Figure 3 - uploaded by Narendra Pal Singh
Content may be subject to copyright.
Single-stran d D NA breaks frequency distribution graph plotting percent of cells versus length of D NA m igration of brain cells from contin uous-wave RFR-and sham-exposed anim als. Each treatm ent plotte d consists of data from 800 brain cells: 100 cells per anim al.
Source publication
We investigated the effects of acute (2-h) exposure to pulsed (2-micros pulse width, 500 pulses s(-1)) and continuous wave 2450-MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on DNA strand breaks in brain cells of rat. The spatial averaged power density of the radiation was 2mW/cm2, which produced a whole-body average-specific absorption rate of 1.2W...
Citations
... In our sample, comet assays revealed a higher amount of DNA damage (p = 0.045) in the exposed group (Table 4). Under laboratory conditions short term RF-EMF exposure for few hours was repeatedly associated with transient DNA damage (Franzellitti et al., 2010;Lai and Singh, 1996;Schwarz et al., 2008). Compared to laboratory conditions the exposure in our participants was weak even in the exposed group. ...
... Similarly, some authors have revealed that RF-EMF stimulates the development of ROS in the reproductive system [5,6,39,40]. According to Lai and Singh [41], when rat brain cells were subjected to continuous and pulsed radiofrequency radiation at a frequency of 2450MHz with SAR of 1.2 W/kg for 2 hr each day, the free radical production in the body increased. ...
A growing threat to male infertility has become a major concern for the human population due to the advent of modern technologies as a source of radiofrequency radiation (RFR). Since these technologies have become an integral part of our daily lives, thus, it becomes necessary to know the impression of such radiations on human health. In view of this, the current study aims to focus on the biological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiations on mouse Leydig cell line (TM3) in a time-dependent manner. TM3 cells were exposed to RFR emitted from 4G cell phone and also exposed to a particular frequency of 1800 MHz and 2450 MHz from RFR exposure system. The cells were then evaluated for different parameters such as cell viability, cell proliferation, testosterone production, and ROS generation. A considerable reduction in the testosterone levels and proliferation rate of TM3 cells were observed at 120 min of exposure as compared to the control group in all exposure settings. Conversely, the intracellular ROS levels showed a significant rise at 60, 90 and 120 min of exposure in both mobile phone and 2450 MHz exposure groups. However, RFR treatment for different time durations (15, 30, 45, 60, 90, and 120 min) did not have significant effect on cell viability at any of the exposure condition (2450 MHz, 1800 MHz, and mobile phone radiation). Therefore, our findings concluded with the negative impact of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiations on Leydig cell’s physiological functions, which could be a serious concern for male infertility. However, additional studies are required to determine the specific mechanism of RFR action as well as its long-term consequences.
... Similarly, Agarwal et al. [11] reported no significant change in DNA damage between the group exposed to mobile phone waves and the control group. These conflicting results regarding DNA damage may be attributed to the source of sperm preparation and the test protocols used, such as exposure time, frequency of EMWs, SAR, and other factors (Table 1) [11,15,22,[25][26][27]33,35,[45][46][47][48][49][50][51]. ...
Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from various sources may impact health due to the generation of frequency bands. Broad pulses emitted within frequency bands can be absorbed by cells, influencing their function. Numerous laboratory studies have demonstrated that mobile phones—generally the most widely used devices—can have harmful effects on sex cells, such as sperm and oocytes, by producing RF-EMR. Moreover, some research has indicated that RF-EMR generated by mobile phones can influence sperm parameters, including motility, morphology, viability, and (most critically) DNA structure. Consequently, RF-EMR can disrupt both sperm function and fertilization. However, other studies have reported that exposure of spermatozoa to RF-EMR does not affect the functional parameters or genetic structure of sperm. These conflicting results likely stem from differences among studies in the duration and exposure distance, as well as the species of animal used. This report was undertaken to review the existing research discussing the effects of RF-EMR on the DNA integrity of mammalian spermatozoa.
... In our sample, comet assays revealed a higher amount of DNA damage (p = 0.045) in the exposed group (Table 4). Under laboratory conditions short term RF-EMF exposure for few hours was repeatedly associated with transient DNA damage (Franzellitti et al., 2010;Lai and Singh, 1996;Schwarz et al., 2008). Compared to laboratory conditions the exposure in our participants was weak even in the exposed group. ...
... A recent study mentioned that exposure to electromagnetic fields might produce a variety of adverse effects on human health as headaches, chronic fatigue, heart problems, stress, nausea, chest pain, and also some bad effects on central nervous, endocrine, and immune systems (Jbireal et al., 2018). Lai H, and Singh, 1996, Lixia et al., 2006, and Zhao et al., 2007 reported that exposure to electromagnetic field resulted in DNA damage, changes in the chromatin conformation, formation of micronucleus in different cell types, gene expression, enzyme activity, and changes in the structure and function of cell membrane (Savitz, 1995, Lewy et al., 2003, Yokus et al., 2005. Also, subacute exposure to static electromagnetic fields stimulated an increase in apoptosis and biosynthesis of plasma metallothionein and corticosterone in female rats, that may be linked to oxidative stress (Chater et al. 2005). ...
Background: Electromagnetic radiation has become an extensive new pollution source in modern civilization. Therefore, the biological effects of electromagnetic radiation have attracted considerable attention worldwide. Objectives: The current review was aimed to highlight on sources of electromagnetic fields and their effects on vital organs and the risk of cancer. Electromagnetic sources can be classified into natural electromagnetic sources (sun, some distant stars, atmospheric discharges like thunder, or human body) and unnatural or human made sources (printers, vacuum cleaners, cellular phones, hair dryers, refrigerators, washing machines, kettles microwaves, cables that carry electrical currents, television and computers, electrical home gadgets, radio and television base stations, mobile phone base stations and phone equipment), home wiring airport, and transformers. Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are electromagnetic waves less than 300 GHz, that are divided into extremely low frequencies (ELFs; 3–3,000 Hz), involving high-voltage transmission lines and in-house wiring; and radiofrequencies (RFs; 30 kHz to 300 GHz), involving mobile phones, smart devices, base stations, WiFi, and 5G technologies. Cell phone technology is an integral part of everyday life and its use is not only restricted to voice conversations but also conveying news, high-resolution pictures, and the internet. Exposure to electromagnetic fields might produce oxidative stress, sperm damage, DNA damage, changes in the chromatin conformation, formation of micronucleus in different cell types, gene expression, enzyme activity, and changes in the structure and function of cell membrane, stimulated an increase in apoptosis and biosynthesis of plasma metallothionein and corticosterone. It causes headaches, chronic fatigue, heart problems, stress, nausea, chest pain, gastrointestinal issues, pain in the muscles and joints, sweating, neurocognitive disturbances, eye burning, nose, ear, and throat issues, bad effects on reproductive, central nervous, endocrine, cardiovascular, and immune systems. Also, it increases anxiety-related behavior; spatial memory, and learning deficits in male mice offspring, decreased thermal pain perception, induced a sleep disturbance, latency, and day dysfunction especially in females, a change in memory performance, damage to the lens epithelial cells of rabbits after 8 hours of exposure to microwave radiation, produced lens opacity in rats, which is linked to the production of cataracts, and derangement of chicken embryo retinal differentiation. There are a relationship between exposure to electromagnetic fields and the increased incidence of the occurrence of some tumors types, particularly brain cancer and leukemia. EMFs induce damage of tissues by increasing free radicals and changing the antioxidant defense systems of tissues, eventually leading to oxidative stress which leads to behavioral, histopathological and biochemical alterations. Exposure to radar, which uses RF fields above 6 GHz similar to 5 G causes effects on production of cancer at different sites, and other diseases. The possible mechanism proposed of how EMFs lead to cancer is the impact of EMFs on free radical combination rates in certain enzymes, such as coenzyme B12-dependent ethanolamine ammonia lyase. The enzyme reaction rate may be amplified by a factor of up to 100. A case-control studies found an increased risk of gliomas, acoustic neuromas, and temporal lobe tumours in users with highest self-reported cell phone use. Exposure of experimental animals to microwave radiation caused a decrease in learning and memory ability, abnormal hippocampal morphology and abnormal Electroencephalogram. Also, it could lead to a decrease in norepinephrine and epinephrine contents in the brain, leading to neurotransmitter production disorders. Conclusion: It can be concluded that electromagnetic sources classified into natural electromagnetic and human made sources. EMFs) are electromagneticwaves less than 300 GHz are divided into extremely low frequencies and radiofrequencies. Exposure to electromagnetic fields might produce oxidative stress, which leads to histopathological and biochemical alterations in different body organs and increased risk of gliomas, acoustic neuromas, and temporal lobe tumours in users with highest self-reported cell phone use. Further studies are needed to confirm these effects in human and experimental animals. Keywords: Electromagnetic fields, Sources of EMFs, Wireless Communication, Cell phones, Health hazards, Risk of Cancer.
... This whole process can take many minutes to complete [21]. There are some papers suggesting that RF exposure may also have an effect on the DNA repair process [22], but this needs to be confirmed and replicated. ...
In genetics, the term genotoxicity describes the action of physical agents, such as chemicals and ionising radiation, which results in damage to genetic material encoded in deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), and can take many forms. Markers of genetic damage include single strand and double strand DNA breaks, DNA base damage, chromosome aberrations and micronuclei induction. It is well-recognised that genetic damage is a major pathway to carcinogenesis.
There has been much debate over the last 30 years as to whether man-made radiofrequency radiation is genotoxic. With a number of narrative reviews, Ruediger’s review in 2009 found 49 studies reporting a genotoxic effect while 42 did not, and more recently, a review by Lai in 2021 found 237 or 66% of studies had a significant effect while 124 or 34% did not. Both papers provide a summary of the current state of science with a “balance of evidence” finding. Further, both suggest some possible reasons for the discrepancies. However, such reviews can only best be described as superficial, as neither of these papers investigated in depth (using meta-analysis techniques) about how experimental methodology and parameters used may affect outcomes.
A search of the ORSAA database has identified over 370 papers investigating RF exposures and genotoxicity. A comprehensive data set was then constructed by capturing important comparable parameters from the collection of identified studies. Example parameters include: experiment type (in vivo, in vitro, epidemiological); funding source; cell type (primary vs cell line); species; RF generation source; carrier wave frequency and signal modulation used; number of sequential exposures; duration of exposures; intensity of the signal; DNA damage assay type; sacrificial method (animal studies); time between exposure cessation and commencement of assay. These parameters and their inter-relationships were methodically analysed.
The resulting comprehensive data set provides valuable insights into how some of these parameters can have significant influences on study results and identifies the main drivers contributing to the mixed findings. The data set also shines a light on methodological limitations and issues that will need to be addressed in future studies in order to further clarify the genotoxic potential of radiofrequency exposures. The preliminary findings to be presented are likely to have far-reaching implications to our understanding of radiofrequency exposure in relation to health and safety. The findings also bring into question the applicability of the current RF Standard (ARPANSA 2021) and RF Guidelines (ICNIRP 2020) for providing suitable protection to all species, not just humans.
... Genetic studies displaying the adverse effects of RFR are conducted with the help of in vitro and in vivo experiments. Many in vitro and in vivo studies on genotoxic effects have been summarized so far, concluding the genomic instability with an increase in DNA fragmentation, chromosomal aberrations, and induction of micronuclei after to RFR [41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51]. At the same time, controversial articles have also been reported, suggesting insignificant DNA effects with in vitro studies [52][53][54][55][56]. ...
During modern era, mobile phones, televisions, microwaves, radio, and wireless devices, etc., have become an integral part of our daily lifestyle. All these technologies employ radiofrequency (RF) waves and everyone is exposed to them, since they are widespread in the environment. The increasing risk of male infertility is a growing concern to the human population. Excessive and long-term exposure to non-ionizing radiation may cause genetic health effects on the male reproductive system which could be a primitive factor to induce cancer risk. With respect to the concerned aspect, many possible RFR induced genotoxic studies have been reported; however, reports are very contradictory and showed the possible effect on humans and animals. Thus, the present review is focusing on the genomic impact of the radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) underlying the male infertility issue. In this review, both in vitro and in vivo studies have been incorporated explaining the role of RFR on the male reproductive system. It includes RFR induced-DNA damage, micronuclei formation, chromosomal aberrations, SCE generation, etc. In addition, attention has also been paid to the ROS generation after radiofrequency radiation exposure showing a rise in oxidative stress, base adduct formation, sperm head DNA damage, or cross-linking problems between DNA & protein.
... Exposure was carried out in a specially designed anechoic chamber. After the exposure rats were sacrificed and whole brain, hippocampus and testis were dissected out and used for various assays [1,2]. ...
... Membrane bound enzymes, which are associated with cell proliferation and differentiation, were also suggested to be tumor promoters [45]. An often cited experiment from 1996 investigated the effects of 2 h exposure using pulsed and continuous waves at 2.45 GHz [46]. PD of 2 mW/cm 2 with a SAR of 1.2 W/kg caused single-and double-strand DNA breaks in the brain cells of rats for both signal presentations. ...
The possible adverse health effects of electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure have been in research focus since radio waves were introduced to telecommunication. Broadcast radio systems, satellites, and mobile communication devices use different bands of the radio spectrum, antennas, modulations, and radiated power. The proliferation of cellular networks and mobile phones as user devices have brought transmitting and receiving antennas in the close proximity of the human body and the head. Hundreds of experiments have been conducted to prove and disprove adverse health effects of exposure. Literature reviews of experimental results have also followed the current developments in technology; however, an exhaustive analysis performed on the methodologies has revealed many flaws and problems. This article focuses on the latest results on frequency bands mostly used for 5G below and above 6 GHz in the mmWave band. Current results do not indicate significant health effects and responses below the current safety limits. Nevertheless, further research directions can be identified, especially for mmWave radiation.
... In addition, convincing studies on the hazardous effects of WC EMFs in human germ cells have been published De Iuliis et al. 2009). Most importantly, genetic damage in animal/human cells induced by WC EMFs has been repeatedly and reliably documented by several research groups (Lai and Singh 1996;1997;Diem et al. 2005;Burlaka et al. 2013;Panagopoulos 2019;Yakymenko et al. 2018). ...
... There is a substantial number of studies which have demonstrated the formation of micronuclei (Garaj-Vrhovac et al. 1992;Tice et al. 2002;Zotti-Martelli et al. 2005) or structural anomalies of metaphase chromosomes (Kerbacher et al. 1990;Garson et al. 1991;Maes et al. 2000;Panagopoulos 2020) in living cells due to non-thermal RF/WC EMF exposure. The majority of studies on the mutagenic effects of ELF or RF/WC EMFs successfully applied a comet assay approach (Baohong et al. 2005;Belyaev et al., 2006;Diem et al., 2005;Kim et al., 2008;Lai and Singh, 1996;Liu et al., 2013a;Tsybulin et al. 2013;Yakymenko et al. 2018). ...
