5 EMF Safety Assumes EMF Research Shows only ionizing radiation causes chemical changeEMF cell damage is only caused by heatingsafe EMF limits can be set in terms of heating rate (SAR)EMF exposure limits can be set separately for each EM spectrum subdivisionEMF Research Showsnon-ionizing EMF also causes chemical changeEMF cell damage occurs without heatingnon-thermal EMF effects occur below the safety limits• biological reactions are stimulated across spectrum and effects may be additive
7 Epidemiology of childhood leukemia EMF-RAPID Report to Congress (1999) on ELF‘EMF… not entirely safe… minimize exposure to magnetic fields…’Epidemiology threshold for childhood leukemia is 3-4mG (Greenland et al, 2000; Ahlbom et al, 2000)IARC - International Agency for Research on Cancer (2002)Exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMF) is possible cause of cancerELF background ~1mG; appliances >> 4mG
8 Biological Thresholds in the ELF Range Biological System Threshold ReferenceEnzyme reaction ratesNa,K-ATPase mG Blank & Soo, 1996cytochrome oxidase mG Blank & Soo, 1998ornithine decarboxylase ~20mG Mullins et al, 1999Electron transfer rateBelousov-Zhabotinsky <5mG Blank & Soo, 2001Stress protein synthesisHL60, Sciara, yeast, <8mG Goodman et al, 1994breast (HTB124, MCF7) <8mG Lin et al, 1998chick embryo (anoxia) ~20mG DiCarlo et al, 2000Disease relatedblock melatonin inhibitionof breast carcinoma <12mG Liburdy et al, 1993Safety limit (ELF) ~1000mG ICNIRP, 1997Leukemia epidemiology mG
10 Stress Response: Evidence of Molecular Damage stress response: ‘... defense reaction of cells to damage that environmental forces inflict on macromolecules.’Kültz, Physiol Rev (2005)genes stimulated along with stress genes sense and repair damage to DNA, proteinsstimulated by ELF and RF
11 EMF affects breast cancer cell growth Melatonin, Tamoxifen inhibit MCF7 breast cancer cell growth. Liburdy et al. J Pineal Res, 19932mG does not affect inhibition; 12mG overcomes the inhibition and cells continue to grow.EMF threshold is between 2mG and 12mG.Experiment has been repeated in six labs.
12 Human DNA is ~2meters long and has ~3 billion base pairs
13 EMF Specific Domain in HSP70 MYCAMYCCMYCB-320-230-192-166-160-107-100-68(bp)ATFTATAHSP70Sp1AP-2HSESp1AP-2HSESRESp1AP-2EMF Domain(non-thermal)Heat Shock Domain(thermal).Lin et al (1999) J Cellular Biochem 75:
14 EMF-Specific DNA can be moved Chloramphenicol transferase(CAT) ActivityLuciferase Activitycountscounts102030405060BackgroundEMNetivCl60BackgroundEMNetivCl5040302010Experimental ConditionsExperimental ConditionsLin et al (2001) J Cellular Biochem 81:
15 EMF breaks DNA ‘Comet Assay’ 60Hz, 2hrs a. control b. 1G c. 2.5G d. 5G Lai, Singh (1997)REFLEX (2004): DNA damage at 0.35G
16 RF also reacts with DNA RF stimulates stress response C. elegans (dePomerai et al, 2000)Human epithelial cells (Kwee et al, 2001)Human endothelial cells (Leszczynski et al, 2002)Chick embryos (Shallom et al, 2002)Drosophila (Weisbrot et al, 2003)RF damages DNA (strand breaks)Human T-lymphoblastoid cells (Phillips et al, 1998)Human lymphocytes (Mashevich et al, 2003)Human fibroblasts, HL60 (REFLEX, 2004)
17 Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) does not measure biological dose The stress response is stimulated- in ELF, SAR ~10-12 W/kg (no heating)- in RF, SAR ~10-1 W/kgBiological dose is not related to heating rateSAR is no basis for a safety standard!Blank, Goodman. BEMS 25: , 2004
18 Health Risk of RF Fields Cellular studies- RF stimulates protein synthesis, DNA damageAnimal studies- lymphoma in mice, Repacholi et al (1997)- blood-brain barrier leaks, Persson et al (1997)- micronuclei in blood, Carlo (2001)Epidemiology- cell phones and cancer, acoustic neuroma10yr, RR>3 (Kundi et al, 2004; Lonn et al, 2004)- radio and TV antennasCherry (San Francisco); Szmigielski (Poland);Hocking (Sydney); short wave case in Rome
19 Sutro Tower Study (Cherry, 2002) Tower: 577mAntennas: mFM: 54.7kWTV: 616kWUHF: 18.3MWRisk Ratio for all childhood cancers ( )is elevated (at 3km, 1µW/cm2, RR>5)falls off with distance from antennas
20 Effects of EMF on Cells ELF/RF interact with DNA in many cells - activate DNA, protein synthesis → cancer- cause DNA damage → cancerMany frequencies active; may be synergisticELF thresholds (field strength, duration) are below safety limitsThermal basis (SAR) for RF safety is flawed!
21 EMF Safety Needs a Scientific Basis IEEE guideline: “The RF safety standard should be based on science.”EMF research requires a biological standard to replace thermal (SAR) standardEMF research requires protection against cumulative biological effects stimulated by EMF across the EM spectrum
22 Above all: Minimize EMF Exposure! Precautionary PrinciplePrudent Avoidance - for publicALARA – as low as reasonably attainable – for regulatory agencies