2010
DOI: 10.1002/bem.20589
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The lack of histological changes of CDMA cellular phone‐based radio frequency on rat testis

Abstract: We examined the histological changes by radiofrequency (RF) fields on rat testis, specifically with respect to sensitive processes such as spermatogenesis. Male rats were exposed to 848.5 MHz RF for 12 weeks. The RF exposure schedule consisted of two 45-min RF exposure periods, separated by a 15-min interval. The whole-body average specific absorption rate (SAR) of RF was 2.0 W/kg. We then investigated correlates of testicular function such as sperm counts in the cauda epididymis, malondialdehyde concentration… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
36
0
4

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
1
36
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…PARP, p53, bcl-2, caspase 3 and p21 immunoblotting of the testes in RF-EMR exposed and unexposed animals were also evaluated. RF-EMR did not have any observable adverse effects on rat spermatogenesis in this study [15].…”
Section: Studies In Malesmentioning
confidence: 43%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…PARP, p53, bcl-2, caspase 3 and p21 immunoblotting of the testes in RF-EMR exposed and unexposed animals were also evaluated. RF-EMR did not have any observable adverse effects on rat spermatogenesis in this study [15].…”
Section: Studies In Malesmentioning
confidence: 43%
“…This suggests that the impairment of fertility reported in some studies may not be caused by the induction of apoptosis in spermatozoa. The histological changes by RF-EMR fields on rat testis, specifically with respect to sensitive processes such as spermatogenesis, have been also evaluated [15]. Male rats were exposed to RF-EMR for 12 weeks (two 45-min exposure periods, separated by a 15-min interval).…”
Section: Studies In Malesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly animal studies failed also to provide any consistent evidence for the cancer promoting effects of RF radiation (Gurbuz et al, 2010;Kowalczuk et al, 2010;Lee et al, 2010). Epidemiological studies also failed to clearly and consistently prove an excess cancer or tumor risk (in terms of odds ratios) for cell phone users.…”
Section: Mobile Phone Penetrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Brain tumour risk, 2010). None of these studies could confirm a change in human cells than can be satisfactorily associated with malignant transformation, but some changes in neuronal activity of unknown clinical significance or biological implication were demonstrated (Aalto et al, 2006;Vecchio et al, 2007;Gerner et al, 2010;Lee et al, 2010). The case control human studies, some of which were flawed by to methodological issues (Han et al, 2009;Schüz, 2009;Vrijheid et al, 2009aVrijheid et al, : 2009bAydin et al, 2011;Cardis, 2011) were for the most part inconclusive with some showing even a reduced risk for tumor formation in cell phone users (or "protective effect" in epidemiological terms) rather than an elevated risk (Ahlbom et al, 2009;Saracci and Samet, 2010;The Interphone Study Group Brain tumour risk, 2010;Frei et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cep telefonlarının yaydığı radyofrekans dalgalarının hücresel ve moleküler düzeyde birçok zararlı etkiye neden olabileceği düşünülmektedir [2]. Elektromanyetik alanın farklı canlılarda üreme sistemine olası yan etkilerinin incelendiği çalışmalarda farklı görüşler bildirilmektedir [3][4][5][6]. Ancak tatmin edici bir mekanizma henüz ortaya konulmamıştır [1].…”
Section: Introductionunclassified