Follow up study on the immune response to low frequency electromagnetic fields in men and women working in a museum.

International journal of immunopathology and pharmacology · 2006 · Mixed · Very low evidence

← Research stream
MixedVery low evidencePaper 3518

In 1999, EMF-exposed men had reduced blood NK lymphocytes versus controls, while EMF-exposed women had reduced PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release from PBMC. In 2005, EMF-exposed men showed higher occupational stress but normal immune parameters, whereas EMF-exp…

Study snapshot

PublicationInternational journal of immunopathology and pharmacology · 2006
Study typecohort
Reported directionMixed
Evidence ratingVery low

Abstract

Seven women and eight men, exposed to low frequency (50 Hz) electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in a museum for 20 hours a week, were investigated in the years 1999 and 2005. During the first study, the mean EMF exposure in the working place was 1.7 microT and 1.1 microT, respectively. In the first investigation, the EMF-exposed men showed reduced blood NK lymphocytes in relation to controls, while EMF-exposed women presented reduced PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). In the year 2005, blood cytotoxic activity, state and trait anxiety (STAI I and II, respectively) and occupational stress were also investigated. The scores of STAI I and II of the control women were slightly higher than those of the control men. EMF-exposed men showed higher occupational stress but normal immune parameters. EMF-exposed women showed, in relation to controls, lower PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release from PBMC and reduced blood cytotoxic activity/CD45+-CD16+-56+ NK lymphocytes (but not per ml of blood). One of the women exposed to EMF, who worked a night shift, showed marked lymphopenia with very low NK lymphocytes and reduced IFN-gamma release; these immune parameters returned to normal following a change of work site. This study suggests that low frequency EMFs affect the immune functions of women more than those of men. Moreover, the determination of immune parameters seems to be a useful marker of the health effects of exposure to EMFs.

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 typecohort
Effect directionmixed
PopulationMen and women working in a museum
Sample size15
ExposureELF · 20 hours/week; follow-up assessments in 1999 and 2005
Evidence strengthVery lowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

In 1999, EMF-exposed men had reduced blood NK lymphocytes versus controls, while EMF-exposed women had reduced PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release from PBMC. In 2005, EMF-exposed men showed higher occupational stress but normal immune parameters, whereas EMF-exposed women showed lower PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release and reduced blood cytotoxic activity and reduced CD45+-CD16+-56+ NK lymphocytes (not reduced per ml of blood). One night-shift exposed woman had marked lymphopenia with very low NK lymphocytes and reduced IFN-gamma release that returned to normal after a change of work site.

Outcomes measured

  • Blood NK lymphocytes (including CD45+-CD16+-56+ NK lymphocytes)
  • PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release from PBMC
  • Blood cytotoxic activity
  • State and trait anxiety (STAI I and II)
  • Occupational stress
  • Lymphopenia (case observation)

Limitations

  • Very small sample size (7 women, 8 men)
  • Exposure characterization limited to mean workplace microtesla values reported for the first study; 2005 exposure levels not stated
  • Observational design with potential confounding (e.g., night shift, occupational stress)
  • One notable finding is based on a single individual case observation
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "cohort",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "ELF",
    "source": "occupational",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "20 hours/week; follow-up assessments in 1999 and 2005"
  },
  "population": "Men and women working in a museum",
  "sample_size": 15,
  "outcomes": [
    "Blood NK lymphocytes (including CD45+-CD16+-56+ NK lymphocytes)",
    "PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release from PBMC",
    "Blood cytotoxic activity",
    "State and trait anxiety (STAI I and II)",
    "Occupational stress",
    "Lymphopenia (case observation)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In 1999, EMF-exposed men had reduced blood NK lymphocytes versus controls, while EMF-exposed women had reduced PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release from PBMC. In 2005, EMF-exposed men showed higher occupational stress but normal immune parameters, whereas EMF-exposed women showed lower PHA-stimulated IFN-gamma release and reduced blood cytotoxic activity and reduced CD45+-CD16+-56+ NK lymphocytes (not reduced per ml of blood). One night-shift exposed woman had marked lymphopenia with very low NK lymphocytes and reduced IFN-gamma release that returned to normal after a change of work site.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Very small sample size (7 women, 8 men)",
    "Exposure characterization limited to mean workplace microtesla values reported for the first study; 2005 exposure levels not stated",
    "Observational design with potential confounding (e.g., night shift, occupational stress)",
    "One notable finding is based on a single individual case observation"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "very_low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "ELF-EMF",
    "50 Hz",
    "occupational exposure",
    "museum workers",
    "immune function",
    "NK lymphocytes",
    "IFN-gamma",
    "PBMC",
    "cytotoxic activity",
    "stress",
    "anxiety"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0.9,
      "reason": "Study population is workers exposed to 50 Hz EMFs at the workplace."
    }
  ]
}
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: 17291405

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library