Barth A et al. · 2008
Researchers carried out a meta-analysis on 19 experimental studies. Ten of the 19 studies met minimum requirements such as blind design and reported means and standard deviations. Attention measured by the subtraction task seems to be affected in regard to decreased reaction time. Working memory measured by the N-back test seems to be affected: 0-back target response time is lower under exposure, 2-back target response time increases, and the number of errors on 2-back non-targets appears to be higher under exposure. The meta-analysis compared exposed with non-exposed subjects assuming a common population effect.
Andrzejak R et al. · 2008
Researchers recorded ECG Holter monitoring in 32 healthy students before, during, and after a mobile phone call in the morning while seated. During the call, time-domain HRV parameters SDNN and SDANN increased significantly, and frequency-domain components VLF, LF, and HF were highest while LF/HF ratio was lowest. The authors concluded that the call may alter autonomic balance, though electromagnetic field effects could not be separated from the influence of speaking.
Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J · 2008
Mothers of 13,159 children completed a follow-up questionnaire reporting cell phone use during pregnancy and the child's current cell phone use. Greater odds ratios for behavioral problems were observed for children with possible prenatal or postnatal exposure to cell phone use. After adjustment for potential confounders, the odds ratio for a higher overall behavioral problems score was 1.80 (95% confidence interval = 1.45–2.23) in children with both prenatal and postnatal exposure. The authors noted that these associations may be noncausal and may be due to unmeasured confounding.
Mortazavi SM et al. · 2008
In the first phase, 30 patients provided saliva samples before and after a 30-minute MRI at 0.23 T. Saliva mercury concentrations increased from 8.6 ± 3.0 to 11.3 ± 5.3 µg L⁻¹ after MRI (p < 0.01). In the second phase, 14 female university students with no prior mobile phone use received amalgam restorations and gave urine samples before and on days 1-4 after. Urinary mercury levels were significantly higher in the mobile-phone users than in controls across the four days (p < 0.05).
Curcio G et al. · 2008
The study investigated whether repeated brief exposures to a GSM mobile phone signal had a cumulative effect on psychomotor functions. After each of 3 15-min exposures, both an acoustic simple reaction time task and a sequential finger tapping task were administered to subjects. No cumulative effects were detected, though there was a non-statistical trend toward shorter reaction times.
Yan JG, Agresti M, Zhang LL, Yan Y, Matloub HS. · 2008
Researchers exposed adult Sprague-Dawley rats to cell phones for 6 hours per day for 126 days and measured mRNA levels of several injury-associated proteins in the brain. The proteins evaluated included Calcium ATPase, Neural Cell Adhesion Molecule, Neural Growth Factor, and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor. The results showed statistically significant mRNA up-regulation of these proteins in the brains of exposed rats.
Sokolovic D et al. · 2008
Researchers exposed Wistar rats to microwave radiation from a mobile test phone for 20, 40, and 60 days to evaluate oxidative stress in brain tissue and whether melatonin could reduce it. Exposure led to a significant increase in malondialdehyde and carbonyl group concentrations in brain tissue, along with decreased catalase activity and increased xanthine oxidase activity. Melatonin treatment significantly prevented the rise in MDA content and xanthine oxidase activity after 40 days of exposure, but was unable to prevent the decrease in catalase activity or the increase in carbonyl group content.
Nittby H et al. · 2008
Researchers exposed rats to GSM-900 mobile phone radiation for 2 hours each week for 55 weeks at SAR levels of 0.6 and 60 mW/kg, then compared them to sham-exposed controls. GSM-exposed rats had impaired memory for objects and their temporal order of presentation compared to sham-exposed controls (P = 0.02). Detecting the place in which an object was presented was not affected by GSM exposure, and no difference in exploratory behaviour was seen in the open-field test.
Lee KS, Choi JS, Hong SY, Son TH, Yu K. · 2008
Researchers studied biological effects of mobile phone 835 MHz electromagnetic fields in Drosophila at SAR 1.6 W/kg and SAR 4.0 W/kg. At SAR 1.6 W/kg, more than 90% of flies remained viable even after the 30 h exposure, while at SAR 4.0 W/kg viability dropped from the 12 h exposure. Both exposure levels triggered a stress response, increased reactive oxygen species production, and activated ERK and JNK signaling, but not p38 kinase signaling. SAR 4.0 W/kg strongly activated JNK signaling, expression of apoptotic genes, and amplified the number of apoptotic cells in the fly brain.
Eberhardt JL, Persson BR, Brun AE, Salford LG, Malmgren LO · 2008
Researchers exposed rats to GSM microwave signals in the 900 MHz band and measured blood-brain barrier permeability and signs of neuronal damage after recovery periods of 14 or 28 days. Non-anaesthetized rats were sham exposed or exposed to microwaves for 2 hours at whole-body specific absorption rates of 0.12, 1.2, 12, or 120 mW/kg. Albumin leakage and its uptake into neurons was enhanced after 14 days but not after the 28-day recovery period, while the occurrence of dark neurons was enhanced after 28 days.
Croft RJ et al. · 2008
Researchers tested 120 healthy participants in a double-blind, counterbalanced crossover design, with each person receiving a 30-minute active and a 30-minute sham exposure one week apart while EEG data were recorded. The purpose of the study was to test one of the strongest findings in the literature, that of increased alpha power in response to MP-type radiation. Overall alpha power was enhanced during exposure, with the effect larger at sites on the same side as the exposure source than on the opposite side over posterior regions. After exposure ended, no overall change to alpha power was observed, though there was less alpha power contralateral to the exposure source relative to the ipsilateral side.
Nittby H et al. · 2008
Researchers exposed Fischer 344 rats to radiation from a GSM mobile test phone at 1,800 MHz for 6 hours and then analyzed gene expression in the cortex and hippocampus. Four rats were exposed in an anechoic chamber one at a time, and four control rats were kept in the same chamber for the same duration without exposure. Gene ontology analysis found highly significant changes in gene categories related to membrane functions in both brain regions.
Schmid G et al. · 2007
A numerical model of the human middle and inner ear was developed at 0.1 mm resolution based on a real human tissue sample. The model was inserted into a commercial head model and FDTD computations were run for handheld device exposures from 400 to 3700 MHz. Highest absorption occurred at 400 MHz with 166 microW in the labyrinth and 12 microW in the vestibulocochlear nerve for a 500 mW device. For typical mobile phone frequencies (900 MHz and 1850 MHz) and output power values (250 mW and 125 mW), absorbed RF power was more than one order of magnitude lower than the values given above. The researchers concluded that temperature-related biologically relevant effects from typical handheld devices are unlikely.
Parazzini M et al. · 2007
The GUARD project involved nine European centers and aimed to assess potential changes in auditory function from low-intensity EMFs produced by GSM cellular phones. Participants were healthy young adults without any evidence of hearing or ear disorders. Auditory function was assessed immediately before and after EMF exposure using hearing threshold level, transient otoacoustic emissions, distortion product otoacoustic emissions, and auditory brainstem response. The study used a double-blind design with genuine and sham exposures separated by at least 24 hours. Exposure consisted of speech at a typical conversational level delivered via an earphone to one ear, plus genuine or sham EMF exposure from a consumer cellular phone at full power for 10 min.
Oftedal G, Straume A, Johnsson A, Stovner L · 2007
Seventeen eligible individuals who experienced symptoms in an open provocation test took part in a double-blind, randomized provocation study with cross-over design. Sixty-five pairs of sham and mobile phone RF exposures were conducted. The increase in pain or discomfort on visual analogue scales was 10.1 in RF sessions and 12.6 in sham sessions (P=0.30). Changes in heart rate or blood pressure were not related to the type of exposure (P: 0.30-0.88). The study gave no evidence that RF fields from mobile phones may cause head pain or discomfort or influence physiological variables.
Klaeboe L, Blaasaas KG, Tynes T. · 2007
Researchers tested whether radio-frequency electromagnetic fields from mobile phones increase the incidence of gliomas, meningiomas, and acoustic neuromas in adults. They collected detailed mobile phone use information from 289 glioma patients, 207 meningioma patients, 45 acoustic neuroma patients, and 358 controls. For regular mobile phone use defined as at least once a week for at least six months, the odds ratios were 0.6 for gliomas, 0.8 for meningiomas, and 0.5 for acoustic neuromas. No increasing trend was observed for gliomas or acoustic neuromas with longer duration, time since first use, or cumulative use. The results indicate that mobile phone use is not associated with an increased risk of these tumors.
Kan P, Simonsen SE, Lyon JL, Kestle JR. · 2007
Researchers conducted a meta-analysis of nine case-control studies with 5,259 brain tumor cases and 12,074 controls to examine cellular phone use and brain tumor risk. The pooled analysis showed an overall odds ratio of 0.90 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.81 to 0.99 for cellular phone use and brain tumor development. For long-term users of ten years or more, the pooled odds ratio was 1.25 with a 95% confidence interval of 1.01 to 1.54 based on five studies. No increased risk was observed for analog or digital cellular phone users.
Terao Y et al. · 2007
Researchers used a double-blind, counterbalanced crossover design with 10 normal subjects to test saccade performance before and after 30 minutes of mobile phone EMF exposure or sham exposure. They also measured hand reaction time to a visual signal. Saccade task parameters were unchanged after real or sham exposure, except for VGS and MGS latencies which also did not differ between exposure conditions. Hand reaction time shortened with repeated trials similarly for both exposures. The authors concluded that 30 minutes of mobile phone exposure has no significant short-term effect on saccade performance.
Stefanics G et al. · 2007
Each participant underwent a 10-minute exposure to 900 MHz pulsed EMF from a commercial Nokia 6310 mobile phone. Fifteen participants received genuine EMF exposure and fifteen received sham exposure in a double-blind, counterbalanced order. No significant differences were found in the latency of ABR waves I, III, and V before and after either genuine or sham exposure. The authors suggest that, in their experimental conditions, a single 10-minute exposure to 900 MHz EMF from a commercial mobile phone does not produce measurable immediate effects on the latency of auditory brainstem waves I, III and V.
Perentos N, Croft RJ, McKenzie RJ, Cvetkovic D, Cosic I · 2007
Researchers used a fully counterbalanced cross-over design with 12 participants to test mobile phone-like RF exposure effects on EEG. Exposures lasted 15 minutes using a dipole antenna more closely resembling a real GSM handset.
Inomata-Terada S et al. · 2007
They also assessed short-interval intracortical inhibition reflecting GABAergic interneuron function using paired-pulse TMS. No effects of exposure were found on MEPs or SICI in healthy volunteers, and no effects on MEPs were observed in two multiple sclerosis patients despite conduction block after a hot bath.
Haarala C et al. · 2007
Researchers studied the effects of continuous wave and pulsed wave electromagnetic fields on cognitive function in 36 healthy male subjects. Subjects performed cognitive tasks during exposure to continuous wave, pulsed wave, and sham fields, with left- and right-sided exposure in a double-blind design. No effects were found between EMF conditions, hemisphere exposures, or between the control and experimental groups.
Cinel C, Boldini A, Russo R, Fox E · 2007
Roosli M, Michel G, Kuehni CE, Spoerri A · 2007
Researchers used Swiss national mortality registry data from 1969 to 2002 to calculate age-standardized brain tumour mortality rates per 100,000 person-years. The study period was split before and after 1987 when analogue mobile technology was introduced. Over the whole period, mortality increased significantly in older age groups (60-74 and 75+ years) but not in younger groups. From 1987 onward, brain tumour mortality rates were relatively stable in all age groups.
Lahkola A et al. · 2007
Researchers conducted a population-based case-control study of 1,522 glioma patients and 3,301 controls. Regular mobile phone use was not associated with increased glioma risk (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.68–0.91). No significant associations were found for duration of use, years since first use, cumulative calls, or cumulative hours, though a linear trend showed a small increase per 100 hours of cumulative use (OR = 1.006 (1.002, 1.010) per 100 hr). For more than 10 years of use on the same side as the tumor, a borderline significant increased odds ratio of 1.39 (95% CI: 1.01–1.92) was observed, while use on the opposite side showed no increase (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.71–1.37).
