Archive

4 posts

Filters: tag: marketing claims Clear

Why the “99% Blocked” Claim is a Myth: The Best Anti-Radiation Phone Case

Independent Voices RF Safe Feb 1, 2026

RF Safe argues that marketing claims such as “blocks 99% of EMF” for anti-radiation phone cases are misleading because many “lab tests” are reportedly performed on shielding fabric alone rather than on a working phone. The piece frames a phone as a “dynamic radio” and suggests real-world performance may differ from…

The Anti‑Radiation Phone Case Market Runs on Percentages. RF Safe Refuses to Sell One.

Independent Voices RF Safe Jan 16, 2026

RF Safe critiques the anti-radiation phone case market for relying on headline percentage-blocking claims that may reflect tests of shielding material rather than real-world phone behavior in a case on a live network. The article argues that poorly designed or misused shielding cases can interfere with a phone’s…

Why RF Safe’s TruthCase Refuses the “99% Blocking” Game — and Why That’s the Point

Independent Voices RF Safe Jan 16, 2026

RF Safe argues that “anti-radiation” phone case marketing based on universal “99% blocking” claims is misleading because real-world phone emissions vary with signal conditions, orientation, and how a case affects the antenna. The post positions RF Safe’s TruthCase/QuantaCase as more credible specifically because it…

Best Anti‑Radiation Phone Case 2026: Why QuantaCase (RF Safe) Is the Stand‑Out Choice

Resources RF Safe Jan 3, 2026

RF Safe argues that many “anti-radiation” phone cases use misleading marketing (e.g., fabric-swatch tests, vague “FCC tested” claims) and that some designs may cause phones to increase transmit power if they interfere with antennas. The article provides a checklist of red flags (magnets/metal plates, detachable…

Page 1 / 1