ArticlePDF Available

Scientific panel on electromagnetic field health risks: Consensus points, recommendations, and rationales



In November, 2009, a scientific panel met in Seletun, Norway, for three days of intensive discussion on existing scientific evidence and public health implications of the unprecedented global exposures to artificial electromagnetic fields (EMF). EMF exposures (static to 300 GHz) result from the use of electric power and from wireless telecommunications technologies for voice and data transmission, energy, security, military and radar use in weather and transportation. The Scientific Panel recognizes that the body of evidence on EMF requires a new approach to protection of public health; the growth and development of the fetus, and of children; and argues for strong preventative actions. New, biologically-based public exposure standards are urgently needed to protect public health worldwide.
Scientific Panel on Electromagnetic Field Health Risks:
Consensus Points, Recommendations, and Rationales
Scientific Meeting: Seletun, Norway, November 17-21, 2009
Adamantia Fragopoulou,1 Yuri Grigoriev,2 Olle Johansson,3 Lukas H Margaritis,1
Lloyd Morgan,4 Elihu Richter5 and Cindy Sage6
1University of Athens, Athens, Greece; 2Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection, Moscow (Russian Federation); 3Karolinska Institute and The Royal Institute of Technology,
Stockholm, Sweden ; 4Bioelectromagnetics Society, Berkeley, CA, USA; 5Hebrew University-Hadassah
School of Medicine, Jerusalem (Israel); 6Sage Associates, Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Summary: In November, 2009, a scientific panel met in Seletun, Norway, for three days of intensive discussion on
existing scientific evidence and public health implications of the unprecedented global exposures to artificial
electromagnetic fields (EMF). EMF exposures (static to 300 GHz) result from the use of electric power and from wireless
telecommunications technologies for voice and data transmission, energy, security, military and radar use in weather and
transportation. The Scientific Panel recognizes that the body of evidence on EMF requires a new approach to protection of
public health; the growth and development of the fetus, and of children; and argues for strong preventative actions. New,
biologically-based public exposure standards are urgently needed to protect public health worldwide.
Keywords: EMF, wireless telecommunications technology, radiofrequency, non-ionizing radiation, non-thermal effects,
long-term effects, public exposure guidelines, public health
Correspondence: Professor Olle Johansson, The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience,
Karolinska Institute, 171 77 Stockholm, and The Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44, Stockholm (Sweden). E-mail:
In November, 2009, a scientific panel met in
Seletun, Norway, for three days of intensive
discussion on existing scientific evidence and
public health implications of the unprecedented
global exposures to artificial electromagnetic
fields (EMF).
EMF exposures (static to 300 GHz) result
from the use of electric power and from wireless
telecommunications technologies for voice and
data transmission, energy, security, military and
radar use in weather and transportation.
The Scientific Panel recognizes that the body
of evidence on EMF requires a new approach to
protection of public health; the growth and
development of the fetus, and of children; and
argues for strong preventative actions. These
conclusions are built upon prior scientific and
public health reports /1-6/ documenting the
1) Low-intensity (non-thermal) bioeffects and
adverse health effects are demonstrated at
levels significantly below existing exposure
2) ICNIRP and IEEE/FCC public safety limits
are inadequate and obsolete with respect to
prolonged, low-intensity exposures.
3) New, biologically-based public exposure
standards are urgently needed to protect
public health world-wide.
4) It is not in the public interest to wait.
Strong concern has been voiced by the public,
and by scientists as well as public health and
environmental policy experts, that the deployment
of technologies that expose billions of people
worldwide to new sources of EMF may pose a
pervasive risk to public health. Such exposures
did not exist before the ―age of industry and
information‖. Prolonged exposure appears to
disrupt biological processes that are fundamental
to plant, animal and human growth and health.
Life on earth did not evolve with biological
protections or adaptive biological responses to
these EMF exposures. Exceptionally small levels
of EMF from earth and space existed during the
time that all life evolved on earth on the order of
less than a billionth to one ten-billionth of a Watt
per meter squared. A rapidly accumulating body
of scientific evidence of harm to health and well-
being constitute warnings that adverse health
effects can occur with prolonged exposures to
very low-intensity EMF at biologically active
frequencies or frequency combinations.
The Seletun Scientific Panel has adopted a
Consensus Agreement that recommends
preventative and precautionary actions that are
warranted now, given the existing evidence for
potential global health risks. We recognize the
duty of governments and their health agencies to
educate and warn the public, to implement
measures balanced in favor of the Precautionary
Principle, to monitor compliance with directives
promoting alternatives to wireless, and to fund
research and policy development geared toward
prevention of exposures and development of new
public safety measures.
Global populations are not sufficiently
protected from electromagnetic fields (EMF)
from emerging communication and data
transmission technologies that are being
deployed worldwide, affecting billions of
Sensitive populations (for example, the
elderly, the ill, the genetically and/or
immunologically challenged) and children and
fetuses may be additionally vulnerable to
health risks; their exposures are largely
involuntary and they are less protected by
existing public safety standards;
It is well established that children are more
vulnerable to health risks from environmental
toxins in general;
It is established that the combined effects of
chemical toxins and EMF together is greater
than either exposure alone;
The Seletun Scientific Panel takes note of
international scientific reviews, resolutions
and recommendations documenting scientific
and public health evidence on EMF exposures;
The Seletun Scientific Panel notes that
complete “consistency” of study findings is
not to be expected, and it should not be
interpreted as a necessary pre-condition for a
consensus linking EMF exposure to health
impacts. “Consistency in nature does not
require that all or even a majority of studies
find the same effect. If all studies of lead
showed the same relationship between
variables, one would be startled, perhaps
justifiably suspicious” /7/;
The Seletun Scientific Panel acknowledges that
some, but not all, of these exposures support
preventative and precautionary action, and the
need for more stringent public health limits;
The Panel takes note of international scientific
resolutions and expressions of concern
including the Salzburg, Catania, Freiberger
Appeal, Helsinki, Irish Doctors (IDEA),
Benevento, Venice, London, and Porto Alegre
Resolutions (2000-2009);
The Panel is guided by previously
recommended target limits for EMF exposure
in the BioInitiative Report (2007) and the
London Resolution (2009);
The Panel urges governments to adopt an
explicit statement that ―the standard for
judging and acting on the scientific evidence
shall be based on prudent public health
planning principles rather than scientific
certainty of effect (causal evidence)‖. Actions
are warranted based on limited or weak
scientific evidence, or a sufficiency of
evidence rather than a conclusive scientific
evidence (causation or scientific certainty)
where the consequence of doing nothing in the
short term may cause irreparable public health
harm, where the populations potentially at risk
are very large, where there are alternatives
without similar risks, or where the exposures
are largely involuntary;
The Seletun Scientific Panel urges govern-
ments to make explicit that the burden of
proof of safety rests with the producers and
providers of EMF-producing technologies, not
with the users and consumers.
General Agreements from the Seletun Scientific
The Seletun Scientific Panel has identified
specific scientific and public health
benchmarks for numeric limits and
preventative action that are justified now
based on the existing body of evidence;
The Panel is relying on scientific evidence as
the basis for identifying scientific benchmarks
establishing EMF levels associated with
adverse health effects. The Panel notes that
radiofrequent (RF) levels in some regions may
already exceed scientific benchmarks for
health harm identified here, but political
expediency is not the guiding criterion in this
EMF exposures should be reduced now rather
than waiting for proof of harm before acting.
This recommendation is in keeping with
traditional public health principles, and is
justified now given abundant evidence that
biological effects and adverse health effects
are occurring at exposure levels many orders
of magnitude below existing public safety
standards around the world;
SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) is not an
adequate approach to predict many important
biologic effects in studies that report increased
risks for cancer, neurological diseases,
impairments to immune function, fertility and
reproduction, and neurological function
(cognition, behaviour, performance, mood
status, disruption of sleep, increased risk for
auto collisions, etc);
SAR fails to adequately address known effects
from modulation.
General Recommendations from the Seletun
Scientific Panel
The Seletun Scientific Panel recommends an
international registry be established to track
time-trends in incidence and mortality for
cancers and neurological and immune
diseases. Tracking effects of EMF on children
and sensitive EHS populations is a high
priority. There should be open access to this
The Panel recommends existing brain tumour
registries provide timely age-specific
incidence rates. An early indication of brain
tumors from mobile (cell) phone use could be
in the younger age-specific incidence rates.
Where such brain tumors registries to not
exist, they should be established;
Intervention-related epidemiological studies
are needed to track the efficacy of
intervention(s) that reduce or eliminate
exposures to EMF;
There is a need for mandatory pre-market
assessments of emissions and risks before
deployment of new wireless technologies.
There should be convincing evidence that
products do not cause health harm before
For occupational exposures, there has been
epidemiological evidence as well as clusters
and case reports which state the case for
action‘ and stringent control measures based
on classic industrial hygiene principles
(separation, distancing and enclosure). Further,
there is need for surveillance markers of
hematologic, immunotoxic and chromosome
The Panel discourages use of more lenient
safety standards for workers, as compared to
the general public. Separate safety limits are not
ethically acceptable. Workers include women
of childbearing age and men who wish to retain
their fertility. Occupational environments
where wireless exposures are common may be
potentially hazardous to fertility and repro-
duction (retail and restaurant workers, transit
workers, telecommunications and broadcast
workers, medical workers, educators, admini-
strators, etc) and those with other exposures or
special health risks;
The Panel strongly recommends that persons
with electrohypersensitivity symptoms (EHS)
be classified as functionally impaired rather
than with ‗idiopathic environmental disease‘
or similar indistinct categories. This
terminology will encourage governments to
make adjustments in the living environment to
better address social and well-being needs of
this subpopulation of highly sensitive
members of society.
General Research Recommendations from the
Seletun Scientific Panel
Research funding is urgently needed for
assays for biological markers [EMF bioassays
as biological markers of EMF dose] which
show promise to measure adverse health
effects, and biological effects that, with
prolonged or repetitive exposure, can
reasonably be presumed to lead to harmful
health consequences (biomarkers from
cerebrospinal fluid, saliva, immune function
changes, and DNA damage to name some);
The Scientific Panel recommends research
funding for studies on bioactive modulation
which may, based on current knowledge,
cause major consequences at far lower
exposure levels based on different exposure
parameters including modulation, frequency
windows, intensity windows, duration,
geomagnetic field and other factors;
Research is urgently recommended for effects
of prolonged or repetitive wireless exposure
on children (cancers, neurological diseases,
and impairment of cognition, behavior,
performance and mood status, and disruption
of sleep, etc) ;
Research in SAR refinements is given a low
priority. The scientific panel is in unanimous
agreement that SAR is a poor measurement
tool. Yet SARs have been used in many key
studies reporting increased risk of DNA
damage, increased risk for brain cancer,
increased risk for acoustic neuroma, and
reduced sperm quality parameters, among
others. SAR measures only one aspect of
exposure and ignores other critical aspects,
such as biologically active frequencies (and
modulations) that is essential information
needed to understand the biological responses
induced by EMF over short and long term
exposures (e.g., nervous system response and
tissue/organ development, respectively) that
does not cause thermal damage so that
effective, biologically protective limits can be
Specific Recommendations from the Seletun
Scientific Panel
Extremely Low Frequency (Fields from Electrical
Based on the available evidence, the Seletun
Scientific Panel recommends a 0.1 uT (1 mG)
exposure limit for all new installations based
on findings of risk for leukemia, brain
tumours, Alzheimer‘s, ALS, sperm damage
and DNA strand breaks. This exposure limit
does not include a safety margin;
For all newly installed, or newly upgraded
electrical power distribution, the Panel
recommends a 0.1 uT (1 mG) set-back
distance, from residences, hospitals, schools,
parks, and playgrounds schools (and similar
locations occupied by children) [A 0.1 uT (1
mG) time-weighted average (TWA) using
peak loading for transmission lines to ensure
that average is about half of this for typical
exposures; or equivalent for long-term
exposure in interior EMF environments
(wiring, trans-formers, appliances, others).];
For all newly constructed residences, offices,
schools (and other facilities with children),
and hospitals there shall be a 0.1 uT (1 mG)
max. 24 hour average exposure limit;
For all new equipment (e.g. transformers,
motors, electronic products), where practical,
the Panel recommends a 0.1 uT (1 mG) max.
24 hour average exposure limit. Where not
practical (e.g. large power transformers), there
should be a fence, or boundary marker, with
clearly written warning labels that states that
within the boundary area the 0.1 uT (1 mG)
maximum, 24 hour average exposure limit is
The Panel recommends all countries should
adopt electrical code requirements to disallow
conduction of high-frequency voltage
transients back into electrical wiring systems;
All new electronic devices including compact
fluorescent lamps (CFLs) should be
constructed with filters to block high-
frequency voltage transients from being
conducted back onto electrical wiring systems;
The Panel recommends electric field
reductions from electrical wiring in buildings
based on evidence of increased cancer risk
from prolonged or repetitive electric field
exposure. The United States National
Electrical Code (NEC) and other govern-
mental codes relating to building design and
construction should be revised so that all new
electrical wiring is enclosed in a grounded
metal shield;
The United States NEC and other govern-
mental codes that disallow net current on
electrical wiring should be better enforced,
and ground fault interrupters (GFIs) should be
installed on all electrical circuits in order to
reduce net current.
Radiofrequency/Microwave Radiation
Exposure Limit Recommendations
Present guidelines, such as IEEE, FCC, and
ICNIRP, are not adequate to protect humans from
harmful effects of chronic EMF exposure. The
existing scientific knowledge is, however, not
sufficient at this stage to formulate final and
definite science-based guidelines for all these
fields and conditions, particularly for such chronic
exposure as well as contributions of the different
parameters of the fields, e.g. frequency,
modulation, intensity, and window effects. The
values suggested below are, thus, provisional and
may be altered in the future.
For whole-body (in vivo experiments) or cell
culture-based exposure, the Seletun Scientific
Panel finds sufficient evidence to establish a
scientific benchmark for adverse health effect
at 0.0166 W/kg based on at least 32 scientific
studies reporting low-intensity effects (defined
as studies reporting effects at exposures of 0.1
W/kg or lower) /8-39/.
The Panel recommends a provisional whole-
body limit of 0.00033 W/kg by incorporation
of an additional 50-fold safety margin applied
to the scientific benchmark of 0.0166 W/kg.
This is consistent with both ICNIRP and
IEEE/FCC safety factors. An additional 10-
fold reduction is applied to take prolonged
exposure into account (because 29 of the 32
studies are acute exposure only), giving a final
whole-body limit of 0.000033 W/kg (33
µW/kg). No further safety margin or provision
for sensitive populations is incorporated. This
may need to be lowered in the future.
Based on power density measurements, the
Seletun Scientific Panel finds sufficient
evidence for a whole-body scientific bench-
mark for adverse health effect exists down to
85 mW/m2 (0.0085 mW/cm2 or 8.5 µW/cm2)
based on at least 17 scientific studies reporting
low-intensity effects on humans. Taking more
recent human studies conducted near base
stations, or at base-station RF levels, Kundi
and Hutter /57/ report that the levels must
exceed 0.5-1.0 mW/m2 (0.05 to 0.1 uW/cm2)
for effects to be seen; /40-57/.
The Panel recommends a provisional whole-
body (far-field) limit of 1.7 mW/m2 (also =
0.00017 mW/cm2 = 0.17 µW/cm2) by
incorporation of an additional 50-fold safety
margin applied to the scientific benchmark of
85 mW/m2. This is consistent with both
ICNIRP and IEEE/FCC safety factors. This
may need to be lowered in the future.
It can be argued that a further 10-fold
reduction is not justified since 13 of the 17
studies are already testing for long-term RF
exposure. However, considering that the latest
human population studies as reported by
Kundi & Hutter (2009) do not show effects
below 0.5-1.0 mW/m2, it can also then be
argued that an additional 10-fold reduction on
precautionary grounds is justified. If another
10-fold reduction is applied, the recommended
level would then be 0.17 mW/m2 (also
0.000017 mW/cm2 = 0.017 µW/cm2);
The Seletun Scientific Panel recommends
these numeric limits to governments and
health agencies for adoption in place of
ICNIRP, IEEE/FCC and other outdated public
safety guidelines and limits in use around the
world. This approach is based on traditional
public health principles that support taking
actions to protect public health when
sufficient evidence is present. Sufficient
scientific evidence and public health concern
exist today based on increased risk for cancer,
adverse fertility and reproductive outcomes,
immune disruption, neurological diseases,
increased risk of road collisions and injury-
producing events, and impairment of
cognition, behaviour, performance, mood
status, and disruption of sleep;
Numeric limits recommended here do not yet
take into account sensitive populations (EHS,
immune-compromised, the fetus, developing
children, the elderly, people on medications,
etc). Another safety margin is, thus, likely
justified further below the numeric limits for
EMF exposure recommended here;
The Scientific Panel acknowledges that
numeric limits derived here for new
biologically-based public exposure standards
are still a billion times higher than natural
EMF levels at which all life evolved.
Specific Recommendations for mobile (cell) and
cordless phone use
The Seletun Scientific Panel recommends that
users keep mobile (cell) phones away from
head and body;
The Seletun Scientific Panel recommends that
users keep mobile (cell) phones and PDAs*
switched off if worn or carried in a pocket or
holster, or on a belt near the body.
*PDA is generic for any type of Personal
Digital Assistant or hand-held computer device;
The Panel strongly recommends against the
use of mobile (cell) and cordless phones and
PDAs by children of any age;
The Panel strongly recommends against the
use of mobile (cell) and cordless phones and
PDAs by pregnant women;
The Panel recommends that use of mobile
(cell) and cordless phones and PDAs be
curtailed near children or pregnant women, in
keeping with preventative and precautionary
strategies. The most vulnerable members of
society should have access to public places
without fear of harm to health;
Public access to public places and public
transportation should be available without
undue risk of EMF exposure, particularly in
enclosed spaces (trains, airplanes, buses, cars,
etc) where the exposure is likely to be
The Panel recommends wired internet access
in schools, and strongly recommends that
schools do not install wireless internet
connections that create pervasive and
prolonged EMF exposures for children;
The Panel recommends preservation of existing
land-line connections and public telephone
The Panel recommends against the use of
cordless phones (DECT phones) and other
wireless devices, toys and baby monitors,
wireless internet, wireless security systems, and
wireless power transmitters in SmartGrid-type
connections that may produce unnecessary and
potentially harmful EMF exposures;
The Panel recognizes that wired internet access
(cable modem, wired Ethernet connections, etc)
is available as a substitute;
The Panel recommends use of wired headsets,
preferably with hollow-tube segments;
The Panel recommends avoidance of wireless
(Bluetooth-type) headsets in general;
The Panel encourages the removal of speakers
from headsets on wireless phones and PDAs;
The Panel encourages ‗auto-off switches‘ for
mobiles (cells) and PDAs that automatically
turn off the device when placed in a holster;
The Panel strongly discourages the technology
that allows one mobile (cell) phone to act as a
repeater for other phones within the general
area. This can increase exposures to EMF that
are unknown to the person whose phone is
―piggy-backed‖ upon without their knowledge
or permission;
The Panel recommends the use of telephone
lines (land-lines) or fiber optic cables for
SmartGrid type energy conservation infra-
structure. Utilities should choose options that
do not create new, community-wide exposures
from wireless components of SmartGrid-type
projects. Future health risks from prolonged or
repetitive wireless exposures of SmartGrid-type
systems may be avoided by using telephone
lines or fiber-optic cable. The Panel endorses
energy conservation but not at the risk of
exposing hundreds of millions of families in
their homes to a new, involuntary source of
wireless radiofrequency radiation.
The undersigned recognize the duty of governments and their health agencies to educate and warn the
public, to implement measures balanced in favor of the Precautionary Principle, to monitor compliance with
directives promoting alternatives to wireless, and to fund research and policy development geared toward
prevention of exposure.
The undersigned urge governments and their health agencies to adopt new interim numeric limits and
new timetables for implementation of biologically-based precautionary action to limit exposures to EMF.
Agreed 19 November 2009
(as revised through April 20, 2010)
(in alphabetical order)
Adamantia Fragopoulou, Greece Yuri Grigoriev, Russia
Olle Johansson, Sweden Lukas H Margaritis, Greece
Lloyd Morgan, USA Elihu Richter, Israel
Cindy Sage, USA
(in alphabetical order)
Adamantia Fragopoulou, Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Cell Biology and Biophysics,Faculty of
Biology,University of Athens, Athens (Greece)
Yury Grigoriev, Professor, Dr of Med Sci, Chairman of Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing
Radiation Protection, Moscow (Russian Federation)
Olle Johansson, professor, The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience,
Karolinska Institute, and The Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm (Sweden)
Lukas H Margaritis, professor, Department of Cell Biology and Biophysics,Faculty of Biology,
University of Athens, Athens (Greece)
Lloyd Morgan, Bioelectromagnetics Society, 2022 Francisco Street, Berkeley, CA 94709, USA
Elihu D Richter, Professor, Unit of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Hebrew University-
Hadassah School of Medicine, Jerusalem (Israel)
Cindy Sage, MA, Sage Associates,Santa Barbara, CA, USA
1. Pathophysiology 2009; 16
2. European Parliament, Mid-Term Review of the
European Environmental and Health Action Plan
3. European Environmental Agency 2007. http://
4. Blackman CF, Blank M, Kundi M, Sage C,
Carpenter DO, Davanipour Z, et al. The
Bioinitiative ReportA Rationale for a
Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for
Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF). http://, 2007.
5. European Commission Health and Consumer
Protection Directorate-General Scientific Committee
on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks
(SCENIHR), Possible Effects of Electromagnetic
Fields (EMF on Human Health 2007 (Sections on
scientific evidence).
6. REFLEX Consortium, Risk evaluation of
potential environmental hazards from low energy
electromagnetic field exposure using sensitive in
vitro methods. A project funded by the European
Union under the 5th Framework Programme.
Contract QLK4-CT-1999-01574, 2004; 292 pp,
7. Needleman HL. Making models of real world
events: the use and abuse of inference. Neuro-
toxicol Teratol 1995;17: 241-2; discussion 249-51
8. Belyaev IY, Hillert L, Protopopova M, Tamm C,
Malmgren LO, Persson BR, Selivanova G, et al.
915 MHz microwaves and 50 Hz magnetic field
affect chromatin conformation and 53BP1 foci in
human lymphocytes from hypersensitive and
healthy persons. Bioelectromagnetics 2005;26:
9. Belyaev IY, Markovà E, Hillert L, Malmgren LO,
Persson BR. Microwaves from UMTS/GSM mobile
phones induce long-lasting inhibition of 53BP1/
gamma-H2AX DNA repair foci in human lymph-
ocytes. Bioelectromagnetics 2009;30:129-41.
10. Capri M, Scarcella E, Fumelli C, Bianchi E,
Salvioli S, Mesirca P, et al. In vitro exposure of
human lymphocytes to 900 MHz CW and GSM
modulated radiofrequency: studies of proliferation,
apoptosis and mitochondrial membrane potential0.
Radiat Res 2004; 162: 211-218.
11. de Pomerai DI, Smith B, Dawe A, North K, Smith
T, Archer DB, et al. Microwave radiation can
alter protein conformation without bulk heating.
FEBS Lett 2003; 543: 93-97.
12. DInzeo G, Bernardi P, Eusebi F, Grassi F,
Tamburello C, Zani BM. Microwave effects on
acetylcholine-induced channels in cultured chick
myotubes. Bioelectromagnetics 1988; 9: 363-372.
13. Dutta SK, Ghosh B, Blackman CF. Radio-
frequency radiation-induced calcium ion efflux
enhancement from human and other neuro-
blastoma cells in culture. Bioelectromagnetics
1989; 10: 197-202.
14. Forgacs Z, Somosy Z, Kubinyi G, Bakos J,
Hudak A, Surjan A, et al. Effect of whole-body
1800MHz GSM-like microwave exposure on
testicular steroidogenesis and histology in mice.
Reprod Toxicol 2006; 22: 111-117.
15. Ivaschuk OI, Jones RA, Ishida-Jones T, Haggren
W, Adey WR, Phillips JL. Exposure of nerve
growth factor-treated PC12 rat pheochromo-
cytoma cells to a modulated radiofrequency field
at 836.55 MHz: effects on c-jun and c-fos
expression. Bioelectromagnetics 1997; 18: 223-9.
16. Jech R, Sonka K, Ruzicka E, Nebuzelsky A,
Bohm J, Juklickova M, et al. Electromagnetic
field of mobile phones affects visual event related
potential in patients with narcolepsy. Bio-
electromagnetics 2001; 22: 519-28.
17. Kesari KK, Behari J. Fifty-gigahertz microwave
exposure effect of radiations on rat brain. Appl
Biochem Biotechnol 2009; 158: 126-139.
18. Kwee S, Raskmark P, Velizarov P. Changes in
cellular proteins due to environmental non-
ionizing radiation. I. Heat-shock proteins,
Electro- and Magnetobiology 2001; 20: 141-152.
19. Lerchl A, Krüger H, Niehaus M, Streckert JR,
Bitz AK, Volkert Hansen V. Effects of mobile
phone electromagnetic fields at nonthermal SAR
values on melatonin and body weight of
Djungarian hamsters (Phodopus sungorus), J
Pineal Res 2008; 44: 267-272.
20. Markovà E, Hillert L, Malmgren L, Persson BR,
Belyaev IY. Microwaves from GSM mobile
telephones affect 53BP1 and gamma-H2AX foci
in human lymphocytes from hypersensitive and
healthy persons. Environ Health Perspect 2005;
113: 1172-1177.
21. Marinelli F, La Sala D, Cicciotti G, Cattini L,
Trimarchi C, Putti S, et al. Exposure to 900 MHz
electromagnetic field induces an unbalance
between pro-apoptotic and pro-survival signals in
T-lymphoblastoid leukemia CCRF-CEM cells. J
Cell Physiol 2004; 198: 324-332.
22. Navakatikian MA, Tomashevskaya LA. Phasic
behavioral and endocrine effects of microwaves
of nonthermal intensity. In: Carpenter DO, ed,
Biological effects of electric and magnetic fields,
Volume 1. San Diego, CA: Academic Press,
23. Nittby H, Grafström G, Tian DP, Malmgren L,
Brun A, Persson BR, et al. Cognitive impairment
in rats after long-term exposure to GSM-900
mobile phone radiation. Bioelectromagnetics
2007; 29: 219-232.
24. Pérez-Castejón C, Pérez-Bruzón RN, Llorente M,
Pes N, Lacasa C, Figols T, Lahoz M, et al.
Exposure to ELF-pulse modulated X band micro-
waves increases in vitro human astrocytoma cell
proliferation. Histol Histopathol 2009;24:1551-61.
25. Persson BRR, Salford LG, Brun A. Blood-brain
barrier permeability in rats exposed to electro-
magnetic fields used in wireless communication.
Wireless Network 1997; 3: 455-461.
26. Phillips JL, Ivaschuk O, Ishida-Jones T, Jones
RA, Campbell-Beachler M, Haggren W. DNA
damage in Molt-4 T-lymphoblastoid cells
exposed to cellular telephone radiofrequency
fields in vitro. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 1998;
45: 103-110.
27. Pyrpasopoulou A, Kotoula V, Cheva A,
Hytiroglou P, Nikolakaki E, Magras IN, et al.
Bone morphogenetic protein expression in
newborn rat kidneys after prenatal exposure to
radiofrequency radiation. Bioelectromagnetics
2004; 25: 216-227.
28. Salford LG, Brun AR, Eberhardt JL, Malmgren L,
Persson BRR, Nerve cell damage in mammalian
brain after exposure to microwaves from GSM
mobile phones. Environ Health Persp 2003; 111:
29. Sarimov R, Malmgren LO, Markova E, Persson
BR, Belyaev IY. Nonthermal GSM microwaves
affect chromatin conformation in human
lymphocytes similar to heat shock. IEEE Trans
Plasma Sci 2004; 32: 1600-1608.
30. Schwartz JL, House DE, Mealing GA. Exposure
of frog hearts to CW or amplitude-modulated
VHF fields: selective efflux of calcium ions at 16
Hz. Bioelectromagnetics 1990; 11: 349-358.
31. Schwarz C, Kratochvil E, Pilger A, Kuster N,
Adlkofer F, Rüdiger HW. Radiofrequency
electromagnetic fields (UMTS, 1,950 MHz)
induce genotoxic effects in vitro in human
fibroblasts but not in lymphocytes. Int Arch
Occup Environ Health 2008; 81: 755-767.
32. Somosy Z, Thuroczy G, Kubasova T, Kovacs J,
Szabo LD. Effects of modulated and continuous
microwave irradiation on the morphology and cell
surface negative charge of 3T3 fibroblasts.
Scanning Microsc 1991; 5: 1145-1155.
33. Stagg RB, Thomas WJ, Jones RA, Adey WR.
DNA synthesis and cell proliferation in C6
glioma and primary glial cells exposed to a
836.55 MHz modulated radiofrequency field.
Bioelectromagnetics 1997; 18: 230-236.
34. Stankiewicz W, Dąbrowski MP, Kubacki R,
Sobiczewska E, Szmigielski S, Immunotropic
influence of 900 MHz microwave GSM signal on
human blood immune cells activated in vitro.
Electromagn Biol Med 2006; 25: 45-51.
35. Tattersall JE, Scott IR, Wood SJ, Nettell JJ, Bevir
MK, Wang Z, et al. Effects of low intensity
radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on
electrical activity in rat hippocampal slices. Brain
Res 2001; 904: 43-53.
36. Velizarov S, Raskmark P, Kwee S, The effects of
radiofrequency fields on cell proliferation are
non-thermal. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 1999; 48:
37. Veyret B, Bouthet C, Deschaux P, de Seze R,
Geffard M, Joussot-Dubien J, et al. Antibody
responses of mice exposed to low-power micro-
waves under combined, pulse-and-amplitude
modulation, Bioelectromagnetics 1991; 12: 47-56.
38. Wolke S, Neibig U, Elsner R, Gollnick F, Meyer R.
Calcium homeostasis of isolated heart muscle cells
exposed to pulsed high-frequency electromagnetic
fields. Bioelectromagnetics 1996; 17:144-153.
39. Yurekli AI, Ozkan M, Kalkan T, Saybasili H,
Tuncel H, Atukeren P, et al. GSM base station
electromagnetic radiation and oxidative stress in
rats, Electromagn Biol Med 2006; 25: 177-188
40. Boscol P, Di Sciascio MB, DOstilio S, Del
Signore A, Reale M, Conti P, et al. Effects of
electromagnetic fields produced by radiotelevision
broadcasting stations on the immune system of
women, Sci Total Environ 2001; 273: 1-10.
41. Chiang H, Yao GD, Fang QS, Wang KQ, Lu DZ,
Zhou YK. Health effects of environmental electro-
magnetic fields. J Bioelectricity 1989;8:127-31.
42. DInzeo G, Bernardi P, Eusebi F, Grassi F,
Tamburello C, Zani BM. Microwave effects on
acetylcholine-induced channels in cultured chick
myotubes. Bioelectromagnetics 1988; 9: 363-372.
43. Fesenko EE, Makar VR, Novoselova EG,
Sadovnikov VB. Microwaves and cellular
immunity. I. Effect of whole body microwave
irradiation on tumor necrosis factor production in
mouse cells. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 1999; 49:
44. Hjollund NH, Bonde JP, Skotte J. Semen analysis
of personnel operating military radar equipment.
Reprod Toxicol 1997; 11: 897.
45. Hutter H-P, Moshammer H, Wallner P, Kundi M.
Subjective symptoms, sleeping problems, and
cognitive performance in subjects living near
mobile phone base stations. Occup Environ Med
2006; 63: 307-313.
46. Kolodynski AA, Kolodynska VV. Motor and
psychological functions of school children living
in the area of the Skrunda Radio Location Station
in Latvia. Sci Total Environ 1996; 180: 87-93.
47. Lebedeva NN, Sulimov AV, Sulimova OP,
Kotrovskaya TI, Gailus T. Cellular phone
electromagnetic field effects on bioelectric activity
of human brain. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 2000; 28:
48. Magras IN, Xenos TD. RF radiation-induced
changes in the prenatal development of mice.
Bioelectromagnetics 1997; 18: 455-461.
49. Mann K, Wagner P, Brunn G, Hassan F, Hiemke
C, Roschke J. Effects of pulsed high-frequency
electromagnetic fields on the neuroendocrine
system. Neuroendocrinology 1998; 67: 139-144.
50. Navarro EA, Segura J, Portoles M, Gomez-
Perretta de Mateo C. The microwave syndrome: a
preliminary study in Spain. Electromag Biol Med
2003; 22: 161-169.
51. Novoselova EG, Fesenko EE, Makar VR, Sadov-
nikov VB. Microwaves and cellular immunity. II.
Immunostimulating effects of microwaves and
naturally occurring antioxidant nutrients.
Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 1999; 49: 37-41.
52. Novoselova EG, Ogay VB, Sorokina OV,
Glushkova OV, Sinotova OA, Fesenko EE. The
production of tumor necrosis factor in cells of
tumor-bearing mice after total-body microwave
irradiation and antioxidant diet. Electromag Biol
Med 2004; 23: 167-180.
53. Oberfeld G, Enrique NA, Manuel P, Ceferino M,
Gomez-Perrretta C. The microwave syndrome
further aspects of a Spanish study, 3rd Inter-
national Workshop on Biological Effects of
Electromagnetic Fields, Kos, Greece, 2004.
54. Pologea-Moraru R, Kovacs E, Iliescu KR, Calota
V, Sajin G. The effects of low level microwaves
on the fluidity of photoreceptor cell membrane,
Bioelectrochemistry 2002; 56: 223-225.
55. Thomas S, Kühnlein A, Heinrich S, Praml G,
Nowak D, von Kries R, et al. Personal exposure
to mobile phone frequencies and well-being in
adults: a cross-sectional study based on
dosimetry. Bioelectromagnetics 2008;29:463-70.
56. Zwamborn AP, Vossen SH, van Leersum BJ,
Ouwens MA, Mäkel WN. Effects of global
communication system radiofrequency fields on
well being and cognitive functions of human
subjects with and without subjective complaints,
TNO-report FEL-03-C148 2003; 148: 1-89
57. Kundi M Hutter HP. Mobile phone base
stationsEffects on wellbeing and health.
Pathophysiology 2009; 16: 123-35.
... The increasing demand, constant development, the rapid expansion for continuous production of new and advanced communication devices have a significant effect on the global environment in terms of energy consumption, life-loss due to radiation effects, biological changes and disappearance of living species etc. The most prevalent aforementioned issues have motivated the research community toward green communication [2,3]. ...
... For any BS and mobile stations (MSs), the radio frequency pollution can be measured by Electromagnetic Pollution Index (EPI) (1) which is the product of the normalized polluted area (PA norm ) and polluting energy (PE). The PA norm (2) is the ratio of a sum of the area of all packets of pollution (PoP) (A 1 ) and area of the cell (A), and the PE is the sum of energy of all PoP [9]. The normalized area of PoP is a function of threshold; the recommendations for threshold are widely varying from 4.7µW/m 2 to 170µW/m 2 [2,4]. ...
... The PA norm (2) is the ratio of a sum of the area of all packets of pollution (PoP) (A 1 ) and area of the cell (A), and the PE is the sum of energy of all PoP [9]. The normalized area of PoP is a function of threshold; the recommendations for threshold are widely varying from 4.7µW/m 2 to 170µW/m 2 [2,4]. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The colossal increase in mobile users in today’s technology leads to heavy traffic in cell communication which results in a substantial increase in mobile radiation. This mobile radiation or electromagnetic radiation shows its footprint on global warming as well as on the environment. When electromagnetic radiation exceeds beyond the threshold level it results in electromagnetic pollution measured as Electromagnetic pollution index of a cell. The electromagnetic pollution index is defined as the product of normalized polluted area and polluting energy in a cell. An existing literature shows an evidence of electromagnetic pollution index measurement considering free space model, but their derived mathematical model failed to provide accurate results. To measure the electromagnetic pollution index, this research has focused on the free space propagation model (Line of sight) using an isotropic antenna for green communication in a macro cell. The proposed methodology evaluates the electromagnetic pollution index considering simulation parameters like frequency, number of users, power and radius of macro-cell. It is observed from the results the Electromagnetic pollution index in the environment is significantly affected with high transmission power, frequency and number of users. The obtained results of the electromagnetic pollution index is hazardous i.e., beyond 150 Watt-hour and hence an optimum design for low Electromagnetic pollution index (say < 150 Watt-Hour) in the environment has been suggested.
... The electromagnetic field (EMF) is an important environmental agent affecting living organisms (Deruelle 2020). More than three billion people daily in more than 200 countries are consciously exposed to EMF (Fragopoulou et al. 2010). Mobile phones with widespread use constitute a large part of EMF exposure. ...
Full-text available
Electromagnetic radiation from elecromagnetic field (EMF) sources has been an important health concern for a long time. The vast majority of this exposure is due to the widespread use of mobile phones, an important source of the EMF. The EMF generated by mobile phones may have adverse effects on the various biological structures that regulate the body system and function. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate histopathologically the effects of 900-megahertz (MHz) EMF application in the prenatal period on the development of the ventral cochlear nucleus, which is the first place of hearing in the brainstem, at various time points of the postnatal period in rats. In the study, Sprague-Dawley pregnant rats were divided randomly into two groups as the control group and the EMF group. The rats in the EMF group were exposed to a 900-MHz EMF every day until birth, while no EMF was applied to the rats in the control group. Auditory brainstem responses of both groups were recorded on the postnatal 13th day, the day the hearing starts. Newborn rats were sacrificed by anesthesia on days 7, 10, 15, and 30. Contrary to the control group, structural damage in cochlear nuclear neurons and oligodendrocyte cell structures and increased caspase-3 activity were observed in the postnatal period in the EMF groups. However, no significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of structural damage and caspase-3 activity at different stages of the postnatal period when cochlear nucleus development was observed. According to ABS, there was no significant difference between the average latency of waves in both groups. In conclusion, this study shows that 900-MHz electromagnetic waves propagated from mobile phones during the prenatal period have no harmful effects on the development of the ventral cochlear nucleus of rats.
... To address the concern of the potential harm of EVs, several researchers have measured EMF levels and compared these measures to the limits set by regulatory agencies. Predominately, the most commonly used regulations are those of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) [9,10] and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) [11], but other agencies [12][13][14][15] have different limits due to differences in opinion and scientific deduction [16,17]. For example, the BioInitiative Working Group [17] argued that the ICNIRP limits were obtained using anatomical models and thus may not reflect the real human body. ...
This study aimed to evaluate the direct current (DC) and alternating current (AC) electromagnetic field (EMF) intensity and distribution of an electric vehicle (EV). The results revealed that the EV generated DC and AC EMFs, which differed depending on the operation (resting, idling, and driving at speeds of 40 and 80 km/h). A correlation was established between the AC and DC components of the EMF, which was approximately 0.5 when idling and 0.8 at speeds of 40 and 80 km/h. The results obtained were below the harmful limit set by regulatory agencies, specifically the International Commission on Non‐Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). To further contribute to this field of study, the various measurement equipment used in the literature are summarized according to their parameters.
... Precisamente estos autores enfatizan que la disparidad de frecuencias a las que están sometidos los niños en la actualidad eleva de manera importante la polución electromagnética a la que están expuestos. A este respecto Fragopoulou et al. (2010) claman por establecer más medidas preventivas y proteger especialmente a los niños y a las embarazadas. Otros estudios, además, han mostrado que existe un efecto sinérgico entre la exposición a campos electromagnéticos de bajas frecuencias y otros cancerígenos (Juutilainen et al., 2006), por tanto la sobreexposición a diferentes agentes tóxicos puede potenciar el efecto dañino con respecto a su exposición a nivel individual. ...
Full-text available
Informe sobre los riesgos para la salud de convivir en las cercanías de una línea de alta tensión de 132 kV.
... Such a reaction can be detected through the increase in reactive oxygen species or by the increase of stress proteins [59][60][61]. In addition, the conditions of exposure to mobile phones and DECT have caused real bioeffects in memory and brain of mice [62][63][64][65]. Figure 4 exposure and radiofrequencies effect at varied powers [66]. ...
The exponential increase of the usage of mobile handsets and other electronic gadgets has significant impact on the global atmospheric warming of a cell and is estimated as an electromagnetic pollution index. The evidence of electromagnetic pollution index measures using the FS model in the literature, but the authors generated a mathematical model that was erroneous. This research has focused on deriving correct model to measure the pollution index of macrocell using the free space propagation model considering macrocell simulation parameters like frequency, cell size, power, and radius of macrocell. The results show that high transmission power, frequency, and number of users have a significant impact on the environmental electromagnetic pollution index. The resulting electromagnetic pollution index values are harmful, i.e., greater than 150 Wh, and an ideal strategy for small electromagnetic pollution index (say, less than 150 Wh) has been proposed.KeywordsElectromagnetic pollution indexElectromagnetic radiationFS propagationGlobal warmingGreen mobile communicationLine of sightMacrocellPolluted areaPolluting energyTransmission power
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity is categorised as a multisymptomatic 'el-allergy' in the Nordic classification of 2000 (R.68.8). Its symptoms are 'certainly real' and it can be a 'disabling condition' (W.H.O., 2005). It was first recorded in the mid 20th century as an occupational illness, but it has now spread into the general population through environmental exposure from increasing levels of electromagnetic fields and radiation. This Summary covers current research on this syndrome, covering EM Sensitivity and EM Hypersensitivity. It includes tables of symptoms, EMF sources and exposure guidelines, along with references to scientific studies. This New Edition adds updates, international doctors' protocols, aspects of quantum biology, evidence for sensitivity in animals and plants, case studies, disability issues and human rights.
Full-text available
This paper describes the effect of weak microwave fields on the amounts of heat-shock proteins in cell cultures at various temperatures. The field was generated by signal simulation of the Global System for Mobile communications (GSM) of 960 Mhz, used in portable phones. Transformed human epithelial amnion (AMA) cells, growing on glass coverslips, were exposed in a transverse electromagnetic (TEM) cell to a microwave field, generating a specific absorption rate (SAR) of 2.1−1 in the cells. Exposure temperatures were 35, 37, and 40 ± 0.1°C, respectively, and the exposure time was 20 min. The heat-shock proteins Hsp-70 and Hsp-27 were detected by immuno-fluorescence. Higher amounts of Hsp-70 were present in the cells exposed at 35 and 37°C than in the sham-exposed cells. These effects can be considered to be athermal, since the field strength was much lower than the safety standard for absence of heat generation by microwave fields. There was no significant response in the case of Hsp-27.
Full-text available
A health survey was carried out in Murcia, Spain, in the vicinity of a Cellular Phone Base Station working in DCS‐1800 MHz. This survey contained health items related to “microwave sickness” or “RF syndrome.” The microwave power density was measured at the respondents' homes. Statistical analysis showed significant correlation between the declared severity of the symptoms and the measured power density. The separation of respondents into two different exposure groups also showed an increase of the declared severity in the group with the higher exposure.
Full-text available
Biological effects of radio frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) on the blood‐brain barrier (BBB) have been studied in Fischer 344 rats of both sexes. The rats were not anaesthetised during the exposure. All animals were sacrificed by perfusion–fixation of the brains under chloralhydrate anaesthesia after the exposure. The brains were perfused with saline for 3–4 minutes, and thereafter perfusion fixed with 4% formaldehyde for 5–6 minutes. Whole coronal sections of the brains were dehydrated and embedded in paraffin and sectioned at 5 µm. Albumin and fibrinogen were demonstrated immunohistochemically and classified as normal versus pathological leakage. In the present investigation we exposed male and female Fischer 344 rats in a Transverse Electromagnetic Transmission line chamber to microwaves of 915 MHz as continuous wave (CW) and pulse‐modulated with different pulse power and at various time intervals. The CW‐pulse power varied from 0.001 W to 10 W and the exposure time from 2 min to 960 min. In each experiment we exposed 4–6 rats with 2–4 controls randomly placed in excited and non‐excited TEM‐cells respectively. We have in total investigated 630 exposed rats at various modulation frequencies and 372 controls. The frequency of pathological rats is significantly increased (p p p
We investigated the effects of exposure to environmental electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in 1170 subjects. Neutrophil phagocytosis was enhanced in the low-intensity exposure groups, but reduced significantly at relatively high intensities. Visual reaction time was prolonged and the scores of short-term memory tests were lower in some high-intensity exposure groups. EMFs may affect the central nervous and immune systems in man. © 1989 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted.
The effects of repeated treatment with weak microwaves (MW) (8.15–18 GHz, 1 µW/cm2, 1.5 h daily) and diet with antioxidants (AO) (β-carotene, α-tocopherol, and ubiquinone Q9) on production of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) in macrophages and T lymphocytes of healthy and tumor-bearing mice (TBM) were studied. Tumor size and mortality of TBM were also followed. Microwave radiation and antioxidant diet stimulated production of TNF in cells from healthy mice. At early stages, tumor growth induced TNF production in mouse cells; however, this effect decreased as tumors grew. In TBM exposed to MW, TNF production was higher than in unirradiated TBM. Oppositely, AO diet induced TNF production in healthy mice but did not affect TNF secretion in TBM. Accordingly, prolonged treatment of TBM to MW, but not to AO diet, decreased tumor growth rate and increased overall animal longevity. These results suggest that diminished tumor growth rate due to extremely low-level MW exposure of mice carrying tumors, at least in part, was caused by enhancement in TNF production and accumulation of plasma TNF.
The effect of 8.15-18 GHz (1 Hz within) microwave radiation at a power density of 1 microW/cm2 on the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) production and immune response was tested. A single 5 h whole-body exposure induced a significant increase in TNF production in peritoneal macrophages and splenic T cells. The mitogenic response in T lymphocytes increased after microwave exposure. The activation of cellular immunity was observed within 3 days after exposure. The diet containing lipid-soluble nutrients (beta-carotene, alpha-tocopherol and ubiquinone Q9) increased the activity of macrophages and T cells from irradiated mice. These results demonstrate that irradiation with low-power density microwaves stimulates the immune potential of macrophages and T cells, and the antioxidant treatment enhances the effect of microwaves, in particular at later terms, when the effect of irradiation is reduced.
Whole body microwave sinusoidal irradiation of male NMRI mice with 8.15-18 GHz (1 Hz within) at a power density of 1 microW/cm2 caused a significant enhancement of TNF production in peritoneal macrophages and splenic T lymphocytes. Microwave radiation affected T cells, facilitating their capacity to proliferate in response to mitogenic stimulation. The exposure duration necessary for the stimulation of cellular immunity ranged from 5 h to 3 days. Chronic irradiation of mice for 7 days produced the decreasing of TNF production in peritoneal macrophages. The exposure of mice for 24 h increased the TNF production and immune proliferative response, and these stimulatory effects persisted over 3 days after the termination of exposure. Microwave treatment increased the endogenously produced TNF more effectively than did lipopolysaccharide, one of the most potential stimuli of synthesis of this cytokine. The role of microwaves as a factor interfering with the process of cell immunity is discussed.
The effects of the mobile phone (MP) electromagnetic fields on electroencephalography (EEG) and event-related potentials (ERP) were examined. With regard to the reported effects of MP on sleep, 22 patients with narcolepsy-cataplexy were exposed or sham exposed for 45 min to the MP (900 MHz, specific absorption rate 0.06 W/kg) placed close to the right ear in a double blind study. There were no changes of the EEG recorded after the MP exposure. A subgroup of 17 patients was studied on visual ERP recorded during the MP exposure. Using an adapted “odd-ball” paradigm, each patient was instructed to strike a key whenever rare target stimuli were presented. There were three variants of target stimuli (horizontal stripes in (i) left, (ii) right hemifields or (iii) whole field of the screen). The exposure enhanced the positivity of the ERP endogenous complex solely in response to target stimuli in the right hemifield of the screen (P < 0.01). The reaction time was shortened by 20 ms in response to all target stimuli (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the electromagnetic field of MP may suppress the excessive sleepiness and improve performance while solving a monotonous cognitive task requiring sustained attention and vigilance. Bioelectromagnetics 22:519–528, 2001. © 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.