3,138 Studies Reviewed. 77.4% Found Biological Effects. The Evidence is Clear.

Microwave emission from police radar.

Bioeffects Seen

Fink JM, Wagner JP, Congleton JJ, Rock JC · 1999

View Original Abstract
Share:

Police radar exposure measured 0.034 mW/cm² at officer positions, prompting researchers to recommend prudent avoidance despite levels below safety standards.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

Researchers measured microwave radiation exposure from police radar units on officers' eyes and reproductive organs. They found extremely low exposure levels (less than 1% of safety standards) at officer positions, though direct antenna exposure was higher. Proper training and equipment positioning minimize risks.

Why This Matters

This study provides important real-world exposure data for an occupational group with regular microwave radiation exposure. While the researchers found officer exposure levels were well below current safety standards, their recommendation for 'prudent avoidance' acknowledges the scientific uncertainty surrounding long-term health effects of microwave radiation exposure. The measured levels of 0.034 mW/cm² are actually comparable to what you might experience from some wireless devices at close range. What's particularly significant is that this research was conducted by safety engineers, not telecommunications industry researchers, lending credibility to both the findings and the precautionary recommendations. The fact that even these relatively low occupational exposures prompted calls for avoidance measures underscores the growing recognition that current safety standards may not account for all potential health risks.

Exposure Details

Power Density
0.034, 0.04 µW/m²

Exposure Context

This study used 0.034, 0.04 µW/m² for radio frequency:

Building Biology guidelines are practitioner-based limits from real-world assessments. BioInitiative Report recommendations are based on peer-reviewed science. Check Your Exposure to compare your own measurements.

Where This Falls on the Concern Scale

Study Exposure Level in ContextA logarithmic scale showing exposure levels relative to Building Biology concern thresholds and regulatory limits.Study Exposure Level in ContextThis study: 0.034, 0.04 µW/m²Extreme Concern1,000 uW/m2FCC Limit10M uW/m2Effects observed in the No Concern range (Building Biology)FCC limit is 294,117,647x higher than this exposure level

Study Details

This study evaluated police officers' exposures to microwaves emitted by traffic radar units. Exposure measurements were taken at approximated ocular and testicular levels of officers seated in patrol vehicles.

Comparisons were made of the radar manufacturers' published maximum power density specifications and...

The four high measurements were maximum power density readings taken directly in front of the radar....

Results of this study indicate that police officer exposure to microwave radiation is apparently minimal. However, because of uncertainty in the medical and scientific communities concerning nonionizing radiation, it is recommended that law enforcement agencies implement a policy of prudent avoidance, including purchasing units with the lowest published maximum power densities, purchasing dash/rear deck-mounted units with antennae mounted outside the patrol vehicle, and training police officers to use the "stand-by" mode when not actually using radar.

Cite This Study
Fink JM, Wagner JP, Congleton JJ, Rock JC (1999). Microwave emission from police radar. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 60(6):770-76, 1999.
Show BibTeX
@article{jm_1999_microwave_emission_from_police_972,
  author = {Fink JM and Wagner JP and Congleton JJ and Rock JC},
  title = {Microwave emission from police radar.},
  year = {1999},
  
  url = {https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10671181/},
}

Quick Questions About This Study

Researchers measured microwave radiation exposure from police radar units on officers' eyes and reproductive organs. They found extremely low exposure levels (less than 1% of safety standards) at officer positions, though direct antenna exposure was higher. Proper training and equipment positioning minimize risks.