Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Panagopoulos Et Al IJRB 2010a

Panagopoulos Et Al IJRB 2010a

Ratings: (0)|Views: 80|Likes:
Published by Emf Refugee

More info:

Published by: Emf Refugee on Dec 29, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Bioeffects of mobile telephony radiation in relation to its intensity or distance from the antenna
Department of Cell Biology and Biophysics, Faculty of Biology, University of Athens, Athens, Greece(Received 10 June 2009; Revised 2 December 2009; Accepted 9 December 2009)
To examine the bioactivity of GSM 900 and 1800 (Global System for Mobile Telecommunications) radiations, inrelation to the distance from the antenna or to the radiation-field intensities.
 Materials and methods: Drosophila melanogaster 
adult insects were exposed to the radiation of a GSM 900/1800 mobilephone antenna at different distances ranging from 0 to 100 cm, and the effect on their reproductive capacity and cell deathinduction in the gonads by the use of TUNEL (Terminal deoxynucleotide transferase dUTP Nick End Labeling) assay, wasstudied.
These radiations/fields decreased the reproductive capacity by cell death induction, at all the different distancestested. The effect diminished with the distance/decreasing intensities. An increased bioactivity ‘window’ was revealed atdistances of 20–30 cm from the mobile phone antenna, (radiation intensity around 10
) where the effect becamehighest, in relation to smaller or longer distances. The effect diminished considerably for distances longer than 40–50 cmand became not evident for distances longer than 1 m or radiation intensities smaller than 1
GSM bioactivity is highest for intensities down to less than 10
and still evident until 1
exhibiting ‘window’ effects.
GSM, DCS, distances, intensity, cell death, electromagnetic fields, reproduction, bioactivity windows
A number of biological effects from digital mobiletelephony and radio frequency (RF)-microwaveradiations, including changes in intracellular ionicconcentrations, changes in the synthesis rate of different biomolecules, changes in cell proliferationrates, changes in the reproductive capacity of animals, changes in gene expression and evenDNA damage and cell death, have already beenreported and documented by many research groups(Bawin et al. 1975; 1978; Bawin and Adey 1976; Laiand Singh 1995, 1996, 1997; Magras and Xenos1997; Kwee and Raskmark 1998; Velizarov et al.1999; Salford et al. 2003; Xenos and Magras 2003;Panagopoulos et al. 2004, 2007a, 2007b; Aitkenet al. 2005; Barteri et al. 2005; Belyaev et al. 2005;2009; Caraglia et al. 2005; Diem et al. 2005;Markova et al. 2005; Nylund and Leszczynski2006; Remondini et al. 2006; Eberhardt et al.2008; Garaj-Vrhovac and Orescanin 2009; Lopez-Martin et al. 2009). At the same time, someepidemiological studies are starting to indicate aconnection between the use of cellular mobilephones and certain types of cancer (Kundi 2004;Hardell et al. 2006, 2007, 2009; Hardell andHansson Mild 2006; Hardell and Carlberg 2009;Khurana et al. 2009), as well as a connectionbetween exposure to radiation from base stationsand adverse health effects reported as ‘microwavesyndrome’ (Navarro et al. 2003; Hutter et al. 2006;Blettner et al. 2009; Kundi and Hutter 2009; Vielet al. 2009).Most of the experiments carried out in regards tothe bioactivity of mobile telephony radiation wereperformed either by use of commercial mobile phonedevices emitting real mobile telephony signals or by test mobile phones emitting idealized mobile tele-phony signals with constant and controllable para-meters. Until now there were no experiments
Correspondence: Dr Dimitris Panagopoulos, Department of Cell Biology and Biophysics, Faculty of Biology, University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis, 15784,Athens, Greece. Tel:
30210 7274117. Fax:
30210 7274742. E-mail: dpanagop@biol.uoa.gr
Int. J. Radiat. Biol.
, Vol. 86, No. 5, May 2010, pp. 345–357
ISSN 0955-3002 print/ISSN 1362-3095 online
2010 Informa UK Ltd.DOI: 10.3109/09553000903567961
regarding the effects at different distances frommobile phone antennas corresponding to differentintensities of the emitted radiation, neither experi-ments regarding the effects of mobile telephony basestation antennas, except of statistical observationswhich have reported reduction of bird and insectpopulations around base station antennas (Balmori2005; Everaert and Bauwens 2007).Both systems of Digital Mobile Telephony Radia-tion establishedandcommonlyused inEurope,GSM900MHz (Global SystemforMobile telecommunica-tions), and GSM 1800 MHz, (also called DCS 1800MHz – Digital Cellular System), except of their RFcarrier signal, use a pulse repetition frequency of 217 Hz, plus other extremely low frequencies (ELF)necessary for the transmission of information (Tisal1998; Hamnerius and Uddmar 2000; Hyland 2000;Clark 2001; Hillebrand 2002; Panagopoulos andMargaritis 2008). Thereby the signals of both systemscombine RF and ELF frequencies. This combinationof RF carrier and ELF pulsing frequencies isconsidered to play an important role in the bioactivity of this kind of radiation (Lin-Liu and Adey 1982;Penafiel et al. 1997).Radiation from base station antennas is almostidentical to that from mobile phones of the samesystem (GSM 900 or 1800), except that it is about100 times more powerful, and uses a little highercarrier frequency. GSM 900 mobile phones emitbetween 890 and 915 MHz (uplink operation) whilebase stations emit between 935 and 960 MHz(downlink operation). The corresponding GSM (orDCS) 1800 spectrums are 1710–1785 MHz (uplink operation) and 1805–1880 MHz (downlink opera-tion) (Tisal 1998; Hamnerius and Uddmar 2000;Hyland 2000; Clark 2001; Hillebrand 2002; Pana-gopoulos and Margaritis 2008). Thereby, effectsproduced by mobile phones at certain distances,could possibly be extrapolated to represent effectsfrom base station antennas, of the same type of radiation, at about 100 times longer distances.The difficulty in performing experiments with basestation mobile telephony antennas is due to the factof uncontrolled conditions in the open air that do notallow the use of sham-exposed animals, (exposed toidentical other conditions like temperature, humid-ity, light etc.). In other words, there is no way to havea sham-exposed group of experimental animalsunder identical environmental conditions as theexposed ones, but without being exposed to theradiation at the same time. We thought that the only way to simulate the reality of the exposure by a basestation antenna is to expose the animals at differentdistances from a mobile phone within the laboratory.In order to study the bioactivity of mobiletelephony signals at different intensities anddistances from the antenna of a mobile phonehandset, resembling effects from base station signalswithin residential areas, we used the same biologicalindex as in previous experiments of ours, thereproductive capacity of the insect
Drosophila mela-nogaster 
, defined by the number of F
(first filialgeneration) pupae derived during the three days of the insect’s maximum oviposition, as this was foundto be a reliable indicator for the bioactivity of electromagnetic fields (EMF) (Panagopoulos et al.2000a, 2004, 2007a, 2007b; Panagopoulos andMargaritis 2002, 2003a).Our previous experiments regarding a few minutesdaily exposure of the same model animal to the nearfield of a mobile phone antenna have shown a largedecrease in the reproductive capacity, affecting bothsexes (Panagopoulos et al. 2004). Both systems of digital mobile telephony radiation GSM 900 MHzand GSM/DCS 1800 MHz were found to producethe same effects, but GSM 900 was found to be evenmore bioactive than 1800, mainly due to the higherintensity of GSM 900 antennas compared to GSM/ DCS 1800 ones (Panagopoulos et al. 2007a). Thedecrease in the reproductive capacity was found to bedue to induced cell death (DNA fragmentation) inthe gonads, caused by both types of mobile telephony radiations (Panagopoulos et al. 2007b).A widely used method for identifying cell death isTUNEL (Terminal deoxynucleotide transferasedUTP Nick End Labeling) assay. By use of thismethod, fluorescein dUTP is bound through theaction of terminal transferase, onto fragmentedgenomic DNA which then becomes labelled by characteristic fluorescence. The label incorporatedat the fragmented DNA is visualised by fluorescencemicroscopy (Gavrieli et al. 1992).Each
ovary consists of 16–20 ovarioles.Each ovariole is an individual egg assembly line, withnew egg chambers in the anterior moving toward theposterior as they develop, through 14 successivestages until the mature egg reaches the oviduct. Themost anterior region is called the germarium. Themost sensitive developmental stages during oogen-esis for stress-induced cell death, are region 2 withinthe germarium and stages 7–8 just before the onset of vitellogenesis (Drummond-Barbosa and Spradling2001; McCall 2004). Electromagnetic stress frommobile telephony radiations was found in ourexperiments to be extremely bioactive, inducing celldeath to a high degree not only to the above two‘check points’ (germarium and stages 7–8) but to alldevelopmental stages of early and mid oogenesisand moreover to all types of egg chamber cells,i.e. nurse cells, follicle cells and the oocyte (OC)(Panagopoulos et al. 2007b).In continuing our research on the biologicalimpacts of the cellular mobile telephony radiation,the aim of the present study was to investigate the346
D. J. Panagopoulos et al.
dependence of GSM 900/1800 bioactivity on itsintensity, within intensity levels that people areexposed to, from mobile phones and base stationantennas as well. Finally, in the case that we woulddetect a decrease in the reproductive capacity atsmaller intensities than in our previous experiments(Panagopoulos et al. 2004, 2007a, 2007b), our aimwould be to confirm whether again the decrease isdue to cell death induced by the radiation or not, by use of the TUNEL assay.
Materials and methods
Drosophila culturing 
Wild-type strain Oregon
Drosophila melanogaster 
flies were cultured according to standard methodsand kept in glass vials with standard food (Panago-poulos et al. 2004). Ovaries from exposed and sham-exposed flies were dissected into individual ovariolesat the sixth day after eclosion and then treated forTUNEL assay.
Exposure system
As an exposure device we used a commercial cellularmobile phone itself, in order to analyse the effects of real mobile telephony signals. As in previous experi-ments (Panagopoulos et al. 2007a, 2007b), we used adual band cellular mobile phone that could beconnected to either 900 or 1800 networks simply by changing SIM (‘Subscriber Identity Module’)cards on the same handset. The highest SpecificAbsorption Rate (SAR), given by the manufacturerfor human head, is 0.89 W/kg. The exposureprocedure was the same as in earlier experiments of ours (Panagopoulos et al. 2007b). The handset wasfully charged before each set of exposures. Theexperimenter spoke on the mobile phone’s micro-phone during the exposures. Thereby, the emitted900 or 1800 radiation during the exposures was‘modulated’ by the human voice, (‘speaking emis-sions’).Exposures and measurements of mobile phoneemissions were performed at the same place wherethe mobile phone had full perception of both 900 and1800 signals, as described before (Panagopouloset al. 2007a). The measured mean power densities incontact and at different distances from the mobilephone antenna for 6 min of modulated emission, forGSM 900 MHz and for DCS 1800 MHz, are shownin Table I. As explained before (Panagopoulos et al.2007a, 2007b), the GSM 900 MHz intensity at thesame distance from the antenna and with the samehandset was higher than the corresponding GSMDCS 1800 MHz. Measurements at 900 and 1800MHz were performed with a RF Radiation Survey Meter, NARDA 8718 (Hauppauge, NY, USA).Since both GSM 900 and 1800 signals use a pulserepetition frequency at 217 Hz plus other ELFpulses, we measured electric and magnetic fieldintensities in the ELF range, with a Holaday HI-3604 ELF Survey Meter (Eden Prairie, MN, USA).The measured values for the modulated ELF fields,excluding the ambient electric and magnetic fields of 50 Hz, for GSM 900 and 1800 at different distancesfrom the antenna are also shown in Table I. Allvalues shown in Table I are averaged over 10separate measurements of each kind
standarddeviation (SD). These values are typical for digitalmobile telephony handsets and they are all within theestablished current exposure criteria (InternationalCommission for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection[ICNIRP] 1998).The radiation and field measurements given inTable I show that although the ELF electric andmagnetic field intensities fall within the backgroundlevels for distances longer than 50 cm from bothGSM 900 and 1800 mobile phone antennas, the RFcomponents of the signals are still evident fordistances up to 100 cm.
Exposure procedures
In each single experiment, we separated the collectedinsects into thirteen groups: The first group (named‘0’) was exposed to GSM 900 or 1800 field with themobile phone antenna in contact with the glass vialcontaining the flies. The second (named ‘1’), wasexposed to GSM 900 or 1800 field, at 1 cm distancefrom the mobile phone antenna. The third group(named ‘10’) was exposed to GSM 900 or 1800 fieldat 10 cm distance from the mobile phone antenna.The fourth group (named ‘20’) was exposed to GSM900 or 1800 field at 20 cm distance from the mobilephone antenna, etc, the 12th group (named ‘100’)was exposed to GSM 900 or 1800 field at 100 cmdistance from the mobile phone antenna. Finally, the13th group (named ‘SE’) was the sham-exposed.Each group consisted of 10 male and 10 femaleinsects as previously (Panagopoulos et al. 2004,2007a).In each experiment, we collected newly eclosedadult flies from the stock early in the afternoon, andseparated them into the 13 different groups followingthe same methodology as in previous experiments(Panagopoulos et al. 2004).We exposed the flies within the glass vials by placing the antenna of the mobile phone outside of the vials, parallel to the vial’s axis. The total durationof exposure was 6 min per day in one dose andexposures were started on the first day of eachexperiment (day of eclosion). In each experiment, allthe 12 exposed groups were simultaneously exposed
Intensity effects of mobile telephony radiation

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->