8,655 Studies Reviewed. 86.9% Found Biological Effects. The Evidence is Clear.
Shield Your Body
Whole Body / GeneralPart of the Glaser Archive

Field Measurement of Ultraviolet, Infrared, and Microwave Energies

Bioeffects Seen

Julius H. Fanney Jr., Charles H. Powell · 1967

Share:

Industrial hygienists recognized potential EMF hazards and measurement challenges in 1967, decades before today's wireless explosion.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

This 1967 technical review examined field measurement techniques for non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation including ultraviolet, infrared, and microwave energies. The study evaluated available instruments for detecting these energies in workplace settings and identified the need for better measurement tools with improved spectral response and reliability.

Why This Matters

This foundational work from 1967 represents an early recognition that non-ionizing electromagnetic energies posed potential workplace hazards requiring proper measurement and monitoring. What's striking is how prescient this concern was - written decades before cell phones, WiFi, and the explosion of wireless technology that now surrounds us daily. The study's call for better instrumentation and standardized measurement techniques highlighted a critical gap that persists today. While industrial hygienists in 1967 were concerned about occupational exposures from specific sources, we now face ubiquitous low-level exposures from countless wireless devices and infrastructure. The reality is that the measurement challenges identified over 50 years ago have only grown more complex as our electromagnetic environment has become exponentially more dense and varied.

Figures from the Original Paper

Diagrams extracted from the original research document.

chartPage 2 - Figure 1. Electromagnetic spectrum.
p. 2 of the original PDF
chartPage 3 - AI-described figure: Figure 2. Microwave spectrum showing frequency ranges for various applications such as EHF (Extremely High Frequency), SHF (Super High Frequency), UHF (Ultra High Frequency), and others, along with corresponding wavelengths in meters.
p. 3 of the original PDF
diagramPage 4 - Figure 3. Infrared spectrum.
p. 4 of the original PDF
diagramPage 5 - Figure 4. Ultraviolet spectrum.
p. 5 of the original PDF
graphPage 6 - AI-described figure: Figure 5. Ultraviolet action spectrum showing relative effectiveness across different wavelengths in micrometers.
p. 6 of the original PDF
graphPage 7 - Figure 6. Response of various phototubes.
p. 7 of the original PDF

Exposure Information

Specific exposure levels were not quantified in this study.

Cite This Study
Julius H. Fanney Jr., Charles H. Powell (1967). Field Measurement of Ultraviolet, Infrared, and Microwave Energies.
Show BibTeX
@article{field_measurement_of_ultraviolet_infrared_and_microwave_energies_g3908,
  author = {Julius H. Fanney Jr. and Charles H. Powell},
  title = {Field Measurement of Ultraviolet, Infrared, and Microwave Energies},
  year = {1967},
  
  
}
No DOI on file for this study.

Quick Questions About This Study

The study examined ultraviolet, infrared, and microwave energies in industrial settings. Researchers evaluated instruments available for detecting these non-ionizing electromagnetic radiations and assessed their effectiveness for workplace safety monitoring.
Existing instruments lacked adequate spectral response and reliability for accurate field measurements. The study identified critical gaps in measurement technology that hindered proper assessment of electromagnetic energy exposures in workplace environments.
The research presented specific survey techniques tailored to different electromagnetic energy sources and frequencies. These methods addressed the unique challenges of measuring various portions of the non-ionizing electromagnetic spectrum in real-world conditions.
Instruments were categorized by their specific advantages, disadvantages, and spectral response capabilities. Each type was evaluated for its effectiveness in measuring particular portions of the electromagnetic spectrum and interpreting measurement results.
Researchers emphasized the need for continuing research on instrumentation improvements, particularly focusing on better spectral response characteristics and enhanced reliability for field measurements of electromagnetic energies.