The Anti Radiation Case That Refuses to Sell a Number
RF Safe argues that many “anti-radiation” phone cases market misleading “% blocked” claims based on lab material tests rather than whole-device, real-world performance. The article promotes RF Safe’s TruthCase/QuantaCase as a “physics-first” design that avoids advertising a single blocking percentage and emphasizes directional shielding and user education. It cites a 2017 CBS San Francisco/KPIX test as an example of how some flip-style shielding cases can reduce measured RF in certain orientations but may increase readings in other common-use configurations.
Key points
- RF Safe claims percentage-based “99% blocking” marketing often reflects controlled material swatch tests, not a live phone operating inside a case.
- The piece argues phone transmit power and radiation patterns can change with signal conditions and case/antenna interactions, potentially increasing emissions in some scenarios.
- RF Safe positions its TruthCase/QuantaCase as intentionally avoiding a single “% blocked” claim to prevent false certainty and misuse.
- The article references a 2017 CBS San Francisco/KPIX report that found reduced RF readings when a flip-case flap was properly positioned, but increased readings in at least one configuration (flap folded behind the phone).
- RF Safe says its packaging/instructions emphasize using the shielded flap closed during calls, framing this as a consumer-education gap in the market.
Referenced studies & papers
Relevant papers in OpenMel
Source:
Open original
AI-generated summaries may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.
AI-generated summaries may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.
Comments
Log in to comment.
No comments yet.