BIOLOGICAL HAZARDS OFELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION:A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSISUSINGMOBILEPHONESAS ACASESTUDY
Keywords:
Electromagnetic Radiation, EMR,EMF, Biological Hazard, Mobile phones, Radiofrequency, Biological effects, DNA damage, Oxidative stress, Neurological impacts, Health risks, Safety standards, Precautionary policies, Mitigation strategies, Wireless technologies, Scientific evidence, Controversies, ResearchAbstract
This articleprovidesa comprehensive analysis of the biological hazards associated with electromagnetic radiation (EMR)usingmobile phonesas a case study, aiming to dispel ambiguities and provide practical insights grounded in scientificevidence. Delving into the intricate interplay between EMR and living organisms,
the authorsexplore various biological effects, including DNA damage, oxidative stress, and neurological impacts, substantiated by a wealth of research studies. The conflicting findings and controversies in EMR research are critically examined, shedding light on methodological differences, confounding variables, and ethical considerations. Regulatory guidelines, safety standards, and precautionary approaches are evaluated,emphasizing the need for international collaboration and continued research. Furthermore, the articleclearly describesmitigation strategies at individual, community, and policy levels, empowering readers with practical measures to minimize EMR exposure whilemaximizing the benefits of modern technology.
References
Chapter 1:
1(a)Markovà, E., Hillert, L., Malmgren, L., Persson, B. R., & Belyaev, I. Y. (2005). Microwaves from GSMMobile Telephones Affect 53BP1 and ?-H2AX Foci in Human Lymphocytes from Hypersensitive andHealthy Persons. Environmental Health Perspectives, 113(9), 1172-1177.
2 (a)International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). (2020). ICNIRP Guidelines
for Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields. Available online:https://www.icnirp.org/en/frequencies/radiofrequency/index.html
2 (b)Gandhi, O. P., Lazzi, G., & Furse, C. M. (1996). Electromagnetic Absorption in the Human Head andNeck forMobile and Cordless Telephones. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques,44(10), 1884-1897.
3 (a)Lai, H., & Singh, N. P. (1995). Acute Exposure to a 60 Hz Magnetic Field Increases DNA Strand Breaksin Rat Brain Cells. Bioelectromagnetics,16(3), 207-210.
3(b)Pall, M. L. (2018). Scientific Evidence Contradicts Findings and Assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel6: Microwaves Act Through Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel Activation To Induce Biological Impacts atNon-Thermal Levels, Supporting a Paradigm Shift for Microwave/Lower Frequency Electromagnetic FieldAction. Reviews on Environmental Health, 33(3), 221-228.
4(a) Hardell, L., Carlberg, M., & Mild, K. H. (2009). Case–control Study on Cellular and CordlessTelephones and the Risk for AcousticNeuroma or Meningioma in Patients Diagnosed 2000–2003.Neuroepidemiology, 33(3), 200-207.
Chapter2:
3 (a)BioInitiative Working Group. (2012). BioInitiative 2012: A Rationale for a Biologically-based PublicExposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF). Available online:http://www.bioinitiative.org/
3(b)International Agency for Research on Cancer. (2011). Interphone Study Reports on Mobile Phone Useand Brain Cancer Risk. Available online:https://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf
3(c)National Toxicology Program. (2018). NTP Technical Report on the Toxicology and CarcinogenesisStudies in Hsd: Sprague Dawley SD Rats Exposed to Whole-Body Radiofrequency Radiation at a Frequency(900 MHz) and Modulations (GSM and CDMA) Used by Cell Phones. Available online:https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/trpanel/2018/march/tr595peerdraft.pdf
Chapter3:
5(a)Federal Communications Commission. (2019). Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Cellular Telephones.Available online:https://www.fcc.gov/general/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cellular-telephones
5(b)International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). (2020). ICNIRP Guidelines
for Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields. Available online:https://www.icnirp.org/en/frequencies/radiofrequency/index.html
5(c)International Agency for Research on Cancer. (2011). Interphone Study Reports on Mobile Phone Useand Brain Cancer Risk. Available online:https://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf
5(d)The COSMOS Study. (2023).COSMOS: Investigating the Long-Term Health of Mobile Phone Users.Available online:http://www.ukcosmos.org/
5(e)National Cancer Institute. (2022). Cell Phones and Cancer Risk.Available online:https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet
Chapter4:
1(a)Lai, H., & Singh, N. P. (1995). Acute Exposure to a 60 Hz Magnetic Field Increases DNA Strand Breaksin Rat Brain Cells. Bioelectromagnetics, 16(3),207-210.
1(b)Phillips, J. L., Singh, N. P., & Lai, H. (2009). Electromagnetic Fields and DNA Damage.Pathophysiology, 16(2-3), 79-88.
2(a)Naz?ro?lu, M., & Gumral, N. (2009). Modulator Effects of L-carnitine and Selenium on WirelessDevices (2.45 GHz)-Induced Oxidative Stress and Electroencephalography Records in Brain of Rat.International Journal of Radiation Biology, 85(8), 680-689.
3(a)Foster, K. R. (2007). Thermal and Nonthermal Mechanisms of Interaction of Radiofrequency Energywith Biological Systems.IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, 35(4), 1220-1230.
4(a)Divan, H. A., Kheifets, L., Obel, C., & Olsen, J. (2012). Prenatal and Postnatal Exposure to Cell PhoneUse and Behavioral Problems in Children. Epidemiology, 23(6), 829-836.
4(b)Volkow, N. D., Tomasi, D., Wang, G. J., Vaska, P., Fowler, J. S., Telang, F., ... & Swanson, J. M.(2011). Effects of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism. JAMA,305(8), 808-813.
5(a)Adams, J. A., & Galloway, T. S. (2014). Mond, H. S. (2014). Effect of Mobile Telephones on SpermQuality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Environment International, 70, 106-112.
5(b)Aldad, T. S., Gan, G., Gao, X. B., Taylor, H. S., & Abedi-Valugerdi, M. (2012). Fetal RadiofrequencyRadiation Exposure from800-1900 Mhz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment andBehavior in Mice. Scientific Reports, 2, 312.
Chapter5:
1(a)Verschaeve, L. (2018). Genetic Damage in Subjects Exposed to Radiofrequency Radiation. MutationResearch/Reviews in Mutation Research, 777, 53-63.
2(a)Pall, M. L. (2015). Scientific Evidence Contradicts Findings and Assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel6: Microwaves Act Through Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel Activation to Induce Biological Impacts atNon-Thermal Levels, Supportinga Paradigm Shift for Microwave/Lower Frequency Electromagnetic FieldAction. Reviews on Environmental Health, 30(2), 99-116.
2(b)Levitt, B. B., Lai, H., & Shu, X. Z. (2010). Biological Effects from Exposure to ElectromagneticRadiation Emitted by Cell Tower Base Stations and Other Antenna Arrays. Environmental Reviews, 18,369-395.
3(a)Henry, C., Al-Qahtani, A., Alnafea, B., Almugren, K., Algadheeb, H., Al-Qahtani, A. A., & Khoder, M.(2021). Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation Emitted From 3G/4G WiFi Routers on DNA Damage in RatLiver and Brain. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences, 14(1), 153-163.
3(b)Moskowitz, J. M. (2011). Corporate Influence of Scientists and Perceptions of Mobile Phone Hazards.Reviews on Environmental Health, 26(3), 161-171.
4(a)Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2013). Science, New Media, and the Public. Science, 339(6115), 40-41.
5(a)Sage, C., & Carpenter, D. O. (2009). Public Health Implications of Wireless Technologies. Pathophysi-ology, 16(2-3), 233-246.
Chapter6:
1 (a)International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). (2020). ICNIRP Guidelines
for Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields. Available online:https://www.icnirp.org/en/frequencies/radiofrequency/index.html
1(b)World Health Organization. (2022). Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health: Mobile Phones. Availableonline:https://www.who.int/news/item/20-10-2014-electromagnetic-fields-and-public-health-mobile-phones
2 (a)Federal Communications Commission. (2019). Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Cellular Telephones.Available online:https://www.fcc.gov/general/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cellular-telephones
3(a)Khurana, V. G., Teo, C., & Kundi, M. (2010). Cell Phonesand Brain Tumors: A Review Including theLong-Term Epidemiologic Data. Surgical Neurology, 72(3), 205-214.
3(b)Redmayne, M., & Johansson, O. (2015). Could Myelin Damage from Radiofrequency ElectromagneticField Exposure Help Explain the Functional Impairment Electrohypersensitivity? A Review. Journal ofChemical Neuroanatomy, 75, 116-121.
4(a)European Environment Agency. (2013). Late Lessons from Early Warnings: Science, Precaution,Innovation. Available online:https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/late-lessons-2
4(b)Leszczynski, D., & Xu, Z. (2018). Mobile Phone Radiation Health Risk Controversy: The Reliability andSufficiency of Science Behind the Safety Standards. Health Research Policy and Systems, 16, 69.
5(a)Karipidis, K., & Henderson, S. (2017). Policy Considerations on Radiofrequency Exposure Limits andHealth Impacts from the Use of Mobile Telecommunication Devices. Public Health Research & Practice,27(3), e2731723.
5(b)Wood, A. W., & Rubin, G. J. (2017). Wireless Communication and Health: Evidence and ResearchNeeds. Bioelectromagnetics, 38(7), 487-493.
Chapter 7:
1(a)Redmayne, M., & Johansson, O. (2015). Could Myelin Damage from Radiofrequency ElectromagneticFieldExposure Help Explain the Functional Impairment Electrohypersensitivity? A Review. Journal ofChemical Neuroanatomy, 75, 116-121.
1(b)Mortazavi, S. M. J., Taeb, S., Dehghan, N., Alter, D., & Mortazavi, G. H. (2012). The FundamentalReasons Why LaptopComputers Should Not Be Used on Your Lap. Journal of Biomedical Physics &Engineering, 2(4), 1-4.
2(a)Havas, M. (2017). When Theory and Observation Collide: Can Non-ionizing Radiation Cause Cancer?Environmental Pollution, 221, 501-505.
2(b)Preece, A. W.,& Georgiou, A. G. (2007). Non-thermal Biological Effects of Microwaves: CurrentKnowledge, Further Indications. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 87(1), 1-20.
2 (c) In Compliance News. (2015).Nigerian Regulators Address EMF Exposure. Available online:https://incompliancemag.com/nigerian-regulators-address-emf-exposure/
3(a)Sage, C., & Carpenter, D. O. (2009). Public Health Implications of Wireless Technologies.
Pathophysiology, 16(2-3), 233-246.
3(b)Pall, M. L. (2018). Scientific Evidence Contradicts Findings and Assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel6: Microwaves Act Through Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel Activation To Induce Biological Impacts atNon-ThermalLevels, Supporting a Paradigm Shift for Microwave/Lower Frequency Electromagnetic FieldAction. Reviews on Environmental Health, 33(3), 221-228.
4(a)Kesari, K. K., Siddiqui, M. H., & Meena, R. (2013). Cell Phone Radiation Exposure on Brain andAssociatedBiological Systems. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology, 51(3), 187-200.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Author(s) and co-author(s) jointly and severally represent and warrant that the Article is original with the author(s) and does not infringe any copyright or violate any other right of any third parties and that the Article has not been published elsewhere. Author(s) agree to the terms that the IPHO Journal will have the full right to remove the published article on any misconduct found in the published article.
