Dokumentenliste - CARCINOGENIC POTENCY OF MICROWAVE RADIATION
Table
published
European Journal of Oncology, 2001.
CARCINOGENIC
POTENCY OF MICROWAVE RADIATION: OVERWIEV OF THE PROBLEM AND RESULTS OF
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES ON POLISH MILITARY PERSONNEL.
Stanislaw SZMIGIELSKI, Elzbieta
SOBICZEWSKA and Roman KUBACKI.
Department of Microwave Safety,
Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Kozielska 4, PL-01-163 Warsaw,
Poland.
Acknowledgments: This
work was supported partially from theEuropean Union Commission INCO-COPERNICUS ERB IC15 CT980303 Research
Project „Assessment of Health Risks Related to Occupational and Environmental
Exposure to Radiofrequency and Microwave Electromagnetic Fields (RADIORISKS)”.
Address
for correspondence: Prof. dr med. Stanislaw SZMIGIELSKI,
Department of
Microwave Safety,
Military Institute
of Hygiene and Epidemiology,
Kozielska str.4,
PL-01-163 WARSAW,
POLAND.
Running title:Carcinogenic potency of microwaves.
Key words: electromagnetic
fields, microwaves, occupational cancer, cancer epidemiology.
CARCINOGENIC POTENCY OF MICROWAVE
RADIATION: OVERWIEV OF THE PROBLEM AND RESULTS OF EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES ON
POLISH MILITARY PERSONNEL.
Abstract.
Microwave (MW) radiation, part of the electromagnetic spectrum at wave
frequencies of 300 MHz – 300 GHz, can penetrate human tissues and exert various
bioeffects at relatively low field power densities. Experimental investigations
revealed the possibility of epigenetic activity of certain MW exposures
(frequently limited to particular frequencies and/or modulations of the carrier
wave), but there exists no satisfactory support from epidemiological studies
for the increased cancer risk in MW-exposed subjects.
Use of mobile phones
(MP) considerably increased local exposure to 900 or 1800 MHz and raised
concerns of the risk of brain tumors and other neoplasms of the head. At
present the experimental and epidemiological bulk of evidence is too limited
for valid assessment of the risks. Two available epidemiological studies of
brain cancer morbidity in MP users did not confirm an increased risk for all
types of neoplasms, but unexplained excesses of particular types and/or
locations of the tumors has been reported.
However, there exist
single epidemiological studies which indicate increased mortality of certain
types of neoplasms in workers exposed to microwave radiation. As an example,
the multiyear study of cancer morbidity in Polish military personnel exposed to
2 – 10 W/m2 will be presented. Despite of the reported increased
morbidity of haematopoietic and lymphatic neoplasms, it was not possible to
confirm the causal link of the morbidity with exposure to MW radiation.
Therefore, it is concluded that the
epidemiologic evidences still falls short of their strength and consistency
required to come to a reasonable conclusion that MW can cause human cancer and
thus, this radiation should be classified in group 3 (unclassifiable as to
carcinogenicity in humans) of the IARC classification of human carcinogens.
INTRODUCTION.
In the last few decades, the use of devices which emit electromagnetic
fields (EMFs) has increased considerably. This proliferation has been
accompanied by an increased concern about possible health effects of exposure
to these fields (for reviews see 1, 2, 3, 4). Human-made sources in the
spectrum of EMFs (up to 300 000 MHz) produce local field levels many orders of
magnitude above the natural background. Radio and television transmitters are
examples of radiofrequency (RF - 0.1 - 300 MHz) and microwave (MW - 300 - 300
000 MHz) sources that intentionally produce EM emmisions to the environment.
Exposure levels in the MW range are traditionally described in terms of"power density" and are normally
reported in watt per square metre (W/m2), or milliwatts per square
centimetre (mW/cm2 = 10 W/m2). Systems which emit MW energy
to the environment, including broadcasting stations, radar and
telecommunication antennas,vary greatly
in terms of their design. This diversity results in somewhat different
approaches in evaluating human exposure and potential risk problems.
Fortunately, a comprehensive evaluation of residential exposure to RF
and MW indicates that, in general, the exposure levels are relatively low.
Measurements performed in 15 large cities in the USA revealed that the median
exposure level ranged about 0.05 W/m2, with 90% of residents being
exposed to fields not exceeding 0.1 W/m2 (4). Only approximatly 1%
of the population studied was potentially exposed to levels greater than 0.1
W/m2 . These higher exposures occur at limited areas located close
to strong MW sources. Such situations can exist e.g. in proximity to very
powerful, ground-level transmitters. or to low-power, in-town repeaters, which
are typically mounted on the top of tall buildings (1, 5).
Introduction of
cellular phone (CP) systems and a fast increase of number of users of hand-held
phones in the last decade has changed the MF exposure levels of the population
quite considerably. With CPs, a MW transmitter has been for the first time ever
in history put right up against the side of anyone’s head, and switched on.
Analysis of distribution and absorption of the radiation revealed that about
40% of the MW energy emitted from CP antenna goes into the user’s head and
hands (6). Such situation raised immediately concerns about possible health
risks of the exposures, both among the bioelectromagnetic community and the
public.
Fortunately, till now, no cases ofspecific syndromes and/or increased risk of any spontaneous diseases,
which can be causally linked to action of MWs emitted from CPs, have been
documented in medical or epidemiological observations of CP users (6, 7, 8, 9).
On the other side, a variety of non-specific health symptoms (NSHS), including
headaches, fatigue, affected sleep parameters, and small changes in blood
pressure, generally referred as „MW hypersensitivity”were reported in single studies of CP users
(10, 11, 12, 13). Still more, the recent epidemiologic study performed in
Sweden and Norway on about 11 000 CP users points a clear relation between
occurance of NSHS and intensity of CP use – about 20% of these who use CP for 1
hr daily or more report NSHS, while the numbers are considerably lower for
those who use CP for 15 or 30 min daily (14). From the scientists’s point of
view, the present bulk of evidence allows to conclude without doubts that CPs
have a „biological effect”, although the clinical relevance of this „effect”
still remains unclear. On the other side, the CP industry has conducted a
sophisticated and, so far, very successful campaign to accentuate the positive
possibility that their product do not pose anyhealth problems. The problem of health risks and mobile phone systems
has been discussed in detail in a comprehensive and well balanced report of the
Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones, headed by Sir William Stewart (3).
The report has been published in 2000 by NRPB in UK and is addtionally
available at the website address www.iegmp.org.uk.
MW energy penetrates inside biological tissues and may be there
transformed into heat. The deposition of larger amounts of MW energy in the
human body tends to increase the body temperature to the extent which depends
on numerous external and internal factors, including thermal environment
andmetabolic heat production. In normal
thermal environment a SAR (specific absorption rate) of MW radiation of 1 - 4
W/kg for 30 minutes produces an average body temperaurte increase of less than
10C for healthy adults (2, 4) a situation which is considered as
tolerable from the thermophysiologic point of view. Thermal effects caused by absorption
of MW energy are considered as dangerous (2) and therefore, all safety
guidelines leave a large margin of protection against such complications, even
at the worst possible environmental conditions.
A real problem starts when the effects of low-level MW fields are being
considered, when the amount of absorbed energy is much too small to cause a
detectable increase oftemperature (15).
At present there exist sufficient experimental and epidemiological evidence
which clearly indicates that under certain conditions of exposure, weak and
very weak MW fields can cause measurable effects in biological organisms
(cells, animals, human beings) (for most recent reviews, see 3, 6, 7, 15, 16),
but mechanisms of these effects and their relevance for health status of the
organisms are still difficult for interpretation. In general, bioeffects linked
with eposures in low-level MW fields are weak, transient, disappear shortly
after exposure and are difficult for replication. Still more, quite frequently
certain bioeffects (e.g. increase in efflux of calcium ions from brain tissues
and neural cells exposed to weak MW fields modulated at 16 Hz frequency (17)
occur only at particular frequencies and/or modulations of MW
("windowing" phenomena) and/or do not show any relation with exposure
intensity (dose).
Analysis of available publications on effects of exposure in low-level
MW fields reveals that only part of the material fulfills the quality assurance
criteria (15). Numerous reports from experimental studies do not provide
sufficient information about exposure conditions, MW dosimetry, use of
sham-exposed controls and/or experimental design. In numerous medical and
epidemiological observations of personnel working in MW fields, the assessment
ofindividual exposure is at least
uncertain, particularly historical exposures are often determined via
surrogates (e.g. job titles, service cards, etc.) (18). In view of the above, a
considerable practical experience in studies of bioeffects of EMFs is needed
for critical evaluation of the available literature on effects of low-level MW
fields, synthesis of data and selection ofresults into these which are properly verified, possible but requiring
further confirmation from those which are still poorly documented and seem unacceptable
for experienced reviewers (Table I).
Non-cancer health disorders which are frequently linked to long-term
exposures in low-level MW fields include a variety of behavioural effects,
functional changes in the neural and circulatory systems, dysregulation of the
autonomic control of internal organs, as well as certain ocular effects (for
recent reviews, see 7, 8, 11, 16).Although there exists partial support for these effects from
experimental studies in animals and medical observations of occupational groups
which are exposed to MW at work, it still remains an open question whether or
not such health disorders remain causally linked to the radiation or are the
effect of non-specific stress reactions experienced in the work environment.
Another concept which may explain the above health disorders occuring after
exposure in weak MW fields is generally referred as "EMF
hypersensitivity",which is defined
as ability of individual people to react to EMFs at significantly lower levels
than normal (13). According to its etiology, in general the term "EMF
hypersensitivity" (EMH) is used for people who claim to have subjective
health problems (headaches, depressive symptoms, neurasthenia, anxiety, etc.)
due to the nearby electric and electronic appliances and/or MW transmitters.
The problem ofEMH has become recently a
subject of systemic investigations, as in some European countries (mostly in
the Nordic countries and in Germany) centers of occupational medicine have to
deal with large number of persons claiming to be hypersensitive and several
self-aid groups of citizens were already formed (13, 15). Existing studies,
based on response of "hypersensitive" subjectsto provocational exposures in weak EMFs, tend
to support the existence of EMH, but only in part of those who claim their
hypersensitivity. EMH is assumed to occur, with more or less pronounced
symptoms, in about 1-2% of the general population, but in most
Table
I.
Biological
effects and health hazards of long-term exposures
inlow-level microwave fields.
Experimental investigations
Human studies
A.Effects with sufficient confirmation in
experimental/human studies,
occuring frequently under different conditions of
exposure.
·No documented health effects and delayed risks of
long-term exposure in low-level MW fields;
·Generally weak and poorly replicable effects in
experimental animals exposed in low-level MW fields;
·Inability to establish thresholds for bioeffects
related to exposure in low-level MW fields;
·Non-specific symptoms without proven clinical
relevance;
·Dysregulation of autonomic control of physiologic
systems;
·Functional changes in brain bioelectric activity
without clinical relevance.
B.Probable effects, difficult for confirmation
and/or replication,
occuring under specific conditions of exposure
(„widowing” phenomena).
·Influenced (generally slightly increased) efflux
of calcium from cells and tissues exposed in
vitro;
·Slightly changed active membrane transport of ions
in cells exposed in vitro;
·Activation of certain cellular enzymes, relevant
for proliferation and/or carcinogenesis (e.g. ornithone decarboxylase,
protein kinases);
·Changed reactivity of immunocompetent cells
(lymphocytes, killer cells, macrophages) after exposure in vitro;
·Individual hypersensitivity to EM fields;
·Non-specific stress reaction with general
adaptation syndrome (GAS);
·Intensification of symptoms of liability of
autonomic regulation of physiologic systems („vegetative neuroses”).
C.Poorly documented effects,frequently not replicable,
relation to
exposure conditions needs confirmation.
·Increased neoplastic transformation rate of cells
exposed in vitro;
·Faster development of spontaneous and/or induced
neoplasms in mice and rats;
·More pronounced cytopathic effects after exposure
in pulse-modulated MW fields than in equivalent continous wave fields.
·Increased risk of development of certain
neoplastic diseases (haemopoietic and lymphatic malignancies, brain tumours);
·Increased risk of development of organic diseases,
influenced by neurogenic and psychic stimuli;
·Immunologic and endocrine abnormalities.
D.Unconfirmed/unacceptable effects reported in the
literature,
difficult for interpretation and/or validation.
·Morphologic injury of cells and/or internal
organs;
·Morphologic injury of cells and/or internal
organs;
·Specific diseases (e.g. „microwave” sickness)
cases the symptoms can be
triggered by exposure in power frequency (50 Hz) EMFs, while MW seem to play
only little role in development of the symptoms (8, 13).It should be however emphasized that current
data are still unable to give a definite positive identification of causal
relationships between exposure in weak EMFs and appearance of non-specific
health symptoms, even in subjects concerned as "hypersensitive".
Improved methodologic design of future studies with healthy volunteers and
"hypersensitive" subjects and better coordination of studies in
different countries may allow to solve the problem.
CARCINOGENIC POTENCY OF MICROWAVE
RADIATION.
Electromagnetic
fields have been linked with increased risk of neoplastic diseases for a long
time, but the available experimental and medical data still did not allow for
valid conclusions. There exists a fragmentaric and scarce support from
experimental studies which indicates a possibility of epigenetic (non-genotoxic)
potency of microwave energy in the multistep process of carcinogenesis,
although possible mechanisms underlying these phenomena still remain
hypothetic. A detail analysis of this problem is presented in the recent
IEGMP-2000 Report (3).
Human data on possible health effects of exposure to low-level MW
fields are mostly based on medical and epidemiological observations of
occupational groups which are exposed to MW at work (military personnel, police
officers, physiotherapists who use medical diathermy equipment, plastic sealers
and workers in the broadcasting, transport and communication centeres). Effects
of residential exposures were relatively rarely a subject of sudy. The
epidemiological studies completed so far have mostly looked at cancer incidence
in residents living close to radio and television transmitters anddid not found a sufficient evidence for an
increased risk. Following a study of residents living around one TV and radiobroadcasting tower in UK in which a
significant increase in morbidity from adult leukaemia was reported in people
residing within 2 km of the transmitter (19), a more comprehensive study,
performed by the same authors around 20 transmission towers in UK, did not
confirm this finding (20). The study, based on 79 cases of adult leukemia
revealed that for persons residing within 2 km from the transmitters the
morbidity ratio was not increased (ebserved/expected O/E = 0.97), however a
small, but significant, decline in risk of adult leukemia with distance from
transmitters in the 2-10 km. was found (19, 20). Similar observations were made
in Australia. A study of cancer incidence among residents living in the
"inner" (close to TV towers) and "outer" (more distant)
municipalities in Northern Sydney reported an increased morbidity and mortality
of childhood leukaemia (21) in the "inner" municipalities. However,
when these data were reanalyzedand
other"inner" municipalities
were added (22), it apperared that the excess of childhood leukaemia was
restricted only to one (of six) "inner" municipalities and there
exist no evideneces for linking it with the low-level MW exposures.
Epidemiological observations of occupational groups which are exposed
to MW at work also do not provide sufficient evidence for a causal links between
exposure and increased risk of neoplastic diseases, although in some studies a
considerably higher morbidity rates were reported (for recent reviews, see 3,
23). It should be also pointed that eachwork environment has an individual combination of physical, chemical and
psychosocial factors which may influence human physiology, including
development of neoplastic diseases, in a very specific and unique way.
Therefore, the results of occupational studies of MW-exposed workers cannot be
directly extrapolated as health risks for the general public, the more that
intensities and time sequences of MW exposures in workers and in the
environment are different (18, 24). A typical MW intensities at work range from
2 - 10 W/m2 with incidental exposures at 10 - 30 W/m2 and
a period of exposure being limited to 1-2 hr during a working shift (4), while
in the environment and homes MW fields normally do not exceed 0.1 W/m2,
but the exposure tends to be continous.
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL
STUDIES ON POLISH MILITARY PERSONNEL.
Some time
ago the results of our retrospective analysis of cancer morbidity for the whole
population of career military personnel in Poland during the decade of 1970 -
1979 was published (24), although at that time the exact size of the population
could not be revealed; therefore, the results and their discussion were limited
to mortality rates (number ofnewly
diagnosed cancer cases per 100 000 of subjects per year). Nevertheless, a
significantly higher rate of particular types of neoplasms (haematologic,
lymphatic system, skin tumours, alimentary tract cancers) in personnel exposed
occupartionally to RFs and MWs (24) encouraged us to continue the prospective
analysis of morbidity and extend the observation period for the years 1980 -
1985. In 1996 the joint analysis covering the 15- year period of 1971 - 1985
has been published (25). It has been found that the subpopulation of about 3-4%
which had a documented occupational exposure to RF/MW radiation developed about
9% of all malignancies, giving the OER (Observed/Exposed Ratio) of 2.1 - 3.1,
depending on year of analysis. This difference in cancer morbidity related only
to particular types of malignancies and still more, the retrospective analysis
did not allow forprecise assessment
ofpast RF/MW exposure intensity
(dosis). Therefore, at that time the search for possible relations between
cancer morbity (risks) andlevels of the
RF/MW exposure was not possible. Additionally, we were aware that the analysis
was based on generally low number of registered cases of neoplasms and both
increasing size of the RF/MW-exposed population and longer period ofobservation has been postulated, before final
conclusions can be obtained.
In 1985 a
prospective analysis of cancer morbidity in Polish military career personnel
has been started and additionally, the exposure levels of the personnel were
measured.
In this
paper we present the available data and the summary of cancer morbidity for the
20-year period (1971 - 1990), including the 5-year period (1986 - 1990) where
both prospective analysis ofnew cases
and assessment of the RF/MW exposure were performed.
Material and Methods.
During 1971
- 1985 a retrospective analysis of all cases of neoplasms in the whole
population of career personnel in Polish army have been collected and compared
with service records listing exposure to RF/MW. Starting from 1985 each newly
diagnosed case of malignancy is recorded and a questionnaire describing type of
service and possible exposure to different risk factors, including RF/MW
radiation is filled. Additionally, all service posts where exposure of
personnel to RF/MWs occurs were assessed for the exposure levels. This allowed
to divide the RF/MW-exposed posts into four types - low (1 - 2 W/m2),
medium (2 - 6 W/m2), above medium (6 - 10 W/m2) and high
(exceeding 10 W/m2) maximal exposure levels during working shift
(Table V).
The size of population analyzed( active servicemen aged 25 - 59 years)
varied from year to year with a mean of 124 500 and standard deviation of 18
300. About 3% of this population (3 500 - 4 500 subjects) were considered on
base of service records as exposed to RF/MW radiation. For analysis the
population was divided intofour age
groups(< 30, 30 - 39, 40 - 49, 50 -
59).
All cases of neoplasms diagnosed in
the population were divided into 12 groups (type/localization - Table III).
Additionally, analysis of morbidity was performed in age groups and forthe prospective study (1986 - 1990) also in
subgroups with various levels of RF/MW exposure.
A battery of statistical tests was
used for analysis and correlation of the results. A CSS Statistica 5.5.
(Statsoft) software was applied for computing the results.
Results and Discussion.
. During
the 20-year period (1971 - 1990) in the investigated population a total of 2
493 various neoplasms was diagnosed, 2 355(94.46%) of them in non-exposed subjects and 138 (5.53%) in
RF/MW-exposed subpopulation (Table II). This gave the morbidity rates (per 100
000 subjects per year) for all age groups 97.61 for non-exposed and 178.75 for
RF/MW-exposed (exposed to non-exposed ratio = 1.83) (Table II).
Table
II.
Cancer
morbidity in Polish career military personnel
exposed
occupationally to radiofrequency and microwave radiation
- a 20
year analysis (1971 - 1990).
NUMBER
OF NEOPLASMS.
Non-Exposed
Exposed
TOTAL
Size
of population
120 630 ± 17900
(96.9%)
3 860 ± 770
( 3.1%)
124 500 ± 18300
(100.0%)
Number of neoplasms
(all cases)
2 355
(94.46%)
138
(5.53%)
2 493
(100.0%)
Morbidity rate
(per 100 000
per
year)
97.61
178.75
100.12
Exposed/Non-exposed
Ratio
1.83
Analysis
ofparticular localizations of the
diagnosed neoplasms (Table III) indicates that significantly higher morbidity
rates in the RF/MW-exposed group were noted for cancers of the alimentary
tract, skin tumours, including melanoma, brain neoplasms and
haematologic/lymphatic malignancies. For haematologic/lymphatic malignancies
the difference in morbidity between exposed and non-exposed servicemen was the
largest (ratio = 5.33, Tables III and IV), although in the RF/MW-exposed group
only 36 cases were diagnosed during 20 years. It should be noted that for
particular types of haematologic/lymphatic malignancies (Table IV) only single
cases were diagnosed in RF/MW-exposed group during the 20-year period of
observation – e.g. acute lymphatic leukaemias or plasmocytomas.
Cancer
morbidity in age groups (Fig.1) follows a rapidly increasing rate in subjects
aged over 40 years, both in non-exposed and exposed groups. For all neoplasms
the curves for cancer morbidity are parallel each other, although at the
considerably higher level for the RF/MW-exposed group (Fig.1). This may suggest
that in the RF/MW-exposed group the spontaneous neoplasms (or at least
particular types of the neoplasms) develop faster, with shorter latency period
than in non-exposed. In fact, a cumulative morbidity for a lifetime would be in
this case similar, but in exposed subjects the disease occurs earlier, by 5-10
years. The only
Table
III.
Cancer
morbidity in Polish career military personnel
exposed
occupationally to radiofrequency and microwave radiation
- a 20
year analysis (1971 - 1990).
LOCALIZATION
OF NEOPLASMS.
Localization
Non-exposed
Exposed
Ex/N-Ex
ratio
p
No.
Rate
No.
Rate
Oral
cavity
82
3.39
3
3.88
1.14
Pharynx
71
2.94
2
2.59
0.88
Esophag./Stomach
341
14.13
21
27.20
1.92
<0.05
Colorectal
249
10.32
14
18.13
1.76
< 0.05
Liver/Pancreas
73
3.02
3
3.88
1.28
Larynx/Lungs
724
30.01
27
34.97
1.16
Bones
53
2.19
2
2.59
1.18
Skin/Melanoma
106
4.39
7
9.07
2.07
< 0.05
Kidney/Prostate
146
6.05
6
7.77
1.28
Nervous
s./Brain
81
3.36
7
9.07
2.70
< 0.01
Thyroid
51
2.11
2
2.59
1.23
Haematologic
& Lymphatic
211
8.74
36
46.63
5.33
< 0.01
Other
167
6.92
8
10.36
1.49
ALL
LOCATIONS
2355
97.61
138
178.75
1.83
< 0.01
exception
apperas to be haematologic/lymphatic neoplasms, which show a considerable
increment in number of cases in RF/MW-exposed personnel aged above 40 years
(Fig.1) and for these neoplasms the depart of lines is visible at the very
early age of victims.
Assessment
of exposure of the investigated personnel (Table V) revealed that about 85% of
the servicemen had during work shifts the average exposure levels which did not
exceed 6 W/m2. Correlation of cancer morbidity rates with the
exposure levels (Table V), although
based on
relative small number of cases (36 during 5 years) has shown a considerably
higher rate in the two subgroups with high exposure levels.
A
comparison of cancer morbidity rates during the first (1970 - 1979) and the
second (1980 - 1989) decade and during the whole 20-year period of analysis
revealed the same trends and significances for all periods, however, higher morbidity
rates in RF/MW-exposed rates were noted during the decade of seventies. It is
not possible to assess the exposure levels for servicemen who worked with MW
fields in the fifties andearly sixties,
when no safety limits were yet established, however it is reasonable to assume
that at that time there were numerous cases of exposure in strong MW fields and
even thermal effects were noted.
To our
knowledge the present data for the first time present a hint that there exist a
relation between cancer risk and exposure level in RF/MW fields (Table V).
There is a long way to confirm this relation, but a considerably higher
morbidity rate in subjects exposed to RF/MW fields exceeding 6 W/m2
clearly indicate a need to confirm this observation on a larger material.
Table
IV.
Cancer
morbidity in Polish career military personnel
exposed
occupationally to radiofrequency and microwave radiation
- a 20
year analysis (1971 - 1990).
NEOPLASMS
OF THE HAEMOPOIETIC SYSTEM
AND LYMPHATIC ORGANS.
Diagnosis
Non-exposed
Exposed
Ex/N-Ex
ratio
p
No.
Rate
No.
Rate
Lymphogranulo-matosis
(Hodgkin)
52
2.15
6
7.77
3.61
< 0.01
Non-Hodgkin
lymphoma, Lymphosarcoma
68
2.81
10
12.95
4.61
< 0.01
Chronic
Lymphocytic Leukaemia (CLL)
36
1.49
5
6.48
4.35
< 0.01
Acute
Lymphoblastic Leukaemia (ALL)
9
0.37
2
1.54
4.16
< 0.01
Chronic
Myelocytic Leukaemia (CML)
23
0.95
8
10.36
10.90
< 0.01
Acute
Myeloblastic Leukaemia (AML)
20
0.83
4
5.18
6.24
< 0.01
Plasmocytoma
(PL) and other Myelomas
3
0.12
1
1.29
10.75
?
ALL
DIAGNOSES
211
8.74
36
46.63
5.33
< 0.01
A comparison of
own studies with other available studies on cancer morbidity in workers exposed
to radiofrequency and microwave fields (for most recent review, see 3) reveals
that only part of published epidemiological studies reported increased risk of
certain forms of neoplasms, while in other studies no significant differences
were found. However, each study,including our, suffers from certain limitations in assessment of
individual past MW exposure of cancer victims and therefore, concluding about
causal links is very difficult. Taking into advance the above, it is reasonable
to assume at the present state of knowledge that the epidemiologic evidences
still falls short of their strength and consistency required to come to a
reasonable conclusion that MW can cause human cancer. Therefore, MW radiation
should be still classified in group 3 (unclassifiable as to carcinogenicity in
humans) of the IARC classification of human carcinogens.
Table
V.
Cancer
morbidity in Polish career military personnel
exposed
occupationally to radiofrequency and microwave radiation
- a 5-
year analysis (1985 - 1990).
EXPOSURE
LEVELS AND MORBIDITY RATE
IN PROSPECTIVE STUDY (1985 - 1990).
OCCUPATIONALEXPOSURETORF/MWRADIATION
Year of analysis
Percent of career personnel considered as exposed to
RF/MW
2.ICNIRP. Guidelines for limiting
exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (1 Hz -
300 GHz), Health Physics, 1998;74 : 494-522.
3.Stewart W.Mobile Phones and Health. Independent Expert
Group on Mobile Phones – 2000. National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton,
Didcot, UK, 2000.
4.WHO
Working Group. Electromagnetic fields (300 Hz - 300 GHz). Environmental Health
Criteria Monograph No.137, World Health Organization,Geneva,1993.
5.Hester GL. Mental models and EMF
risk perceptions in the US general public. In: Matthes R, Bernhardt JH,
Repacholi MH, editors. Risk perception, risk communication and its application
to EMF exposure. ICNIRP 5/98 Intern. Comminssion Non-Ioniz.Radiat.Prot.
(ICNIRP),Munich, Germany. 1998,
243-254.
6.Adey
WR. Bioeffects of mobile communications fields. In: Kuster N, Bolzano Q, Lin
JC, editors. Telecommunications technology and applications, Series 4: Mobile
communication safety. Chapman & Hall, London, Weinheim, New York, Tokyo.
1997, 95-133.
7.ICNIRP. Health issues related to
the use of hand-held radiotelephones and base transmitters, Health Physics,
1996; 70: 587-593.
8.Juutilainen
J, deSeze R Biological effects of amplitude-modulated radiofrequency radiation,
Scand J Work Environm Health, 1998; 24: 245-254.
9.Rothman
KJ, Loughlin JE, Funch DP Dreyer NA. Overall mortality of cellular telephone
customers, Epidemiology, 1996; 7 :303-305.
10.Braune S. Resting blood pressure
increase during exposure to a radio-frequency electromagnetic field.
Lancet,1998;. 351: 1857-1858.
11.Hermann DM, Hossmann K.
Neurological effects of microwave exposure related to mobile communication. J
Neurol Sci, 1997; 152 : 1-14.
12.Hocking B. Preliminary report:
symptoms associated with mobile phone use, Occupational Med. 1998; 48 :
357-360.
13.Leitgeb N. Hypersensitivity to
electromagnetic fields. In: Leitgeb N., Simunic D. (Editors), COST 244
International Workshop on Electromagnetic Fields and Non-Specific Health
Symptoms. Proceedings. Graz,Austria, 19-20 September 1998 , University
Publishers, Graz,Austria; Graz University of Technology, 1998, 1-91.
14.Mild KH, Oftel G, Sandstroem M.
Comparison of symptoms experienced by users of analogue and digital mobile
phones: A Swedish-Norwegian epidemiological study. Technical Report
98-NIWL-MKH, National Inst Working Life, Stockholm,Sweden, 1998, 1-126.
15.Repacholi M. Low-level exposure
to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: Health effects and research needs.
Bioelectromagnetics, 1998; 19 : 1-19.
16.Verschaeve L, Maes A. Genetic,
carcinogenic and teratogenic effects of radiofrequency fields. Mutat Res, 1998;
410 : 141-165.
17.Cleary SF. In vitro studies of the
effects of nonthermal radiofrequency and microwave radiation. In:Bernhardt JH, Matthes R, Repacholi MH,
editors. Non-thermal effects of RF electromagnetic fields. Int.Commmision
Non-Ioniz Rad.Prot. (ICNIRP), Munich,Germany,1997, 119-130.
18.Simunic D. 5th COST 244 Workshop
on RF Exposure Assessment in Epidemiological Studies.University of Zagreb, Croatia; Faculty of
Electrical Engineering, University of Zagreb, Croatia,1998, 1-58.
19.Dolk H, Elliot P, Shaddick H, et al. Cancer incidence near radio and
television transmitters in Great Britain. Part II: All high power
transmitters",Amer J Epidemiol, 1997; 145 : 10-17.
20.Dolk H, Shaddick H, Walls P, et al. Cancer incidence near radio and
television transmitters in Great Britain. Part I: Sutton Coldfield
transmitter",Amer J Epidemiol.,1997;
145 : 1-9.
21.Hocking B, Gordon IR, Grain HL
Hartfield GE. Cancer incidence and mortality and proximity to TV towers. Med J
Australia,1996; 165 : 601-605.
22.McKenzie DR,Yin Y, Morrell S.
Childhood leukaemia and acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and exposure to broadcast
radiation in Sydney - a second look. Australian N Zeal J Public Health, 1998;
22 : .360-367.
23.Veyret B. COST-244 Forum on Future
European Reasearch on Mobile Communications and Health. University of Bordeaux,
France; College of Chemistry and Physics (ENSCB), Bordeaux, France, 1999,
1-115.
24.Szmigielski S., Bielec M., Lipski
S.,Sokolska G.,: Immunological and
cancer-related aspects of exposure to low-level microwave and radiofrequency
fields. In.: Marino A.A. (Ed.), Modern Bioelectricity, Marcel Dekker Inc., N.York, 1988, 861 - 925.
25.SzmigielskiS.Cancer morbidity in subjects occupationally exposed to high frequency
(radiofrequency and microwave) electromagnetic radiation, Science of the Total
Environment (STOTEN), 1996; 180 : 9-19.