No, really, read it for yourself.
So, the largest global study detailing research into radiation and mobile phones plainly shows that there is no clear link between mobile phones and cancer. The response from San Francisco is to ensure radiation labeling on phones. Compare that with the science of cigarettes and cancer which has never been anything but unequivocal.
The Board of Supervisors approved the ordinance, believed to be the first of its kind in the United States, despite opposition from the cell phone industry which argued that it could impede sales and mislead consumers into believing some phones are safer than others.
And this will be both misleading and confusing. Most countries have regulators that only allow phones that meet certain safety requirements onto the market. Your phone, somewhere in the fine-print, says “FCC approved.” So, except for illegally distributed phones, all US phones meet current safety standards. This isn’t the same as food labeling where there is a benchmark dietary allowance and you get to add up your calories. What exactly will radiation levels be expressed as a percentage of? And how will an absolute number related to emissions levels mean anything to people if they don’t know what “normal” background radiation is, or even the levels of radon in their own homes?
I remain convinced that people only accept scientific evidence that confirms their historical biases, which are frequently that things are getting “worse.” Climate change science confirms the victim theory, so that is in. But genetic science, mobile phone research, MMR vaccine research, all show no harmful side-effects worth discussing, so they must be clearly wrong.
Any time that science and the general public (and their elected representatives) happen to agree with a scientific recommendation it is purely a matter of convenience.