Evaluation of Electrochemical Information Transfer System: I . Effect of Electric Fields on Living Organisms
Abstract
The 1976 study "Evaluation of Electrochemical Information Transfer System: I. Effect of Electric Fields on Living Organisms" by Andrew A. Marino, Thomas J. Berger, B. Peter Austin, Robert O. Becker, and Francis X. Hart investigated the biological impacts of weak electric fields, specifically related to Project Seafarer, finding potential stress-related effects on mammalian systems. Key Findings and Context: Study Focus: The researchers evaluated the impact of extremely low-frequency (ELF) electric fields (similar to the range of the Navy's Project Seafarer) on mice. Biological Stress: The study, often cited alongside other studies, indicated that electric field exposure acted as a stressor, causing effects on the central nervous and endocrine systems. Relevance: It was part of a body of literature evaluating the environmental and health impacts of high-power, low-frequency electromagnetic communication systems, which found that such fields could, in some cases, induce measurable physiological changes. Context in Electromagnetics: This study, along with work by Becker and others, explored how external electromagnetic environments interact with the body's internal, electrochemical information-transfer systems. The research contributed to the scientific discussion regarding the potential, though sometimes debated, health risks and biological alterations resulting from exposure to man-made electromagnetic fields.
AI evidence extraction
Main findings
The study investigated weak extremely low-frequency (ELF) electric fields (noted as similar to those associated with Project Seafarer) in mice and reported that electric field exposure acted as a stressor, with effects described on the central nervous and endocrine systems.
Outcomes measured
- stress-related effects
- central nervous system effects
- endocrine system effects
- physiological changes
Limitations
- No exposure metrics (e.g., field strength, frequency) reported in the provided abstract/metadata.
- Sample size not reported in the provided abstract/metadata.
- Exposure duration not reported in the provided abstract/metadata.
- Outcome measures and methods are not described in the provided abstract/metadata.
Suggested hubs
-
occupational-exposure
(0.2) Mentions Navy Project Seafarer context (high-power low-frequency communication system), but the study itself is in mice and does not clearly specify occupational exposure.
View raw extracted JSON
{
"study_type": "animal",
"exposure": {
"band": "ELF",
"source": "other",
"frequency_mhz": null,
"sar_wkg": null,
"duration": null
},
"population": "Mice",
"sample_size": null,
"outcomes": [
"stress-related effects",
"central nervous system effects",
"endocrine system effects",
"physiological changes"
],
"main_findings": "The study investigated weak extremely low-frequency (ELF) electric fields (noted as similar to those associated with Project Seafarer) in mice and reported that electric field exposure acted as a stressor, with effects described on the central nervous and endocrine systems.",
"effect_direction": "harm",
"limitations": [
"No exposure metrics (e.g., field strength, frequency) reported in the provided abstract/metadata.",
"Sample size not reported in the provided abstract/metadata.",
"Exposure duration not reported in the provided abstract/metadata.",
"Outcome measures and methods are not described in the provided abstract/metadata."
],
"evidence_strength": "insufficient",
"confidence": 0.61999999999999999555910790149937383830547332763671875,
"peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
"keywords": [
"extremely low frequency",
"ELF",
"electric fields",
"Project Seafarer",
"mice",
"stress",
"central nervous system",
"endocrine system",
"electrochemical information transfer"
],
"suggested_hubs": [
{
"slug": "occupational-exposure",
"weight": 0.200000000000000011102230246251565404236316680908203125,
"reason": "Mentions Navy Project Seafarer context (high-power low-frequency communication system), but the study itself is in mice and does not clearly specify occupational exposure."
}
]
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.
Comments
Log in to comment.
No comments yet.