RF Safe

The in vivo effects of low-intensity radiofrequency fields on the motor activity of protozoa

Int J Radiat Biol · 2014 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream
HarmLow evidencePaper 4716

Exposure to 0.1 W/m^2 at either 1 GHz or 10 GHz significantly decreased ciliate motility. Non-exposed progeny of ciliates irradiated with 0.1 W/m^2 at 10 GHz showed significantly compromised motility across at least 10–15 generations.

Study snapshot

PublicationInt J Radiat Biol · 2014
Study typeanimal
Reported directionHarm
Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyze the direct and transgenerational effects of exposure to low-dose 1 GHz (mobile phone/wireless telecommunication range) and 10 GHz (radar/satellite communication range) radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on the motility of ciliates Spirostomum ambiguum. MATERIALS AND METHODS: S. ambiguum were exposed to 1 GHz and 10 GHz RF-EMF with power flux densities (PD) ranging from 0.05-0.5 W/m(2) over a period of time from 0.05-10 h. The motility of directly exposed ciliates and their non-exposed progeny across 10-15 generations was measured. RESULTS: Exposure to 0.1 W/m(2) of either 1 or 10 GHz RF-EMF resulted in a significant decrease in the motility. The dose of exposure capable of altering the mobility of ciliates was inversely correlated with the flux density of RF-EMF. The motility of the non-exposed progeny of ciliates irradiated with 0.1 W/m(2) of 10 GHz RF-EMF remained significantly compromised, at least, across 10-15 generations, thus indicating the presence of transgenerational effects. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study show that low-dose exposure to RF-EMF can significantly affect the motility of irradiated ciliates and their non-exposed offspring, thus providing further insights into the unknown mechanisms underlying the in vivo effects of RF-EMF.

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
PopulationCiliates (protozoa) Spirostomum ambiguum
Sample sizeNot supplied
ExposureRF · 0.05–10 h
Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Exposure to 0.1 W/m^2 at either 1 GHz or 10 GHz significantly decreased ciliate motility. Non-exposed progeny of ciliates irradiated with 0.1 W/m^2 at 10 GHz showed significantly compromised motility across at least 10–15 generations.

Outcomes measured

  • Motility/motor activity of ciliates
  • Transgenerational effects on motility across 10–15 generations

Limitations

  • Sample size not reported in abstract
  • Exposure metric reported as power flux density; SAR not provided
  • Details on experimental controls and blinding not described in abstract
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "mobile phone/wireless telecommunication; radar/satellite communication",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "0.05–10 h"
  },
  "population": "Ciliates (protozoa) Spirostomum ambiguum",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Motility/motor activity of ciliates",
    "Transgenerational effects on motility across 10–15 generations"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Exposure to 0.1 W/m^2 at either 1 GHz or 10 GHz significantly decreased ciliate motility. Non-exposed progeny of ciliates irradiated with 0.1 W/m^2 at 10 GHz showed significantly compromised motility across at least 10–15 generations.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "Sample size not reported in abstract",
    "Exposure metric reported as power flux density; SAR not provided",
    "Details on experimental controls and blinding not described in abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "RF-EMF",
    "radiofrequency",
    "1 GHz",
    "10 GHz",
    "power flux density",
    "protozoa",
    "ciliates",
    "Spirostomum ambiguum",
    "motility",
    "transgenerational effects"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": []
}
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: 10.3109/09553002.2014.868612
PubMed: 24266430

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library