International and National Expert Group Evaluations: Biological/Health Effects of Radiofrequency Fields

Abstract

The escalated use of various wireless communication devices, which emit non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) fields, have raised concerns among the general public regarding the potential adverse effects on human health. During the last six decades, researchers have used different parameters to investigate the effects of in vitro and in vivo exposures of animals and humans or their cells to RF fields. Data reported in peer-reviewed scientific publications were contradictory: some indicated effects while others did not. International organizations have considered all of these data as well as the observations reported in human epidemiological investigations to set-up the guidelines or standards (based on the quality of published studies and the “weight of scientific evidence” approach) for RF exposures in occupationally exposed individuals and the general public. Scientists with relevant expertise in various countries have also considered the published data to provide the required scientific information for policy-makers to develop and disseminate authoritative health information to the general public regarding RF exposures. This paper is a compilation of the conclusions, on the biological effects of RF exposures, from various national and international expert groups, based on their analyses. In general, the expert groups suggested a reduction in exposure levels, precautionary approach, and further research.

Quality Matters: Systematic Analysis of Endpoints Related to “Cellular Life” in Vitro Data of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure

“…Among them are the World Health Organization (WHO), the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), and the European Commission (SCENIHR, Scientific Committee for the Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks). In a recent review [1], the different evaluations were summarized and analyzed with the general conclusion that more research is needed to get answers to health risk-related questions.…”

“…In addition, many review articles have summarized the state of the art in almost all areas of biology, considering different living systems, exposure levels (specific absorption rates, SAR), frequencies, exposure duration, and so on (for some of the recent review articles, see [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8]). The main concern regards possible biological effects at the non-thermal level of RF exposure.…”

Neutralization of wireless DECT base radiation by novel resonance devices

“…Schematic presentation of a resonance device (type RD-B) consisting of a housing (1), a copper hollow conductor filled up with varying quartz granulates (2), carbon and zinced iron sheet (3), copper sheet (4), tube elements filled with quartz (5,6), magnet element (7), zinced iron sheet (8), rose quartz pieces (9,10) and some cardboard anti-shake elements (11,12). RD-A consists of two additional AC power supply wires inside from right (input) to left (output) crossing the element number (2) as a copper/iron hollow conductor plus its wire surrounding elements (7,10 Table 1.…”

“…All these sources emit radiation with different characteristics in a wide spectrum of frequencies ranging from 0.9 to 2.5 GHz. Although the energy of this type of radiation is quite weak, recent research studies have provided strong evidence that electromagnetic radiation influences human wellbeing and health by affecting biological and biochemical processes [3][4][5][6][7][8]. Due to its world-wide importance with more than 5 billion users [9], mobile phone technology has been extensively investigated for its health effects at the cellular, experimental animal, and epidemiological level.…”

Brain Topography of Emf-Induced Eeg-Changes in Restful Wakefulness: Tracing Current Effects, Targeting Future Prospects

“…Indeed, the latest reviews in this field were published in the first half of the last decade (2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011), despite the fact that all of them were alerting for the need of further explorations [Kwon and Hämäläinen, 2011;Marino and Carrubba, 2009;van Rongen et al, 2009;Valentini et al, 2007]. Those reviews were part of a larger group that covered vast area of biological effects from EMF fields [Juutilainen et al, 2011;Vijayalaxmi and Scarfi, 2014], specific for their focus on our field of interest exclusively. Namely they were oriented toward investigation of potential EMF-EEG relationship from sleep to wakefulness, and from resting state to cognitive engagement.…”