Literature DB >> 15387150

Biological effects of radiofrequency fields: does modulation matter?

Kenneth R Foster1, Michael H Repacholi.   

Abstract

This commentary considers modulation as a factor of potential biological importance in assessment of risk of radiofrequency (RF) energy emitted by communications systems and other technologies. Modulation introduces a spread of frequencies into a carrier waveform, but in nearly all cases this spread is small compared to the frequency of the carrier. Consequently, any nonthermal (field-dependent) biological effects related to modulation must result from interaction mechanisms that are fast enough to produce a response at radiofrequencies. Despite considerable speculation, no such mechanisms have been established. While a variety of modulation-dependent biological effects of RF energy have been reported, few such effects have been independently confirmed. Some widely discussed effects, for example a reported modulation-dependent effect of RF fields on the efflux of calcium from brain tissue, remain controversial with no established biological significance. The lack of understanding of the mechanisms underlying such effects prevents any assessment of their significance for communications signals with complex modulation characteristics. Future research should be directed at confirmation and mechanistic understanding of reported biological effects related to modulation. While modulation should be considered in the design of risk studies involving communications-type signals, it should not compromise other aspects of good study design, such as maintaining adequate statistical power and identifying dose-response relationships.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15387150     DOI: 10.1667/rr3191

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Res        ISSN: 0033-7587            Impact factor:   2.841


  8 in total

1.  Analysis of the Genotoxic Effects of Mobile Phone Radiation using Buccal Micronucleus Assay: A Comparative Evaluation.

Authors:  Sumita Banerjee; Narendra Nath Singh; Gadiputi Sreedhar; Saikat Mukherjee
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-03-01

2.  Effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on benign prostate hyperplasia.

Authors:  Xenophon K Giannakopoulos; Christos Giotis; Spyridon Ch Karkabounas; Ioannis I Verginadis; Yannis V Simos; Dimitrios Peschos; Angelos M Evangelou
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2011-05-03       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 3.  Workgroup report: base stations and wireless networks-radiofrequency (RF) exposures and health consequences.

Authors:  Peter A Valberg; T Emilie van Deventer; Michael H Repacholi
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2006-11-06       Impact factor: 9.031

4.  Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure and the Resting EEG: Exploring the Thermal Mechanism Hypothesis.

Authors:  Sarah P Loughran; Adam Verrender; Anna Dalecki; Catriona A Burdon; Kyoko Tagami; Joonhee Park; Nigel A S Taylor; Rodney J Croft
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-04-28       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Comparative Analysis of User Exposure to the Electromagnetic Radiation Emitted by the Fourth and Fifth Generations of Wi-Fi Communication Devices.

Authors:  Annamaria Sârbu; Simona Miclăuș; Angela Digulescu; Paul Bechet
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Electromagnetic energy radiated from mobile phone alters electrocardiographic records of patients with ischemic heart disease.

Authors:  Ah Alhusseiny; Ms Al-Nimer; Ad Majeed
Journal:  Ann Med Health Sci Res       Date:  2012-07

Review 7.  Source of funding and results of studies of health effects of mobile phone use: systematic review of experimental studies.

Authors:  Anke Huss; Matthias Egger; Kerstin Hug; Karin Huwiler-Müntener; Martin Röösli
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 8.  EMF monitoring-concepts, activities, gaps and options.

Authors:  Gregor Dürrenberger; Jürg Fröhlich; Martin Röösli; Mats-Olof Mattsson
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 3.390

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.