High Power Electromagnetic Waves Exposure of Healthy and Tumor Bearing Mice: Assessment of Effects on Mice Growth, Behavior, Tumor Growth, and Vessel Permeabilization

International journal of molecular sciences · 2021 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 1061

Study snapshot

PublicationInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021

Study typeanimal

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

High Power Electromagnetic Waves Exposure of Healthy and Tumor Bearing Mice: Assessment of Effects on Mice Growth, Behavior, Tumor Growth, and Vessel Permeabilization Kolosnjaj-Tabi J, Golzio M, Bellard E, Catrain A, Chretiennot T, Saurin Q, Tarayre J, Vezinet R, Rols MP. High Power Electromagnetic Waves Exposure of Healthy and Tumor Bearing Mice: Assessment of Effects on Mice Growth, Behavior, Tumor Growth, and Vessel Permeabilization. Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Aug 7;22(16):8516. doi: 10.3390/ijms22168516. Abstract High power radiofrequencies may transiently or permanently disrupt the functioning of electronic devices, but their effect on living systems remains unknown. With the aim to evaluate the safety and biological effects of narrow-band and wide-band high-power electromagnetic (HPEM) waves, we studied their effects upon exposure of healthy and tumor-bearing mice. In field experiments, the exposure to 1.5 GHz narrow-band electromagnetic fields with the incident amplitude peak value level in the range of 40 kV/m and 150 MHz wide- band electric fields with the amplitude peak value in the range of 200 kV/m, did not alter healthy and tumor- bearing animals' growth, nor it had any impact on cutaneous murine tumors' growth. While we did not observe any noticeable behavioral changes in mice during the exposure to narrow-band signals when wide-band HPEM signals were applied, mice could behave in a similar way as they respond to loud noise signals: namely, if a mouse was exploring the cage prior to signal application, it returned to companion mates when wide-band HPEM signals were applied. Moreover, the effect of wide-band signals was assessed on normal blood vessels permeability in real-time in dorsal-chamber-bearing mice exposed in a pilot study using wide-band signal applicators. Our pilot study conducted within the applicator and performed at the laboratory scale suggests that the exposure to wide-band signals with the amplitude of 47.5 kV/m does not result in increased vessel permeability. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeanimal

Effect directionmixed

PopulationHealthy and tumor-bearing mice (including dorsal-chamber-bearing mice in a pilot study)

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureRF

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

In field experiments, exposure to 1.5 GHz narrow-band fields (peak incident amplitude 40 kV/m) and 150 MHz wide-band electric fields (peak amplitude 200 kV/m) did not alter growth of healthy or tumor-bearing mice and did not affect cutaneous tumor growth. No noticeable behavioral changes were observed during narrow-band exposure; during wide-band exposure, mice showed a response described as similar to loud noise (e.g., returning to companion mates). In a pilot laboratory-scale study within an applicator, wide-band exposure at 47.5 kV/m did not increase normal vessel permeability.

Outcomes measured

Mice growth
Behavior during exposure
Cutaneous murine tumor growth
Normal blood vessel permeability (real-time assessment in dorsal-chamber-bearing mice)

Limitations

Sample size not reported in abstract
Exposure duration and schedule not reported in abstract
Pilot vessel-permeability assessment described as laboratory-scale; details not provided

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "high-power electromagnetic (HPEM) waves",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "Healthy and tumor-bearing mice (including dorsal-chamber-bearing mice in a pilot study)",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Mice growth",
    "Behavior during exposure",
    "Cutaneous murine tumor growth",
    "Normal blood vessel permeability (real-time assessment in dorsal-chamber-bearing mice)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In field experiments, exposure to 1.5 GHz narrow-band fields (peak incident amplitude 40 kV/m) and 150 MHz wide-band electric fields (peak amplitude 200 kV/m) did not alter growth of healthy or tumor-bearing mice and did not affect cutaneous tumor growth. No noticeable behavioral changes were observed during narrow-band exposure; during wide-band exposure, mice showed a response described as similar to loud noise (e.g., returning to companion mates). In a pilot laboratory-scale study within an applicator, wide-band exposure at 47.5 kV/m did not increase normal vessel permeability.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Sample size not reported in abstract",
    "Exposure duration and schedule not reported in abstract",
    "Pilot vessel-permeability assessment described as laboratory-scale; details not provided"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "high power electromagnetic waves",
    "HPEM",
    "radiofrequency",
    "narrow-band",
    "wide-band",
    "1.5 GHz",
    "electric field kV/m",
    "mice",
    "tumor-bearing",
    "behavior",
    "tumor growth",
    "vessel permeability"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "animal-studies",
      "weight": 0.9,
      "reason": "Study evaluates biological effects of high-power RF exposures in mice, including tumor-bearing models."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.3390/ijms22168516
PubMed: 34445226

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library