World's First Cellphone, the Real Story Behind Time Traveler Rumors

Daily Mail of UK ran this story on how a Leominster, Massachusetts office worker was the person in 1938 film sporting an experimental test model of a cellphone: Gertrude Jones, coming out of a Dupont building. Is this the world's first cell phone? Film from 1938 shows a woman talking on a wireless device... but it is not 'time travel' family say to the disappointment of conspiracy theorists

Watch the video for yourself; link supplied by Huffington Post.

EWG study: top most attractive cellphones and 10 worst phones in radiation emissions

Bravo to the Environmental Working Group for posting its ranking of the best and the worst of cell phones (or mobile phones), measured by the factor of lowest or highest radiation emissions.

AND

Here is the link to the full Environmental Working Group (EWG) study on DOZENS of phones.

AND ANOTHER AUTHOR ASKED, Was Senator Ted Kennedy's brain cancer death the result of frequent cell phone use?
Follow this link at examiner.com.

Yet, the EWG ratings rate the SAR levels. As one writer notes, this is insufficient and possibly misleading.

Why is the SAR value not an accurate measure of safety?

The SAR value is only comparing the heating effect of different phones and does not give an indication that a cell phone is ‘safe.’
The power, or heating effect, of the phone is only one of many possible factors impacting cell phone ‘safety.’ Exposures to the radiation from the cell phone at non-heating levels have been linked to many serious biological effects, and the SAR value is not capturing anything about these harmful non-thermal exposures.
SAR values are reported to the FCC by the manufacturer and have been known to vary from the reported number by a factor of two across models of the same phone.
The SAR value varies with the source of exposure and the person using the phone. For example, if you are in a rural area or in an elevator or a car, where the cell phone uses more power, your brain will get a greater exposure from the higher power required in these instances.
Holding the phone in a slightly different way can actually render the worst SAR value phone better than the best SAR value phone.
SAR values have been created based on simulations of exposure in a plexiglass head filled with fluid, not a human head, and many scientists consider them to be inaccurate and irrelevant at determining actual biological effects. As Rees points out, and I wholeheartedly agree:
“Physical distance of the phone from your brain, and less usage of the cell phone overall, more so than simply choosing a phone with a lower SAR value, is probably a far better insurance policy.”