28/01/2009 - January 2009 - Science Update

Many apologies for the late release of the "January 2009" science update, there will be a February update at the end of the month as well. The following is a quick summary of another fourteen papers that have come out over the last few months related to effects of electromagnetic radiation.

This is an interesting paper published in December 2008 from Finland, that demonstrated strongly significant ROS creation and DNA damage from continuous wave radiofrequency radiation but not from GSM exposure (both at a SAR of 5 W/kg). The test were performed in vitro on Human SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells, and found that after 60 minutes of exposure both ROS creation and DNA breakage were statistically signficantly increased (P < 0.01). This paper yet again demonstrates non-thermal effects of RF exposure, though it is interesting that they did not find the effects for GSM signals that were found in earlier work^{[Oktem 2005, Nikolova 2005, Oral 2006, Panagopoulos 2007, Yao 2008]}, and found that continuous wave radiation was more bioactive than pulsed signals.

A Nigerian team have reviewed the literature on mobile phone use and the associated risk of brain cancer. Their conclusions were that "The preponderance of published research works over several decades including some with over ten years of follow up have not demonstrated any significant increase in cancer among mobile phone users. However, the need for caution is emphasized as it may take up to four decades for carcinogenesis to become fully apparent." We feel that the literature does not support their view that the majority of papers in published literature "have not demonstrated any significant increase in cancer among mobile phone users", especially for those who have used their phones for more than 10 years, but their final caveat is very important. The latency period of brain tumours must be taken into consideration when analysing brain tumour risk - if the typical period is around 25 years (approximate estimate for ionising radiation) then to see anything for data between 10 and 15 years should be considered highly concerning.

The King's College psychology team of Rubin, Wessely and colleagues have teamed up to assess whether providing the participants of a double-blinded study on the accuracy of their results would affect subsequent symptom severity and attribution to mobile phone signals. It was find that this was not the case, although some were quite willing to consider the possibility that their symptoms may be caused by something other than electromagnetic fields.

This Turkish paper analysed rat exposure to high levels of ELF magnetic fields (50 Hz, 100 and 500 µT), and found that the exposure generates oxidatively induced DNA base modifications which are mutagenic in mammalian cells in vivo. They conclude that the paper is evidence that may explain the apparent genotoxicity of ELF magnetic fields.

Jukka Juutilainen has produced a number of papers assessing the affect of ELF MF exposure acting as a catalyst for other known carcinogens, and this paper was intended as a summary of the effects, with a separation between high fields (>= 100 µT) and low fields (< 100 µT). His findings were as follows: "The majority of in vitro studies have reported positive findings, which supports the conclusion that MFs of 100 microT or higher interact with other chemical and physical agents. Further studies should address biophysical mechanisms and dose-response relationship below 100 microT. Animal studies designed according to the classical initiation-promotion concept may not be sufficient for studying the cocarcinogenic effects of MFs, and further studies using novel study designs would be useful. Epidemiological data on the interaction between MFs and other environmental agents are scant and inconclusive, and any further studies may be difficult because of the scarcity of subjects with suitable combined exposures."

Researchers from Germany conducted a population-based, multi-phase, cross-sectional study within the context of a large panel survey (involving 51,444 people, of whom 30,047 responded) regularly carried out by a private research institute. The aim was to identify whether proximity of residence to mobile phone base stations as well as risk perception is associated with health complaints. The findings were interesting: 18.7% of participants were concerned about adverse health effects of mobile phone base stations, while an additional 10.3% attributed their personal adverse health effects to the exposure from them. From the conclusions made by the authors themselves, this is interesting non-laboratory support for the possible existence of ES in the German population: "A substantial proportion of the German population is concerned about adverse health effects caused by exposure from mobile phone base stations. The observed slightly higher prevalence of health complaints near base stations can not however be fully explained by attributions or concerns."

This study found cellular effects in germinating onions when they were exposed to 400 and 900 MHz electric fields strengths of 41 and 120 V/m. These findings are entirely non-thermal, and whilst the upper value is above ICNIRP the lower value is not, and a quite feasible electric field level to be received by the head when talking on a mobile phone. This is further support that cellular effects in living organisms can be found at exposure levels typical for those using a mobile phone.

Scientists from Gray Cancer Institute in the UK have failed to find DNA or chromosomal damage from exposure to 50 - 1,000 µT ELF magnetic fields. The field levels being used are a large distance above typical environmental levels (< 1 µT;) so these findings have little impact on assessments of health effects of these levels, but is relevant as an attempt to investigate findings from the EU REFLEX report.

Researchers from the Jiao Tong University School of Medicine in Shanghai, China, have found genetic markers that demonstrate a 4-fold increase in risk of childhood leukaemia if they also live within 100 metres of powerlines or transformers compared to their neighbours with a fully functioning version of this gene.

This doesn't give a biological mechanism (for which there are a number of theories requiring further research ^{[Henshaw 2002, Henshaw & Reiter 2005, Binhi 2008, Blank 2008]}), but what it does give is a marker for biological susceptibility. This has been suspected with most causes of cancer (that the issue is multi-causal and multi-factorial - i.e. for each of the many causes there are many factors) but previously there has been no evidence of this for ELF electromagnetic fields. This research strongly supports the association between living proximity to powerlines and childhood leukaemia^{[Ahlbom 2000, Greenland 2000]}, but more importantly it also provides the beginnings of a possibility that people may be able to screen themselves for susceptibility. This is potentially groundbreaking as it allows some level of preventative action for those looking at purchasing a house near existing overhead powerlines, and could also provide peace of mind for those already living near powerlines if they are tested and found not to have the marker.

We have covered this paper in much greater detail in an earlier news story already.

Russian physicists (including Igor Belyaev, who has published numerous papers on cellular effects of RF radiation, e.g. Belyaev 2005, Belyaev 2006) have suggested a "combined action" mechanism that may trigger non-thermal effects from radiofrequency radiation.

Belgian researcher Luc Verschaeve has compiled a review of the findings of the past several review papers published on laboratory investigations devoted to in vitro and in vivo animal (cyto)genetic studies on RF EMF exposure. His conclusions are that there are consistent findings of cellular and genetic damage, but the studies are not robust enough to draw firm conclusions, and that it is important to fund large multi-disciplinary investigations to analyse these findings in greater detail.

German researchers have failed to find effects on the fertility of rats exposed to UMTS EMF exposure. The exposure was 24 hour per day lifelong exposure, and the mean whole-body SARs were 0 (sham), 0.08, 0.4 and 1.3 W/kg, measured at time of mating. Four generations of these rats and their offspring were monitored, with no statistical effects on fertility or development found.

Scientists from the Italian Agency for New Technologies have performed an in vivo study to determine whether GSM-modulated RF fields affected the behaviour of bone marrow precursor cells which would then have an impact on carcinogenesis. No effect was found on cell number or proliferation.

This paper looks at the many different aspects of electromagnetic fields, from the different effects associated with their electrical and magnetic components to the many mechanisms which have generated the beginnings of published scientific support. Focusing largely on cellular interaction, the paper assesses ion transport in cells and tissues, gene expression and the effects on healing. The authors conclude that it is appropriate to look at cross-disciplinary information to further progress relevant biological science, stating that "As an outlook for future research topics, this review tries to link areas of EF, MF and EMF research to thermodynamics and quantum physics, approaches that will produce novel insights into cell biology".

Further References