Wireless technology is an environmental stressor requiring new understanding and approaches in health care

Abstract

Wireless technology is an environmental stressor requiring new understanding and approaches in health care McCredden JE, Cook N, Weller S, Leach V. Wireless technology is an environmental stressor requiring new understanding and approaches in health care Front. Public Health, 20 December 2022. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.986315. Abstract Electromagnetic signals from everyday wireless technologies are an ever-present environmental stressor, affecting biological systems. In this article, we substantiate this statement based on the weight of evidence from papers collated within the ORSAA database (ODEB), focusing on the biological and health effects of electromagnetic fields and radiation. More specifically, the experiments investigating exposures from real-world devices and the epidemiology studies examining the effects of living near mobile phone base stations were extracted from ODEB and the number of papers showing effects was compared with the number showing no effects. The results showed that two-thirds of the experimental and epidemiological papers found significant biological effects. The breadth of biological and health categories where effects have been found was subsequently explored, revealing hundreds of papers showing fundamental biological processes that are impacted, such as protein damage, biochemical changes and oxidative stress. This understanding is targeted toward health professionals and policy makers who have not been exposed to this issue during training. To inform this readership, some of the major biological effect categories and plausible mechanisms of action from the reviewed literature are described. Also presented are a set of best practice guidelines for treating patients affected by electromagnetic exposures and for using technology safely in health care settings. In conclusion, there is an extensive evidence base revealing that significant stress to human biological systems is being imposed by exposure to everyday wireless communication devices and supporting infrastructure. This evidence is compelling enough to warrant an update in medical education and practice. Excerpt Indeed, the data from ODEB (see Table 1) corroborates the above research findings, by showing that the type of signal used: real or simulated, can affect study outcomes. Within the 1,106 relevant experimental papers selected from ODEB using the quality of reporting criteria above, there were proportionally more “Effect” outcomes when the experiments used real-world signals and proportionally more “No Effect” outcomes when simulated signals were used. This relationship between signal type and biological effect outcome was statistically significant (p < 0.05), indicating that signal type needs to be clearly articulated in reporting because it can potentially bias outcomes. This result also supports our decision to investigate further only the experimental papers that used real-world signals. For these papers, shown in the final column of Table 1, there was a significantly higher proportion of papers showing effects (79.1%) than those reporting no effects (15.3%). Conclusion Man-made radiofrequency signals from everyday devices and communications technology infrastructure constitute an environmental stressor, well-documented as creating various adverse biological effects. Plausible mechanisms in which harm can occur initially on a cellular level have been proposed, and these mechanisms are known to have subsequent downstream health effects. The application of the ICRP radiation protection philosophy and framework for the protection of members of the public is over 90 years in the making and is absent in setting exposure limits for this form of (wireless) radiation. The extensive evidence base is compelling enough to call for an update in medical education and practice. Out of care for their patients, healthcare workers may develop their understanding using the practical methods introduced in this discussion paper. Furthermore, modern institutional practices need to be reviewed to ensure that any harm from electromagnetic fields is reduced as much as reasonably possible while still providing optimal health care. Open access paper: frontiersin.org

AI evidence extraction

Main findings

Using papers collated in the ORSAA database (ODEB), the authors report that about two-thirds of extracted experimental and epidemiological papers found significant biological effects. They also report that among experimental papers using real-world signals, a higher proportion reported effects (79.1%) than no effects (15.3%), and that signal type (real vs simulated) was statistically associated with study outcome (p < 0.05).

Outcomes measured

• Biological effects (general)
• Health effects (general)
• Protein damage
• Biochemical changes
• Oxidative stress

Limitations

• Review is based on papers collated within the ORSAA database (ODEB); selection and inclusion criteria beyond brief mention are not fully specified in the provided abstract/excerpt.
• Findings are presented largely as counts/proportions of studies reporting effects vs no effects rather than quantitative pooled effect estimates (no meta-analytic effect sizes reported in the provided text).
• Exposure characteristics (frequencies, SAR, durations) are not specified in the provided abstract/excerpt.
• The abstract/excerpt does not provide detailed methods for assessing study quality or risk of bias beyond mentioning 'quality of reporting criteria'.

Suggested hubs

• who-icnirp (0.62)
  Discusses ICRP radiation protection philosophy/framework and implications for exposure limits for wireless radiation.

{
    "study_type": "review",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "RF",
        "source": "everyday wireless technologies; real-world devices; mobile phone base stations",
        "frequency_mhz": null,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": "Health professionals and policy makers (target audience); includes epidemiology studies of people living near mobile phone base stations (as reviewed)",
    "sample_size": null,
    "outcomes": [
        "Biological effects (general)",
        "Health effects (general)",
        "Protein damage",
        "Biochemical changes",
        "Oxidative stress"
    ],
    "main_findings": "Using papers collated in the ORSAA database (ODEB), the authors report that about two-thirds of extracted experimental and epidemiological papers found significant biological effects. They also report that among experimental papers using real-world signals, a higher proportion reported effects (79.1%) than no effects (15.3%), and that signal type (real vs simulated) was statistically associated with study outcome (p < 0.05).",
    "effect_direction": "harm",
    "limitations": [
        "Review is based on papers collated within the ORSAA database (ODEB); selection and inclusion criteria beyond brief mention are not fully specified in the provided abstract/excerpt.",
        "Findings are presented largely as counts/proportions of studies reporting effects vs no effects rather than quantitative pooled effect estimates (no meta-analytic effect sizes reported in the provided text).",
        "Exposure characteristics (frequencies, SAR, durations) are not specified in the provided abstract/excerpt.",
        "The abstract/excerpt does not provide detailed methods for assessing study quality or risk of bias beyond mentioning 'quality of reporting criteria'."
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "wireless technology",
        "radiofrequency",
        "electromagnetic fields",
        "environmental stressor",
        "ORSAA",
        "ODEB",
        "mobile phone base stations",
        "real-world signals",
        "simulated signals",
        "oxidative stress",
        "protein damage",
        "biochemical changes",
        "health care guidelines"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "who-icnirp",
            "weight": 0.61999999999999999555910790149937383830547332763671875,
            "reason": "Discusses ICRP radiation protection philosophy/framework and implications for exposure limits for wireless radiation."
        }
    ]
}

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.