| Literature DB >> 32610554 |
Yazan Akkam1, Ahmed A Al-Taani2,3, Salam Ayasreh2, Abeer Almutairi4, Nosaibah Akkam1.
Abstract
Background: Electromagnetic pollution is a general health concern worldwide, as cell phone towers are ubiquitous and are located adjacent to or on the roof of schools, and hospitals. However, the health risks are still inconclusive. This cross-sectional study evaluated the potential effect of electromagnetic radiation generated from various resources including cell phone towers on blood glutathione S transferase activity (e-GST) and total antioxidant activity of the Jordanian population.Entities:
Keywords: cell phone towers; electromagnetic radiation (EMR); glutathione S transferase (GST); oxidative stress; power density
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32610554 PMCID: PMC7369753 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17134673
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The geographical location. The area of the study is located in northern Jordan (city of Irbid). The amplified map showing the distribution of cellular stations with the tested (Hofa, Johfiah, and Habaka). Cell phone towers assigned by Arabic number (1–5).
Figure 2Experimental design for mapping the electromagnetic field around the cellular station. (●) Assigned points for measuring the power density. (∆) The cellular station. Numbers are distance in meters.
Figure 3Contour map (elevation surface) of the tested area using geographic information system (GIS) software. The gradient gray color represents the elevation (in meter) from the sea level. The dark circles are the cell phone towers.
Basic information about cellular towers in the tested area. The assignment of the towers is in Figure 1.
| Tower | Description | Height (m) | Tools | Microwave Link | Datalink | Companies |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Green field | 40 | 2G/3G | 1 | 0 | O/U |
| 2 | Roof top | 26 | 2G/3G | 1 | 0 | Z |
| 3 | Roof top | 21 | 2G/3G | 6 | 7 | U |
| 4 | Green field | 30 | 2G/3G/4G | 4 | 0 | Z |
| 5 | Green field | 30 | 2G/3G | 2 | 0 | U |
Cell phone frequencies of each company (from spectrummonitoring.com).
| X | Technology | Cell Phone Frequencies (MHz) |
|---|---|---|
| Z | 2 g | 880–885/925–930/947.5–960 |
| 3 g | 1765–1785/1860–1880 | |
| 4 g | 1945–1965/2135–2155 | |
| O | 2 g | 900–902.5/935–947.5 |
| 3 g | 1755–1765/1850–1860 | |
| 4 g | 1935–1945/1965–1970/2125–2135/2155–2160/2550–2560/2670–2680 | |
| U | 2 g/3 g | 1730–1750/1825–1845 |
| 4 g | 1970–1980/2160–2170 |
Figure 4Three-dimensional maps of the tested area showing the power density (μW/cm2). With a color gradient. (A) Outside the houses. (B) Inside the houses. The color gradient showing the average power density.
Figure 5Distribution of volunteers’ houses on the power density map.
Figure 6Three-dimensional map represents the glutathione S transferase (GST) activity.
Demographic characteristics of study volunteers.
| Characteristics | N = 132 | Interpretation | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Male | 58 (44%) | −0.265 | 0.827 | 0.048 | 0.806 | No differences between the total GST activities in the two groups |
| Female | 74 (56%) | −0.245 | 0.807 | |||
|
| There are significant differences at the level of (α < 0.05) | |||||
| Yes | 37 (28%) | −5.652 | 0.000 | 13.260 | 0.000 | |
| No | 95 (72%) | −5.951 | 0.000 | |||
|
| There are significant differences at the level of (α < 0.05) | |||||
| Yes | 74 (56%) | −5.322 | 0.000 | 16.452 | 0.000 | |
| No | 58 (44%) | −4.952 | 0.000 | |||
|
| No differences between the total GST activities in the two groups | |||||
| Yes | 55 (42%) | 1.430 | 0.144 | 2.158 | 0.155 | |
| No | 77 (58%) | 1.568 | 0.121 | |||
Regression analysis for tested continuous variables and GST activity.
| Variable | Mean ± SD | F | R2 | B | β | t | Type of Relationship | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power density outside the house (μW/cm) | 0.428 ± 0.2 | 0.447 | 0.58 | 0.005 | 0.654 | 0.07 | 0.764 | NO relation |
| Power density inside the house (μW/cm) | 0.789 ± 1.2 | 0.0001 | 63.8 | 0.589 | 0.784 | 0.589 | 7.99 | proportional |
| duration of exposure (h) | 17.72 ± 4.53 | 0.0004 | 29.9 | 0.202 | 0.39 | 0.45 | 5.469 | proportional |
| elevation of the house (m) | 625.2 ± 184.6 | 0.075 | 3.23 | 0.026 | 0.043 | 0.162 | 1.797 | NO relation |
| distance from the tower (m) | 384.18 ± 85.3 | 0.182 | 1.8 | 0.015 | 0.003 | 0.122 | 1.343 | NO relation |
Regression analysis with dependent variable GST activity and the five factors, that is, power density outside the house, power density inside the house, duration of exposure, the elevation of the house, distance from the tower as independent variables. a Dependent variable: GST activity. Predictors: (constant), power density outside the house, power density inside the house, duration of exposure, the elevation of the house, distance from the tower.
| ANOVA a | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | R | R2 |
| Regression | 800.682 | 5 | 160.136 | 18.993 | 0.000 b | 0.676 | 0.457 |
| Residual | 952.735 | 127 | 8.431 | ||||
| Total | 1753.418 | 132 | |||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| (Constant) | 3.718 | 1.203 | 3.091 | 0.003 | |||
| Power density inside the house | 0.715 | 0.102 | 0.503 | 6.987 | 0.000 | ||
| duration of exposure | 0.303 | 0.062 | 0.351 | 4.848 | 0.000 | ||
| distance from the tower | 0 | 0.002 | −0.009 | −0.097 | 0.923 | ||
| elevation of the house | 0.017 | 0.023 | 0.068 | 0.747 | 0.456 | ||
| Power density outside the house | 0.37 | 0.653 | 0.042 | 0.567 | 0.572 | ||
Figure 7Linear regression between GST activity and total antioxidant activity.