ID Number		2523
Study Type		Human / Provocation
Model		Analysis of heart rate variability in human subjects exposed for short intervals to a 2.4-GHz cordless phone base station signal.
Details		AUTHORS' ABSTRACT: Havas and Marrongelle 2013 (IEEE #6176): This is a replication of a study that we previously conducted in Colorado with 25 subjects designed to test the effect of electromagnetic radiation generated by the base station of a cordless phone on heart rate variability (HRV). In this study, we analyzed the response of 69 subjects between the ages of 26 and 80 in both Canada and the USA. Subjects were exposed to radiation for 3-min intervals generated by a 2.4-GHz cordless phone base station (3-8 ¼W/cm²). A few participants had a severe reaction to the radiation with an increase in heart rate and altered HRV indicative of an alarm response to stress. Based on the HRV analyses of the 69 subjects, 7% were classified as being "moderately to very" sensitive, 29% were "little to moderately" sensitive, 30% were "not to little" sensitive and 6% were "unknown". These results are not psychosomatic and are not due to electromagnetic interference. Twenty-five percent of the subjects' self-proclaimed sensitivity corresponded to that based on the HRV analysis, while 32% overestimated their sensitivity and 42% did not know whether or not they were electrically sensitive. Of the 39 participants who claimed to experience some electrical hypersensitivity, 36% claimed they also reacted to a cordless phone and experienced heart symptoms and, of these, 64% were classified as having some degree of electrohypersensitivity (EHS) based on their HRV response. Novel findings include documentation of a delayed response to radiation. Orthostatic HRV testing combined with provocation testing may provide a diagnostic tool for some sufferers of EHS when they are exposed to electromagnetic emitting devices. The protocol used underestimates reaction to electromagnetic radiation for those who have a delayed autonomic nervous system reaction and it may under diagnose those who have adrenal exhaustion as their ability to mount a response to a stressor is diminished. AUTHORS' ABSTRACT: Havas et al. 2011 (IEEE #6177): Aim: The effect of pulsed (100 Hz) microwave (MW) radiation on heart rate variability (HRV) was tested in a double blind study. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five subjects in Colorado between the ages of 37 to 79 completed an electrohypersensitivity (EHS) questionnaire. After recording their orthostatic HRV, we did continuous real-time monitoring of HRV in a provocation study, where supine subjects were exposed for 3-minute intervals to radiation generated by a cordless phone at 2.4 GHz or to sham exposure. Results: Questionnaire: Based on self-assessments, participants classified themselves as extremely electrically sensitive (24%), moderately (16%), slightly (16%), not sensitive (8%) or with no opinion (36%) about their sensitivity. The top 10 symptoms experienced by those claiming to be sensitive include memory problems, difficulty concentrating, eye problems, sleep disorder, feeling unwell, headache, dizziness, tinnitus, chronic fatigue, and heart palpitations. The five most common objects allegedly causing sensitivity were fluorescent lights, antennas, cell phones, Wi-Fi, and cordless phones. Provocation Experiment: Forty percent of the subjects experienced some changes in their HRV attributable to digitally pulsed (100 Hz) MW radiation. For some the response was extreme (tachycardia), for others moderate to mild (changes in sympathetic nervous system and/or parasympathetic nervous system). and for some there was no observable reaction either because of high adaptive capacity or because of systemic neurovegetative exhaustion. Conclusions: Orthostatic HRV combined with provocation testing may provide a diagnostic test for some EHS sufferers when they are exposed to electromagnetic emitting devices. This is the first study that documents immediate and dramatic changes in both Hearth Rate (HR) and HR variability (HRV) associated with MW exposure at levels well below (0.5%) federal guidelines in Canada and the United States (1000 microW/cm2). EMB Editor-in-Chiefs (H. Lai and J.R. Salvatore) retraction of Havas and Marrongelle 2013 (IEEE #6402): The Editors and Publisher regret to announce the following article published in 2013 has been retracted from publication in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine: Havas M, Marrongelle J. Replication of heart rate variability provocation study with 2.4-GHz cordless phone confirms original findings. Electromagn Biol Med. 2013 Jun;32(2):25366. (doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.776437). The Journal has had to retract this article because institutional review board approval for the research on which the article is based has been found to be lacking. After a detailed review by the Research Ethics Board at Trent University, it has been determined that the paper published in the Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine by Magda Havas and Jeffrey Marrongelle in June 2013 did not receive institutional ethics review and approval by Trent University (Havas host institution) for research involving human subjects. As a result it is the opinion of Trent University that the work should not have been conducted or published based on the ethics policies and guidelines that the universitys faculty are expected to follow. It is noted that the author, Magda Havas, did receive a Human Subjects Protocol (#22836) approval for a study entitled Effects of exogenous electromagnetic fields on endogenous electromagnetic properties of the human body, with an approval date of November 5th, 2013. Havas has informed the Publisher that embedded in this approved proposal was a similar research protocol to that used in the published study above, and therefore this was a blind retroactive approval. The Research Ethics Board at Trent University have since confirmed that because the published article in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, June 2013 predates approval of protocol #22836, it cannot be considered retroactive approval for work that preceded ethical review by the Trent University Research Ethics Board. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine published this article in good faith, and on the basis of signed statements of the corresponding author regarding the ethical reliability of their work. The article is withdrawn from all print and electronic editions. Henry Lai and Joseph R. Salvatore (Editors-in-Chief)
Findings		Effects
Status		Completed With Publication
Principal Investigator		Trent University, Peterborough, Canada
Funding Agency		?????
Country		CANADA
References		Havas, M et al. Electromagn Biol Med., (2013) 32:253-266 Havas, M et al. Euro. J. Oncol. Library., (2010) 5:273-300 Lai, H et al. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine., (2014) 33:335- Havas, M et al. Medical Research Archives., (2021) 9:29-(17 pages)
Comments