Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (3375)	9/5/2001 12:17:45 AM
From: Jon Koplik	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12231

Pediatricians revising policy on distinguishing SIDS from murder. [Maurice -- I recommend you refrain from trying to come up with a witty reply to this. Some topics should just not be replied to (?) ] September 4, 2001 Pediatric Group Revises SIDS Info By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 5:00 p.m. ET CHICAGO (AP) -- The nation's largest group of pediatricians has revised its policy on distinguishing sudden infant death syndrome from murder after getting complaints from medical examiners and parents. The American Academy of Pediatrics had said in February that all sudden, unexplained infant deaths should be investigated in hospital emergency rooms by a child abuse expert, out of concern that a small portion of SIDS deaths might actually be homicides. The revision, published in the September issue of the journal Pediatrics, says that investigations of sudden, unexplained infant deaths should include ``appropriate utilization of available medical specialists by medical examiners and coroners.'' Such specialists could include pediatric pathologists, pediatricians and radiologists, the academy says. The National Association of Medical Examiners had complained that the initial policy could result in illegal meddling with autopsies if outside experts examined bodies before they did. The policy also angered some parents of SIDS babies, who worried that it made them appear guilty. ``It was like they were saying who cares what the medical examiner said, you abused your child,'' said Charlene Melcher, 38, of Orlando, Fla., whose son died of SIDS in 1998. The amended policy ``provides pediatricians with information and guidelines to avoid distressing or stigmatizing families of sudden infant death syndrome victims while allowing accumulation of appropriate evidence in potential cases of death by infanticide,'' the academy said. Dr. Randy Hanzlick, president of the medical examiners group, praised the revision and said medical examiners welcome working with outside experts to investigate unexplained infant deaths. Experts do not know what causes SIDS, which kills about 3,000 infants a year, though theories include brain stem defects and heat stress. The policy published in February stemmed from a few highly publicized cases and a 1997 report from British researchers who documented an alarming number of parents trying to suffocate their babies. Dr. Henry Krous, a SIDS expert and pathologist at Children's Hospital of San Diego, praised the revised policy. But he said that having abuse experts assist medical examiners probably will not lead to an increase in SIDS cases being reclassified as murder because, like true SIDS, suffocation with a soft object leaves virtually no physical evidence. Copyright 2001 The Associated Press

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (3375)	9/5/2001 12:24:04 AM
From: S100	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12231

SAR Links www2.arnes.si brooks.af.mil domode.com Current since it give data for the Kyocera 2035, 3035 and 6035. Might be good to start using an ear bud or similar device. snip Hands-Free Phone Kits Reduce Electromagnetic Radiation Australia—A recent report concluded that the use of hands-free kits (microphone and earpiece) with mobile phones greatly reduces electromagnetic radiation (EMR) exposure to the head. However, the study also found that wearing the phone on the waist or in a pocket places it and the antenna in closer contact with the body and is likely to increase actual exposure, according to Chris Zombolas, technical director for EMC Technologies Pty Ltd. (Tullamarine, Victoria, Australia). The report also notes that the exposure limits are unlikely to be exceeded when the phone is operated wearing a hands-free kit and holding the phone. Specific absorption rate was measured using a DASY3. Recent media reports questioning the benefit of hands-free kits in reducing exposure to EMR prompted the Australian consumers association, Choice, to commission the independent testing of mobile phones with and without hands-free kits. Specific absorption rate (SAR) measurements were performed by EMC Technologies, an independent laboratory accredited for SAR measurements on mobile phones. Two 900-MHz GSM phones and one 835-MHz AMPS phone were tested. Both GSM phones complied with the Australian and New Zealand SAR limits when tested under normal conditions at the ear position. The New Zealand AMPS phone complied with the New Zealand limit, but did not comply with the Australian limit. The hands-free kits reduced the SAR inside the head by worst-case margins of 92% for the two GSM phones as well as for the AMPS phone, according to the report. The SAR reduction at the head was achieved when simulating both the handheld and the body-worn positions for each phone. Data indicate that further reduction is likely when the hands-free kit cable is arranged away from the phone antenna, which is generally consistent with normal use. At the waist position (in hands-free mode), the New Zealand AMPS phone SAR exceeded both the New Zealand and Australian SAR limits. No international standard currently exists for measuring SAR in the hip or waist, the report noted. Methodology Because SAR is defined as the rate of absorption of electromagnetic energy per unit mass of biological tissue, the measured SAR for each mobile phone quantified the energy that was absorbed by the body part exposed to the EMR. Each phone was measured with and without the hands-free kit in use. According to the report, the test methodology used was generally in accordance with the mandatory human exposure standard for mobile and cordless phones as specified by the Australian Communications Authority. SAR requirements are specified only for the head. SAR measurements were taken in the head and torso of the Phantom. To simulate the human torso, EMC Technologies used a Generic Twin Phantom (Schmid & Partner Engineering AG; Zurich) filled with tissue-simulating liquid. Using a DASY3 dosimetric assessment system (also from Schmid), baseline SAR measurements were performed on the three mobile phones transmitting at full power in the standard left- and right-ear touch positions. After baseline measurements were recorded, the hands-free kits were evaluated for their ability to reduce SAR inside the head. The hands-free adapters were attached to the Phantom, and the cable was taped along the length of the phone and its antenna to represent worst-case coupling of the EMR to the cable. SAR measurements were then performed inside the Phantom at the ear position with the phone placed 70 cm away from the body to simulate handheld use. Then, with the phone mounted at the flat section of the Phantom, the third segment of the test evaluated the SAR performance of each phone worn at the waist or pocket position. A copy of the report, including detailed procedures, photographs, and SAR plots, is available from the Choice Web site at choice.com.au. For more information, contact Chris Zombolas at EMC Technologies Pty Ltd. via e-mail at chris@emctech.com.au or by phone at +61 3 93353333. snip ce-mag.com