lta emf update

1 EMF update LTA 2006 / SL

LTA EMF update

Head, EMF Research & Standards

Standardization & Industry Relations

NOKIA CORPORATION

Sakari Lang, PhD

Chairman, MMF Research Working Group


Presentation outline

• Mobile phones – media activity

• RF dosimetry

• Established RF effects

• Exposure guidelines

• Current status of research on mobile telephony and health

• Concluding remarks


Mobile Manufacturers Forum


Background to the MMF

• International association of radio equipment manufacturers

• Representing around 90% of global handset sales; and

• The providers of the majority of global network infrastructure

• Association's focus: EMF and health • With particular emphasis on supporting

research

• Related areas of activity: standards and regulatory harmonisation and public communications


Mobile phone subscriptions globally, millions

Source: Nokia at 3GSM Cannes, February 2005

3 billionby end of 2010

3 billionby end of 2010

0-92 -93 -94 -95 -96 -97 -98 -99 -00 -02-01 -03 -04 -05

e-10e

200400600800

1 000

1 2001 4001 6001 8002 000

2 2002 400

2 6002 800

3 000

Current global penetration 28

%

Mobile phone subscriptions


Mobile telephony & health

• Year 2010 about 3 billion mobile phone users→ Concerns about adverse health effects

• Biological and potential health effects of RF energy have been studied for about 60 years

• Biomedical research effort on mobile telephony signals extensive today

• Effects due to significant RF heating well-established -> fundamental basis for exposure standards

• Increasing number of anecdotal reports and speculative media articles


BIOLOGICAL vs ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS

• A biological effect occurs when exposure to electromagnetic waves causes some noticeable or detectable physiological change in a biological system

• An adverse health effect occurs when the biological effect is outside the normal range for the body to compensate, and thus leads to some detrimental health condition


Region Frequency Photon energy(eV)

Effect on matter

Soft X-ray 1018 Hz 1000 Ionize moleculesVisible light 1015 Hz 2 Bend moleculesRF fields (radar) 30-300 GHz 0.0001 Vibrate moleculesRF fields: (TV/MP) 100- 2000 MHz 0.000001 Induce torques on

moleculesELF-MF (e.g. 50 Hz) 0-1 kHz 0.000…001 ?

Reference Valberg 1997

WHAT DOES PHYSICS TELL US?

Photon energies v. effects on matter


WHAT DOES PHYSICS TELL US?

• Energy of one 900 MHz photon 0.01% of average thermal energy (kT) in the body significant exposure needed to increase body temperature

• Energy of one 900 MHz photon is 0.004% of the chemical bond energy breakdown of chemical bond not plausible


BIOPHYSICS OF RADIOFREQUENCY FIELDS


Optical radiationf = 300 GHz-1000 THz = 1 mm – 100 nm

Non-ionizing radiation – effects on human

Radio frequency electromagnetic fieldsf = 30 kHz – 300 GHz = 10 km – 1 mm

Low-frequency electric and magnetic fieldsf = 0 - 30 kHz = – 10 km

Heating

Heating, photochemical reactions

DermisEpidermis

Currents

Surface charge

Electric field Magnetic field

Circulatingcurrents

RadiowaveOptical radiation


Established thermal effects for RF Fields of 1 MHz - 10 GHz

• A whole-body SAR of at least 4 W/kg (1 °C temperature rise) is needed to produce physiological effect (behavioral disruption in laboratory animals)

• Birth defects, if the temperature rise of the fetus by 2-3 °C for hours

• Under most environmental conditions, a given tissue or organ (and probably body) must attain a temperature of at least 43 °C before a level constituting a hazard may be reached such as cataract formation (power density 1000 W/m2, SAR > 100 W/kg)

• The time required to produce a full thickness burn in human skin ranges from 100 min at 45 °C to ~5 sec at 60 °C


Established critical temperature levels (produced by RF energy or other types of heating) in various species, organs or tissues leading to adverse biological effects

Endpoint Species/organ/tissue Threshold ( ºC and SAR (W/kg))

Exposure duration

Heat stroke Human (core temperature) Human (brain temperature)

> 42 ºC ? 40.5 ºC

Tt Varies Tt

CNS deterioration Human (CNS) 42-43 ºC Tt

Skin necrosis Full thickness Burn Pricking pain

Human Human Human Human

43 ºC 55-50 ºC 45 ºC 60 ºC 45 ºC

10-12 h 3-10 s 100 min 5 s 3-10 s

Thermal injury Rat, mouse, dog, cat (spinal cord, brain)

43 - 44 ºC 1 to 80 min

Fetal abnormalities Rat (whole body) 2 – 2.5 ºC increase Tens of minutes up to 1 h or so

Behavioral disruption Rat (whole-body) Monkey (whole-body)

1 ºC increase, 4 W/kg

40-60 min

Cataract Convulsions

Rabbit (eye) Mouse

>41 ºC (>150 W/kg)

Tre = 44 ºC

> 30 min ??

Increase in BBB permeability

Rat > 40 ºC brain temperature (> 4 W/kg WBA SAR)

4 h


Portability requires a mechanism

• > 400 studies cover wide range of frequencies and modulations

Do not support the “non-thermal hypothesis”

1) Biophysical analyses and reviews do not support that non-thermal interactions are plausible at mobile telephony frequencies

2) Examination of biological effects literature does not provide a consistent body of data supporting theoretical postulates on “non-thermal” mechanisms

Large mobile-telephony-health research database portable to new technologies


Biophysical mechanisms – current views

Although RF energy can affect bulk matter, inspection of many mechanisms has showed that

• By very large factors, energy cannot be sufficiently concentrated to the cellular and molecular dimensions needed to change chemical structure or binding

• Damping by water is a fundamental obstacle

• Signals far below noise levels have no effect


Conclusions

• Cellular metabolism can be affected by relatively small (order of 1 K) temperature changes

• Specialized sensitive receptors/organs respond to small temperature differences (<0.1 K)

• Temperature differences >0.1 K) between points separated by subcellular dimensions are not possible due to thermal diffusion and are not plausible mechanisms for causing microwave biological effects.


Exposure from mobile phone GSM handset

• SAR non-uniform (local SAR value usually below 1 W/kg in 10 g tissue mass)

• Temperature more uniform

• Equilibrium temperature increase is <0.2 °C at maximum

van Leeuwen GMJ et al. Phys. Med. Biol. 44 (1999) 2367.


Van Leeuwen et al 1999: T in head (10 g average mass, antenna average emitted

power of 0.25 W)

SAR (W/kg)

Peak 10g cube 10g any

4.0 0.91 1.66


A B C D

A: Female B: Male C: 3-y D: 7-y

2450

1800

900

SAR distribution in various head models


Base stations – exposures and health

14 ©NOKIA emftraining2002v4.ppt 8/11/2002 P.Harrison

Main lobe

Side lobe

Back lobe


Exposures from base station

• Fields are hundreds to thousands of times weaker than near handset

• SAR many thousand to millions times weaker than near handset

• Population base station exposures in only a small fraction of ICNIRP power density limit

•Range 0.00007 mW/m2 - 3 mW/m2 •ICNIRP limit 4,5 W/m2 at 900 MHz)

• Reflections make fields non-uniform in buildings and some outdoor environments


Power density (mW/m2)

All Home Urban Town Rural

mediana 0.04 0.005 0.5 0.033 0.0006

meana 0.5 0.0055 0.8 0.034 0.0016

rangea 0.00007-3

rangeb 0.00038-0.31

medianc 0.2

a) 30 – 2000 MHz, Göteborg and various sites, Sweden (Uddmar T, Thesis, Chalmers U., 1999)

b) GSM900 GSM 1800 downlinks at 9 residential locations, Mainz (Schüz & Mann, J Expos Analysis & Env Epi 10:600, 2000)

c) GSM900, GSM1800 downlinks only, 272 locations, Germany (Haumann et al., 2nd Int’l Workshop, Rhodes, 2002 p 327)

Population base station exposures in Europe (ICNIRP limit 4,5 W/m2 at 900 MHz)


M. Swicord, WHO conference, Bangkok, 01/2004


Flux of electromagnetic energy EMF source Approximate energy

flux (watts/square meter)

Sunlight at the earth's surface at noon

1350 W/m2

Infrared heat radiation from a living person

20 W/m2

Mobile base station 70 W/m2 – 3 mW/m2 a)

Microwave emission from a living person

3 mW/m2

ICNIRP limit 4.5 W/m2 at 900 MHz a) 30 – 2000 MHz, Göteborg and various sites, Sweden (Uddmar T, Thesis, Chalmers U., 1999)


Who Sets RF Safety Who Sets RF Safety Standards?Standards?

• ICES • large committee open to anyone with a material interest • open consensus process

• National agencies and standards bodies

ICNIRP guidelines developed by a relatively small committee of appointed experts, no industry members closed meetings Endorsed by WHO


IEEE/ICNIRP: WHOLE-BODY LIMITSIEEE/ICNIRP: WHOLE-BODY LIMITS

0

1

2

3

4

5

Threshold forAdverse Effect

OccupationalLimit

General PublicLimit

SA

R,

W/k

g

10X SafetyMargin

50X SafetyMargin

0.08 W/kg0.4 W/kg


ICNIRP basic restrictionsICNIRP basic restrictions

Standard Condition Frequency Whole Body

Local SAR (head and trunk)

Local SAR (limbs)

ICNIRP(1998)

Occupational 100 kHz-10 GHz 0.4 10 W/kg 20 (10g)

ICNIRP (1998)

General population

100 kHz-10 GHz 0.08 2 W/kg (applied for mobile phones)

4 (10g)

Basic SAR Restrictions (W/kg)


“Science journalism”…

Indian Business Insight (9 Sept 2003) claims a study has shown that the use of mobile phones might lead to long-time health hazards.

The article says the use of mobile phone can lead to brain cancer, brain tumour, destruction of brain cells and might lead to early Alzheimer's disease. The radiation is likely to affect the brain's blood brain barrier, creating problems with memory and processing functions while disturbing sleep patterns. Other consequences of using mobile phones include learning, concentration and behavioural disorders, extreme fluctuation in blood pressure, heart rhythm disorders, heart attack and strokes, brain degenerative diseases, epilepsy and leukaemia among others.


Peer-reviewed papers describing biological and health effects of RF

fieldsStudies are listed on the WHO web site under "citation listings": http://www.who.int/peh-emf/research/database/en/A study represents a single paper published in a peer reviewed journal (All studies are listed on the WHO web site: http://www.who.int/peh-emf/research/database/en/)

Research study type Ongoing1 Reported but not published1

Published2

Epidemiology 39 7 215

Human studies 61 18 139

Animal studies (incl. bioassays) 54 33 717

Cellular studies 59 32 376

Totals 213 90 1447

1. From project listings, 2. From Citation listings

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/research/database/en/

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/research/database/en/

http://www.who.int/

http://www.who.int/

Research Study type Ongoing Completed Total

• Cancer relevant or relatedEpidemiology 25 2045Animal studies 22 4971Cellular studies 34 59 93

Total cancer studies 81 128 209

• Non-cancer studiesEpidemiology 5 1015Human studies 39 59 98Animal studies 13 4558Cellular studies 9 15 24

Total non-cancer studies 76 129195Totals 157 257 414

All studies are listed on the WHO web site: http://www-nt.who.int/peh-emf/database.htm

A project may include one or more published papers and/or ongoing follow-on work

Mobile telephony relevant projects in the WHO database

http://www-nt.who.int/peh-emf/database.htm

http://www-nt.who.int/peh-emf/database.htm


0102030405060708090

100110

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

Mobile phone prevalence and brain tumor incidence: Finland


Malignant brain tumors

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00


Cancer starts

developing

Buy a mobile phone

Cancer

diagnosed

Epidemiological study

on mobile phone use & cancer

1985 1995 2005 2006

Problems with epidemiology

Correlation does not mean causation!!!

Research conclusion: the mobile phone use is correlated with cancer


Human laboratory studies



• Cognitive function and memory• Improved or hindered cognitive function and memory in

humans under mobile phone exposure• Reported changes very small in magnitude• Non-replicated findings

• EEG, sleep disturbances and event-related potentials• Both EEG and sleep findings inconsistent and not replicated• Replication attempts ongoing

• Headache and fatigue• correlations between headache and RF exposure derived

data from subjects through questionnaires. • Problems with bias not clearly addressed in these studies• Lack of relevant exposure assessment disallows any

meaningful dose-response to substantiate the reported effects

• Two controlled laboratory provocation studies examining the effects of RF exposure on headaches have reported no effect



• Hypersensitivity• Well-performed laboratory studies with controlled

provocation in normal and self-claimed hypersensitive subjects have reported no association between the self-reported hypersensitivity and RF exposure from mobile phones

• Blood pressure & heart rate• Effect not confirmed by well-conducted laboratory studies• Animal studies that have reported effects of RF exposure

on BP and HR, have all been at clearly thermal exposure levels

• Conclusions: No consistent evidence exists to indicate an adverse effect of low-level RF exposure on the nervous system. However, because of the variety of different effects reported by some investigators and the many contradictory reports, research in this area continues.


Mobile phones and children


WHO - children• With more and more research data available, it has become

increasingly unlikely that exposure to electromagnetic fields constitutes a serious health hazard, nevertheless, some uncertainty remains.

• Present scientific information does not indicate the need for any special precautions for use of mobile phones. If individuals are concerned, they might choose to limit their own or their children's' RF exposure by limiting the length of calls, or using "hands-free" devices to keep mobile phones away from the head and body.

• There have been suggestions that exposure of young children to electromagnetic fields (EMF) may be detrimental to their health, especially during the development and maturation of the central nervous system, immune system and other critical organs.(Introduction “WHO Workshop sensitivity of Children to EMF Exposure 9 June 2004 - 10 June 2004 Istanbul, Turkey”)


FDA/USA – children – mobile phones

• "The scientific evidence does not show a danger to users of wireless phones, including children and teenagers. If you want to take steps to lower exposure to radiofrequency energy (RF), the measures described above would apply to children and teenagers using wireless phones. Reducing the time of wireless phone use and increasing the distance between the user and the RF source will reduce RF exposure”.

• “Some groups sponsored by other national governments have advised that children be discouraged from using wireless phones at all. For example, the government in the United Kingdom distributed leaflets containing such a recommendation in December 2000. They noted that no evidence exists that using a wireless phone causes brain tumors or other ill effects. Their recommendation to limit wireless phone use by children was strictly precautionary; it was not based on scientific evidence that any health hazard exists”.


Children – mobile phones – health

Facts – what is science telling us?

• Exposure to mobile phonesRF energy absorption does not differ significantly between adult and child heads

• Health effectsNo established scientific evidence that developing organisms, such as children, would be more sensitive to RF fields


Scientific expert group reviewsA review of the extensive literature on RF biological effects, consisting

of well over 1300 primary peer reviewed publications published as early as 1950, reveals no adverse health effects that are not thermally related. This conclusion is consistent with those reached by other scientific expert groups including the:

• Australian Government, Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, Committee on Electromagnetic Energy Public Health Issues

• European Commission Expert Group • European Committee on Toxicology, Eco-toxicology and the Environment (CSTEE) • France’s Commission for Consumer Safety (the French Expert Report) (‘Zmirou

report’ to the French Health General Directorate)• Health Council of the Netherlands • Hong Kong - Office of the Telecommunications Authority• International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection • Japanese Ministry of Post and Telecommunications • New Zealand Ministry of Health and Ministry of Environment • Royal Society of Canada Expert Panel• Singapore Health Sciences Authority• Swedish State Radiation Protection Authority • U.K. Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones • U.K. National Radiological Protection Board U.S. Food and Drug Administration • World Health Organization


WHO statement 2004

Conclusions from scientific research “In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields. However, some gaps in knowledge about biological effects exist and need further research”..

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/index1.html


WHO health risk assessment of EMF 0-300 GHz

• Methodology• Evaluation of research data • Based on peer-reviewed published papers• Use weight-of-evidence approach i.e. consider relevant,

well-established, replicated results and coherence of the data

• Replication vs. confirmation studies

• IARC cancer review Spring 2007

• WHO assessment of RF energy 2007-2008• Environmental health criteria (EHC) document covering 0-

300 Ghz

• Continuation of WHO EMF project?

• ICNIRP exposure standard revision started (< 100 KHz)


Research Conclusions

• The weight of evidence suggests that RF energy does not induce cancers or promote cancer development

• No consistent evidence exists to indicate an adverse effect of low-level RF (below safety guidelines) exposure on the nervous system.

• However, because of the variety of different effects reported by some investigators and the many contradictory reports, research in this area continues.


Conclusions

• Increased use of wireless communication technology has triggered extensive media debates and also caused public concerns often based on misleading information by poorly conducted studies

• Biological and potential health effects of RF energy have been studied for about 60 years

• WHO database contains about 1500 peer-reviewed scientific papers describing biological and health effects of RF energy

• ICNIRP and IEEE standards setting processes are based on a rigorous review of scientific literature

• No adverse health effects have been observed below the internationally accepted exposure limits (ICNIRP and IEEE)

lta emf update

Documents