Apple iPhone 16 Plus SAR Level Summary:

The cellular transmission SAR values for the Apple iPhone 16 Plus (FCC ID BCG-E8692A) are 1.13 W/kg (watts per kilogram) at the head and 1.16 W/kg when worn on the body. The hotspot/Airplay SAR level is 1.16 W/kg. The simultaneous transmission SAR values for iPhone 16 Plus (cellular plus Wi-Fi) is 1.35 W/kg at the head, 1.55 W/kg when worn on the body, and 1.55 W/kg when used as a hotspot simultaneously with other transmitters active.

Which iPhone 16 Model Has the Lowest Radiation?

iPhone 16 Plus

Apple iPhone 16 Plus: SAR Levels and the Broader Concerns Over RF Radiation Health Risks

The Apple iPhone 16 Plus (Model A3082) is one of the latest models to be released, and its Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) levels are being closely scrutinized by experts concerned about the health risks associated with radiofrequency (RF) radiation. In this comprehensive blog, we’ll break down the SAR levels of the iPhone 16 Plus, discuss the latest research on RF radiation, and explore the regulatory failures that continue to allow these health risks to go unchecked. Additionally, we’ll dive deeper into RFK Jr.’s legal battles with the FCC, which exposed the outdated safety standards that are still in use today, even as new evidence emerges about the non-thermal biological effects of RF exposure.

---

SAR Level Breakdown for the iPhone 16 Plus

iPhone 16 Plus

Apple iPhone 16 Plus

Apple iPhone 16 Plus
Head SAR (Cellular Only)
1.13 W/kg
Body SAR (Cellular Only)
1.16 W/kg
Hot Spot SAR (Cellular Only)
1.16 W/kg
Head SAR (Wi-Fi + Cellular)
1.35 W/kg
Body SAR (Wi-Fi + Cellular)
1.55 W/kg
Hot Spot SAR (Wi-Fi + Cellular)
1.55 W/kg

 

Parameter	Value
FCC ID	BCG-E8692A
Model Name	A3082 (iPhone 16 Plus)
Head SAR	1.13 W/kg
Body-worn SAR	1.16 W/kg
Hotspot SAR	1.16 W/kg
Simultaneous Transmission SAR
– Head	1.35 W/kg
– Body-worn	1.55 W/kg
– Hotspot	1.55 W/kg

Compare Your Phone’s Radiation

The FCC’s Lawsuit Loss and Outdated 1996 Guidelines

In 2020, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) lost a landmark lawsuit filed by the Environmental Health Trust (EHT) and Children’s Health Defense. The plaintiffs challenged the FCC’s decision to maintain the RF (radiofrequency) radiation exposure limits established in 1996, arguing that the guidelines were outdated and did not adequately protect public health in light of advancements in wireless technology. As we now live in a world surrounded by mobile devices and wireless networks, the outdated guidelines from 1996 no longer reflect the realities of modern technology use and its potential impact on health.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, stating that the FCC failed to provide a reasoned explanation for maintaining these outdated limits. The court criticized the FCC for not adequately addressing the potential health risks associated with long-term exposure to RF radiation, especially for vulnerable populations like children. This decision was a significant victory for public health advocates and highlighted the urgent need for updated radiation exposure guidelines.

The Need for Updated RF Exposure Guidelines

The FCC’s 1996 guidelines were primarily concerned with the thermal effects of RF radiation, or the heating of body tissues, similar to the way microwave ovens work. However, since then, many studies have suggested that non-thermal effects—biological changes in cells and tissues that do not result in measurable temperature increases—could also pose significant health risks.

With the explosion of wireless devices, including smartphones, tablets, Wi-Fi routers, and smart home devices, the amount of RF radiation we are exposed to daily has increased exponentially. These outdated guidelines fail to account for modern usage patterns, and the ruling has intensified calls for a comprehensive review of the FCC’s radiation standards to better reflect current scientific knowledge.

The Court’s Ruling and Its Implications

The court’s decision emphasized that the FCC did not sufficiently review evidence regarding long-term health risks, including:

• Increased risk of cancer, particularly glioblastomas (a type of brain tumor).
• Potential neurological effects like memory and cognitive decline.
• Higher susceptibility in children due to their developing nervous systems and thinner skulls, which may allow for greater absorption of RF radiation.

The court also pointed to the National Toxicology Program (NTP) and Ramazzini Institute studies, which demonstrated an increased incidence of cancer in animals exposed to non-ionizing radiation at levels similar to those emitted by cell phones.

Factors That Contribute to Low Radiation Cell Phones

Manufacturers are aware of the growing concerns over RF radiation and are continuously working to design phones that emit less radiation. Several factors influence a phone’s radiation levels:

1. Design and Technology

The design of a cell phone, particularly its internal components, can impact radiation emissions. Phones that incorporate advanced antenna designs and power management systems are often able to reduce RF emissions. The placement of the antenna and materials used in the phone’s body can help direct radiation away from the user’s body.

2. Antenna Placement and Performance

The placement of the antenna plays a crucial role in determining the amount of RF radiation that reaches the user. Phones with antennas positioned farther from the head or body can reduce radiation exposure. Additionally, multi-antenna systems can distribute the workload, reducing the power required by individual antennas and thus lowering radiation emissions.

3. Signal Strength and Network Coverage

When a phone has to work harder to maintain a connection to a cell tower, it emits more radiation. Phones that perform efficiently even in areas of weak signal strength or poor network coverage emit less radiation overall. Choosing a device that maintains strong signal integrity under various conditions is an important consideration for reducing exposure.

The Potential Health Risks of Antenna Relocation

Many newer phones relocate the antenna away from the head, but some research suggests that this practice may inadvertently increase the risk of thyroid cancer. Studies conducted in the Nordic countries have shown a rise in thyroid cancer cases, which could potentially be linked to increased cell phone use.

Further, radiofrequency radiation may affect the thyroid gland by altering serum thyroid hormone levels and causing histopathological changes in thyroid gland follicles, as observed in animal studies. While these findings are concerning, more research is needed to establish a direct link between antenna relocation and thyroid cancer in humans.

The Limitations of Relying on a Single SAR Value

The Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) is the metric used by the FCC to measure the amount of RF energy absorbed by the human body during cell phone use. However, the SAR value represents only the maximum level of radiation emitted under specific conditions, such as holding the phone against the head.

Incomplete Picture of Radiation Emission

A single SAR value does not capture the full picture of a phone’s radiation profile. For example, a phone may have a low SAR value for head exposure, but a much higher SAR when used against the body, such as when carried in a pocket or used with a hands-free device. This can give users a false sense of security, as they may assume that a low SAR value indicates low overall radiation levels.

Examples of Phones with Discrepancies in SAR Values

Some phones on the market have low head SAR values but emit significantly higher radiation when in close proximity to the body. This is often due to antenna placement or design factors that concentrate radiation in areas not measured by the SAR test for head exposure. This discrepancy highlights the importance of considering the total exposure across different usage scenarios, rather than focusing solely on the head SAR value.

The Problem with a Single SAR Value for Comparison

Consumers often compare phones based on one SAR value, but this can be misleading. A phone with a low SAR for head exposure may still expose users to significant radiation in other use scenarios. To make informed decisions, consumers should look at multiple SAR values for different parts of the body and consider additional factors such as design, antenna placement, and network coverage to get a better understanding of a device’s overall radiation profile.

SAR: A Focus on Thermal Effects Only

The SAR standard was developed to measure the thermal effects of RF radiation—how much energy is absorbed by the body and converted into heat. However, emerging research suggests that non-thermal effects of RF radiation could also pose significant health risks.

Non-Thermal Effects: What the SAR Doesn’t Measure

Non-thermal effects of RF radiation may include:

• Changes in cell membrane permeability.
• Calcium efflux, affecting cellular communication.
• Oxidative stress, leading to inflammation and cellular damage.
• Potential DNA damage, which could contribute to cancer development.

Since SAR values only measure the heating effects of radiation, they do not capture these non-thermal biological effects. This means that even if a phone complies with the FCC’s SAR guidelines, it may still pose risks to human health.

The Need for a Holistic Approach to Cell Phone Safety

The FCC’s outdated 1996 guidelines for RF radiation exposure fail to account for the modern usage of wireless technology and the potential non-thermal health risks. The recent lawsuit victory by the Environmental Health Trust and Children’s Health Defense underscores the need for a comprehensive review and update of these guidelines. As the court ruling indicates, the FCC must take a science-based approach to ensure that its standards reflect the realities of today’s technology.

For consumers, it is important to recognize that SAR values provide only a limited view of radiation exposure. A comprehensive approach to evaluating cell phone safety should consider factors such as design, antenna placement, and signal strength—in addition to SAR values. Only by understanding the full scope of radiation emissions can consumers make informed choices to protect their health.

As wireless technology continues to evolve, we must prioritize public health and demand that regulatory agencies like the FCC keep pace with the latest scientific research. This will ensure that safety standards are aligned with the realities of RF radiation exposure in the 21st century.

Understanding SAR Values

• Peak Spatial-Average SAR (1g of tissue): This measures how much RF energy is absorbed in a small section of the body during phone use. The general public safety limit is 1.6 W/kg, and extremities like hands and wrists have a limit of 4 W/kg.
• Body-Worn SAR: This value shows how much radiation is absorbed when the phone is carried close to the body (e.g., in a pocket), which can be concerning due to continuous exposure during long periods of use.
• Simultaneous Transmission: These SAR values represent the energy absorbed when the device is transmitting cellular signals and Wi-Fi signals at the same time, a common scenario in everyday phone use.

---

The Bigger Picture: Health Risks Beyond SAR Limits

While the iPhone 16 Plus and other models stay within the FCC’s outdated SAR guidelines, it’s critical to recognize that these guidelines do not reflect the latest scientific understanding of RF radiation’s health effects, particularly non-thermal effects.

Key Studies Proving the Risks of RF Radiation

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) Study

The NTP study remains one of the most comprehensive investigations into the effects of RF radiation. This multi-year study exposed rats to RF radiation levels similar to those emitted by cell phones. Key findings include:

• Glioblastomas (brain cancer) in male rats.
• Schwannomas (heart tumors) in male rats.
• Clear evidence of carcinogenic activity, even at exposure levels considered safe for human use.

Despite these alarming findings, further NTP research was halted under the Biden-Harris administration, leaving critical questions unanswered about the long-term effects of RF exposure on humans.

The Ramazzini Institute (RI) Study

The Ramazzini Institute replicated the NTP study but with lower exposure levels—similar to what people experience from cell towers. The study found:

• Increased risk of schwannomas in male rats.
• Increased occurrence of malignant tumors.

The fact that two independent studies found similar results, even at different exposure levels, confirms that RF radiation is a real cancer risk.

Genetic Profiling of Rat Gliomas

A recent study went a step further by genetically profiling the tumors from the Ramazzini Institute’s animal studies. Researchers found that these tumors share significant morphological similarities with human gliomas, effectively countering the argument that findings in rats cannot be applied to humans. This is a breakthrough in understanding how RF radiation may induce similar cancers in humans.

The Suppression of Science and Missed Medical Advances

Why aren’t most Americans aware of these health risks? The answer lies in the misclassification of RF radiation risks and the suppression of independent research. Regulatory agencies like the FCC, influenced by telecommunications industry lobbyists, have ignored or downplayed the growing body of scientific evidence pointing to the dangers of RF exposure.

1. Regulatory Capture and Corporate Influence

The FCC, tasked with protecting the public, has been accused of regulatory capture—where the very industries it is supposed to regulate have undue influence over its policies. This has allowed outdated safety standards to remain in place, despite the mounting evidence of RF radiation’s non-thermal biological effects.

2. RFK Jr. and the Environmental Health Trust Lawsuit

In 2021, RFK Jr. and the Environmental Health Trust successfully sued the FCC, proving that its safety guidelines were woefully insufficient. The court found that the FCC had failed to update its standards since 1996 and had ignored scientific evidence showing potential health risks, particularly for children.

Despite the court ruling, no meaningful action has been taken to update these guidelines or reinstate critical research like the NTP’s. This is where regulatory capture continues to play a dangerous role.

---

The Real Health Risks of RF Radiation

Non-Thermal Effects: The Silent Dangers

The thermal effects of RF radiation are well-understood—these refer to the heating of tissue when exposed to high levels of radiation. However, the real concern lies in the non-thermal effects, which occur at much lower exposure levels but can have profound biological consequences, such as:

• DNA damage
• Oxidative stress
• Disruption of cellular signaling
• Hormonal imbalances

Numerous studies, including those in the BioInitiative Report, have documented these effects. The current FCC guidelines, however, do not address them, leaving the public exposed to potentially harmful levels of radiation.

The Impact on Children

Children are particularly vulnerable to RF radiation. Their developing brains and thinner skulls allow for greater absorption of RF energy, and their longer lifetime exposure means that the risks accumulate over time. Studies have shown that children who begin using cell phones at a young age are at higher risk of developing brain tumors later in life.

---

Why You Should Be Concerned: The Need for Updated Guidelines

The FCC’s Failure to Act

Despite the mounting evidence, the FCC has failed to update its RF safety guidelines. The standards currently in place were established in 1996, based on the assumption that only thermal effects of RF radiation are harmful. These guidelines do not reflect the modern scientific understanding of the non-thermal biological effects of RF exposure.

The Call for Action

The lawsuit led by RFK Jr. is a critical step in pushing for updated safety standards, but it is not enough. The American public must demand that regulatory agencies:

• Update the FCC guidelines to reflect the latest scientific research.
• Reinstate the NTP’s RF radiation research, which was prematurely halted.
• Hold telecommunications companies accountable for their role in downplaying these risks.

---

Mitigating Your Exposure: What You Can Do

While we wait for regulatory changes, there are steps you can take to protect yourself and your family from RF radiation:

• Use speakerphone or wired headphones to minimize direct contact with your phone.
• Limit screen time for children, particularly with wireless devices.
• Invest in RF-safe accessories, like RF Safe’s anti-radiation cases and shields.
• Turn off your Wi-Fi router at night and avoid placing devices near your body for extended periods.

---

A Call to Protect Our Future

The SAR values for the iPhone 16 Plus may fall within the FCC’s outdated guidelines, but these guidelines do not account for non-thermal effects, which represent the real danger of RF radiation. The growing body of scientific evidence shows that prolonged exposure to RF radiation poses serious health risks, particularly for children.

The regulatory failures that have allowed these risks to go unchecked are a direct result of corporate influence over public policy. As more research emerges, it becomes increasingly clear that the misclassification of RF radiation risks has prevented necessary safety updates and stifled scientific progress.

It’s time for the public to demand action. We must push for:

• Updated FCC guidelines that account for the non-thermal effects of RF radiation.
• Reinstated research into the long-term health effects of RF exposure.
• Transparency and accountability from the telecommunications industry.

The health of our children and future generations depends on it.

---

Let’s come together to ensure that the iPhone 16 Plus and other wireless devices meet modern safety standards. With more information and better regulation, we can protect ourselves and our loved ones from the hidden dangers of RF radiation.

FAQs

What is the SAR value for the Apple iPhone 16 Plus?

The SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) value for the Apple iPhone 16 Plus (FCC ID BCG-E8692A) is 1.13 W/kg at the head and 1.16 W/kg when worn on the body. These values measure the RF energy absorbed by the body when using the phone.

---

Is the Apple iPhone 16 Plus SAR level within safe limits?

Yes, the iPhone 16 Plus’ SAR levels fall within the FCC’s safety limit of 1.6 W/kg for general population exposure. However, concerns are growing about whether these guidelines adequately protect users, especially regarding non-thermal effects of RF radiation.

---

What is the simultaneous transmission SAR value for the iPhone 16 Plus?

For simultaneous transmission (e.g., using cellular and Wi-Fi at the same time), the SAR value for the head is 1.35 W/kg, and 1.55 W/kg when worn on the body or used as a hotspot.

---

How does RF radiation from the iPhone 16 Plus affect health?

While the iPhone 16 Plus complies with FCC SAR limits, studies show that non-thermal effects of RF radiation, such as DNA damage and oxidative stress, may pose significant health risks, even at levels below current safety standards.

---

What are the SAR limits for smartphones like the iPhone 16 Plus?

The FCC’s SAR limits for the general population are 1.6 W/kg for the head and body (1g of tissue) and 4 W/kg for extremities (10g of tissue), such as hands and wrists.

---

Why are the current SAR guidelines for phones like the iPhone 16 Plus outdated?

The current FCC SAR guidelines were established over 25 years ago and are based only on thermal effects of RF radiation. New scientific evidence suggests that non-thermal biological effects—like DNA damage—may pose greater risks than previously recognized, especially for children.

---

How can I reduce RF exposure from the iPhone 16 Plus?

To reduce RF exposure, use speakerphone, wired headphones, or an RF Safe anti-radiation case. Keeping the phone at least 5mm away from your body can also lower the absorbed radiation.

---

Is the iPhone 16 Plus safe for children to use?

Children are more vulnerable to RF radiation due to their thinner skulls and developing brains. While the iPhone 16 Plus meets current SAR limits, parents may want to minimize their children’s exposure to reduce potential long-term health risks.

---

What research supports concerns about RF radiation and phones like the iPhone 16 Plus?

Studies like the National Toxicology Program (NTP) and Ramazzini Institute have found evidence that RF radiation exposure increases the risk of gliomas (brain cancer) and schwannomas (heart tumors), highlighting the need for updated safety guidelines.

---

Why is there concern about non-thermal effects of RF radiation from the iPhone 16 Plus?

The non-thermal effects of RF radiation, which occur at levels below the SAR safety limits, can cause DNA damage, oxidative stress, and disrupted cellular function, potentially leading to long-term health problems. Current guidelines do not address these risks.

Breakdown of SAR Table:

Applicant Name & FCC ID:

• Applicant Name: Apple Inc., which is the company applying for the FCC certification.
• FCC ID: BCG-E8692A, the unique identifier for the iPhone 16 Plus (Model A3082).

Applicable Standards:

• The testing follows the RF exposure KDB procedures and IEEE Std 1528-2013, which are guidelines and standards for SAR testing.

SAR Limits (W/kg):

• Peak Spatial-Average (1g of tissue): The SAR limit for the general public, set at 1.6 W/kg for 1g of tissue.
• Extremities (10g of tissue): The SAR limit for extremities (hands, wrists, ankles) is 4 W/kg.

Exposure Categories:

• General Population / Uncontrolled Exposure: These limits apply to people who use the device without any specific control or restrictions on exposure, with safety thresholds that should not be exceeded.

RF Exposure Conditions:

The SAR values are measured in different conditions to reflect how the phone is used. Here’s what the terms mean:

• TNE: Test Network Environment.
• PCE: Peak Controlled Exposure.
• CBE: Controlled Body Exposure.
• DTS: Device Test Scenario.
• NII: Non-Intentional Interference.
• 6CD: Six-Class Domain.
• DSS: Dynamic Spectrum Sharing.
• DXX: Dynamic Excess Exposure.

SAR Values (W/kg):

• Head: SAR measured when the phone is held against the head.
• Body-worn (Dist. = 5 mm): SAR when the device is worn close to the body (e.g., in a pocket).
• Hotspot (Dist. = 5 mm): SAR when the device is used as a hotspot.
• Extremities (Dist. = 0 mm): SAR when the device is held directly against extremities.

Simultaneous Transmission (TX):

These values reflect the SAR when multiple wireless connections (like cellular and Wi-Fi) are active at the same time:

• Head (Simultaneous TX): SAR for simultaneous transmissions near the head.
• Body-worn (Simultaneous TX): SAR for simultaneous transmissions when worn near the body.
• Hotspot (Simultaneous TX): SAR for simultaneous transmissions during hotspot usage.
• Extremities (Simultaneous TX): SAR for simultaneous transmissions when held against extremities.

8. Power Density (PD) Results:

• PD Limit (W/m²): The general public is limited to 1.0 W/m² for exposure over 30 minutes in the frequencies above 6 GHz.
• PD Result (W/m²): The measured result here is 0.700 W/m², which is well below the public safety limit.

9. Date Tested & Test Results:

• Date Tested: This device was tested from 6/24/2024 to 8/1/2024.
• Test Results: The device passed the test, meaning it complies with the FCC guidelines for RF safety.

---

Highest Reported SAR (W/kg) for Apple iPhone 16 Plus (A3082):

Head (single TX):

1.129 W/kg under the DTS condition.

Body-worn (Dist. = 5 mm):

1.157 W/kg under the NII condition.

Hotspot (Dist. = 5 mm):

1.157 W/kg under the NII condition.

Extremities (Dist. = 0 mm):

1.788 W/kg under the TNE condition.

---

Simultaneous Transmission (TX) SAR Values:

Head (Simultaneous TX):

1.352 W/kg under multiple conditions (PCE, CBE, DTS, NII).

Body-worn (Simultaneous TX):

1.550 W/kg under multiple conditions (DTS, NII, 6CD, DSS).

Hotspot (Simultaneous TX):

1.550 W/kg under multiple conditions (DTS, NII, 6CD, DSS).

Extremities (Simultaneous TX):

1.899 W/kg under the TNE and DXX conditions.

---

The SAR values for the Apple iPhone 16 Plus (A3082), like the iPhone 16 Pro Max and iPhone 16, fall within the FCC’s current safety guidelines, with a peak SAR of 1.157 W/kg for body-worn or hotspot scenarios and 1.788 W/kg for extremities in single transmission tests.

However, it’s important to highlight that these guidelines, established over 25 years ago, do not reflect modern scientific understanding of the effects of RF exposure, especially for children. In a landmark lawsuit in 2021, RFK Jr. and the Environmental Health Trust challenged the FCC, arguing that these outdated standards failed to protect children and did not account for the non-thermal biological effects of RF radiation. The court found that the FCC had ignored substantial evidence showing potential health risks, emphasizing the need for updated safety regulations.

You should be aware of the potential dangers of electromagnetic radiation and consider using RF Safe products or other solutions to reduce exposure. It is essential to stay informed about the latest scientific findings on RF radiation, as current guidelines may not fully protect public health.