Department of a Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas 78229.
b Department of Pathology, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas 78229.
Radiat Res. 2019 Jan;191(1):20-30. doi: 10.1667/RR15117.1. Epub 2018 Oct 19.
There have been numerous published studies reporting on the extent of genetic damage observed in animal and human cells exposed in vitro and in vivo to non-ionizing radiofrequency fields (RF, electromagnetic waves that carry energy as they propagate in air and dense media). Overall, the data are inconsistent; while some studies have suggested significantly increased damage in cells exposed to RF energy compared to unexposed and/or sham-exposed control cells, others have not. Several variables in exposure conditions used in the experiments might have contributed to the controversy. In this comprehensive review, four specific quality control measures were used to determine the quality of 225 published studies in animal and human cells exposed in vitro and in vivo to RF energy, and the results from 2,160 tests with different sample sizes were analyzed. The four specific quality control measures were as follows: 1. "Blind" collection/analysis of the data to eliminate individual/observer "bias"; 2. Adequate description of "dosimetry" for independent replication/confirmation; 3. Inclusion of "positive controls" to confirm the outcomes; and 4. Inclusion of "sham-exposed controls" which are more appropriate to compare the data with those in RF exposure conditions. In addition, meta-analysis of the genetic damage in cells exposed to RF energy and control cells, thus far available in the RF literature database, was performed to obtain the "d" values, i.e., standardized mean difference between these two types of cells or the effect size. The relationship between d values and the above-mentioned quality control measures was ascertained. In addition, the correlation between the quality control measures and the conclusions reported in the publications (no significant difference between the cells exposed to RF energy and control cells; increased damage in former cells compared to the latter; increased, no significant difference and decreased damage in cells exposed to RF energy in the same experiment; or decreased damage in cells exposed to RF energy) was examined. The overall conclusions were as follows: 1. When all four quality control measures were mentioned in the publication, the d values were smaller compared to those when one or more quality control measures were not mentioned in the investigation; 2. Based on the inclusion of quality control measures, the weighted outcome in cells exposed to RF energy (d values) indicated a very small effect, if any; 3. The number of published studies reporting no significant difference in genetic damage of cells exposed to RF energy, compared to that of control cells, increased with increased number of quality control measures employed in investigations; 4. The number of published studies reporting increased genetic damage in cells exposed to RF energy decreased with increased number of quality control measures; and 5. There was a "bias" towards the publications reporting increased genetic damage in cells exposed to RF energy even with very small sample size. Overall, the results from this study underscore the importance of including quality control measures in investigations so that the resulting data are useful, nationally and internationally, in evaluating "potential" health risks from exposure to RF energy.
已经有许多已发表的研究报告了在体外和体内暴露于非电离射频场 (RF,在空气中和致密介质中传播时携带能量的电磁波) 的动物和人类细胞中观察到的遗传损伤的程度。总的来说,数据不一致;虽然一些研究表明,与未暴露和/或假暴露对照细胞相比,暴露于射频能量的细胞的损伤明显增加,但其他研究并未表明。实验中使用的暴露条件的几个变量可能导致了争议。在本次全面审查中,使用了四项特定的质量控制措施来确定在体外和体内暴露于射频能量的动物和人类细胞的 225 项已发表研究的质量,并且对具有不同样本大小的 2,160 项测试的结果进行了分析。这四项特定的质量控制措施如下:1. “盲法”收集/分析数据,以消除个人/观察者的“偏见”;2. 充分描述“剂量测定”以进行独立复制/确认;3. 包含“阳性对照”以确认结果;4. 包含“假暴露对照”,这更适合将数据与射频暴露条件下的数据进行比较。此外,还对迄今为止在射频文献数据库中可用的暴露于射频能量的细胞和对照细胞的遗传损伤进行了荟萃分析,以获得“d”值,即这两种类型细胞之间的标准化均数差或效应大小。确定了 d 值与上述质量控制措施之间的关系。此外,还检查了质量控制措施与出版物中报告的结论(暴露于射频能量的细胞与对照细胞之间无显着差异;与后者相比,前者的损伤增加;同一实验中暴露于射频能量的细胞的损伤增加,无显着差异和减少;或暴露于射频能量的细胞的损伤减少)之间的相关性。总体结论如下:1. 当出版物中提到所有四项质量控制措施时,与未在调查中提到一项或多项质量控制措施时相比,d 值较小;2. 根据质量控制措施的包含情况,暴露于射频能量的细胞(d 值)的加权结果表明,如果有任何影响,也是非常小的;3. 报告暴露于射频能量的细胞的遗传损伤与对照细胞无显着差异的已发表研究数量随着调查中采用的质量控制措施数量的增加而增加;4. 报告暴露于射频能量的细胞的遗传损伤增加的已发表研究数量随着质量控制措施数量的增加而减少;5. 即使样本量很小,也存在偏向于报告暴露于射频能量的细胞的遗传损伤增加的出版物的“偏见”。总的来说,这项研究的结果强调了在调查中包含质量控制措施的重要性,以便使由此产生的数据在评估射频能量暴露的“潜在”健康风险方面在国家和国际上都具有有用性。