Physiopathological effects of quercetin on oxidative stress from 4.5 g mobile phone radiation exposed to liver tissue of rat

2018 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream

HarmLow evidencePaper 2022

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2018

Study typeanimal

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Physiopathological effects of quercetin on oxidative stress from 4.5 g mobile phone radiation exposed to liver tissue of rat Postaci I, Coskun O, Senol N, Aslankoc R, Comlekci S. The physiopathological effects of quercetin on oxidative stress in radiation of 4.5 g mobile phone exposed liver tissue of rat. Bratisl Lek Listy. 2018;119(8):481-489. doi: 10.4149/BLL_2018_088. Abstract OBJECTIVE: The study was aimed to evaluate the physiopathological consideration of the effects of electromagnetic field (EMF) from the radiation of 4.5 G mobile phones on the liver tissue of rats and quercetin (Qu) applied as an antioxidant for reducing these effects. METHODS: Male Wistar-Albino rats were divided into four groups with 8 rats in each group. Group 1 (control group), Group 2 (sham group), Group 3 (EMF group) and Group 4 (EMF + Qu). From the animals sacrificed at the end of the 30th day; liver tissues were taken for histopathological and immunohistochemical examinations. RESULTS: In the liver tissue of the electromagnetic field group; dilatation of sinusitis was determined to be higher than in the sham group. It was concluded that the concentration of caspase-3 and TNF-α immunopositive cells was in the EMF group (+3) level and also the immunostaining was stronger, it caused an increase in malondialdehyde level, the difference between the groups was statistically significant, in terms of superoxide dismutase, catalase activities, the difference was not significant. CONCLUSION: It was determined that 2600 MHz EMF exposure caused damage to the liver, 100 mg/kg/day quercetin was not sufficient to prevent this damage (Tab. 5, Fig. 15, Ref. 27). bit.ly

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 Wistar-Albino rats

Sample size32

ExposureRF · 2600 MHz · 30 days

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Compared with sham, the EMF group showed higher sinusoid dilatation, stronger caspase-3 and TNF-α immunostaining (+3 level), and increased malondialdehyde; SOD and catalase activities did not differ significantly between groups. The authors concluded that 2600 MHz EMF exposure caused liver damage and that quercetin (100 mg/kg/day) was not sufficient to prevent this damage.

Outcomes measured

Liver histopathology (sinusoid dilatation)
Caspase-3 immunopositive cells
TNF-α immunopositive cells
Malondialdehyde (MDA) level
Superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity
Catalase activity

Limitations

No SAR or exposure intensity details reported in the abstract
Small group sizes (8 rats per group)
Exposure description includes '4.5 G mobile phone radiation' but protocol details are not provided in the abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "mobile phone",
    "frequency_mhz": 2600,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "30 days"
  },
  "population": "Male Wistar-Albino rats",
  "sample_size": 32,
  "outcomes": [
    "Liver histopathology (sinusoid dilatation)",
    "Caspase-3 immunopositive cells",
    "TNF-α immunopositive cells",
    "Malondialdehyde (MDA) level",
    "Superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity",
    "Catalase activity"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Compared with sham, the EMF group showed higher sinusoid dilatation, stronger caspase-3 and TNF-α immunostaining (+3 level), and increased malondialdehyde; SOD and catalase activities did not differ significantly between groups. The authors concluded that 2600 MHz EMF exposure caused liver damage and that quercetin (100 mg/kg/day) was not sufficient to prevent this damage.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "No SAR or exposure intensity details reported in the abstract",
    "Small group sizes (8 rats per group)",
    "Exposure description includes '4.5 G mobile phone radiation' but protocol details are not provided in the abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "rat",
    "liver",
    "mobile phone",
    "EMF",
    "2600 MHz",
    "oxidative stress",
    "quercetin",
    "caspase-3",
    "TNF-α",
    "malondialdehyde"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "5g-policy",
      "weight": 0.25,
      "reason": "Mentions '4.5 G' and 2600 MHz mobile phone EMF exposure (cellular band context), though this is an animal study rather than policy."
    }
  ]
}

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: 10.4149/bll_2018_088
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library