Christos Baliatsas1, John Bolte2, Joris Yzermans3, Gert Kelfkens2, Mariette Hooiveld3, Erik Lebret4, Irene van Kamp2. 1. Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands; National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands. Electronic address: Christos.Baliatsas@rivm.nl. 2. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands. 3. Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands; National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is continuing scientific debate and increasing public concern regarding the possible effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF) on general population's health. To date, no epidemiological study has investigated the possible association between actual and perceived EMF exposure and non-specific physical symptoms (NSPS) and sleep quality, using both self-reported and general practice (GP)-registered data. METHODS: A health survey of adult (≥ 18) participants (n=5933) in the Netherlands was combined with the electronic medical records (EMRs) of NSPS as registered by general practitioners. Characterization of actual exposure was based on several proxies, such as prediction models of radiofrequency (RF)-EMF exposure, geo-coded distance to high-voltage overhead power lines and self-reported use/distance of/to indoor electrical appliances. Perceived exposure and the role of psychological variables were also examined. RESULTS: Perceived exposure had a poor correlation with the actual exposure estimates. No significant association was found between modeled RF-EMF exposure and the investigated outcomes. Associations with NSPS were observed for use of an electric blanket and close distance to an electric charger during sleep. Perceived exposure, perceived control and avoidance behavior were associated with the examined outcomes. The association between perceived exposure was stronger for self-reported than for GP-registered NSPS. There was some indication, but no consistent pattern for an interaction between idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI-EMF) and the association between actual exposure and NSPS. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, there is no convincing evidence for an association between everyday life RF-EMF exposure and NSPS and sleep quality in the population. Better exposure characterization, in particular with respect to sources of extremely low frequency magnetic fields (ELF-MF) is needed to draw more solid conclusions. We argue that perceived exposure is an independent determinant of NSPS.
BACKGROUND: There is continuing scientific debate and increasing public concern regarding the possible effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF) on general population's health. To date, no epidemiological study has investigated the possible association between actual and perceived EMF exposure and non-specific physical symptoms (NSPS) and sleep quality, using both self-reported and general practice (GP)-registered data. METHODS: A health survey of adult (≥ 18) participants (n=5933) in the Netherlands was combined with the electronic medical records (EMRs) of NSPS as registered by general practitioners. Characterization of actual exposure was based on several proxies, such as prediction models of radiofrequency (RF)-EMF exposure, geo-coded distance to high-voltage overhead power lines and self-reported use/distance of/to indoor electrical appliances. Perceived exposure and the role of psychological variables were also examined. RESULTS: Perceived exposure had a poor correlation with the actual exposure estimates. No significant association was found between modeled RF-EMF exposure and the investigated outcomes. Associations with NSPS were observed for use of an electric blanket and close distance to an electric charger during sleep. Perceived exposure, perceived control and avoidance behavior were associated with the examined outcomes. The association between perceived exposure was stronger for self-reported than for GP-registered NSPS. There was some indication, but no consistent pattern for an interaction between idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI-EMF) and the association between actual exposure and NSPS. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, there is no convincing evidence for an association between everyday life RF-EMF exposure and NSPS and sleep quality in the population. Better exposure characterization, in particular with respect to sources of extremely low frequency magnetic fields (ELF-MF) is needed to draw more solid conclusions. We argue that perceived exposure is an independent determinant of NSPS.
Authors: Floor Borlée; C Joris Yzermans; Floor S M Oostwegel; François Schellevis; Dick Heederik; Lidwien A M Smit Journal: Environ Epidemiol Date: 2019-04-12
Authors: Nadav L Sprague; Ariana N Gobaud; Christina A Mehranbod; Christopher N Morrison; Charles C Branas; Ahuva L Jacobowitz Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Wilma L Zijlema; Nynke Smidt; Bart Klijs; David W Morley; John Gulliver; Kees de Hoogh; Salome Scholtens; Judith G M Rosmalen; Ronald P Stolk Journal: Arch Public Health Date: 2016-08-01
Authors: Alfred Bürgi; Sanjay Sagar; Benjamin Struchen; Stefan Joss; Martin Röösli Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Christos Baliatsas; Lidwien A M Smit; Michel L A Dückers; Christel E van Dijk; Dick Heederik; C Joris Yzermans Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2019-06-10 Impact factor: 3.317
Authors: Xavier Bosch-Capblanch; Ekpereonne Esu; Stefan Dongus; Chioma Moses Oringanje; Hamed Jalilian; John Eyers; Gunnhild Oftedal; Martin Meremikwu; Martin Röösli Journal: Environ Int Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Martin Röösli; Stefan Dongus; Hamed Jalilian; Maria Feychting; John Eyers; Ekpereonne Esu; Chioma Moses Oringanje; Martin Meremikwu; Xavier Bosch-Capblanch Journal: Environ Int Date: 2021-09-06 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Frederik Freudenstein; Luis M Correia; Carla Oliveira; Daniel Sebastião; Peter M Wiedemann Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 3.390