Is WiFi harmful? Some experts say it’s nothing to worry about

TORONTO – The union representing over 40,000 Catholic school teachers issued a position paper urging the Toronto District School Board not to use Wi-Fi in schools, citing possible detrimental health effects.

The Ontario English Catholic Teacher’s Association studied the effects of Wi-Fi, and according to the position paper, contends that it can be considered a potential workplace hazard, because the long term effects of its use are not known.

Though the paper does admit that the long-term effect of Wi-Fi exposure is not known, “It is estimated that at least 3 percent of the population has an environmental sensitivity to the radiation that is emitted by these devices and, as a result, experience serious immediate physical/biological effects when exposed.”

In a statement to Global News, the office for Minister of Education Laurel Barton said, “there is no evidence to show that the use of WiFi is linked to adverse health effects, including in school children,” and suggested that whether or not wi-fi is used in schools should be left up to the school boards.

The Ontario Catholic Teachers union is not alone in questioning the safety of radiation emitted by Wi-Fi signals. Some health organizations have started to question the safety of non-ionizing radiation, though many of the findings simply say that though there is no conclusive evidence of danger, not enough is known about the long-term effects.

Get breaking National news

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up

By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.

The World Health Organization (WHO) released a review of studies on potential health risks from Wi-Fi and determined that it could potentially be carcinogenic.

In a press release from the WHO, Dr. Jonathan Samet of the University of Southern California, argued that “the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk.”

Though the 2B classification defines something as a “possible human carcinogen,” some experts believe that the classification doesn’t carry much weight. Dr. Anthony Muc, an expert in electromagnetic radiation with the University of Toronto, argues that many things used every day are classified in that range and do not warrant major policy changes.

“A possible human carcinogen is still not a level at which major public policy is introduced. Because… coffee is in the same classification.” Muc said.

Health Canada issued a statement in 2010 concerning possible adverse health effects from the low-level radiation. They warned that there was no need for Canadians to be wary of Wi-Fi, saying there was no proof of health effects.