Limiting exposure to radiofrequency radiation: the principles and possible criteria for health protection

References

• Al-Jawhar YA, Khairun NR, Taher MA, Shah NSM, Mostafa SA, Khalaf BA. 2021. Improving PAPR performance of filtered OFDM for 5G communications using PTS. ETRI J. 43(2):209–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes F, Greenebaum B. 2020. Setting guidelines for electromagnetic exposures and research needs. Bioelectromagnetics. 41(5):392–397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birks LE, Struchen B, Eeftens M, van Wel L, Huss A, Gajšek P, Kheifets L, Gallastegi M, Dalmau-Bueno A, Estarlich M, et al. 2018. Spatial and temporal variability of personal environmental exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields in children in Europe. Environ Int. 117:204–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter RC, Biddle DK, Van Ummersen TA. 1960. Opacities in the lens of the eye experimentally induced by exposure to microwave radiation. IRE Trans Med Electron. ME-7(3):152–157.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Giudici P, Genier JC, Martin S, Doré JF, Ducimetière P, Evrard AS, Letertre T, Ségala C. 2021. Radiofrequency exposure of people living near mobile-phone base stations in France. Environ Res. 194:110500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Lorge JO. 1984. Operant behavior and colonic temperature of Macaca mulatta exposed to radio frequency fields at and above resonant frequencies. Bioelectromagnetics. 5(2):233–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Lorge JO, Ezell CS. 1980. Observing-responses of rats exposed to 1.28- and 5.62-GHz microwaves. Bioelectromagnetics. 1(2):183–198.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eberhardt JL, Persson BR, Brun AE, Salford LG, Malmgren LO. 2008. Blood–brain barrier permeability and nerve cell damage in rat brain 14 and 28 days after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phones. Electromagn Biol Med. 27(3):215–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EC. 1999. 1999/519/EC: Council Recommendation of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz). OJ L 199 30.07.1999; p. 59. ELI. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reco/1999/519/oj.
   Google Scholar
• Eeftens M, Struchen B, Birks LE, Cardis E, Estarlich M, Fernandez MF, Gajšek P, Gallastegi M, Huss A, Kheifets L, et al. 2018. Personal exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields in Europe: is there a generation gap? Environ Int. 121(Pt 1):216–226.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Foster KR, Schwan H. 1995. Dielectric properties of tissues. In: Polk C, Postow E, editors. Handbook of biological effects of electromagnetic fields. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; p. 25–102.
   Google Scholar
• Gabriel C, Gabriel S, Corthout E. 1996. The dielectric properties of biological tissues: I. Literature survey. Phys Med Biol. 41(11):2231–2249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gabriel S, Lau RW, Gabriel C. 1996. The dielectric properties of biological tissues: II. Measurements in the frequency range 10 Hz to 20 GHz. Phys Med Biol. 41(11):2251–2269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinrikus H, Bachmann M, Lass J. 2018. Understanding physical mechanism of low-level microwave radiation effect. Int J Radiat Biol. 94(10):877–882.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinrikus H, Koppel T, Lass J, Orru H, Roosipuu P, Bachmann M. 2022. Possible health effects on the human brain by various generations of mobile telecommunication: a review based estimation of 5G impact. Int J Radiat Biol. 98(7):1210–1221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinrikus H, Lass J, Bachmann M. 2021. Threshold of radiofrequency electromagnetic field effect on human brain. Int J Radiat Biol. 97(11):1505–1515.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ICNIRP. 1998. Guidelines for limiting exposure to time‐varying electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz). Health Phys. 74(4):494–522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ICNIRP. 2020. Guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). Health Phys. 118(5):483–524.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ICRP. 1991. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. Ann ICRP. 21(1–3):1–201.
   Google Scholar
• Jalilian H, Eeftens M, Ziaei M, Röösli M. 2019. Public exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields in everyday microenvironments: an updated systematic review for Europe. Environ Res. 176:108517.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang C, Liu Y, Hu M, Zhang H. 2017. A low complexity PAPR reduction method based on FWFT and PEC for OFDM systems. IEEE Trans Broadcast. 63(2):416–425.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karastergios I, Gialofas A, Karabetsos E. 2020. National observatory of electromagnetic fields: National Telemetric Network for the measurement of high-frequency electromagnetic fields in Greece. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 188(4):413–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laakso I, Morimoto R, Heinonen J, Jokela K, Hirata A. 2017. Human exposure to pulsed fields in the frequency range from 6 to 100 GHz. Phys Med Biol. 62(17):6980–6992.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahham A, Ayyad H. 2019. Personal exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields among Palestinian adults. Health Phys. 117(4):396–402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai H, Levitt BB. 2022. The roles of intensity, exposure duration, and modulation on the biological effects of radiofrequency radiation and exposure guidelines. Electromagn Biol Med. 41(2):230–255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leszczynski D, Xu Z. 2010. Mobile phone radiation health risk controversy: the reliability and sufficiency of science behind the safety standards. Health Res Policy Syst. 8(1):2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McLean AR, Adlen EK, Cardis E, Elliott A, Goodhead DT, Harms-Ringdahl M, Hendry JH, Hoskin P, Jeggo PA, Mackay DJC, et al. 2017. A restatement of the natural science evidence base concerning the health effects of low-level ionizing radiation. Proc R Soc B. 284(1862):20171070.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neufeld E, Kuster N. 2018. Systematic derivation of safety limits for time-varying 5G radiofrequency exposure based on analytical models and thermal dose. Health Phys. 115(6):705–711.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pethig R. 1979. Dielectric and electronic properties of biological materials. New York (NY): John Wiley & Sons; p. 376.
   Google Scholar
• Postow E, Swicord ML. 1995. Modulated fields and “window” effects. In: Polk C, Postow E, editors. Handbook of biological effects of electromagnetic fields. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; p. 535–580.
   Google Scholar
• Project 5GEMF1. 2022. Assessment of current and 5G caused possible health effects related to nonionizing radiation. Final Report. Estonia: Tallinn University of Technology; 147 p. (available by request).
   Google Scholar
• Ramirez-Vazquez R, Gonzalez-Rubio J, Arribas E, Najera A. 2019. Characterisation of personal exposure to environmental radiofrequency electromagnetic fields in Albacete (Spain) and assessment of risk perception. Environ Res. 172:109–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sagar S, Adem SM, Struchen B, Loughran SP, Brunjes ME, Arangua L, Dalvie MA, Croft RJ, Jerrett M, Moskowitz JM, et al. 2018. Comparison of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure levels in different everyday microenvironments in an international context. Environ Int. 114:297–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sagar S, Dongus S, Schoeni A, Roser K, Eeftens M, Struchen B, Foerster M, Meier N, Adem S, Roosli M. 2018. Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure in everyday microenvironments in Europe: a systematic literature review. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 28(2):147–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selmaoui B, Mazet P, Petit P-B, Kim K, Choi D, de Seze R. 2021. Exposure of South Korean population to 5G mobile phone networks (3.4–3.8 GHz). Bioelectromagnetics. 42(5):407–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stam R. 2018. Comparison of international policies on electromagnetic fields (power frequency and radiofrequency fields). Bilthoven, The Netherlands: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM; 18 p.
   Google Scholar
• Suhhova A, Bachmann M, Karai D, Lass J, Hinrikus H. 2013. Effect of microwave radiation on human EEG at two different levels of exposure. Bioelectromagnetics. 34(4):264–274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tell RA, Mantiply ED. 1980. Population exposure to VHF and UHF broadcast radiation in the United States. Proc IEEE. 68(1):6–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urbinello D, Joseph W, Verloock L, Martens L, Roosli M. 2014. Temporal trends of radio-frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure in everyday environments across European cities. Environ Res. 134:134–142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velghe M, Joseph W, Debouvere S, Aminzadeh R, Martens L, Thielens A. 2019. Characterisation of spatial and temporal variability of RF-EMF exposure levels in urban environments in Flanders, Belgium. Environ Res. 175:351–366.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velizarov S, Raskmark P, Kwee S. 1999. The effects of radiofrequency fields on cell proliferation are non-thermal. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg. 48(1):177–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Ijaz A, Xiao P, Molu M, Tafazolli R. 2018. Filtered OFDM systems, algorithms and performance analysis for 5G and beyond. IEEE Trans Commun. 66(3):1205–1218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zong L, Zhou S, Sgriccia N, Hawley MC, Kempel LC. 2003. A review of microwave-assisted polymer chemistry (MAPC). J Microw Power Electromagn Energy. 38(1):49–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar