StopUMTS Logo
how to get rid of moles
Zoeken
   
Voorlichting
24/06/17ICNIRP Guidelines 1998 en
10/06/17Zonnepanelen: straling va
Artikelen
28/06/17Brain Drain: The Mere Pre
28/06/17Schimmels, bacteriën en
28/06/17How heart pacemakers can
28/06/17Hoe aluminium in vaccins
27/06/17COMPILATIE: Maatregelen v
27/06/1710 redenen om je iPhone w
Berichten Nederland
28/06/17Straling vooral de aanjag
27/06/17Blauhús krijt foarearst
27/06/17Radygo vraagt patent aan
21/06/17Schippers: 2,5 miljoen eu
20/06/17Cijfers over kanker; Inci
Berichten België
26/06/17Voorstel van resolutie vo
24/06/1740 procent van acht- en n
Berichten Internationaal
28/06/17USA: ‘Health Exemption
26/06/17WHO Radiofrequency Rad
11/06/17USA: 2 Ripon Children Dia
09/06/17Phonegate: French Gove
Ervaringen | Appellen/oproepen
16/06/17GGD ervaring
07/06/17Vrouw zoekt veilige wonin
01/06/17Elana's pantry: ''The Gre
Onderzoeken
26/06/17136 Studies Showing Healt
02/06/17The Effect of RF Radiatio
27/05/17Diabetis 1: Radiation fro
Veel gestelde vragen
13/05/17Vakantie? Witte zo
10/07/16Zeven veel gestelde vrage
Juridische informatie
27/06/17Arrest van Europese Hof v
05/06/17Wireless Devices - Minimi
03/06/17Professor Belpomme in
Oproepen
12/06/17Lezing in Sommelsdijk (Go
10/06/17Lezing in Nijkerk over vo
19/05/17Lezing Straling en Gezond
Folders
10/04/17Brochures, folders, websi
29/04/16USA: Meer dan 50 tips voo
Briefwisselingen | Archief: 2008, 2005
14/06/17Mail naar 'De Monitor' na
09/06/17Letters From Doctors on W
Illustraties
 Algemeen
 Fotoalbum zendmasten
 Wetenschappelijke illustraties
Australiè: Sommige mensen blijken veel gevoeliger voor radiofrequente straling mobieltjes.    
Ga naar overzicht berichten in: Berichten Internationaal

Australiè: Sommige mensen blijken veel gevoeliger voor radiofrequente straling mobieltjes.
vrijdag, 03 augustus 2012 - Dossier: Internationale berichten


Resultaten van de onderzoeksgroep van prof. Rodney Croft van de universiteit van Wollongong laten zien dat sommige mensen veel gevoeliger zijn voor de straling van mobieltjes (radiofrequente straling) dan anderen. De implicatie is dat studies waarbij door statistische correctie (zie Zwitsers Onderzoek) sommige subgroepen uitgesloten zijn in het verleden tot foutieve conclusies hebben geleid:

Bron: ABC Science 31 juli 2012

Could mobiles affect some more than others?

Auteur: Anna Salleh

The findings don't point to an effect on health per se raises questions about the reliability of previous research findings, say researchers.

Mobile phones affect the brainwaves of some individuals more than others, say researchers, who are calling for a rethink about how we study the effects of the pervasive technology.

Professor Rodney Croft, of the University of Wollongong, and colleagues, report their findings in the journal Bioelectromagnetics.

''The kind of studies that we do may be overlooking some problems,'' says Croft, who studies radiofrequency health effects.

Some studies have suggested that mobile phones can increase human electroencephalogram (EEG) activity during wake and sleep, says Croft.

But findings, including those made by Croft and colleagues in an NHRMC-funded study, have found that the increase in brainwave activity does not appear to have health effects.

''We found on average there was an increase but it was very small and there was no effect on sleep quality,'' says Croft.

But, Croft and colleagues did notice that the effect on the brainwaves was much greater in some people than in others.

They hypothesised that the averaging out of effects across the whole group was masking individual variability in sensitivity to mobile phone emissions.

''It could be that people are responding quite differently, with some people exhibiting no effect and others exhibiting a substantial effect,'' says Croft.
Follow-up study

To test if there were any individual differences in the effect of mobile phones on EEG and sleep, the researchers retrieved 20 volunteers who had been involved in their previous study and tested them again.

''The logic was that if there were individual differences, we'd find that those who had an effect the first time would have an effect the second time,'' says Croft. ''And those that didn't have an effect the first time wouldn't have an effect the second time.''

For two consecutive nights, volunteers were exposed for 30 minutes to a mobile phone, positioned in a cradle over the right temporal region, before going to sleep.

On one night the phone was continuously transmitting and on the other it was turned off - a so-called 'sham control'. The volunteers didn't know whether the phone was turned or not.

Brainwave monitoring during sleep showed, in keeping with previous findings, that exposure to mobile phones increased EEG activity during the first 30 minutes of non-rapid eye movement (non-REM) sleep.

But what was most interesting was the increase was more prominent in those individuals who had shown an increase in the previous study, supporting Croft and colleagues' hypothesis.

''The response to mobile phones seems to be mediated by some kind of individual difference,'' says Croft.

While Croft and colleagues still found no impact on the quality of sleep, they say the findings question the reliability of previous studies, including those which have found no effect on EEG.

''Finding no effect or a very small effect could be the result of averaging people together. By looking at groups as a whole we may be missing important things,'' says Croft. ''It raises the question whether we can be as confident in past research as we have been.''

''Given the far-reaching implications of mobile phone research, we may need to rethink the interpretation of results and the manner in which research is conducted in this field,'' say Croft and colleagues.
Sensitive subgroup?

The research has been welcomed by Dr Edoardo Aromataris, of the The Joanna Briggs Institute, which assesses evidence for healthcare.

Aromataris says the study suggests that there could be a subgroup of people whose EEGs are predisposed to being effected by mobile phones.

''It might be a physiological difference, or it might be a psychological difference,'' he says. ''If this is true, all of what has gone before will be put to question.''

Aromataris says individual differences in physiology are already known to be very important. For example, it causes some individuals to be more sensitive to the effect of drugs than others, something that is often not discovered until after drugs are on the market.

He suggests it could be useful for researchers to eventually develop and test hypotheses about which subgroups of people are most sensitive to mobile phone impact on EEG.

''This is really how science progresses,'' says Aromataris. ''Croft and colleagues have seen something there that others haven't and that could potentially spin off research in another direction or it could not.''

Voor het originele artikel zie:
www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/07/31/3556674.htm .


Ga terug naar het hoofdmenu
Afdrukken | Vragen | RSS | Disclaimer