OBJECTIVE: Universal Mobile Telecommunication System (UMTS) was recently introduced as the third generation mobile communication standard in Europe. This was done without any information on biological effects and genotoxic properties of these particular high-frequency electromagnetic fields. This is discomforting, because genotoxic effects of the second generation standard Global System for Mobile Communication have been reported after exposure of human cells in vitro. METHODS: Human cultured fibroblasts of three different donors and three different short-term human lymphocyte cultures were exposed to 1,950 MHz UMTS below the specific absorption rate (SAR) safety limit of 2 W/kg. The alkaline comet assay and the micronucleus assay were used to ascertain dose and time-dependent genotoxic effects. Five hundred cells per slide were visually evaluated in the comet assay and comet tail factor (CTF) was calculated. In the micronucleus assay 1,000 binucleated cells were evaluated per assay. The origin of the micronuclei was determined by fluorescence labeled anticentromere antibodies. All evaluations were performed under blinded conditions. RESULTS: UMTS exposure increased the CTF and induced centromere-negative micronuclei (MN) in human cultured fibroblasts in a dose and time-dependent way. Incubation for 24 h at a SAR of 0.05 W/kg generated a statistically significant rise in both CTF and MN (P = 0.02). At a SAR of 0.1 W/kg the CTF was significantly increased after 8 h of incubation (P = 0.02), the number of MN after 12 h (P = 0.02). No UMTS effect was obtained with lymphocytes, either unstimulated or stimulated with Phytohemagglutinin. CONCLUSION: UMTS exposure may cause genetic alterations in some but not in all human cells in vitro.
OBJECTIVE: Universal Mobile Telecommunication System (UMTS) was recently introduced as the third generation mobile communication standard in Europe. This was done without any information on biological effects and genotoxic properties of these particular high-frequency electromagnetic fields. This is discomforting, because genotoxic effects of the second generation standard Global System for Mobile Communication have been reported after exposure of human cells in vitro. METHODS:Human cultured fibroblasts of three different donors and three different short-term human lymphocyte cultures were exposed to 1,950 MHz UMTS below the specific absorption rate (SAR) safety limit of 2 W/kg. The alkaline comet assay and the micronucleus assay were used to ascertain dose and time-dependent genotoxic effects. Five hundred cells per slide were visually evaluated in the comet assay and comet tail factor (CTF) was calculated. In the micronucleus assay 1,000 binucleated cells were evaluated per assay. The origin of the micronuclei was determined by fluorescence labeled anticentromere antibodies. All evaluations were performed under blinded conditions. RESULTS: UMTS exposure increased the CTF and induced centromere-negative micronuclei (MN) in human cultured fibroblasts in a dose and time-dependent way. Incubation for 24 h at a SAR of 0.05 W/kg generated a statistically significant rise in both CTF and MN (P = 0.02). At a SAR of 0.1 W/kg the CTF was significantly increased after 8 h of incubation (P = 0.02), the number of MN after 12 h (P = 0.02). No UMTS effect was obtained with lymphocytes, either unstimulated or stimulated with Phytohemagglutinin. CONCLUSION: UMTS exposure may cause genetic alterations in some but not in all human cells in vitro.
Authors: Sanggyu Lee; Debra Johnson; K Dunbar; Hui Dong; Xijin Ge; Yeong C Kim; Claudia Wing; Nimanthi Jayathilaka; Nimmi Emmanuel; Chenn Q Zhou; Howard L Gerber; Charles C Tseng; San Ming Wang Journal: FEBS Lett Date: 2005-08-29 Impact factor: 4.124
Authors: Joachim Schüz; Eva Böhler; Gabriele Berg; Brigitte Schlehofer; Iris Hettinger; Klaus Schlaefer; Jürgen Wahrendorf; Katharina Kunna-Grass; Maria Blettner Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2006-01-27 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: M J Schoemaker; A J Swerdlow; A Ahlbom; A Auvinen; K G Blaasaas; E Cardis; H Collatz Christensen; M Feychting; S J Hepworth; C Johansen; L Klaeboe; S Lönn; P A McKinney; K Muir; J Raitanen; T Salminen; J Thomsen; T Tynes Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2005-10-03 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Anders Ahlbom; Adele Green; Leeka Kheifets; David Savitz; Anthony Swerdlow Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Elisa Danese; Giuseppe Lippi; Ruggero Buonocore; Marco Benati; Chiara Bovo; Chiara Bonaguri; Gian Luca Salvagno; Giorgio Brocco; Dirk Roggenbuck; Martina Montagnana Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2017-07
Authors: Christopher Gerner; Verena Haudek; Ulla Schandl; Editha Bayer; Nina Gundacker; Hans Peter Hutter; Wilhelm Mosgoeller Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2010-02-10 Impact factor: 3.015