Representativeness and repeatability of microenvironmental personal and head exposures to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields

Abstract

The aims of this study were to: i) investigate the repeatability and representativeness of personal radio frequency-electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) exposure measurements, across different microenvironments, ii) perform simultaneous evaluations of personal RF-EMF exposures for the whole body and the head, iii) validate the data obtained with a head-worn personal distributed exposimeter (PDE) against those obtained with an on-body worn personal exposimeter (PEM). Data on personal and head RF-EMF exposures were collected by performing measurements across 15 microenvironments in Melbourne, Australia. A body-worn PEM and a head-worn PDE were used for measuring body and head exposures, respectively. The summary statistics obtained for total RF-EMF exposure showed a high representativeness (r > 0.66 for two paths in the same area) and a high repeatability over time (r > 0.87 for repetitions of the same path). The median head exposure in the 900MHz downlink band ranged between 0.06V/m and 0.31V/m. The results obtained during simultaneous measurements using the two devices showed high correlations (0.42 < r < 0.94). The highest mean total RF-EMF exposure was measured in Melbourne's central business district (0.89V/m), whereas the lowest mean total exposure was measured in a suburban residential area (0.05V/m). This study shows that personal RF-EMF microenvironmental measurements in multiple microenvironments have high representativeness and repeatability over time. The personal RF-EMF exposure levels (i.e. body and head exposures) demonstrated moderate to high correlations.

Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure assessment: a pilot study on mobile phone signal strength and transmitted power levels

“…It is also important to consider that in urban environments where the concentration of base stations is higher that far-field RF-EMF exposure would also be higher. Previous far-field RF-EMF exposure assessment research in Melbourne found the highest mean exposure to be in the central business district (0.89 V/m) and the lowest in a suburban residential area (0.05 V/m) [32]. Therefore, there may be a trade off in reducing sporadic near-field exposure from mobile phones but increasing lower and constant far-field exposure from base stations.…”

Personal Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields among Australian Adults

“…Similar studies performed previously also reported a workday-weekday contrast and also difference between days of the week [ 14 , 24 , 25 ]. A more recent study in Melbourne performed micro-environment measurements for a duration of 15–20 min during the daytime and revealed variations of personal RF-EMF exposure depending on the time of the day, in which the morning resulted in lower exposure values in all studied exposure groups, except broadcasting [ 13 ].…”

“…Previous research [ 8 , 13 ] demonstrated high variability across the same micro-environment on different days and hours of the day in Australia. Nonetheless, the relatively smaller number of measurements for each day of the week and the lack of repeated measurements made it difficult to appreciate daily variations in the current study.…”

“…Previous studies in Europe have reported personal RF-EMF exposures using exposimeters [ 9 , 10 , 11 ] although most were limited to predefined micro-environment measurements over a short time or did not address the issue of personal RF-EMF exposures [ 7 , 8 , 12 , 13 ]. Such measurements are known to introduce significant variability according to the type and location of the selected micro-environments, the RF-EMF frequency band considered, and the time of day measurements were performed [ 12 , 13 ]. Although some studies found that exposure to RF-EMF can depend on many complex factors, exposimeters can help capture different sources of personal RF-EMF exposure, and evaluate how this exposure varies over time [ 4 , 9 , 14 , 15 ].…”

Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation and Memory Performance: Sources of Uncertainty in Epidemiological Cohort Studies

“…Otherwise, it may be difficult and inconvenient for participants to carry them around for long periods of time resulting in low participation rates. Finally, measurements recorded by exposimeters worn on the body have been found to be underestimates due to body shielding, which would randomly reduce the level of RF-EMR exposure recorded [ 34 , 35 ].…”