NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Orbi: I need to switch off wireless radios at night
I have an Orbi system, RBR50/RBK50. I am increasingly aware of research that makes a good case for health risks for children from wifi systems, even if they operate within legal limits (e.g. https:/...
I am sorry, and with all due respect, with all the click bait articles and other wifi danger scenarios that have been floating about, some reason and science must be introduced into the debate before we all toss our phones and routers into the garbage and go back to paper and landlines.The really bad radiation is ionizing. Radio and microwave radiation is not. Those wavelengths are longer than even visible light. Microwaves in your oven are 700 to 1200 watts. Even without shielding you still would not feel it unless you crawled in, and the danger is the water molecules heating up, not ionizing radiation destroying tissue or DNA. Your router puts out perhaps 1 watt in a dispersed cloud. Also, the quantity or intensity of linear-wave radiation is directly inverse to the distance the observing/affected body is from the source of the radiation, so the power drops off quickly with distance.
Your router puts out non-ionizing, low frequency radiation (lower than infrared or visible light) in extremely low absorbtion power. To be afraid of this, you also need to be terrified of visible light. The next higher frequency of light above visible is ultra violet, which is the very beginning of where there could be long term cumulative damage due to some minor ionization in light skinned people. There are magnitudes of danger more in going outside without slathering yourself with sunscreen if you are light skinned, than owning an Orbi and leaving it on.
Thanks for your detailed and polite response. I also write with respect and appreciation for what you've said. That being said, I don't find your comparisons helpful. The word "radiation" per se is not a concern to me and I don't think that RF is the same as ionising radiation, of course! As regards sunlight, the fact that over-exposure is dangerous is a well documented and serious risk, as you say, but it is a fallacy to move from that to the claim that levels of exposure to RF can be ignored. The issues are different.
There are unanswered questions emerging when it comes to wifi becase of the permanent exposure to levels of RF that, while low, are orders of magnitude higher than would have been the case previously. There have always been concerns about the effects of RF and microwave radiation stretching way back before wifi. This was clear to me as a radio amateur using mobile technology in the VHF and UHF wavebands as far back as the 1980s. The power output of that equipment was much higher, but it was not present everywhere or all the time.
Now that these issues about wifi are mainstream they are, of course, a happy hunting ground for the uninformed neurotic and so I share frustration about that. That is not the point, however. There seems to be a paucity of research in this area and also vested commercial interests, so at least some concern is warranted. As in other areas of technology, enthusiasm about what new technology can do means that adoption outstrips responsible use and so there is the possibility of living to regret this. For example, while UK government advice for mobile phones is that children should not use them unless absolutely necessary and then only for short periods, this is largely unknown and ignored. It may be that we find in a generation that there are no long-term ills associated with this technology. But at this stage we don't know and there is evidence emerging that the picture may not be entirely rosy. If you know about this research then do let me know because I am only just beginning to hear about it.
In the meantime, parents want to look after their children and in the absence of clear information may want to limit their overall exposure by not having the wifi switched on at night. That is not unreasonable and it is a very simple and inexpensive thing for manufacturers to install in their products until such time as we have not a lack of evidence of harm but positive evidence of safety.
If you truly want to protect your children, turn off all devices, remove internet access entirely and never eat fast food or pre-packed meals. Good luck.
I agree that when safety is concerned and especially in children, and over abundance of caution should be taken. This is especially true in Europe. And yes, the exponential growth in wireless technology in the recent decade provides little time for definitive long term studies on any potential effects. In this then there leaves some room for doubts. Our own FCC has mobile phone emission limits on cell phones for this reason of caution in the absence of studies.
Having said that, electromagnetic radiation (all forms) is a deeply studied section of physics. The recent hype about growing danger due to the growing prevalence of more radio signals in the environment simply ignores the point that we are literally bathed in EMR and have been since we became a unique species. We have been protected from most bad ioninzing radiation by the earth's magnetic field, and the ozone layer in the atmosphere, but lower wave lengths (visible light) have been swamping our bodies for as long as we have been around. The addition to very low wattage long wave radiation - falling off inversely from its source - to the other sea of low frequency radiation is virtually insignificant. Only above visible light do we have hard statistical evidence of cause and effect of biological damage in varying degrees to long exposure.
There is all kinds of information out there. Naturally when one searches for this information, the most discussed is the more sensational which is usually the negative aspect. But buried in there is information containing the science known to date.
I respect your concern for your children. We simply disagree about the concept of danger in this type of radiation.