8,700 Studies Reviewed. 87.0% Found Biological Effects. The Evidence is Clear.

Note: This study found no significant biological effects under its experimental conditions. We include all studies for scientific completeness.

Measurement of DNA damage after exposure to electromagnetic radiation in the cellular phone communication frequency band (835.62 and 847.74 MHz).

No Effects Found

Malyapa RS, Ahern EW, Straube WL, Moros EG, Pickard WF, Roti Roti JL. · 1997

View Original Abstract
Share:

Cell phone radiation at typical use levels didn't cause detectable DNA damage in lab cells, but this doesn't rule out other biological effects.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

Researchers exposed mouse and human cells to cell phone frequencies (835-847 MHz) for up to 24 hours at power levels similar to phone use to see if the radiation damaged DNA. Using a sensitive test called the comet assay, they found no DNA damage in the exposed cells compared to unexposed control cells. This suggests that cell phone radiation at typical exposure levels may not directly break DNA strands in laboratory conditions.

Exposure Information

A logarithmic frequency spectrum from 10 Hz to 100 GHz showing where this study's 847.7 MHz exposure sits relative to common EMF sources.Where This Frequency Sits on the EMF SpectrumELFVLFLF / MFHF / VHFUHFSHFmm10 Hz100 GHzThis study: 847.7 MHzPower lines50/60 Hz5G mm28 GHzLogarithmic scale

The study examined exposure from: 835.62 and 847.74 MHz Duration: 2, 4 or 24 h

Study Details

Mouse C3H 10T1/2 fibroblasts and human glioblastoma U87MG cells were exposed to cellular phone communication frequency radiations to investigate whether such exposure produces DNA damage in in vitro cultures.

Two types of frequency modulations were studied: frequency-modulated continuous-wave (FMCW), with a...

No significant differences were observed between the test group exposed to FMCW or CDMA radiation an...

Our results indicate that exposure of cultured mammalian cells to cellular phone communication frequencies under these conditions at an SAR of 0.6 W/kg does not cause DNA damage as measured by the alkaline comet assay.

Cite This Study
Malyapa RS, Ahern EW, Straube WL, Moros EG, Pickard WF, Roti Roti JL. (1997). Measurement of DNA damage after exposure to electromagnetic radiation in the cellular phone communication frequency band (835.62 and 847.74 MHz). Radiat Res 148(6):618-627, 1997.
Show BibTeX
@article{rs_1997_measurement_of_dna_damage_3224,
  author = {Malyapa RS and Ahern EW and Straube WL and Moros EG and Pickard WF and Roti Roti JL. },
  title = {Measurement of DNA damage after exposure to electromagnetic radiation in the cellular phone communication frequency band (835.62 and 847.74 MHz).},
  year = {1997},
  
  url = {https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9399708/},
}

Cited By (136 papers)

Quick Questions About This Study

No, 24-hour exposure to 835 MHz cell phone radiation did not damage DNA in mouse and human cells. Researchers used the sensitive comet assay test and found no DNA strand breaks at 0.6 W/kg exposure levels, similar to typical phone use.
SAR 0.6 W/kg represents the specific absorption rate used in this 1997 study, measuring how much electromagnetic energy tissues absorb. At this level, which mimics typical cell phone use, researchers found no DNA damage in laboratory cell cultures.
The comet assay is highly sensitive for detecting DNA strand breaks from electromagnetic radiation. This test can identify even small amounts of DNA damage, making the 1997 study's negative findings at 835-847 MHz frequencies particularly significant.
No, both FMCW and CDMA cell phone signal types showed identical results in this study. Neither format caused DNA damage in cultured mammalian cells compared to unexposed control groups, suggesting signal modulation type doesn't affect cellular safety.
This study used both mouse and human cells, finding no DNA damage in either type from 835-847 MHz radiation. The consistent results across species suggest the laboratory findings may translate to real-world human exposure scenarios.