Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiations, Emitted by a Cellular Phone, Modify Cutaneous Blood Flow

Background: Our surroundings are full of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (EMR) of different frequency and power. The non-ionizing EMRs emitted by television, computer and cellular phone (CF) sets have been increasing over the past few years. Objective: The aim of our study was to assess the effects of non-ionizing EMRs (frequency 3 × 10<sup>8</sup> to 3 × 10<sup>11</sup> Hz), emitted by CFs, on cutaneous blood flow in healthy volunteers. Methods: Thirty healthy volunteers (14 male and 16 female; age: 18–53 years) entered the study. Measurements of cutaneous blood flow were taken under standard conditions (temperature and humidity), using a laser Doppler He-Ne flowmeter that was applied to the ear skin by an optical fibre probe. Microflow values were recorded without CF contact with the skin (T₀), with the CF turned off but in contact with the ear skin (T<sub>1</sub>), with CF contact and turned on (T<sub>2</sub>), with CF contact, turned on and receiving (T<sub>3</sub>). The microflow values were also recorded backwards: with CF contact and set turned on (T<sub>4</sub>), with CF contact and turned off (T<sub>5</sub>), without CF contact (T<sub>6</sub>). Results: The mean value of basal microflow (T₀), expressed as perfusion units (PU), was 51.26 ± 11.93 PU. During the T<sub>1</sub> phase, the microflow increase was 61.38%; in T<sub>2</sub> it was 131.74%, in T<sub>3</sub> 157.67%, in T<sub>4</sub> 139.21% and in T<sub>5</sub> 122.90%; in T<sub>6</sub>, the microflow value was 57.58 ± 10 PU (similar to the basal microflow). Statistically significant cutaneous microflow values (p < 0.050) were observed comparing the T<sub>1</sub> to T<sub>5</sub> values with basal microflow (T₀). Furthermore, in comparison with T<sub>1</sub> values (CF turned off in contact with the ear skin), the T<sub>2</sub>, T<sub>3</sub> and T<sub>4</sub> data were statistically significant (T<sub>2</sub> vs. T<sub>1</sub>: t = 7.763 with p < 0.050; T<sub>3</sub> vs. T<sub>1</sub>: t = 9.834 with p < 0.050; T<sub>4</sub> vs. T<sub>1</sub>: t = 8.885 with p < 0.050).

[1]  A. P. Shepherd,et al.  Laser-Doppler Blood Flowmetry , 2010, Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine.

[2]  G. Monfrecola,et al.  The Acute Effect of Smoking on Cutaneous Microcirculation Blood Flow in Habitual Smokers and Nonsmokers , 1998, Dermatology.

[3]  M. Repacholi,et al.  Radiofrequency field exposure and cancer: what do the laboratory studies suggest? , 1997, Environmental health perspectives.

[4]  A Basten,et al.  Lymphomas in E mu-Pim1 transgenic mice exposed to pulsed 900 MHZ electromagnetic fields. , 1997, Radiation research.

[5]  S. Szmigielski,et al.  Cancer morbidity in subjects occupationally exposed to high frequency (radiofrequency and microwave) electromagnetic radiation. , 1996, The Science of the total environment.

[6]  P. Pochi The Physiology and Pathophysiology of the Skin , 1988 .

[7]  J. Johnson,et al.  Nonthermoregulatory control of human skin blood flow. , 1986, Journal of applied physiology.

[8]  Luc Duteil,et al.  A Double Wavelength Laser Doppler System to Investigate Skin Microcirculation , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  R. Nossal,et al.  Model for laser Doppler measurements of blood flow in tissue. , 1981, Applied optics.

[10]  T. Ryan The blood vessels of the skin. , 1976, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[11]  Gert Nilsson Perimed’s LDV Flowmeter , 1990 .

[12]  G. A. Holloway,et al.  An Instrument to Measure Cutaneous Blood Flow Using the Doppler Shift of Laser Light , 1978, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[13]  H M WRIGHT,et al.  THE CUTANEOUS CIRCULATION. , 1964, The Journal of osteopathy.