Residential exposure to radiofrequency fields from mobile phone base stations, and broadcast transmitters: a population-based survey with personal meter

Abstract

Objectives: Both the public perceptions, and most published epidemiologic studies, rely on the assumption that the distance of a particular residence from a base station or a broadcast transmitter is an appropriate surrogate for exposure to radiofrequency fields, although complex propagation characteristics affect the beams from antennas. The main goal of this study was to characterise the distribution of residential exposure from antennas using personal exposure meters. Methods: A total of 200 randomly selected people were enrolled. Each participant was supplied with a personal exposure meter for 24 h measurements, and kept a timelocation-activity diary. Two exposure metrics for each radiofrequency were then calculated: the proportion of measurements above the detection limit (0.05 V/m), and the maximum electric field strength. Residential address was geocoded, and distance from each antenna was calculated. Results: Much of the time, the recorded field strength was below the detection level (0.05 V/m), the FM band standing apart with a proportion above the detection threshold of 12.3%. The maximum electric field strength was always lower than 1.5 V/m. Exposure to GSM and DCS waves peaked around 280 m and 1000 m from the antennas. A downward trend was found within a 10 km range for FM. Conversely, UMTS, TV 3, and TV 4&5 signals did not vary with distance. Conclusions: Despite numerous limiting factors entailing a high variability in radiofrequency exposure assessment, but owing to a sound statistical technique, we found that exposures from GSM and DCS base stations increase with distance in the near source zone, to a maximum where the main beam intersects the ground. We believe these results will contribute to the ongoing public debate over the location of base stations and their associated emissions.People are exposed to many sources of radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields including radio and TV transmitters, telecommunications links and satellite communication as well as mobile phones and their supporting transmitters. TV transmitters operate at relatively high power levels up to about 1 MW (to cover as much area as possible), but are not located in heavily populated areas. Cellular wireless technology relies on an extensive network of low-power transmitters (or base stations) that communicate with users' handsets. Base stations are ubiquitous in populated areas to maintain quality and avoid congestion increases, but they are less numerous in lowerdemand areas.

Systematic review on the health effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from mobile phone base stations

“…In fact, objectively measured distance to an MPBS is only weakly correlated with actual exposure from that MPBS. 46,47 Interestingly, our review found the strongest symptomatic effects in two studies using measured distance, 1,27 which makes these findings arguable as well.…”

Multiple assessment methods of prenatal exposure to radio frequency radiation from telecommunication in the Mothers and Children’s Environmental Health (MOCEH) study

“…The EME Spy 100 (Satimo, France) PEM, used as a measurement tool in this study, is capable of receiving the FM radio frequency band in Korea [19]. In Europe, EME Spy 120 (Satimo, France) products from the same company have been used for other research [16,17,34,35]. Personal exposure meter measurements made for 24 h involve all exposure frequencies encountered in a daily life as well as whole-body exposure.…”

Statistical perturbations in personal exposure meters caused by the human body in dynamic outdoor environments

“…They have been employed in epidemiological research in recent years [Kühnlein et al, 2009;Viel et al, 2009;Frei et al, 2009a]. Nevertheless, some constraints have been reported in the scientific community, such as the shadowing effect caused by the subject's body [Blas et al, 2007], false summation of signals within the same band, out-of-band responses, and high calibration factors in a few frequency bands [Neubauer et al, 2010].…”