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

Characterization of personal RF electromagnetic field exposure and actual absorption for the general public.

Bioeffects Seen

Joseph W, Vermeeren G, Verloock L, Heredia MM, Martens L · 2008

View Original Abstract
Share:

Real-world RF exposure varies dramatically by location, with mobile environments and indoor offices often exceeding outdoor levels.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

Scientists measured radiofrequency radiation from phones, WiFi, and other devices in 28 real-world situations. They found office environments often had higher exposure than outdoors, with the highest levels on trains and buses where phones work harder to maintain connections, affecting actual body absorption rates.

Why This Matters

This research provides crucial baseline data for understanding how much RF radiation we're actually exposed to in daily life - and more importantly, how much our bodies absorb. The finding that indoor office environments can exceed outdoor exposure challenges common assumptions about where we face the highest exposures. The study's focus on whole-body absorption rates (SAR) is particularly significant because it moves beyond simple field measurements to quantify actual biological dose. What's striking is that mobile scenarios like trains and buses produced the highest exposures, as phones boost their power to penetrate metal and maintain connections through constantly changing conditions. This research gives epidemiologists the tools to correlate actual absorption with health outcomes, moving the field toward more precise exposure assessments.

Exposure Details

SAR
0.00000058, 0.00000208, 0.00000501 W/kg
Electric Field
0.36 to 0.58, 0.33, 0.52, 0.26 V/m

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: 0.00000058, 0.00000208, 0.00000501 W/kgExtreme Concern0.1 W/kgFCC Limit1.6 W/kgEffects observed in the No Concern range (Building Biology)FCC limit is 2,758,621x higher than this exposure level

Study Details

In this paper, personal electromagnetic field exposure of the general public due to 12 different radiofrequency sources is characterized.

Twenty-eight different realistic exposure scenarios based upon time, environment, activity, and loca...

Indoor exposure in office environments can be higher than outdoor exposure: 95th percentiles of fiel...

The methodology of this paper enables epidemiological studies to make an analysis in combination with both electric field and actual whole-body SAR values and to compare exposure with basic restrictions

Cite This Study
Joseph W, Vermeeren G, Verloock L, Heredia MM, Martens L (2008). Characterization of personal RF electromagnetic field exposure and actual absorption for the general public. Health Phys. 95(3):317-330, 2008.
Show BibTeX
@article{w_2008_characterization_of_personal_rf_1052,
  author = {Joseph W and Vermeeren G and Verloock L and Heredia MM and Martens L},
  title = {Characterization of personal RF electromagnetic field exposure and actual absorption for the general public.},
  year = {2008},
  
  url = {https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18695413/},
}

Quick Questions About This Study

Scientists measured radiofrequency radiation from phones, WiFi, and other devices in 28 real-world situations. They found office environments often had higher exposure than outdoors, with the highest levels on trains and buses where phones work harder to maintain connections, affecting actual body absorption rates.