In June 2012, The Federal Communications Commission announced that it was going to take a closer look at its standards for cell phone safety to see if the agency needed to revise its 15-year-old guidelines. By November, Pong filed a letter with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) asking the agency to “seek information on ways that the device testing guidelines can be improved to more accurately reflect predominant consumer behavior.”
Recently, the European Environment Agency published the second volume of Late Lessons from Early Warnings in which specific cases where danger signals have gone unheeded were investigated. In some cases the events resulted in deaths, illness and environmental destruction. Originally published in 2002, the first volume detailed the history of technologies subsequently found to be harmful. More than a decade later, the EEA examined the warning signs emerging from technologies currently in use, including mobile phones, genetically modified organisms and nanotechnology.
By now, you have probably noticed that not all smartphone cases are the same. A Pong case, for example, is the only mobile device case proven to reduce your exposure to cell phone radiation while still protecting your signal strength.
And while all Pong cases are rigorously tested by our researchers in state-of-the-art facilities, did you know that most mobile phone cases are neither tested nor factored into the device equipment authorization process, even though most people use a case with their mobile device?
As a result, the “radiation profile” of a given device with a case may be drastically different compared to the same device without a case, often dramatically increasing Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) and decreasing Total Radiated Power (TRP).
At Pong, we think that consumers deserve to know how their mobile device cases affect their exposure to unwanted radiation, which is why we filed a letter with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) asking it to “seek information on ways that the device testing guidelines can be improved to more accurately reflect predominant consumer behavior.” We think that test data should include the presence of a case, which would more accurately determine (among other things) “real SAR,” especially since most consumers use cases (as many as 85% according to many sources).
At Pong, we are committed to protecting people from the potential dangers of cell phone radiation. Everything we do is grounded in science, and we don’t make claims that we cannot validate. We believe that cell phone radiation is a serious issue, even though research is still being done to determine the effects that exposure has on our brains and bodies.
Unfortunately, many companies have sought to exploit concerns about cell phone radiation with scams aimed at taking advantage of worried consumers. Recently the Better Business Bureau warned consumers to be on the lookout for scammers selling “shields” and other questionable devices that supposedly protect cell phone users from the radiation emitted from their phones.
We at Pong Research Corporation appreciate all consumer feedback. In a recent review, a user comment caught our attention. The commenter noted that after using his Pong case he claimed that “Instead of helping with signal, [Pong case] actually interfere[d] with signal.”
While some customers may benefit from Pong in different ways, we test our cases rigorously. Not only do we maintain state-of-the-art equipment but also test our products independently at certified laboratories like Cetecom. WIRED magazine and many others have tested Pong products independently at these labs, and have verified Pong’s claims in every respect. Continue reading “Pong Tested & Consumer Approved: How We Test Pong Cases”