Effect of electromagnetic waves from mobile phone on immune status of male rats: possible protective role of vitamin D

2016 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream

HarmLow evidencePaper 1370

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2016

Study typeanimal

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Effect of electromagnetic waves from mobile phone on immune status of male rats: possible protective role of vitamin D El-Gohary O, Said MA. Effect of electromagnetic waves from mobile phone on immune status of male rats: possible protective role of vitamin D. Can J Physiol Pharmacol. 2016 Sep 5:1-6. Abstract There are considerable public concerns about the relationship between mobile phone radiation and human health. The present study assesses the effect of electromagnetic field (EMF) emitted from a mobile phone on the immune system in rats and the possible protective role of vitamin D. Rats were randomly divided into six groups: Group I: control group; Group II: received vitamin D (1000 IU/kg/day) orally; Group III: exposed to EMF 1 h/day; Group IV: exposed to EMF 2 h/day; Group V: exposed to EMF 1 h/day and received vitamin D (1000 IU/kg/day); Group VI: exposed to EMF 2 h/day and received vitamin D (1000 IU/kg/day). After 30 days of exposure time, 1 h/day EMF exposure resulted in significant decrease in immunoglobulin levels (IgA, IgE, IgM, and IgG); total leukocyte, lymphocyte, eosinophil and basophil counts; and a significant increase in neutrophil and monocyte counts. These changes were more increased in the group exposed to 2 h/day EMF. Vitamin D supplementation in EMF-exposed rats reversed these results when compared with EMF-exposed groups. In contrast, 7, 14, and 21 days of EMF exposure produced nonsignificant differences in these parameters among all experimental groups. We concluded that exposure to mobile phone radiation compromises the immune system of rats, and vitamin D appears to have a protective effect. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov Excerpts In the EMF exposure room, there were no other metals, and the use of any other EMF-emitting device except the mobile phone used in the study was not allowed. There was no WiFi or cellular signal in the room. The rats were exposed to EMF (900 MHz at a specific absorption rate of approximately 0.9 W/kg) emitted by Nokia N70 mobile phone (Nokia Corporation, Finland) for 1 h daily (from 0800 to 0900) for groups III and V or 2 h daily (from 0800 to 1000) for groups IV and VI for 30 days. For the used mobile phone (Nokia N70), the highest SAR value under the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines for use of the device and the European Union SAR value stated by the manufacturer was 0.95 W/kg of body mass (Chan et al. 1997; Sieroń-Stołtny et al. 2015). The mobile phone was placed directly under the cage in which the animals stayed during the exposure. It was kept in the silent mode during the time of exposure; this means that both sound of a bell and sound in the receiver were switched off, so the animals were exposed solely to EMF generated by the mobile phone (Al-Damegh 2012; Hammodi 2011). Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain the effects of EMF on the immune system. Cell phone radiation results in activation of the hypothalamo-pituitary adrenal system, leading to elevated serum level of corticosteroid, indicating the existence of stress response in rats exposed to cell phone radiation. The elevated corticosteroid level may be the reason for the decreased lymphocytes (Ahmadi et al. 2014; Barnes and Greenebaum 2006). The percentage of lymphocytes and neutrophils are inversely related to each other both in basal and stressed conditions. Thus, the increase in the neutrophil count could be secondary to the decrease in the lymphocyte count (Keller et al. 1983). Among the putative mechanisms by which EMF from mobile phones may affect biological systems is the interference of EMF with Ca2+ regulatory processes in lymphoid cells (Walleczek 1992) or increasing free radicals' life span and cellular concentration of reactive oxygen species (Balci et al. 2007). This leads to oxidative damage in major cell macromolecules such as lipids and nucleic acids (Lee et al. 2004). Lantow et al. (2006) reported a significant increase in reactive oxygen species production in human monocytes and lymphocytes after exposure to 1800 MHz RF-EMFs. Increased free radicals and interference with Ca2+ regulatory processes can both cause cell growth inhibition, protein misfolding, and DNA breaks (Gye and Park 2012).

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 directionharm

PopulationMale rats

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureRF · 900 MHz · 0.9 W/kg · 1 h/day or 2 h/day for 30 days (also assessed at 7, 14, 21 days)

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

After 30 days, RF-EMF exposure (1 h/day) was associated with significant decreases in IgA, IgE, IgM, IgG and in total leukocyte, lymphocyte, eosinophil, and basophil counts, with significant increases in neutrophil and monocyte counts; effects were greater with 2 h/day exposure. Vitamin D supplementation (1000 IU/kg/day) in exposed rats reversed these changes compared with EMF-exposed groups. At 7, 14, and 21 days of exposure, differences in these immune parameters were reported as nonsignificant among groups.

Outcomes measured

Immunoglobulin levels (IgA, IgE, IgM, IgG)
Total leukocyte count
Lymphocyte count
Eosinophil count
Basophil count
Neutrophil count
Monocyte count

Limitations

Sample size not reported in provided text
Exposure conditions may not reflect typical real-world mobile phone use (phone placed directly under cage; no WiFi/cellular signal in room)
Short duration and animal model limits direct generalization to humans
Only selected immune markers reported; clinical outcomes not described

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "mobile phone",
    "frequency_mhz": 900,
    "sar_wkg": 0.9,
    "duration": "1 h/day or 2 h/day for 30 days (also assessed at 7, 14, 21 days)"
  },
  "population": "Male rats",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Immunoglobulin levels (IgA, IgE, IgM, IgG)",
    "Total leukocyte count",
    "Lymphocyte count",
    "Eosinophil count",
    "Basophil count",
    "Neutrophil count",
    "Monocyte count"
  ],
  "main_findings": "After 30 days, RF-EMF exposure (1 h/day) was associated with significant decreases in IgA, IgE, IgM, IgG and in total leukocyte, lymphocyte, eosinophil, and basophil counts, with significant increases in neutrophil and monocyte counts; effects were greater with 2 h/day exposure. Vitamin D supplementation (1000 IU/kg/day) in exposed rats reversed these changes compared with EMF-exposed groups. At 7, 14, and 21 days of exposure, differences in these immune parameters were reported as nonsignificant among groups.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "Sample size not reported in provided text",
    "Exposure conditions may not reflect typical real-world mobile phone use (phone placed directly under cage; no WiFi/cellular signal in room)",
    "Short duration and animal model limits direct generalization to humans",
    "Only selected immune markers reported; clinical outcomes not described"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "RF-EMF",
    "mobile phone",
    "900 MHz",
    "SAR",
    "rats",
    "immune system",
    "immunoglobulins",
    "leukocytes",
    "vitamin D",
    "supplementation"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "mobile-phones",
      "weight": 0.9,
      "reason": "Exposure source is a Nokia N70 mobile phone at 900 MHz with SAR reported."
    },
    {
      "slug": "animal-studies",
      "weight": 0.85,
      "reason": "Experimental study in male rats assessing immune outcomes."
    }
  ]
}

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: Not supplied
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library