| For
Your
Information: February 20, 2002 FTC
Charges Sellers of Cell Phone Radiation Protection Patches with Making False
Claims
The Federal Trade Commission has charged two
companies that
sold devices that purportedly protect users from electromagnetic radiation
emitted by
cellular telephones with making false and unsubstantiated claims. In separate
court
actions announced today, the FTC alleges that Stock Value 1, Inc. and Comstar
Communications, Inc. (Comstar) falsely represented that their products block
up to 97% or
99% of radiation and other electromagnetic energy emitted by cellular
telephones, thereby
reducing consumers' exposure to this radiation. According to the FTC, the
defendants
lacked a reasonable basis to substantiate their claims. The Commission is
seeking
permanent injunctions, consumer redress, and other equitable
relief.
"These companies are using a shield of
misrepresentation
to block consumers from the facts,"said J. Howard Beales III, Director of
the FTC's
Bureau of Consumer Protection. "There is no scientific evidence that
their products
work as they claim."
Stock Value 1
Stock Value 1, Inc., based in Boca Raton,
Florida, and also
known as SV1, and its president, Deborah Jenkins, marketed and sold two
products --
"SafeTShield" and "NoDanger"-- that purportedly
block
electromagnetic energy emitted from cellular and cordless telephones to
consumers
throughout the United States. These products consist of metallic fiber patches
that are
placed over the earpieces of cellular and cordless telephones. The defendants
advertised
their products through TV, radio and print ads, and on the Internet. The
defendants' ads
and promotional materials contained statements such as:
"'NoDanger' is proven to protect the
soft tissue
of the ear ducts by filtering out 99% of the Electromagnetic waves emitted
from the ear
piece of mobile phones up to a frequency of 2,000 MHz."
"'SafeTShield''prevents
electromagnetic
waves from penetrating the brain through the ear duct. . . .
'SafeTShield' blocks up
to 99% of the electromagnetic waves from penetrating the brain through the ear
canal."
Comstar
Communications
Comstar, based in West Sacramento, California,
and its
president, Randall Carasco, marketed and sold their products under the names
"WaveShield," "WaveShield 1000," and "WaveShield
2000." They
advertised their products to consumers nationwide through TV, radio and print
ads, and on
the Internet. To induce consumers to buy WaveShield products, the
defendants'ads and
promotional materials contained the following statements:
"STOP Cell Phone Radiation! with
the ....
WaveShield"
"When you purchase a WaveShield for
each of your
cell phones, you can rest assured you have enhanced the safety of your cell
phone use. The
WaveShield will block up to 99% of the radiation entering the soft tissue of
the ear
canal."
"The WaveShield 1000 features a soft
comfort
cushion design, about the size of a penny that adheres to the ear piece of any
cellular
phone and acts as a cellular protection system. The WaveShield 1000 blocks up
to 99% of
the harmful electromagnetic radiation that enters through the antenna into the
unprotected
ear canal, without affecting the quality of the
transmission."
The complaints allege that the defendants, in
both cases,
failed to disclose in their ads that the vast majority of electromagnetic
energy emitted
by cellular and cordless phones comes from the antenna and parts of the phone
other than
the earpiece. The defendants allegedly also failed to disclose that the
WaveShield,
NoDanger, and SafeTShield products have no effect on this other
electromagnetic
energy. These facts, the FTC said, would be material to consumers' decision to
buy or use
their products.
Both complaints further allege that the
defendants made false
statements that their products had been scientifically "proven" and
"tested," when in fact that was not the case.
According to a May 2001 Report by the General
Accounting
Office, "Scientific research to date does not demonstrate that the radio
frequency
energy emitted from mobile phones has adverse health effects, but the findings
of some
studies have raised questions indicating the need for further
investigation."
The FTC has issued a new Consumer Alert -
"Radiation
Shields: Do They 'Cell' Consumers Short?"
that offers suggestions for cell phone users who want to limit their exposure
to the electromagnetic emissions from their phone. According
to the FTC, there is no scientific proof that so-called shields significantly
reduce
exposure from electromagnetic emissions. Consumers who want to limit their
exposure can
take steps such as:
- limit cell phone use to short
conversations;
- increase the distance between the antenna and
the head by
using a hands free set or a car phone with the antenna outside the car;
and
- avoid using cell phones where the signal is
poor.
These cases were referred to the Commission by
the Good
Housekeeping Institute, the consumer product evaluation laboratory of Good
Housekeeping
Magazine. Independent tests conducted by the Good Housekeeping Institute on
SafeTShield, WaveShield, and similar products found that the products
did not reduce
radiation exposure from cellular telephones.
The Commission vote to authorize staff to file
the complaints
in the appropriate federal district courts was 5-0. The complaint against the
SV1
defendants was filed in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida,
in Fort
Lauderdale, on February 13, 2002. The complaint against the Comstar defendants
was filed
in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, in
Sacramento, on
February 13, 2002. |