PubMed · 9019803
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R A Frosch. 1997-01-24. EMF statement.. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.275.5299.461d
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Electromagnetic radiations are named according to frequency or to wavelength (which is inversely proportional to frequency) and create electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Frequencies widely vary according to sources: high-voltage power lines, electrically heated beds, MRI, VDTs, microwave ovens, satellite, and radio/TV transmissions or cellular phone transmitters/receivers. Public concern has increased about the potential health effects of EMFs. There are arguments in favour of EMFs being biologically active, but no mechanism has been identified that explains the link between EMFs and bioeffects. Human data reviewed concern the potential reproductive effects (mainly spontaneous abortions, low birthweight and congenital malformations) of exposure to sources of EMFs: maternal residence, electrically heated beds, occupational exposure (mainly video display terminals), and medical exposures. The available epidemiologic studies all have limitations that prevent to draw clearcut conclusions on the effects of EMFs on human reproduction. EMFs are ubiquitous and unavoidable exposures. The matter of possible effects cannot be considered closed, but until our understanding of the biologic important parameters of EMFs exposures is stronger,design of new studies will be difficult and small epidemiologic studies are unlikely to provide definitive answers and should not be given high priority. No conclusion can be drawn for radiofrequencies and microwaves because of lack of data. There is no convincing evidence today that EMFs of the sort pregnant women or potential fathers meet in occupational or daily life exposures does any harm to the human reproductive process.
Electric and magnetic fields are of concern as risk factors for adverse reproductive outcomes, including congenital anomalies. Among residential exposures to electric and magnetic fields, electric bed-heating devices such as electric blankets may be a substantial source of such exposures, and their use is fairly common. Two population-based case-control studies were analyzed to investigate whether the periconceptional use of electric blankets, bed warmers, or electrically heated waterbeds increased the risk of women to deliver infants or fetuses with neural tube defects (NTDs) or orofacial clefts. We obtained information on bed-heating devices from 538 NTD cases and their 539 controls in one study, and 265 NTD cases and 481 controls and 652 orofacial cleft cases and their 734 controls from another study. Our results revealed a few modestly elevated risks of certain anomaly phenotypes with maternal use of certain bed-heating devices, but risks tended to be imprecise. In general, women who reported more frequent use of a bed-heating device, or longer duration of use, did not appear to have a higher risk for delivering offspring with anomalies than were women who reported less frequent or shorter-duration use.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.