Wi-Fi会对新生婴儿有害吗？

梦里梦外; 2021-07-26 16:45 284阅读 0赞

![could-wi-fi-be-harmful-to-a-newborn-baby-00][]

Wi-Fi has become such an ingrained part of our everyday lives that we tend not to give it much thought unless it has stopped working. But what if your family has a newborn baby in the house? Are there any dangers that new parents should be aware of?

Wi-Fi已成为我们日常生活中根深蒂固的一部分，以至于除非它停止工作，否则我们往往不会考虑太多。 但是，如果您的家人在家里有一个新生婴儿怎么办？ 新父母应该注意哪些危险？

*Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-driven grouping of Q&A web sites.*

*今天的“问答”环节由SuperUser提供，它是Stack Exchange的一个分支，该社区是由社区驱动的Q＆A网站分组。*

## 问题 **(**The Question**)** ##

SuperUser reader avy wants to know if Wi-Fi could actually be harmful to his family’s newborn baby:

超级用户读者avy想知道Wi-Fi是否实际上会对他的家人的新生婴儿有害：

> I am most likely being an overprotective parent, but since the birth of our newborn, my wife and I have been wondering about credible studies dealing with Wi-Fi and health concerns. I love my Wi-Fi, it’s the cornerstone to all my gadgets and computer setup throughout our house, and it makes my world easier plain and simple, but having a newborn enter that world changes the way I think about everything.
> 
> 我很可能是个保护过度的父母，但是自从我们的新生儿出生以来，我和我的妻子一直想知道有关Wi-Fi和健康问题的可靠研究。 我爱我的Wi-Fi，它是我整个房屋中所有小工具和计算机设置的基石，它使我的世界变得更加简单明了，但是让新生儿进入这个世界将改变我对一切的思考方式。
> 
> Now before people start writing that Wi-Fi is safe because they use it in hospitals and schools, let me be clear, I’m aware of all that, but the idea of having it 24/7 for years to come around this little person that is our responsibility to look out for makes me want to have a definitive answer to the subject.
> 
> 现在，在人们开始写Wi-Fi是安全的，因为他们在医院和学校使用Wi-Fi之前，请让我清楚，我已经知道了所有这些，但是要让这个小矮人持续24/7多年的想法这是我们要注意的责任，这使我希望对这个问题有一个明确的答案。
> 
> I will put on my tin foil hat and await some well thought out/educated answers.
> 
> 我将戴上锡纸帽子，等待一些深思熟虑/受过良好教育的答案。

Could Wi-Fi pose a danger to a newborn baby or is it just a bit of unnecessary paranoia?

Wi-Fi会对新生婴儿构成危险吗，还是仅仅是一些不必要的妄想症？

## 答案 **(**The Answer**)** ##

SuperUser contributors NothingsImpossible and Bob have the answer for us. First up, NothingsImpossible:

超级用户贡献者NothingsImpossible和Bob为我们提供了答案。 首先，没什么不可能：

> *Disclaimer. This is a very simplified explanation, mistakes are (mostly) intentional.*
> 
> *免责声明* *这是一个非常简化的解释，错误(大多数是故意的)。*
> 
> Radiation can be separated into two categories: **ionizing** radiation and **non-ionizing** radiation.
> 
> 辐射可分为两类： **电离**辐射和**非电离**辐射。
> 
> In layman’s terms, [ionizing][] radiation is radiation that can “break” the molecules that make up things.
> 
> 用外行的话来说， [电离][ionizing]辐射是可以“破坏”构成事物的分子的辐射。
> 
> [Non-ionizing][] radiation, on the other hand, just passes through objects or is converted to heat when it hits them.
> 
> 另一方面， [非电离][Non-ionizing]辐射仅穿过物体或在撞击物体时转换为热量。
> 
> Wi-Fi networks operate on the same frequency as a microwave oven. It uses non-ionizing radiation and when it hits the objects, it is just converted into heat, it does not change the composition of the object itself. It is harmless, at most it will heat your body, but a very, very, veryyyy tiny amount that is not even measurable.
> 
> Wi-Fi网络的运行频率与微波炉相同。 它使用非电离辐射，当它撞击物体时，它只是转化为热量，它不会改变物体本身的成分。 它是无害的，最多会加热您的身体，但是非常，非常，非常非常微小的量甚至无法测量。
> 
> Ionizing radiation is dangerous. Examples of it are ultraviolet rays and nuclear radiation. They not only heat you, but they also change the composition of the molecules that make up your body. They can modify the DNA of your cells, causing cancer.
> 
> 电离辐射很危险。 例如紫外线和核辐射。 它们不仅会加热您，而且还会改变构成您身体的分子的组成。 它们可以修饰细胞的DNA，从而导致癌症。
> 
> Example: Sunburns. It burns after long, unprotected exposure to the sun, not because your skin got hot. The UV rays of the sun damaged the DNA of the skin cells, and the body reacts with the burning sensation.
> 
> 例如：晒伤。 长时间无保护地暴露在阳光下，它会燃烧，而不是因为皮肤变热。 太阳的紫外线会破坏皮肤细胞的DNA，人体会产生灼热感。
> 
> **Conclusion: Wi-Fi is harmless**.
> 
> **结论：Wi-Fi无害** 。

Followed by the answer from Bob:

随后是鲍勃的回答：

> Perfectly safe.
> 
> 万无一失。
> 
> The term “radiation” is often used to scare people. Let’s get it straight. There are two factors – frequency and intensity. Frequency has a far larger effect on how damaging radiation is. Wi-Fi and other radio communications use a *very* low frequency – far below visible light.
> 
> 术语“辐射”通常用于吓people人。 让我们弄清楚。 有两个因素–频率和强度。 频率对辐射的破坏程度影响更大。 Wi-Fi和其他无线电通信使用的频率*非常*低-远低于可见光。
> 
> Radiation that actually causes issues, could potentially cause cancer, etc., is usually *ionizing radiation*. It has a very high frequency and can cause mutations in DNA, possibly leading to cancer ([more info on that process][]). The frequency required to be ionizing? At least 1,000,000 GHz. That is literally a 500,000 times higher frequency than what Wi-Fi transmits on, 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz. *Non-ionizing radiation*, which Wi-Fi falls under, does little more than transfer heat.
> 
> 实际上引起问题，可能潜在导致癌症等的*辐射*通常是*电离辐射* 。 它的频率很高，会引起DNA突变，可能导致癌症( [有关该过程的更多信息][more info on that process] )。 需要电离的频率？ 至少1,000,000 GHz。 实际上，这是Wi-Fi传输2.4 GHz或5 GHz频率的500,000倍。 Wi-Fi属于*非电离辐射* ，其作用仅仅是传递热量。
> 
> Did you know light is also EM radiation? Yup. In fact, [light][] (~500,000 GHz on the near-infrared side, ~750,000 GHz near-ultraviolet) is much closer to ionizing radiation than Wi-Fi. [Sunlight actually contains some ionizing radiation (UVB, UVC – UVA can also cause DNA damage, but it’s not in the same way)][Sunlight actually contains some ionizing radiation _UVB_ UVC _ UVA can also cause DNA damage_ but it_s not in the same way]. But you’re not going to hide in your house for the rest of your life, are you?
> 
> 您知道光也是EM辐射吗？ 对。 实际上， [光][light] (在近红外侧约为500,000 GHz，在近紫外约为750,000 GHz)比Wi-Fi更接近电离辐射。 [阳光实际上包含一些电离辐射(UVB，UVC – UVA也会造成DNA损伤，但方式不同)][Sunlight actually contains some ionizing radiation _UVB_ UVC _ UVA can also cause DNA damage_ but it_s not in the same way] 。 但是您一生都不会躲在房子里，对吗？
> 
> Apart from frequency, there is intensity. Non-ionizing radiation can also be damaging – but this really only applies to higher intensities. And ionizing radiation is not always dangerous – our bodies can cope with lower intensities, which is why we don’t all die in the sun (vampires are another matter). Wi-Fi has a transmitting power usually far under 1 Watt (I’ve seen figures for 200 mW). And most of that energy never reaches you – by the inverse square law, you only get about 1/distance squared of that. In layman’s terms – the energy spreads equally in all directions. 10 meters away? 1/100 \* 200 mW = 2 mW. That’s *nothing*.
> 
> 除了频率，还有强度。 非电离辐射也可能会造成破坏，但这实际上仅适用于更高的强度。 电离辐射并不总是危险的-我们的身体可以应付较低的强度，这就是为什么我们不会在阳光下全部死亡(吸血鬼是另一回事)的原因。 Wi-Fi的发射功率通常远低于1瓦(我看过200毫瓦的数字)。 而且，大多数能量永远不会到达您-根据平方反比定律，您只能得到大约1 /距离平方的距离。 用外行的话来说，能量在各个方向上均等地分布。 10米远？ 1/100 \* 200毫瓦= 2毫瓦 *没什么*
> 
> Microwave ovens (which operate on a similar frequency as Wi-Fi) transmit ~1000 Watts, and it’s highly focused inside that metal box. Only maybe 1 Watt can be released through the shielding, and even that is considered perfectly safe. To put all this in perspective, sunlight (which is a higher frequency, and therefore more energetic) is about 1000 Watts per square meter when it hits the ground, half of which is visible light or higher.
> 
> 微波炉(以与Wi-Fi相似的频率运行)可传输约1000瓦特，并且高度集中在该金属盒内。 通过屏蔽只能释放1瓦特，甚至被认为是绝对安全的。 从所有角度看，日光(频率较高，因此能量更高)在撞击地面时约为每平方米1000瓦，其中一半是可见光或更高。
> 
> You might also find some interesting sources and studies cited on a [similar question on Skeptics.SE][].
> 
> 您可能还会[在Skeptics.SE][similar question on Skeptics.SE]的[类似问题上][similar question on Skeptics.SE]发现一些有趣的资源和研究。

Make sure to look through the rest of the lively discussion on the topic at SuperUser via the link below!

请确保通过以下链接在SuperUser上浏览有关该主题的其余热烈讨论！

--------------------

Have something to add to the explanation? Sound off in the comments. Want to read more answers from other tech-savvy Stack Exchange users? [Check out the full discussion thread here][].

有什么补充说明吗？ 在评论中听起来不错。 是否想从其他精通Stack Exchange的用户那里获得更多答案？ [在此处查看完整的讨论线程][Check out the full discussion thread here] 。

> 翻译自: [https://www.howtogeek.com/183031/could-wi-fi-be-harmful-to-a-newborn-baby/][https_www.howtogeek.com_183031_could-wi-fi-be-harmful-to-a-newborn-baby]

[could-wi-fi-be-harmful-to-a-newborn-baby-00]: /images/20210726/4e85bbc88866465285203c6223dd3ab5.png
[ionizing]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation
[Non-ionizing]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing_radiation
[more info on that process]: http://biology.stackexchange.com/a/14379
[light]: http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/science/uv-spectrum.htm
[Sunlight actually contains some ionizing radiation _UVB_ UVC _ UVA can also cause DNA damage_ but it_s not in the same way]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight#Summary
[similar question on Skeptics.SE]: http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/1178/are-wifi-waves-harmful
[Check out the full discussion thread here]: http://superuser.com/questions/718650/paranoid-parent-wifi-safe-for-baby
[https_www.howtogeek.com_183031_could-wi-fi-be-harmful-to-a-newborn-baby]: https://www.howtogeek.com/183031/could-wi-fi-be-harmful-to-a-newborn-baby/