2
$\begingroup$

Where I sleep I have my wifi router right above me. I don't know if this is safe for my health since it emits radiation.

Some people say that it should be safe since the radiation emitted is non-ionising.

But other sources claim that even non-ionising radiation can have harmful effects biologically.

Therefore, I'm quite confused whether it is safe or not.

These articles claim that it is not safe:

https://educateemf.com/is-it-safe-to-sleep-near-a-wireless-router/

https://emfadvice.com/sleep-near-wifi-router/

https://techwellness.com/blogs/expertise/is-wifi-safe-distance-is-key-emf-protection

https://ictbuz.com/wifi-router-in-bedroom/

Some insight would be much appreciated.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
7
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Major health effect is all the danged blinking lights keeping me awake. No worries from wifi frequencies. $\endgroup$
    – Jon Custer
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 0:25
  • $\begingroup$ They are all trying to sell you something, alarming you with "some people say"s and "some studies". Haven't you seen this before with G5 voodoo blather, radio waves in the 30s, etc? $\endgroup$
    – Cosmas Zachos
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 0:25
  • $\begingroup$ @JonCuster make a flap out of black paper over the lights $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 4:29
  • $\begingroup$ Apart from radiation, sometimes in cold dry areas, static charge is developed between skin and bedsheets/blankets. This static charge can damage electronics. So its better to keep any electronics away from bed when you sleep, preferably at some wooden table. $\endgroup$
    – Jdeep
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 5:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I’m voting to close this question because it belongs to a biology site. $\endgroup$
    – Miyase
    Commented May 11, 2023 at 6:18

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6
$\begingroup$

The wifi router, as well as cell phones and microwave ovens all produce non ionizing radiation. To date, the major concern for non ionizing radiation is its heating (thermal) effect on tissue. It is my understanding that the magnitude of the non ionizing radiation of wifi and cell phones is limited by regulations to be well below harmful in terms of heating of tissue. The leakage limits for microwave ovens is likewise regulated to be well below harmful in terms of heating of tissue.

Insofar as the potential harmful non-thermal effects of these sources are concerned, research continues. Clearly, as the number of these sources continue to increase, more data will be available to determine whether or not there are cumulative harmful non thermal effects of non ionizing radiation at the levels being produced.

In the meantime, in my opinion only, though it would seem prudent to limit ones exposure as much as practicable, it should not be because of being alarmed by non scientific information one may encounter on the internet. Rather it should be in recognition of the fact that the long term effects of non ionizing radiation continue to be studied.

Hope this helps.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
9
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your caution goes the same way as the fears. We live and walk in the cities where the effects of being hit by a car are known, and the probability of being hit by a car when crossing the street is known. Should we not cross the street? Drive a car? Unknown risks because too small to be seen in studies now, should be way below the threshold of being prudent. $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 4:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @annav I would argue the answer to all of the questions you raise can only be given with respect to benefits. If there are no benefits, it is absolutely rational to avoid potential slight risks. The reality is that there are benefits to the examples you give, and thus we keep driving and keep walking. $\endgroup$
    – Cort Ammon
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 5:38
  • $\begingroup$ @CortAmmon what about sleeping in a limited space (money, situation etc) $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 5:42
  • $\begingroup$ @annav Then, as Bob D puts it, one should act in recognition of the fact that the long term effects of non ionizing radiation continue to be studied (and most likely sleep near the wifi). $\endgroup$
    – Cort Ammon
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 5:44
  • $\begingroup$ This, of course, makes more sense using the Open World Assumption. If not knowing a things is true is subtly different from knowing a thing is not true, Bob's answer makes sense. If one uses a Closed World Assumption, where not knowing the risk is the same as knowing there is no risk, then the answer doesn't hold up as well. $\endgroup$
    – Cort Ammon
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 5:48

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.