how to get rid of moles
Effect of mobile telephones on sperm quality: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Volume 70, September 2014, Pages 106–112
Effect of mobile telephones on sperm quality: A systematic review and meta-analysis ☆
Jessica A. Adams a, Tamara S. Galloway a, Debapriya Mondal a, Sandro C. Esteves b, Fiona Mathews a, ,
a Biosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, Hatherly Laboratories, Prince of Wales Road, University of Exeter, EX4 4PS, UK
b Androfert, Andrology and Human Reproduction Clinic, Campinas, Brazil
Received 14 January 2014, Accepted 22 April 2014, Available online 10 June 2014
Open Access funded by Natural Environment Research Council
Under a Creative Commons license
The potential role of mobile phone exposure on sperm quality needs to be clarified.
A systematic review was done followed by a meta-analysis using random effects models.
Mobile phone exposure was associated with reduced sperm motility and viability.
No effect on concentration was apparent.
Mobile phones are owned by most of the adult population worldwide. Radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from these devices could potentially affect sperm development and function. Around 14% of couples in high- and middle-income countries have difficulty conceiving, and there are unexplained declines in semen quality reported in several countries. Given the ubiquity of mobile phone use, the potential role of this environmental exposure needs to be clarified. A systematic review was therefore conducted, followed by meta-analysis using random effects models, to determine whether exposure to RF-EMR emitted from mobile phones affects human sperm quality. Participants were from fertility clinic and research centres. The sperm quality outcome measures were motility, viability and concentration, which are the parameters most frequently used in clinical settings to assess fertility.
We used ten studies in the meta-analysis, including 1492 samples. Exposure to mobile phones was associated with reduced sperm motility (mean difference − 8.1% (95% CI − 13.1, − 3.2)) and viability (mean difference − 9.1% (95% CI − 18.4, 0.2)), but the effects on concentration were more equivocal. The results were consistent across experimental in vitro and observational in vivo studies. We conclude that pooled results from in vitro and in vivo studies suggest that mobile phone exposure negatively affects sperm quality. Further study is required to determine the full clinical implications for both sub-fertile men and the general population.
CI, confidence interval; RF-EMR, radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, SAR, specific absorption rate; EEG, electroencephalography; ROS, reactive oxygen species; FEM, fixed effect model; REM, random effects model
Fertility; Mobile or cell phone; Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation; Sperm concentration; Sperm viability; Sperm motility
Voor het volledige artikel zie link bovenaan.
Ga terug naar het hoofdmenu