The increasing deployment of mobile communication base stations led to an increasing demand for epidemiological studies on possible health effects of radio frequency emissions. The methodological challenges of such studies have been critically evaluated by a panel of scientists in the fields of radiofrequency engineering/dosimetry and epidemiology. Strengths and weaknesses of previous studies have been identified. Dosimetric concepts and crucial aspects in exposure assessment were evaluated in terms of epidemiological studies on different types of outcomes. We conclude that in principle base station epidemiological studies are feasible. However, the exposure contributions from all relevant radio frequency sources have to be taken into account. The applied exposure assessment method should be piloted and validated. Short to medium term effects on physiology or health related quality of life are best investigated by cohort studies. For long term effects, groups with a potential for high exposure need to first be identified; for immediate effect, human laboratory studies are the preferred approach.
BackgroundThe development of new wireless communication technologies that emit radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) is ongoing, but little is known about the RF-EMF exposure distribution in the general population. Previous attempts to measure personal exposure to RF-EMF have used different measurement protocols and analysis methods making comparisons between exposure situations across different study populations very difficult. As a result, observed differences in exposure levels between study populations may not reflect real exposure differences but may be in part, or wholly due to methodological differences.MethodsThe aim of this paper is to develop a study protocol for future personal RF-EMF exposure studies based on experience drawn from previous research. Using the current knowledge base, we propose procedures for the measurement of personal exposure to RF-EMF, data collection, data management and analysis, and methods for the selection and instruction of study participants.ResultsWe have identified two basic types of personal RF-EMF measurement studies: population surveys and microenvironmental measurements. In the case of a population survey, the unit of observation is the individual and a randomly selected representative sample of the population is needed to obtain reliable results. For microenvironmental measurements, study participants are selected in order to represent typical behaviours in different microenvironments. These two study types require different methods and procedures.ConclusionApplying our proposed common core procedures in future personal measurement studies will allow direct comparisons of personal RF-EMF exposures in different populations and study areas.
The selection of an adequate exposure assessment approach is imperative for the quality of epidemiological studies. The use of personal exposimeters turned out to be a reasonable approach to determine exposure profiles, however, certain limitations regarding the absolute values delivered by the devices have to be considered. Apart from the limited dynamic range, it has to be taken into account that these devices give only an approximation of the exposure due to the influence of the body of the person carrying the exposimeter, the receiver characteristics of the exposimeter, as well as the dependence of the measured value on frequency band, channel, slot configuration, and communication traffic. In this study, the relationship between the field strength measured close to the human body at the location of the exposimeter and the exposure, that is, the field strength at the location of the human body without the human body present, is investigated by numerical means using the Visible Human model as an anatomical phantom. Two different scenarios were chosen: (1) For FM, GSM, and UMTS an urban outdoor scenario was examined that included a transmitting antenna mounted on the roof of one of four buildings at a street crossing, (2) For WLAN an indoor scenario was investigated. For GSM the average degree of underestimation by the exposimeter (relation of the average field levels at the location of the exposimeter to the field level averaged over the volume of the human body without the body present) was 0.76, and for UMTS 0.87; for FM no underestimation was found, the ratio was 1. In the case of WLAN the degree of underestimation was more pronounced, the ratio was 0.64. This study clearly suggests that a careful evaluation of correction factors for different scenarios is needed prior to the definition of the study protocol. It has to be noted that the reference scenario used in this study does not allow for final conclusions on general correction factors.
Exposimeters are increasingly applied in bioelectromagnetic research to determine personal radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure. The main advantages of exposimeter measurements are their convenient handling for study participants and the large amount of personal exposure data, which can be obtained for several RF-EMF sources. However, the large proportion of measurements below the detection limit is a challenge for data analysis. With the robust ROS (regression on order statistics) method, summary statistics can be calculated by fitting an assumed distribution to the observed data. We used a preliminary sample of 109 weekly exposimeter measurements from the QUALIFEX study to compare summary statistics computed by robust ROS with a naïve approach, where values below the detection limit were replaced by the value of the detection limit. For the total RF-EMF exposure, differences between the naïve approach and the robust ROS were moderate for the 90th percentile and the arithmetic mean. However, exposure contributions from minor RF-EMF sources were considerably overestimated with the naïve approach. This results in an underestimation of the exposure range in the population, which may bias the evaluation of potential exposure-response associations. We conclude from our analyses that summary statistics of exposimeter data calculated by robust ROS are more reliable and more informative than estimates based on a naïve approach. Nevertheless, estimates of source-specific medians or even lower percentiles depend on the assumed data distribution and should be considered with caution.
We present a geospatial model to predict the radiofrequency electromagnetic field from fixed site transmitters for use in epidemiological exposure assessment. The proposed model extends an existing model toward the prediction of indoor exposure, that is, at the homes of potential study participants. The model is based on accurate operation parameters of all stationary transmitters of mobile communication base stations, and radio broadcast and television transmitters for an extended urban and suburban region in the Basel area (Switzerland). The model was evaluated by calculating Spearman rank correlations and weighted Cohen's kappa (kappa) statistics between the model predictions and measurements obtained at street level, in the homes of volunteers, and in front of the windows of these homes. The correlation coefficients of the numerical predictions with street level measurements were 0.64, with indoor measurements 0.66, and with window measurements 0.67. The kappa coefficients were 0.48 (95%-confidence interval: 0.35-0.61) for street level measurements, 0.44 (95%-CI: 0.32-0.57) for indoor measurements, and 0.53 (95%-CI: 0.42-0.65) for window measurements. Although the modeling of shielding effects by walls and roofs requires considerable simplifications of a complex environment, we found a comparable accuracy of the model for indoor and outdoor points.
The use of personal exposure meters (exposimeters) has been recommended for measuring personal exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) from environmental far-field sources in everyday life. However, it is unclear to what extent exposimeter readings are affected by measurements taken when personal mobile and cordless phones are used. In addition, the use of exposimeters in large epidemiological studies is limited due to high costs and large effort for study participants. In the current analysis we aimed to investigate the impact of personal phone use on exposimeter readings and to evaluate different exposure assessment methods potentially useful in epidemiological studies. We collected personal exposimeter measurements during one week and diary data from 166 study participants.Moreover, we collected spot measurements in the participants' bedrooms and data on self-
The dielectric properties of gray matter in the frequency range of 800-2450 MHz were measured on 20 human brains immediately after excision, less than 10 h after death. The brains were obtained during autopsy of 10 male and 10 female humans who died at ages between 47.5 and 87.5 years [70.4 +/- 9.8 years, mean +/- standard deviation (SD)]. The tissue temperature at the measurement sites ranged between 18 and 25 degrees C (21.35 +/- 1.6 degrees C, mean +/- SD). On each brain, four specific locations on the temporal lobe were measured on the right and left sides, i.e., 160 different measurements of the dielectric properties were performed. The dielectric probe was placed on the intact arachnoid on a gyrus in the selected area. The measurements yielded a mean value (+/-SD) of gray matter equivalent conductivity of 1.13 +/- 0.12 and 2.09 +/- 0.16 S/m at 800 and 2450 MHz, respectively. The mean value of measured relative permittivity was 58.2 +/- 3.3 and 54.7 +/- 3.3 at 800 and 2450 MHz, respectively. Taking into account a positive temperature coefficient of equivalent conductivity, these measurements indicate that the equivalent conductivity of human gray matter at body temperature is somewhat higher than today's generally accepted value, which is based on measurements on animal tissue and excised samples of human tissue measured more than 24 h postmortem.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.