World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health - a hard nut to crack (Review)

Hardell,Lennart

doi:10.3892/ijo.2017.4046

World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health - a hard nut to crack (Review)

Authors:
- Lennart Hardell
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, SE-701 82 Örebro, Sweden
Published online on: June 21, 2017 https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2017.4046
Pages: 405-413
Copyright: © Hardell . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

In May 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) evaluated cancer risks from radiofrequency (RF) radiation. Human epidemiological studies gave evidence of increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma. RF radiation was classified as Group 2B, a possible human carcinogen. Further epidemiological, animal and mechanistic studies have strengthened the association. In spite of this, in most countries little or nothing has been done to reduce exposure and educate people on health hazards from RF radiation. On the contrary ambient levels have increased. In 2014 the WHO launched a draft of a Monograph on RF fields and health for public comments. It turned out that five of the six members of the Core Group in charge of the draft are affiliated with International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), an industry loyal NGO, and thus have a serious conflict of interest. Just as by ICNIRP, evaluation of non-thermal biological effects from RF radiation are dismissed as scientific evidence of adverse health effects in the Monograph. This has provoked many comments sent to the WHO. However, at a meeting on March 3, 2017 at the WHO Geneva office it was stated that the WHO has no intention to change the Core Group.

View Figures

View References

1	Cardis E, Deltour I, Mann S, Moissonnier M, Taki M, Varsier N, Wake K and Wiart J: Distribution of RF energy emitted by mobile phones in anatomical structures of the brain. Phys Med Biol. 53:2771–2783. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Gandhi OP, Morgan LL, de Salles AA, Han Y-Y, Herberman RB and Davis DL: Exposure limits: The underestimation of absorbed cell phone radiation, especially in children. Electromagn Biol Med. 31:34–51. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar
3	Baan R, Grosse Y, Lauby-Secretan B, El Ghissassi F, Bouvard V, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Guha N, Islami F and Galichet L: Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Lancet Oncol. 12:624–626. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	International Agency for Research on Cancer: IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, Volume 102. Non-Ionizing Radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields. WHO Press; Lyon, France: 2013, Available online: http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/mono102.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.
5	Hardell L, Carlberg M, Söderqvist F and Hansson Mild K: Case-control study of the association between malignant brain tumours diagnosed between 2007 and 2009 and mobile and cordless phone use. Int J Oncol. 43:1833–1845. 2013.PubMed/NCBI
6	Hardell L, Carlberg M and Hansson Mild K: Use of mobile phones and cordless phones is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma. Pathophysiology. 20:85–110. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar
7	Coureau G, Bouvier G, Lebailly P, Fabbro-Peray P, Gruber A, Leffondre K, Guillamo JS, Loiseau H, Mathoulin-Pélissier S, Salamon R, et al: Mobile phone use and brain tumours in the CERENAT case-control study. Occup Environ Med. 71:514–522. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Carlberg M and Hardell L: Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use and glioma risk using the Bradford Hill viewpoints form 1965 on association or causation. BioMed Res Int. 2017:92184862017. View Article : Google Scholar
9	Markovà E, Malmgren LO and Belyaev IY: Microwaves from mobile phones inhibit 53BP1 focus formation in human stem cells more strongly than in differentiated cells: Possible mechanistic link to cancer risk. Environ Health Perspect. 118:394–399. 2010.PubMed/NCBI
10	Megha K, Deshmukh PS, Banerjee BD, Tripathi AK, Ahmed R and Abegaonkar MP: Low intensity microwave radiation induced oxidative stress, inflammatory response and DNA damage in rat brain. Neurotoxicology. 51:158–165. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Dasdag S, Akdag MZ, Erdal ME, Erdal N, Ay OI, Ay ME, Yilmaz SG, Tasdelen B and Yegin K: Effects of 2.4 GHz radio-frequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi equipment on microRNA expression in brain tissue. Int J Radiat Biol. 91:555–561. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O and Kyrylenko S: Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 35:186–202. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar
13	Akdag MZ, Dasdag S, Canturk F, Karabulut D, Caner Y and Adalier N: Does prolonged radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi devices induce DNA damage in various tissues of rats? J Chem Neuroanat. 75:116–122. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Wyde M, Cesta M, Blystone C, Elmore S, Foster P, Hooth M, Kissling G, Malarkey D, Sills R, Stout M, et al: Report of Partial findings from the National Toxicology Program Carcinogenesis Studies of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation in Hsd: Sprague Dawley® SD rats (Whole Body Exposures). US National Toxicology Program (NTP); 2016, doi: org/10.1101/055699. http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055699.full.pdf. Accessed on April 1, 2017.
15	Hedendahl L, Carlberg M and Hardell L: Electromagnetic hypersensitivity - an increasing challenge to the medical profession. Rev Environ Health. 30:209–215. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar
16	Hardell L, Koppel T, Carlberg M, Ahonen M and Hedendahl L: Radiofrequency radiation at Stockholm Central Railway Station in Sweden and some medical aspects on public exposure to RF fields. Int J Oncol. 49:1315–1324. 2016.PubMed/NCBI
17	Hardell L, Carlberg M, Koppel T and Hedendahl L: High radio-frequency radiation at Stockholm Old Town: An exposimeter study including the Royal Castle, Supreme Court, three major squares and the Swedish Parliament. Mol Clin Oncol. 6:462–476. 2017.PubMed/NCBI
18	International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz). Health Phys. 74:494–522. 1998.
19	International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: ICNIRP statement on the 'Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz)'. Health Phys. 97:257–258. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
20	BioInitiative Working Group: BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF). Sage C and Carpenter DO: Bioinitiative. 2007, http://www.bioinitiative.org/table-of-contents/. Accessed on April 1, 2017.
21	BioInitiative Working Group: BioInitiative 2012 A Rationale for a Biologically-based Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF). Sage C and Carpenter DO: Bioinitiative. 2012, http://www.bioinitiative.org/table-of-contents/. Accessed on April 1, 2017.
22	Buchner K and Eger H: Changes of clinically important neurotransmitters under the influence of modulated RF fields - A long-term study under real-life conditions. Umwelt-Medizin-Gesellschaft. 24:pp. 44–57. 2011, (In German). https://www.avaate.org/IMG/pdf/Rimbach-Study-20112.pdf.
23	Fragopoulou AF, Samara A, Antonelou MH, Xanthopoulou A, Papadopoulou A, Vougas K, Koutsogiannopoulou E, Anastasiadou E, Stravopodis DJ, Tsangaris GT, et al: Brain proteome response following whole body exposure of mice to mobile phone or wireless DECT base radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 31:250–274. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Nittby H, Brun A, Eberhardt J, Malmgren L, Persson BR and Salford LG: Increased blood-brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone. Pathophysiology. 16:103–112. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Tang J, Zhang Y, Yang L, Chen Q, Tan L, Zuo S, Feng H, Chen Z and Zhu G: Exposure to 900 MHz electromagnetic fields activates the mkp-1/ERK pathway and causes blood-brain barrier damage and cognitive impairment in rats. Brain Res. 1601:92–101. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Abramson MJ, Benke GP, Dimitriadis C, Inyang IO, Sim MR, Wolfe RS and Croft RJ: Mobile telephone use is associated with changes in cognitive function in young adolescents. Bioelectromagnetics. 30:678–686. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Deshmukh PS, Nasare N, Megha K, Banerjee BD, Ahmed RS, Singh D, Abegaonkar MP, Tripathi AK and Mediratta PK: Cognitive impairment and neurogenotoxic effects in rats exposed to low-intensity microwave radiation. Int J Toxicol. 34:284–290. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Calvente I, Pérez-Lobato R, Núñez MI, Ramos R, Guxens M, Villalba J, Olea N and Fernández MF: Does exposure to environmental radiofrequency electromagnetic fields cause cognitive and behavioral effects in 10-year-old boys? Bioelectromagnetics. 37:25–36. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	OECD: Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection. PISA, OECD Publishing; 2015, http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/students-computers-and-learning_9789264239555-en. Accessed on April 1, 2017.
30	Spitzer M: Information technology in education: Risks and side effects. Trends Neurosci Educ. 3:81–85. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar
31	Hensinger P: Big data: A paradigm shift in education from personal autonomy to conditioning toward excessive consumerism. Umwelt-Medizin-Gesellschaft. 28:206–213. 2015.
32	Roser K, Schoeni A, Foerster M and Röösli M: Problematic mobile phone use of Swiss adolescents: Is it linked with mental health or behaviour? Int J Public Health. 61:307–315. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar
33	Hardell L, Söderqvist F, Carlberg M, Zetterberg H and Hansson Mild K: Exposure to wireless phone emissions and serum β-trace protein. Int J Mol Med. 26:301–306. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
34	Sangün Ö, Dündar B, Çömlekçi S and Büyükgebiz A: The effects of electromagnetic field on the endocrine system in children and adolescents. Pediatr Endocrinol Rev. 13:531–545. 2015.
35	Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P, Müller K, et al: EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 31:363–397. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Carter B, Rees P, Hale L, Bhattacharjee D and Paradkar MS: Association between portable screen-based media device access or use and sleep outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 170:1202–1208. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	Thomas S, Heinrich S, von Kries R and Radon K: Exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields and behavioural problems in Bavarian children and adolescents. Eur J Epidemiol. 25:135–141. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar
38	Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C and Olsen J: Cell phone use and behavioural problems in young children. J Epidemiol Community Health. 66:524–529. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar
39	Herbert MR and Sage C: Autism and EMF? Plausibility of a pathophysiological link - Part I. Pathophysiology. 20:191–209. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
40	Herbert MR and Sage C: Autism and EMF? Plausibility of a pathophysiological link part II. Pathophysiology. 20:211–234. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
41	Sudan M, Olsen J, Arah OA, Obel C and Kheifets L: Prospective cohort analysis of cellphone use and emotional and behavioural difficulties in children. J Epidemiol Community Health. May 23–2016.Epub ahead of print. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
42	Avendaño C, Mata A, Sanchez Sarmiento CA and Doncel GF: Use of laptop computers connected to internet through Wi-Fi decreases human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertil Steril. 97:39–45.e2. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar
43	Dasdag S, Taş M, Akdag MZ and Yegin K: Effect of long-term exposure of 2.4 GHz radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi equipment on testes functions. Electromagn Biol Med. 34:37–42. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar
44	Ong EK and Glantz SA: Tobacco industry efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer's second-hand smoke study. Lancet. 355:1253–1259. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
45	Michaels D: Doubt is Their Product How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health. Oxford University Press; New York: 2008
46	McGarity TO and Wagner WE: Bending Science. How Special Interests Corrupt Public Health Research. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, London: 2008
47	Oreskes N and Conway EM: Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. Bloomsbury Press; New York: 2010
48	Walker MJ: Corporate Ties that Bind. An Examination of Corporate Manipulation and Vested Interest in Public Health. Skyhorse Publishing; New York: 2017
49	Repacholi MH, Basten A, Gebski V, Noonan D, Finnie J and Harris AW: Lymphomas in E mu-Pim1 transgenic mice exposed to pulsed 900 MHZ electromagnetic fields. Radiat Res. 147:631–640. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
50	WHO Launches New International Project to Assess Health Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields. Press release WHO/42, June 4, 1996.
51	Leloup D: Téléphonie mobile: Trafic d'influence à l'OMS? Mediaattitudes. 2007, http://www.mediattitudes.info/2006/12/trafic-dinfluence-loms.html. Accessed on April 1, 2017.
52	Starkey SJ: Inaccurate official assessment of radiofrequency safety by the Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation. Rev Environ Health. 31:493–503. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI