28 New Papers on Electromagnetic Fields and Biology or Health
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety, 2 May 2023Dr. Joel Moscowitz, University of California Berkeley, has been circulating abstracts of newly-published scientific papers on radio frequency and other non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) about once a month since 2016. Several hundred EMF scientists around the world receive these updates. The complete collection of these papers contains more than 1,900 abstracts and links to more than 2,000 papers.
To see abstracts for the most recent papers or to download volumes 1 and/or 2 of this collection go to: https://bit.ly/saferemr040323
Featuring a new open access paper from the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF):
Héroux P, Belyaev I, Chamberlin K, Dasdag S, De Salles AAA, Rodriguez CEF, Hardell L, Kelley E, Kesari KK, Mallery-Blythe E, Melnick RL, Miller AB, Moskowitz JM, on behalf of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits and Engineering Solutions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(7):5398. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20075398.
Abstract
In the 1990s, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) restricted its risk assessment for human exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in seven ways: (1) Inappropriate focus on heat, ignoring sub-thermal effects. (2) Reliance on exposure experiments performed over very short times. (3) Overlooking time/amplitude characteristics of RFR signals. (4) Ignoring carcinogenicity, hypersensitivity, and other health conditions connected with RFR. (5) Measuring cellphone Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) at arbitrary distances from the head. (6) Averaging SAR doses at volumetric/mass scales irrelevant to health. (7) Using unrealistic simulations for cell phone SAR estimations. Low-cost software and hardware modifications are proposed here for cellular phone RFR exposure mitigation: (1) inhibiting RFR emissions in contact with the body, (2) use of antenna patterns reducing the Percent of Power absorbed in the Head (PPHead) and body and increasing the Percent of Power Radiated for communications (PPR), and (3) automated protocol-based reductions of the number of RFR emissions, their duration, or integrated dose. These inexpensive measures do not fundamentally alter cell phone functions or communications quality. A health threat is scientifically documented at many levels and acknowledged by industries. Yet mitigation of RFR exposures to users does not appear as a priority with most cell phone manufacturers.
Conclusions
Protection measures against wireless RFR exposures need considerable improvement due to the parochial positions adopted in the IEEE-ICNIRP risk assessments. The expanding modern needs for data communications are obviously best served by established optical fiber solutions [141,142] which, in contrast to wireless, offer complete confinement, energy efficiency, and privacy.
Engineering can contemplate many technically practical solutions aimed at reducing cell phone users’ RFR exposures. Software-based solutions controlling RFR emissions, as well as hardware changes to antenna designs, should not be expensive to implement, and would only mildly influence the habits of cell phone users. Although these solutions are available, it seems that in many cases, the industry has either not implemented them, or, in some cases, has even fought exposure abatements by preventing public education about RFR exposures [143,144].
The charters of professional organizations in the world, including engineering, usually state that they place human safety above all other considerations.
We firmly believe that RFR exposures to living tissues should be avoided when possible and that RFR power absorbed by the user’s body is wasted and harmful to health. In all likelihood, our recommendations for cell phone alterations would improve the lifespan of both humans and batteries.
Open access paper: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/7/5398
--
Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits and Engineering Solutions (ICBE-EMF review)
Cellular and molecular effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields
Nordic Appeal: More Stringent Regulatory Framework on Microwave Radiation from Wireless Technologies is Needed - Stop Further Rollout of 5G
The need for consensus guidelines to address the mixed legacy of genetic damage assessments for radiofrequency fields
Impact of comorbidity on symptomatology in various types of environmental intolerance in a general Swedish and Finnish adult population
The association between real-life markers of phone use and cognitive performance, health-related quality of life and sleep
Evaluation of the Genotoxic Effects of Mobile Phone Radiation Using Buccal Micronucleus Assay
Statistical Characterization and Modeling of Indoor RF-EMF Down-Link Exposure
Large-Area Monitoring of RF EMF from Mobile Phone Base Stations and Broadcast Transmission Towers by Car-Mounted Measurements around Tokyo
Effects of mobile phone electromagnetic radiation on thyroid glands and hormones in Rattus norvegicus brain
900 MHZ electromagnetic field exposure relieved Alzheimer's Disease-like symptoms on APP/PS1 mice
Teratogenic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on the embryonic development of chick: A study on morphology and hatchability (2G and 4G study)
Biological effects of exposure to 2650 MHz electromagnetic radiation on the behavior, learning, and memory of mice
Myrtenal improves memory deficits in mice exposed to radiofrequency radiation during gestational & neonatal development via enhancing oxido-inflammatory, and neurotransmitter functions
3.5 GHz radiofrequency radiation may affect biomechanics of bone and muscle of diabetics
Physiological and Psychological Stress of Microwave Radiation-Induced Cardiac Injury in Rats
Non-thermal disruption of β-adrenergic receptor-activated Ca2+ signalling and apoptosis in human ES-derived cardiomyocytes by microwave electric fields at 2.4 GHz
Effect of 2.45 GHz Electromagnetic Fields on Fear Memory Extinction in Male Rats
Effects of 2600 Mhz RF Radiation and Melatonin on Skin and Liver Tissue Hydroxyprolin Levels of Male Rats
Specific Absorption Rate Variability in Long Term Exposure In Vivo Experiments
Effects of Power-Frequency Magnetic Field Exposure on B-Cell Differentiation From Human Hematopoietic Stem/Progenitor Cells
Extremely Low Frequency-Electromagnetic Fields (ELF-EMF) Can Decrease Spermatocyte Count and Motility and Change Testicular Tissue
Calculated residential exposure to power frequency magnetic fields for an epidemiological study in France and comparison to measurements
Extremely Low Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields Exposure: Survey of Recent Findings
Static electric field inhibits the proliferation and secretion functions of splenic lymphocytes in mice
Exposure to a static magnetic field attenuates hepatic damage and function abnormality in obese and diabetic mice
Introducing energy into marine environments: A lab-scale static magnetic field submarine cable simulation and its effects on sperm and larval development on a reef forming serpulid
Power lines and birds: An overlooked threat in South America
Electromagnetic fields (EMF) in electric cars
==
Related Posts:
International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields
Hybrid & Electric Cars: Electromagnetic Radiation Risks5G Wireless Technology: Cutting Through the Hype
Wireless Radiation TV News
Key Cell Phone Radiation Research Studies
Tips to Reduce Your Wireless Radiation Exposure
The "Havana syndrome": A special case of electrohypersensitivity
Thyroid Cancer & Mobile Phone Use
In the 1990s, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) restricted its risk assessment for human exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in seven ways: (1) Inappropriate focus on heat, ignoring sub-thermal effects. (2) Reliance on exposure experiments performed over very short times. (3) Overlooking time/amplitude characteristics of RFR signals. (4) Ignoring carcinogenicity, hypersensitivity, and other health conditions connected with RFR. (5) Measuring cellphone Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) at arbitrary distances from the head. (6) Averaging SAR doses at volumetric/mass scales irrelevant to health. (7) Using unrealistic simulations for cell phone SAR estimations. Low-cost software and hardware modifications are proposed here for cellular phone RFR exposure mitigation: (1) inhibiting RFR emissions in contact with the body, (2) use of antenna patterns reducing the Percent of Power absorbed in the Head (PPHead) and body and increasing the Percent of Power Radiated for communications (PPR), and (3) automated protocol-based reductions of the number of RFR emissions, their duration, or integrated dose. These inexpensive measures do not fundamentally alter cell phone functions or communications quality. A health threat is scientifically documented at many levels and acknowledged by industries. Yet mitigation of RFR exposures to users does not appear as a priority with most cell phone manufacturers.
Conclusions
Protection measures against wireless RFR exposures need considerable improvement due to the parochial positions adopted in the IEEE-ICNIRP risk assessments. The expanding modern needs for data communications are obviously best served by established optical fiber solutions [141,142] which, in contrast to wireless, offer complete confinement, energy efficiency, and privacy.
Engineering can contemplate many technically practical solutions aimed at reducing cell phone users’ RFR exposures. Software-based solutions controlling RFR emissions, as well as hardware changes to antenna designs, should not be expensive to implement, and would only mildly influence the habits of cell phone users. Although these solutions are available, it seems that in many cases, the industry has either not implemented them, or, in some cases, has even fought exposure abatements by preventing public education about RFR exposures [143,144].
The charters of professional organizations in the world, including engineering, usually state that they place human safety above all other considerations.
We firmly believe that RFR exposures to living tissues should be avoided when possible and that RFR power absorbed by the user’s body is wasted and harmful to health. In all likelihood, our recommendations for cell phone alterations would improve the lifespan of both humans and batteries.
Open access paper: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/7/5398
--
Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits and Engineering Solutions (ICBE-EMF review)
Cellular and molecular effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields
Nordic Appeal: More Stringent Regulatory Framework on Microwave Radiation from Wireless Technologies is Needed - Stop Further Rollout of 5G
The need for consensus guidelines to address the mixed legacy of genetic damage assessments for radiofrequency fields
Impact of comorbidity on symptomatology in various types of environmental intolerance in a general Swedish and Finnish adult population
The association between real-life markers of phone use and cognitive performance, health-related quality of life and sleep
Evaluation of the Genotoxic Effects of Mobile Phone Radiation Using Buccal Micronucleus Assay
Statistical Characterization and Modeling of Indoor RF-EMF Down-Link Exposure
Large-Area Monitoring of RF EMF from Mobile Phone Base Stations and Broadcast Transmission Towers by Car-Mounted Measurements around Tokyo
Effects of mobile phone electromagnetic radiation on thyroid glands and hormones in Rattus norvegicus brain
900 MHZ electromagnetic field exposure relieved Alzheimer's Disease-like symptoms on APP/PS1 mice
Teratogenic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on the embryonic development of chick: A study on morphology and hatchability (2G and 4G study)
Biological effects of exposure to 2650 MHz electromagnetic radiation on the behavior, learning, and memory of mice
Myrtenal improves memory deficits in mice exposed to radiofrequency radiation during gestational & neonatal development via enhancing oxido-inflammatory, and neurotransmitter functions
3.5 GHz radiofrequency radiation may affect biomechanics of bone and muscle of diabetics
Physiological and Psychological Stress of Microwave Radiation-Induced Cardiac Injury in Rats
Non-thermal disruption of β-adrenergic receptor-activated Ca2+ signalling and apoptosis in human ES-derived cardiomyocytes by microwave electric fields at 2.4 GHz
Effect of 2.45 GHz Electromagnetic Fields on Fear Memory Extinction in Male Rats
Effects of 2600 Mhz RF Radiation and Melatonin on Skin and Liver Tissue Hydroxyprolin Levels of Male Rats
Specific Absorption Rate Variability in Long Term Exposure In Vivo Experiments
Effects of Power-Frequency Magnetic Field Exposure on B-Cell Differentiation From Human Hematopoietic Stem/Progenitor Cells
Extremely Low Frequency-Electromagnetic Fields (ELF-EMF) Can Decrease Spermatocyte Count and Motility and Change Testicular Tissue
Calculated residential exposure to power frequency magnetic fields for an epidemiological study in France and comparison to measurements
Extremely Low Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields Exposure: Survey of Recent Findings
Static electric field inhibits the proliferation and secretion functions of splenic lymphocytes in mice
Exposure to a static magnetic field attenuates hepatic damage and function abnormality in obese and diabetic mice
Introducing energy into marine environments: A lab-scale static magnetic field submarine cable simulation and its effects on sperm and larval development on a reef forming serpulid
Power lines and birds: An overlooked threat in South America
Electromagnetic fields (EMF) in electric cars
==
Related Posts:
International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields
Hybrid & Electric Cars: Electromagnetic Radiation Risks5G Wireless Technology: Cutting Through the Hype
Wireless Radiation TV News
Key Cell Phone Radiation Research Studies
Tips to Reduce Your Wireless Radiation Exposure
The "Havana syndrome": A special case of electrohypersensitivity
Thyroid Cancer & Mobile Phone Use
--
Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
Website: https://www.saferemr.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.