ICES Database
ElectroMagnetic Field Literature
Search Engine
  

EMF Study
(Database last updated on Mar 27, 2024)

ID Number 2307
Study Type In Vivo
Model Chromosome aberrations, micronucleus frequency, mitotic index and polychromatic erythrocytes were measured in rats exposed to 900 and 1800 MHz.
Details

AUTHORS' ABSTRACT: Sekeroglu et al. 2013 (IEEE #5306): Purpose: One of the most important issues regarding radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) is their effect on genetic material. Therefore, we investigated the cytogenotoxic effects of 900 MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) and the effect of a recovery period after exposure to RF-EMF on bone marrow cells of immature and mature rats. Materials and methods: The immature and mature rats in treatment groups were exposed to RF-EMF for 2 h/day for 45 days. Average electrical field values for immature and mature rats were 28.1 ± 4.8 V/m and 20.0 ± 3.2 V/m, respectively. Whole-body specific absorption rate (SAR) values for immature and mature rats were in the range of 0.38-0.78 W/kg, and 0.31-0.52 W/kg during the 45 days, respectively. Two recovery groups were kept for 15 days after RF-EMF exposure. Results: Significant differences were observed in chromosome aberrations (CA), micronucleus (MN) frequency, mitotic index (MI) and ratio of polychromatic erythrocytes (PCE) in all treatment and recovery groups. The cytogenotoxic damage in immature rats was statistically higher than the mature rats. The recovery period did not reduce the damage to the same extent as the corresponding control groups. Conclusions: The exposure of RF-EMF leads to cytotoxic and genotoxic damage in immature and mature rats. More sensitive studies are required to elucidate the possible carcinogenic risk of EMF exposure in humans, especially children.

Findings Effects
Status Completed With Publication
Principal Investigator
Funding Agency ?????
Country TURKEY
References
  • Sekeroglu, A et al. Int J Radiat Biol., (2013) 89:985-992
  • Sekeroglu, V et al. Ecotoxicology and environmental safety., (2012) 80:140-144
  • Comments

    Return