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.

Highlights

  • The introduction of mobile phones emitting non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) fields and delivering voice, data and images has increased concern in the general public regarding the potential adverse health effects from RF exposure, especially the development of brain cancer since the antenna is held close to head when the phone is being used

  • Exposure in animals and humans or cells. These included: (i) epidemiological studies in humans examining the incidence of brain and other types of cancers, (ii) carcinogenesis in normal, transgenic and tumor-prone animals, (iii) genetic damage, and (vi) non-genotoxic indices such as cell cycle/proliferation, apoptosis, inter-/intra-cellular signaling, gene and protein expression, and oxidative stress as well as immune, reproduction, neurological responses

  • International organizations, such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) have considered all of the available peer-reviewed scientific literature and used the weight of scientific evidence approach to set-up the guidelines or standards for RF exposures in occupationally exposed individuals and the general public to protect against established adverse effects [12,13,14]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The introduction of mobile phones emitting non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) fields and delivering voice, data and images has increased concern in the general public regarding the potential adverse health effects from RF exposure, especially the development of brain cancer since the antenna is held close to head when the phone is being used. Based on the quality of published studies which should include detailed description of RF dosimetry, exposure conditions and protocols consistent with good laboratory practices, sample sizes with sufficient statistical power, as well as confirmation and replication studies conducted by independent researchers International organizations, such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) have considered all of the available peer-reviewed scientific literature and used the weight of scientific evidence approach to set-up the guidelines or standards for RF exposures in occupationally exposed individuals and the general public to protect against established adverse effects [12,13,14]. Much of the text in italics below was the information, as presented, in the various evaluations/reports

Evaluations
International Organizations
Conclusions
National Organizations
Australia
Belgium
Canada
Finland
France
Germany
Jülich
Latin America
New Zealand
Cancer Society of New Zealand
2.2.10. Nordic Countries
2.2.11. Norway
2.2.13. Sweden
2.2.14. Switzerland
2.2.15. Tanzania
2.2.16. United Kingdom
2.2.16.4. Isle of Man
2.2.17. United States of America
Comments
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call