Man kanske inte ska ge sig in i debatter med folk som inte ens tror på vetenskapen. Man kan liksom inte ens resonera då när man får argument som baseras på tro och upplevelser. Typ, jag vet att spöken finns eftersom jag själv sett ett spöke.
Wi-Fi är fortfarande ofarligt eller lika farligt som kaffe eller inlagd gurka då som också KAN ge cancer. Så man debatterar för Wi-Fi blir man bombarderad med osakliga argument och studier eller debattartiklar. Eller blir man påhoppad att vara router-försäljare.
Sedan finns det en ödmjukhet som är inbyggt i vetenskapen. Man forskar och vill veta mer och den processen är jätteviktig. Det är en trygghet som gör att vi kan vara säkra på fakta. Att basera slutsatser på rädsla och ”försiktighetsprincipen” kan ju folk göra i sina personliga val. Men att genomföra lagar och besluta om förbjud mot t ex Wi-Fi i skolor är inte rimligt så länge det inte finns några bevis.
I dec 2013 kom denna ”review” – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24162060 som entydigt säger att alla rapporter hittills visar på effekter men värden ligger långt under för vad som är skadligt. Svaret som foliehattsorganisationerna och Strålsäkerhetsstiftelsen då kommer med är att gränsvärdena är för låga. Tjena.
Det behövs alltid mer forskning vilket är sunt. Det KAN ju fortfarande vara så att Wi-Fi är farligt men än så länge har ingen bevisat något hälsoeffekter som ens i närheten av den skräckpropaganda som en del sprider, t ex att man får skador motsvarande radioaktiv strålning eller UV-strålning.
Så det är lugnt, jag litar på vetenskapen. Sov gott med smarta telefonen under kudden uppkopplad via Wi-Fi men akta er för vårsolen och den betydligt starkare strålningen från solen och ännu mer UV-strålningen – den kan bevisligen ge cancer. Fast jag kommer njuta av vårsolen ändå. Den värmer mig t o m inombords vilket får mig att må bra! Vädret är strålande, så att säga.
Why do you continue to state that there is no proof?
The fact is, there are thousands of peer reviewed studies showing wireless radiation to be harmful.
And 25000 saying there it’s not. Harmful as daylight of coffee or pickled vegetables maybe.
In fact, thousands of reports are saying ”it” may be harmful. No evidence has been shown, reviewed and approved by the scientific community that it is. But it may.
There is no proof. Coffee is more dangerous than Wifi. So your argumentation is rubbish. /Fredrik
That’s not how science works.
Studies which do not report effects do not eliminate studies that do find harmful effects.
Your pickled vegetables comment must be referring to the IARC class 2B Possible Human Carcinogen classification given to wireless radiation in 2011.
Perhaps you should take the time to look over the full list.
That would be much more responsible than simply cherry picking those agents that appear least harmful.
You are forgetting such agents as:
The bottom line is that one should do their homework before advising others about health issues.
Yes, do your homework before making non-scientific conclusions. Why do you still waste my time?
DDT etc is deadly but not proven to cause cancer. Do your homework before wasting my time. Show me one single report that proves wifi causes cancer. One is enough. Not indices, not false assumptions, not peer reviews. Show me one serious report with evidence.
Why do you list substances that are not proven to give cancer? Why do you exclude pickled vegetables and coffee?
Because you have posted false statements about a health issue affecting children.
You said that there was no proof that WiFi is harmful.
Why not fix the error in your blogs and actually post the fact that there is mixed evidence?
Thousands of studies report effects, thousands do not.
By the way, you really should check your sources about the theoretical 25,000 studies.
The WHO EMF program was run for many years by a former telecommunications executive, who subsequent to his departure, went back into the industry.
You don’t want to believe everything you read.
Show me one study, that’s all I’m asking. One study is enough for me. But not some BS study referring to thousands of crap reports. Give me your best evidence.
Like the wifiinschools-site, yes I agree. That whole site is complete rubbish, lies and fearmongering : http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_mongering
As you may realize, there are very few studies that have been conducted on WiFi. We have studies showing genetic damage, which has been shown to occur in as little as 4 hours of exposure, but none have looked at long-term effects such as cancer, which typically takes 10+ years to develop.
We do, however, have many studies that looked at other similar frequencies, such as cell phones and cell towers. Studies on radio and cell towers are especially relevant because they emit long term, whole-body radiation
Klicka för att komma åt epidemiological_studies.pdf
Eger, 2004, found 3x increased incidence of cancer near a cell tower.
Ha, 2007, found 59% increased risk of cancer.
Hocking 1997 found an increase in childhood leukemia with proximity to towers.
Michelozzi 1998 found an creasd in leukemia near the transmitter.
Park, 2004 found a higher mortality rate for all cancers and leukemia near towers.
Richter 2000 found that young people had an increased risk of cancer.
Tynes, 1996 found that Norwegian radio operator women reported an increase in breast cancer.
Wolf 2004 found 4x the increased risk of cancer for those living near a cell tower.
The radiation levels found in WiFi enabled classrooms are much higher than were found near these radio and cell towers.
None of those are valid proving wifi causes cancer or anything hazardous. Show me ONE that I can review. I ask only of one singel report or study.
Correct, no studies have looked at long-terms effects of WiFi, such as cancer, which generally has a latency period of at least 10 years.
But, if you want a study showing other adverse effects of WiFi, here you go:
Immunohistopathologic demonstration of deleterious effects on growing rat testes of radiofrequency waves emitted from conventional Wi-Fi devices.
Results: We observed significant increases in serum 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine levels and 8-hydroxyguanosine staining in the testes of the experimental group indicating DNA damage due to exposure (p < 0.05). We also found decreased levels of catalase and glutathione peroxidase activity in the experimental group, which may have been due to radiofrequency effects on enzyme activity (p < 0.05).
Conclusions: These findings raise questions about the safety of radiofrequency exposure from Wi-Fi Internet access devices for growing organisms of reproductive age, with a potential effect on both fertility and the integrity of germ cells.
Is it that study with 10 rats? Come on… And they couldn’t do it again and the rats where destroyed so no-one else could verify. Useless. 10 rats NOT showing anything at all. Indicating damage and I bet they recommended more research. I’m done with that kind of evidence. Was that your best?
Is this some kind of sporting event for you?
What kind of person immediately discounts peer reviewed research reporting DNA damage?
That was your best shot. Can you read even?
…10 and only ten
Wistar albino male rats were divided into experimental and control groups, with five rats per group. Standard wireless gateways communicating at 2.437 GHz were used as radiofrequency wave sources. The experimental group was exposed to radiofrequency energy for 24 h a day for 20 weeks.
The rats were sacrificed at the end of the study.
Intracardiac blood was sampled for serum 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine levels. Testes were removed and examined histologically and immunohistochemically. Testis tissues were analyzed for malondialdehyde levels and prooxidant-antioxidant enzyme activities.
We observed significant increases in serum 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine levels and 8-hydroxyguanosine staining in the testes of the experimental group indicating DNA damage due to exposure (p < 0.05). We also found decreased levels of catalase and glutathione peroxidase activity in the experimental group, which
have been due to radiofrequency effects on enzyme activity (p < 0.05).
about the safety of radiofrequency exposure from Wi-Fi Internet access devices for growing organisms of reproductive age, with a
on both fertility and the integrity of germ cells.
Wow, that study is ridiculous. Now, please buy a cap with foil and leave the this thread. You have nothing.
In 2011 the first study on WiFi and genetic effects was published. It found that ex vivo sperm exposed to WiFi suffered increased DNA fragmentation and decreased sperm motility after 4 hours.
No it did not.
Complete rubbish:”We speculate that keeping a laptop connected wirelessly to the internet on the lap near the testes may result in decreased male fertility. Further in vitro and in vivo studies are needed to prove this contention.” Nice evidence.
”Donor sperm samples, mostly normozoospermic, exposed ex vivo during 4 hours to a wireless internet-connected laptop showed a significant decrease in progressive sperm motility and an increase in sperm DNA fragmentation.”
Why do you pretend to know more than these scientists?
It’s clear from your background that you don’t have expertise in this area.
You have a 3 year degree from an Institute of Technology.
And here comes the ad hominem argument. Out of others?
2014: Effect of long-term exposure of 2.4 GHz radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi equipment on testes functions
”In conclusion, we observed that long-term exposure of 2.4 GHz RF emitted from Wi-Fi (2420 μW/kg, 1 g average) affects some of the reproductive parameters of male rats. We suggest Wi-Fi users to avoid long-term exposure of RF emissions from Wi-Fi equipment.”
16 rats – ridiculous. How many studies with 16 rats showed no difference? Complete rubbish.
Also in 2014:
2.45-GHz microwave irradiation adversely affects reproductive function in male mouse, Mus musculus by inducing oxidative and nitrosative stress.
Electromagnetic radiations are reported to produce long-term and short-term biological effects, which are of great concern to human health due to increasing use of devices emitting EMR especially microwave (MW) radiation in our daily life. In view of the unavoidable use of MW emitting devices (microwaves oven, mobile phones, Wi-Fi, etc.) and their harmful effects on biological system, it was thought worthwhile to investigate the long-term effects of low-level MW irradiation on the reproductive function of male Swiss strain mice and its mechanism of action. Twelve-week-old mice were exposed to non-thermal low-level 2.45-GHz MW radiation (CW for 2 h/day for 30 days, power density = 0.029812 mW/cm2 and SAR = 0.018 W/Kg). Sperm count and sperm viability test were done as well as vital organs were processed to study different stress parameters. Plasma was used for testosterone and testis for 3β HSD assay. Immunohistochemistry of 3β HSD and nitric oxide synthase (i-NOS) was also performed in testis. We observed that MW irradiation induced a significant decrease in sperm count and sperm viability along with the decrease in seminiferous tubule diameter and degeneration of seminiferous tubules. Reduction in testicular 3β HSD activity and plasma testosterone levels was also noted in the exposed group of mice. Increased expression of testicular i-NOS was observed in the MW-irradiated group of mice. Further, these adverse reproductive effects suggest that chronic exposure to nonionizing MW radiation may lead to infertility via free radical species-mediated pathway.
You have now linked to 4 studies that are not considered serious by the scientific community. Now stop wasting my time. And please don’t link to Hardell and Olle Johansson either. That’s rubbish too.
They state a false statement in the first sentence even:”Electromagnetic radiations are reported to produce long-term and short-term biological effects, which are of great concern to human health due to increasing use of devices emitting EMR especially microwave (MW) radiation in our daily life.” Biased science are not serious. The next sentence is even worse. When will you stop? Why just not buy the hat and be safe?
I don’t think as a ”Cooperation and Innovation Expert” at Saab you are qualified to speak in behalf of the scientific community.
Electromagnetic radiations are reported to produce long-term and short-term biological effects.
Given that several thousand peer reviewed research papers have reported this, it is absolutely true.
More ad hominem attacks? Gimme your best.
And 25000 other reviews says they’re not. Still.
Actually as I pointed out on your other blog entry, WHO reports that there were 25,000 studies conducted in all.
This does not mean 25,000 have not reported effects.
It’s probably more like 15,000 vs 10,000.
None gave evidence however they recommended further studies.
2.45 GHz radiofrequency fields alter gene expression in cultured human cells. Lee et al. 2005.
We observed that 221 genes altered their expression after a 2-h exposure. The number of affected genes increased to 759 after a 6-h exposure. Functional classification of the af-fected genes reveals that apoptosis-related genes were among the upregulated ones and the cell cycle genes among the down-
These results indicate that the RF fields at 2.45 GHz can alter gene expression in cultured hu-
man cells through non-thermal mechanism.
Klicka för att komma åt 2.45ghz_rf_fields_alter_gene_expression_2005.pdf
As in every stupid report:”These results indicate that the RF fields at 2.45 GHz can alter gene expression in cultured hu- man cells through non-thermal mechanism.” As can probably pickled vegetables, coffee, DDT etc. completely useless.
WiFi alters brain activity in young adults.
The P300 component of event-related potentials (ERPs) is believed to index attention and working memory (WM) operation of the brain. The present study focused on the possible gender-related effects of Wi-Fi (Wireless Fidelity) electromagnetic fields (EMF) on these processes. Fifteen male and fifteen female subjects, matched for age and education level, were investigated while performing a modified version of the Hayling Sentence Completion test adjusted to induce WM. ERPs were recorded at 30 scalp electrodes, both without and with the exposure to a Wi-Fi signal. P300 amplitude values at 18 electrodes were found to be significantly lower in the response inhibition condition than in the response initiation and baseline conditions. Independent of the above effect, within the response inhibition condition there was also a significant gender X radiation interaction effect manifested at 15 leads by decreased P300 amplitudes of males in comparison to female subjects only at the presence of EMF. In conclusion, the present findings suggest that Wi-Fi exposure may exert gender-related alterations on neural activity associated with the amount of attentional resources engaged during a linguistic test adjusted to induce WM.
Do you even know what the word MAY means? ”In conclusion, the present findings suggest that Wi-Fi exposure may exert gender-related alterations on neural activity associated with the amount of attentional resources engaged during a linguistic test adjusted to induce WM.” Again, no evidence.
I asked you to give med ONE single report providing scientific evidence. You have given me soon 10 probably that are not proving anything. Shall we go through thousands you think?
It will generate a lot of traffic on my site – next?
Paulraj R, Behari J. Single strand DNA breaks in rat brain cells exposed to microwave radiation.
Mutat Res 596:7680, 2006.
This investigation concerns with the effect of low intensity microwave (2.45 and 16.5GHz, SAR 1.0 and
2.01W/kg, respectively) radiation on developing rat brain. Wistar rats (35 days old, male, six rats in each
group) were selected for this study. These animals were exposed for 35 days at the above mentioned
frequenciesseparately in two different exposure systems. After the exposure period, the rats were sacrificed
and the whole brain tissue was dissected and used for study of single strand DNA breaks by micro gel electrophoresis (comet assay). Single strand DNA breaks were measured as tail length of comet. Fifty cells
from each slide and two slides per animal were observed. One way ANOVA method was adopted for
This study shows that the chronic exposure to these radiations cause statistically significant (p<0.001) increase in DNA single strand breaks in brain cells of rat
12 rats, useless. What happened to the other studies that randomly didn’t show anything? Rubbish.
Please cite this article in press as: H. Nittby, et al., Increased blood–brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone,
Klicka för att komma åt blood_brain_barrier.pdf
A discussion is not an evidence. ”We here discuss the present findings as well as the previous results of altered BBB permeability from our and other laboratories.”
You didn’t even look at it. They presented new evidence that RF radiation caused leakage of the blood brain barrier.
In fact, I did:” The effects seen in the rat studies give some clues about what might possibly happen in the human brain, with a BBB very similar to that of rats. While awaiting latency periods long enough for adequate epi- demiological interpretations, further studies on both animals and cells are of utmost importance..” Again, no evidence but clams on more research funding. Pathetic.
Increased levels of numerical chromosome aberrations after in vitro exposure of human peripheral blood lymphocytes to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields for 72 hours.
Mazor, R., Korenstein-Ilan, A., Barbul, A., Eshet, Y., Shahadi, A., Jerby, E. and Korenstein, R. Increased Levels of Numerical Chromosome Aberrations after In Vitro Exposure of Human Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields for 72 Hours. Radiat. Res. 169, 28-37 (2008). We investigated the effects of 72 h in vitro exposure of 10 human lymphocyte samples to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (800 MHz, continuous wave) on genomic instability. The lymphyocytes were exposed in a specially designed waveguide resonator at specific absorption rates (SARs) of 2.9 and 4.1 W/kg in a temperature range of 36-37 degrees C. The induced aneuploidy of chromosomes 1, 10, 11 and 17 was determined by interphase FISH using semi-automated image analysis.
We observed increased levels of aneuploidy depending on the chromosome studied as well as on the level of exposure. In chromosomes 1 and 10, there was increased aneuploidy at the higher SAR, while for chromosomes 11 and 17, the increases were observed only for the lower SAR.
Multisomy (chromosomal gains) appeared to be the primary contributor to the increased aneuploidy. The effect of temperature on the level of aneuploidy was examined over the range of 33.5-40 degrees C for 72 h with no statistically significant difference in the level of aneuploidy compared to 37 degrees C.
These findings suggest the possible existence of an athermal effect of RF radiation that causes increased levels of aneuploidy. These results contribute to the assessment of potential health risks after continuous chronic exposure to RF radiation at SARs close to the current levels set by ICNIRP guidelines.
Yes, as in every report: ”These findings suggest the possible existence of an athermal effect of RF radiation that causes increased levels of aneuploidy.” Possible existence – we can’t rule out that it is wifi or cucumbers or ghosts even.
Microwave electromagnetic field regulates gene expression in T-lymphoblastoid leukemia CCRF-CEM cell line exposed to 900 MHz.
Electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields are ubiquitous in our society, and concerns have been expressed regarding possible adverse effects of these exposures. Research on Extremely Low-Frequency (ELF) magnetic fields has been performed for more than two decades, and the methodology and quality of studies have improved over time. Studies have consistently shown increased risk for childhood leukemia associated with ELF magnetic fields. There are still inadequate data for other outcomes. More recently, focus has shifted toward Radio Frequencies (RF) exposures from mobile telephony. There are no persuasive data suggesting a health risk, but this research field is still immature with regard to the quantity and quality of available data. This technology is constantly changing and there is a need for continued research on this issue. To investigate whether exposure to high-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) could induce adverse health effects, we cultured acute T-lymphoblastoid leukemia cells (CCRF-CEM) in the presence of 900 MHz MW-EMF generated by a transverse electromagnetic (TEM) cell at short and long exposure times.
We evaluated the effect of high-frequency EMF on gene expression and we identified functional pathways influenced by 900 MHz MW-EMF exposure.
False statement:”Studies have consistently shown increased risk for childhood leukemia associated with ELF magnetic fields.” What is ”functional pathways”? Possibilities?
Exposure to cell phone radiation up-regulates apoptosis genes in primary cultures of neurons and astrocytes
The health effects of cell phone radiation exposure are a growing public concern. This study investigated whether expression of genes related to cell death pathways are dysregulated in primary cultured neurons and astrocytes by exposure to a working Global System for Mobile Communication (GSM) cell phone rated at a frequency of 1900MHz. Primary cultures were exposed to cell phone emissions for 2h. We used array analysis and real-time RT-PCR to show up-regulation of caspase-2, caspase-6 and Asc (apoptosis associated speck-like protein containing a card) gene expression in neurons and astrocytes. Up-regulation occurred in both ”on” and ”stand-by” modes in neurons, but only in ”on” mode in astrocytes. Additionally, astrocytes showed up-regulation of the Bax gene. The effects are specific since up-regulation was not seen for other genes associated with apoptosis, such as caspase-9 in either neurons or astrocytes, or Bax in neurons.
The results show that even relatively short-term exposure to cell phone radiofrequency emissions can up-regulate elements of apoptotic pathways in cells derived from the brain, and that neurons appear to be more sensitive to this effect than astrocytes.
The stats are increasing, keep it coming a couple of thousand of ridiculous studies to go. This will be a great reference to me in the future. Is it ok to quote you in my next blog post? Oh, wait yes it is.
Glad I can help you bring greater attention to this public health issue.
Evidence for mobile phone radiation exposure effects on reproductive pattern of male rats: role of ROS.
The relationship between radiofrequency electromagnetic fields emitted from mobile phone and infertility is a matter of continuing debate. It is postulated that these radiations may affect the reproduction pattern spell by targeting biochemistry of sperm. In an attempt to expedite the issue, 70 days old Wistar rats (n = 6) were exposed to mobile phone radiofrequency (RF) radiation for 2 h per day for 45 days and data compared with sham exposed (n = 6) group. A significant decrease (P < 0.05) in the level of testosterone and an increase in caspase-3 activity were found in the RF-exposed animals. Distortions in sperm head and mid piece of sperm mitochondrial sheath were also observed as captured by Transmission Electron Microscope (TEM). In addition, progeny from RF-exposed rats showed significant decreases in number and weight as compared with that of sham-exposed animals. A reduction in testosterone, an increase in caspase-3, and distortion in spermatozoa could be caused by overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in animals under mobile phone radiation exposure.
Our findings on these biomarkers are clear indications of possible health implications of repeated exposure to mobile phone radiation.
6 rats… Even worse than the infamous 10-rat-study.
Reactive oxygen species formation and apoptosis in human peripheral blood mononuclear cell induced by 900 MHz mobile phone radiation.
We demonstrate that reactive oxygen species (ROS) plays an important role in the process of apoptosis in human peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) which is induced by the radiation of 900 MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RFEMF) at a specific absorption rate (SAR) of ~0.4 W/kg when the exposure lasts longer than two hours. The apoptosis is induced through the mitochondrial pathway and mediated by activating ROS and caspase-3, and decreasing the mitochondrial potential.
The activation of ROS is triggered by the conformation disturbance of lipids, protein, and DNA induced by the exposure of GSM RFEMF.
Although human PBMC was found to have a self-protection mechanism of releasing carotenoid in response to oxidative stress to lessen the further increase of ROS, the imbalance between the antioxidant defenses and ROS formation still results in an increase of cell death with the exposure time and can cause about 37% human PBMC death in eight hours.
”…can cause..” Yes, and coffee probably as well.
Fetal radiofrequency radiation exposure from 800-1900 mhz-rated cellular telephones affects neurodevelopment and behavior in mice.
Neurobehavioral disorders are increasingly prevalent in children, however their etiology is not well understood.
An association between prenatal cellular telephone use and hyperactivity in children has been postulated, yet the direct effects of radiofrequency radiation exposure on neurodevelopment remain unknown.
Here we used a mouse model to demonstrate that in-utero radiofrequency exposure from cellular telephones does affect adult behavior.
Mice exposed in-utero were hyperactive and had impaired memory as determined using the object recognition, light/dark box and step-down assays.
Whole cell patch clamp recordings of miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents (mEPSCs) revealed that these behavioral changes were due to altered neuronal developmental programming.
Exposed mice had dose-responsive impaired glutamatergic synaptic transmission onto layer V pyramidal neurons of the prefrontal cortex.
We present the first experimental evidence of neuropathology due to in-utero cellular telephone radiation. Further experiments are needed in humans or non-human primates to determine the risk of exposure during pregnancy.
Rubbish again. ” Further experiments are needed..” Nice evidence?
The influence of microwave radiation from cellular phone on fetal rat brain.
The increasing use of cellular phones in our society has brought focus on the potential detrimental effects to human health by microwave radiation. The aim of our study was to evaluate the intensity of oxidative stress and the level of neurotransmitters in the brains of fetal rats chronically exposed to cellular phones. The experiment was performed on pregnant rats exposed to different intensities of microwave radiation from cellular phones. Thirty-two pregnant rats were randomly divided into four groups: CG, GL, GM, and GH. CG accepted no microwave radiation, GL group radiated 10 min each time, GM group radiated 30 min, and GH group radiated 60 min. The 3 experimental groups were radiated 3 times a day from the first pregnant day for consecutively 20 days, and on the 21st day, the fetal rats were taken and then the contents of superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px), malondialdehyde (MDA), noradrenaline (NE), dopamine (DA), and 5-hydroxyindole acetic acid (5-HT) in the brain were assayed. Compared with CG, there were significant differences (P<0.05) found in the contents of SOD, GSH-Px, and MDA in GM and GH; the contents of SOD and GSH-Px decreased and the content of MDA increased. The significant content differences of NE and DA were found in fetal rat brains in GL and GH groups, with the GL group increased and the GH group decreased.
Through this study, we concluded that receiving a certain period of microwave radiation from cellular phones during pregnancy has certain harm on fetal rat brains.
32 rats into 4 groups. 8 rats in each group is not enough. What happened with the 320-rats-study?
Modulation of heat shock protein response in SH-SY5Y by mobile phone microwaves.
Cell stress response was evaluated by MTT assay as well as changes in the heat shock protein expression (Hsp20, Hsp27 and Hsp70) and caspase-3 activity levels, as biomarkers of apoptotic pathway. Under our experimental conditions, neither cell viability nor Hsp27 expression nor caspase-3 activity was significantly changed. Interestingly, a significant decrease in Hsp20 expression was observed at both times of exposure, whereas Hsp70 levels were significantly increased only after 4 h exposure.
The modulation of the expression of Hsps in neuronal cells can be an early response to radiofrequency microwaves.
”… can be..” Why do you keep posting ridiculous studies that shows ”may”, ”can be”, ”might” etc? Yes we know that. We can’t rule out health effects. And we can’t prove it’s dangerous and we can’t prove it’s not. Do you even read these articles? Do you even understand what they are saying?
Single-strand DNA breaks in human hair root cells exposed to mobile phone radiation.
The data showed that talking on a mobile phone for 15 or 30 min significantly increased (p < 0.05) single-strand DNA breaks in cells of hair roots close to the phone. Comparing the 15-min and 30-min data using the paired t-test also showed that significantly more damages resulted after 30 min than after 15 min of phone use.
A short-term exposure (15 and 30 min) to RFR (900-MHz) from a mobile phone caused a significant increase in DNA single-strand breaks in human hair root cells located around the ear which is used for the phone calls.
Hair-loss? Link to study? Is hair-loss dangerous, now? Wow… Now I’m terrified.
GSM 900 MHz radiation inhibits ants’ association between food sites and encountered cues
The kinetics of the acquisition and loss of the use of olfactory and visual cues were previously obtained in six experimental colonies of the ant Myrmica sabuleti meinert 1861, under normal conditions. In the present work, the same experiments were conducted on six other naive identical colonies of M. sabuleti, under electromagnetic radiation similar to those surrounding GSM and communication masts. In this situation, no association between food and either olfactory or visual cues occurred. After a recovery period, the ants were able to make such an association but never reached the expected score. Such ants having acquired a weaker olfactory or visual score and still undergoing olfactory or visual training were again submitted to electromagnetic waves. Not only did they lose all that they had memorized, but also they lost it in a few hours instead of in a few days (as under normal conditions when no longer trained). They kept no visual memory at all (instead of keeping 10% of it as they normally do). The impact of GSM 900 MHz radiation was greater on the visual memory than on the olfactory one.
These communication waves may have such a disastrous impact on a wide range of insects using olfactory and/or visual memory, i.e., on bees.
Ah, there’s the bees report! 🙂
Brain proteome response following whole body exposure of mice to mobile phone or wireless DECT base radiation.
The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of two sources of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on the proteome of cerebellum, hippocampus, and frontal lobe in Balb/c mice following long-term whole body irradiation. Three equally divided groups of animals (6 animals/group) were used; the first group was exposed to a typical mobile phone, at a SAR level range of 0.17-0.37 W/kg for 3 h daily for 8 months, the second group was exposed to a wireless DECT base (Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications/Telephone) at a SAR level range of 0.012-0.028 W/kg for 8 h/day also for 8 months and the third group comprised the sham-exposed animals. Comparative proteomics analysis revealed that long-term irradiation from both EMF sources altered significantly (p < 0.05) the expression of 143 proteins in total (as low as 0.003 fold downregulation up to 114 fold overexpression). Several neural function related proteins (i.e., Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein (GFAP), Alpha-synuclein, Glia Maturation Factor beta (GMF), and apolipoprotein E (apoE)), heat shock proteins, and cytoskeletal proteins (i.e., Neurofilaments and tropomodulin) are included in this list as well as proteins of the brain metabolism (i.e., Aspartate aminotransferase, Glutamate dehydrogenase) to nearly all brain regions studied. Western blot analysis on selected proteins confirmed the proteomics data.
The observed protein expression changes may be related to brain plasticity alterations, indicative of oxidative stress in the nervous system or involved in apoptosis and might potentially explain human health hazards reported so far, such as headaches, sleep disturbance, fatigue, memory deficits, and brain tumor long-term induction under similar exposure conditions.
”..might explain..” 12 useless rats sacrificed…
Effects of radiofrequency radiation exposure on blood-brain barrier permeability in male and female rats.
During the last several decades, numerous studies have been performed aiming at the question of whether or not exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RFR) influences the permeability of the blood-brain barrier (BBB). The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of RFR on the permeability of BBB in male and female Wistar albino rats. Right brain, left brain, cerebellum, and total brain were analyzed separately in the study. Rats were exposed to 0.9 and 1.8 GHz continuous-wave (CW) RFR for 20 min (at SARs of 4.26 mW/kg and 1.46 mW/kg, respectively) while under anesthesia. Control rats were sham-exposed. Disruption of BBB integrity was detected spectrophotometrically using the Evans-blue dye, which has been used as a BBB tracer and is known to be bound to serum albumin. Right brain, left brain, cerebellum, and total brain were evaluated for BBB permeability. In female rats, no albumin extravasation was found in in the brain after RFR exposure. A significant increase in albumin was found in the brains of the RF-exposed male rats when compared to sham-exposed male brains.
These results suggest that exposure to 0.9 and 1.8 GHz CW RFR at levels below the international limits can affect the vascular permeability in the brain of male rats. The possible risk of RFR exposure in humans is a major concern for the society. Thus, this topic should be investigated more thoroughly in the future.
” can be”.. How many rats? 2? 10? More research is needed.
Effect of electromagnetic radiofrequency radiation on the rats’ brain, liver and kidney cells measured by comet assay.
The goal of study was to evaluate DNA damage in rat’s renal, liver and brain cells after in vivo exposure to radiofrequency/microwave (Rf/Mw) radiation of cellular phone frequencies range. To determine DNA damage, a single cell gel electrophoresis/comet assay was used. Wistar rats (male, 12 week old, approximate body weight 350 g) (N = 9) were exposed to the carrier frequency of 915 MHz with Global System Mobile signal modulation (GSM), power density of 2.4 W/m2, whole body average specific absorption rate SAR of 0.6 W/kg. The animals were irradiated for one hour/day, seven days/week during two weeks period. The exposure set-up was Gigahertz Transversal Electromagnetic Mode Cell (GTEM–cell). Sham irradiated controls (N = 9) were apart of the study. The body temperature was measured before and after exposure. There were no differences in temperature in between control and treated animals. Comet assay parameters such as the tail length and tail intensity were evaluated. In comparison with tail length in controls (13.5 +/- 0.7 microm), the tail was slightly elongated in brain cells of irradiated animals (14.0 +/- 0.3 microm). The tail length obtained for liver (14.5 +/- 0.3 microm) and kidney (13.9 +/- 0.5 microm) homogenates notably differs in comparison with matched sham controls (13.6 +/- 0.3 microm) and (12.9 +/- 0.9 microm). Differences in tail intensity between control and exposed animals were not significant.
The results of this study suggest that, under the experimental conditions applied, repeated 915 MHz irradiation could be a cause of DNA breaks in renal and liver cells, but not affect the cell genome at the higher extent compared to the basal damage.
N=9 rats means nine rats. 9 is less than 10. ”…could be a cause..” Yes, pickled vegetables could probably also be a cause.
Non-thermal effects of 2.45 GHz microwaves on spindle assembly, mitotic cells and viability of Chinese hamster V-79 cells.
The production of mitotic spindle disturbances and activation of the apoptosis pathway in V79 Chinese hamster cells by continuous 2.45 GHz microwaves exposure were studied, in order to investigate possible non-thermal cell damage. We demonstrated that microwave (MW) exposure at the water resonance frequency was able to induce alteration of the mitotic apparatus and apoptosis as a function of the applied power densities (5 and 10mW/cm(2)), together with a moderate reduction in the rate of cell division. After an exposure time of 15 min the proportion of aberrant spindles and of apoptotic cells was significantly increased, while the mitotic index decreased as well, as compared to the untreated V79 cells. Additionally, in order to understand if the observed effects were due to RF exposure per se or to a thermal effect, V79 cells were also treated in thermostatic bath mimicking the same temperature increase recorded during microwave emission. The effect of temperature on the correct assembly of mitotic spindles was negligible up to 41°C, while apoptosis was induced only when the medium temperature achieved 40°C, thus exceeding the maximum value registered during MW exposure. We hypothesise that short-time MW exposures at the water resonance frequency cause, in V79 cells, reversible alterations of the mitotic spindle, this representing, in turn, a pro-apoptotic signal for the cell line.
Yes.. Nice hypothesis, but where is the evidence?
How does long term exposure to base stations and mobile phones affect human hormone profiles?
This study showed significant decrease in volunteers’ ACTH, cortisol, thyroid hormones, prolactin for young females, and testosterone levels.
The present study revealed that high RFR effects on pituitary-adrenal axis.
Link to study? Rats? Bees? Ants? Humans? How many rats this time? Useless.
Well that’s more than enough evidence of adverse biological effects from RF radiation.
It’s your decision if you expose your children to high levels long-term RF radiation.
Ultimately it’s a human experiment, and your children are the guinea pigs.
I appreciate your hard work but not one single evidence. I’m sorry. Don’t give up tho.. some day someone may or might prove you right.
Not one single evidence – still!
En eloge till dig, Christer, som orkar ägna så mycket tid åt att syna alla dessa irrelevanta studier!
WiFi verkar alltså okej men hur farlig är strålningen från mobiltelefonmastar (GSM/2G, 3G, 4G), skärmar och annat som finns i hemmet? Något man bör tänka på?
Tack Torkel. Nej, inte ens hos de som jobbar med det dagligen har man hittat vettiga samband. Om jag har en telefonlur mot örat känner dock jag obehag (varmt och svettigt ungefär som en katt i knät) så jag försöker undvika det. Oron för att det är farligt är farligare än själva ”strålningen” eftersom oron skapar stress som t o m kan ge fysiska symptom. Stress är aldrig bra, inte ens hos försöksdjur som möss. Ja, och sedan är det nog inte bra att stirra på en skärm 18 timmar per dygn (liksom att läsa pappersbok 18 per dygn) men det är p g a andra orsaker än just strålning.
Jag tänker inte godkänna spam-länkar i fortsättningen bara så du vet. Dessa 190 ”forskare” har inte nån enda gång producerat 1 enda seriös och vetenskaplig rapport med belägg för att ”tekniken dödar oss i förtid”. Inte enda rapport. https://christerhellberg.com/2015/01/25/genomgang-inga-bevis-i-100-rapporter-som-stralskyddsstiftelsen-refererar-till/
Att de DESSUTOM som ”forskare” utgår från denna tes i deras forskande är ju rent ut sagt diskvalificerande i sig. Det kallas för confirmation bias – ”Konfirmeringsbias är en tendens i mänskligt beteende, att omedvetet vara selektivt uppmärksam på sådan information som bekräftar våra egna uppfattningar. Konfirmeringsbias är en typ av kognitiv bias.
Har man en negativ självbild tenderar man att ta fasta på kritik och inte höra beröm. Även vetenskapliga forskare tenderar att vara selektivt uppmärksamma på forskningsresultat som stämmer med deras egen teori och omedvetet ignorera sådant som strider mot den. Karl Popper förordar därför att forskare ska lägga mer tid på att försöka hitta fel med (falsifiera) sina teorier än på att bekräfta dem. En konfirmeringsbias riskerar att leda till en övertro på personliga åsikter medan motbevis och alternativa källor ignoreras. Detta kan leda till katastrofalt felaktiga beslut, speciellt i vetenskapliga, politiska och militära sammanhang.”