Literature DB >> 20737608

Do mobile phone base stations affect sleep of residents? Results from an experimental double-blind sham-controlled field study.

Heidi Danker-Hopfe1, Hans Dorn, Christian Bornkessel, Cornelia Sauter.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present double-blind, sham-controlled, balanced randomized cross-over study was to disentangle effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF) and non-EMF effects of mobile phone base stations on objective and subjective sleep quality.
METHODS: In total 397 residents aged 18-81 years (50.9% female) from 10 German sites, where no mobile phone service was available, were exposed to sham and GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications, 900 MHz and 1,800 MHz) base station signals by an experimental base station while their sleep was monitored at their homes during 12 nights. Participants were randomly exposed to real (GSM) or sham exposure for five nights each. Individual measurement of EMF exposure, questionnaires on sleep disorders, overall sleep quality, attitude towards mobile communication, and on subjective sleep quality (morning and evening protocols) as well as objective sleep data (frontal EEG and EOG recordings) were gathered.
RESULTS: Analysis of the subjective and objective sleep data did not reveal any significant differences between the real and sham condition. During sham exposure nights, objective and subjective sleep efficiency, wake after sleep onset, and subjective sleep latency were significantly worse in participants with concerns about possible health risks resulting from base stations than in participants who were not concerned.
CONCLUSIONS: The study did not provide any evidence for short-term physiological effects of EMF emitted by mobile phone base stations on objective and subjective sleep quality. However, the results indicate that mobile phone base stations as such (not the electromagnetic fields) may have a significant negative impact on sleep quality. (c) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20737608     DOI: 10.1002/ajhb.21053

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hum Biol        ISSN: 1042-0533            Impact factor:   1.937


  11 in total

1.  [Smart ophthalmologists : Smartphones for nothing and the Apps for free?].

Authors:  C H Meyer
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 2.  Wireless communication fields and non-specific symptoms of ill health: a literature review.

Authors:  Martin Röösli; Kerstin Hug
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2011-05

3.  Determinants and stability over time of perception of health risks related to mobile phone base stations.

Authors:  Bernd Kowall; Jürgen Breckenkamp; Maria Blettner; Brigitte Schlehofer; Joachim Schüz; Gabriele Berg-Beckhoff
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 3.380

4.  Mobile Devices and Insomnia: Understanding Risks and Benefits.

Authors:  Mohammed N Khan; Rebecca Nock; Nalaka S Gooneratne
Journal:  Curr Sleep Med Rep       Date:  2015-10-19

5.  Exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and sleep quality: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Evelyn Mohler; Patrizia Frei; Jürg Fröhlich; Charlotte Braun-Fahrländer; Martin Röösli
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Subjective symptoms related to GSM radiation from mobile phone base stations: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Claudio Gómez-Perretta; Enrique A Navarro; Jaume Segura; Manuel Portolés
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-12-30       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  The Link between Health Complaints and Wind Turbines: Support for the Nocebo Expectations Hypothesis.

Authors:  Fiona Crichton; Simon Chapman; Tim Cundy; Keith J Petrie
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2014-11-11

8.  Long-term effect of mobile phone use on sleep quality: Results from the cohort study of mobile phone use and health (COSMOS).

Authors:  Giorgio Tettamanti; Anssi Auvinen; Torbjörn Åkerstedt; Katja Kojo; Anders Ahlbom; Sirpa Heinävaara; Paul Elliott; Joachim Schüz; Isabelle Deltour; Hans Kromhout; Mireille B Toledano; Aslak Harbo Poulsen; Christoffer Johansen; Roel Vermeulen; Maria Feychting; Lena Hillert
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2020-04-08       Impact factor: 9.621

9.  The pattern of complaints about Australian wind farms does not match the establishment and distribution of turbines: support for the psychogenic, 'communicated disease' hypothesis.

Authors:  Simon Chapman; Alexis St George; Karen Waller; Vince Cakic
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: a critical review of explanatory hypotheses.

Authors:  Maël Dieudonné
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 5.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.