Wi-fi related radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF): a pilot experimental study of personal exposure and risk perception

Chicken or egg? Attribution hypothesis and nocebo hypothesis to explain somatization associated to perceived RF-EMF exposure

Introduction

The aim of this study is to understand the temporal relationship between the somatization usually attributed to RF-EMFs, and to evaluate the attribution hypothesis and the nocebo hypothesis in this context.

Method

In this longitudinal study, data from the Dutch Occupational and Environmental Health Cohort Study (AMIGO) was analyzed, consisting of a baseline questionnaire collected in 2011 (14,829 participants) and a follow-up questionnaire collected in 2015 (7,904 participants). Participants completed a questionnaire providing information on their health status, perceived environmental exposures, and demographics. Two sets of multiple regressions were conducted to evaluate the two hypotheses.

Results

Results show that the attribution hypothesis overall explained symptom reporting in association to perceived RF-EMF base station exposure and perceived electricity exposure more frequently than the nocebo hypothesis.

Discussion

This finding stands out from most of the existing literature, which primarily points to the nocebo effect as the main explanation for somatization in response to RF-EMF exposure. While this does not exclude, in absolute terms, the existence of a nocebo effect, potentially at other time scales, this finding has relevant consequences at the policy making level. The emerging relevance of the attribution hypothesis moves the focus on the discomfort of people with unexplained symptoms and their need to find a plausible explanation for their discomfort.

Effects of website-based risk communication of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields on general public

Background

Radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) are utilized in communications and appliances and are indispensable in daily life. However, some people have concerns about the adverse health effects of RF-EMFs; therefore, effective risk communication (RC) is needed in this field.

Objective

In this study, we investigate public attitudes towards RF-EMFs and examine the impact of RC via a website on these attitudes and objective knowledge.

Methods

Three web surveys were conducted over 10 weeks with the same participants. The questionnaires were conducted at three different time points with 5-week intervals: baseline survey (T1), RC evaluation survey (T2), and follow-up survey (T3). Participants of T2 were randomly recruited from among those of T1, and participants of T3 were randomly selected from among the T2 respondents. Approximately half of the respondents in each of T2 and T3 were assigned to the control group. Twelve items regarding attitudes toward RF-EMFs and objective knowledge were evaluated in all surveys (T1-T3). After removing low-engagement data, the number of valid answers was 782 in T3. Differences between T1 and T2 (Sub T1-T2) and T1 and T3 (Sub T1-T3) were analyzed. Participant selection was randomized and the authors were blind to this selection until analysis.

Results

Four clusters were identified: Cluster 1 (Non-anxious, 25.0%), Cluster 2 (Anxious, 16.0%), Cluster 3 (Low-interest, 40.5%), and Cluster 4 (High-interest, 18.5%). A decrease in subjective RF-EMF exposure levels was noted in Cluster 2 immediately after website viewing. Temporary increases and decreases in health concerns about RF-EMF usage activities were observed in Clusters 1 and 2, respectively, immediately after viewing. Clusters 1 and 3 showed a temporal decrease in needs for RF-EMF usage activities at T2 but it returned to the baseline level 5 weeks later. Cluster 4 was less responsive to the risk communication. Subanalysis stratified by gender and age showed fluctuations in responses, especially in Clusters 1 and 2.

Conclusion

We demonstrate the effectiveness of RF-EMF risk communication via websites, particularly for Cluster 2. The results of this study showed that offering objective and comprehensible information through a website can significantly reduce concerns and perceived risks related to RF-EMFs.

Measurement studies of personal exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: A systematic review

The last 25 years have seen an increase in the number of radiofrequency sources with the global adoption of smartphones as primary connectivity devices. The objective of this work was to review and evaluate the measured studies of personal exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (RF-RMF) and meet the basic quality criteria eligible for inclusion in this Review, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, following the eligibility criteria of the PECO (Population, Exposure, Comparator, and Outcome) methodology, and the instrument for critical reading Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Español (CASPe). We systematically reviewed the works published between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2021, yielding 56 publications. Of the different types of studies in which personal exposure to RF-EMF has been measured with two measurement methodologies can be highlighted: Personal measurements with volunteers and Personal measurements with a trained researcher (touring a specific area, one or several microenvironments, an entire city, walking or in some means of transport). Personal exposimeters were used in 83% of the studies. The lowest mean was measured in Egypt with a value of 0.00100 μW/m² (1.00 nW/m²) in 2007 and the highest mean was measured in Belgium with a value of 285000 μW/m² (0.285 W/m²) in 2019. The results of our study confirm that RF-EMF exposure levels are well below the maximum levels established by the ICNIRP guidelines.

Instruments to measure environmental and personal radiofrequency-electromagnetic field exposures: an update

Modern human populations are exposed to anthropogenic sources of radiofrequency-electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs), primarily to telecommunication and broadcasting technologies. As a result, ongoing concerns from some members of the public have arisen regarding potential health effects following RF-EMF exposures. In order to monitor human RF-EMF exposures and investigate potential health effects, an objective assessment of RF-EMF exposures is necessary. Accurate dosimetry is essential for any investigation of potential associations between RF-EMF exposure and health effects in human populations. This review updates state-of-the-art knowledge of currently available RF-EMF exposure assessment tools applicable in human epidemiological studies. These tools cater for assessing RF-EMF exposures in human environments; through mobile phone-based tools or other standalone tools. RF-EMF exposure assessment has been significantly improved through the application of some of these tools in recent years.

Physical units to report intensity of electromagnetic wave

The aim of this work is to propose a consensus to scientific community that handles personal exposimeters, which measure intensity of an electromagnetic wave (W/m²). To express the intensity of an electromagnetic wave there is a duality in the way of expressing it. Some scientists prefer to use W/m² while others use V/m, which is a unit of the electric field. There is also a duality in the name, sometimes it is called it power flux density and some other times, wave intensity. We believe that this second name is more appropriate from the point of view of physics. We suggest expressing intensity of an electromagnetic wave in W/m² instead of giving the value of their electric field which is measured in V/m. There is a quadratic relation between electric field and intensity of the wave, and it is necessary to do a mathematical operation, so in our opinion, it is preferable to use W/m² which directly gives us the value of the measured intensity. Furthermore, if the intensity is very low, it may be expressed in μW/m² and with only three significant figures, due to sensitivity of the current exposimeters used.