Medical/biological study (experimental study)

The effects of 884 MHz GSM wireless communication signals on headache and other symptoms: an experimental provocation study med./bio.

By: Hillert L, Akerstedt T, Lowden A, Wiholm C, Kuster N, Ebert S, Boutry C, Moffat SD, Berg M, Arnetz BB

Published in: Bioelectromagnetics 2008; 29 (3): 185-196

Aim of study (acc. to author)

To study whether exposure to radiofrequency caused by cell phone use has any acute effect on self-reported symptoms (e.g. headache, vertigo) and whether subjects are able to accurately detect the correct exposure status (exposure vs. sham exposure).

Background/further details

The study group consisted of 71 subjects (age 18-45) including 38 subjects reporting headache or vertigo in relation to cell phone use (symptom group) and 33 non-symptomatic subjects (control group).

Endpoint

hypersensitivity/subjective complaints: electromagnetic field perception and symptoms (headache, vertigo, skin irritation and sensation of heat)

Exposure

- mobile communications
- digital mobile phone
- GSM

Exposure	Parameters
Exposure 1: 884 MHz Modulation type: pulsed Exposure duration: continuous for 3 h	SAR: 1.4 W/kg average over time (10 g) (spatial peak for all head tissues) SAR: 1.8 W/kg average over time (1 g) (spatial peak for grey matter) SAR: 0.2 W/kg average over mass (brain) (± 0.26 W/kg grey matter) SAR: 0.18 W/kg average over mass (brain) (e: ± 0.21 W/kg white matter d: ± 0,21 W/kg weiße Substanz) SAR: 0.18 W/kg average over mass (brain) (± 0.06 W/kg thalamus)

General information

The study followed a double blind, cross-over provocation design testing exposure versus sham. The exposure setup was designed to expose all those head tissues that are exposed in daily phone usage, taking into account the range of phone designs, reasonable phone positions and head anatomies [Kuster et al., 2004], and the exposure was also intended to provide a similar tissue specific exposure distribution as applied by Huber et al. [2002].

Exposure 1

Main characteristics

Frequency	884 MHz
Type	electromagnetic field
Exposure duration	continuous for 3 h

Modulation

Modulation type	pulsed
Pulse width	0.577 ms
Additional info	The GSM signal with a basic frame of 4.6 ms consisted of temporal changes between non-DTX and DTX modes and included all coherent ELF amplitude modulation components of 2, 8, 217, and 1736 Hz.

Exposure setup

Exposure source	stacked micro patch antenna
Chamber	Two subjects participating in each session were seated in two adjacent unshielded rooms (5.1 m x 3.6 m and 5.1 m x 2.5 m, respectively) with RF absorbers placed on three sides. The exposure conditions were set to be the same for both participants during a session in order to avoid an influence of any possible leakage of fields.
Setup	The exposure apparatus consisted of a balanced headset positioning a low-weight, stacked micro patch antenna on the left side of the subject's head.
Sham exposure	A sham exposure was conducted.
Additional info	To mimic the sensation caused by the active phone, a small ceramic plate connected to the left ear lobe was heated to 39 ± 0.2 °C by a laser during all exposure sessions.

Parameters

Measurand	Value	Type	Method	Mass	Remarks
SAR	1.4 W/kg	average over time	measured and calculated	10 g	spatial peak for all head tissues
SAR	1.8 W/kg	average over time	measured and calculated	1 g	spatial peak for grey matter
SAR	0.2 W/kg	average over mass	measured and calculated	brain	± 0.26 W/kg grey matter
SAR	0.18 W/kg	average over mass	measured and calculated	brain	e: ± 0.21 W/kg white matter d: ± 0,21 W/kg weiße Substanz
SAR	0.18 W/kg	average over mass	measured and calculated	brain	± 0.06 W/kg thalamus

Additional parameter details

The non-DTX mode with every 26th basic frame idle was set to a 10-g averaged peak spatial SAR (psSAR10g) of 1.95 W/kg. The DTX mode active during listening resulted in a reduced time-averaged psSAR10g of only 12% of the non-DTX mode. The temporal change was random with an average duration of 11 s for non-DTX and 5 s for DTX resulting in a time-averaged psSAR10g of 1.4 W/kg.

Measurement and calculation details

Numerical dosimetry was conducted with SEMCAD software and verified by measurements using DASY4 and the latest probe technology on a SAM head filled with tissue simulating liquid. Detailed dosimetric results were obtained following the methodology outlined in [Kuster et al., 2006]. In addition, the inter-subject variations as well as assessment uncertainty were estimated. The basic numerical head model was derived from 121 magnetic resonance images of a 40-year European female and distinguished 23 tissues.

Reference articles

Kuster N et al. (2006): Methodology of detailed dosimetry and treatment of uncertainty and variations for in vivo studies
Kuster N et al. (2004): Guidance for exposure design of human studies addressing health risk evaluations of mobile phones
Huber R et al. (2002): Electromagnetic fields, such as those from mobile phones, alter regional cerebral blood flow and sleep and waking EEG

Exposed system:

human
partial body: head (left side)

Methods Endpoint/measurement parameters/methodology

effects on the immune system: biochemical blood analysis (erythrocyte sedimentation rate, white blood cell count, electrolytes, glucose, liver function enzymes, thyroid stimulating hormone, creatinine, cortisol, prolactin, hemoglobin)
hypersensitivity/subjective complaints: symptoms (headache, nausea, concentration difficulties, feeling low-spirited, vision problems, vertigo, skin irritation, sensation of heat, stress; 7-point Likert scale); electromagnetic field perception
sleep: sleep disorders (EEG, medical history)
physical examination

Investigated system:

blood samples
investigation on living organism

Time of investigation:

before exposure
during exposure

Main outcome of study (acc. to author)

The data showed that headache was more commonly reported after exposure than sham exposure, mainly due to an increase in the non-symptom group (control group).
Neither group could detect radiofrequency exposure better than by chance.
A belief that the radiofrequency irradiation had been active was associated with skin symptoms.
Further investigation of the higher prevalence of headache in the non-symptom group and a possible physiological correlation should be performed.
The findings indicate a need to better characterize subjects in cell phone exposure studies and differences between symptom and non-symptom groups.

Study character:

medical/biological study
experimental study
full/main study
provocation study, double-blind study, crossover study

Study funded by

Mobile Manufacturers Forum (MMF), Belgium

Verrender A et al. (2018): IEI-EMF provocation case studies: A novel approach to testing sensitive individuals
van Moorselaar I et al. (2017): Effects of personalised exposure on self-rated electromagnetic hypersensitivity and sensibility - A double-blind randomised controlled trial
Kjellqvist A et al. (2016): Psychological symptoms and health-related quality of life in idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields
Chu MK et al. (2011): Clinical features of headache associated with mobile phone use: a cross-sectional study in university students
Nieto-Hernandez R et al. (2011): Can exposure to a terrestrial trunked radio (TETRA)-like signal cause symptoms? A randomised double-blind provocation study
Lowden A et al. (2011): Sleep after mobile phone exposure in subjects with mobile phone-related symptoms
Johansson A et al. (2010): Symptoms, personality traits, and stress in people with mobile phone-related symptoms and electromagnetic hypersensitivity
Kaul G (2009): [Is there an ability to perceive or to be sensitive on?]
Nam KC et al. (2009): Hypersensitivity to RF fields emitted from CDMA cellular phones: a provocation study
Korpinen LH et al. (2009): Self-report of physical symptoms associated with using mobile phones and other electrical devices
Kwon MS et al. (2008): Perception of the electromagnetic field emitted by a mobile phone
Kim DW et al. (2008): Physiological effects of RF exposure on hypersensitive people by a cell phone
Stovner LJ et al. (2008): Nocebo as headache trigger: evidence from a sham-controlled provocation study with RF fields
Cinel C et al. (2008): Exposure to mobile phone electromagnetic fields and subjective symptoms: a double-blind study
Riddervold IS et al. (2008): Cognitive Function and Symptoms in Adults and Adolescents in Relation to RF Radiation from UMTS Base Stations
Eltiti S et al. (2007): Does short-term exposure to mobile phone base station signals increase symptoms in individuals who report sensitivity to electromagnetic fields? A double-blind randomized provocation study
Abdel-Rassoul G et al. (2007): Neurobehavioral effects among inhabitants around mobile phone base stations
Regel SJ et al. (2006): UMTS base station-like exposure, well-being, and cognitive performance
Seitz H et al. (2006): [Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) and subjective health complaints associated with electromagnetic fields of mobile phone communication - a literature review]
Hutter HP et al. (2006): Subjective symptoms, sleeping problems, and cognitive performance in subjects living near mobile phone base stations
Rubin GJ et al. (2006): Are some people sensitive to mobile phone signals? Within participants double blind randomised provocation study
Wilen J et al. (2006): Psychophysiological tests and provocation of subjects with mobile phone related symptoms
Seitz H et al. (2005): Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) and subjective health complaints associated with electromagnetic fields of mobile phone communication--a literature review published between 2000 and 2004
Rubin GJ et al. (2005): Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: a systematic review of provocation studies
Röösli M et al. (2004): Symptoms of ill health ascribed to electromagnetic field exposure--a questionnaire survey
Zwamborn APM et al. (2003): Effects of Global Communication system radio-frequency fields on Well Being and Cognitive Functions of human subjects with and without subjective complaints
Hietanen M et al. (2002): Hypersensitivity symptoms associated with exposure to cellular telephones: no causal link
Lyskov E et al. (2001): Neurophysiological study of patients with perceived 'electrical hypersensitivity'
Koivisto M et al. (2001): GSM phone signal does not produce subjective symptoms
Oftedal G et al. (2000): Symptoms experienced in connection with mobile phone use
Chia SE et al. (2000): Prevalence of headache among handheld cellular telephone users in Singapore: a community study
Radon K et al. (1998): [Hypersensitivity to Electricity]