Influence of electromagnetic fields on reproductive system of male rats

Kumar, Sanjay; Behari, J.; Sisodia, Rashmi

doi:10.3109/09553002.2013.741282

Cited by 42 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A second connection, to male infertility, is also hidden in the report. Two of the positive studies (53,54) are falsely stated in the Report as being on blood formation but what was actually being studied in both of these studies was testicular sperm formation. The positive study Liu et al (55) which shows genotoxicity in a spermatocyte cell line may also have implications regarding male infertility, because of the cell type being studied.…”

Section: Genotoxicity Of Non-thermal Microwave Exposures: Examples Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action

Pall

2015

Reviews on Environmental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractThis review considers a paradigm shift on microwave electromagnetic field (EMF) action from only thermal effects to action via voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) activation. Microwave/lower frequency EMFs were shown in two dozen studies to act via VGCC activation because all effects studied were blocked by calcium channel blockers. This mode of action was further supported by hundreds of studies showing microwave changes in calcium fluxes and intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i signaling. The biophysical properties of VGCCs/similar channels make them particularly sensitive to low intensity, non-thermal EMF exposures. Non-thermal studies have shown that in most cases pulsed fields are more active than are non-pulsed fields and that exposures within certain intensity windows have much large biological effects than do either lower or higher intensity exposures; these are both consistent with a VGCC role but inconsistent with only a heating/thermal role. Downstream effects of VGCC activation include calcium signaling, elevated nitric oxide (NO), NO signaling, peroxynitrite, free radical formation, and oxidative stress. Downstream effects explain repeatedly reported biological responses to non-thermal exposures: oxidative stress; single and double strand breaks in cellular DNA; cancer; male and female infertility; lowered melatonin/sleep disruption; cardiac changes including tachycardia, arrhythmia, and sudden cardiac death; diverse neuropsychiatric effects including depression; and therapeutic effects. Non-VGCC non-thermal mechanisms may occur, but none have been shown to have effects in mammals. Biologically relevant safety standards can be developed through studies of cell lines/cell cultures with high levels of different VGCCs, measuring their responses to different EMF exposures. The 2014 Canadian Report by a panel of experts only recognizes thermal effects regarding safety standards for non-ionizing radiation exposures. Its position is therefore contradicted by each of the observations above. The Report is assessed here in several ways including through Karl Popper’s assessment of strength of evidence. Popper argues that the strongest type of evidence is evidence that falsifies a theory; second strongest is a test of “risky prediction”; the weakest confirms a prediction that the theory could be correct but in no way rules out alternative theories. All of the evidence supporting the Report’s conclusion that only thermal effects need be considered are of the weakest type, confirming prediction but not ruling out alternatives. In contrast, there are thousands of studies apparently falsifying their position. The Report argues that there are no biophysically viable mechanisms for non-thermal effects (shown to be false, see above). It claims that there are many “inconsistencies” in the literature causing them to throw out large numbers of studies; however, the one area where it apparently documents this claim, that of genotoxicity, shows no inconsistencies; rather it shows that various cell types, fields and end points produce different responses, as should be expected. The Report claims that cataract formation is produced by thermal effects but ignores studies falsifying this claim and also studies showing [Ca2+]i and VGCC roles. It is time for a paradigm shift away from only thermal effects toward VGCC activation and consequent downstream effects.

show abstract

Section: Genotoxicity Of Non-thermal Microwave Exposures: Examples Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action

Pall

2015

Reviews on Environmental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Exposure to mobile phone radiation 60 min/d for 3 mo significantly decrease the serum testosterone level of Wistar rats [28]. Exposed to 10 GHz microwave radiation for 2 h/day for 45 d significantly decreases the testosterone level of seventy day-old rats [30]. In spite of, exposure to electromagnetic field 1 800 and 900 MHz for 2 h continuously per day for 90 d [31] and exposure to 1 800 MHz GSM-like [32] caused an enhance in testosterone level.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Effects of long-term exposure to radiofrequency radiations emitted by mobile Jammers on reproduction parameters in rats

Owjfard

fard

2017

APJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several studies have reported that EMF leads to interruption of spermatogenesis, impairment of sperm quality, degeneration of germinal epithelium cells, impaired testosterone levels, infertility, premature birth in rats and a decrease in testicular biopsy scores (Svedenstal and Johanson 1995, Dasdag et al 1999, Al-Akhras et al 2001, Ozguner et al 2005, Mailankot et al 2009, Li et al 2010, Kumar et al 2013. In contrast, however, other studies have reported that EMF has no effect on male fertility or else that the effect of EMF depends on intensity, length of exposure, wavelength and distance from EMF (Margonato et al 1995, Cecconi et al 2000, Dasdag et al 2003, Kim et al 2006, Çelik et al 2012, Gye and Park 2012.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure to a 900 MHz electromagnetic field for 1 hour a day over 30 days does change the histopathology and biochemistry of the rat testis

Odacı

Özyılmaz

2015

International Journal of Radiation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Influence of electromagnetic fields on reproductive system of male rats

Abstract: 10 GHz field has an injurious effect on fertility potential of male-exposed animals.

Cited by 42 publications

References 40 publications

Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action

Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action

Effects of long-term exposure to radiofrequency radiations emitted by mobile Jammers on reproduction parameters in rats

Exposure to a 900 MHz electromagnetic field for 1 hour a day over 30 days does change the histopathology and biochemistry of the rat testis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About