Cardiovascular disease: Time to identify emerging environmental risk factors
zondag, 25 maart 2018 - Categorie: Onderzoeken
met onderaan een samenvatting van EMF Refugee
European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
Cardiovascular disease: Time to identify emerging environmental risk factors
Priyanka Bandara, Steven Weller
Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association (ORSAA) Inc., Brisbane, Australia
First Published October 3, 2017
Vernon et al.(1) recently reported a significant increase in the proportion of first-time ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients without standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (hypercholesterolaemia, hypertension, diabetes and smoking). While the authors correctly highlighted the need for discovering new mechanisms of coronary heart disease based on theirs and other complementing data, we would like to draw the attention of researchers in cardiovascular disease (CVD) to emerging environmental risk factors, focusing here on microwave radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR).
Human exposure to RF-EMR has exponentially increased over the past three decades due to rapid and widespread deployment of wireless communication and surveillance infrastructure and the use of personal wireless devices. Public exposures have increased from extremely low natural radiofrequency levels (2) below 10−15 W/m2, to above 10−2 W/m2 now. (i.e. from 10 to the power minus 15 to 10 to the power minus 2) (3,4) RF-EMR is an environmental pollutant with cytotoxic effects. (5,6)
Despite the European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM) (7) and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) (8) publishing evidence linking RF-EMR to adverse health effects and calling for exposure reduction, there is widespread ignorance about the scientific evidence of radiofrequency-induced biological/health effects within the medical fraternity. This appears to be largely due to the controversial approach by the International EMF Project at the World Health Organization (WHO), (4) which has ignored the calls by a large group of international electromagnetic field (EMF) scientists (9) for improved exposure regulation.
The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) appointed an expert panel to examine the evidence related to cancer in 2011 which classified RF-EMR as a group 2B possible carcinogen. (10) The new scientific evidence that has emerged since then, particularly epidemiological evidence linking mobile/cordless phone use to brain tumours (11,12) and experimental evidence of genotoxicity and carcinogenicity (6,13) warrants an update to this classification. (14) However, no such evaluation of CVD risk has been carried out. Furthermore, there are serious shortcomings in the few panel reports that have so far evaluated biological/health effects. (15)
In our latest review, 242 RF-EMR studies that investigated experimental endpoints related to oxidative stress (OS) (16) were identified. A staggering 216 (89%) of them found significant effects related to OS, similar to a previous review. (17) These are being further analysed following presentation at the recent Australasian Radiation Protection Society conference. (18) Mostly in-vivo animal studies and in-vitro studies have demonstrated increased markers of endogenous OS and/or affected antioxidant levels in different tissue/cell types upon exposure to RF-EMR. Some studies have further demonstrated amelioration of RF-induced OS upon treatment with various antioxidants. Limited human studies at this stage complement these studies demonstrating OS and/or reduced antioxidant status upon acute radiofrequency exposure under experimental settings,(19) in mobile phone users (20) and residents near mobile phone base stations. (21) Renowned physical scientists have recently presented experimental evidence and a theoretical explanation on how low-intensity RF-EMR can generate OS. (22)
OS is known to be implicated in CVD (23,24) and therefore RF-EMR, a new ubiquitous environmental exposure, may contribute to CVD by maintaining chronic OS, and thereby causing oxidative damage to cellular constituents and altering signal transduction pathways.
Acute RF-EMR exposure has been shown to increase blood pressure under experimental conditions, (25) while chronic exposure has been found to be associated with an increased CVD risk (26) as well as alteration in the diurnal rhythms of blood pressure and heart rate (27) in studies investigating clinical, anthropometric, behavioural, environmental and socioeconomic parameters.
Research on biological/health effects of RF-EMR started mostly within the military due to RF use in radar, (28) with former Soviet Bloc countries conducting the most. A US Army medical intelligence document (29) reporting on Soviet research stated:
Comparison of a group of engineers and administrative officials who were exposed to microwaves for a period of years and an unexposed control group revealed a significantly higher incidence of coronary disease, hypertension, and disturbances of lipid metabolism among the exposed individuals. Hereditary predisposition to heart disease was approximately the same for both groups, but overt disorders developed much more frequently in the previously exposed group. It was concluded that microwaves may act as a nonspecific factor which, under certain conditions, interferes with adaptation to unfavorable influences. Exposure may, therefore, promote an earlier onset of cardiovascular disease in susceptible individuals.
However, despite substantial evidence of biological effects and some evidence of adverse health effects even back in the 1970s, the west did not stringently control public exposure as did the Soviet Bloc countries, and conflicts of interest are apparent in same military report:
If the more advanced nations of the West are more stringent in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military functions.
This divergent approach to recognition of radiofrequency-induced health effects and exposure regulation still continues today between the USA and Russia and their allies.
Early epidemiological evidence from chronically exposed populations near radiofrequency transmitters (radio/TV/radar towers) before RF-EMR emitters became common everyday gadgets is extremely valuable. Now everyone is exposed and, therefore, it is very difficult to obtain reliable epidemiological data. However, there is still great variation in the level of exposure which can be assessed only by individual measurement in controlled studies. A 1994 US Air Force report (30) gives important insights on early epidemiological evidence:
In response to earlier Soviet reports, the World Health Organization (WHO) decided to conduct a comprehensive study on the biological effects of exposure to RF/MW radiation. In 1976, M. Zaret published the results of the study (reference found in (8)). The WHO investigation focused on the population of North Karelia, a remote area of Finland that borders the Soviet Union. This region was selected because of its close proximity to a then Soviet early warning radar station. North Karelia is geographically located in the path of intercontinental ballistic missiles that would originate from the midwest United States. To detect these missiles, the Soviets constructed a number of high power tropospheric scattering radar units adjacent to nearby Lake Ladoga. The operation of these units exposes the residents of North Karelia to large doses of ground and scatter radiation. The WHO investigation found evidence linking exposure of RF/MW radiation to cardiovascular disease and cancer. The North Karelian population suffered from an unusually high number of heart attacks and cases of cancer. In addition, it was found that the affliction rate of these diseases was much higher among residents living closest to the radar site.
Although the success of the North Karelia project lifestyle intervention programme that reduced the CVD mortality is well known, (31) how many are aware of this reported CVD risk identified by the WHO related to chronic RF-EMR exposure? While a PubMed search with ‘North Karelia’ and ‘cardiovascular’ picked up 191 publications, ‘North Karelia’ and ‘radar/radiofrequency/radiation’ picked up none (on 2 September 2017). We therefore assume that this WHO/military knowledge about RF-EMR risk in CVD was not passed on to the scientific community for investigation. The success of the North Karelia project by increasing the consumption of fruit and vegetables, i.e. antioxidant therapy, supports our hypothesis that chronic exposure to RF-EMR causes CVD via redox mechanisms of OS which can be countered, albeit not fully, with increased dietary intake of antioxidants. However, what about measures to reduce exposure? While regular use of/being close to personal wireless devices such as phones, computers and WiFi routers as well as living close to wireless infrastructure such as mobile phone base stations can greatly increase one’s exposure, the common habit of carrying a connected mobile phone in a shirt pocket is of particular concern regarding radiofrequency exposure to the heart.
As for recovery from STEMI, restoration of myocardial perfusion can be compromised by changes of endothelial integrity, platelet aggregation, neutrophil infiltration and inflammation after an acute thrombotic coronary occlusion. At a cellular level, these processes are controlled by redox mechanisms/signalling pathways and therefore, actively reducing exposure to RF-EMR warrants consideration as part of post-STEMI patient management. Indeed, we require high quality clinical studies to investigate if such an approach is effective.
Radiofrequency exposure may also contribute to standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors. The risk of hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia and truncal obesity was significantly higher in the occupationally radiofrequency-exposed radio/TV station operators (mean age 47.9 years) compared to their occupationally unexposed colleagues in a study by researchers at the Bulgarian National Centre of Public Health Protection. (26) This was despite a lower incidence of smoking in the radiofrequency-exposed group. Similar to several other studies, these researchers also found increased excretion rates of stress hormones: cortisol, adrenaline and noradrenaline in the radiofrequency-exposed. (32) It is very concerning that the occupational RF-EMR exposure levels of this group of radio and TV station workers are now common in the general public due to widespread wireless technologies, with little investigation of the health consequences.
Apart from an OS-mediated chronic effect in coronary heart disease, there may be chronic and acute effects involving OS/other mechanisms on cardiac electrophysiology. Dysregulation of the autonomic control of the cardiovascular system in healthy men (under 50 years) occupationally exposed to RF-EMR has been reported (27,33) compared to their unexposed colleagues, as well as altered heart rate variability under acute experimental exposure to cordless and mobile phones. (34,35) There is also evidence for immediate responses of voltage-gated ion channels, particularly Ca2+ channels (VGCC) upon radiofrequency exposure. (36) The downstream effects of VGCC disruption may involve alteration of important functions of Ca2+/calmodulin-dependent enzymes (such as nitric oxide synthase and protein kinase II), influencing the pathophysiology of CVD. (37) Chronic disturbance of ion channels directly/via OS by persistent RF-EMR exposure may lead to pathologies of the heart muscle similar to primary electrical diseases (i.e. channelopathies). While the manufacturers of pacemakers have developed shielding to prevent electromagnetic interference from RF-EMR over the years, we note that the natural cardiac electrical network remains susceptible to interference by common RF-EMR emitters.
Although a few western countries have recently taken steps to reduce public exposure to RF-EMR, particularly of children, such as discouraging the use of wireless devices by children and banning/restricting WiFi in schools, (38,39) there is largely inaction at this stage. Intriguingly, a professor in public health at the University of California recently went to court and accessed the cell phone safety ‘fact sheet’ (on health risks with instructions to reduce exposure) prepared by the Californian Department of Public Health. (40) It is reported that this document, originally prepared in 2009 and revised 27 times up to 2014, was abandoned due to influences from vested interests. Meanwhile in France, a physician took legal action to access data from government testing of mobile phones (41) revealing that most phones would not even pass the entirely thermally based (tissue heating) current exposure standards if held directly against the body, such as in a garment pocket.
It is clearly time to investigate the potential role of RF-EMR exposure from common wireless device use on CVD. Noting that existing research findings are influenced by the funding source, (42) fresh directives are necessary for objective high quality research to expand current primary and secondary prevention strategies. (43)
PB drafted the manuscript, PB and SW jointly conducted the review of studies on OS and both agreed on the final version of this research communication.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
1. Vernon ST, Coffey S, Bhindi R, et al. Increasing proportion of ST elevation myocardial infarction patients with coronary atherosclerosis poorly explained by standard modifiable risk factors. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2017: 24: 1824–1830. Google Scholar
2. Raines, JK. Electromagnetic field interactions with the human body: Observed effects and theories, Greenbelt, MD, USA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Goddard Space Flight Center, 1981. Google Scholar
3. Bandara P and Johannson O. Letter to the Editor. Radiat Protect Dosimetry. 2017. doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncx108 (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
4. Hardell, L. World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health – a hard nut to crack (Review). Int J Oncol 2017; 51: 405–413. Google Scholar, Medline, ISI
5. Ruediger, HW. Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Pathophysiology 2009; 16: 89–102. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline
6. National Toxicology Program, USA. NTP releases rodent studies on cell phone radiofrequency radiation. 2016. ntp.niehs.nih.gov/update/2016/6/cellphones/index.html (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
7. European Academy for Environmental Health (EURPAEM). EMF Guideline 2016. europaem.eu/en/library/blog-en/97-europaem-emf-guideline-2016 (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
8. American Academy of Environmental Medicine. Electromagnetic and Radiofrequency Fields Effect on Human Health. www.aaemonline.org/emf_rf_position.php (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
9. International EMF Scientist Appeal. 2015. emfscientist.org/ (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
10. Baan, R, Grosse, Y, Lauby-Secretan, B Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12: 624–626. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
11. Bortkiewicz, A, Gadzicka, E, Szymczak, W. Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors and salivary gland tumors – a meta-analysis. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2017; 30: 27–43. Google Scholar, Medline, ISI
12. Coureau, G, Bouvier, G, Lebailly, P Mobile phone use and brain tumours in the CERENAT case–control study. Occup Environ Med 2014; 71: 514–522. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
13. Lerchl, A, Klose, M, Grote, K Tumor promotion by exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below exposure limits for humans. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2015; 459: 585–590. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
14. Carlberg, M, Hardell, L. Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use and glioma risk using the Bradford Hill viewpoints from 1965 on association or causation. BioMed Res Int 2017; 2017: 9218486–9218486. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
15. Starkey, SJ. Inaccurate official assessment of radiofrequency safety by the Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation. Rev Environ Health 2016; 31: 493–503. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
16. Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association (ORSAA) Inc. ORSAA Database. www.orsaa.org/orsaa-database.html (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
17. Yakymenko, I, Tsybulin, O, Sidorik, E Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromag Biol Med 2016; 35: 1–17. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
18. Bandara, P, Weller, S. Biological effects of low-intensity radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation – time for a paradigm shift in regulation of public exposure. J Australas Radiat Prot Soc 2017; 34: in press–in press. Google Scholar
19. Abu Khadra, KM, Khalil, AM, Abu Samak, M Evaluation of selected biochemical parameters in the saliva of young males using mobile phones. Electromag Biol Med 2015; 34: 72–76. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
20. Hamzany, Y, Feinmesser, R, Shpitzer, T Is human saliva an indicator of the adverse health effects of using mobile phones? Antioxid Redox Signal 2013; 18: 622–627. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
21. Zothansiama, Zosangzuali, M, Lalramdinpuii, M Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations. Electromag Biol Med 2017; 36: 1–11. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
22. Barnes, F, Greenenbaum, B. Some effects of weak magnetic fields on biological systems: RF fields can change radical concentrations and cancer cell growth rates. IEEE Power Electronics Mag 2016; 3: 60–68. Google Scholar, Crossref
23. Vassalle, C, Bianchi, S, Battaglia, D Elevated levels of oxidative stress as a prognostic predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease. J Atheroscler Thromb 2012; 19: 712–717. Google Scholar, Medline, ISI
24. Luscher, TF. Ageing, inflammation, and oxidative stress: final common pathways of cardiovascular disease. Eur Heart J 2015; 36: 3381–3383. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
25. Braune, S, Wrocklage, C, Raczek, J Resting blood pressure increase during exposure to a radio-frequency electromagnetic field. Lancet 1998; 351: 1857–1858. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
26. Vangelova, K, Deyanov, C, Israel, M. Cardiovascular risk in operators under radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. Int J Hyg Environ Health 2006; 209: 133–138. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
27. Szmigielski, S, Bortkiewicz, A, Gadzicka, E Alteration of diurnal rhythms of blood pressure and heart rate to workers exposed to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Blood Press Monit 1998; 3: 323–330. Google Scholar, Medline
28. Cook, HJ, Steneck, NH, Vander, AJ Early research on the biological effects of microwave radiation: 1940–1960. Ann Sci 1980; 37: 323–351. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
29. Army Medical Intelligence and Information Agency. Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation (Radiowaves and Microwaves) – Eurasian Communist Countries. Office of the Surgeon General, United States of America, 1976. Google Scholar
30. Bolen, SM. Radiofrequency/microwave radiation biological effects and Safety standards: A review, Griffiss Air Force Base, New York: United States Air Force Materiel Command, 1994. Google Scholar, Crossref
31. Puska, P, Vartiainen, E, Nissinen, A Background, principles, implementation, and general experiences of the North Karelia Project. Glob Heart 2016; 11: 173–178. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
32. Vangelova, KK, Israel, MS. Variations of melatonin and stress hormones under extended shifts and radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. Rev Environ Health 2005; 20: 151–161. Google Scholar, Medline
33. Bortkiewicz, A, Gadzicka, E, Szymczak, W Heart rate variability (HRV) analysis in radio and TV broadcasting stations workers. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2012; 25: 446–455. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
34. Havas, M, Marrongelle, J. Replication of heart rate variability provocation study with 2.4-GHz cordless phone confirms original findings. Electromag Biol Med 2013; 32: 253–266. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
35. Andrzejak R, Poreba R, Poreba M, et al. The influence of the call with a mobile phone on heart rate variability parameters in healthy volunteers. Ind Health 2008; 46: 409–417. Google Scholar
36. Pall, ML. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 2013; 17: 958–965. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
37. Pall, ML. The NO/ONOO-cycle as the central cause of heart failure. Int J M Sci 2013; 14: 22274–22330. Google Scholar, Crossref
38. The Ministry of Health Israel. Environmental Health in Israel 2014. 2014. www.health.gov.il/publicationsfiles/bsv_sviva2014e.pdf (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
39. French National Assembly. 2015. www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/ta/ta0468.asp (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
40. Moskowitz JM. Cell Phone Safety Guidance from the California Public Health Department. 2017. www.saferemr.com/2017/03/cell-phone-safety-guidance-from.html (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
41. Arazi M. Blog. 2017. arazi.fr/wp2/ (accessed 20 September 2017). Google Scholar
42. Huss, A, Egger, M, Hug, K Source of funding and results of studies of health effects of mobile phone use: systematic review of experimental studies. Environ Health Perspect 2007; 115: 1–4. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI
43. Piepoli, MF, Hoes, AW, Agewall, S 2016 European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: the Sixth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts): developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation (EACPR). Eur J Prev Cardiol 2016; 23: NP1–NP96. Google Scholar, Link, ISI
Zie verder ook:
Tot slot de samenvatting van enkele hoofdpunten van EMF Refugee:
Acute radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation exposure has been shown to increase blood pressure under experimental conditions, while chronic exposure has been found to be associated with an increased cardiovascular disease risk as well as alteration in the diurnal rhythms of blood pressure and heart rate...
A US Army medical intelligence document reporting on Soviet research stated:
Comparison of a group of engineers and administrative officials who were exposed to microwaves for a period of years and an unexposed control group revealed a significantly higher incidence of coronary disease, hypertension, and disturbances of lipid metabolism among the exposed individuals. Hereditary predisposition to heart disease was approximately the same for both groups, but overt disorders developed much more frequently in the previously exposed group. It was concluded that microwaves may act as a nonspecific factor which, under certain conditions, interferes with adaptation to unfavorable influences.
Exposure may, therefore, promote an earlier onset of cardiovascular disease in susceptible individuals. However, despite substantial evidence of biological effects and some evidence of adverse health effects even back in the 1970s, the west did not stringently control public exposure as did the Soviet Bloc countries, and conflicts of interest are apparent in same military report: If the more advanced nations of the West are more stringent in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military functions.
Lees verder in de categorie Onderzoeken | Terug naar homepage | Lees de introductie