Medical/biological study (experimental study)

IEI-EMF provocation case studies: A novel approach to testing sensitive individuals med./bio.

By: Verrender A, Loughran SP, Anderson V, Hillert L, Rubin GJ, Oftedal G, Croft RJ

Published in: Bioelectromagnetics 2018; 39 (2): 132-143

Aim of study (acc. to author)

1) To test whether exposure to radiofrequency exposure from a portable exposure device resulted in an increase in an electrosensitive subjects's symptom compared to sham exposure and
2) to determine whether electrosensitive probands could detect the active radiofrequency signal at greater than chance level.

Background/further details

Three (2 male, 1 female) subjects with self-diagnosed electromagnetic hypersensitivity were included. The tests were conducted in the home environments of the participants.
On the first day, two non-blinded open trials were conducted: one with radiofrequency exposure and one without (both subject and researcher were aware of the exposure status). Afterwards, 12 double-blind, randomized and counterbalanced trials were conducted consisting of 6 trials with radiofrequency exposure and 6 trials with sham exposure. Each trial ran for 105 minutes, starting with a 15 minutes baseline to assess the subject's symptoms prior to exposure. This was followed by a 30 minutes exposure/sham exposure accompanied by questions about symptoms and exposure status. Afterwards, symptoms were assessed in a 30 minutes post-exposure period. Finally, a 30 minutes rest closed the trial. The trials took part on three consecutive days.

Endpoint

hypersensitivity/subjective complaints: symptoms and field perception

Exposure

- 902–928 MHz
- RF
- mobile communications
- GSM
- UMTS
- W-LAN/WiFi

Exposure	Parameters
Exposure 1: 902–928 MHz Exposure duration: 30 min each exposure (6 x in double-blind study)	power density: 0.3 W/m² mean (incident power density at the participant) power: 1 W mean (power output)

Exposure 1

Main characteristics

Frequency	902–928 MHz
Type	electromagnetic field
Exposure duration	30 min each exposure (6 x in double-blind study)
Additional info	ISM band

Modulation

Modulation type	cf. additional info
Additional info	digitally modulated like Wi-Fi and 3G and 4G signals

Exposure setup

Exposure source	portable, battery-operated device (RF modem)
Distance between exposed object and exposure source	30 cm
Chamber	device was fully enclosed in a thermally insulated case
Setup	exposure device was situated in front or to the side of the subject depending on what was comfortable for the subject
Sham exposure	A sham exposure was conducted.

Parameters

Measurand	Value	Type	Method	Mass	Remarks
power density	0.3 W/m²	mean	measured	-	incident power density at the participant
power	1 W	mean	-	-	power output

Exposed system:

human
whole body

Methods Endpoint/measurement parameters/methodology

hypersensitivity/subjective complaints: demographic data and health status, subject's symptom history, quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF), symptom (visual analog scale) and exposure status (field perception)

Investigated system:

investigation on living organism

Time of investigation:

before exposure
during exposure
after exposure

Main outcome of study (acc. to author)

No significant difference in symptom severity or exposure detection was found for any of the subjects between the two conditions (exposure and sham exposure). Belief of exposure strongly predicted symptom severity score for all subjects.

Study character:

medical/biological study
experimental study
experimental case study
double-blind study

Study funded by

National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Australia

Hardell L et al. (2023): Electromagnetic hypersensitivity close to mobile phone base stations - a case study in Stockholm, Sweden
Bräscher AK et al. (2017): Are media reports able to cause somatic symptoms attributed to WiFi radiation? An experimental test of the negative expectation hypothesis
van Moorselaar I et al. (2017): Effects of personalised exposure on self-rated electromagnetic hypersensitivity and sensibility - A double-blind randomised controlled trial
Carpenter DO (2015): The microwave syndrome or electro-hypersensitivity: historical background
Eltiti S et al. (2015): Aggregated data from two double-blind base station provocation studies comparing individuals with idiopathic environmental intolerance with attribution to electromagnetic fields and controls
Carpenter DO (2014): Excessive Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields May Cause the Development of Electrohypersensitivity
Koteles F et al. (2013): Idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF) and electrosensibility (ES) - are they connected?
Röösli M et al. (2010): Sense and sensibility in the context of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure
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
Nieto-Hernandez R et al. (2008): Can evidence change belief? Reported mobile phone sensitivity following individual feedback of an inability to discriminate active from sham signals
Hillert L et al. (2008): The effects of 884 MHz GSM wireless communication signals on headache and other symptoms: an experimental provocation study
Kwon MS et al. (2008): Perception of the electromagnetic field emitted by a mobile phone
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
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
Rubin GJ et al. (2005): Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: a systematic review of provocation studies
Leitgeb N et al. (2003): Electrosensibility and electromagnetic hypersensitivity
Hietanen M et al. (2002): Hypersensitivity symptoms associated with exposure to cellular telephones: no causal link