Value chain · CLM-1301
Low confidence
The evidence behind this statement is thin, indirect or second-hand. Read it as a lead to check, not as a settled finding.
In plain terms
The pregnant rats absorbed about 0.4 W per kilogram, the same as the whole-body figure the 1982 US standard later used as its limit, yet the litters still showed the early deaths and delays reported in the companion paper.
The claim as recorded
For the 2450 MHz, 500 uW/cm2 prenatal rat exposure, thermographic dosimetry gave a whole-body SAR of 0.416 W/kg in pregnant rats: 2.3 W/kg per W input, with each waveguide fed about 181 mW. The earlier 918 MHz, 5 mW/cm2 prenatal study had a dam SAR of 2.5 W/kg, about six times higher. Despite that difference, exposed dams in both studies gained less weight in gestation (9 g less here, p < .01; 7 g less at 918 MHz), and the abstract states the dams showed no apparent adverse effect on general health.
Evidence behind this: T3-an unattributed typescript abstract; thermographic dosimetry on four additional pregnant rats.
Scope and limits
Recomputed: 2.3 x 0.181 = 0.416 W/kg; 2.5 / 0.416 = 6.0. As a cross-check, 0.81 W absorbed in a 0.349 kg dam is 2.32 W/kg per W, consistent. The dosimetry rats were not the exposed rats (four extra females, 336 +/- 16 g). The match to the 0.4 W/kg of ANSI C95.1-1982 (CLM-1299) is my observation; the paper does not make it. Animal data only; same limits as CLM-1300 (low confidence).
What it assumes
No assumptions are recorded against this claim.
Where it comes from
PDF p.3 (render): females absorbed 81 +/- 3 per cent of input power, giving 2.3 +/- .15 per W input; waveguides fed 181 +/- 15 mW for 500 uW/cm2; average SAR .416 W/kg (paraphrase; the text layer is garbled). PDF p.4: "whole-body SAR for these dames was 2.5 W/kg" in the 918 MHz study, "a six fold increase in SAR as reported" here; exposed dams gained 9 g less (p < .01) (paraphrase). PDF p.1: dams exposed "without apparent adverse effect upon their general health".
Basis: W/kg whole-body SAR; mW per waveguide; per cent of input absorbed
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-023 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-1301
CLM-1301, Energy Aperture, as of unknown (after 1977; not printed).