6,486 Studies Reviewed. 85.2% of Original Studies 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.

Influence of radiofrequency-electromagnetic waves from 3rd-generation cellular phones on fertilization and embryo development in mice.

No Effects Found

Suzuki S, Okutsu M, Suganuma R, Komiya H, Nakatani-Enomoto S, Kobayashi S, Ugawa YTateno H, Fujimori K. · 2017

View Original Abstract
Share:

Fertilization, embryogenesis, and blastocyst formation rates did not change significantly across exposure groups.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of 3rd-generation (3G) cellular phone radiofrequency-electromagnetic wave (RF-EMW) exposure on fertilization and embryogenesis in mice. Oocytes and spermatozoa were exposed to 1.95 GHz RF-EMWs at 2 mW/g for 60 minutes or sham exposure. After RF-EMW exposure, in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection were performed. Groups compared were both exposed, both non-exposed, one exposed, and the other non-exposed. Fertilization, embryogenesis, and blastocyst formation rates did not change significantly across the four groups.

Why This Matters

The exposure level in the study was at least 100 times greater than daily human sperm exposure. The authors concluded that the results indicate safety of RF-EMW exposure in humans.

Exposure Details

SAR
2 W/kg
Source/Device
3G cellular phone 1.95 GHz
Exposure Duration
60 min

Exposure Context

This study used 2 W/kg for SAR (device absorption):

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 ContextStudy Exposure Level in ContextThis study: 2 W/kgExtreme Concern - 0.1 W/kgFCC Limit - 1.6 W/kgEffects observed in the Extreme Concern range (Building Biology)This level is 1 times the FCC limit
A logarithmic frequency spectrum from 10 Hz to 100 GHz showing where this study's 1.95 GHz exposure sits relative to common EMF sources.Where This Frequency Sits on the EMF SpectrumELFVLFLF / MFHF / VHFUHFSHFmm10 Hz100 GHzThis study: 1.95 GHzPower lines50/60 Hz5G mm28 GHzLogarithmic scale

Study Details

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of 3rd-generation (3G) cellular phone radiofrequency-electromagnetic wave (RF-EMW) exposure on fertilization and embryogenesis in mice.

Oocytes and spermatozoa were exposed to 3G cellular phone RF-EMWs, 1.95 GHz wideband code division m...

Rates of fertilization, embryogenesis, and blastocyst formation did not change significantly across ...

Cite This Study
Suzuki S, Okutsu M, Suganuma R, Komiya H, Nakatani-Enomoto S, Kobayashi S, Ugawa YTateno H, Fujimori K. (2017). Influence of radiofrequency-electromagnetic waves from 3rd-generation cellular phones on fertilization and embryo development in mice. Bioelectromagnetics. 38(6):466-473, 2017.
Show BibTeX
@article{s_2017_influence_of_radiofrequencyelectromagnetic_waves_3432,
  author = {Suzuki S and Okutsu M and Suganuma R and Komiya H and Nakatani-Enomoto S and Kobayashi S and Ugawa YTateno H and Fujimori K.},
  title = {Influence of radiofrequency-electromagnetic waves from 3rd-generation cellular phones on fertilization and embryo development in mice.},
  year = {2017},
  
  url = {https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28628221/},
}

Cited By (9 papers)

Quick Questions About This Study

The study evaluated effects of 3G cellular phone RF-EMW exposure on fertilization and embryogenesis in mice.
Oocytes and spermatozoa were exposed to 1.95 GHz RF-EMWs at 2 mW/g for 60 minutes or sham exposure.
Fertilization, embryogenesis, and blastocyst formation rates did not change significantly across the four exposure groups.
The exposure level was at least 100 times greater than daily human sperm exposure and even greater than daily oocyte exposure.
Groups compared were both exposed, both non-exposed, one exposed, and the other non-exposed.