J

     
 


January 2008

Another study on electrical hypersensitivity shows no effect from RFR exposure

This study was done under the auspices of the Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme in the UK. It was designed to assess the effect of exposure to base station signals on individuals with electrical hypersensitivity or on controls. The subjects were exposed to a GSM signal, a UTMS signal, and a sham signal, each for 15 minutes. The first session was "open" and the next 3 sessions the testing was double blind. A variety of psychological and physiological tests were done.

During the open provocation, sensitive individuals reported lower levels of wellbeing in both the UTMS and UTMS exposures than in the sham, while controls reported more symptoms in the UTMS signal. During double-blind tests the GSM signal did not have any effect on either group. Sensitive individuals reported increased levels of arousal during the UTMS signal, but further analysis indicated that the difference was likely to be due to the effect of order of exposure rather than the exposure itself. Physiological measures did not differ across the three exposure conditions for either group. Neither group was able to judge accurately whether the signal was sham or RFR. These results are consistent with most other studies.

For more, see "Research - Clinical- General health effects".

Reference: Eltiti S, Wallace D, Ridgewell A, Zougkou K, et al. Does short-term exposure to mobile phone base station signals increase symptoms in individuals who report sensitivity to electromagnetic fields? A double-blind randomized provocation study. Environ Health Perspect 2007a;115:1603-1608.
Go to summary>

Another study shows no effect of short-term cell phone exposure on hearing

This study was carried out as part of the European "Guard" project that addressed the potential effects of cell phones on the hearing system. A sample of 169 young adults with no hearing problems were exposed to a GSM phone signal for 10 minutes, and their hearing was assessed before and after the exposure. The exposure to GSM signals had no effects on the auditory system.

For more, see Research - Clinical - Others - Hearing".

Reference: Parazzini M, Brazzale AR, Paglialonga P, Tognola G, et al. Effects of GSM cellular phones on human hearing: The European project “GUARD”. Radiat Res 2007a;168:608-613.
Go to summary>


Effect of RFR exposure on EEG tracings

Hinrikus and colleagues have recently added to the long list of experiments that have examined the effect of RFR exposure on electroencephalogram (EEG) tracings. EEGs were recorded while subjects were exposed or sham-exposed to RFR at 450 MHz. The subjects were resting and awake during the sessions. There was an increase in the average EEG alpha and beta power during the first 30 seconds of RFR exposure at 14 and 21 Hz modulation.

For more, see "Research - Clinical - cognitive function".

Reference: Hinrikus H, Bachmann M, Lass J, Tomson R, et al. Effect of 7, 14, and 21 Hz modulated 450 MHz microwave radiation on human electroencephalographic rhythms. Int J Radiat Biol 2007;84:69-79.
Go to summary>

               
More on heat shock proteins

Sanchez and colleagues studied the effect of RFR exposure on the expression of HSPs in the skin of hairless rats. Two sets of experiments were done, involving either a single exposure of 2 hours, or repeated exposures over 12 weeks. Neither single nor repeated exposures altered HSP expression in rat skin. The HSPs examined were Heat-shock cognate 70, and HSP 25 and 70.

For more, see "Research - Laboratory - Other - Heat shock response".

Reference: Sanchez S, Masuda H, Ruffie G, Poulletier De Gannes F, et al. Effect of GSM-900 and -1800 signals on the skin of hairless rats. III: Expression of heat shock proteins.  Int J Radiat Biol 2007b;84:61-68.
Go to summary>


RFR exposure and the human visual system

A recent study tested the effect of RFR exposure on the visual discrimination threshold (VDThr) of volunteers. Each subject took part in two experiments (RF- and sham-exposure) on two days one week apart.  In each experiment the VDThr was assessed by the subject pressing a key when she or he recognized a flash on an illuminated screen in front of them. No statistically significant differences in the VDThr were found in comparing the data for RFR exposure with those for sham exposure.

For more, see "Research - Clinical - Others - Vision".

Reference: Irlenbusch L, Bartsch B, Cooper J, Herget I, et al. Influence of a 902.4MHz GSM signal on the human visual system: Investigation of the discrimination threshold. Bioelectromagnetics 2007;28:648-654.
Go to summary>



Home             Links              Sitemap               Contact Us
© McLaughlin Centre for Population Health Risk Assessment