Health effects of AC routers and N routers (2.4ghz vs 5ghz).

[ironk]

I am looking into the health effects of AC routers vs N only routers and I am finding that many articles state that the 5ghz frequency is safer than 2.4ghz? However, isn't AC more than just 5ghz and maybe transmits signals at a much higher "rate" and distance? I am wondering if it is better to then stay with N only router for health.

 

[frowertr]

Finding definitive health affects (adverse or not) for routers, cell phones, cordless phones, blue tooth etc., is like looking for the lost city of Atlantis. Lots of research with little or no substance. The power output is so low that it's considered safe. But I'm sure there are plenty of people that think it's not either just like there are those that think vaccinations cause autism.

5Ghz has less penetration than 2.4Ghz so it typically has less distance.

Your probably more likely to to develop health issues due to UVA and UVB emitted from the sun when outside than you are from APs. That's my opinion anyway.

 

[Kaido]

Finding definitive health affects (adverse or not) for routers, cell phones, cordless phones, blue tooth etc., is like looking for the lost city of Atlantis. Lots of research with little or no substance. The power output is so low that it's considered safe. But I'm sure there are plenty of people that think it's not either just like there are those that think vaccinations cause autism.

5Ghz has less penetration than 2.4Ghz so it typically has less distance.

Your probably more likely to to develop health issues due to UVA and UVB emitted from the sun when outside than you are from APs. That's my opinion anyway.

Yeah, I'm sure it has some sort of negative health impact, but given the period of time we've had cell phones & the fact that there is no glaring issues that kill you right away...meh. Especially meh when you think about how much crap is in the air around you...cell phone signals, AM radio, FM radio, XM-Sirius radio, all the government signals floating around, plus the sun's UV stuff...yeah. You can't escape it

 

[ironk]

I guess I was asking more about going with a AC router or a N router. If you had a choice between the two, which one would you go with if health/safety was the concern?

Certainly there many things that can cause problems but I think it is better to lessen them, especially inside the house. I think this whole "you can't escape it", is not a good excuse. At least try....

 

[frowertr]

There are no health concern, in my mind, with ANY access Point. There are only two factors I consider: Price and Performance. That means I pick AC every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

I get your concern, but the amount of RF energy emitted by these things are so low that the consensus is that smoking, drinking, background radiation, sunlight, driving in your car to the supermarket, etc., is far more detrimental to your health that the tiny amount of energy coming out of an AP.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

The only way to be safe:

 

[RLGL]

It's all in your head

 

[ironk]

I will look into this more, but thanks everyone.

 

[nerp]

No more impact than the radiation coming from the sun, which is quite a bit more powerful. You realize you're bombarded with more energy from space than you will get from a wifi router, right?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Start with the output power of the WAP. Factor in the distance, intervening walls, and the inverse-cube drop off... you're getting tiny fractions of a milliwatt of exposure, unless you somehow managed to swallow your wifi hotspot.

Eating farmed fish (mercury) or making microwave popcorn (microwaves leak enough power to completely drown out local 2.4GHz spectrum communications) will probably kill you long before the WAP does. If sun exposure, the american diet, or tripping over your own two feet don't get you first.

Basically, everything under the sun, including the sun, does damage to you and your cells, dna, etc. The trick, if you can call it that, is to do a small enough amount of damage that you can heal yourself faster than the damage is being done.

 

[RadiclDreamer]

There has been no evidence that any wifi has ANY health effects at all. Remember this is low power non-ionizing radiation, its the same type of radiation but at a MUCH lower power as AM/FM radio, sattellite, HAM, etc. The frequencies are all different but they are all radiation sources...but then again so is the sun and so are bananas.

 

[RadiclDreamer]

Also, AC is only 5ghz, but most still have N radios as well to support legacy 2.4ghz devices.

 

[JackMDS]

I am willing to Trade.

You tell me which one is more Dangerous, Bigfoot, Sasquatch, or Yeti.

In turn, I will tell you about Entry Level Wireless Routers.

 

[Just Mark]

I am certain that my 55 years of exposure to RF radiation is what has caused me to go grey and have wrinkles on my face. I am also certain that another 55 years of exposure is going to kill me.

 

[smitbret]

I am willing to Trade.

You tell me which one is more Dangerous, Bigfoot, Sasquatch, or Yeti.

In turn, I will tell you about Entry Level Wireless Routers.

Literally, LOL.

 

[jegesq]

I am looking into the health effects of AC routers vs N only routers and I am finding that many articles state that the 5ghz frequency is safer than 2.4ghz? However, isn't AC more than just 5ghz and maybe transmits signals at a much higher "rate" and distance? I am wondering if it is better to then stay with N only router for health.

Actually, you have it exactly backwards: 5ghz transmits at a higher frequency than 2.4ghz, and the radio waves do not travel as far with 5ghz than they do with 2.4ghz. Think of it like sound waves: You can hear the much lower frequencies of the bass woofer in a car coming from blocks away, and yet you cannot hear the tweeter until the car is almost next to you. Same principle: low frequency waves travel farther than higher frequencies. This is why 5ghz AC does not provide nearly the kind of coverage at distances as does 2.4ghz. 5hgz simply doesn't travel as far and thus is really intended for optimal use at closer distances.

The 802.11 AC standard essentially allows for wider (not more powerful) channel broadcasting (think of a bigger pipe) which allows the transmission of more data than narrower channels than does the narrower channels that are within the 802.11n spec. While the higher frequencies need to be broadcast at a higher power than the lower 2.4ghz frequencies, "higher" is all relative, and we're talking about only milliwatts of difference. Not enough to affect anyone's health.

The other part of the health effect equation that you're overlooking is that it's not just the frequency at which radio waves are transmitted, but also the power at which they are transmitted. Consumer routers pose literally no health issues, and in part this is due to the specifications that manufactures are required to meet with respect to limiting the effective levels of radiation and by limiting the power at which such routers are permitted to transmit (and why many manufacturers are now "locking down" their devices so that end users can no longer modify transmit power per new FCC regs).

But if you're concerned, put on that tin foil hat.

 

[KingFatty]

I thought the power level was irrelevant.

The frequency can't ionize, so increasing the power wouldn't do anything would it?

The wireless routers limit the power output to avoid interfering with everyone else - sets a finite limit where the neighborhood won't be saturated.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I thought the power level was irrelevant.

The frequency can't ionize, so increasing the power wouldn't do anything would it?

The wireless routers limit the power output to avoid interfering with everyone else - sets a finite limit where the neighborhood won't be saturated.

Microwave ovens don't ionize either, but they cook food. But they operate at like 1500w, vs maybe 1w for a router. I think frequency matters too though.

That said the low power levels of communication equipment is more than likely way below the danger threshold. I would not worry really.

 

[5G kills]

You are in error, because you do not understand the bio physics. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810017132.pdf See also: http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/BioInitiativeReport-RF-Color-Charts.pdf See also: http://thermoguy.com/wp-content/uploads/Bioeffects-of-Selected-Non-Lethal-Weapons.pdf Good luck.

 

[sdifox]

You are in error, because you do not understand the bio physics. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810017132.pdf See also: http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/BioInitiativeReport-RF-Color-Charts.pdf See also: http://thermoguy.com/wp-content/uploads/Bioeffects-of-Selected-Non-Lethal-Weapons.pdf Good luck.

And you have difficulty understanding the difference between ionising and non-ionising radiation.

 

[5G kills]

And you have difficulty understanding the difference between ionising and non-ionising radiation.

Oh grasshopper. You have much catching up to do. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810017132.pdf Page 4. "The second restriction requires a clear distinction between ionizing radiation and NIR, and actually there is none. Both forms of radiation are electromagnetic waves, and they seem to differ only in terms of frequency. Generally, ionizing radiation is at the high (in frequency) end of the spectrum, while NIR occupies the lower part. What frequency marks the dividing line between ionizing and nonionizing radiation? A standard definition for ionizing radiation was found; however, it is arbitrary and does not identify an abrupt physical threshold." Good luck.

 

[repoman0]

Pretty sure that ~1300 W/m^2 worth of wide spectrum power flux from the sun, highly concentrated at frequencies 10000x higher than the measly 0.1W radiated RF power from a typical router, is a lot more worrying. You might as well wear a tin foil suit every time you go outside if you are still worried about this.

 

[sdifox]

Oh grasshopper. You have much catching up to do. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810017132.pdf Page 4. "The second restriction requires a clear distinction between ionizing radiation and NIR, and actually there is none. Both forms of radiation are electromagnetic waves, and they seem to differ only in terms of frequency. Generally, ionizing radiation is at the high (in frequency) end of the spectrum, while NIR occupies the lower part. What frequency marks the dividing line between ionizing and nonionizing radiation? A standard definition for ionizing radiation was found; however, it is arbitrary and does not identify an abrupt physical threshold." Good luck.

Don't vaccinate either. But keep your kids out of school. We must weed out stupidity.

No personal attacks allowed
in the tech areas.

AT Mod Usandthem

 

[5G kills]

Don't vaccinate either. But keep your kids out of school. We must weed out stupidity.

So sorry for you. It appears your central nervous system has succumbed to the health effects of your wireless fun-boat. No matter how ignorant a person chooses to be about this extinction event, it still saddens me when one appears to be succumbing to psychosis - just one of the risk factors of over exposure to toxic agents. May God have mercy on your soul.

Personal attacks are not
allowed in the tech areas.

AT Mod Usandthem

 

[mnewsham]

extinction event

Lmao, this made me burst out laughing.

Thanks.