Low-power Density Radiations Emitted from Common Wi-Fi Routers Influence Sperm Concentration and Sperm Histomorphometric Parameters: A New Horizon on Male Infertility Treatment

Abstract

Background: Male infertility is defined as an inability to impregnate a fertile female; it is a widespread problem which is usually caused by some male factors such as low quantity and quality of sperm, specifically oligospermia and azoospermia.Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the bio-positive effects of low power density Wi-Fi radiation on the reproductive system of infertile and healthy mice.Materials and Methods: Thirty adult male Balb/c mice were randomly divided into 5 groups. Groups oligospermic-sham (OS), oligospermic-exposure 1 (OE1) and oligospermic-exposure 2 (OE2) received Busulfan, 10 mg/kg, intraperitoneally, but the control-sham (CS) and control-exposure (CE) groups left without Busulfan therapy. Groups CE, OE1 and OE2 were exposed to 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi radiation while, the CS and OS were sham exposed to Wi-Fi radiation without energizing the Wi-Fi router. The right and left testes and right epididymis were dissected out and histopathological, histomorphologic changes and the quality of the sperms were analyzed.Results: Low power density Wi-Fi radiation significantly increased sperm concentration in the CE group compared to that in CS, while enhancement of spermatid cells was not significant. Sperm concentration in OE2 was more than that in OE1 as the spermatid cells enhanced.Conclusion: Findings revealed that radiation hormesis induced by low power density Wi-Fi radiation have biological beneficial effects on mouse sperm concentration and sperm histomorphometric parameters.

Adverse Effects of Wi-Fi Radiation on Male Reproductive System: A Systematic Review

“…Evaluation on the sperm quality showed that the decrease of sperm count, motility, viability and normal morphology occurred following the RF-EMR exposure (Kesari and Behari 2010;Shahin et al 2014;Dasdag et al 2015;Shokri et al 2015). However, Delavarifar et al (2018) reported an increase in sperm count. Furthermore, a study by Mahmoudi et al (2015) demonstrated that sperm count and motility were decreased following the exposure but sperm morphology and sperm DNA were not affected.…”

“…Most of the literature consistently demonstrated various degrees of degenerative changes on testes histomorphometry with a parallel appearance of apoptotic cells (Kesari and Behari 2010;Kumar et al 2011;Saygin et al 2011;Almasiova et al 2014Almasiova et al , 2018Shahin et al 2014;Dasdag et al 2015;Shokri et al 2015;Delavarifar et al 2018;Jonwal et al 2018;Simaiova et al 2018) and more prominent DNA damage compared to other organs following RF-EMR exposure (Akdag et al 2016). Moreover, oxidative stress developed in the testes after RF-EMR exposure as evidenced by increased ROS level, decreased enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant levels and increased lipid and nucleic acid peroxidation products in the testes (Kesari and Behari 2010;Atasoy et al 2013;Ozorak et al 2013;Oksay et al 2014;Shahin et al 2014;Saygin et al 2016;Almasiova et al 2018;Simaiova et al 2018).…”

“…The age of the animal used in the studies varied, ranging from prenatal age (Ozorak et al 2013), weanlings (14 and 21 days for rats) (Simaiova et al 2018), early adults, i.e. 6 to 8 weeks for mice (Atasoy et al 2013;Saygin et al 2016;Delavarifar et al 2018;Jonwal et al 2018) and 10 weeks for rats (Kesari and Behari 2010;Kumar et al 2011). Other studies used adult mice and rats aged 12 to 24 weeks (Saygin et al 2011;Shahin et al 2014;Mahmoudi et al 2015;Akdag et al 2016;Bilgici et al 2018).…”

“…The generator for the 2.45 GHz Wi-Fi radiation were derived from various sources which include horn antenna (Kesari and Behari 2010;Kumar et al 2011;Shahin et al 2014;Jonwal et al 2018), monopole antenna (Saygin et al 2016;Bilgici et al 2018), half-wave dipole antenna (Saygin et al 2011;Ozorak et al 2013;Oksay et al 2014;Akdag et al 2016), purpose design chamber (Almasiova et al 2014(Almasiova et al , 2018Simaiova et al 2018), Wi-Fi router (Mahmoudi et al 2015;Delavarifar et al 2018), Wi-Fi antenna (Dasdag et al 2015;Shokri et al 2015) and Wi-Fi gateway (Atasoy et al 2013). The studies vary in terms of distance between samples and the generator and duration of exposure.…”

“…Most of the studies defined control or sham group as the group that received no exposure of RF-EMR as the generator was switched off and only received cage restriction stress (Kesari and Behari 2010;Saygin et al 2011Saygin et al , 2016Kumar et al 2011;Atasoy et al 2013;Ozorak et al 2013;Almasiova et al 2014Almasiova et al , 2018Oksay et al 2014;Shahin et al 2014;Shokri et al 2015;Akdag et al 2016;Bilgici et al 2018;Jonwal et al 2018;Simaiova et al 2018). On the other hand, the sham group in the study done by Mahmoudi et al (2015) and Delavarifar et al (2018) were exposed to non-energizing Wi-Fi router which refers to a switched on Wi-Fi router without any data exchange between the linked devices.…”