Is EM radiation from a domestic main electric supply harmful?

Question

Pardon me if this not exactly the right site for asking this question but one of my friends sleeps in a room directly next to the main electric supply of his house (220V, 50Hz in India) and insists that the EM radiation from the electric wire may be harmful. I have tried explaining to him that the (thick) wire is about 1m away from his bed, emits non-ionising radiation, is separated by a brick wall and cited him this answer and this fact sheet: ICNIRP guidelines which states:

At the power frequency (50 Hz) the reference for occupational exposure are 10 kV/m for the electric field, and 1 mT for the magnetic field. With respect to general public exposure the reference levels are 5 kV/m for the electric field and 200 µT for the magnetic field.

I could not find whether the above guidelines were for limited or prolonged exposure.

Thus is the radiation in any form from the wire near the above levels and is being 1m from the wire continuously for more than 8 hours everyday safe.

Also what about continuous prolonged exposure (8 hours) radiation exposure from other sources such as the wifi router 0.5 meters from my desk or a mobile phone?

Answer 1

In the 1980s and 1990s, there was some public concern about whether humans had any biological response to the 50 Hz or 60 Hz radiation from high-voltage power lines, the ones that cross the countryside on skeletal metal towers. The strong-field region around those towers is pretty large: it's possible to illuminate a fluorescent light tube by holding it, unconnected, in your hand under the path of the power lines.

To my knowledge, there was never any convincing research that showed medical effects from power-line-frequency radiation leaking into the empty space around high-voltage power lines. (There were charlatans who claimed differently in order to sell books and appear on television.) I vaguely remember this research under the acronym ELF, for "extremely low frequency." A name to search for, if you want to dig into the literature of the time, is the late debunker Bob Park.

Low-power lines in households are even less risk. Note that you can't illuminate a fluorescent bulb by waving it around in your house. Note also that Earth's magnetic field is about 50 µT in most places, so a 200 µT oscillating field would make a compass needle buzz like a maladjusted AC motor.

Answer 2

In considering claims about the possibility of electromagnetic radiation causing damage to the human body, one needs to first look at how, in general, electromagnetic radiation interacts with matter and then consider what the interaction is when the "matter" is the human body.

For the first I recommend you look at the following Hyperphysics website on "The Interaction of Radiation with Matter" (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod3.html). Then, for "Radiation and the Human Body" see, from the same site, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod4.html#c1

The adverse effect of electromagnetic radiation on the human body can be broadly divided into two categories: Thermal and Ionizing. Which effect applies depends on the frequency of the radiation. To quote the second link from the website, “To have a physiological effect, the energy of the radiation must be absorbed”.

It goes on to point out that at power frequencies (50-60 Hz) the “The body is transparent”, meaning the electromagnetic energy passes through the body without being absorbed. Ionizing effects, those associated with cancer type injuries, don’t begin to occur until you reach the ultraviolet frequency range.

To quote the position of the US FDA from their site https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/cell-phones/radio-frequency-radiation-and-cell-phones#:~:text=Scientific%20consensus%20shows%20that%20non,cause%20any%20harm%20to%20people.

“Scientific consensus shows that non-ionizing radiation is not a carcinogen and, at or below the radio frequency exposure limits set by the FCC, non-ionizing radiation has not been shown to cause any harm to people”

Bottom Line: Since the power frequency (50-60Hz) of a domestic mains is neither absorbed by human tissue (and thus does not have thermal effects) nor has the potential to ionize tissue, the current scientific consensus appears to be that it does not have the potential for causing harm.

Hope this helps.

Answer 3

Fields from power lines are "possibly carcinogenic to humans" per the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research in Cancer.

The WHO/IARC classified ELF electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic, group 2B, in 2002. In a 2007 review:

Much of the scientific research examining long-term risks from ELF magnetic field exposure has focused on childhood leukaemia. In 2002, IARC published a monograph classifying ELF magnetic fields as "possibly carcinogenic to humans". This classification is used to denote an agent for which there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity in experimental animals (other examples include coffee and welding fumes). This classification was based on pooled analyses of epidemiological studies demonstrating a consistent pattern of a two-fold increase in childhood leukaemia associated with average exposure to residential power-frequency magnetic field above 0.3 to 0.4 µT. The Task Group concluded that additional studies since then do not alter the status of this classification.

However, the epidemiological evidence is weakened by methodological problems, such as potential selection bias. In addition, there are no accepted biophysical mechanisms that would suggest that low-level exposures are involved in cancer development. Thus, if there were any effects from exposures to these low-level fields, it would have to be through a biological mechanism that is as yet unknown. Additionally, animal studies have been largely negative. Thus, on balance, the evidence related to childhood leukaemia is not strong enough to be considered causal.

Basically, there is weak evidence suggesting that power lines do cause childhood leukemia. There is no strong evidence that they don't. If they did cause cancer, this would involve an unknown mechanism that we don't know how to model and isolate biases. The balance of these factors are why it retains its current rating.

WHO policy suggests "When constructing new facilities and designing new equipment, including appliances, low-cost ways of reducing exposures may be explored." Moving one's bed across the room is certainly low-cost, and would be consistent with this guidance.