Medical/biological study (experimental study)

Idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF) and electrosensibility (ES) - are they connected? med./bio.

By: Koteles F, Szemerszky R, Gubanyi M, Kormendi J, Szekrenyesi C, Lloyd R, Molnar L, Drozdovszky O, Bardos G

Published in: Int J Hyg Environ Health 2013; 216 (3): 362-370

Aim of study (acc. to author)

To study simultaneously the magnetic field detection ability and symptoms reported by people with idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF). It was hypothesized that
1) people with IEI-EMF are able to detect a 50 Hz, 0.5 mT magnetic field to a given extent,
2) people with IEI-EMF adopt a lower decision criterion when deciding about the presence of the magnetic field,
3) people with IEI-EMF show an increased sympathetic activity during exposure,
4) people with IEI-EMF experience more unpleasant symptoms than the control group, and
5) some of these symptoms can be explained by previous expectations.
In addition, a relationship between IEI-EMF and the personality characteristics of somatosensory amplification and modern health worries was hypothesized.

Background/further details

29 individuals with self-reported idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields and 42 control persons participated. The subjects had to attempt to detect the presence/absence of a magnetic field in 20 subsequent sessions. During the 20 detection sessions, the power supply of the coils was randomly enabled or disabled by the computer software (ten times "on" and ten times "off") for 60 s. After each session, participants were asked for the magnetic field perception. Exposure/sham exposure sessions were separated by 30 s recovery periods.

Endpoint

hypersensitivity/subjective complaints: subjective complaints; magnetic field perception; somatosensory amplification; modern health worries; anxiety; expectations of unpleasant symptoms

Exposure

- 50/60 Hz
- magnetic field

Exposure	Parameters
Exposure 1: 50 Hz Exposure duration: 10 x 1 minute (in random order with sham exposure sessions for 1 minute)	magnetic flux density: 500 µT (± 25 µT) magnetic flux density: 6 µT (at the distance of the heart) magnetic flux density: 3.6 µT (at the distance of the brain)

Exposure 1

Main characteristics

Frequency	50 Hz
Type	magnetic field
Exposure duration	10 x 1 minute (in random order with sham exposure sessions for 1 minute)

Exposure setup

Exposure source	Helmholtz coils
Setup	two solenoids (diameter: 42 cm) placed on a common axis spaced apart at a distance equal to their radii (21 cm); coils produced a vertical and homogenous field in the space between the coils; the coils were constructed of glaze-insulated copper wire (d = 1.4 mm) and had 240 turns; participants had to put their right hand between the coils; exposure of other body parts was prevented by an iron plate (dimensions: 800 mm x 500 mm x 2 mm) positioned between the coils and participants' body and by covering the coils with a special fabric containing copper fiber
Sham exposure	A sham exposure was conducted.

Parameters

Measurand	Value	Type	Method	Mass	Remarks
magnetic flux density	500 µT	-	measured	-	± 25 µT
magnetic flux density	6 µT	-	measured	-	at the distance of the heart
magnetic flux density	3.6 µT	-	measured	-	at the distance of the brain

Additional parameter details

a laptop computer was used in the experiment and measured ambient magnetic induction near the keyboard of the computer and at participants' brain was 4.5 µT and 2.5 µT, respectively

Exposed system:

human
partial body: right hand

Methods Endpoint/measurement parameters/methodology

effects on the cardiovascular system: heart rate, heart rate variability (ECG)
hypersensitivity/subjective complaints: 19 different subjective symptoms (e.g. headache, dizziness, dryness of mouth, tinnitus, sweating, burning sensation); somatosensory amplification (tendency to experience somatic sensations as intense, noxious, disturbing); modern health worries (people's concerns about the possibly harmful nature of features of modern life affecting their health); level of anxiety; motivation to cooperate; expectations of unpleasant symptoms (questionnaire)

Investigated system:

investigation on living organism

Investigated organ system:

Time of investigation:

before exposure
during exposure
after exposure

Main outcome of study (acc. to author)

Individuals with IEI-EMF were able to detect the presence of the 50 Hz magnetic field of 0.5 mT slightly better than by random guessing. while control groups' performance did not differ from chance. Experimental sessions followed by correct decisions were characterized by higher heart rate variability than periods followed by errors. Participants with IEI-EMF had a significantly lower decision criterion when they had to decide about the presence of the magnetic field. This means that they not only had slightly better detection abilities than controls, but they were also more prone to maximize the hit rate at the expense of false alarms in ambiguous cases. Additionally, participants with IEI-EMF exhibited more symptoms at the end of the experiment. IEI-EMF was closely related to concerns about possible harmful effects of electromagnetic exposure and to somatosensory amplification.
In conclusion, the detection of the magnetic field might be possible for people with IEI-EMF to some extent. Although increased sensibility to magnetic fields may play a role in the development of the IEI-EMF phenomenon, symptoms attributed to the magnetic field seem to be mainly of psychogenic origin.

Study character:

medical/biological study
experimental study
full/main study

Study funded by

Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS), Hungary
Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA), Hungary

Replication studies

Szemerszky R et al. (2015): Is there a connection between electrosensitivity and electrosensibility? A replication study

Hardell L et al. (2023): Electromagnetic hypersensitivity close to mobile phone base stations - a case study in Stockholm, Sweden
Kursawe M et al. (2021): Human detection thresholds of DC, AC, and hybrid electric fields: a double-blind study
Jankowiak K et al. (2021): Identification of Environmental and Experimental Factors Influencing Human Perception of DC and AC Electric Fields
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
Domotor Z et al. (2016): Dispositional aspects of body focus and idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF)
Szemerszky R et al. (2015): Is there a connection between electrosensitivity and electrosensibility? A replication study
Witthöft M et al. (2013): Are media warnings about the adverse health effects of modern life self-fulfilling? An experimental study on idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF)
Kim DW et al. (2012): Origins of electromagnetic hypersensitivity to 60 Hz magnetic fields: A provocation study
Nam KC et al. (2011): Physiological variables and subjective symptoms by 60 Hz magnetic field in EHS and non-EHS persons
McCarty DE et al. (2011): Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: evidence for a novel neurological syndrome
Rubin GJ et al. (2011): Do people with idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields display physiological effects when exposed to electromagnetic fields? A systematic review of provocation studies
Szemerszky R et al. (2010): Polluted places or polluted minds? An experimental sham-exposure study on background psychological factors of symptom formation in 'Idiophatic Environmental Intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields'
Rubin GJ et al. (2010): Idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (formerly 'electromagnetic hypersensitivity'): An updated systematic review of provocation studies
Kaul G (2009): [Is there an ability to perceive or to be sensitive on?]
Dahmen N et al. (2009): Blood laboratory findings in patients suffering from self-perceived electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS)
Rubin GJ et al. (2008): Psychological factors associated with self-reported sensitivity to mobile phones
Schröttner J et al. (2007): Investigation of electric current perception thresholds of different EHS groups
Rubin GJ et al. (2006): A systematic review of treatments for electromagnetic hypersensitivity
Leitgeb N et al. (2005): Electric current perception of the general population including children and the elderly
Chapman CE et al. (2005): Perception of local DC and AC electric fields in humans
Frick U et al. (2005): Comparison perception of singular transcranial magnetic stimuli by subjectively electrosensitive subjects and general population controls
Rubin GJ et al. (2005): Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: a systematic review of provocation studies
Leitgeb N et al. (2003): Electrosensibility and electromagnetic hypersensitivity
Mueller CH et al. (2002): Project NEMESIS: perception of a 50 Hz electric and magnetic field at low intensities (laboratory experiment)
David E et al. (2002): [On the Phenomenon of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity]
Lyskov E et al. (2001): Neurophysiological study of patients with perceived 'electrical hypersensitivity'
Flodin U et al. (2000): Provocation of electric hypersensitivity under everyday conditions