• Physics/Biology: Can a high-powered wifi signal cause headaches?
    33 replies, posted
Hi all, My friend claims that he was working on a high-powered wifi access point designed for outdoor use, which gave everyone in the room a noticeable headache, but there was no noticeable heat. He swears this isn't a nocebo effect. The most recent claim is that the power of the antenna can directly cause "artificiated pressure" on the nerves in the pain receptors around the brain associated with headache. The legal power limit he could have been working on is a 1W signal(30dBm) with a 4W antenna(unsure of how that translates to dBi). Frequency of 2.4GHz. I think that: -The signal is too weak to cause any heat in the tissue surrounding the brain(the parts that cause headaches), to any noticeable extent. -Any wireless device that could cause any damage in humans, even at 1 foot away, would not be legally allowed to be sold. -Brain damage would occur long before you can feel a headache. [URL="http://www.netis-systems.com/en/products/outdoor-series/1823.html#.VqJ9flIkPaq"]Here's a link to one of these devices, for reference.[/URL] Can any facepunch scientists help prove or debunk this case?
No. You don't have to read much further than the FCC briefs on consumer-grade wifi hardware.
[QUOTE=woolio1;49585336]No.[/QUOTE] I don't think my friend will take that for an answer, but I don't know enough about biology to refute his argument on nerves being affected by microwave signals. Is there a good argument supporting the case?
What my friend accidentally left out is this is a networking dish for long range communication. It is not a consumer grade dish. It did let out an enormous amount of heat. And the people in the room were not told the dish was on. One of my coworkers started complaining about a bad headache and then the others admitted they felt uncomfortable for no reason. We then explained the dish must have been left on and after turning it off and waiting several minutes, the headaches wore off. If anyone has any pertinent information, we would both love to hear your argument as to how this may be a psychological effect or maybe the signal strength was set too high in an enclosed area.
It's an FCC-certified consumer-grade device. That means it cannot legally cause harm in humans or animals, no matter how close you are to it. The only way it would be able to cause harm would be if it were operating outside the standard frequencies at a significantly higher transmit power than normal (unlikely), or if it were a defective unit (also unlikely, since wifi routers tend to not transmit when they fail). And if you were feeling headaches due to the radiation emitted by the wi-fi router, you'd have much more serious issues. Like the fact that your wi-fi router was actually a chunk of plutonium approaching critical mass.
I think you may be confusing the word radiation. All form of visible light is radiation, the only radiation that can actually ionize a molecule or an atom are gamma, x-ray and ultraviolet. Since this uses radio waves, yes it is radiation, no it can't ionize anything. Meaning it won't give you cancer or "approach critical mass". Now back to the point at hand, this device is used to relay or transmit over great distances meaning it needs to circumvent the obvious problem, range. In order for the device to broadcast over 20+km it needs considerable transmission strength to push a signal (wave) through 20km of air (and water in the air). Since the one I was working on uses a frequency of 2.4 GHz (which so happens to be the right size for water to absorb) it gets blocked easily and the signal fades quickly. To be able to broadcast very far it needs to be fairly strong. The reason I think this may cause headaches is as follows: -It's the right frequency to vibrate water molecules. -It's transmitting up to 4watts (average access point transmits at 0.0013watts. That's 3077 times stronger for those who don't own a calculator). -Human biology makes it easy for a human to to get a headache when their nerve receptors are made of water. -Vibration in these certain nerves receptors (several located around the head and neck) do cause headaches. -A 600 watt microwave can kill you but is only 150 times stronger than this router. To top it off we have a medical student in 3rd year, a 4th year concordia biology major and a radio frequency engineer agreeing that it is very plausible that a device like this could in fact cause a headache.
It is very legal for you to build a wireless wan. It is commonly done in every university and college. This isn't a giant microwave, its basically wifi but beefed up for commercial use. Also yes its totally more likely that a device that has 150 times less power than a microwave (which can kill you in seconds) is just as harmful as another similar device operating at 3077 times less strength. Yup! Harmless! I'm just batshit crazy, what are numbers? :O
Well, all right. Fine. The wifi router gave you headaches. I don't see much point to this thread now, if you're not going to listen.
[QUOTE=woolio1;49585746]Well, all right. Fine. The wifi router gave you headaches. I don't see much point to this thread now, if you're not going to listen.[/QUOTE] Can you give me a reason as to why this absolutely can't? I have 3 sources I know personally, who agree. Yet I have 2 strangers on the internet telling me its impossible. Your only argument is the government wont let you buy this type of product because FCC... [URL="http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/65/6553/UNT4100Z/posters/the-x-files-i-want-to-believe-print.jpg"]http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/65/6553/UNT4100Z/posters/the-x-files-i-want-to-believe-print.jpg[/URL]
I've stopped arguing. You already know the answer you want to believe. I can't convince you otherwise. If your friends are so informed, listen to them. After all, we're just random guys on the Internet.
[QUOTE=woolio1;49585813]I've stopped arguing. You already know the answer you want to believe. I can't convince you otherwise. If your friends are so informed, listen to them. After all, we're just random guys on the Internet.[/QUOTE] Thanks! And nice legs ;)
[QUOTE=laffytaffy38;49585738]Also yes its totally more likely that a device that has 150 times less power than a microwave (which can kill you in seconds) is just as harmful as another similar device operating at 3077 times less strength. Yup! Harmless! I'm just batshit crazy, what are numbers? :O[/QUOTE] Beats the shit out of me.
[url]http://www.icnirp.org/en/frequencies/high-frequency/index.html[/url] "A considerable amount of research has been conducted on the relationship between HF fields and health outcomes such as headaches, concentration difficulty, sleep quality, cognitive function, cardiovascular effects, etc. This research to date has not shown any such health effects."
[QUOTE=laffytaffy38;49585760]Can you give me a reason as to why this absolutely can't? I have 3 sources I know personally, who agree. Yet I have 2 strangers on the internet telling me its impossible. Your only argument is the government wont let you buy this type of product because FCC... [URL="http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/65/6553/UNT4100Z/posters/the-x-files-i-want-to-believe-print.jpg"]http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/65/6553/UNT4100Z/posters/the-x-files-i-want-to-believe-print.jpg[/URL][/QUOTE] There is a difference between radiation that is ionizing radiation and radiation that does not ionize. Headaches are also a difficult mechanism to understand, as not a lot is understood about how they're caused. Hell, the exact mechanism by which NSAID's fight headache pain isn't [I]entirely[/I] understood. Headaches are shown to be affected by both placebos [I]and[/I] nocebos though. Like the one here. Anyways non-ionizing radiation is harmless, as it doesn't have the energy to excite any particles inside your brain. The amount of radiation you receive from 24hrs spent with your head against a wifi router is less than that gained from 1m in the sun, which emits high-energy ionizing radiation in the form of ultraviolet radiation. In fact, the exposure from a normal wifi router is 20 [B]millionths[/B] of that considered to be the level of radiation exposure by international agencies. Multiple studies have been done on this topic of being sensitive to fields like this, and all have pointed to this being entirely bogus. [URL="http://www.bmj.com/content/332/7546/886.full"]Here's a particularly good one[/URL]
If you live in a dense apartment in the city then you would experience much worse headache. But you don't, thus it's harmless.
have to wonder if the reason is electrical in nature and not physical, the electromagnetic field given off by the device causing electrical interference in the brain. i'm a total layperson though so for all i know that could be impossible
[QUOTE=ichiman94;49586319]If you live in a dense apartment in the city then you would experience much worse headache. But you don't, thus it's harmless.[/QUOTE] And what would cause these headaches? [editline]22nd January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49586328]have to wonder if the reason is electrical in nature and not physical, the electromagnetic field given off by the device causing electrical interference in the brain. i'm a total layperson though so for all i know that could be impossible[/QUOTE] Unlikely, as the electromagnetic fields generated by the brain are for use in neuronal communication and have hilariously small magnitudes. In addition to being highly redundant. However, electromagnetic therapy is used to disrupt and reset these neural networks in Parkinsons patients so there is a possibility. Except in these cases, this is through electrodes hooked onto bare spots on the skull and made to do what they do. Which is a bit different than the energy level of 2.4Ghz radiation from wifi systems. I can't dismiss it entirely, but it doesn't seem likely. [editline]22nd January 2016[/editline] someone sound the :johnnymo1: alarm, he's much better at radiation and particle physics stuff like this than I am since he's actually a physicist and not a sophomore engineering student :v
If wifi gave people headaches they would never [I]stop[/I] having headaches. There's so many signals all over the place these days that you probably wouldn't even be able to tell that the wifi's causing it.
[QUOTE=paindoc;49586329]And what would cause these headaches?[/QUOTE] That's what I am saying. If he doesn't experience headaches in the city where there's thousands of WLAN shit then it's harmless.
[QUOTE=ichiman94;49586355]That's what I am saying. If he doesn't experience headaches in the city where there's thousands of WLAN shit then it's harmless.[/QUOTE] oh. gotcha. I was curious what you meant, since there have been a few studies that have shown the possibility of high-density living causing "tree sickness" or something like that.
[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;49586349]If wifi gave people headaches they would never [I]stop[/I] having headaches. There's so many signals all over the place these days that you probably wouldn't even be able to tell that the wifi's causing it.[/QUOTE] The important thing that's being thrown here is that this is a high-powered wifi antenna, not a home-use wifi antenna. 1W versus 0.00x watts. [QUOTE=paindoc;49586329] [editline]22nd January 2016[/editline] someone sound the :johnnymo1: alarm[/QUOTE] :johnnymo1: He probably has better shit to do than say for the 100th time that wifi cannot cause headaches, even though this one is stronger. The next thing I found is the FCC saying that these very same antennas would "be above unsafe levels" if you were to stand directly in front of it at close range. No mention of headaches, though, and the argument is specifically about headaches, and not about RF safety. Link: [url]https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/electromagnetic-compatibility-division/radio-frequency-safety/faq/rf-safety#Q19[/url]
[QUOTE=willtheoct;49586420]The important thing that's being thrown here is that this is a high-powered wifi antenna, not a home-use wifi antenna. 1W versus 0.00x watts. :johnnymo1: He probably has better shit to do than say for the 100th time that wifi cannot cause headaches, even though this one is stronger. The next thing I found is the FCC saying that these very same antennas would "be above unsafe levels" if you were to stand directly in front of it at close range. No mention of headaches, though, and the argument is specifically about headaches, and not about RF safety. Link: [url]https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/electromagnetic-compatibility-division/radio-frequency-safety/faq/rf-safety#Q19[/url][/QUOTE] Well, I have better shit to do too. Like a fuck load of statics homework and figuring wtf mhd fusion is. But I still doubt the field is a worry. 1W isn't that crazy, as this 30dbm and is the legal limit for 5ghz systems. Which are higher energy than 2.4Ghz systems as energy and wavelength are directly proportional. 5ghz systems have been in use for a long time now, and we all seem to be okay. I believe the 2.4ghz 1W limit is more about not interfering with other routers due to range and signal density, which js hardly a problem in parks and the like.
No but I may be wrong, but I heard that porn shrinks the brain.
[QUOTE=paindoc;49586294]There is a difference between radiation that is ionizing radiation and radiation that does not ionize. Headaches are also a difficult mechanism to understand, as not a lot is understood about how they're caused. Hell, the exact mechanism by which NSAID's fight headache pain isn't [I]entirely[/I] understood. Headaches are shown to be affected by both placebos [I]and[/I] nocebos though. Like the one here. Anyways non-ionizing radiation is harmless, as it doesn't have the energy to excite any particles inside your brain. The amount of radiation you receive from 24hrs spent with your head against a wifi router is less than that gained from 1m in the sun, which emits high-energy ionizing radiation in the form of ultraviolet radiation. In fact, the exposure from a normal wifi router is 20 [B]millionths[/B] of that considered to be the level of radiation exposure by international agencies. Multiple studies have been done on this topic of being sensitive to fields like this, and all have pointed to this being entirely bogus. [URL="http://www.bmj.com/content/332/7546/886.full"]Here's a particularly good one[/URL][/QUOTE] What I'm trying to get at is that wifi uses the same frequency as a microwave (2.4 Ghz). It's obviously not as strong as a microwave. A microwave heats up your food by using a lot of energy at a specific frequency, that frequency agitates and vibrates water molecules as the wave passes through at just the right size for water to gain this energy. If you had a access point broadcasting such a large amount of energy could it not "shake" some water molecules in your head? Namely the areas that have receptors for pressure. I'm thinking pressure because when you're sick, the over accumulation of mucus causes headaches as pressure builds up. Could this level of power not possibly cause a headache as it's targeted to water molecules? (I should mention because Will is pissed at me about it, there is no heat build up because your body is very good at getting rid of heat (heat capacity of water is very high). [QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;49586349]If wifi gave people headaches they would never [I]stop[/I] having headaches. There's so many signals all over the place these days that you probably wouldn't even be able to tell that the wifi's causing it.[/QUOTE] Keyword used here is its not regular wifi, it's about 3077 times stronger than your average router. Meaning you would need about 3077 access points in close proximity on the same frequency to have the same effect.
im sorry but they all have terminal brain cancer use tinfoil hats to prevent further damage to others
Those posts are giving me a headache, poster is literally radiation
Might as well make a "does vaccines cause autism" thread. It is a bullshit myth made up by the same type of people. The "electrosensitivity" and headache shit is psychosomatic of nature and a psychosis at worst. Mass hysteria.
I think it's about time I posted this again: [t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/111996868/reactions/RadiationDosageCart.png[/t] TL;DR a banana phone emits more radiation that can actually harm you in any way than your everyday radio devices, which emit none. There's a difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
[QUOTE=daigennki;49610816]I think it's about time I posted this again: [t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/111996868/reactions/RadiationDosageCart.png[/t] TL;DR a banana phone emits more radiation that can actually harm you in any way than your everyday radio devices, which emit none. There's a difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.[/QUOTE] You know, I was actually looking for that chart for other reasons, thanks! But this guy's ideas don't involve radiation, I think that now he's suggesting that microwaves directly turn into nerve signals.
I cannot imagine a mechanism by which microwaves could affect nerve signals. All cells in the body maintain a potential difference of -70 mV across the cell membrane. Depolarisation of the membrane only occurs when the potential reaches -55 mV. Let's say the dish had a diameter of 0.3 m, which would give it a surface area of 0.0707 m^2. Assume that all the power (1 W) of this dish was transmitted in that cylindrical beam. The flux density of the beam is thus 14.1 W/m^2. This gives an electric field strength of 103 V/m. A typical cell membrane is 10 nm thick. Assuming no dielectric effects from the water surrounding the cells, which is clearly nonsense but for the sake of argument we will assume that, we find that the potential difference across the membrane caused by the WiFi signal is 103 μV. You will notice that this is quite a bit lower than the 15 mV required to depolarise the membrane. So no, microwaves probably don't affect nerves. At all. EDIT: I'm not a physicist or engineer so maybe my understanding of EM waves is completely off, but as far as I know, even if my calculations are wrong, they do not affect nerves at all.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.