Thursday, March 29, 2018

Industry-funded Scientists Undermine Cell Phone Radiation Science

"How Big Wireless Made Us Think That Cell Phones Are Safe: A Special Investigation"

The disinformation campaign—and massive radiation increase—behind the 5G rollout.

Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie, THE NATION, March 29, 2018

http://bit.ly/BigWireless

--

January 30, 2017

In the following post, Dr. Leszczynski, one of the world's leading EMF scientists, was censored by STUK, the Finnish government radiation research agency whom he worked for, when he wrote about scientific misconduct in the WHO-sponsored Interphone study in 2011.
Uncensored version of blog post on Interphone, first published in 2011 and re-published for the first time now…Dariusz Leszczynski, Between a Rock and a Hard Place, Jan 30, 2017.  http://bit.ly/2jMBgwa
--

March 7, 2015

In his February 12 blog post, Dr. Dariusz Leszczynski discussed how industry-funded scientists undermined his cutting-edge research on cell phone radiation biologic effects which he conducted for the Finnish government for more than a decade. The Wireless Industry, following Big Tobacco's playbook, co-opts scientists to do low quality research and  uses them to manufacture doubt about high quality science. Dr. Leszczynski provides some insight about how industry-funded scientists undermined his government-funded, state-of-the-art scientific research.

Dr. Leszczynski was one of 31 experts selected to review the cancer risks of radio frequency (RF) radiation in 2011 by the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer. The panel declared that RF radiation is "possibly carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2B). Dr. Leszczynski reported in a subsequent blog post that he and several other experts wanted RF radiation to be classified as "probably carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2A), but a majority of the panel would not support this designation.

Since 2011, we have considerably more biologic and epidemiologic data to support the Group 2A classification for RF radiation.

--

Science and Conflict of Interest in Bioelectromagnetics

Dariusz Leszczynski, Between a Rock and a Hard Place, March 7, 2015


Key-note presentation of Dariusz Leszczynski at the Jubiläums-Generalversammlung of the Swiss association Gigaherz, celebrating its 15th anniversary, Thalvil (near Zurich) on March 7, 2015.

Video recording of the presentation will be made available shortly.


--

The GameChanger: revision of dosimetry by Schmid & Kuster

Dariusz Leszczynski, Between a Rock and a Hard Place, Feb 12, 2015

<SNIP>

"The general trend of exposing cells at 2.0 SAR was strongly advocated and propagated by the scientists from the telecom industry. It was a strong peer pressure from, among others, Mays Swicord, Joe Elder and C-K Chou of Motorola, USA, and Sakari Lang and Jafar Keshvari of Nokia, Finland, that caused lack of in vitro studies at SAR higher than 2.0. These five scientists mentioned above were the most active in exercising peer pressure.It was a normal occurrence at the scientific meetings, and I attended really a lot of them, that whenever scientist reported biological effects at SAR over 2.0, the above mentioned industry scientists, singularly or as a group, jumped up to the microphone to condemn and to discredit the results. The argument was always the same – safety standards are set at 2.0 and examining effects above it is futile. Furthermore, any study with SAR above 2.0 was suggested to be caused by thermal effect. It meant, according to these industry scientists that the obtained biological data were irrelevant.It was the continuous and relentlessly executed peer pressure from the industry scientists that discouraged, and in the end prevented, scientists from the academia to do freely research at SAR higher than 2.0, even when the exposure chamber had cooling system."
<SNIP>
"Therefore, with the extreme delight I read the recent paper in Bioelectromagnetics “The Discrepancy Between Maximum In Vitro Exposure Levels and Realistic Conservative Exposure Levels of Mobile Phones Operating at 900/1800 MHz” by Gernot Schmid and Niels Kuster.
Here area  few quotes from this game-changing paper by Schmid and Kuster:"
 <SNIP>  
http://bit.ly/1FDwkw6
--

In vitro studies of GSM cell phone radiation should be redone using higher SAR levels to better simulate real-world conditions

Here is the abstract for the "game-changing" paper by Schmid and Kuster. The results of this analysis suggest that most in vitro studies of GSM cell phone bioeffects tested exposures that are too low to simulate real-world exposures, especially to cells contained in skin and blood. According to the authors, these studies should to be redone using SAR's that greatly exceed 2 watts per kilogram so the results can be generalized to real-world exposures.
Gernot Schmid, Niels Kuster. The discrepancy between maximum in vitro exposure levels and realistic conservative exposure levels of mobile phones operating at 900/1800 MHz. Bioelectromagnetics. 36(2):133-148. 2015. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25644546
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to compare realistic maximum electromagnetic exposure of human tissues generated by mobile phones with electromagnetic exposures applied during in vitro experiments to assess potentially adverse effects of electromagnetic exposure in the radiofrequency range.

We reviewed 80 in vitro studies published between 2002 and present that concern possible adverse effects of exposure to mobile phones operating in the 900 and 1800 MHz bands. We found that the highest exposure level averaged over the cell medium that includes evaluated cells (monolayer or suspension) used in 51 of the 80 studies corresponds to 2 W/kg or less, a level below the limit defined for the general public. That does not take into account any exposure non-uniformity. For comparison, we estimated, by numerical means using dipoles and a commercial mobile phone model, the maximum conservative exposure of superficial tissues from sources operated in the 900 and 1800 MHz bands.

The analysis demonstrated that exposure of skin, blood, and muscle tissues may well exceed 40 W/kg at the cell level. Consequently, in vitro studies reporting minimal or no effects in response to maximum exposure of 2 W/kg or less averaged over the cell media, which includes the cells, may be of only limited value for analyzing risk from realistic mobile phone exposure.

We, therefore, recommend future in vitro experiments use specific absorption rate levels that reflect maximum exposures and that additional temperature control groups be included to account for sample heating.
Keywords:SAR; GSM; cell; compliance; radiofrequency 
http://bit.ly/1BTqtz3

Sunday, March 25, 2018

Trends in Brain Tumor Incidence Outside the U.S.


Rates of Aggressive Brain Cancer Increasing in England

A newly-published study of brain tumor incidence trends in England from 1995 to 2014 found that the trends over time varied by type of cancer, especially in the frontal and temporal lobes.

The study found “a sustained and highly statistically significant” increase in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), the most common brain cancer, across all ages. The rate of GBM more than doubled from 2.4 to 5.0 per 100,000 people. However, this increase was mostly hidden because the overall malignant brain tumor trend was relatively flat due to a reduced incidence of lower grade brain tumors.

In England in 1995, when the tumor site was specified at the time of diagnosis, the frontal or temporal lobes of the brain accounted for 41% of malignant brain tumors. By 2015, these two sites accounted for 60% of the tumors.

One cannot know from tumor registry data alone what caused these differential trends in brain cancer. Based upon epidemiologic research, the most compelling explanation for the increased incidence in these deadly brain tumors, especially in the frontal and temporal lobes, may be exposure to microwave radiation due to widespread adoption of cell phones. However, the increased use of CT imaging scans is an alternative, but less compelling, explanation because far fewer people would have been exposed to this form of ionizing radiation.

In the U.S., Zada and his colleagues (2012) obtained similar results in an analysis of national tumor registry data from 1992 to 2006.

Those who cite statistics which appear to show a flat-line trend in overall brain tumor incidence and argue that cell phone use doesn’t cause brain cancer need to examine data on the location and type of brain tumors over time.

Also see:


Microwave News. “Aggressive Brain Tumors on the Rise in England.” March 25, 2018. http://microwavenews.com/news-center/gbms-rising-uk


Source: Alasdair Philips via Microwave News.

--

Brain tumours: rise in Glioblastoma Multiforme incidence in England 1995–2015 suggests an adverse environmental or lifestyle factor

Alasdair Philips, Denis L. Henshaw, Graham Lamburn, and Michael O'Carroll. Brain tumours: rise in Glioblastoma Multiforme incidence in England 1995–2015 suggests an adverse environmental or lifestyle factor. Journal of Environmental and Public Health, in press.

Highlights

• A clear description of the changing pattern in incidence of brain tumour types
• The study used extensive data from an official and recognised quality source
• The study included histological and morphological information
• The study identified a significant and concerning incidence time trend
• Some evidence is provided to help guide future research into causal mechanisms

Abstract

Objective To investigate detailed trends in malignant brain tumour incidence over a recent time period.

Methods UK Office of National Statistics (ONS) data covering 81,135 ICD10 C71 brain tumours diagnosed in England (1995–2015) were used to calculate incidence rates (ASR) per 100k person–years, age–standardised to the European Standard Population (ESP–2013).

Results We report a sustained and highly statistically significant ASR rise in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) across all ages. The ASR for GBM more than doubled from 2.4 to 5.0, with annual case numbers rising from 983 to 2531. Overall, this rise is mostly hidden in the overall data by a reduced incidence of lower grade tumours.

Conclusions The rise is of importance for clinical resources and brain tumour aetiology. The rise cannot be fully accounted for by promotion of lower–grade tumours, random chance or improvement in diagnostic techniques as it affects specific areas of the brain and only one type of brain tumour. Despite the large variation in case numbers by age, the percentage rise is similar across the age groups which suggests widespread environmental or lifestyle factors may be responsible.


 Conclusions

1/. We show a linear, large and highly statistically significant increase in primary GBM tumours over 21 years from 1995–2015, especially in frontal and temporal lobes of the brain. This has aetiological and resource implications.
2/. Although most of the cases are in the group over 54 years of age, the age–standardised AAPC rise is strongly statistically significant in all our three main analysis age groups.

3/. The rise in age–standardised incidence cannot be fully accounted for by improved diagnosis as it affects specific areas of the brain and just one type of brain tumour which is generally fatal. We suggest that widespread environmental or lifestyle factors may be responsible.

4/. Our results highlight an urgent need for funding more research into the initiation and promotion of GBM tumours. This should include the use of CT imaging for diagnosis and also modern lifestyle factors that may affect tumour metabolism.








Thursday, March 22, 2018

Ramazzini Institute Cell Phone Radiation Study Replicates NTP Study

A newly-published study by the Ramazzini Institute (RI) replicates the heart tumor result from the NationalToxicology Program (NTP) study of cell phone radiation on rats.The RI study found increased incidence of heart schwannoma in male rats despite the use of different frequencies and much lower intensity radio frequency radiation (RFR) than the NTP study. This suggests that the primary health effect found in the NTP study is robust.

The Ramazzini Institute (RI) conducted a life-span study on rats to evaluate the carcinogenic effects of cell phone radiation.

Among male rats, the overall incidence of heart schwannoma and hyperplasia (precancerous cells) was 0.7% (3 of 412) in the control group, 1.2% (5/401) in the 5 volts/meter (V/m) group, 1.0% (2/209) in the 25 V/m group, and 3.9% (8/207) in the 50 V/m group. The 50 V/m group had significantly greater incidence than the control group (p < .02).

Among male rats, the overall incidence of glioma and glial cell hyperplasia in the control group was 0.0% (0 of 412), 0.7% (3/401) in the 5 V/m group, 1.4% (3/209) in the 25 V/m group, and 0.0% (0/207) in the 50 V/m group. However, these differences were not statistically significant.

The study used a different GSM cell phone carrier frequency (1800 MHz vs. 900 MHz) and much lower intensity microwave radiation exposures than the NTP study. The Specific Absorption Rates ranged from 0.001 - 0.1 W/kg SAR in the RI study as compared to 1.5 - 6.0 W/kg in the NTP study.

The Ramazzini Institute is a non-profit organization in Bologna, Italy that has conducted scientific research for more than two decades to identify and quantify environmental toxic and carcinogenic risks and evaluate the effectiveness of drugs to prevent the onset or development of cancer.

The abstract for the paper and the press release appear below.

P.S. In our six-nation study of RFR exposure, the average total RFR exposure (not just cell tower RFR) was highest in Los Angeles where it ranged from 0.72 to 1.60 V/m across eight different outdoor microenvironments (Sagar et al., 2018). The highest average total RFR value measured in our study was 1.85 V/m which was found on a university campus in Australia and was attributable to FM radio transmissions.

--

Falcioni et al (2018). Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz GSM base station environmental emission. Environmental Research. Article in press. Accessed from ScienceDirect on March 9, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.037

Abstract

Background: In 2011, IARC 
(International Agency for Research on Cancer) classified radiofrequency radiation (RFR) as possible human carcinogen (Group 2B). According to IARC, animals studies, as well as epidemiological ones, showed limited evidence of carcinogenicity. In 2016, the NTP published the first results of its long-term bioassays on near field RFR, reporting increased incidence of malignant glial tumors of the brain and heart Schwannoma in rats exposed to GSM – and CDMA –modulated cell phone RFR. The tumors observed in the NTP study are of the type similar to the ones observed in some epidemiological studies of cell phone users.

Objectives: The Ramazzini Institute (RI) performed a life-span carcinogenic study on Sprague-Dawley rats to evaluate the carcinogenic effects of RFR in the situation of far field, reproducing the environmental exposure to RFR generated by 1.8 GHz GSM antenna of the radio base stations of mobile phone. This is the largest long-term study ever performed in rats on the health effects of RFR, including 2448 animals. In this article, we reported the final results regarding brain and heart tumors.

Methods: Male and female Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed from prenatal life until natural death to a 1.8 GHz GSM far field of 0, 5, 25, 50 V/m with a whole-body exposure for 19 h/day.

Results: A statistically significant increase in the incidence of heart Schwannomas was observed in treated male rats at the highest dose (50 V/m). Furthermore, an increase in the incidence of heart Schwann cells hyperplasia was observed in treated male and female rats at the highest dose (50 V/m), although this was not statistically significant. An increase in the incidence of malignant glial tumors was observed in treated female rats at the highest dose (50 V/m), although not statistically significant.

Conclusions: The RI findings on far field exposure to RFR are consistent with and reinforce the results of the NTP study on near field exposure, as both reported an increase in the incidence of tumors of the brain and heart in RFR-exposed Sprague-Dawley rats. These tumors are of the same histotype of those observed in some epidemiological studies on cell phone users. These experimental studies provide sufficient evidence to call for the reevaluation of IARC conclusions regarding the carcinogenic potential of RFR in humans.


--

Title: World’s Largest Animal Study on Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link

Environmental Health Trust, Press Release, March 22, 2018
Byline: Scientists call on the World Health Organization International Agency for the Research on Cancer to re-evaluate the carcinogenicity of cell phone radiation after the Ramazzini Institute and US government studies report finding the same unusual cancers.


(Washington, DC) – Researchers with the renowned Ramazzini Institute (RI) in Italy announce that a large-scale lifetime study of lab animals exposed to environmental levels of cell tower radiation developed cancer.  A $25 million study of much higher levels of cell phone radiofrequency (RF) radiation, from the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) has also reported finding the same unusual cancer called Schwannoma of the heart in male rats treated at the highest dose.  In addition, the RI study of cell tower radiation also found increases in malignant brain (glial) tumors in female rats and precancerous conditions including Schwann cell hyperplasia in both male and female rats.


"Our findings of cancerous tumors in rats exposed to environmental levels of RF are consistent with and reinforce the results of the US NTP studies on cell phone radiation, as both reported increases in the same types of tumors of the brain and heart in Sprague-Dawley rats. Together, these studies provide sufficient evidence to call for the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to re-evaluate and re-classify their conclusions regarding the carcinogenic potential of RFR in humans," said Fiorella Belpoggi PhD, study author and RI Director of Research.  


The Ramazzini study exposed 2448 Sprague-Dawley rats from prenatal life until their natural death to “environmental” cell tower radiation for 19 hours a day (1.8 GHz GSM radio frequency radiation (RFR) of 5, 25 and 50 V/m).  RI exposures mimicked base station emissions like those from cell tower antennas, and exposure levels were far less than those used in the NTP studies of cell phone radiation.


“All of the exposures used in the Ramazzini study were below the US FCC limits. These are permissible exposures according to the FCC. In other words, a person can legally be exposed to this level of radiation. Yet cancers occurred in these animals at these legally permitted levels. The Ramazzini findings are consistent with the NTP study demonstrating these effects are a reproducible finding,” explained Ronald Melnick PhD, formerly the Senior NIH toxicologist who led the design of the NTP study on cell phone radiation. “Governments need to strengthen regulations to protect the public from these harmful non-thermal exposures.”   


“This important article from one of the most acclaimed institutions of its kind in the world provides a major new addition to the technical literature indicating strong reasons for concern about electromagnetic radiation from base stations or cell towers,” stated Editor in Chief of Environmental Research Jose Domingo PhD, Professor of Toxicology, School of Medicine at Reus University, Catalonia, Spain.


“The US NTP results combined now with the Ramazzini study, reinforce human studies from our team and others providing clear evidence that RF radiation causes acoustic neuroma (vestibular schwannoma) and gliomas, and should be classified carcinogenic to humans,” stated Lennart Hardell MD, PhD, physician-epidemiologist with the Department of Oncology,  University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden who has published extensively on environmental causes of cancer including Agent Orange, pesticides and cell phone radiofrequency radiation.


“The evidence indicating wireless is carcinogenic has increased and can no longer be ignored,” stated University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health Professor Emeritus Anthony B. Miller MD, Member of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of Canada and the UK, who is also a  long-term adviser to the World Health Organization.  


This study raises concerns that simply living close to a cell tower will pose threats to human health. Governments need to take measures to reduce exposures from cell tower emissions. Cell towers should not be near schools, hospitals or people's homes.  Public health agencies need to educate the public on how to reduce exposure from all sources of wireless radiofrequency radiation--be it from cell towers or cell phones or Wi-Fi in schools, " stated David O. Carpenter MD, former Dean of the School of Public Health at the University at Albany. “This is particularly urgent because of current plans to place small 5G cell towers about every 300 meters in every street across the country.  These 5G “small cell’ antennas will result in continuous exposure to everyone living nearby and everyone walking down the street. The increased exposures will increase risk of cancer and other diseases such as electro-hypersensitivity.”


Ramazzini Institute investigators have completed nearly 500 cancer bioassays on more than 200 compounds, and their study design is unique in that animals are allowed to live until their natural deaths in order to allow detection of late-developing tumors. Eighty percent of all human cancers are late-developing, occurring in humans after 60 years of age. This longer observation period has allowed the RI to detect such later-occurring tumors for a number of chemicals, and their published research includes studies of benzene, xylenes, mancozeb,  formaldehyde,  and vinyl chloride.


The Ramazzini research results come in the wake of similar findings from the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) large-scale experimental studies on cell phone radiation. Both studies found statistically significant increases in the development of the same type of very rare and highly malignant tumor in the heart of male rats—schwannomas.


“This publication is a serious cause for concern, “ stated Annie J. Sasco, MD, DrPH, SM, MPH, retired Director of Research at the INSERM (French NIH) and former Unit Chief at International Agency for the Research on Cancer/World Health Organization, France who commented that, “some of the results are not statistically significant due to the relatively small number of animals involved. Yet, that does not mean they should be ignored. Larger studies could turn out statistically significant results and in any event statistical significance is just one aspect of evaluation of the relation between exposure and disease. Biological significance and concordance of results between humans and animals clearly reinforces the strength of the evidence of carcinogenicity. The facts that both experimental studies found the same types of rare tumors, which also have pertinence to the human clinical picture, is striking,”


“Such findings of effects at very low levels are not unexpected,” stated Devra Davis PhD, MPH, president of Environmental Health Trust (EHT), pointing to a Jacobs University replication animal study published in 2015 that also found very low levels of RFR promoted tumor growth.“This study confirms an ever growing literature and provides a wake-up call to governments to enact protective policy to limit exposures to the public and to the the private sector to make safe radiation-free technology available.”


In January 2017 at an international conference co-sponsored by EHT and the Israel Institute for Advanced Study at Hebrew University, Fiorella Belpoggi PhD, Director of Research at the Ramazzini Institute, presented the study design and the findings that RFR-exposed animals had significantly lower litter weights. Belpoggi’s presentation and slides are available online. The Ramazzini findings of lower litter weights are consistent with the NTP study, which also found lower litter weights in prenatally exposed animals. At that time, the  Italian journal Corriere published an article about the presentation of the Ramazzini study and quoted Belpoggi’s recommendation of “maximum precaution for children and pregnant women.”  


Noting that “current standards were not set to protect children, pregnant women, and the growing numbers of infants and toddlers for whom devices have become playthings”, Davis, who is also Visiting Professor of Medicine of Hebrew University Medical Center, and Guest Editor in Chief of the journal Environmental Research, added, “Current two-decade old FCC limits were set when the average call was six minutes and costly cell phones were used by very few. These important, new, game-changing studies show that animals develop the same types of unusual cancers that are being seen in those few human epidemiological studies that have been done. In light of these results, EHT joins with public health experts from the states of California, Connecticut and Maryland, as well as those in France, Israel, and Belgium to call on government and the private sector to carry out major ongoing public health educational campaigns to promote safer phone and personal device technology, to require and expedite fundamental changes in hardware and software to reduce exposures to RFR/microwave radiation throughout indoor and outdoor environments, and to institute major monitoring, training and research programs to identify solutions, future problems and prevention of related hazards and risks.”  


“More than a dozen countries recommend reducing radiofrequency radiation exposure to children, and countries such as China, Italy, India and Russia have far more stringent cell tower radiation regulations in place when compared to the United States. However, this study provides scientific evidence that governments can use to take even further action,” stated Theodora Scarato, Executive Director of EHT.



Friday, March 9, 2018

Cell Phone Towers are Largest Contributor to Environmental Radiofrequency Radiation




New Study Shows that Cell Phone Towers are Largest Contributor 
to Environmental Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure

A new study measuring radiofrequency electromagnetic fields shows considerable variability in exposure in six countries. Cell phone towers are the most dominant contributor.

(Los Angeles, CA, March 9, 2018) Today the journal, Environment International, published online a six-nation study of outdoor exposures to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF).

Wireless devices and infrastructure emit RF-EMF. However, little is known about how this affects environmental exposures around the world. In the present study, RF-EMF measurements were taken in locations in Australia, Ethiopia, Nepal, South Africa, Switzerland and the United States by means of portable measurement devices. The devices considered exposure from cell phone towers, TV and FM radio broadcast antennas, cell phone handsets and Wi-Fi.

According to Dr. Martin Röösli, Associate Professor at the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute and senior author of the paper, “The study demonstrates that total RF-EMF exposure levels in the environment vary widely between different areas. Cell phone tower radiation is the dominant contributor in most outdoor areas.”

Los Angeles was the study site in the United States.

Compared to the other five countries, the US had high exposure levels ranging from 1.4 milliwatts per square meter (mW/m²) in a non-central residential area of Los Angeles to 6.8 mW/m² in a rural center of the city. The median total exposure to RF-EMF across all eight outdoor microenvironments in Los Angeles was 3.4 mW/m².

Today’s outdoor RF-EMF levels in Los Angeles are about 70 times greater than what the EPA estimated forty years ago.

The last time RF-EMF exposure was systematically measured in Los Angeles was in the late 1970’s as part of a 12-city study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Tell and Mantiply, 1982). The EPA assessed RF-EMF in 38 outdoor locations in Los Angeles and found that the median population-weighted exposure was 0.05 mW/m². At that that time television and FM radio broadcast antennas were the most important contributors. Hence, since the 1990’s, the implementation of cell phone tower networks has resulted in substantial increase in RF-EMF.

Although this measurement study demonstrates that environmental exposure levels are substantially below regulatory limits, there are still uncertainties about whether the strong increase of RF-EMF in the environment in recent years poses a health risk. Switzerland has implemented precautionary limits for RF-EMF and indeed exposure levels were lowest among all countries participating in the study.

Röösli and his colleagues emphasize that this measurement study contributes to a better understanding of the exposure situation of the general population all over the world and foster the design of future health studies.

Sanjay Sagar, the first author of the paper, and Martin Röösli, are with the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute in Basel, Switzerland. Co-authors from the U.S. include Michael Jerrett and Tony Kuo with the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Michael Brunjes and Lisa Arangua with the Los Angeles County Health Department,  and Joel Moskowitz with the UC Berkeley School of Public Health.

--

Sagar S, Adem SM, Struchen B, Loughran SP, Brunjes ME, Arangua L, Dalvie MA, Croft RJ, Jerrett M, Moskowitz JM, Kuo T, Röösli M. Comparison of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure levels in different everyday microenvironments in an international context. Environment International, 114: 297-306. Published online ahead of print, March 9, 2018.

Highlights

We measured RF-EMF in 94 matched microenvironments in six countries.
We applied a common protocol for direct comparison of RF-EMF.
Downlink and broadcasting exposure was most relevant in outdoor microenvironments.
Uplink is only relevant in public transport with the highest in Switzerland.
Exposure in urban areas tended to be higher.

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to quantify RF-EMF exposure applying a tested protocol of RF-EMF exposure measurements using portable devices with a high sampling rate in different microenvironments of Switzerland, Ethiopia, Nepal, South Africa, Australia and the United States of America.

Method: We used portable measurement devices for assessing RF-EMF exposure in 94 outdoor microenvironments and 18 public transport vehicles. The measurements were taken either by walking with a backpack with the devices at the height of the head and a distance of 20–30 cm from the body, or driving a car with the devices mounted on its roof, which was 170–180 cm above the ground. The measurements were taken for about 30 min while walking and about 15–20 min while driving in each microenvironment, with a sampling rate of once every 4 s (ExpoM-RF) and 5 s (EME Spy 201).

Results: Mean total RF-EMF exposure in various outdoor microenvironments varied between 0.23 V/m (noncentral residential area in Switzerland) and 1.85 V/m (university area in Australia), and across modes of public transport between 0.32 V/m (bus in rural area in Switzerland) and 0.86 V/m (Auto rickshaw in urban area in Nepal). For most outdoor areas the major exposure contribution was from mobile phone base stations. Otherwise broadcasting was dominant. Uplink from mobile phone handsets was generally very small, except in Swiss trains and some Swiss buses.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates high RF-EMF variability between the 94 selected microenvironments from all over the world. Exposure levels tended to increase with increasing urbanity.

Open Access Paper (available until April 27, 2018): http://bit.ly/6nationRFstudy

Supplemental Material: http://bit.ly/6nationsupplement

--

Tell and Mantiply. Population exposure to VHF and UHF broadcast radiation in the United States. Radio Science. 17(5S):39S-47S. 1982. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/RS017i05Sp0039S/epdf




Available for interview:

Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley; jmm@berkeley.edu

Prof. Martin Röösli, Ph.D., Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel;  martin.roosli@swisstph.ch, https://www.swisstph.ch/en/staff/profile/people/martin-roeoesli/

Sanjay Sagar, Ph.D., Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel; sanjay.sagar@swisstph.ch