Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Affects Heart Rate Variability in Rabbits
Abstract
Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Affects Heart Rate Variability in Rabbits Jakub Misek, Marcel Veternik, Ingrid Tonhajzerova, et al. Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Affects Heart Rate Variability in Rabbits. Physiological Research. 69(4):633-643. Aug 2020. Summary The aim of this study was to assess the effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF EMF) on heart rate variability (HRV) in rabbits with intensity slightly exceeding the limits for occupations. Totally 21 New Zealand white rabbits divided into two groups were used in this double-blind study. The first group of animals without general anesthesia was subjected to HRV examination under exposure to a device generated RF EMF source (frequency 1788 MHz, intensity 160 V/m, lasting 150 min.). The second group (premedications +α chloralose mg/kg) underwent the same protocol under the exposure to the real RF EMF signal from the base stations of mobile providers (frequency range 1805 - 1870 MHz -corresponding to the downlink signal of Slovak mobile providers, 160 V/m, 150 min., respectively). Individual 5-min records were used to analyze the HRV parameters: heart rate and root Mean Square of the Successive Differences (rMSSD) for time domain analysis and spectral powers in the low (LF-VFS) and high frequency (HF-VFS) bands for frequency domain analysis. Our study revealed the increased in HRV parameters (HF-HRV, rMSSD) associated with lower heart rate indicating increased cardiac vagal control under the exposure to RF EMF in experimental methods. Open access paper: biomed.cas.cz
AI evidence extraction
Main findings
In 21 rabbits, exposure to RF EMF (160 V/m for 150 min; either a device-generated 1788 MHz source or real base-station downlink 1805–1870 MHz under anesthesia) was associated with increased HRV parameters (HF-HRV, rMSSD) and lower heart rate, interpreted as increased cardiac vagal control during exposure.
Outcomes measured
- heart rate variability (HRV)
- heart rate
- rMSSD
- HF-HRV (high-frequency spectral power)
- LF-VFS (low-frequency spectral power)
- HF-VFS (high-frequency spectral power)
Limitations
- No sham/control (unexposed) condition described in the abstract
- Two exposure conditions differ beyond RF source (anesthesia/premedication present in one group)
- Intensity reported as V/m; SAR not reported
- Short-term exposure only (150 min)
Suggested hubs
-
occupational-exposure
(0.55) Exposure intensity described as slightly exceeding occupational limits.
View raw extracted JSON
{
"study_type": "animal",
"exposure": {
"band": "RF",
"source": "base station",
"frequency_mhz": 1788,
"sar_wkg": null,
"duration": "150 min"
},
"population": "New Zealand white rabbits",
"sample_size": 21,
"outcomes": [
"heart rate variability (HRV)",
"heart rate",
"rMSSD",
"HF-HRV (high-frequency spectral power)",
"LF-VFS (low-frequency spectral power)",
"HF-VFS (high-frequency spectral power)"
],
"main_findings": "In 21 rabbits, exposure to RF EMF (160 V/m for 150 min; either a device-generated 1788 MHz source or real base-station downlink 1805–1870 MHz under anesthesia) was associated with increased HRV parameters (HF-HRV, rMSSD) and lower heart rate, interpreted as increased cardiac vagal control during exposure.",
"effect_direction": "mixed",
"limitations": [
"No sham/control (unexposed) condition described in the abstract",
"Two exposure conditions differ beyond RF source (anesthesia/premedication present in one group)",
"Intensity reported as V/m; SAR not reported",
"Short-term exposure only (150 min)"
],
"evidence_strength": "low",
"confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
"peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
"keywords": [
"radiofrequency",
"RF EMF",
"1788 MHz",
"1805-1870 MHz",
"base stations",
"downlink",
"heart rate variability",
"HRV",
"rMSSD",
"HF-HRV",
"rabbits",
"animal study",
"double-blind"
],
"suggested_hubs": [
{
"slug": "occupational-exposure",
"weight": 0.5500000000000000444089209850062616169452667236328125,
"reason": "Exposure intensity described as slightly exceeding occupational limits."
}
]
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.
Comments
Log in to comment.
No comments yet.