No effects of short-term GSM mobile phone radiation on cerebral blood flow measured using positron emission tomography

The effect of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on cognitive performance in human experimental studies: Systematic review and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

The objective of this review is to evaluate the associations between short-term exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) and cognitive performance in human experimental studies.

METHODS

Online databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and EMF-Portal) were searched for studies that evaluated effects of exposure to RF-EMF on seven domains of cognitive performance in human experimental studies. The assessment of study quality was based on the Risk of Bias (RoB) tool developed by the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT). Random effects meta-analyses of Hedges's g were conducted separately for accuracy- and speed-related performance measures of various cognitive domains, for which data from at least two studies were available. Finally, the certainty of evidence for each identified outcome was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

57,543 records were identified and 76 studies (80 reports) met the inclusion criteria. The included 76 studies with 3846 participants, consisting of humans of different age, sex and health status from 19 countries, were conducted between 1989 and 2021. Quantitative data from 50 studies (52 reports) with 2433 participants were included into the meta-analyses. These studies were performed in 15 countries between 2001 and 2021. The majority of the included studies used head exposure with GSM 900 uplink. None of the meta-analyses observed a statistically significant effect of RF-EMF exposure compared to sham on cognitive performance as measured by the confidence interval surrounding the Hedges's g or the significance of the z-statistic. For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Attention - Attentional Capacity RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g 0.024, 95 % CI [-0.10; 0.15], I2 = 28 %, 473 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Attention - Concentration / Focused Attention RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in speed (Hedges's g 0.005, 95 % CI [-0.17; 0.18], I2 = 7 %, 132 participants) and probably results in little to no difference in accuracy; it does not reduce accuracy (Hedges's g 0.097, 95 % CI [-0.05; 0.24], I2 = 0 %, 217 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Attention - Vigilance RF-EMF exposure probably results in little to no difference in speed and does not reduce speed (Hedges's g 0.118, 95 % CI [-0.04; 0.28], I2 = 41 %, 247 participants) and results in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g 0.042, 95 % CI, [-0.09; 0.18], I2 = 0 %, 199 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Attention - Selective Attention RF-EMF exposure probably results in little to no difference in speed and does not reduce speed (Hedges's g 0.080, 95 % CI [-0.09; 0.25], I2 = 63 %, 452 participants); it may result in little to no difference in accuracy, but it probably does not reduce accuracy (Hedges's g 0.178, 95 % CI [-0.02; 0.38], I2 = 68 %, 480 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Attention - Divided Attention RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in speed (Hedges's g -0.010, 95 % CI [-0.14; 0.12], I2 = 5 %, 307 participants) and may result in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g -0.089, 95 % CI [-0.35; 0.18], I2 = 53 %, 167 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Processing Speed - Simple Reaction Time Task RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in speed (Hedges's g 0.069, 95 % CI [-0.02; +0.16], I2 = 29 %, 820 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Processing Speed - 2-Choice Reaction Time Task RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in speed (Hedges's g -0.023, 95 % CI [-0.13; 0.08], I2 = 0 %, 401 participants), and may result in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g -0.063, 95 % CI [-0.38; 0.25], I2 = 63 %, 117 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Processing Speed - >2-Choice Reaction Time Task RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in speed (Hedges's g -0.054, 95 % CI [-0.14; 0.03], I2 = 0 %, 544 participants) and probably results in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g -0.129, 95 % CI [-0.30; 0.04], I2 = 0 %, 131 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Processing Speed - Other Tasks RF-EMF exposure probably results in little to no difference in speed and does not reduce speed (Hedges's g 0.067, 95 % CI [-0.12; 0.26], I2 = 38 %, 249 participants); it results in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g 0.036, 95 % CI [-0.08; 0.15], I2 = 0 %, 354 participants). For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Working Memory - n-back Task (0-3-back) we found Hedges's g ranging from -0.090, 95 % CI [-0.18; 0.01] to 0.060, 95 % CI [-0.06; 0.18], all I2 = 0 %, 237 to 474 participants, and conclude that RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in both speed and accuracy. For the domain Orientation and Attention, subclass Working Memory - Mental Tracking RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g -0.047, 95 % [CI -0.15; 0.05], I2 = 0 %, 438 participants). For the domain Perception, subclass Visual and Auditory Perception RF-EMF exposure may result in little to no difference in speed (Hedges's g -0.015, 95 % CI [-0.23; 0.195], I2 = 0 %, 84 participants) and probably results in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g 0.035, 95 % CI [-0.13; 0.199], I2 = 0 %, 137 participants). For the domain Memory, subclass Verbal and Visual Memory RF-EMF exposure probably results in little to no difference in speed and does not reduce speed (Hedges's g 0.042, 95 % CI [-0.15; 0.23], I2 = 0 %, 102 participants); it may result in little to no difference in accuracy (Hedges's g -0.087, 95 % CI [-0.38; 0.20], I2 = 85 %, 625 participants). For the domain Verbal Functions and Language Skills, subclass Verbal Expression, a meta-analysis was not possible because one of the two included studies did not provide numerical values. Results of both studies did not indicate statistically significant effects of RF-EMF exposure on both speed and accuracy. For the domain Construction and Motor Performance, subclass Motor Skills RF-EMF exposure may reduce speed, but the evidence is very uncertain (Hedges's g -0.919, 95 % CI [-3.09; 1.26], I2 = 96 %, 42 participants); it probably results in little to no difference in accuracy and does not reduce accuracy (Hedges's g 0.228, 95 % CI [-0.01; 0.46], I2 = 0 %, 109 participants). For the domain Concept Formation and Reasoning, subclass Reasoning RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in speed (Hedges's g 0.010, 95 % CI [-0.11; 0.13], I2 = 0 %, 263 participants) and probably results in little to no difference in accuracy and does not reduce accuracy (Hedges's g 0.051, 95 % CI [-0.14; 0.25], I2 = 0 %, 100 participants). For the domain Concept Formation and Reasoning, subclass Mathematical Procedures RF-EMF exposure results in little to no difference in speed (Hedges's g 0.033, 95 % CI [-0.12; 0.18], I2 = 0 %, 168 participants) and may result in little to no difference in accuracy but probably does not reduce accuracy (Hedges's g 0.232, 95 % CI [-0.12; +0.59], I2 = 86 %, 253 participants). For the domain Executive Functions there were no studies.

DISCUSSION

Overall, the results from all domains and subclasses across their speed- and accuracy-related outcome measures according to GRADE provide high to low certainty of evidence that short-term RF-EMF exposure does not reduce cognitive performance in human experimental studies. For 16 out of 35 subdomains some uncertainty remains, because of limitations in the study quality, inconsistency in the results or imprecision of the combined effect size estimate. Future research should focus on construction and motor performance, elderly, and consideration of both sexes.

OTHER

This review was partially funded by the WHO radioprotection programme. The protocol for this review was registered in Prospero reg. no. CRD42021236168 and published in Environment International (Pophof et al. 2021).

Exposure to Mobile Phone-Emitted Electromagnetic Fields and Human Attention: No Evidence of a Causal Relationship

In the past 20 years of research regarding effects of mobile phone-derived electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on human cognition, attention has been one of the first and most extensively investigated functions. Different domains investigated covered selective, sustained, and divided attention. Here, the most relevant studies on this topic have been reviewed and discussed. A total of 43 studies are reported and summarized: of these, 31 indicated a total absence of statistically significant difference between real and sham signal, 9 showed a partial improvement of attentional performance (mainly increase in speed of performance and/or improvement of accuracy) as a function of real exposure, while the remaining 3 showed inconsistent results (i.e., increased speed in some tasks and slowing in others) or even a worsening in performance (reduced speed and/or deteriorated accuracy). These results are independent of the specific attentional domain investigated. This scenario allows to conclude that there is a substantial lack of evidence about a negative influence of non-ionizing radiations on attention functioning. Nonetheless, published literature is very heterogeneous under the point of view of methodology (type of signal, exposure time, blinding), dosimetry (accurate evaluation of specific absorption rate-SAR or emitted power), and statistical analyses, making arduous a conclusive generalization to everyday life. Some remarks and suggestions regarding future research are proposed.

Mobile phone use, blood lead levels, and attention deficit hyperactivity symptoms in children: a longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Concerns have developed for the possible negative health effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure to children's brains. The purpose of this longitudinal study was to investigate the association between mobile phone use and symptoms of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) considering the modifying effect of lead exposure.

METHODS

A total of 2,422 children at 27 elementary schools in 10 Korean cities were examined and followed up 2 years later. Parents or guardians were administered a questionnaire including the Korean version of the ADHD rating scale and questions about mobile phone use, as well as socio-demographic factors. The ADHD symptom risk for mobile phone use was estimated at two time points using logistic regression and combined over 2 years using the generalized estimating equation model with repeatedly measured variables of mobile phone use, blood lead, and ADHD symptoms, adjusted for covariates.

RESULTS

The ADHD symptom risk associated with mobile phone use for voice calls but the association was limited to children exposed to relatively high lead.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that simultaneous exposure to lead and RF from mobile phone use was associated with increased ADHD symptom risk, although possible reverse causality could not be ruled out.

Human short-term exposure to electromagnetic fields emitted by mobile phones decreases computer-assisted visual reaction time

The worldwide dramatic increase in mobile phone use has generated great concerns about the detrimental effects of microwave radiations emitted by these communication devices. Reaction time plays a critical role in performing tasks necessary to avoid hazards. As far as we know, this study is the first survey that reports decreased reaction time after exposure to electromagnetic fields generated by a high specific absorption rate mobile phone. It is also the first study in which previous history of mobile phone use is taken into account. The aim of this study was to assess both the acute and chronic effects of electromagnetic fields emitted by mobile phones on reaction time in university students. Visual reaction time (VRT) of young university students was recorded with a simple blind computer-assisted-VRT test, before and after a 10 min real/sham exposure to electromagnetic fields of mobile phones. Participants were 160 right-handed university students aged 18-31. To assess the effect of chronic exposures, the reaction time in sham-exposed phases were compared among low level, moderate and frequent users of mobile phones. The mean ± SD reaction time after real exposure and sham exposure were 286.78 ± 31.35 ms and 295.86 ± 32.17 ms (P < 0.001), respectively. The age of students did not significantly alter the reaction time either in talk or in standby mode. The reaction time either in talk or in standby mode was shorter in male students. The students' VRT was significantly affected by exposure to electromagnetic fields emitted by a mobile phone. It can be concluded that these exposures cause decreased reaction time, which may lead to a better response to different hazards. In this light, this phenomenon might decrease the chances of human errors and fatal accidents.