Biological Responses of Mobile Phone Frequency Exposure

Published on January 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 26 | Comments: 0 | Views: 173
of 23
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

Indian Journal of Experimental Biology
Vol. 48, October 2010, pp. 959-981

Review Article

Biological responses of mobile phone frequency exposure
Jitendra Behari
Bioelectromagnetics Laboratory, School of Environmental Sciences
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi 110 067, India
Existence of low level electromagnetic fields in the environment has been known since antiquity and their biological
implications are noted for several decades. As such dosimetry of such field parameters and their emissions from various
sources of mass utilization has been a subject of constant concern. Recent advancement in mobile communications has also
drawn attention to their biological effects. Hand held children and adults alike generally use mobile sources as cordless
phones in various positions with respect to the body. Further, an increasing number of mobile communication base stations
have led to wide ranging concern about possible health effects of radiofrequency emissions. There are two distinct
possibilities by which health could be affected as a result of radio frequency field exposure. These are thermal effects caused
by holding mobile phones close to the body and extended conversations over a long period of time. Secondly, there could be
possibly non thermal effects from both phones and base stations whereby the affects could also be cumulative. Some people
may be adversely affected by the environmental impact of mobile phone base stations situated near their homes, schools or
any other place. In addition to mobile phones, appliances like microwave oven etc are also in increasing use. Apart from the
controversy over the possible health effects due to the non-thermal effect of electromagnetic fields the electromagnetic
interaction of portable radio waves with human head needs to be quantitatively evaluated. Relating to this is the criteria of
safe exposure to the population at large. While a lot of efforts have gone into resolving the issue, a clear picture has yet to
emerge. Recent advances and the problems relating to the safety criteria are discussed.
Keywords : Electromagnetic fields, Health effects, Mobile phone

Introduction
A large number of individuals (>109 world wide)
are exposed to the radiofrequency (RF) signals from
cellular phones and other personal communication
services and the number is increasing exponentially.
Because the mobile phones and other wireless gadgets
are held close to the body and are used frequently,
these devices are potentially the most dangerous
sources of electromagnetic radiation that the average
person possesses. Therefore, mobile phone appears to
be one of the major biological exposure1. This has
given rise to an increasing concern for any unknown
effects that may be potentially detrimental to the
human health. Antennas of modern mobile telephones
are located close to the head and the radiations from
base stations are distributed all over in areas around it.
Mobile telephones emit radiations that are intercepted
in the proximity of the brain and cranial nerves. There
is now an added worry if these radiations are
carcinogenic or tumor promoter or have any other
health implications. Keeping these in view, special
—————
Telephone: 91-011-26704323
Fax: 91-11-26717502, 26715886
E-mail- [email protected]

attention has been drawn to the biological effects of
electromagnetic fields (EMF’s) in general,
particularly on human nervous and reproductive
system. This is largely because the positioning of the
cellular phone may have proximity to one of these
organs at a given instance. Reports confirming
biological hazards and otherwise have been appearing
and the issue appears to be far from resolved. This is
largely because of different protocols, the type of
input signals and the orientation and distance between
electronic devise and the uncertainty involved with
the subject. Cellular phones (CPs) operate at
800-900 MHz (Fig. 1). These may be classified as
analog (advanced mobile phone system, AMPS). On
the other hand, digital cellular phones operate under
various standards such as GSM (global system for
mobile communication) and digital AMPS (DAMPS).
All the systems developed for cellular phones transmit
encoded, digitized information using some form of
phase or frequency modulation2. Two low frequency
waves of GSM, at 8.3 and at 217 Hz, act on the
composite pulsed GSM signal, in which these
frequencies are present. This signal carries no power
when the user is not talking or receiving but when the
user communicates the power of this electromagnetic

960

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

Fig. 1—In terms of the electromagnetic spectrum, cell phones fall between microwave ovens and TV transmitters. Such radiation, though
non-ionizing, can induce biologically significant effects

field reaches a maximum of 250 mW3. The specific
absorption rate of mobile phone varies in the range
(0.1-2 W/kg) depending upon the manufacturing
details, but the field emission is below the safety
level.
The development of wireless (mobile) telephony
has resulted in the transmission and propagation in the
atmosphere of microwaves modulated by very
specific signals. Radio waves transmitted by mobile
phones of the GSM type present a characteristic
pattern that results from the particular time structure
of such a signal (time division multiple access,
TDMA). It is an electromagnetic field (ELF)
modulated pulsed microwave carrier. This is not the
case for analog radio and television. One may say that
digital cellular phones using the GSM system transmit
information in bursts of microwaves. The presence of
ELF components in the signal and the bursting
activity of these waves have raised a new
controversial question: can this signal structure exert a
negative influence on human head tissues and more
specifically on the brain by inducing nonthermal
effects? This stems from the fact that modulated or

pulsed radio frequency radiations are more effective
in producing biological effects. They may produce a
different effect when compared with continuous wave
radiation of the same or different frequency.
Modulated signal carries multiplicity of messages.
This finding is important, because mobile telephonic
radiation is modulated at low frequencies. Biological
effects of low frequency (<100 Hz) electric and
magnetic fields are well established. Therefore,
frequency, intensity, exposure duration and the
number of exposure episodes can affect the exposure
to radio frequency radiations.
Wireless communication systems operate at several
frequencies in the electromagnetic spectrum. In
United States it operates at two frequencies: the old
existing ones at 850 MHz and the newer personal
communication services at 1900 MHz (Fig. 1).
European mobile phones operate at slightly different
frequencies than these. Since mobile phones are used
close to the head, the emitted radiations are absorbed
by the brain4. Microwaves in the frequency range
(800-1000 MHz) can penetrate the cranium and nearly
40% of these can reach the deep brain5-7. Some

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

studies have already suggested that mobile phones
affect brain functioning and behaviour8-13. The energy
corresponding to these frequencies is insufficient to
knock an electron from atoms in a living tissue and
belong to the non ionizing part of the electromagnetic
spectrum. A commonly occurring partial body
exposure of humans to microwave radiation occurs
with the use of cellular phones. Because the phone
antenna is close to the head, much effort has gone into
determining the dosimetry profile of microwaves in
the head in various possible configurations (Fig. 2).
The geometry of holding the mobile phones suggest
that the exposure will be principally to the side of the
head for the hand held use, or to the other parts of the
body closest to the phone during hand free use. Frey14
opined that the headache was linked to microwave
emissions from cellular phones. The body of research
is controversial in several respects since the
experimental results as of now are, mostly understood
in terms of thermal effects. The effects due to nonthermal effects are controversial and in a way not well
understood. The accepted existence of non thermal
phenomena in biological systems is difficult to
explain within the framework of known laws of
physics. This may be beyond limits set by chemical
reactions in biomolecular systems.
In the mobile communication frequency range, all
presently available exposure standards are based on
the assumption that the incident radiations (non
ionizing radiations) cause an increase in temperature
(thermal effects). At the frequency range 40 MHz-6
GHz, the electromagnetic field penetrates deep into
the tissue, causing an increase in the random
molecular motion. This is suggestive that while
defining the exposure time and the volume of the
tissue over which the temperature rise is measured
needs to be defined. The tissue shape is often taken as
cubic, largely for geometric and numerical

Fig. 2—A schematic diagramme of head model for calculations of
induced field due to mobile phone expousre

961

convenience. Some people may also be adversely
affected by the environmental impact of mobile phone
base stations located near their homes, schools or any
other place.
Partial or whole body exposure of human and
animals to RF radiation as due to mobile phone use
may lead to a variety of changes in tissues.
Communication between brain cells is mediated by a
spectrum of chemical substances that both excite and
inhibit transaction and transmission of information
between them. These substances act by binding to
their specific receptors on cell surfaces. Changes in
the different tissues may occur depending on the
exposure conditions, species, and histological
parameters. Penafiel et al.2 have shown that the
radiation from TDMA digital cellular phones can
cause significant changes in ornithine decarboxylase
activity (ODC), which is essential for DNA synthesis.
Kolomytkin et al.15 studied specific receptor binding
of three neurotransmitters: gamma-aminobutyric acid
(GABA), an inhibitory transmitter and acetyl choline
and glutamate, both excitatory to rat brain
synaptosomes. Microwave exposures used 880 or
915 MHz fields at power densities from 10 to
1500µW/cm2. With incident field intensities of
1.5mW/cm2, binding to GABA receptors decreased
30% at 16 pps, but differences were not significant at
3, 5, 7 or 30 pps. Conversely, 16 pps modulation
induced a significant increase in glutamate receptor
binding. For acetyl choline receptors, binding
decreased 25% at 16pps, with similar trends at higher
and lower frequencies. As a function of field
intensity, sensitivities of GABA and glutamate
receptors persisted for field densities as low as
50µW/cm2 at 16 pps with 915 MHz fields.
Results of Zhao et al.16 suggest that specific CNS
cells may activate different genes in response to cell
phone emissions, and there is variable threshold
sensitivity depending on cell type. The variations in
culture conditions that could contribute to the
observed differences were minimized since both cells
were grown in an attached manner, in the same size
culture dish, and in the same volume of medium. Still,
some technical differences are impossible to avoid
and might create disparities in the amount of total
radiation received by the two cell types. For example,
the culture media for astrocytes and neurons is
slightly different. Astrocytes which are highly
proliferative were also plated at a lower density
compared to neurons to allow for expansion of the

962

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

cell
population
between
plating
and
radiofrequency/microwave
(RF/MW)
radiation
exposure. Inherent differences in cell size and shape,
composition of cell membranes, organelle
distribution, junctional coupling between adjacent
cells, stages of the cell cycle, and other parameters
that cannot be controlled will also contribute to
different amounts of energy absorption by the cells.
Definition of the problem
Using a mobile phone generate magnetic pulses
that peak at several tens of micro tesla, while
biological effects are reported around 0.2µT17,18. In
the process of electromagnetic (EM) propagation,
radiation falls on the population. Energy intercepted
by the human body (or any other biological object)
and subsequently absorbed is dependent upon several
parameters viz, part body/full body exposure, l/λ
(length of the body, wavelength of incident radiation),
resonant absorption, deviation and signal type
(pulsating sine, triangular etc), polarization of the
radiation, coupling of the energy to the body and if
the body is grounded or not. In the phones used the
field emissions may extend over a wide range, which
may have different mode of interaction. Also at any
instance of time differentiation between thermal and
nonthermal effect or their combination is difficult to
distinguish16. Obviously these parameters are
uncontrollable and hence the amount of energy
deposited rather uncertain, which makes the
estimation of effects and safe exposure criteria open
for question.
When EM fields pass from one medium to another,
they can be reflected, refracted, transmitted or
absorbed, depending on the complex conductivity of
the exposed body and the frequency of the source.
Absorbed RF energy can be converted to other form
of energy and cause interference with the functioning
of the living system. Most of this energy is converted
into heat (absorption). However, not all EM field
effects can be explained in terms of energy absorption
and conversion by this process. At frequencies well
below 100 kHz, it has been shown that induced
electric fields can stimulate nervous tissue and at the
microscopic level, other interactions have been
observed.
Role of ELF components—Low frequency
component has been a source of signal transmission in
the biological media. While estimating the biological
implications, it is therefore imperative that their role
may be assessed.

An in vitro experimental investigation was
conducted to verify if pure magnetic fields at 8.3 and
217 Hz could induce any effect on the spontaneous
bioelectric activity of the neurons from the brain
ganglia of the snail Helix aspersa19. Changes have
been observed, as well as the reversibility of the
effects induced under exposure to magnetic fields of
low magnetic flux densities in the ranges of
0.37-6.68 and 0.6-3.6 mT for 8.3 and 217 Hz,
respectively. The first results indicated that, in most
cases, the neurons reacted to the lowest values of
applied magnetic flux density, that is, 50 µT, and that
some neurons would probably react to a lower
exposure level20. A second series of results shows the
ability of the neurons to recover their spontaneous
activity, after it has been modified under exposure to
8.3 and 217 Hz sinusoidal applied magnetic flux
density values between 0.6 and 6.68 mT. These
results show the reversibility of the bioelectric
induced alterations on neurons under the specified
experimental conditions19. These investigations are
important in view of obtaining practical conclusions
about sensitivity threshold and reversibility for actual
mobile phone ELF magnetic field exposure.
Dosimetry—At frequencies below 100 KHz, many
biological effects are quantified in terms of the
current density in tissue and this parameter is most
often used as a dosimetric quantity. At higher
frequencies, many (but not all) interactions are due to
the rate of energy deposition per unit mass. This is
why the specific absorption rate (SAR) is used as the
dosimetric measure. It is expressed in watts per
kilogram (W/kg) and is based on absorption only.
This raises questions about using this parameter for
evaluating effects that may be of another nature than
absorption. In this connection, the possibility of
having only the SAR for evaluating all the biological
effects does not seem to be suggestive.
Specific absorption rate (SAR)—The time
derivative (rate of the incremental energy (dW)
absorbed by (dissipated in) an incremental mass (dm)
contained in a volume element (dV) of a given
density (ρ).
SAR =

d
dt

 dw  d  (dw) 



=
 dm  dt  ρdv 

It also refers to a volume-SAR, expressed in units
of mW/cm3, where mass density has been set to unity.
(i) SAR can be related to the E-field at a point by
the relationship:

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

SAR =

σE

2

ρ

where σ = conductivity of the tissue (S/m)
ρ = mass density of the tissue (kg/m3)
E = rms electric field strength (V/m)
(ii)- SAR can also be related to the increase in
temperature at a point by
SAR =

c∆T
∆t

t=0

where ∆T = change in temperature (oC)
∆t = duration of exposure (s)
c = specific heat capacity (J/kg oC)
This assumes that measurements are made where
no heat loss occurs by thermal diffusion, heat
radiation, or thermoregulation (blood flow, sweating,
etc.) With this formal definition, it is now customary
to measure SAR due to mobile phone emissions and
estimate its value inside the brain, using complex
computation formalism.
It is said that Poynting’s theorem expresses
equality between the space variation of EM power
and the time variation of EM energy. However,
temperature is not an EM parameter: it is a
consequence of energy absorption at RFs and MW
frequencies. The SAR is proportional to absorption
losses and there is a temperature elevation when the
SAR is positive. Using EM theory, only thermal
effects can be evaluated and this in principle,
possibility of nonthermal effects cannot be
investigated.
In the model of the mobile phone (Fig. 2), the
calculated peak local SAR over 10 g is lower than the
limit of 2 W/kg given by the ICNIRP. The power
absorption budget by tissues indicates that more than
half of the power is absorbed by the skin (absorption
at 1800 MHz is more superficial than at 900 MHz).
As the brain is nearer to the mobile phone in the case
of the CS head, one finds that the power absorption in
the brain of the CS is slightly more significant than
that for the adult, while it remains at a weak level of
exposure (from one third to one-half maximum) of the
SAR on 10 g in the head.
Whole body exposure and mobile phone radiation
Even though the power deposited in the head is
lower than that prescribed by safety considerations21,
there are reports pouring that biological effects
(at times called hazards) are invariably there. This

963

suggests that effects have nonthermal origin. These
effects are caused by low intensity or ultra low
intensity fields.
Based on modeling it has been estimated that SAR
to head from a 900 MHz cellular telephone vary from
0.16 to 0.69W/kg and for the brain 0.06-0.41 W/kg22.
However a similar examination by Dimbylow and
Mann23 with a vertical or a lateral antenna suggests a
3-4 W/kg averaged over 1 g. Excell24 calculation
suggested higher values upto 4.2 W/kg rising to
8.2 W/kg at 1800 MHz based on magnetic resonance
imaging (MRI) and FDTD techniques. A level of
1 W/kg is expected to raise the temperature
by < 0.5oC.
Correspondingly non thermal effects have also
been reported ranging from changes in permeability
of the blood brain barrier and ocular symptoms25,26.
Calculation of the maximum temperature rise in the
head from RF exposure during mobile phone use
suggest that increase of no more than about 0.1oC
would be expected27. Thus if there are health effects
from RF exposure, they are unlikely to be due to any
temperature rise. It is thus imperative that the non
thermal effect phenomena need to be investigated. As
a further indication to this DNA strand break and
generation of micronuclei has been a clear indication
of genotoxic effects28-31. Nittby et al.32 reported
cognitive alterations in GSM exposed animals as
compared to sham exposed ones.
Research pertinent to the use of mobile phones by
Sarkar et al.33 and Lai and Singh34,35 showed an
increase in DNA breaks at 2.45 and 50 GHz36. Paulraj
and Behari31 have also obtained similar results at
amplitude modulated RF signal (112 MHz – AM
16 Hz). However these findings are not supported by
several other workers37,38. Stronati et al.39 showed that
24 h of exposure to 935 MHz basic signal at 1 or
2 W/kg did not cause DNA strand breaks in human
blood cells. Long term exposure of the mouse40
showed an elevated risk of developing lymphoma in a
transgenic strain. Use of phone in driving stimulator
leads to negative reaction time. Evidence for a direct
memory effect on brain slices from the hippocampus
of rat that showed changes in long term potentiation
when exposed to 915 MHz41. Mild et al.42 looking for
a subjective response, suggested increased headache
or sensation of warmth when using mobile phones.
Braune et al.43 reported blood pressure increase
(5-10 mm Hg) induced by exposure to the right side
of the head. However Barker et al.44 in a double blind

964

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

study reported no effect of GSM and TETRA signals
on blood pressure and related physiological
parameters. These authors also did not reported any
significant
differences
between
the
mean
concentration of adrenaline and nor adrenaline
concentrations. Roschke and Mann45 did not notice
any difference in the awake electroencephalograms
(EEG) of subjects exposed to radiation emitted by
cellular phones.
Biological implications
The biological implications arose with the use of
cell phones have been demonstrated to cause dose
dependent difficulty in concentration, fatigue and
headache46 and increase in reaction time47. The
emitted microwaves from communication devises are
shown to alter cognitive functions32,48, decrease in
cholinergic activity49, gene expression alteration in
cerebellum50, cortex and hippocampus51. It can be
logically concluded that cells with higher metabolic
rate will be more susceptible to EMF. This is because
more hydrogen peroxide is generated by mitochondria
to excite the reaction. The proximity of EMF to
interact with iron provides a clue for more
vulnerability of cell have higher content of
intracellular free ions.
Blood brain barrier (BBB)—In the normal brain,
the passage of compounds over the BBB is highly
restricted and homeostatis within the sensitive
environment of the brain parenchyma can be
maintained. The BBB is formed by the vascular
endothelial cells of the capillaries of the brain and the
glial cells wrapped around them. The tight junctions,
that seal the endothelial cells together, limit
paracellular leakage of molecules. A bi-layered basal
membrane supports the ablumenal side of the
endothelial cells. The glial astrocytes, surrounding the
surface of the basal membrane cells, are important for
the maintenance, functional regulation and repair of
the BBB. The protusions of the astrocytes, called end
feet, cover the basal membrane on the outer
endothelial surface and thus form a second barrier to
hydrophilic molecules and connect the endothelium to
the neurons. About 25% ablumenal membrane of the
capillary surface is covered by pericytes52, which are
a type of macrophages. Seemingly, they are in the
position to significantly contribute to the central
nervous system (CNS) immune mechanisms53. Also,
perivascular structures such as astrocytes and
pericytes as well as a bi-layered basal membrane help
maintaining the BBB54.

In a functioning BBB, the membrane properties
control the bidirectional exchange between the
general circulation and the CNS. Water, most lipid
soluble molecules, oxygen and carbon dioxide can
diffuse from the blood to the nerve cells. The barrier
is highly permeable to ions such as sodium, potassium
and chloride, but large molecules, such as proteins
and most water soluble, chemicals have only a poor
passage. However when the barrier is damaged, in
conditions such as tumors, infarcts or infections, also
the normally excluded molecules can pass through,
possibly bringing toxic molecules out into the brain
tissue. The selective permeability is also disrupted
temporally in cases of epileptic seizures55,56.
BBB has been a favorable subject of investigation
due to electromagnetic field exposure57, for even a
slight variation in its permeability can lead to tissue
damage58. Non thermal effects are identified by the
leakage of albumin through the BBB54,59. Two hours
of exposure to the radiation from a global system for
mobile communications (GSM) phone at 915 MHz, at
non thermal SAR values of 12mW/kg and
120mW/kg, gives rise to focal albumin extravasation
and albumin uptake into neurons after 14 days
exposure60. Significant neuronal damage is present in
28 days60 and 50 days after exposure61, and not after
14 days57. Some other investigators62 have supported
these findings.
Shivers et al.63 observed that the EMF exposure of
the type emitted during a MRI procedure resulted in a
temporarily increased BBB permeability in the brain
of rats. Through transendothelial channels, a vesiclemediated transport of horseradish peroxidase (HRP)
took place, which was replicated by Garber et al64.
The work of Shivers et al.63 later got quantitative
support for the findings65,66. In rats exposed
to the MRI, the BBB permeability to
diethylenetriameninepentaacetic acid (DTPA) is
increased. It is suggested that the increased
permeability may be a stimulation of endocytosis,
made possible through the time-varying magnetic
fields. These findings support the observations67 that
BBB permeability to albumin was increased after
exposure to MRI radiations. The most significant
effect was observed after exposure to the RF part of
the MRI.
Nittby et al.68 reported increased permeability after
mobile phone exposures which has been confirmed by
others69. Four hours of GSM-900 MHz exposure at
brain power densities ranging from 0.3 to 7.5 W/kg

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

resulted in significantly increased albumin
extravasation both at the SAR-value of 7.5 W/kg,
which is a thermal effect, but also at 0.3 and
1.3 W/kg69. Albumin extravasation was also seen in
rats exposed for 2h to GSM-900 MHz at non thermal
SAR values of 0.12, 0.5 and 2 W/kg using
flourescein-labelled proteins70. At SAR of 2 W/kg a
marked BBB permealization was observed, but also at
lower SAR value of 0.5 W/kg,. However, the
extravasation at 0.5 W/kg was seen at a lesser extent
as compared to that seen at 2 W/kg. These authors69,70
also concluded that an already disrupted BBB is more
sensitive to the RF fields than an intact BBB.
In another study62, increased BBB activity was
seen at exposure levels of 2 W/kg and duration of
30-120 min. When the rats were pretreated with
colchicines, the EMF induced rhodamine-ferritin
uptake was however blocked. Colchicine is well
known for its inhibition of microtublar function,
which seems to play an important role for
the BBB opening.
However, in other experiment no albumin
extravasation was seen, neither after 2 nor 4 weeks of
1h of daily exposure (average whole body exposure at
0.25 W/kg)71. Kuribayashi et al.72 concluded no BBB
alterations after 90 min of daily EMF exposure for
1-2 weeks at SAR values of 2 or 6 W/kg. Finnie et
al.73 exposed mice for 1h/day at the SAR level of 4
W/kg, which is above the safe criteria for exposure. In
another study Finnie et al.74 exposed mice for 104
weeks at SAR values of 0.25-4 W/kg, with no
alteration in BBB permeability.
It has been suggested that BBB leakage is the
major reason for nerve cell injury, such as dark
neurons in stroke prone spontaneously hypertensive
rats75. Albumin leaks into the brain and neuronal
degeneration is observed in areas with BBB
disruption in several circumstances: after intracartoid
infusion of hyperosmolar solutions in rats76; in the
stroke prone hypertensive rat77; in acute hypertension
by aortic compression in rats78. The linkage between
album extravasation over the BBB and neural damage
may be a potentiating effect of albumin upon the
glutamate mediated neurotoxicity79. Indeed, both
albumin and glumate induced lesions have the same
histopathological appearance with invasion of
macrophages and absence of neuronal cell bodies and
axons in the lesion areas77. The glumate itself can also
increase the BBB opening80, leading to further
albumin extravasation 14 days after exposure60 and

965

dark neurons not until after 28 days and 50 days60,61.
It is hypothesized that albumin extravasation into the
brain parenchyma, is the first observable effect of the
mobile phone exposure. The albumin leakage
precedes and possibly could be the cause of, the
damage to the neurons seen as the dark neurons later
on. In this connection it is suggested78 that transient
openings of the BBB can result in permanent tissue
damage. It is apparent that cellular damage is more in
the EMF exposed animals.
Developmental effects—Young laying hens, when
continuously exposed to 915 MHz (CW) were
exposed to incident power of 800 mW, during the first
2.5 weeks zero mW during the following week and
200mW for the rest of the experiment, the hatching
was reduced by 8%. No macroscopic malformations
were observed in the chick or dead embryos81. These
authors did not mention the SAR value and the power
density. Jensh et al.82 irradiated pregnant Wistar
albino rats at a power density level of 10 mW/cm2, at
a frequency of 915 MHz (average SAR 3.57 W/kg).
The animals were exposed for 6 h/day from day 1 to
day 21 of gestation. No significant teratogenic signs
were observed regarding the resorption rate,
malformation rate, mean litter size, fetal weight and
number of live and dead fetuses. The experiment was
extended to include embryonic and postnatal
development of offspring83. The authors reported no
significant morphologic changes.
In another study Berman et al.84 exposed
(970 MHz, 22 h/day) pregnant rats (1st to 19th day).
The SAR varied from 0.07, 2.4 and 4.8 W/kg. The
embryo mortality, fetal weight, skeletal ossification,
as well as maternal fertility were evaluated. The
exposure due to (4.8 W/kg) of these caused reduced
(~ 12%) fetal body weight versus the control. All the
other examined parameters were not significantly
different. Klug et al.85 exposed rat embryos
(9.5 days old) for up to 36 hr to 900 MHz. The
modulation frequency was fixed at 215 Hz and the
SAR values were calculated as 0.2, 1 and 5 W/kg. The
end points of the experiments were crown-rump
length, number of somites as well as embryonic
malformations. No significant changes were observed
on the growth and differentiation parameters
of the embryos86.
Reproduction pattern—Effects of radiofrequency
effects on prenatal development in mice have been a
favorable subject of investigation, and results have
been conflicting. A study consisted of in vivo

966

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

experiments at several places around an “antenna
park” where the frequency emission ranged from
88.5 to 950 MHz. At these locations RF power
densities between 168 and 1053 nW/cm2 were
measured. These authors observed a progressive
decrease in the number of new born per dam, which
resulted in irreversible infertility. The prenatal
development of the new born, however evaluated by
the crown-rump length, the body weight, and the
number of lumbar, sacral, and coccygeal vertebrae,
was improved. Wistar albino rats were exposed
through pregnancy (6 h/day) to 915 MHz radiation at
a power density level of 10mW/cm2,87. Teratologic
evaluation included the following parameters: mean
litter size, maternal organ weight and organ
weight/body weight ratios of various organs (brain,
liver, kidneys, and ovaries), number of resorptions
and absorption rate, number of abnormalities and
abnormality rate and mean term fetal weight. Mothers
were rebred, and the second, unexposed litters were
evaluated for teratogenic effects. Animals exposed to
915 MHz did not exhibit any constant significant
alterations in any of the above parameters.
Waist pockets are the sites usually adopted by
people to keep their mobile phones. Dasdag et al.88
experimenting on Wistar albino rats exposed animals
to mobile phone for 2 h/day for 1 month in standby
position, where the SAR was 0.141 W/kg. The
decrease of epididymal sperm counts in the exposed
group was not found to be significant. Histological
changes were observed in the testes. Seminiferious
tubular diameter of rat testes in experimental group
was lower than those of controls. Rectal temperature
of rats in the experimental group was found to be
higher than in the sham exposed group. However the
same group of workers could not replicate the same
results in Sprague-Dawley rats, exposed to
890-915 MHz pulsed wave (PW) daily for 20 min/day
for one month (250mW radiated power,
SAR=0.52 W/kg).
Aitken et al.89 assessed the testis of mice irradiated
with 900 MHz in a wave guide, for 7 days (12 h/day,
SAR=90mw/kg) and reported no abnormalities in
sperm count, morphology and vitality. However, they
reported significant damage to the mitochondrial
genome as well as to the nuclear globin locus.
Ozguner et al.90 have not reported any adverse affect
on rats due to 900 MHz CW microwave exposure
(1±0.4 mW/cm2). The parameters they considered
were weight of testis, testicular biopsy score count

and the percentage of interstitial tissue. However the
exposed group showed a decrease in height of
germinal epithelium.
Forgacs et al.91 repeatedly exposed male mice
to 1800MHz GSM like microwave radiation at
0.018-0.023 W/kg whole body SAR. A two week
exposure (2 h/day) was resulted no morphological
alterations in testis, epididymus and prostate. In
another study Ribeiro et al.92 exposed male rats
to RF emitted from a conventional cell phone
on their testicular function (1835-1850 MHz,
0.04-1.4 mW/cm2). These authors have reported that
total body weight and absolute and relative testicular
and epididymal weights did not change significantly,
and so the epididymal sperm count. Yan et al.93
exposed (800 MHz digital and 800 MHz analog) cell
phones to rats for a period of 3h-30 min rest-3 h) for
18 weeks, for SAR of 0.9 to 1.8 W/kg. The authors
analyzed the morphology of the sperm cells from
epididymis of rats and found no significant difference
in the deformities among the experimental and control
group of animals. Yilmaz et al.94 reported that rats
exposed to 900 MHz radiation (SAR 0.87 W/kg)
20 min/day for a period of one month did not alter the
anti-apoptotic protein in the testes of rats. Also
Dasdag et al.95 reported that 2hr/day (7 days a week)
exposure to rats for a period of 10 months did not
affect the active caspase-3 level in testes of rats.
Oral et al.96 exposed 16 weeks female rats to
900 MHz radiation (30 min/day for 30 days). The
animals were exposed at 1±04 mW/cm2
(SAR 0.016-4 W/kg) and experimental group fed
vitamin C and E. They found endometrium apoptosis
in exposed group. Guney et al.97 repeating the same
set of experiments (with the inclusion of control
group) reported histological changes in endometrium,
diffuse and severe apoptosis in the endometrial
surface, epithelial and glandular cells in the group
exposed to EMF. Also, eosinophilic leucocytes and
lymphocyte infiltration were seen in the endometrial
stroma.
Wistar rats were continuously exposed98 during
pregnancy to a low level of 0.1mw/cm2 (900 MHz,
217 Hz pulse modulated EMF). Whole body average
SAR values for the freely roaming, pregnant animals
were measured in models; they ranged between
17.5 and 75 mW/kg. No differences between exposed
and sham exposed dams or offspring were recorded in
terms of litter size, evolution of body mass and
developmental landmarks of litter mates.

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

Dasdag et al.99 examined the effect of microwaves
emitted by cellular phones on males and females
(915 MHz, SAR 0.155 W/kg). These authors
observed no difference in the rectal temperature
between the experimental and control group. The
birth weight of offspring in the experimental group
was significantly lower than in the sham exposed
group. However in the next generation of rats the
parameters under investigation showed no difference.
Cobb et al.100 exposed pregnant rats to ultra wide
band (UVB) 0.1-1 GHz radiation. In order to
determine if teratological changes occur in rat pups as
a result of (i) daily UWB exposures during gestation
days 3±1.8, or (ii) as a result of both prenatal and
postnatal (10 days) exposures, dams were exposed
either to (a) UWB irradiation with average whole
body specific absorption rate 45 mW/kg (b) sham
irradiation or (c) a positive control. Offsprings were
examined regarding litter size, sex ratios, weights,
coat appearance, and tooth eruption. The pups
postnatally exposed were examined for hippocampal
morphology. Generally, no significant differences
were found between the exposed and sham group. The
medial to lateral length of the hippocampus was
significantly longer in the UWB-exposed pups than in
the sham exposed animals but could not be correlated
with neurological dysfunction. The male offspring
exposed in utero to UWB mated significantly less
frequently than sham exposed males, but when they
did mate there was no difference in fertilization and
offspring numbers from the sham group.
Chicken embryos were exposed to EMF from GSM
mobile phone during the embryonic development. The
embryo mortality rate in the incubation period
increased to 75% versus 16% in control group101.
Ingole and Ghosh102 studied the developmental
effects on the avian kidney of radiation, from a cell
phone handset (900 MHz frequency, power of 2W
and SAR of 0.37 W/kg). The authors reported
morphological alterations on the epithelium of the
renal tubules as well as the renal corpuscles and
chicken embryos.
Kumlin et al.12 examined the effect of 900 MHz for
2h/day (5 day/week) on the development of the
nervous system of Wistar rats. After five weeks of
exposure no degenerative morphological changes
were found.
Batellier et al.103 exposed fertilized chicken eggs to
a mobile phone over the entire period of incubation.
The cell phone in call position was placed at a

967

distance of <25 cm from the eggs, where in the sham
position the cell phone in the off position was kept at
a distance of 1.5 m away from the exposed group. A
significantly higher percentage of embryo mortality
was observed in the experimental group compared to
the sham.
Agarwal et al.104 in an epidemiological study has
concluded that the use of mobile phone adversely
affected the quality of semen by decreasing the sperm
count, motility, viability and morphology. These
parameters were found to be lower in mobile user
group. In another study conducted on 37 men, the
duration of possession and daily transmission time of
cell phones correlated negatively with the proportion
of rapidly progressive mobile spermatozoa,
suggesting that the prolonged use of cell phone have
negative result on sperm motility105. Davoudi et al.106
involving 13 men with normal semen analysis, also
concluded that using GSM phones for 6 h a day for
5 days decreased the rapid progressive motility of
spermatozoa. Similarly, Erogul et al.107 found a
decrease in sperm motility in semen samples of
27 men exposed to 900 MHz cell phone for 5 min.
Kilgallon and Simmons108 found a decrease in sperm
concentration in subjects using mobile phone. Inspite
of consistency in these data, the variability in the life
style and possible impact of emitted radiation from
other sources are the major instance of uncertainty.
Brain function—Exposure of brain to mobile phone
is maximum, hence the possibility of EMF induced
genetic damage in brain cells is of particular
importance. These cells have high level of iron. Nerve
cells have low capacity of DNA repair and hence such
damages could accumulate. The presence of magnetic
particles could enhance free radical activity in cell.
Thus the effect of EMF on DNA is more significant
on nerve cells than on other type of cells in the body.
Since nerve cells do not repair, they may undergo
apoptosis or accelerate the process of neuro
degeneration. Double strand breaks if not properly
repaired, are known to lead to cell death109. However
another type of brain cells (glial cells), can become
cancerous as a result of DNA damage.
Preece et al.47 studied the effect of a 915 MHz
simulated mobile phone signal on cognitive function
in man. They reported evidence of an increase in
responsiveness, strongly in the analogue and less in
the digital simulation, in reaction time. They further
concluded that this could be associated with mild
localized heating, or possibly a non-thermal response.

968

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

Lai et al.110 have reported that different areas of the
brain have different sensitivities to radiofrequency
radiations. Chou et al.111, measuring energy
absorption (SAR’s), have shown that brain regions
less than 1 mm apart can have more than two fold
difference in SAR. The situation is more complicated
if the animal was moving. Ray and Behari112 have
also computed different values of relaxation time in
grey and white matter of rat brain, thus confirming
these findings.
Several researchers have showed non thermal
bioeffects of mobile phones9,113-115. Some of these
have used evoked potentials as one kind of objective
analysis of human brain exposure. Arai et al.114 have
shown that no short term adverse affects of 30 min of
mobile phone exposure on auditory brain stem
responses (ABRs), middle latency responses (MLRs)
or somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs)116. Other
groups have employed visual evoked potentials
(VEPs) to investigate possible bioeffects of mobile
phone exposure117 and showed no significant effects.
The reaction times were not affected by the mobile
phone exposure118. Even though transcranial magnetic
stimulation (TMS) is very useful in investigating
motor cortex physiology in humans, there have been
no reports of effects of mobile phones on human
motor cortex using (TMS).
Exposure due to mobile phone frequencies has
been found to have an impact on brain EEG
activity119. This also affects the synchronization of
cerebral rhythms. These findings suggest that
prolonged exposure to mobile phone emissions affect
cortical activity and the speed of neural
synchronization by inter hemispherical functional
coupling of EEG rhythms.
This may also point to the possibility of
desynchronizing the rhythms between two halves of the
brain by deregulating the normal alpha wave 2
(8-10 Hz) and alpha 3 (10-12 Hz) bands. This may
affect the brain-immune system. Also human brain
EEG beta rhythms energies are reported to be increased
by exposure to 450 MHz modulated at different low
wave frequencies120. Frequency and intensity windows
of Ca2+ have been observed in the presence of weak
fields below 100 Hz, similar to the ELF modulated RF
fields121,122. These findings suggest further interactions,
resulting in specific EEG changes that are affected by
modulated RF fields. Further, different effects of
modulated and CW microwave exposure were found
on morphology and cell surface negative charges. As

static experimental models (i.e., biochemical models)
do not give information about the transient effects and
functional changes induced by EM exposure, especially
in the nervous system, an electro physiological
approach is more appropriate to explain the phenomena
in the CNS.
GSM radiation does seem to affect a variety of
brain functions (including the neuroencocrine system)
and health problems reportedly happen to be
neurological. It may be pointed out that mobile phone
frequency has two components: one CW and other in
the extremely low frequency range (8.3 Hz and
8.34 Hz) respectively. These are close to delta and
alpha range of brain wave frequencies, having
similarity in the oscillatory behavior. Salford et al.61
reported neuronal damage caused by nonthermal
microwave exposure. The cortex as well as the
hippocampus and the basal ganglia in the brains of
exposed rats contain dark neurons.
A study undertaken in Australia on transgenic mice
due to exposure of 918 MHz (repeated at 217 Hz) for
30 min a day for 18 months, showed incidences of
lymphomas length in exposed (53%) than in sham
exposed (22%). In these experiments pulse width was
0.6 ms. the average incident power density and SAR
were 2.6 to 13W/m2 and 0.13 to 1.4W/kg,
respectively. However, in this study since the
transgenic mice were free to move around, a wide
venation in SAR, value has been reported to occur. It
is possible that the incidence of lymphomas might
have occurred due to the high value of SAR. The
study has however several dosimetric and
experimental problems123.
In a double blind study Utteridge et al.124 carried
out study on mice for two years to a exposure of
GSM-mobile phone radiation, where the animals were
exposed for one hour a day. These authors reported no
significant effects when compared to sham-irradiated
animals. Oberto et al.125 carried out investigations on
500 transgenic mice (250 female/250 male) and SAR
levels varied between 0.5–4.0 W/kg. The exposure
was performed 1 hr/day seven days a week, for a
period of 18 months. These authors reported different
results on six animals. The incidence in female being
two to three times higher than males. These authors
have reported that there was no significant difference
in the number of animals with incidence of tumors,
regardless of malignancy. However, the incidence
was reduced by 34% at 4.0 W/kg for females. Further
in female, there was reduction in the time in death at
0.5 W/kg.

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

Brain tumor formation—The animal research that
has followed provides possible importance of
localized exposures and the occurrence consequence
impact on biological objects. Development of brain
cancer takes years or may be decades to develop and
in view of the difficulty in controlling the exposure
parameters over a long period of time is difficult to
arrive at any definite conclusion. Exposing rats to
pulse modulated 837 MHz RF energy similar to that
emitted by some digital cell phones does not cause
any promotion of brain cancer126. Adey126 reported the
same finding for continuous wave RF, such as those
emitted by analog cell phones. Most studies
performed so far have reported conflicting findings,
varying from no major effect to severe health risk.
Evidence of brain tumor promotion from exposure
to TDMA fields has been sought in rats exposed to a
single dose of the short-lived carcinogen ENU (ethyl
nitrosourea) in utero, and thereafter, intermittently
exposed to digital phone fields for 243 months127. The
mean life span of rats used in this study was
26 months. A low dose of ENU (4mg/kg) on day of
promotion, animals was exposed by phone fields over
the life time of the animals. Far field irradiation with
an 836 MHz circularly polarized field began on day
19 and continued after parturition until weaning of
offspring at 23 days of age. Near field exposure of
offspring began at 35 days, and continued for the next
22 months, 4 days weekly. Exposures were for
2 h daily, field on and off for 7.5 min. Modeled farfield time averaged SAR were: pregnant dam (uterus)
0.3 W/kg; fetus (brain) 0.29 W/kg isolated pup (brain)
0.035 W/kg; young rat (brain) 0.13 W/kg). Time
averaged near field thermographic SARs were: larger
males 0.75 W/kg (localized maximum 1.0 W/kg);
smaller females 0.58 W/kg (localized maximum
0.75 W/kg).
Genotoxic effects are thought to be significant
contributors to and/or initiators of carcinogenesis.
Among the potentially genotoxic effects reported are
that 2450 MHz radiations can cause DNA damage in
rat brain cells exposed in vivo31,34,35,28,129, though this
has not been confirmed by other workers37,130,131.
Similarly, reports that RF radiations in 800-900 MHz
range cause DNA damage in vitro132 has not being
confirmed by other workers133. Work reporting that
RF radiations with modulations relevant to mobile
phones at high SARs (10 W/kg) in human
lymphocytes induce micronuclei after 24 hr
exposure134 or to 5 W/kg 1.748 GHz GSMK for

969

15 min135 are in contrast to reports that 24 h exposures
to either 835.62 MHz FDMA or 847.74 MHz CDMA
at 5 W/kg did not induce micronuclei136.
The TDMA field had no enhancing effect on
incidence, type or location of spontaneous nervous
system tumors. On termination of experiments, the
TDMA field appeared to reduce incidence of
malignant glial cell tumors in rats that received the
ENU drug when compared with rats receiving ENU
and no field exposure (4 vs. 13). The TDMA field
also appeared to reduce the incidence of spontaneous
glial tumors occurring in rats not receiving the ENU
drug when they were compared with control animals
(2 vs. 7). Tumors in exposed rats were smaller in
volume. There were no gender differences in tumor
incidence. In rats not surviving to experiment
termination (n=54, 22%), the TDMA field appeared to
prolong latency of appearance of both spontaneous
and ENU induced glial cell tumors, but did not alter
histological criteria of tumor types. Consistent non
significant differences in survival rates were noted
between the four rat groups, with higher death rates in
a progression: sham/field; sham/sham; ENU/field;
ENU/sham.
Free radical generation and oxidative stress
There are regular media reports of an unusually
high incidence of cancer in the vicinity of mobile
phone base stations. Because there are several
hundred thousand base stations operating all over the
world some must coincide by chance with a high local
cancer incidence. Regionally cancer incidence has a
distribution due to variations in the age and gender.
Therefore, a much higher number of cases than
expected from average incidences can occur by
chance. Unfortunately there are no multi regional
systematic investigations of cancer incidence related
to mobile phone base stations available to date. Only
studies in a single community, one in Bavaria137 and
one in Israel138, have been published that reported a
significantly increased incidence in an area of
400 and 350 m around a base station, respectively.
Although incidence in proximity to the base station
strongly exceeded the expected values and was
significant even considering over dispersion in the
case of the Neila study in Bavaria, still no far reaching
conclusions can be drawn due to the ecological nature
of the studies. However, both studies underline the
urgent need to investigate this problem with an
appropriate design. Neubauer et al.139 have
recommended focusing initially on short term effects

970

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

and ‘soft’ outcomes given the problems of exposure
assessment. However, as has been mentioned
previously, the problems of exposure assessment are
less profound as often assumed. A similar approach as
chosen in the study of leukemia around nuclear power
plants140 could be applied also for studying cancer in
relation to base station exposure. Such a case control
design within areas around a sufficiently large sample
of base stations would provide answers to the
questions raised by the studies of Eger et al.137 and
Wolf and Wolf138.
Water chemistry—Mobile phone frequency
exposure on humans is considered important from the
health point of view, because of its large water content.
The vast majority of biological molecules are
present in an aqueous medium. When water is
exposed to radiation, the water absorbs energy, and as
a results forms chemically reactive species that can
interact with dissolved substances (solutes). Water is
ionized to form a solvated electron and H2O+, the
H2O+ cation can react with water to form a hydrated
proton (H3O+) and a hydroxyl radical (HO).
Furthermore, the solvated electron can recombine
with the H2O+ cation to form an excited state of the
water. This excited state than discomposes to its
species as hydroxyl radicals (HO), hydrogen atoms
(H) and oxygen atoms (O). Finally, the solvated
electron can react with solutes such as solvated
protons or oxygen molecules to form respectively
hydrogen atoms and dioxygen radical anions.
The fact that oxygen changes the radiation
chemistry may be one reason why oxygenated tissues
are more sensitive to irradiation than the
deoxygenated tissue at the centre of a tumor. The free
radicals, such as the hydroxyl radical, chemically
modified biomolecules such as DNA leads to damage
such as breaks in the DNA strands. Some substances
can protect against radiation induced damage by
reacting with the reactive species generated by the
irradiation of water.
While in vitro data are available these are often not
confirmative because of the fact that in vivo there is a
mechanism of defense built into the system which is
not available in the former. Microwave frequency
exposure effects on humans are divided into two
parts: thermal and nonthermal. Mobile phone
exposures are likely to produce mainly non thermal
effects. Blood brain barrier141 and ocular effects142
have been reported, but are mainly due to power
exposure in the thermal range.

Water is a wide band attenuator of microwaves and
hence this property is utilized for cooking in
microwave ovens. The amount of energy deposited
inside the body to produce heating is invariably
dependent on its frequency, its orientation and the
electrical properties of the tissue. When the intensity
increases above the level to maintain homeostates, it
starts affecting the biosystems, when the temperature
exceeds 1oC. There is a preferential heating near a
frequency close to the resonance level. The organs of
the body, having reduced blood supply are more
prone to this leading to cataract formation and
reduction in sperm counts (tests), due to acute
microwaves exposure.
While in vivo exposure of Wistar albino rats143
imply an induction of oxidative stress or an
interaction with antioxidant cellular activity, in vitro
experiments144 found no indication of cellular stress in
human glioblastoma cells and fibroblasts. One of the
major molecular effects of magnetic fields is their
influence on nuclear spins of paramagnetic
molecules145. Results of experimental data in
vitro146,145, revealed that intracellular processes
occurring under the influence of a power line
magnetic field related to free radicals and signal
transmission, may determine its biological effects. An
uncontrolled free oxygen radical release, termed
oxidative stress, may cause protein oxidation, enzyme
inactivation and lipid peroxidation within the cellular
membranes, resulting in structural and functional
abnormalities as well as in oxidative damage to the
DNA and RNA may lead to increased mutation
frequency and correspondingly triggering of
carcinogenesis147.
Mitochondrial respiratory chain is the major site
for the generation of superoxide radicals (O2, H2O2).
It is possible that EMR may affect the mitochondrial
membranes to produce large amounts of radicals ROS
under experimental conditions. It has been pointed out
by Iuleis et al.148 that when SAR increased
(0.4-27.5 W/Kg), human spermatozoa motility and
vitality significantly reduced after the EMR exposure
at 1800 MHz, while the mitochondrial generation of
ROS and DNA fragmentation significantly increased.
Superoxide dismutase (SOD) plays a key role in
the system protecting the body from destructive free
radical activity. Its absence or decreased activity may
have noxious metabolic outcomes. Hydrogen
superoxide, a product of SOD activity, is also a strong
inhibitor of this enzyme149. That is why the effective
detoxication of active oxygen forms takes place with
concordant SOD and CAT action.

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

SOD activity decreases due to the effect of
electromagnetic field exposure and CAT activity
increases.
Glutathione
peroxidase
(GSH-PX)
inactivates hydrogen superoxide and organic
hydroxides together with glutathione raductase and
glucose-6–dehydrogenase with reduced glutathione.
The oxidized glutathione generated is then reduced
again by NADPH dependent glutathione reductase, in
the process that maintains the peroxidation
continuity150.
A significant red blood cell GSH-PX activity
decrease shows a tendency of abnormal function of
the
antioxidative
system
caused
by
the
electromagnetic field. Exposure to electromagnetic
fields had lower ceruloplasmin activity, which seems
to indicate that the free copper plasma concentration
increases. However, mechanism of interaction is
unclear. In young individuals, cellular defenses
against the radicals induced protein oxidation by
antioxidant enzymes are likely in prime shape and the
proteases and protein synthesis machinery are fully
functional. Thus there is no change in the level of
protein carbonyl during the first 45 years. However
after attaining the age of 45 years, enzymes including
proteases and antioxidant proteins, and smaller
antioxidant molecules in the individual become
progressively inactivated due to the failure of the
antioxidant systems to overcome the constant influx
of ROS. Consequently, the accumulation of free
radical induced carbonylated proteins accelerates,
indicating the age when cells in the individual become
increasingly more susceptible to ROS-mediated
damage. Cumulated oxidative stress in brain cells can
lead to neurodegenerative diseases and an excess of
free radicals in cells has been suggested to be the
cause of various human diseases (e.g. Parkinson,
Alzheimer, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, etc).
An enzymatic cascade is initiated within cells when
glutamate receptors are activated, leading to the
synthesis of nitric oxide (NO). Receptor activation
initiates an influx of calcium, triggering the enzyme
nitric oxide synthase to produce nitric oxide from the
amino acid arginine. It has been identified as a widely
distributed neuoregulator and neurotransmitter in
many body tissues151.
Oxidative damage has been reported in brain
tissues152,61. Spermatozoa are known to be susceptible
to damage induced by oxidative stress: however
whether RF radiation is capable of inducing oxidative
stress is still debatable. Conflicting results have been

971

reported regarding the effect of electromagnetic
waves exposure on the secretion of an antioxidant
melatonin153-155. Studies analyzing the effect of RF
radiation on apoptosis have failed to find any
significant effect. An exposure of 1800 MHz signal
for 12 h failed to induce apoptosis is human mono
Mac 6 cells156. No evidence of apoptosis have been
detected after exposing human leukemia cells in vitro
to RF waves 25 times higher than the reference levels
set by the International Commissions Non-Ionising
Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), However, this view
has been recently revised by results from this
laboratory where RF radiations have been found to
increase apoptosis157,158 have examined classical
contact energy reactions, such as chromate allergy.
These authors described the clinical characteristics
and results of patch tests in eight patients with contact
dermatitis possibly caused by handling a cellular
phone. A possible mechanistic pathway is shown in
Fig. 3.
Electromagnetic fields and DNA
DNA damage caused by any endogenous and
exogenous factors is under a constant repair process.
Any imbalance or mistakes in damage and repair
result in accumulation of former, causing apoptosis,
ageing or promotion of cancer. One of the markers of
this is the strand break mostly caused by endogenous
process causing free radical generation by
mitochondrial respiration and metabolism. This may
also be caused by exogenous agents e.g. UV radiation,
ionizing, non ionizing radiation and chemicals109.
Phillips et al.132 were the first to study the effects of
two forms of cellular phones signal known as TDMA
and IDEN on DNA damage in molt-4 human
lymphoblastoid cells using the comet assay, using low
intensity of field (2.4-2.6 µW/kg). Diem et al.159
exposed human fibroblast and rat granulosa cells to
cell phones signal (1800 MHz, SAR 1.2 or 2 W/kg;
different modulation, for 4, 6 and 24 h; intermittent
5 min on/10 min off or continuous). Intermittent
exposure caused a significant stronger effect than
continuous exposure. Gandhi and Anita160 reported
increase in DNA strand breaks and micro-nucleation
in lymphocytes obtained from cell phones user.
Markova et al.161 reported that GSM signals affected
chromatin conformation and Y-H2AX foci that colocalized in distinct foci with DNA double strand
breaks in mouse embryonic cells after acute exposure
to a 1.7 GHz field. Sun et al.162 reported that DNA
damage caused by the field at 4 W/kg was

972

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

Fig. 3—A suggestive mechanistic pathway of EMF field expression on biological systems.

irreversible. Zhang et al.163 also reported that an
1800 MHz field at 3.0 W/kg induced DNA damage.
Erogul et al.107 reported changes in morphology and
decreased motility in isolated sperm cells, exposed to
cell phone radiations93 and cell phone users105. Some
of these in vivo effects caused by hormonal
changes164,90. Stronati et al.39 showed that 24 h of
exposure to 935MHz GSM base signal at 1 or 2 W/kg
did not cause DNA strand break. Similarly,
Verschaeve et al.165 did not observe significant affect
of DNA strand break to long term (2 h/day,
5 days/week for 2 years) to 900 MHz GSM signal.
However, there have also been reports regarding
the effects on DNA damage in cells (C3H10T)
exposed to radiofrequency radiations133. Hook et al.166
showed that a 24 h exposure of Molt-4 cells to
CDMA, FDMA, IDEN or TDMA-modulated RFR did
not significantly alter the level of DNA damage.
Lagroye et al.167,168 also reported no significant
change in DNA strand breaks, DNA-protein cross
links and DNA-DNA cross links in cells exposed to
2450 MHz RFR. In line with these Vijayalaxmi
et al.169 reported no increase in DNA strand breaks in

human lymphocytes exposed in vitro to 2450 MHz
RFR at 2.135 W/kg for 2 h.
EMR and melatonin
The melatonin/serotonin cycle is a primary
physiological driver of the daily metabolic,
awake/sleep cycle. Melatonin is a vital part of many
of the body’s biochemical systems, including sleep
and learning and is free radical scavenging in all cells
and hence is a potent antioxidant with anti-aging and
anti-cancer properties. It helps to protect embryonic
fetuses. Through regulation of the cyclic AMP
(cAMP)
pathway,
the
serotonin/melatonin
transformation is controlled. A key element of the
cAMP pathway is calcium ions. Substances that can
alter cellular calcium ions at many levels involving
many cell receptors and cellular processes. Calcium
ion efflux from the pinealocytes has the effect of
reducing melatonin through reducing the cAMP.
Radon et al.170 showed that pulsed RF
electromagnetic fields (900 MHz carrier frequency
pulsed with 217 Hz) similar to those emitted from
mobile radio telephones had no short term or medium
term effects on salivary melatonin, cortisol, neopterin

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

and sIgA concentrations. These authors also
confirmed the observation that nocturnal melatonin
levels are not affected by exposure to RF
electromagnetic fields171. The findings are in
confirmation with the data showing that day time
melatonin levels are unaffected by exposure to RF
electromagnetic fields of 900 and 1800 MHz153. Also
no effect was noted on melatonin synthesis and
excretion in humans exposed to 50 Hz magnetic fields
of 10 µT172. Vollrath et al.173 have also reported that
day as well as night melatonin levels were unaffected.
EMR alters calcium ion homeostasis—Rosen
et al.174 mentioned suppression of nighttime rise in
pineal melatonin production in laboratory animals.
The show that a 50 mT, 60 Hz field with a 0.066mT
DC field, over 10 experiments, averages a 46%,
reduction in melatonin production from pinealocytes.
Yaga et al.175 showed that rat pineal response to ELF
pulsed magnetic fields varied significantly during the
light-dark cycle. They found that the rate-limiting
enzyme in melatonin synthesis, N-acetyltransferase
(NAT) activity showed that magnetic field exposure
significantly suppressed NAT during the mid-to late
dark phase.
Radiofrequency frequency exposure and health:
nonthermal, micro thermal and isothermal effects
The possibility of either nonthermal or micro
thermal effects on human body is one of continuing
concern. It needs to define the conditions of an
experimental study when investigating the possibility
of nonthermal effects, to be sure to take into account
all the power components. It is thus important
to be able to distinguish between thermal and
nonthermal effects.
The exposure to nonthermal microwave
EMF-generated by mobile phones affects the
expression of many proteins. This effect on
transcription and protein stability can be mediated by
the mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK)
cascades, which serve as central signaling pathways
and govern essentially all stimulated cellular
processes. Indeed, long term exposure of cells to
mobile phone irradiation results in the activation of
p38 using a 915 MHz field, switching modulation
frequencies from 55 to 65 Hz at coherence times of
10s or longer produced full enhancement. These
microwave coherence effects are similar to those
observed in ELF fields176.
There is also controversy about the possibility of
nonthermal or microthermal effects. Accepting the

973

idea that RFs may cause nonthermal effects or
microwave exposure implies that such an exposure
could be of a low or very low level and this is not well
accepted. On the other hand, it is also a misnomer to
believe that all biological related effects are
necessarily pathogenic. This underlies the whole
question about how to establish guidelines for limiting
electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure and more
importantly to understand the mode of EMF
biointeraction (e.g. with neurons and with bone cells)
(Fig. 4). The question of thus accepting or rejecting
nonthermal effects is a major unresolved question.
Investigating the possibility of isothermal effects
does not preclude the attention to be paid to
“nonthermal” effects, which should probably better be
termed microthermal effects177. The question is: can
extremely weak EM exposure have large biological
effects and how is this possible? To answer this, one
then has to consider the possibility of trigger action by
microwaves.
Extensive research has undergone in investigating a
variety of possible effects and includes epidemiologic,
in vivo, and in vitro research. The overall
epidemiologic evidence suggests that mobile phone
use of less than 10 years does not pose any increased
risk, of brain tumor or acoustic neuroma. For longer
duration data are sparse. The safety standard assumes
that EMF exposure cause biological damage only by
heating, but several biological effect (including cell
damage), have been reported which are caused by
exposure below the safety limit. Cellular stress
response where cells synthesize stress proteins in
response to potentially harmful stimuli in the
environment, including EMF. The stress response to
both radiofrequency and microwaves shows the
inadequacy of the thermal SAR standards
(macromolecular effects).
It is possible that there are currently unrecognized
health effects from the use of mobile phones. Children
are more vulnerable, because of their developing
nervous system; greater absorption of energy and a
longer life time of exposure. As such unnecessary use
of mobile phones by children should be avoided.
Other users should use the device with the
instructions as supplied by the manufacturers and as
sparingly as possible. The hand free devices that
move the handset away from the user’s body tend to
reduce exposure, though these may cause exposure to
sperm and there is fear of infertility. The present day
controversy regarding the mobile phone is probably
because of non-thermal effects.

974

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

Fig. 4—Dual behavior of radiofrequency radiation on neuronal and osteoblastic cells

It may be concluded that somewhat correlation
exits between sperm motility and sperm chromatin
structure, which are brought about by distorted
epididymal protamination178. ROS causes DNA
fragmentation
in
somatic
cells
reducing
protamination179.
Discussion
Exposure to human population is from two sources:
hand set and base station. There are important
differences between the two. The typically very low
exposure to microwaves from base stations, rarely
exceeding 1 mW/cm2, is unlikely to produce any
adverse effect. Assuming energy equivalence of
effects a 24 h exposure at 1 mW/cm2 from a base
station would be roughly equivalent to 30 min
exposure to a mobile phone operating at a power of
20 mW (average output power in areas of good
coverage). Because we do not know whether time
dose reciprocity holds for RF-EMF and whether there
is a threshold for biological effects, and there is an

argument that such low exposures in vicinity of
homes near base stations could affect health.
The most important difference between mobile
phone use and exposure from base station signals is
one of duration of exposure. While mobile phones are
used intermittently with normal exposure duration
around 1-2 h per day, exposure to base stations is
continuous (up to 24 h a day). It may be mentioned
that the exposure of mobile phone users is in the near
field and localized at the head (or waist) region, while
base stations exposure to the whole body is essentially
in the far field. Strictly speaking exposure from
mobile phones and their base stations have almost
nothing in common except for the almost equal carrier
frequency that is likely of lesser importance for
determining biological effects. However both the
exposure is non thermal in nature.
Concerning reconstruction of exposure to base
station signals there is no greater difficulty than for
retrospective assessment of exposure to mobile
phones. It is not always necessary to determine

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

exposure
precisely.
For
epidemiological
investigations it often suffices to have a certain
gradient of exposures. As long as any two persons can
be
differentiated
along
such
a
gradient
epidemiological investigations can be relevant.
There are several field studies of well being and
exposure to base stations signals available to date.
Two were in occupational groups working in a
building below180 or below as well as opposite a
building with a roof mounted base station antenna181.
The other five were in neighbors of base stations:
Santini et al.182,183, Navarro et al.184, Hutter et al.185,
Blettner et al.186 and Thomas et al.187. Studies had
different methodologies with the least potential for
bias in the studies of Hutter et al.185 and Blettner
et al186. All other studies could be biased due to self
selection of study participants. One study explored
personal dosimetry during 24 h but results were
inconclusive due to insufficient power and omission
of nighttime measurements187. The study of Blettner
et al.186 had an interesting design with a first phase in
a large population based representative sample and a
second phase with individual measurements in the
bedrooms of participants that were a subgroup of the
larger sample. Unfortunately this second sample did
not contain a sufficiently large fraction of individuals
with relevant exposure (99% had bedside
measurements below 0.3mW/m2).
Despite some methodological limitations of the
different studies there are still strong indications that
long term exposure near base stations affects well
being. Symptoms most often associated with
exposure were headaches, concentration difficulties,
restlessness and tremor. Sleeping problems were also
related to distance from base station or power density,
but it is possible that these results are confounded by
concerns about adverse effects of the base station, or
more generally, by specific personality traits. While
the data are insufficient to delineate a threshold for
adverse effects the lack of observed effects at
fractions of an mW/m2 suggests that exposure around
0.5-1 mW/m2 must be exceeded in order to observe an
effect.

Reference
1

2

3
4
5

6
7

8
9

10

11

12

13
14

Conclusion
While a lot of data have accumulated on the
biological effects of extremely low and mobile phone
frequency exposure, many are contradictory and need
to be explored further, particularly in relation to
human being. There is a need for more independent
replications of above findings.

975

15

Salford L G, Persson B, Maimgren L & Brun A, Téléphonie
mobile et barrière sang-cerveau, In: Téléphonie
Mobile-Effets Potentiels sur la Santé des Ondes
Électromagnétiques de Haute Fréquence edited by Pietteur
Marco, Embourg, Belgium, Collection Resurgence,
(2001) 141.
Penafiel L M, Litovitz T, Krause D, Desta A & Mullins J M,
Role of modulation on the effect of microwaves on ornithine
decarboxylase activity in L929 cells, Bioelectromagnetics,
18 (1997) 132.
Croft R J, Chandler J S, Burgess A P, Rarry R J, Williams J
D & Clark A R, Acute mobile phone operation affects neural
function in humans, Clinical Neurophysiol, 113 (2002) 1623.
Ismail N H & Ibrahim A T, Temperature distribution in the
human brain during ultrasound hyperthermia, J Electromag
Waves and Applications, 16 (2002) 803.
Barnett J, Timotijevic L, Shepherd R & Senior V, Public
responses to precautionary information from the Department
of Health (UK) about possible health risks from mobile
phones, Health Policy, 82 (2007) 240.
Klemn M & Troester G, EM energy absorption in the human
body tissues due to UWB antennas, Progress in
Electromagnetics Res PIER, 62 (2006) 261.
Kang X K, Li L W, Leong M S & Kooi P S, A method of
moments study of SAR inside spheroidal human head and
current distribution among handset wireless antennas, J
Electromag Waves and Applications, 15 (2001) 61.
Ferreri F G, Curico P, Pasqualetti L, de Gennaro L, Fini R &
Rossini P M, Mobile phone emissions and human brain
excitability, Ann Neurol, 60 (2006) 188.
Hamblin D L, Wood A W, Croft R J & Stough C, Examining
the effects of electromagnetic fields emitted by GSM mobile
phones on human event related potentials and performance
during an auditory task, Clin Neurophysiol, 115 (2004) 171.
Khiat N, Charlinet Y & Agoulmine N, The emerging threat
of peer-to-peer worms. In: Proceedings of IEEE/Ist workshop
on monitoring, attack detection and mitigation, Tubingen,
Germany, Sept (2006) 18.
Krause C M, Pesonen M, Haarala-Bjornberg C, Hamalainen,
Effects of pulsed and continuous wave 902 MHz mobile
phone exposure on brain oscillatory activity during cognitive
processing, Bioelectromag, 28 (2007) 296.
Kumlin T, Livonen H, Miettenen P, Junoven A, van Groen
T, Puranen L, Pitkaaho R, Juutilainen R & Tanila H, Mobile
phone radiation and the developing brain: behavioural
and morphological effects in juvenile rats, Radiat Res,
168 (2007) 471.
Sievert U, Eggert S & Pau H W, Can mobile phone
emissions affect auditory functions of cochlea or brain stem?,
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 132 (2005) 451.
Frey A H, Headaches from cellular telephones: Are they real
and what are the implications?, Environ Health Prospect,
106 (1998) 101.
Kolomytkin O, Yurinska M, Zharikov S, Kuznetsov V &
Zharikova A, Response of brain receptor systems to
microwave energy exposure in, On the nature of
electromagnetic field interactions with biological systems
edited by A.H. Frey, Editors, (R.G. Landes Company,
Austin) 1994, 195.

976

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

16 Zhao Tian-Yong, Zou Shi-Ping & Knapp P E, Exposure to
cell phone radiation up-regulates apoptosis genes in primary
cultures of neurons and astrocytes, Neuroscience Lett,
412 (2007) 34.
17 Jokela K, Puranen L & Shivonen, A P, Assessment of the
magnetic field exposure due to the battery current of digital
mobile phones, Health Phys, 86 (2004) 56.
18 Sage C, Johansson O & Sage S A, Personal digital assistant
(PDA) cell phone units produce units elevated extremely
low
frequency
electromagnetic
field
emissions,
Bioelectromagnetics, 28 (2007) 386.
19 Azanza M J, Perez Bruzon R N, Lederer D, Calvo A C,
Vander Vorst A & Del Moral A, Reversibility of the effects
induced on the spontaneous bioelectric activity of neurons
under exposure to 8.3 and 217.0 Hz low intensity magnetic
fields, 2nd Int Workshop Biol Effects of EMFs, Rhodes
(2002). 651.
20 Lederer D, Azanza M J, Calvo A C, Perez Bruzon R N, Del
Moral A & Vander Vorst A, Effects associated with the ELF
of GSM signals on the spontaneous bioelectricity activity of
neurons, Proc 5th Int Cong Eur BioElectromagnetics Associ,
Helsinki, (2001) 194.
21 Gandhi O P, Lazzi G & Furse C M, Electromagnetic
absorption in the human head and neck for mobile telephones
at 850 and 1900 MHz, IEEE Trans Microw Theory Tech, 44
(1996) 1884.
22 Gandhi O P, Some numerical methods for dosimetry:
Extremely low frequencies to microwave frequencies, Radio
Sci, 30 (1995)161.
23 Dimbylow P J & Mann S M, SAR calculations in an
anatomically realistic model of the head for the mobile
communication transreceivers at 900 MHz and 1.8 GHz,
Phys Med Biol, 39 (1994) 1537.
24 Excell P, Computer modeling of high frequency
electromagnetic field penetration into the human head,
Measurem Contl, 31 (1998) 170.
25 Curcio G M, Ferrara M, Moroni F, Inzeo G D, Bertini M &
Gennaro L De, Is the brain influenced by a phone call? An
EEG study of resting wakefulness, Neuro Science Research,
53 (2005) 265.
26 Balik H H, Balik D T, Balikci K & Ozcan I C, Some ocular
symptoms and sensations experienced by long term users of
mobile phones, Pathologie Biologie, 53 (2005) 88.
27 Tahvanainen K, Niño J, Halonen P, Kuusela T, Alanko T,
Laitinen T, Länsimies E, Hietanen M & Lindholm H, Effects
of cellular phone use on ear canal temperature measured by
NTC thermistors, Clin Physiol Funct Imaging, 27 (2007)
162.
28 Zmyslony M, Palus J, Jajte J, Dziubaltowska E & Rajkowska
E, DNA damage in rat lymphocytes treated in vitro with iron
cations and exposed to 7 mT magnetic fields
(static or 50 Hz ), Mutat Res, 453 (2000) 89.
29 Lai H & Singh N P, Magnetic field induced DNA strand
breaks in brain cells of the rat, Environm Health
Perspectives, 112 (2004) 687.
30 Wolf F L, Torsello A, Tedesco B, Fasanella S, Boninsegna A
& D’Ascenzo M, 50 Hz extremely low frequency
electromagnetic fields enhance cell proliferation and DNA
damage: possible involvement of a redox mechanism,
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 1743 (2005) 120.

31 Paulraj R & Behari J, Radio frequency radiation effects on
protein kinase C activity in rats’ brain, Mutat Res,
545 (2004)127.
32 Nittby H, Grafstrom G, Tian D, Brun A, Persson B R R,
Salford L G & Eberhardt J, Cognitive impairment in rats
after long term exposure to GSM-900 mobile phones,
Bioelectromagnetics, 29 (2008a) 219.
33 Sarkar S, Ali S & Behari J, Effect of low power microwave
on the mouse genome: A direct DNA analysis, Mutat Res,
320 (1984) 141.
34 Lai H & Singh N P, Acute low intensity microwave exposure
increases DNA single-strand breaks in rats brain cells,
Bioelectromagnetics, 16 (1995) 207.
35 Lai H & Singh N P, Single and double strands DNA breaks
in rat brain cells after acute exposure to radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation, Int J Radiat Biol, 69 (1996) 513.
36 Kesari K K, Behari J & Kumar S, Mutagenic response of
2.45GHz radiation exposure on rat brain, Int J Radiat Biol,
86 (2010) 334-343.
37 Malyapa R S, Ahern E W, Straube W L, Moros E G, Pickard
W F & Roti J L I, Measurement of DNA damage by alkaline
comet assay in rat brain cells after in vivo exposure to
2450 MHz electromagnetic radiation, In proceedings of
second world congress for electricity and magnetism in
Biology and Medicine, Bologna, Italy, (1997).
38 Chou C K, Guy A W, Kunz L L, Johnson R B, Crowley J J,
& Krupp J H, Long- term, low level microwave irradiation of
rats, Bioelectromagnetics, 13 (1992) 469.
39 Stronati L A, Testa J, Moquet A, Edwards E, Cordelli P,
Villani C, Marino A M, Fresegna M, Appolloni & Lloyd D,
935 MHz cellular phone radiation. An in vitro study of
genotoxicity in human lymphocytes, Int J Radiat Biol,
82 (2006) 39.
40 Repacholi M H, Bosten A, Gebski V, Noonan D, Finnie J &
Harris A W, Lymphomas in Em-Pim 1 transgenic mice
exposed to pulsed 900 MHz electromagnetic fields, Radiat
Res, 147 (1997) 631.
41 Scott I R, Wood S J & Tattersall J E H, Effects of
radiofrequency radiation on long term potentiation in rat
hippocampus slices, In proceedings of Bioelectromagnetics
Society 20th Annual Meeting, St Petersburg, Florida USA,
(1998).
42 Mild K H, Oftedal G, Sandstrom M, Wilen J, Tynes T,
Haugsdai B & Hauger E, Comparison of systems
experienced by users of analogue and digital mobile phones:
a Swedish-Norwegian epidemiological study, Report for the
National Institute for working life, Sweden(1998).
43 Braune S, Wrocklage C, Raczek J, Gailus T & Lucking C H,
Resisting blood pressure during exposure to a radio frequeny
electromagnetc field, Lancet 351 (1998) 1857.
44 Barker A T, Jackson P R, Parry H, Coulton L A, Cook G C
& Wood S M, The effect of GSM and TETRA mobile
handset signals on blood pressure, Catechol Levels and Heart
Rate Variability, Bioelectromag, 28 (2007) 433.
45 Röschke J & Mann K, No short term effects of digital mobile
radio telephone on the awake human electroencephalogram,
Bioelectromagnetics, 18 (1997) 172.
46 Oftedal G, Straume A, Johnsson A & Stovner L J, Mobile
phone headache: a double blind, sham-controlled
provocation study, Cephalalgia, 27 (2007) 447.

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE
47 Preece A W, IWI G, Davies-Smith A, Wesnes K, Butler S,
Lim E & Varey A, Effect of 915 MHz simulated mobile
phone signal on cognitive function in man, Int J Radiat Biol,
75 (1999) 447.
48 Keetly V, Wood A W, Spong J, & Stough C,
Neurophysiological sequelae of digital mobile phone
exposure in humans, Neurophysiologica 44 (2006) 1843.
49 Lai H, Carino M A, Horita A & Guy A W, Opiod receptor
subtypes that mediate a microwave induced decrease in
central cholinergic activity in the rat, Bioelectromagnetics,
13 (1992) 237.
50 Belyaev L Y, Baureus Koch C, Terenius O, Roxstrom,
Lindquist K, Malmggren L O G, Sommer W H, Salford L G
& Persson B R R, Exposure of rat brain to 915 MHz GSM
microwaves induces changes in gene expression but not
double stranded DNA breaks or effects on chromatin
conformation, Bioelectromagnetics, 27 (2006) 295.
51 Nittby H, Widegren B, Krogh M, Grafstrom, Rehn G, Berlin
H, Eberhardt J L, Malmgren L, Persson B R R & Salford L
G, Exposure to human from global system for mobile
communications at 1800 MHz significantly changes gene
expression in rat hippocampus and cortex, Environmentalist,
(2008)
52 Frank R N, Dutta S & Mancini M A, Pericycle coverage is
greater in the retinal than in the cerebral capillaries of the rat,
Invest Opthalmol Vis Sci, 28 (1987) 086.
53 Thomas W E, Brain macrophages: on the role of pericytes
and perivascular cells, Brain Res Rev, 31 (1999) 42.
54 Salford L G, Nittby H, Brun A, Graftstrom G, Eberhardt J L,
Malmgren L & Persson B R R, Non thermal effects of EMF
upon the mammalian brain: the Lund experience.
Environmentalist, 27 (2007) 493.
55 Mihaley A & Bozoky B, Immunochemical localization of
extravasated serum albumin in the hippocampus of human
subjects with partial and generalized epilepsy and
epieptiform convulsions, Acta Neurolpathol, 65 (1984) 471.
56 Mihaley A & Bozoky B, Immunochemical localization of
serum proteins in the hippocampus of human subjects with
partial and generalized epilepsy and epilepsy and
epileptiform convulsions, Acta Neuropathol, 27 (1984) 251.
57 Nittby H, Grafstrom G, Eberhardt J L, Malmgren L, Brun A,
Persson B R R & Salford L G, Radiofrequency and
extremely low frequency electromagnetic field effects on the
blood brain barrier, Electromagn Biol Med, 27 (2008) 103.
58 Sokarb T E O & Johansson B B, A transient hypertensive
opening of the BBB can lead to brain damage, Acta
Neuropathol, 75 (1988) 557.
59 Salford L G, Nittby H, Brun A, Grafstrom G, Malmgren L,
Sommarian M, Eberhardt J, Widegren B & Persson B R R,
The mammalian brain in the electromagnetic field designed
by man-with special reference to blood brain barrier
function, neuronal damage and possible physical
mechanisms, Prog Theoret Phys suppl, 174 (2008) 283.
60 Eberhardt J L, Persson, B R, Brun A E, Salford L G &
Malmgren L O, Blood-brain barrier permeability and nerve
cell damage in rat brain 14 and 28 days after exposure to
microwaves from GSM mobile phones, Electromagn Biol
Med, 27 (2008) 215.
61 Salford L G, Brun A E, Eberhardt J L, Malmgren L &
Persson B R, Nerve cell damage in mammalian brain after

62

63
64
65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

977

exposure to microwave from GSM mobile phones, Environ
Health Perspect, 111 (2003) 881
Neubauer C, Phelan A M, Kues H & Lange D G, Microwave
irradiation of rats at 2.45 GHz activates pinocytolic-like
uptake of tracer by capillary endothelial cells of cerebral
cortex, Bioelectromagnetics, 11 (1990) 261.
Shivers R P, Kavaliers M, Teskey G C, Prato F S & Pelletier
R M, Magnetic resonance imaging alters BBB permeability
in the rat, Neurosci Lett, 76 (1987) 25.
Garber H J, Oldendorf W H, Braun L D & Lufkin R B, MRI
gradient fields increase brain mannitol space, Magn Reson
Imag, 7 (1989) 605.
Prato F S, Frappier R H, Shivers R R, Kraliers M, Zabel P,
Drost D & Lee T Y, Magnetic resonance imaging
increases the BBB permeability to 153-gadolinium
diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid in rats, Brain Res, 523
(1990) 301.
Prato F S, Wills J M, Roger J, Frappier H, Drost D J, Lee T
Y, Shivers R R & Zabel P, BBB permeability in rats is
altered by exposure to magnetic fields associated with
magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T, Micros Res Technol,
27 (1994) 528.
Salford L, Brun A, Eberhardt J, Malmgren L & Persson B,
Electromagnetic fields-induced permeability of the blood–
brain barrier shown by immuno-histochemical methods, In,
Interaction mechanism of low-level electromagnetic fields in
living systems edited by Ramel C, Norden B, (Oxford
University Press, Oxford, UK) 1992, 251.
Nittby H, Brun A. Eberhardt J, Malmgren L, Persson B R R
& Salford L G, Increased blood brain barrier permeability in
mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from
a GSM-900 mobile phone, Pathophysiology, 599 (2009)
Fritze K, Sommer C, Schmitz B, Mies G, Hossman K,
Kiessling M & Wiessner C, Effect of global system for
mobile communication (GSM) microwave exposure on blood
brain barrier permeability in rat, Acta Neuropathologica,
94 (1997) 465.
Tore F, Dulou P E, Haro E, Veyret B & Aubineau P, Effect
of 2h GSM-900 microwave exposures at 2.0, 0.5 and
0.12 W/kg on plasma protein extravasation in rat brain and
dura matter, in: Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of
the BEMS, (2002) 61.
Tsurita G, Nagawa H, Ueni S, Watanabe S & Taki M,
Biological and morphological effects on the brain after of
rats on the brain after exposure rats to a 1439 MHz TDMA
field, Bioelectromagnetics, 21 (2000) 364.
Kuribayashi M, Wang J, Fujiwara O, Doi Y, Nabae K,
Tamano S, Ogiso T, Asamoto M & Shirai T, Lack of effects
of 1439 MHz electromagnetic near field exposure on the
BBB in immature and young rats, Bioelectromagnetics,
26 (2005) 578.
Finnie J W, Blumbergs P C, Manavis J, Uteridge T D,
Gebski V, Swift J G, Vernon-Roberts B & Kucher T R,
Effect of global system for mobile communication (GSM)
like radiofrequency fields on vascular permeability in mouse
brain, Pathology, 33 (2001) 338.
Finnie J W, Blumbergs, Manavis J, Utteridge T D, Gebski V,
Davies R A, Vermon-Roberts & Kuchel T R, Effect of long
tem mobile communication microwave exposure on vascular
permeability in mouse brain, Pathology, 38 (2002) 63.

978

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

75 Fredriksson K, Kalimo H, Norberg C, Johansson B B &
Olsson Y, Nerve cell injury in the brain of stroke prone
spontaneously hypertensive rats, Acta Neuropathol (Berl),
76 (1988) 227.
76 Salahuddin T S, Kalimo H, Johansson B B & Olsson Y,
Observations on exsudation of fibronectin, fibrinogen and
albumin in the brain after carotid infusion of hyperosmolar
solutions. An immunohistochemical study in the rat
indicating longlasting changes in the brain microenvironment
and multifocal nerve cell injuries, Acta Neuropathol (Berl),
76 (1988) 1.
77 Hassel B, Iversen E G & Fonnum F, Neurotoxicity of
albumin in vivo, Neurosci Lett, 167 (1994) 29.
78 Sokrab T E O, Johansson B B, Kalimo H, & Olsson Y, A
transient hypertensive opening of the blood-brain barrier can
lead to brain damage, Acta Neuropathologica, 75 (1988) 557.
79 Eimerl S & Scramm M, Acute glutamate toxicity in cultured
cerebellar granule cells: agonist potency, effects of pH, Zn2+
and the potentiation by serum albumin, Brain Res, 560
(1991) 282.
80 Dietrich W D, Alonsi O, Halley M, Busto R & Globus M Y
T, Intravesticular infusion of N-methyl-D-aspartate, I, Acute
blood-brain barrier consequences, Acta Neuropathol,
84 (1992) 621.
81 Krueger W F, Giarola A J, Bradley J W & Shrekenhamer A,
Effects of electromagnetic fields on fecundity in the chicken,
Ann N Y Acad Sci, 247 (1975) 391.
82 Jensh R P, Vogel W H & Brent R I, Postnatal functional
analysis of prenatal exposure of rats to 915 MHz microwave
radiation, Int J Toxicol, 1 (1982) 73.
83 Jensh R P, Weinberg I & Brent R I, Teratologic studies of
prenatal exposure of rats to 915 MHz microwave radiation,
Radiat Res, 92 (1982) 160.
84 Berman, E, Weil C, Philips P A, Carter H B & House D B,
Fetal and maternal effects of continual exposure of rats to
970 MHz circularly polarized microwaves, Electromgn Biol
Med, 11 (1992) 43.
85 Klug S, Hestcher M, Giles S, Kohlsman S & Kramer K, The
lack of effects of nonthermal RF electromagnetic fields on
the development of rat embryos grown in culture, Life Sci,
61 (1997) 789.
86 Magras I N & Xenos T D, RF radiation-induced changes in
the prenatal development of mice, Bioelctromagnetics,
18 (1997) 455.
87 Jensh R P, Behavioral teratological studies using microwave
radiation: is there an increased risk from exposure to cellular
phones and microwave ovens?, Repro Toxico, 11 (1997) 601.
88 Dasdag S, Ketani M A, Akdag Z, Ersay A R, Sari I, Demirtas
O C & Celik M S, Whole body microwave exposure emitted
by cellular phones and testicular function of rats, Urol Res,
27 (1999) 219.
89 Aitken R J, Bennetts L E, Sawyer D, Wiklendt A M & King
B V, Impact of radiofrequency electromagnetic wave
radiation on DNA integrity in the male germ line, Inter J
Androl, 28 (2005) 171.
90 Ozguner M, Koyu A, Cesur G, Ural M, Ozguner F,
Gokcimen A & Delibas N, Biological and morphological
effects on the reproductive organ of rats after exposure to
electromagnetic field, Saudi Med J, 26 (2005) 405.
91 Forgacs Z, Somosy Z, Kubinyl G, Bakos J, Hudak A, Surjan
A & Thuroczy G, Effects of whole body 1800 MHZ

92

93
94

95
96

97

98

99
100

101

102
103
104

105
106
107

GSM-like microwave exposure on testicular steridogenesis
and histology in mice, Reprod Toxicol, 22 (2006) 111.
Ribeiro E P, Rhoden E L, Horn, M M, Rhoden C, Lima L P
& Toniolo L, Effect of subchronic exposure to
radiofrequency from a conventional cellular telephone on
testicular function in adult rats, J Urol, 177 (2007) 395.
Yan J G, Agresti M, Bruce T, Yan Y H, Grandlund A &
Matloub H S, Effects of cellular phone emissions on sperm
motility in rats, Fertil Steril, 88 (2007) 57.
Yilmaz F, Dasdag S, Akdag M Z & Killine N, Whole body
exposure of radiation emitted from 900 MHz mobile phones
emitted does not seem to affect the levels of anti-apoptic bcl2 protein, Electromagn Biol Med, 27 (2008) 65.
Dasdag S, Akdag, Ulukaya A K & Yegin D, Mobile phone
exposure does not induce apoptosis on spermatogenesis in
rats, Arch Med Res, 39 (2008) 40.
Oral B, Guney M, Ozguner F, Karahan N, Mungan T,
Comleksi, S & Cesur G, Endometrial apoptosis induced by
by a 900 MHz mobile phone: preventive effects of vitamin E
and C, Adv Ther, 23 (2006) 957.
Guney M, Ozguner F, Oral B, Karahan N & Mungan T,
900 MHz radiofrequency induced histopathologic changes
and oxidative stress in rat endometrium: protection by
vitamin E and C, Toxicol Ind Health, 23 (2007) 411.
Bornhausen M & Scheingraber H, Prenatal exposure to
900 MHz cell phone electromagnetic fields had no effect on
operant-behaviour
performances
of
adult
rats,
Bioelectromagnetics, 21 (2000) 566.
Dasdag S, Akdag M Z, Ayyildiz O, Demirtas O C, Yayla M
& Sert C, Do cellular phones alter blood parameters and birth
weight of rats? Electromagn Biol Med, 19 (2000) 107.
Cobb B L, Jauchem J R, Mason P A, Dooley M P, Miller S
A, Ziriax J M & Murphy M R, Neural and behavioral
teratological evaluation of rats exposed to ultra-wideband
electromagnetic fields, Bioelectromagnetics, 21 (2000) 524.
Grigoryev Y, Biological effects of mobile phone
electromagnetic field on chick embryo (Risk assessment
using the mortality rate), Radiats Biol Radioecol, 43 (2003)
541.
Ingole I V & Ghosh S K, Cell phone radiation and
developing tissues in chicken embryo-a light microscope
study of kidneys, J Anat Soc India, 55 (2006) 19.
Batellier F, Couty I, Picard D & Brillard J P, Effects of
exposing chicken eggs to a cell phone in ‘call’ position over
the entire incubation period, Theriogenology 69 (2008) 737.
Agarwal A, Deepinder F, Sharma R K, Ranga G & Li J,
Effect of cell phone usage on semen analysis in men
attending infertility clinic: an observational study, Fertil
Steril, 89 (2008) 124.
Fejes I, Zavaczki Z, Szollosi J, Koloszar S, Daru J, Kovacs L
& Pal A, Is there a relationship between cell phone use and
semen quality? Arch Andro, 51 (2005) 385.
Davoudi M, Brossner C, Kuber W, The influence of
electromagnetic waves on sperm motility, Journal fur
urologie and urogynakologie, 19 (2002) 18.
Erogul O, Oztas E, Yildirim I, Kir T, Aydur E, Komesli G,
Irkilata H C, Irmak M K & Peker A F, Effects of
electromagnetic radiation from a cellular phone on
human sperm motility an in vitro study, Arch Med Res,
37 (2006) 840.

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE
108 Kilgallon S J & Simon L W, Mage content influences men
semen quality, Bio Lett,1 (2005) 253.
109 Phillips J L, Singh N P & Lai H, Electromagnetic fields and
DNA damage, Pathophysiology, 16 (2009) 79.
110 Lai H, Carino M A & Guy A W, Low-level microwave
irradiation and central cholinergic systems, Pharmac
Biochem Behav, 33 (1989) 131.
111 Chou C K, Guy A W, McDougall J & Lai H, Specific
absorption rate in rats exposed to 2450-MHz microwaves
under seven exposure conditions, Bioelectromagnetics,
6 (1985) 73.
112 Ray S & Behari J, Dielectric dispersion in rat brain tissue.
Proceedings of the first asia-pacific microwave conference,
Microwave Technology and Applications (February 24-28),
(1986) 496.
113 Huber R, Graf T, Cote K A, Wittmann L, Gallmann E,
Matter D, Schuderer J, Kuster N, Borbely A A & Achermann
P, Exposure to pulsed high frequency electromagnetic field
during waking affects human sleep EEG, Neuro Report, 11
(2000) 3321.
114 Arai N, Enomoto H, Kkabe S, Yuasa K, KamimuraY &
Ugawa Y, Thirty minutes mobile phone use has no short
term adverse effects on central auditory pathways, Clin
Neurophysiol 114 (2003) 1390.
115 Moby E, Le Bouquin Jeannes R, Faucon G, LiegeoisChauvel C & De Seze R, Effects of GSM signals on auditory
evoked responses, Bioelectromagnetics, 26 (2005) 341.
116 Yuasa K, Arai N, Okabe S, Tarusawa Y, Nojima T,
Hanajima R, Terao Y & Ugawa Y, Effects of thirty minutes
mobile phone use on the human sensory cortex, Clin
Neurophysiol, 117 (2006) 900.
117 Urban P, Lukas E & Roth Z, Does acute exposure to the
electromagnetic field emitted by mobile phone influence
visual evoked potentials? A pilot study Cent Eur, J Public
Health, 6 (1998) 288.
118 Hamblin D L, Croft R J, Wood A W, Stough C & Spong J,
The sensitivity of human event related potentials and reaction
time to mobile phone emitted electromagnetic fields,
Bioelectromag, 27 (2006) 265.
119 Vecchio F, Babilono C, Ferreri F, Curcio G, Fini R, Del
Percio C & Maria Rossin F P, Mobile phone emission
modulated interhemispheric functional coupling of EEG
alpha rhythms, Eur J Neurosci, 25 (2007) 1908.
120 Hinrikus M, Bachmann M, Lass J, Karai D & Tuulik V,
Effect of low frequency modulated modulated microwave
exposure on human EEG: individual sensitivity,
Bioelectromagnetics, 29 (2009) 527.
121 Adey R W, Electromagnetic fields and the essence of living
systems, in Modern Radio Science edited by J.B. Andersen,
(Oxford University Press) 1990.
122 Somossy Z, Thuroczy G, Kubasova T, Kovacs J & Szabo L
D, Effects of modulated and continuous microwave
irradiation on the morphology and cell surfaces of 3T3
fibroblasts, Scan Microsc, 5 (1991) 1145.
123 Lin J C, Radio frequency, Radiation Safety and In: Tumor
incidence studies in lymphoma-phone mice exposed to GSM
mobile phone radiation, URSI, (2008) 41.
124 Utteridge T D, Gebski V, Finnie J W, Vernon-Roberts B &
Kuchel T R, Long term exposure of E-Mu-Pim 1 transgenic
mice to 898.4 MHz. microwaves does not increase
lymphoma incidence, Radiat Res, 158 (2002) 357.

979

125 Oberto G, Rolfo K, Yu P, Carbonatto M, Peano S, Kuster N,
Ebert S & Tofani S, Carcinogenicity Study of 217 Hz Pulsed
900 MHz electromagnetic fields in Pim1 transgenic mice,
Radiat Res, 168 (2007)316.
126 Adey W R, Byus C V, Cain C D, Higgins R J, Jones R A,
Kean C J, Kuster N, MacMurray N A, Stagg R B,
Zimmerman, G J, Phillips J L & Haggren W, Spontaneous
and nitrosourea induced primary tumors of the
central nervous system in fischer 344 rats chronically
exposed to 836 MHz modulated microwaves, Radiat Res,
152 (1999) 293.
127 Adey W R, Byus C V & Hagggren W, Brain tumor incidence
in rats chronically exposed to digital cellular telephone fields
in an initiation promotion model, Bioelectromagnetics
Society, 18th Annual Meeting, Proceeding, Abstract A-7-3,
(1996).
128 Lai H & Singh N P, Melatonin and a spin trap compound
block radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation induced
DNA strand break in rat brain cells, Bioelectromag,
18 (1997) 446.
129 Paulraj R & Behari J, Single strand DNA breaks in rat brain
cells exposed to microwave radiation, Mutat Res, 596 (2006)
76.
130 Malyapa R S, Ahern E W, Bi C, Straube W L, LaRegina M,
Pickard W F & Roti Roti J L, DNA damage in rat brain cells
after in vivo exposure to 2450 MHz electromagnetic
radiation and various methods of euthanasia, Radiat Res,
149 (1998) 637.
131 McNamee J P, Belllier Gajda G B, Miller S M, Lemay E P,
Lavallee B F, Marro L & Thansandote A, DNA damage and
micronucleius induction in human leukocyte s after acute in
vitro exposure to a 1.9 GHz continous wave radiofrequency
field. Radiat Res, 158 (2002) 534.
132 Phillips J L, Ivaschuk O, Ishoda-Jones T, Jones R A,
Campbell-Beachler & Haggren W, DNA damage in Molt-4T lymphoblastocid cells exposed to cellular telephone
radiofrequency fields in vitro, Bioelectrochem Bioenerg, 45
(1998) 103.
133 Li L, Bisht K S, LaGroye I, Zhang P, Straube W L, Moros E
G, Pickard W E & Roti J L, Measurement of DNA damage in
mammalian cells exposed to radiofrequency fields at high
SAR of 3-5 W/kg, Radiat Res, 156 (2001) 328.
134 Tice R R, Hook G G, Donner E M, McRee D & Guy A W,
Genotoxicity at radiofrequency fields. Investigations of DNA
damage and micronuclei induction in cultured human blood
cells, Bioelectromagnetics, 23 (2002) 113.
135 d’Ambrosio G, Massa R, Scarfi M R & Zeni O, Cytogenetic
damage in human lymphocytes following GMSK
phase modulated microwave exposure, Bioelectromag,
23 (2002) 7.
136 Vijayalaxmi, Pickard W F, Bisht K S, Leal B Z, Meltz M L,
Roti J L, Straube W L & MOros E G, Cytogenetic studies in
human blood lymphocyte exposed in vitro to radiofrequency
radiation at a cellular telephone frequency (835.62 MHz,
FDMA), Radat Res, 155 (2001) 113.
137 Eger H, Hagen K U, Lucas B, Vogel P, Voit H, Einfluss der
raumlichen Nahe von Mobilfunksendeanlagen auf die
Krebsinzidenz, Umwelt-Medizin-Gesellschaft 17, (2004) 273.
138 Wolf R, & Wolf D, Increased incidence of cancer
near a cellphone transmitter station, Int J Cancer Prev,
1 (2004) 123.

980

INDIAN J EXP BIOL, OCTOBER 2010

139 Neubauer G, Feyching M, Hamnerius Y, Kheifets L, Kuster
N, Ruiz I, Schuz J, Uberbacher R & Wiart J, Feasibility of
future epidemiological studies on possible health effects
of mobile phone base stations, Bioelectromagnetics,
28 (2007) 224.
140 Kaatsch P, Spix C, Schulze-Rath R, Schmiedel S & Blettner
M, Leukaemia in young children living in the vicinity of
German nuclear power plants, Int J Cancer, 122 (2008) 721.
141 Fritz K & Sommer C, Effect of global system for mobile
communication (GSM) microwave exposure on BBB
permeability in rat, Acta Neuropathol, 94 (1997) 465.
142 Elder J A, Ocular effects of electromagnetic energy,
Bioelectromagnetics (suppl 6), (2003) 148.
143 Yurekli A I, Ozkan M, Kalkan T, Saybasili H, Tuncel H,
Atukeren P, Pinar K, Gumustas K & Seker S, GSM base
station electromagnetic radiation and oxidative stress in rats,
Electromag, Biol Med, 25 (2006) 177.
144 Hirose H, Sakuma N, Kaji N, Suhara T, Sekijima M, Nojima
T & Miyakoshi J, Phosphorylation and gene expression of
p53 are not affected in human cells exposed to 2.1425 GHz
band CW or W-CDMA modulated radiation allocated to
mobile radio base stations, Bioelectromagnetics, 27 (2006)
494.
145 Grissom C B, Magnetic fields effects in biology: A survey of
possible mechanisms with emphasis on radical pair
recommendation, Chem Res, 3 (1995) 95.
146 Kula B & Drozdz M, A study of magnetic field effects on
fibroblasts cultures. Part 2. The evaluation of effects of static
and extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields on free
radical processes in fibroblasts cultures, Bioelectrochem
Bioenerg, 39 (1996) 27.
147 Sun Y, Free radicals, antioxidant enzymes and
carcinogenesis, Free Rad Biol Med, 8 (1990) 583.
148 Iuleis G N D, Newey R J, King B V & Aitken R J, Mobile
phone radiation induces reactive oxygen species production
and DNA damage in human spermatozoa in vitro, Plos One,
4 (2009) 6446.
149 Ratilio G, Effects of hydrogen peroxide on dismutase and
catalase activity in rat liver, Biochemistry, 11 (1972) 21.
150 Collonce J T, & Hochstein K P, Red cells glutathione
content and stability in oxidant stress, J Lab Clin Med,
78, (1981) 736.
151 Izumi Y, Zorumski C F, Nitric oxide and long-term synaptic
depression in the rat hippocampus, Neuro Report, 4 (1993)
131.
152 Ilhan A, Gurel A, Armutcu F, Kamisili S, Iraz M, Akyol O &
Ozen S, Ginkgo biloba prevents mobile phone induced
oxidative stress in brain, Clin Chim Acta, 340 (2004) 153.
153 de Seze R, Ayoub J, Peray P, Miro L & Touitou Y,
Evolutions in humans of the effects of radiocellular
telephones on the circadian patterns
of melatonin
secretion, a chronobiological rhythm marker, J Pineal Res,
27 (1999) 237.
154 Gavella M & Lipovac V, Antioxidative effect of melatonin
on human spermatozoa, Arch Andro, 44 (2000) 23.
155 Burch J B, Reif J S, Noonan C W, Ichinose T, Bachand A M,
Koleber T L & Yost M G, Melatonin metabolite excretion
among cellular telephone users, Intl. J. Radiat Biol,
78 (2002) 1029.
156 Lantow M, Verqutz T, Weiss D G & Simko M, Comparative
study of cell cycle kinetics and induction of apoptosis or

157
158
159

160
161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

necrosis after exposure of human mono mac 6 cells to
radiofrequency radiation, Radiat Res, 166 (2006) 539.
Kesari K K & Behari J, Effect of microwave at 2.45 GHz
radiations on reproductive system of male rats, Toxicol
Environ Chem, 92 (2010) 1135.
Seishima M, Oyama Z & Oda M, Cellular phone dermatitis
with chromate allergy, Dermatoloty, 207 (2003) 48
Diem E, Schwarz C, Adlkofer F, Jahn O & Rüdiger H W,
Non-thermal DNA breakage by mobile phone radiation
(1,800 MHz) in human fibroblasts and in transformed GFSHR17 rat granulosa cells in vitro, Mutat Res, 583 (2005) 178.
Gandhi G & Anita, Genetic damage in mobile phone users:
some preliminary findings, Ind J Hum Genet, 11 (2005) 99.
Markova E, Hillert L, Malmgren L, Persson B R, Belyaev I
Y, Microwaves from GSM mobile telephones affect 53BP1
and gamma-H2AX foci in human lymphocytes from
hypersensitive and healthy persons, Environ Health Perspect,
113 (2005) 1172.
Sun L X, Yao K, He J L, Lu D Q, Wang K J & Li H W,
DNA damage and repair induced by acute exposure of
microwave from mobile phone on cultured human lens
epithelial cells, Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi, 42 (2006) 1084.
Zhang D Y, XUZP, Chiang H, Lu D Q & Zeng Q L, Effects
of GSM 1800 MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on
DNA damage in Chinese hamster lung cell, Zhongune Yu
Fang Xi Xue Za Zhi, 40 (2006) 149.
Forgács Z, Somosy Z, Kubinyi G, Bakos J, Hudák A, Surján
A & Thuróczy G, Effect of whole-body 1800MHz GSM-like
microwave exposure on testicular steroidogenesis and
histology in mice, Reprod Toxicol, 22 (2006) 111.
Verschaeve L, Heikkinen P, Verheyen G, Van Gorp U,
Boonen F, Vander Plaetse F, Maes A, Kumlin T, MäkiPaakkanen J, Puranen L & Juutilainen J, Investigation of
co-genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields
in vivo, Radiat Res, 165 (2006) 598.
Hook G J, Zhang P, Lagroye I, Li L, Higashikubo R, Moros
E G, Straube W L, Pickard W J, Baty J D & Roti Roti J L,
Measurement of DNA damage and apoptosis in Molt-4 cells
in vitro exposure to radiofrequency radiation, Radiat Res,
161 (2004) 193.
Lagroye I, Anane R, Wettring B A, Moros E G, Straube W
L, Laregina M, Niehoff M, Pickard W F, Baty J & Roti Roti
J L, Measurement of DNA damage after acute exposure to
pulsed-wave 2450 MHz microwaves in rat brain cells by
two alkaline comet assay methods, Int J Radiat Bio,
80 (2004) 11.
Lagroye I, Hook G J, Wettring B A, Baty J D, Moros E G,
Straube W L & Roti Roti J L, Measurements of alkali-labile
DNA damage and protein-DNA crosslinks after 2450 MHz
microwave and low-dose gamma irradiation in vitro, Radiat
Res, 161 (2004) 201.
Vijayalaxmi B Z, Leals M, Szilagyi T J, Prihoda & Meltz M
L, Primary DNA damage in human blood lymphocytes
exposed in vitro to 2450 MHz radiofrequency radiation,
Radiat Res, 153 (2000) 479.
Radon K, Parera D, Rose D M & Vollrath L, No effects of
pulsed electromagnetic fields on Melatonin, Cortisol and
selected markers of the immune system in man,
Bioelectromagnetics, 22 (2001) 280.
Mann K, Wagner P, Brunn G, Hassan F, Hiemke C &
Roschke J, Effects of pulsed high frequency electromagnetic

BEHARI: BIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF MOBILE PHONE FREQUENCY EXPOSURE

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

fields on the neuroendocrine system, Neuroendocrino, 67
(1998) 139.
Selmaoui B, Lambrozo J & Touitou Y, Magnetic fields and
pineal function in humans. Evaluation of human function
.Evaluation of nocturnal acute exposure to extremely low
frequency magnetic fields on serum melatonin and urinary
6-sulfatoxymelatonin circadium rhythms, Life Sci, 58
(1996)1539.
Vollrath L, Spessert R, Kartzsch T, Keiner M & Hollmann
H, No short term effects of high frequency electromagnetic
fields on the mammalian pineal gland, Bioelectromagnetics,
18 (1997) 376.
Rosen L A, Barber I & Lyle D B, A 0.5 G, 60 Hz magnetic
field suppressed melatonin production in pinealocytes,
Bioelectromagnetics, 19 (1998) 123
Yaga K, Reite R J, Manchester L C, Nieves H, Sun J H &
Chen L D, Pineal sensitivity to pulsed magnetic fields
changes during the photoperiod, Brain Res Bulletin, 30
(1993) 153.
Litovitz T, Krause D, Penafiel M, Elson E C & Mullins J M,
The role of coherence time in the effect of microwaves
on ornithine decarboxylase activity, Bioelectromagnetics,
14 (1993) 395.
Vander V A, Biological effects, introduction to workshop,
proc workshop biological effects medical applications, 27th
Eur. Microwave Conf., Jerusalem, Sept, (1997) 1.
Giwercman A, Richthoff J Hjollund H, Bonde J P, Jepson K,
Frohm B & Spano M, Correlatin between sperm motility and
sperm chromatin structure assay parameters, Fertil Steril, 80
(2003) 1404.
Sun J G, Jurisicova A & Casper R F, Detection of
deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation in human sperm:
Correlation with fertilization in vitro, Biol Reprod,
56 (1997) 602.

981

180 Heinrich S, Ossig A, Schlittmeier S & Hellbrück J,
Elektromagnetische
Felder
einer
UMTSMobilfunkbasisstation und mögliche Auswirkungen auf die
Befindlichkeit—eine experimentelle Felduntersuchung,
Umwelt Med Forsch Prax, 12 (2007) 171.
181 Abdel-Rassoul G, Abou E, Fatech O, Abou-Salem M,
Michael A, Farahat F, El-Batanouny M & Salem E,
Neurobehavioral effects among inhabitants around mobile
phone base stations, Neurotoxico, 28 (2006) 434.
182 Sanitini R, Santini P, Danze J M & Le Ruz P, Seigne,
Enquete sur la sente de riverains de stations relais de
telephonie mobile: II/Incidneces de I’ae des sujets, de la
duree de leur exposition et de leur postion par rapport aux
antennes et autres sources electromagnetiques, Pathol Biol
(Paris), 51 (2003) 412.
183 Santini R, Santini P, Danze J M, Le Ruz P & Seigne M,
Seigne, Enquete sur la sante de riverains de stations relais de
telephonie mobile: Incidences de la distance et du sexe,
Pathol Biol (Paris), 50 (2003) 369.
184 Navarro E A, Segura J, Portoles M & Gomez-Perretta Mateo
C, The microwave syndrome: a preliminary study in Spain,
Electromag Biol Med, 22 (2003) 161.
185 Hutter H P, Moshammer H, Wallner P & Kundi M,
Subjective symptoms, sleeping problems and cognitive
performance in subjects living near mobile phone base
stations, Occup Environ Med, 63 (2006) 307.
186 Blettner M, Schlehofer B, Breckenkamp J, Kowall B,
Schmiedel S, Reis U, Potthoff P, Schuz J & Berg-Beckhoff
G, Querschnittstudie zur erfassung und bewertung moglicher
gesundheitlicher beeintrachtigungen durch die felder von
moilfunkbasisstationen, BfS, (2007).
187 Thomas S, Kuhnlein A, Heinrich S, Praml G, Nowak D, von
Kries R & Radon K, Personal exposure to mobile phone
frequencies and wellbeing in adults: a cross-sectional study
based on dosimetry, Bioelectromagnetics, 29 (2008) 463.

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close