The negative influence of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation on organisms, including humans, has been discussed widely in recent years. This paper deals with the methodology of examining possible harmful effects of mobile phone radiation, focusing on in vivo and in vitro laboratory methods of investigation and evaluation and their main problems and difficulties. Basic experimental parameters are summarized and discussed, and recent large studies are also mentioned. For the laboratory experiments, accurate setting and description of dosimetry are essential; therefore, we give recommendations for the technical parameters of the experiments, especially for a well-defined source of radiation by Software Defined Radio.

Department of Telecommunication Engineering Faculty of Electrical Engineering Czech Technical University Prague Technicka 2 Prague 6 166 27 Prague Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

ICNIRP ICNIRP Guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz) Health Phys. 2020;118:483–524. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001210. PubMed DOI

SCENIHR Opinion on Potential Health Effects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) 2015. [(accessed on 25 November 2021)]. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/emerging/docs/scenihr_o_041.pdf.

Desai N.R., Kesari K.K., Agarwal A. Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: Oxidative stress and carcinogenesis with focus on male reproductive system. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2009;7:114. doi: 10.1186/1477-7827-7-114. PubMed DOI PMC

Vornoli A., Falcioni L., Mandrioli D., Bua L., Belpoggi F. The contribution of in vivo mammalian studies to the knowledge of adverse effects of radiofrequency radiation on human health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2019;16:3379. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16183379. PubMed DOI PMC

Kesari K.K., Kumar S., Nirala J., Siddiqui M.H., Behari J. Biophysical evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic field effects on male reproductive pattern. Cell Biochem. Biophys. 2013;65:85–96. doi: 10.1007/s12013-012-9414-6. PubMed DOI

American Cancer Society. [(accessed on 2 September 2021)]. Available online: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phones.html.

Zhu S., Zhu Y., Li H., Zhang D., Zhang D. The toxic effect of mobile phone radiation on rabbit organs. All Life. 2020;13:252–258. doi: 10.1080/26895293.2020.1763481. DOI

Prihoda T.J. Genetic damage in human cells exposed to non-ionizing radiofrequency fields: A meta-analysis of the data from 88 publications (1990–2011) Mutat. Res. 2012;749:1–16. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2012.09.007. PubMed DOI

NTP Technical Report on the Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies in Sprague Dawley (Hsd:Sprague Dawley® SD®) Rats Exposed to Whole-body Radio Frequency Radiation at a Frequency (900 Mhz) and Modulations (GSM and CDMA) Used by Cell Phones, Technical Report 595, November 2018. [(accessed on 30 November 2021)]; Available online: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/lt_rpts/tr595_508.pdf. PubMed PMC

NTP Technical Report on the Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies in B6C3F1/N Mice Exposed to Whole-body Radio Frequency Radiation at a Frequency (1,900 MHz) and Modulations (GSM and CDMA) Used by Cell Phones, Technical Report 596, November 2018. [(accessed on 30 November 2021)]; Available online: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/lt_rpts/tr596_508.pdf. PubMed PMC

Smith-Roe S.L., Wyde M.E., Stout M.D., Winters J.W., Hobbs C.A., Shepard K.G., Green A.S., Kissling G.E., Shockeley K.R., Tice R.R., et al. Evaluation of the genotoxicity of cell phone radiofrequency radiation in male and female rats and mice following subchronic exposure. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 2020;61:276–290. doi: 10.1002/em.22343. PubMed DOI PMC

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences High Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation Associated with Cancer in Male Rats. [(accessed on 14 June 2021)];2018 November; News Release. Available online: https://www.nih.gov/NEWS-EVENTS/NEWS-RELEASES/HIGH-EXPOSURE-RADIO-FREQUENCY-RADIATION-ASSOCIATED-CANCER-MALE-RATS.

Falcioni L., Bua L., Tibaldi E., Lauriola M., De Angelis L., Gnudi F., Mandrioli D., Manservigi M., Manservisi F., Manzoli I., et al. Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz GSM base station environmental emission. Environ. Res. 2018;165:496–503. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.037. PubMed DOI

Melnick R.L. Commentary on the utility of the National Toxicology Program study on cellphone radiofrequency radiation data for assessing human health risksdespite unfounded criticisms aimed at minimizing the findings of adverse health effects. Environ. Res. 2019;168:1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.09.010. PubMed DOI

U.S. Food & Drug Administration Review of Published Literature between 2008 and 2018 of Relevance to Radiofrequency Radiation and Cancer. [(accessed on 14 July 2021)];2020 Available online: https://www.fda.gov/media/135043/download.

Phillips J.L., Singh N.P., Lai H. Electromagnetic fields and DNA damage. Pathophysiology. 2009;16:79–88. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2008.11.005. PubMed DOI

Karipidis A., Mate R., Urban D., Tinker R., Wood A. 5G mobile networks and health—A state-of-the-science review of the research into low-level RF fields above 6 GHz. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2021;31:585–605. doi: 10.1038/s41370-021-00297-6. PubMed DOI PMC

Ruediger H.W. Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Pathophysiology. 2009;16:89–102. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2008.11.004. PubMed DOI

Saliev T., Begimbetova D., Masoud A.-R., Matkarimov B. Biological effects of non-ionising electromagnetic fields: Two sides of a coin. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Bio. 2019;141:25–36. doi: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2018.07.009. PubMed DOI

Vijayalaxmi Biological and health effects of radiofrequency fields: Good study design and quality publications. Mutat. Res. 2016;810:6–12. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2016.09.007. PubMed DOI

Vijayalaxmi, Prihoda T.J. Comprehensive review of quality of publications and meta-analysis of genetic damage in mammalian cells exposed to non-ionising radiofrequency fields. Radiat. Res. 2019;191:20–30. doi: 10.1667/RR15117.1. PubMed DOI

Yakymenko I., Tsybulin O., Sidorik E., Hensel D., Kyrylenko O., Kyrylenko S. Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn. Biol. Med. 2015;35:186–202. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2015.1043557. PubMed DOI

Mild K.H., Wilén J., Mttsson M.-O., Simko M. Background ELF magnetic fields in incubators: A factor of importance in cell culture work. Cell Biol. Int. 2009;33:755–757. doi: 10.1016/j.cellbi.2009.04.004. PubMed DOI

Panagopoulos D.J. Comparing DNA damage induced by mobile telephony and other types of man-made electromagnetic fields. Mutat. Res.-Rev. Mutat. Res. 2019;781:53–62. doi: 10.1016/j.mrrev.2019.03.003. PubMed DOI

FCC (Federal Communications Commission) Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Cellular Telephones. [(accessed on 25 November 2021)];2019 Available online: https://www.fcc.gov/general/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cellular-telephones.

Miyakoshi J. Cellular and molecular response to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields. Proc. IEEE. 2013;101:1494–1502. doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2013.2248111. DOI

Panagopoulos D.J., Johansson O., Carlo G.L. Real versus simulated mobile phone exposures in experimental studies. Biomed. Res. Int. 2015;2015:607053. doi: 10.1155/2015/607053. PubMed DOI PMC

3GPP Release 10. [(accessed on 20 March 2021)]. Available online: https://www.3gpp.org/specifications/releases/70-release-10.

3GPP Release 15. [(accessed on 19 March 2020)]. Available online: https://www.3gpp.org/release-15.

The European Commission Harmonisation Framework for the 24.25–27.5 GHz Frequency Band in the Union and Outcome of the World Radiocommunication Conference 2019. [(accessed on 19 March 2021)]. Radio Spectrum Committee, Working Document. Available online: https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/79fa56cf-d47f-49c8-b463-e30fc9eaca24/RSCOM19-47_discussion_26GHz-WRC19.pdf.

The European Commission Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/590 of 24 April 2020 Amending Decision (EU) 2019/784 as Regards an Update of Relevant Technical Conditions Applicable to the 24.25–27.5 GHz Frequency Band. [(accessed on 30 November 2021)]. Notified Under Document C(2020) 2542. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32020D0590.

Oestges C., Czink N., De Doncker P., Degli-Esposti V., Haneda K., Joseph W., Liénard M., Liu L. Radio channel modeling for 4G networks. In: Verdone R., Zanella A., editors. Pervasive Mobile and Ambient Wireless Communications. Signals and Communication TechnologyL. Springer; London, UK: 2012. [(accessed on 16 June 2021)]. Available online: DOI

Miao H., Faerber M. Physical downlink control channel for 5G new radio; Proceedings of the European Conference on Networks and Communications (EuCNC); Oulu, Finland. 12–15 June 2017; pp. 1–5. DOI

Simkó M., Mattsson M.-O. 5G Wireless communication and health effects—A pragmatic review based on available studies regarding 6 to 100 GHz. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health. 2019;16:3406. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16183406. PubMed DOI PMC

Kostoff R.N., Heroux P., Aschner M., Tsatsakis A. Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions. Toxicol. Lett. 2020;323:35–40. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.01.020. PubMed DOI

WHO Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health: Mobile Phones. 2014. [(accessed on 6 September 2021)]. WHO Fact Sheet No. 193. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/electromagnetic-fields-and-public-health-mobile-phones.

Vijayalaxmi, Scarfi M.R. International and National Expert Group Evaluations: Biological/Health Effects of Radiofrequency Fields. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2014;11:9376–9408. doi: 10.3390/ijerph110909376. PubMed DOI PMC

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) Guidance Document on Revisions to OECD Genetic Toxicology Test Guidelines. OECD; Paris, France: 2015.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) Test No. 453: Combined Chronic Toxicity/Carcinogenicity Studies, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. OECD; Paris, France: 2018.

National Toxicology Program Specifications for the Conduct of Studies to Evaluate the Toxic and Carcinogenic Potential of Chemical, Biological and Physical Agents in Laboratory Animals for the National Toxicology Program (NTP) [(accessed on 16 June 2021)];2011 Available online: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/test_info/finalntp_toxcarspecsjan2011.pdf.

Agyekum S.K. QoS/QoE Assessment Methodologies (Subjective and Objective Evaluation Methods). ITU Regional Standardization Forum For Africa. 2015. [(accessed on 12 March 2021)]. Available online: https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/Workshops-and-Seminars/bsg/042015/Documents/Presentations/S2P1Kwame-Baah-Acheamfuor.pptx.

Recommendations: P Series Terminals and Subjective and Objective Assessment Methods. 2016. [(accessed on 12 March 2021)]. Available online: https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-P/en.

Ahlbom A., Green A., Kheifets L.I., Savitz D., Swerdlow A. Epidemiology of health effects of radiofrequency exposure. Environ. Health Perspect. 2004;112:1741–1754. doi: 10.1289/ehp.7306. PubMed DOI PMC

Open Source Mobile Communications. [(accessed on 24 March 2021)]. Available online: http://osmocom.org/

OpenBTS org. [(accessed on 24 March 2021)]. Available online: http://openbts.org.

OpenAir Interface. [(accessed on 24 March 2021)]. Available online: https://openairinterface.org/