Tag: <span>Pubblicazioni scientifiche</span>

The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on sperm function.

[Importante review condotta da ricercatori Australiani, che valuta gli effetti delle Radiofrequenze emesse dalla telefonia mobile sulla fertilità maschile.

Un ostacolo fondamentale all’attuale dibattito riguardo ai danni da Radiazioni Non-Ionizzanti sui sistemi biologici, e nello specifico sul sistema riproduttivo, è che non esiste un chiaro meccanismo per il quale tali Radiazioni li influenzerebbero. Pertanto, quei ricercatori hanno analizzato gli effetti documentati delle Radiazioni Elettromagnetiche in RadioFrequenza sul sistema riproduttivo maschile e preso in considerazione tutte le osservazioni comuni che potessero fornire spunti su un possibile meccanismo.

Di 27 studi analizzati, ben 21(!) hanno mostrato chiaramente una correlazione tra esposizione alle Radiazioni Elettromagnetiche in RadioFrequenza ed effetti negativi sugli spermatozoi, con conseguente danno al sistema riproduttivo maschile.

Fra i succitati 21 studi, 11 dei 15 che hanno investigato la motilità degli spermatozoi ne hanno evidenziato una significativa riduzione; tutti dei 7 che hanno misurato la produzione di Specie Reattive dell’Ossigeno ne hanno documentato livelli elevati; 4 dei 5 che hanno testato il danno al DNA ne hanno evidenziato la presenza.
In aggiunta, tutti e 6 gli studi che hanno investigato la riduzione dei livelli di antiossidanti hanno evidenziato questo fenomeno.

Alla luce di tutto questo, è stato ipotizzato un meccanismo di danno cellulare in due fasi in cui la Radiazione Elettromagnetica in RadioFrequenza, impattati i sistemi cellulari, porterebbe ad una disfunzione mitocondriale (N.B. La stessa evidenziata in altri studi a livello cerebrale, con conseguente danno neuronale) seguita da una elevata produzione di ROS (Specie Reattive dell’Ossigeno).

Forse una campagna seria da parte del Ministero della Salute sul problema della fertilità (vedi Fertility Day), dovrebbe tenere presente questo fondamentale fattore eziologico di infertilità!
Non credete?
]

Reproduction. 2016 Sep 6. pii: REP-16-0126. [Epub ahead of print]

By:

Houston B1, Nixon B2, King BV3, De Iuliis G4, Aitken RJ5.

1B Houston, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, 2308, Australia brendan.houston@uon.edu.au.
2B Nixon, Biological Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, 2308, Australia.
3B King, School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.
4G De Iuliis, Biological Sciences, University of Newcastle, NSW, CALLAGHAN, 2308, Australia.
5R Aitken, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, 2308, Australia.

ARTICLE INFO

Article history
Published online before print: 6 September 2016

ABSTRACT

Mobile phone usage has become an integral part of our lives. However, the effects of the radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) emitted by these devices on biological systems and specifically the reproductive systems are currently under active debate. A fundamental hindrance to the current debate is that there is no clear mechanism of how such non-ionising radiation influences biological systems. Therefore, we explored the documented impacts of RF-EMR on the male reproductive system and considered any common observations that could provide insights on a potential mechanism. Among a total of 27 studies investigating the effects of RF-EMR on the male reproductive system, negative consequences of exposure were reported in 21. Within these 21 studies, 11 of the 15 that investigated sperm motility reported significant declines, 7 of 7 that measured the production of reactive oxygen species documented elevated levels and 4 of 5 studies that probed for DNA damage highlighted increased damage, due to RF-EMR exposure. Associated with this, RF-EMR treatment reduced antioxidant levels in 6 of 6 studies that studied this phenomenon, while consequences of RF-EMR were successfully ameliorated with the supplementation of antioxidants in all 3 studies that carried out these experiments. In light of this, we envisage a two-step mechanism whereby RF-EMR is able to induce mitochondrial dysfunction leading to elevated ROS production. A continued focus on research which aims to shed light on the biological effects of RF-EMR will allow us to test and assess this proposed mechanism in a variety of cell types.

Source/Fonte:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27601711

Full-text PDF file/File PDF del lavoro completo:

http://www.reproduction-online.org/content/early/2016/09/06/REP-16-0126.full.pdf

Studies that Show a Risk of Cancer from Exposures to Cellphone Radiation

[Bella presentazione di Lloyd Morgan sugli effetti delle radiazioni emesse dal telefono cellulare in termini di carcinogenesi (a livello cerebrale e del nervo acustico – gliomi e neurinomi, della ghiandola parotide, della mammella ed altri)  e di detrimento sulla spermatogenesi.]

2nd Neuroscience Stereology and Scientific Writing
Neuroscience
15 March 2016, Arusha Tanzania

L. Lloyd Morgan
Sr. Research Fellow
Environmental Health Trust

http://www.environmentalhealthtrust.org/

Click on the picture below to access the file/Cliccare sulla immagine sottostante per accedere al file:

Elettrosensibili

Source/Fonte:

http://anss2016.org/sayfa/8

Cell Phone Radiation Cancer Study: U.S. National Toxicology Program Presentation to NIEHS June 2016.

[Il 27 maggio 2016, il U.S. National Toxicology Program, degli U.S. National Institutes of Health, ha pubblicato un rapporto con i risultati parziali del loro ampio studio sulla cancerogenicità della Radiazione in RadioFrequenza (RFR, nota anche come Radiazione a Microonde) nei ratti maschi e femmine, e nei topi.

Questo studio, il più grande, il più ben progettato al mondo nel suo genere, e con un costo di 25 milioni di dollari, ha trovato un aumento dell’incidenza di tumori cerebrali rari chiamati gliomi nei ratti maschi e aumenti nei tumori dei nervi chiamati Schwannomi di cuore, timo e mediastino sia nei ratti maschi che nei ratti femmina esposti per due anni a due tipi di Radiazione in RadioFrequenza comunemente usati – Global System for Mobile (GSM) and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA).

I risultati pubblicati sono definiti “parziali” perché più risultati sui ratti e tutti i risultati degli studi nei topi saranno disponibili entro il 2017.

Il video che segue è una presentazione del suddetto studio al National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) tenutasi il 15-16 giugno 2016.

Potete trovare ulteriori informazioni nei link riportati sotto al video.]

[embedyt] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6Qs6mCvmZc[/embedyt]

Pubblicato il 21 ago 2016

This $25 Million Dollar Study found increased cancer in rats exposed to wireless radiation for two years. FAQS at http://ehtrust.org/science/facts-national-toxicology-program-cellphone-rat-cancer-study/

This video is found online at http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/about/org/bsc/meetings/docs/2016/june/videos.html

La Elettrosensibilità esiste davvero! – “SELECTED STUDIES ON ELECTROSENSITIVITY (ES) AND ELECTROMAGNETIC HYPER-SENSITIVITY (EHS)”

[Prove provatissime della esistenza della Elettrosensibilità!]

SELECTED STUDIES ON ELECTROSENSITIVITY (ES) AND ELECTROMAGNETIC HYPER-SENSITIVITY (EHS)

  • There are many thousands of peer-reviewed studies relevant to ES/EHS.
  • This very limited selection of about 200 studies and references aims to provide an indication of the wide range of studies available.
  • This selection does not attempt to give the earliest or most recent studies on any topic.
  • This selection concentrates on positive studies which indicate the range of relevant evidence.

Click on the picture below to access the PDF file/Cliccare sulla immagine sottostante per accedere al file PDF:

Elettrosensibili

“Comments on environmental impact of radiofrequency fields from mobile phone base stations” vs “Environmental Impact of Radiofrequency Fields from Mobile Phone Base Stations”

[Ottima, minuziosa e dettagliata replica, da parte di ricercatori indipendenti di fama nel settore dei CEM, ad un articolo negazionista (assolutamente capzioso nei contenuti) sull’impatto ambientale  delle radiazioni elettromagnetiche emesse dalle Stazioni Radio Base della telefonia mobile.

L’autore dell’articolo negazionista,  Luc Verschaeve, è un membro della IARC.
Questo porta inevitabilmente a chiedersi quale possa essere la affidabilità della attuale classificazione IARC dei CEM in Alta Frequenza, che li vede inseriti fra i cancerogeni di Classe 2B.
Sorge infatti il dubbio che il loro potenziale cancerogeno sia stato ampiamente sottostimato!]

SEPARATORE AIE x sito

19 July 2016 – “Omega News”

Scientists unite to protect Alarming EMF-effects Findings against Offense 

“Comments on Environmental Impact of Radiofrequency Fields from Mobile Phone Base Stations” by Dimitris J. Panagopoulos, Marie-Claire Cammaerts, Daniel Favre, and Alfonso Balmori, Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology. 46(9), 885-903.

[EN]

The article is a response to the review paper: Verschaeve L, (2014), Environmental Impact of Radiofrequency Fields from Mobile Phone Base Stations, Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 44:1313–1369.

In this review paper the author (L. Verschaeve, member of IARC committee) tried to reject every study that shows alarming effects of microwave radiation on living organisms. His conclusions are not supported by scientific data and are mostly based on his claims for “inaccurate” dosimetry in the reviewed studies. This issue is not the case, especially in studies employing real and not simulated exposures by mobile telephony (and related technologies) antennas, since this type of radiation is of highly varying nature, and its levels – regardless of any dosimetry – are simply those exposing daily billions of users.

The author of the review criticized exclusively those studies that find adverse biological effects instead of recognizing the fact that these results are corroborating each other and would thus be most unlikely to be wrong. The author attempted to minimize the importance of these studies by “discovering” “shortcomings” in each and every one of them. Most of the “discovered” “shortcomings” were related with the “accurate” evaluation of the exposure dosimetry. The author claimed that the measurements “are not correct”, and “for this reason these studies do not provide any evidence that observed biological effects are associated with exposure to the electromagnetic fields”. In this way Dr. Verschaeve systematically attempted to discredit practically all studies showing a variety of alarming effects related to animal/human health and the natural environment.

The four scientists demolish one by one Verschaeve’s arguments against the alarming findings. In their paper they write:

“It is as if we are observing a huge tidal wave coming upon a city on a shore and just because we are not able to measure by our instruments its exact height (e.g. whether it is 80 or 90 m), we claim that once we can not measure it exactly, we cannot draw conclusions for any adverse effects that it may cause!… That – of course – would be absolutely absurd, unscientific and catastrophic. Although the example with the tidal wave is an extreme one, phenomena such as the observed disappearance of bees (which is explained by induced cell death in the gonads as found in Drosophila studies) or birds may have tremendous adverse effects on our societies.

In this case, we have already hundreds of studies performed on a variety of organisms in many different laboratories around the world, all pointing at the same direction: This radiation at many different exposure levels is responsible for a variety of adverse biological effects ranging from simple alterations in different biological rates, loss of orientation, or retardation of growth, to DNA damage, protein damage, or cell death, transient or permanent infertility, or even the organisms’ death in extreme cases. But according to Dr Verschaeve, it doesn’t matter… Since there are other studies that do not show effects, and since we cannot estimate accurately the radiation level, there is “no overall evidence” and thus no precaution should be taken! In other words, according to Dr Verschaeve’s reasoning, the effects do not exist, or they are totally negligible!”

“It is most strange to us that such reasoning as that of Dr Verschaeve which is evident throughout his review paper is considered scientific and is published in a peer review scientific journal. It is also most strange that a scientist with such logic is a member of decision making health organizations such as the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (IARC 2013).

The practice of not recognizing the “tidal wave” because of lack of “accurate dosimetry” is not only unscientific but in addition catastrophic for public health in case that those who support and promote it are members of decision making health organizations.”

In the meanwhile Luc Verschaeve continues his work, this time on ELF studies that show alarming effects …

[IT]

L’articolo è una risposta al lavoro di recensione “Environmental Impact of Radiofrequency Fields from Mobile Phone Base Stations, Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology” [“Impatto Ambientale dei Campi Elettromagnetici in Radiofrequenza da Stazioni Radio Base della Telefonia Mobile, Recensioni Critiche in Environmental Science and Technology”] (2014) di Verschaeve L., 44: 1313-1369.

In questo lavoro di recensione l’autore (L. Verschaeve, membro del comitato IARC) ha cercato di respingere ogni studio che mostrasse effetti allarmanti della radiazione in Radiofrequenza/Microonde sugli organismi viventi.
Le sue conclusioni non sono supportate da dati scientifici e si basano principalmente sulle sue affermazioni riguardo a dosimetrie “imprecise” negli studi esaminati. Ma non è questo il caso, specialmente negli studi che impiegano esposizioni da antenne di telefonia mobile (e tecnologie correlate) reali e non simulate, dal momento che questo tipo di radiazione è di natura altamente variabile, ed i suoi livelli – indipendentemente da qualsiasi dosimetria – sono semplicemente quelli che espongono quotidianamente miliardi di utenti.

L’autore ha tentato di minimizzare l’importanza di quegli studi “scoprendo” “carenze” in ognuno di questi.
La maggior parte delle “carenze” “scoperte”, erano correlate con la “accurata” valutazione della dosimetria di esposizione. L’autore ha affermato che le misure “non sono corrette”, e “per questo motivo questi studi non forniscono alcuna prova che gli effetti biologici osservati siano associati all’esposizione ai campi elettromagnetici”.
In questo modo il Dott. Verschaeve ha sistematicamente tentato di screditare praticamente tutti gli studi che mostravano una varietà di effetti allarmanti relativi ad animali/ salute umana e ambiente naturale.

I quattro scienziati demoliscono uno per uno gli argomenti di Verschaeve contro i risultati allarmanti. Nel loro documento scrivono:

“È come se stessimo osservando su una riva una grande onda di marea in arrivo su di una città e solo perché non siamo in grado di misurare con i nostri strumenti la sua esatta altezza (ad esempio se è di 80 o 90 m), si afferma che poihé non possiamo misurarla esattamente, non possiamo trarre conclusioni su tutti gli effetti negativi che essa può causare … Cosa che – ovviamente – sarebbe assolutamente assurda, non scientifica e catastrofica. Anche se l’esempio dell’onda di marea è un estremo, fenomeni come la osservata scomparsa delle api (che si spiega con la morte cellulare indotta nelle gonadi, come trovato negli studi su Drosophila) o degli uccelli possono avere effetti negativi enormi sulle nostre società.

In questo caso, abbiamo già centinaia di studi effettuati su una varietà di organismi in molti diversi laboratori in tutto il mondo, che puntano tutti nella stessa direzione:
Questa radiazione, a livelli di esposizione molto differenti, è responsabile di una serie di effetti biologici avversi che vanno da semplici alterazioni di diversi parametri biologici, perdita di orientamento, o ritardo di crescita, fino a danno al DNA, danno alle proteine, o morte cellulare, infertilità transitoria o permanente, o addirittura in casi estremi morte degli organismi.
Ma secondo il dottor Verschaeve, non importa… Dato che ci sono altri studi che non mostrano effetti, e dal momento che non siamo in grado di stimare con precisione il livello di radiazione, non vi è “globalmente alcuna prova”, e quindi nessuna precauzione dovrebbe essere presa! In altre parole, secondo il ragionamento del dottor Verschaeve, gli effetti non esistono, o sono totalmente trascurabili!”
“E ‘molto strano per noi che un ragionamento come quello del Dott. Verschaeve, che è evidente in tutto il suo lavoro di recensione, sia considerato scientifico e sia pubblicato in una rivista scientifica peer-review. E ‘anche più strano che uno scienziato con una tale logica sia un membro di organizzazioni sanitarie con poteri decisionali come l’Agenzia Internazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro (IARC) (IARC 2013).

La pratica di non riconoscere la “onda di marea” a causa della mancanza di “dosimetria precisa” non solo è poco scientifico, ma in aggiunta catastrofico per la salute pubblica nel caso in cui quelli che la sostengono e promuovono fanno parte di organizzazioni sanitarie con poteri decisionali.”

Nel frattempo Luc Verschaeve continua il suo lavoro, questa volta in studi sugli ELF che mostrano effetti allarmanti …

Source/Fonte:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=de#!topic/omeganews/CvDiTOIKrDA

SEPARATORE AIE x sito

Env_Sc_Technol

CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
2016, VOL. 46, NO. 9, 885–903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2016.1182107

“Comments on Environmental Impact of Radiofrequency Fields from Mobile Phone Base Stations”

By:
Dimitris J. Panagopoulos (a, b, c), Marie-Claire Cammaerts (d), Daniel Favre (e),
and Alfonso Balmori (f)

(a) Laboratory of Health Physics, Radiobiology & Cytogenetics, Institute of Nuclear & Radiological Sciences & Technology, Energy & Safety, National Center for Scientific Research “Demokritos”, Athens, Greece;
(b) Department of Biology, University of Athens, Athens, Greece;
(c) Radiation and Environmental Biophysics Research Centre, Athens, Greece;
(d) DBO, Facultedes Sciences, UniversiteLibre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium;
(e) Association Romande Alerte (A.R.A.), Morges, Switzerland;
(f) Consejerıa de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Castilla y Leon, Valladolid, Spain

ARTICLE INFO

Article history
Published in 2016

Keywords
Electromagnetic fields, radiofrequency fields, mobile phone radiation, base stations, environmental impact, biological effects, health effects

ABSTRACT

This article is an answer to the review paper from Verschaeve (2014). This review paper attempted to dismiss every study that shows negative effects of microwave radiation on living organisms. His conclusions are not supported by scientific data and are mostly based on his claims for “inaccurate” dosimetry. This issue is not the case, especially in studies employing real and not simulated exposures by mobile telephony (and related technologies) antennas, since this type of radiation is of highly varying nature, and its levels – regardless of any dosimetry – are simply the same with those exposing daily billions of users.

[…]

“Comments on environmental impact of radiofrequency fields from mobile phone base stations” by Dimitris J. Panagopoulos, Marie-Claire Cammaerts, Daniel Favre and Alfonso Balmori
Full-text available here/testo completo disponibile qui:

Panagopoulos et al-Commentary-2016

“Environmental Impact of Radiofrequency Fields from Mobile Phone Base Stations” by Luc Verschaeve
Full-text
available here/testo completo disponibile qui:

Verschaeve-2014 review

Acute effects of 30 minutes of exposure to a smartphone call on in vitro platelet function.

[Questo studio dimostra che le emissioni in Radiofrequenza degli smartphone (nello specifico a 900 MHz) inducono una significativa perturbazione della struttura e della funzione delle piastrine, fornendo così ulteriore sostegno alle preoccupazioni riguardo l’uso eccessivo dei telefoni cellulari.

Attenzione dovrebbe anche essere posta nei confronti dei prodotti del sangue contenenti piastrine, che dovrebbero essere tenuti lontani da telefoni cellulari e smartphone in tutta la sequenza di produzione e nel periodo di conservazione.]

Blood Transfus. 2016 May 6:1-5. doi: 10.2450/2016.0327-15. [Epub ahead of print]

By:

Lippi G1, Danese E1, Brocco G1, Gelati M1, Salvagno GL1, Montagnana M1.

1Section of Clinical Biochemistry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.

ARTICLE INFO

Article history
Published in Blood Transfusion (“www.bloodtransfusion.it”), May 2016

Keywords
mobile phone, radiofrequency, platelets, PFA-100

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Significant concerns are now regularly raised about the safety of excessive mobile phone use. This study was aimed to assess the acute effects of radiofrequency waves emitted by a commercial smartphone on platelet function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two sequential citrated blood samples were collected from 16 healthy volunteers recruited from laboratory staff. The first sample was placed in a plastic rack, 1 cm distant from a commercial smartphone receiving a 30-min call and emitting 900 MHz radiofrequency waves. The second sample was placed in another plastic rack, isolated from radiofrequency wave sources, for the same period. The platelet count and the mean platelet volume were then assessed in all blood samples, whereas platelet function was evaluated using the platelet function analyser-100 (PFA-100).

RESULTS: A 30-min exposure of citrated blood to smartphone radiofrequency waves induced significant prolongation of collagen-epinephrine aggregation (median increase, 10%) and a considerable increase of mean platelet volume (median increase, 5%), whereas collagen-adenosine diphosphate aggregation and platelet count remained unchanged.

DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that smartphone radiofrequency waves induce significant perturbation of platelet structure and function, thus providing further support to concerns regarding excessive use of mobile phones. Caution should also be taken with regards to blood products containing platelets, which should be kept far away from mobile phones and smartphones throughout the production pipeline and storage period.

Source/Fonte:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27177410

Full-text/Testo completo:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302902127_Acute_effects_of_30_minutes_of_exposure_to_a_smartphone_call_on_in_vitro_platelet_function

A Survey on the Impact of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (RF-EMF) from Wireless Devices on Information Technology (IT) Professionals

[Commento di Giorgio Cinciripini (Blog “e-smogfree”):

Gli informatici si scoprono elettrosensibili 

Interessante lavoro di ricercatori indiani che hanno elaborato un questionario che è stato diffuso presso professionisti della informatica.

Questi per professione e per abito mentale sono dei grandi utilizzatori dei vari device:  in primis smartphone, ma anche forni a microonde ed altri gadget con Bluetooth.

Guarda caso vengono rilevati i disturbi tipici della elettrosensibilità, senza ovviamente nominarla! 

See more at: http://e-smogfree.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/gli-informatici-si-scoprono.html#sthash.ibmywWCZ.dpuf]

European Journal of Experimental Biology, 2016, 6(4) 51-46):4: 46-51.

By:

Sivani Saravanamuttu* and Sudarsanam Dorairaj

Department of Advanced Zoology and Biotechnology, Loyola College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

ARTICLE INFO

Article history
Published in European Journal of Experimental Biology, 2016

Keywords
Radiofrequency; electromagnetic fields; frequency; wireless; electrohypersensitive

ABSTRACT

An enormous growth in the telecommunication industry has led to an increase in the usage of a number of wireless

devices. The impact of working in an environment saturated with wireless radiation needs to be exploreed.
 A questionnaire was prepared based on 18 non-specific health symptoms and medical conditions. It was circulated among professionals (n=200) in the Information Technology (IT) companies and the data was statistically analyzed.
Both male and female IT professionals possessed cell phones (100%), 19.66% used cordless phones and 2.25% of them used the landline telephones. When compared to the males, it was found that 80.4% of the females used wireless computer networks (p>0.01), 27.2% used the microwave ovens (p>0.01) and 47.8% used Bluetooth devices (p>0.001).
Significant non-specific symptoms (p>0. 001) seen in females were headaches, tremors, depression, blurred vision, irritability,
difficulty concentrating, chronic pain, pain in teeth and deteriorated fillings, and dryness of lips, tongue, mouth and eyes.
The males had poor short-term memory, difficulty sleeping and fatigue. Significant medical conditions noted in the females were allergies and asthma at 18.5% (p>0.001) and skin problems at 26.1% (p>0.01), and in the males were eye-related problems at 21.1% (p>0.01).

Non-thermal effects of wireless radiationneed to be investigated globally in the coming years.

Full-text/Testo completo:

http://pelagiaresearchlibrary.com/european-journal-of-experimental-biology/vol6-iss4/EJEB-2016-6-4-46-51.pdf

Modern Electronic Devices: An Increasingly Common Cause of Skin Disorders in Consumers.

Dermatitis. 2016 May-Jun;27(3):82-9. doi: 10.1097/DER.0000000000000184.

By:

Corazza M1, Minghetti S, Bertoldi AM, Martina E, Virgili A, Borghi A.

1From the *Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche, Sezione di Dermatologia e Malattie Infettive, Università di Ferrara; and †Dermatological Clinic, Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Torrette, Ancona, Italy.

ARTICLE INFO

Article history
Published in Dermatitis, Vol 27,  May/June 2016

ABSTRACT

The modern conveniences and enjoyment brought about by electronic devices bring with them some health concerns. In particular, personal electronic devices are responsible for rising cases of several skin disorders, including pressure, friction, contact dermatitis, and other physical dermatitis. The universal use of such devices, either for work or recreational purposes, will probably increase the occurrence of polymorphous skin manifestations over time. It is important for clinicians to consider electronics as potential sources of dermatological ailments, for proper patient management. We performed a literature review on skin disorders associated with the personal use of modern technology, including personal computers and laptops, personal computer accessories, mobile phones, tablets, video games, and consoles.

Source/Fonte:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27172301

Full-text/Testo completo:

http://www.escuelasinwifi.org/sites/default/files/imagenes/corazza_et_al_2016.pdf

Effects of cell phone use on semen parameters: Results from the MARHCS cohort study in Chongqing, China

[Ennesimo studio di coorte che evidenzia la correlazione tra emissioni in Radiofrequenza/Microonde della telefonia mobile e ridotta fertilità maschile.]

Environment International Volume 91, May 2016, Pages 116–121.
doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2016.02.028.

By:
Guowei ZhangaHuan YanaQing ChenaKaijun LiuaXi LingaLei SunaNiya ZhouaZhi WangaPeng ZouaXiaogang WangaLu TanaZhihong CuiaZiyuan ZhoubJinyi LiuaLin AoaJia Caoa,

a Institute of Toxicology, College of Preventive Medicine, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China
b Department of Environmental Health, College of Preventive Medicine, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China

ARTICLE INFO

Article history
Received: 27 November 2015
Revised: 24 February 2016
Accepted: 25 February 2016
Available online: 4 March 2016

Keywords
Cell phoneTalkingInternet useSperm parameters


HIGHLIGHTS

• Certain aspects of cell phone use negatively affect semen quality.
• Internet use via cellular networks has become an important risk to semen quality.
• The use of 3G or more advanced networks might have less damage to human sperm.
• Recruiting subjects from a general population makes the study typical and relevant.

ABSTRACT

Epidemiological and experimental evidence for detrimental effects of cell phone use on semen quality is still equivocal. And that recruiting participants from infertility clinic not from general population may raise the possibility of a selection bias. To investigate effects of cell phone use on semen parameters in a general population,We screened and documented the cell phone use information of 794 young men from the Male Reproductive Health in Chongqing College students (MARHCS) cohort study in 2013, followed by 666 and 568 in 2014 and 2015, respectively. In the univariate regression analyses, we found that the daily duration of talking on the cell phone was significantly associated with decreased semen parameters, including sperm concentration [β coefficient = − 6.32% per unit daily duration of talking on the cell phone (h); 95% confidence interval (CI), − 11.94, − 0.34] and total sperm count (− 8.23; 95% CI, − 14.38, − 1.63) in 2013; semen volume (− 8.37; 95% CI, − 15.93, − 0.13) and total sperm count (− 16.59; 95% CI, − 29.91, − 0.73) in 2015]. Internet use via cellular networks was also associated with decreased sperm concentration and total sperm counts in 2013 and decreased semen volume in 2015. Multivariate analyses were used to adjust for the effects of potential confounders, and significant negative associations between internet use and semen parameters remained. Consistent but nonsignificant negative associations between talking on the cell phone and semen parameters persisted throughout the three study years, and the negative association was statistically significant in a mixed model that considered all three years of data on talking on the cell phone and semen quality. Our results showed that certain aspects of cell phone use may negatively affect sperm quality in men by decreasing the semen volume, sperm concentration, or sperm count, thus impairing male fertility.

Source/Fonte:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412016300654