The impact of electromagnetic field at a frequency of 50 Hz and a magnetic induction of 2.5 mT on viability of pineal cells in vitro.

Journal of biological regulators and homeostatic agents · 2016 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 4806

Compared with unexposed control cultures, EMF exposure (50 Hz, 2.5 mT) significantly increased pineal cell viability at 2 and 3 hours of exposure. After three days of 3-hour exposure to EMF, a significant decrease in viability was observed versus control, sug…

Study snapshot

PublicationJournal of biological regulators and homeostatic agents · 2016

Study typein_vitro

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

The impact of electromagnetic fields (EMF) on the pineal gland has been described in numerous studies, but many questions still remain unanswered. The aim of the experiment described in this study was to evaluate the effect of EMF on the viability of the pineal gland cells of pig in vitro. Primary culture of the pineal gland cells has been exposed to the influence of an EMF at a frequency of 50 Hz with 1, 2 or 3 hours and for 3 hours every 2 or 3 days. After the experiment, viability of cells was assessed by MTT assay and compared to a control culture not exposed to electromagnetic fields. We noticed that in respect to the control, exposure of the cells to the EMF induced a significant increase in viability of cells at 2 and 3 hours of exposure. After three days of 3-hour exposure to EMF, we observed a significant decrease in cell viability in relation to the control. The results of these studies suggest that EMF can have a significant biological effect on the cells of the pineal gland in a time-dependent exposure to its action.

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 typein_vitro

Effect directionmixed

PopulationPrimary culture of pig pineal gland cells (in vitro)

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureELF · 0.05 MHz · 1, 2, or 3 hours; and 3 hours every 2 or 3 days (three days mentioned)

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Outcomes measured

Cell viability (MTT assay)

Limitations

Letter publication type
Sample size not reported in abstract
In vitro primary cell culture; generalizability to in vivo outcomes is unclear
Exposure schedule details and total number of exposure sessions not fully specified in abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "in_vitro",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "ELF",
    "source": null,
    "frequency_mhz": 0.05,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "1, 2, or 3 hours; and 3 hours every 2 or 3 days (three days mentioned)"
  },
  "population": "Primary culture of pig pineal gland cells (in vitro)",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Cell viability (MTT assay)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Compared with unexposed control cultures, EMF exposure (50 Hz, 2.5 mT) significantly increased pineal cell viability at 2 and 3 hours of exposure. After three days of 3-hour exposure to EMF, a significant decrease in viability was observed versus control, suggesting time-dependent effects.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Letter publication type",
    "Sample size not reported in abstract",
    "In vitro primary cell culture; generalizability to in vivo outcomes is unclear",
    "Exposure schedule details and total number of exposure sessions not fully specified in abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "electromagnetic field",
    "ELF",
    "50 Hz",
    "2.5 mT",
    "pineal gland",
    "pig",
    "primary culture",
    "cell viability",
    "MTT assay",
    "time-dependent effect"
  ],
  "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: Not supplied
PubMed: 28078855

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library