IEEE/ANSI, 1991: El Instituto Nacional Normativo Norteamericano (ANSI) y el Instituto de Ingenieros Electrónicos y Eléctricos (IEEE) son las instituciones en las que se apoya la Comisión Federal de las Comunicaciones en los EU debido a su pericia y competencia. Un panel de científicos y médicos expertos de la IEEE/ANSI han desarrollado los estándares de seguridad, las recomendaciones y las directrices para la exposición a la radiofrecuencia y la energía de microonda. Su posición es que no hay razón para preocuparse en relación con los niveles ambientales de radiofrecuencia de los campos EM a los que la población en general está normalmente expuesta.  

NRPB, 1992: La Junta Nacional de Protección contra la Radiación (NRPB), una agencia gubernamental en el Reino Unido, estableció Un Grupo de Consulta sobre la Radiación No Ionizante (AGNIR) que analizó la literatura científica publicada sobre la exposición a campos EM y el riesgo de cáncer. La  AGNIR, presidida por el eminente epidemiólogo  Sir Richard Doll, concluyó que no hay evidencia cuantitativa sólida de riesgo de cáncer para la población en general y los trabajadores de las industrias eléctrica, electrónica y de las telecomunicaciones debido a la exposición a campos EM (NRPB, 1992).

ICNIRP, 1995: La Comisión Internacional para la Protección Contra la Radiación No Ionizante  (ICNIRP) es una organización científica independiente que se estableció para investigar los riesgos que pueden estar asociados con diferentes formas de radiación no ionizante (NIR) y para desarrollar las directrices internacionales que establecen los límites de la exposición a NIR. El informe de un resumen científico realizado por ICNIRP (1995) declara que:

"Este trabajo prevé complementar la conclusión a la que se ha llegado con respecto a la exposición a campos EM y los posibles efectos para la salud. Todos los estudios que se conocen concluyen que los campos de la RF emitidos por las estaciones de base no tienen ningún impacto en la salud. A pesar de que se continúa investigando para determinar si existen efectos para la salud de la exposición a muy bajos niveles, solo es posible tomar decisiones que tengan como base el conocimiento actual. Los encargados de la regulación son muy concientes del hecho de que agentes físicos tales como los rayos X, el amianto y el tabaquismo fueron considerados en su momento como seguros y los estudios posteriores demostraron que no lo son. En el caso de la RF, los estudios han continuado por más de 40 años y las técnicas de laboratorio son extremadamente sensibles. No podemos descartar que se encuentren efectos sutiles en el futuro pero es reconfortante saber que se han realizado muchas investigaciones y que los estándares nacionales e internacionales no se han reducido en los últimos 15 años. Otra observación que debemos recordar es que las emisiones de la RF de las estaciones de base son alrededor de 30,000 veces más bajas que los niveles a los que se establecen los primeros efectos para la salud".

La NIRP (1996) también ha analizado los temas de salud relacionados con el uso de los teléfonos móviles y los transmisores de base. Entre las conclusiones del informe, la ICNIRP declara que los resultados de los estudios epidemiológicos y de laboratorio publicados relacionados con el cáncer no constituyen una base adecuada para limitar la exposición del hombre a la energía asociada con el uso de los teléfonos inalámbricos.

ECE, 1996: La Comisión Europea estableció un Grupo de Expertos que analizó la literatura científica, examinó las necesidades de investigación y recomendó una agenda de investigación. El Grupo de Expertos de la Comisión Europea examinó los posibles efectos para la salud relacionados con el uso de radioteléfonos y concluyó que se dispone de una base de datos muy pequeña para la exposición a campos de la RF, y hay muy pocos estudios relacionados con las emisiones y las exposiciones específicas de las telecomunicaciones personales.

Eircell, 1998: Un equipo de expertos independientes nombrado por telecomunicaciones Eircell en Irlanda concluyó, en su análisis de la literatura existente, que en la actualidad no hay evidencias de ningún efecto prejudicial para la salud de la RF de las estaciones de base de los teléfonos móviles. También declararon que,

"A menos que el estudio de los usuarios de teléfonos móviles muestre un riesgo significativo de algún efecto negativo para la salud, podría haber muy poca justificación para gastar grandes recursos en la investigación de las intensidades enormemente bajas de radiación de las estaciones de base."

Declaración del Proyecto de campos EM de la OMS: El proyecto ha realizado un trabajo que examina los posibles efectos no termales de la RF (Matthes et al., 1996). En un seminario internacional en Munich en 1996 patrocinado por la OMS, la ICNIRP y otros, varios grupos de trabajo integrados por expertos analizaron la literatura científica sobre la RF y concluyeron que,

"Basándonos en la literatura científica actual, no hay ninguna evidencia convincente de que la exposición a la RF reduzca el tiempo de vida del hombre o induzca o provoque cáncer". También declararon que "aunque se establecieron riesgos producto de la exposición a campos de la RF (termales) de niveles altos, no se asociaron riesgos de salud conocidos con la exposición a fuentes de emisión de la RF demasiado bajos como para causar un aumento significativo de la temperatura del tejido."

Se identificaron los efectos biológicos de las exposiciones a niveles bajos de RF como un aspecto que debe ser investigado con más profundidad (Repacholi, 1998).

Sociedad Real de Canadá, 1999: Un panel de expertos de la sociedad concluyó:

"Hasta la fecha, los estudios de la salud humana han examinado la relación entre la exposición a los campos de la radiofrecuencia y diferentes tipos de cáncer, problemas en la reproducción, anomalías congénitas, epilepsia, dolor de cabeza y el suicidio. En términos generales, estos estudios no proporcionan evidencia concluyente de efectos adversos para la salud de la exposición a la RF. Sin embargo, dadas las limitaciones de los estudios publicados actualmente en esta área, particularmente la dificultad para determinar la naturaleza exacta de la exposición a campos de la RF que las personas han recibido realmente, se necesita investigar con más profundidad la exposición a campos de la RF y la salud humana."

Grupo de Expertos Independientes en Teléfonos Móviles en el Reino Unido, 2000: Este grupo declaró que:

"Las pruebas consideradas en su conjunto, que se tienen hasta la fecha, sugieren que las exposiciones a la radiación de la RF por debajo de las directrices de la NRPB y la ICNIRP no causan efectos adversos par la salud de la población en general."

Consejo de Salud de los Países Bajos, 2002: El consejo de salud concluyó:

"…en la actualidad no hay motivo de preocupación de que los teléfonos móviles puedan causar efectos adversos para la salud"

El informe de 96 páginas, como la mayoría de los otros análisis de los paneles, también expresa que se necesita investigar con más profundidad este asunto.

Grupo de Consulta sobre la Radiación No Ionizante de la NRPB (AGNIR), 2003: Este fue un estudio complementario del realizado por El Grupo de Expertos Independientes en Teléfonos Móviles. La AGNIR declaró que:
"En conjunto, la investigación publicada desde el informe de IEGMP no ofrece motivos de preocupación. El peso de las pruebas de que disponemos hoy no sugiere que hayan efectos adversos debido a la exposición a campos de la RF por debajo de los niveles de las directrices, pero la investigación publicada sobre las exposiciones a la RF y la salud tiene limitaciones y el uso ampliamente difundido de los teléfonos móviles es de un tiempo relativamente corto. Se mantiene abierta, por lo tanto, la posibilidad de que puedan existir efectos adversos para la salud debido a la exposición a campos de la RF por debajo de los niveles de las directrices; de ahí que sea necesario continuar las investigaciones".              

Autoridad Sueca de Protección Contra la Radiación, SSI, 2003: La SSI ha designado un grupo internacional de expertos independientes para los campos electromagnéticos y la salud. La tarea es dar seguimiento y evaluar el desarrollo científico, también asesorar al SSI. El grupo ha hecho público su primer informe anual. Sus conclusiones son:

"La atención de este informe se centra en la investigación experimental y epidemiológica del cáncer, la barrera hematoencefálica y las proteínas de respuesta al calor. En ninguna de estas áreas ha habido un avance significativo de los resultados que garantice conclusiones sólidas de una forma u otra. Sin embargo, vale observar  que en estos momentos se esta realizando una investigación intensa en varios países y que gradualmente dispondremos de nuevas informaciones. Dada la complejidad de esta área de investigación es necesario que se reproduzcan los resultados, tanto positivos como negativos, antes de ser aceptados. Debido al desarrollo de nuevas tecnologías, es esencial seguir varios efectos posibles para la salud desde el principio mismo, particularmente porque estos efectos sólo pueden detectarse después de una larga duración, como consecuencia de la prolongación del período de latencia de muchas enfermedades crónicas. Por consiguiente, se necesita más investigación para tratar la exposición a largo plazo, así como enfermedades que no son las incluidas en los estudios de control de casos en curso actualmente".

Autoridades nórdicas competentes, 2004: La Junta Nacional de Salud Danesa, La Autoridad de Finlandia para la Seguridad Nuclear y contra la Radiación, y las Autoridades de Protección contra la Radiación de Islandia, Noruega y Suecia publicaron una declaración conjunta sobre los teléfonos celulares y la salud. Declararon que:

"Las autoridades nórdicas están de acuerdo en que no existe evidencia científica de ningún efecto adverso para la salud debido a los sistemas de telecomunicación móvil, ni de las estaciones de base ni de los teléfonos, por debajo de las restricciones básicas y los valores de referencia recomendados por la Comisión Internacional para la Protección contra la Radiación No Ionizante. (ICNIRP). Sin embargo, existen lagunas en el conocimiento que justifican la necesidad de investigar mucho más en este campo. Hay varios informes publicados que sugieren que pueden ocurrir efectos biológicos como resultado de la exposición a niveles más bajos que los de las directrices de la ICNIRP. Es necesario reproducir estos estudios y seguir muy de cerca el progreso científico en estos campos de investigación. En este contexto, sin embargo, es importante observar que los efectos biológicos no implican necesariamente un riesgo para la salud".

Update to Royal Society of Canada Report (2001-2003), 2007: Potential health risks of radiofrequency fields from wireless telecommunication devices.

“…the IEGMP (2000) reaffirmed the conclusions reached by the Royal Society of
Canada (1999). All of the authoritative reviews completed within the last 2 yr have concluded that there is no clear evidence of adverse health effects associated with RF fields from mobile phones”.

“The potential health risks of RF fields should be continually reassessed as new research results
become available. RF exposure guidelines also need to be updated as new scientific information on RF fields and health risks is generated”.

Statens strålskyddsinstitut (SSI) Independent Expert Group on Electromagnetic fields, 2007: Recent Research on EMF and Health Risks. Fifth Annual Report

“A large number of in vitro studies have been published recently investigating various
outcomes, including effects on reactive oxygen species, genotoxicity, apoptosis, gene
expression, immunology, and enzyme activity. Most of these studies have not demonstrated effects of RF exposure on the studied outcomes”.

“Six recent studies on carcinogenicity, some with higher exposure levels than previously
used, consistently report lack of carcinogenic effects, and two studies on genotoxicity
report no increase in micronuclei or DNA strand breaks after RF exposure. These results
are consistent with the majority of previous studies”.

“Most recent volunteer studies have investigated the effects of GSM mobile phone RF
radiation on cognitive function, sleep, heart rate variability, blood pressure, and hypersensitivity. In general, the recent, methodologically more rigorous studies do not replicate the positive findings from smaller, less rigorous studies published a few years ago, but a few positive effects are reported”.

“Few new data on mobile phone use and brain tumour risk have been published during the last year. Two national Interphone publications are based on very small numbers and do not change the overall assessment, and two published meta-analyses provide little additional information”.

EMF-NET: EFFECTS OF THE EXPOSURE TO ELECTROMAGNETIC
FIELDS: FROM SCIENCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFER WORKPLACE, November 2007: Report on the Effects on reproduction and development

“Overall, the literature indicates that exposure to low intensity fields, at levels experienced by members of the public, should not have a significant impact on fertility or on development either before or after birth. However, should exposure be sufficiently intense to raise tissue temperatures by a few degrees or more, or to increase core body temperature by more than about 1 0C, then the possibility of effects increases. Intense and prolonged exposure of pregnant animals to RF fields will induce a range of adverse effects that depend on the degree and duration of hyperthermia. These range from subtle behavioural changes, to retardation of fetal growth, gross morphological changes, and increased intrauterine deaths. Similarly, testicular temperatures in mammals are normal several degrees below that of the rest of the body, and exposure to heat (from RF fields or other sources) can induce temporary sterility. It is less clear whether synergistic effects occur with combined exposure to RF fields and other agents. Results suggest that complex interactions may occur but only using RF fields at hyperthermic levels”.

German Mobile Telecommunication Research Programme (DMF), May 2008: Statement by the German Commission on Radiological Protection (Strahlenschutzkommission – SSK)

“Although a final evaluation of the DMF is only possible when the studies still in progress have been completed, the findings available to date show that the initial fears of health risks could not be confirmed. Nor have the research findings of the DMF led to any new indications of health impacts that have not previously been considered. In agreement with other international bodies (WHO, ICNIRP) it can be stated that the protection concepts underlying the present basic restrictions are not challenged”.

National Collaborating Centre for Environmental Health, BC Centre for Disease Control, Sept 2008: Cellular/Mobile Phone Use and Intracranial Tumours

“There is insufficient evidence to indicate a causal association between cell phone use and intracranial tumours. There is weak evidence supporting an increase in odds of glioma, acoustic neuroma, and meningioma in adults with regular, ipsilateral use for 10 years or longer. Existing findings are suggestive but preliminary because they are based on few studies with small numbers and potential biases”.

EMF-NET: EFFECTS OF THE EXPOSURE TO ELECTROMAGNETIC
FIELDS: FROM SCIENCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFER WORKPLACE, October 2008: Report estimating upper and lower bounds of probabilities of occurrence of possible health effects.

“The possibility of the exposure to low level EM fields having hazardous effects on human health is to date a topic of concern. In the last years different specific mechanisms have been proposed to explain possible interaction between electric, magnetic or EM fields and living matter, at different levels of biological complexity. In particular, at molecular level, models have been developed able to face the problem of overcoming local water viscosity and thermal agitation. Among them, the most plausible one is the action of magnetic field on RP recombination, since the spins of radicals are very weakly coupled to the thermal bath and thus sensitive even to low intensity fields. At higher complexity levels concepts as nonlinearity, stochastic resonance, cooperative actions, spatial and temporal integration of biological responses have been invoked to account for the possibility of weak signals to be detect by membranes, cells and network of cells. However, in spite of the great number of proposed models, there is not yet a specific mechanism able to link the action of the EM field at different complexity levels, from the first interaction step, at molecular level, up to some adverse effects on organism health. Therefore, except for the thermal effects, present knowledge does not allow quantification of a threshold value for the field, below which the probability of occurrence of health effects is negligible. In this context, further research work, including both theoretical and experimental activities, seems to be necessary”.

EMF-NET: EFFECTS OF THE EXPOSURE TO ELECTROMAGNETIC
FIELDS: FROM SCIENCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFER WORKPLACE, October 2008: Status report on relevant risk communication initiatives and regulatory harmonization in the EU

“There is no common approach to EMF risk communication that will satisfy all stakeholders. This makes the position of responsible authorities even more challenging when protecting the health of the public, and responding at the same time to public demands for more information, education, measurement and participation concerning these matters. Essential evidence-based information and best practice advice is provided by National scientific institutes, the WHO, and other competent international scientific institutions. The greatest difficulty, however, is that often the majority of the public does not take part in the communication process. So letting aside some highly motivated concerned citizens and action groups, which usually have their own made up opinions, we are left with an apparently silent majority”.

EMF-NET: EFFECTS OF THE EXPOSURE TO ELECTROMAGNETIC
FIELDS: FROM SCIENCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFER WORKPLACE, October 2008: Report estimating approximate upper and lower bounds on ‘cost/benefit ratios’ for the services provided.

 

“To date, a debate is still open in the scientific community about possible health effects due to non-thermal or specific mechanisms of interaction with low level EM field. As discussed in D42, present knowledge does not allow us to quantify a threshold below guidelines, above which the EM field could induce adverse biological effects. As an example, a recent study [44] on the binding process of the carbon monoxide to the myoglobin under a 1 GHz microwave field indicates alterations in the biochemical process only for E field intensities comparable with the atomic/molecular ones, well above any possible value induced by the environmental fields. Therefore, to date, a cost/benefit analysis for the services provided seems to be unnecessary. However, although it has not been established that any of proposed specific mechanism could result in adverse health effects at levels below guidelines, one cannot conclude that long term effects will not be seen. Therefore, in depth investigation on specific mechanisms is advisable, in order to reconstruct the whole chain of effect, from the “first interaction step” at molecular level up the whole organism behavior”.

Scientific Advisory Committee on Radiofrequency Fields and Health (CCRAS) Spain, Jan 2009: CCSAR’s report on radiofrequency fields and health (2007-2008).

“The exposure levels of Spaniards to MT RFs are extremely low…RFs are not considered a causal factor of the symptoms of persons who claim to be hypersensitive…the use and exposure of adult individuals to waves from mobile telephones over a period of less than 10 years is not associated with an increase in the number of brain tumours… as a whole, the national and international committees for protection against RF waves unanimously conclude that recent scientific/technical breakthroughs do not justify changes in the present RF benchmark levels and exposure limits for the public and for workers”.

Update to Royal Society of Canada Report (2004 - 2007), 2009: Recent advances in research on radiofrequency fields and health.

“At present, the results from epidemiologic studies do not provide sufficient evidence to support a clear association between mobile phone use and an increased risk of head and neck benign tumors... Animal carcinogenesis studies conducted to date (Table 2) provide no convincing evidence that nonthermal RF field exposures either cause or contribute to cancer, although some studies suggest the possibility for low-level exposures to increase the risk of cancer”.

Statens strålskyddsinstitut (SSI), Independent Expert Group on Electromagnetic Fields 2009: Recent Research on EMF and Health Risks. Sixth annual report.

“A large number of cell studies are done on both genotoxic and non-genotoxic outcomes,
such as apoptosis and gene expression. There are no new positive findings from cellular
studies that have been well established in terms of experimental quality and replication”.

“…animal studies have not identified any clear effects on any of a number of different biological endpoints following exposure to RF radiation typical of mobile phone use, generally at levels too low to induce significant heating”.

“Many human laboratory studies reviewed here are provocation studies with rather short
exposures. Most use methods that are too crude, or look at phenomena that are too small,
or non-existent, for the research to be informative”.

“Several epidemiological studies on mobile phone use and cancer have been presented
since the previous report, including national studies from the Interphone group as well as
other studies. There are also studies on reproductive outcomes. A few recent studies on
people living near transmitters have also appeared. None of this changes any of the
Groups previous conclusions”.

“Several epidemiological studies on mobile phone use and cancer have been presented
since the previous report, including national studies from the Interphone group as well as
other studies. There are also studies on reproductive outcomes. A few recent studies on
people living near transmitters have also appeared. None of this changes any of the
Groups previous conclusions”.

International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, 2009: Review of the scientific evidence on dosimetry, biological effects, epidemiological observations, and health consequences concerning exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz).

Overall, it is concluded that:
“The mechanisms by which RF exposure heats biological tissue are well understood and the most marked and consistent effect of RF exposure is that of heating, resulting in a number of heat-related physiological and pathological responses in human subjects and laboratory animals. Heating also remains a potential confounder in in vitro studies and may account for some of the positive effects reported”.

”Recent concern has been more with exposure to the lower level RF radiation characteristic of mobile phone use. Whilst it is in principle impossible to disprove the possible existence of non-thermal interactions, the plausibility of various non-thermal mechanisms that have been proposed is very low”.

“Concerning cancer-related effects, the recent in vitro and animal genotoxicity and
carcinogenicity studies are rather consistent overall and indicate that such effects are unlikely at SAR levels up to 4 W kg-1. With regard to in vitro studies of RF effects on non-genotoxic end-points such as cell signaling and gene/protein expression, the results are more equivocal, but the magnitudes of the reported RF radiation induced changes are very small and of limited functional consequence. The results of studies on cell proliferation and differentiation, apoptosis and cell transformation are mostly negative”.

“There is some evidence of small changes in brain physiology, notably on spontaneous EEG, and somewhat more variable evidence of changes in sleep EEG and regional cerebral blood flow but these may be of limited functional consequence; no changes were seen in cognitive function. With regard to more general physiological end-points, the evidence suggests that there are no consistent effects of non-thermal RF exposures on cardiovascular physiology, circulating hormone levels or on auditory or vestibular function, except for the auditory perception of pulsed RF such as that characteristic of radar”.

“The evidence from double-blind provocation studies suggests that subjective symptoms, such as headaches, that have been identified by some individuals as associated with RF exposure, whilst real enough to the individuals concerned, are not causally related to EMF exposure”. “The experimental data do not suggest so far that children are more susceptible than adults to RF radiation, but few relevant studies have been conducted”.

“Studies of the effects of RF modalities such as high peak power pulses have been somewhat diverse and sporadic; no effects have been seen other than those associated with heating and with acoustic perception”.

“Results of epidemiological studies to date give no consistent or convincing evidence of a causal relation between RF exposure and any adverse health effect”.

Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) European Commission, Health & Consumer Protection DG, Jan 2009: Health Effects of Exposure to EMF

“The question receiving most attention is whether RF field exposure is involved in
carcinogenesis. The previous opinion stated that, based on epidemiological findings,
mobile phone use for less than ten years is not associated with cancer incidence.
Regarding longer use, it was deemed difficult to make an estimate since few persons had used mobile phones for more than ten years. Since then, a few additional epidemiological studies have been published. Unfortunately they do not significantly extend the exposure period. These studies do not change this assessment”.

“New improved studies on the association between RF fields from broadcast transmitters and childhood cancer provide evidence against such an association”.

“Animal studies show that RF fields similar to those from mobile phones, alone or in
combination with known carcinogenic factors, are not carcinogenic in laboratory rodents. Certain studies have also employed higher exposure levels (up to 4 W/kg), still with no apparent effects on tumor development”.

“Furthermore, the in vitro studies regarding genotoxicity fail to provide evidence for an involvement of RF field exposure in DNA-damage”.

“It is concluded from three independent lines of evidence (epidemiological, animal and in vitro studies) that exposure to RF fields is unlikely to lead to an increase in cancer in humans. However, as the widespread duration of exposure of humans to RF fields from mobile phones is shorter than the induction time of some cancers, further studies are required to identify whether considerably longer-term (well beyond ten years) human exposure to such phones might pose some cancer risk”.

“Regarding non-carcinogenic outcomes, …the conclusion that scientific studies have failed to provide support for an effect of RF fields on self-reported symptoms still holds”.

“Recent studies have not shown effects from RF fields on human or animal reproduction and development. No new data have appeared that indicate any other effects on human health”.

“From the risk assessment perspective it is important to recognise that information on possible effects caused by RF fields in children is limited. Furthermore, there is a lack of information on diseases other than those discussed in this report”.

Schriften des Forschungszentrums Jülich Gesundheit, Sep 2009: Report Health 16, Children’s health and RF EMF exposure

“For children under 8 years no conclusive evidence exists for the assumption that the SAR level in children’s head is higher than for adults. For whole body exposure, there is some evidence that the ICNIRP reference level cannot ensure that basic restrictions are not exceeded under any circumstances… Overall, the review of the existing scientific literature does not support the assumption that children’s health is affected by RF EMF exposure from mobile phones or base stations. Especially, animal research provides no substantial argument that children are at risk. However, with respect to some endpoints in human risk assessment, in particular cognitive effects and general health disturbances, the available evidence is rather limited so that no firm conclusions can be drawn… The balance of evidence of studies on human does not indicate an evaluated risk of RF EMF exposure for children’s health… The available data from animal experiments do not indicate that younger animals are at risk, when exposed to RF electromagnetic fields at relevant exposure scenarios… Nearly all studies concerning offspring do not suggest any significant threat to the development of offspring when exposed to non-thermal RF levels… The weight of evidence solidly refutes the assumption that RF EMF exposure causes effects on the permeability of the blood brain barrier and nerve cell damage in young animals”.

French Agency for Environmental and Occupational Health Safety (Afsset), Oct 2009: Report on expert update related to radiofrequency fields, Collective Working Group on Radiofrequency fields

 

More than 1,000 studies were reviewed by Afsset, including studies on mobile phones, Wi-Fi emitters, microwave ovens, cordless home phones and other devices that use frequencies of between 9 kilohertz (kHz) and 300 gigahertz (GHz). Most of the studies did not show any negative effects but some studies at high exposure levels did indicate possible health effects such as cell damage, reduced male fertility, and a lower blood flow to the brain.

A joint statement from the Nordic Radiation Safety Authorities, Nov 2009: EXPOSURE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS

“The Nordic authorities agree that there is no scientific evidence for adverse health effects caused by radiofrequency field strengths in the normal living environment at present. This conclusion concurs with the opinion of international scientific and advisory bodies listed as references below [ICNIRP, 1998 and 2009; WHO, 2005 and 2006; SCENIHR 2009; SSI`s Independent Expert Group on Electromagnetic Fields, 2007]. The Nordic authorities therefore at present see no need for a common recommendation for further actions to reduce these radiofrequency fields”.

European Health Risk Assessment Network on Electromagnetic Fields Exposure
EFHRAN, July 2010: Report on the analysis of risks associated to exposure to EMF: in vitro and in vivo (animals) studies

“For the three frequency ranges examined, the conclusions of the 2009 SCENIHR report are still valid in spite of the publication of several positive findings. Many of the new publications originate from laboratories and countries that are new to bioelectromagnetics research. This translates sometimes into unsatisfactory dosimetry or statistical analysis. Health risk assessment to be performed in the coming years (e.g., WHO EMF project) will need to be carried out with strict quality criteria”.



Pàgina Inicial             Otros sitios              Mapa de este sitio               Contáctenos
© Centros McLaughlin para la Evaluación de Riesgo de Salud de la Población