Absence of mutagenic interaction between microwaves and mitomycin C in mammalian cells

Meltz, Martin L.; Eagan, Phyllis A.; Erwin, David N.

doi:10.1002/em.2850130404

Cited by 35 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies (Szmigielski et al, 1982;Scarfi et al, 1996;Maes et al, 1997;Pakhomova et al, 1997) have suggested that microwaves can have an epigenetic effect in vivo, and that they can exacerbate the genotoxicity of ionizing radiation or cancer-inducing substances, or potentiate other epigenetic factors (IEGMP, 2000). However, the evidence for an epigenetic effect of microwaves is equivocal since some studies have failed to reproduce the positive results reported by others (Ciaravino et al, 1987(Ciaravino et al, , 1991Meltz et al, 1989Meltz et al, , 1990Cain et al, 1997).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In addition, cell phone radiation can alter protooncogene activity (Ivaschuk et al, 1997;Goswami et al, 1999). However, a similar number of studies have failed to detect obvious clastogenic effects following microwave irradiation of isolated animal cells in vitro (Alam et al, 1978;Lloyd et al, 1984Lloyd et al, , 1986Wolff et al, 1985;Meltz et al, 1987Meltz et al, , 1989Meltz et al, , 1990Kerbacher et al, 1990;Maes et al, 1997Maes et al, , 2001. Thus, there is still no conclusive answer as to whether exposure to microwaves is clastogenic, i.e., whether they can direct or indirectly increase the frequency of chromosomal aberrations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cytogenetic analysis of the effects of 2.5 and 10.5 GHz microwaves on human lymphocytes

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The biological effects of microwaves on living organisms remain highly controversial. Although some reports have suggested that microwaves may be directly or indirectly genotoxic, a direct action is unlikely because the low energy of microwave photons makes them unable to cause single-strand breaks in DNA. In this work, we examined the possible clastogenic properties of microwaves (2.5 and 10.5 GHz) on blood lymphocytes in vitro by monitoring the frequency of chromosomal aberrations. We also investigated whether blood cells showed increased radiosensitivity or radioresistance when pretreated with the microwaves and then irradiated with gamma radiation. There was no significant difference in the frequency of chromosomal aberrations between cells which had or had not been treated with microwaves. Control cells had a mean frequency of 0.013 aberrations per cell compared to 0.010 and 0.011 aberrations per cell in the microwave-exposed samples. Nor was there any alteration in the radiosensitivity of cells pretreated with microwaves. Gamma irradiated cells showed a mean frequency of 0.279 aberrations per cell compared to 0.343 and 0.310 aberrations per cell in samples pretreated with microwaves. However, cell mortality increased markedly after exposure to microwaves. The results suggest that microwaves do not interact directly or indirectly with chromosomes, although they may target other cell structures, such as cell membranes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cytogenetic analysis of the effects of 2.5 and 10.5 GHz microwaves on human lymphocytes

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Very detailed work in this area has been reported by Meltz et al [1989Meltz et al [ , 1990. In both independently performed series of investigations, L5178Y mouse leukemic cells were exposed to a 2450 MHz pulsed wave signal for 4 h. The mean SARs [30 W/kg in Meltz et al, 1989;40 W/kg in Meltz et al, 1990] were such that the temperature in the medium increased above the initial temperature of 37 8C during the 4 h exposure period. The medium temperature increased to, but did not exceed 38.9 8C.…”

Section: Induction Of Micronucleimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If any of these steps were altered during or because of the simultaneous chemical and RF exposure, there could be an increase or a decrease in the chemically induced mutation frequency. In addition, two different chemical mutagens were examined, MMC [Meltz et al, 1989] and proflavin . The chemicals act in different ways: the MMC can break DNA strands and induce cross links; the proflavin intercalates between the DNA strands.…”

Section: Induction Of Micronucleimentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiofrequency exposure and mammalian cell toxicity, genotoxicity, and transformation

Meltz

2003

Bioelectromagnetics

Self Cite

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The published in vitro literature relevant to the issue of the possible induction of toxicity, genotoxicity, and transformation of mammalian cells due to radiofrequency field (RF) exposure is examined. In some instances, information about related in vivo studies is presented. The review is from the perspective of technical merit and also biological consistency, especially with regard to those publications reporting a positive effect. The weight of evidence available indicates that, for a variety of frequencies and modulations with both short and long exposure times, at exposure levels that do not (or in some instances do) heat the biological sample such that there is a measurable increase in temperature, RF exposure does not induce (a) DNA strand breaks, (b) chromosome aberrations, (c) sister chromatid exchanges (SCEs), (d) DNA repair synthesis, (e) phenotypic mutation, or (f) transformation (cancer-like changes). While there is limited experimental evidence that RF exposure induces micronuclei formation, there is abundant evidence that it does not. There is some evidence that RF exposure does not induce DNA excision repair, suggesting the absence of base damage. There is also evidence that RF exposure does not inhibit excision repair after the induction of thymine dimers by UVexposure, as well as evidence that indicates that RF is not a co-carcinogen or a tumor promoter. The article is in part a tutorial, so that the reader can consider similarities and discrepancies between reports of RF-induced effects relative to one another. Bioelectromagnetics Supplement 6:S196-S213,

show abstract

“…Moreover, the numbers of cytokinase blocked cells scored in the controls varied widely among the 12 cows. Meltz et al [1989] investigated whether there is an interaction between exposure of mammalian cells to 2.45 GHz RFEMF and MMC. Cells were derived from the L5178Y mouse leukemia line.…”

Section: Mammalian Live Tissues and Cells Exposed In Vitromentioning

confidence: 99%

Radio frequency electromagnetic fields: Cancer, mutagenesis, and genotoxicity

Heynick

Johnston²,

Mason

2003

Bioelectromagnetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present critiques of epidemiologic studies and experimental investigations, published mostly in peer‐reviewed journals, on cancer and related effects from exposure to nonionizing electromagnetic fields in the nominal frequency range of 3 kHz to 300 GHz of interest to Subcommittee 4 (SC4) of the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES). The major topics discussed are presented under the headings Epidemiologic and Other Findings on Human Exposure, Mammals Exposed In Vivo, Mammalian Live Tissues and Cell Preparations Exposed In Vitro, and Mutagenesis and Genotoxicity in Microorganisms and Fruit Flies. Under each major topic, we present minireviews of papers on various specific endpoints investigated. The section on Epidemiologic and Other Findings on Human Exposure is divided into two subsections, the first on possible carcinogenic effects of exposure from emitters not in physical contact with the populations studied, for example, transmitting antennas and other devices. Discussed in the second subsection are studies of postulated carcinogenic effects from use of mobile phones, with prominence given to brain tumors from use of cellular and cordless telephones in direct physical contact with an ear of each subject. In both subsections, some investigations yielded positive findings, others had negative findings, including papers directed toward experimentally verifying positive findings, and both were reported in a few instances. Further research on various important aspects may resolve such differences. Overall, however, the preponderance of published epidemiologic and experimental findings do not support the supposition that in vivo or in vitro exposures to such fields are carcinogenic. Bioelectromagnetics Supplement 6:S74–S100, 2003. Published 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

show abstract

Absence of mutagenic interaction between microwaves and mitomycin C in mammalian cells

Cited by 35 publications

References 25 publications

Cytogenetic analysis of the effects of 2.5 and 10.5 GHz microwaves on human lymphocytes

Cytogenetic analysis of the effects of 2.5 and 10.5 GHz microwaves on human lymphocytes

Radiofrequency exposure and mammalian cell toxicity, genotoxicity, and transformation

Radio frequency electromagnetic fields: Cancer, mutagenesis, and genotoxicity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About