Building science and radiofrequency radiation: What makes smart and healthy buildings

2019 · Harm · Insufficient evidence

← Research stream

HarmInsufficient evidencePaper 1694

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2019

Study typereview

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingInsufficient

Abstract

Building science and radiofrequency radiation: What makes smart and healthy buildings Clegg FM, Sears M, Friesen M, Scarato T, Metzinger R, Russell CL, Stadtner A, Miller AB. Building science and radiofrequency radiation: What makes smart and healthy buildings. Building & Environment. Published online August 6, 2019, 106324. doi.org rights and content Highlights • Wireless systems increase radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in buildings. • Scientific evidence identifies adverse effects from RFR below regulatory limits. • Globally, some governments and public health agencies are reducing RFR exposures. • Low RFR best practices include wired technology instead of Wi-Fi, and corded phones. • Safer, sustainable strategies and solutions for "smart" buildings are feasible. Abstract Radiofrequency radiation (RFR), used for wireless communications and "smart" building technologies, including the "Internet of Things," is increasing rapidly. As both RFR exposures and scientific evidence of harmful effects increase apace, it is timely to heed calls to include low RFR levels as a performance indicator for the health, safety and well-being of occupants and the environment. Adverse biochemical and biological effects at commonly experienced RFR levels indicate that exposure guidelines for the U.S., Canada and other countries, are inadequate to protect public health and the environment. Some industry liability insurance providers do not offer coverage against adverse health effects from radiation emitted by wireless technologies, and insurance authorities deem potential liability as "high." Internationally, governments have enacted laws, and medical and public health authorities have issued recommendations, to reduce and limit exposure to RFR. There is urgent need to implement strategies for no- or low-RFR emitting technologies, and shielding, in building design and retrofitting. These strategies include installing wired (not wireless) Internet networks, corded rather than cordless phones, and cable or wired connections in building systems (e.g., mechanical, lighting, security). Building science can profit from decades of work to institute performance parameters, operationalizing prudent guidelines and best practices. The goal is to achieve RFR exposures that are ALARA, "As Low As Reasonably Achievable." We also challenge the business case of wireless systems, because wired or cabled connections are faster, more reliable and secure, emit substantially less RFR, and consume less energy in a sector with rapidly escalating green-house gas emissions. Open access paper: sciencedirect.com

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 typereview

Effect directionharm

PopulationBuilding occupants (general)

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureRF

Evidence strengthInsufficientConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

The article states that wireless systems increase radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in buildings and asserts that scientific evidence identifies adverse biochemical and biological effects at commonly experienced RFR levels, including below regulatory limits. It argues that existing exposure guidelines (e.g., U.S., Canada) are inadequate and recommends building-design strategies to reduce exposures (e.g., wired networks, corded phones, shielding) aiming for ALARA.

Outcomes measured

biochemical effects
biological effects
adverse health effects (general)
environmental impacts (general)

Limitations

No specific study design details, quantitative exposure metrics (e.g., frequencies, SAR), or effect sizes are provided in the abstract.
Population characteristics and any inclusion/exclusion criteria for the cited evidence are not described.
The abstract does not describe methods for evidence selection or appraisal (e.g., systematic search, risk-of-bias assessment).

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "review",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "wireless communications; smart building technologies; Internet of Things; Wi‑Fi; cordless phones",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "Building occupants (general)",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "biochemical effects",
    "biological effects",
    "adverse health effects (general)",
    "environmental impacts (general)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "The article states that wireless systems increase radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in buildings and asserts that scientific evidence identifies adverse biochemical and biological effects at commonly experienced RFR levels, including below regulatory limits. It argues that existing exposure guidelines (e.g., U.S., Canada) are inadequate and recommends building-design strategies to reduce exposures (e.g., wired networks, corded phones, shielding) aiming for ALARA.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "No specific study design details, quantitative exposure metrics (e.g., frequencies, SAR), or effect sizes are provided in the abstract.",
    "Population characteristics and any inclusion/exclusion criteria for the cited evidence are not described.",
    "The abstract does not describe methods for evidence selection or appraisal (e.g., systematic search, risk-of-bias assessment)."
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "radiofrequency radiation",
    "RFR",
    "wireless",
    "smart buildings",
    "Internet of Things",
    "Wi-Fi",
    "corded phones",
    "cordless phones",
    "shielding",
    "ALARA",
    "building design",
    "exposure guidelines"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "school-wi-fi",
      "weight": 0.28,
      "reason": "Discusses Wi‑Fi and recommends wired technology instead of Wi‑Fi to reduce indoor RFR exposure (not school-specific)."
    }
  ]
}

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: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106324get
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library