Share
𝕏 Facebook LinkedIn

Effects of microwave radiation on the lens epithelium in the rabbit eye.

PAPER pubmed Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960) 1976 Animal study Effect: mixed Evidence: Low

Abstract

These experiments were conducted to determine the effect of cataractogenic doses of microwave radiation at 2.45 gigahertz (GHz) on the lens epithelium of the rabbit. One hour before animals were killed, tritiated thymidine was injected into the anterior chamber of both eyes at postirradiation intervals varying from six hours to one month. Epithelial peels were made and autoradiographic techniques used to identify cells manufacturing DNA. Comparison of counts from both experimental and control epithelia revealed two patterns, depending on the presence or absence of vesicle strings. Those lenses without vesicle strings showed an initial pronounced suppression of mitotic activity followed by gradual return to normal levels. Those lenses with strings showed a precipitous rise in DNA synthesis on the fourth to fifth day after irradiation. This increased activity may be the result of lens hydration.

AI evidence extraction

At a glance
Study type
Animal study
Effect direction
mixed
Population
Rabbit (lens epithelium in rabbit eye)
Sample size
Exposure
microwave · 2450 MHz
Evidence strength
Low
Confidence: 74% · Peer-reviewed: yes

Main findings

In rabbit lenses exposed to cataractogenic microwave radiation at 2.45 GHz, epithelial DNA synthesis/mitotic activity showed two patterns depending on vesicle strings. Lenses without vesicle strings had an initial pronounced suppression of mitotic activity with gradual return to normal, while lenses with vesicle strings showed a marked rise in DNA synthesis on days 4–5 post-irradiation.

Outcomes measured

  • Lens epithelium DNA synthesis/mitotic activity (tritiated thymidine incorporation; autoradiography)
  • Presence/absence of vesicle strings in lenses

Limitations

  • Sample size not reported in abstract
  • Exposure metrics beyond frequency (e.g., SAR, power density) not reported
  • Details of control conditions and randomization/blinding not reported
  • Findings stratified by presence/absence of vesicle strings; causal interpretation unclear from abstract
View raw extracted JSON
{
    "study_type": "animal",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "microwave",
        "source": null,
        "frequency_mhz": 2450,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": "Rabbit (lens epithelium in rabbit eye)",
    "sample_size": null,
    "outcomes": [
        "Lens epithelium DNA synthesis/mitotic activity (tritiated thymidine incorporation; autoradiography)",
        "Presence/absence of vesicle strings in lenses"
    ],
    "main_findings": "In rabbit lenses exposed to cataractogenic microwave radiation at 2.45 GHz, epithelial DNA synthesis/mitotic activity showed two patterns depending on vesicle strings. Lenses without vesicle strings had an initial pronounced suppression of mitotic activity with gradual return to normal, while lenses with vesicle strings showed a marked rise in DNA synthesis on days 4–5 post-irradiation.",
    "effect_direction": "mixed",
    "limitations": [
        "Sample size not reported in abstract",
        "Exposure metrics beyond frequency (e.g., SAR, power density) not reported",
        "Details of control conditions and randomization/blinding not reported",
        "Findings stratified by presence/absence of vesicle strings; causal interpretation unclear from abstract"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "microwave radiation",
        "2.45 GHz",
        "rabbit",
        "lens epithelium",
        "cataractogenic dose",
        "DNA synthesis",
        "mitotic activity",
        "tritiated thymidine",
        "autoradiography",
        "vesicle strings"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract/metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.