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

THE NEAR FIELD OF DIPOLE AND HELICAL ANTENNAS

Bioeffects Seen

Q. Balzano, O. Garay, K. Siwiak

Share:

Current EMF safety standards near antennas may be overly restrictive by measuring stored energy instead of penetrating radiation.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

This technical study measured electric field strength around dipole and helical antennas used in portable communication devices. Researchers found that near antennas, current safety standards based on electric field measurements are overly restrictive because they don't account for how electromagnetic energy actually penetrates human tissue. The study shows that reactive energy stored around antennas has high impedance and isn't all available for tissue penetration.

Why This Matters

This research exposes a fundamental flaw in how we measure EMF safety near portable devices. The science demonstrates that our current protection standards, which rely on electric field strength measurements, don't distinguish between energy that can actually penetrate your body and energy that simply exists around the antenna. Put simply, when you're close to your phone or wireless device, the safety criteria may be unnecessarily strict because they're measuring the wrong thing. What this means for you is that near-field exposure assessments using standard methods may overestimate actual biological risk. The reality is that reactive electromagnetic energy stored around antennas behaves differently than the radiating energy that travels away from devices, yet our safety standards treat them the same.

Exposure Information

Specific exposure levels were not quantified in this study.

Cite This Study
Q. Balzano, O. Garay, K. Siwiak (n.d.). THE NEAR FIELD OF DIPOLE AND HELICAL ANTENNAS.
Show BibTeX
@article{the_near_field_of_dipole_and_helical_antennas_g4640,
  author = {Q. Balzano and O. Garay and K. Siwiak},
  title = {THE NEAR FIELD OF DIPOLE AND HELICAL ANTENNAS},
  year = {n.d.},
  
  
}

Quick Questions About This Study

Near antennas, electric field strength doesn't correlate with power flow into tissue. Instead, it measures reactive energy stored around the antenna, which has high impedance and limited tissue penetration capability.
In far field exposure, electric field strength directly relates to power flow and potential hazard. In near field, it primarily reflects stored electromagnetic energy that doesn't all penetrate tissue.
Yes, these antenna types are commonly found in portable communication equipment like cell phones, radios, and wireless devices that people use in close proximity to their bodies.
Reactive electromagnetic energy has high impedance, meaning it resists current flow and isn't all available for penetration and energy deposition in human tissue compared to radiating energy.
No, the ANSI Radio Frequency Protection Guides are based on electric field measurements that work for far field but become overly restrictive in near field antenna environments.