[Ionizing and non-ionizing radiation (comparative risk estimations)].

PAPER pubmed Radiatsionnaia biologiia, radioecologiia 2012 Review Effect: harm Evidence: Insufficient

Read original paper → PMID: 22690585 Evidence Lab

Abstract

The population has widely used mobile communication for already more than 15 years. It is important to note that the use of mobile communication has sharply changed the conditions of daily exposure of the population to EME We expose our brain daily for the first time in the entire civilization. The mobile phone is an open and uncontrollable source of electromagnetic radiation. The comparative risk estimation for the population of ionizing and non-ionizing radiation was carried out taking into account the real conditions of influence. Comparison of risks for the population of ionizing and non-ionizing radiation leads us to a conclusion that EMF RF exposure in conditions of wide use of mobile communication is potentially more harmful than ionizing radiation influence.

AI evidence extraction

At a glance

Study type

Review

Effect direction

harm

Population

population

Sample size

—

Exposure

RF mobile phone

Evidence strength

Insufficient

Confidence: 62% · Peer-reviewed: yes

Main findings

A comparative risk estimation (considering "real conditions of influence") concluded that RF EMF exposure under widespread mobile communication use is potentially more harmful for the population than ionizing radiation influence.

Outcomes measured

comparative risk estimation of ionizing vs non-ionizing radiation
potential harm from RF EMF exposure from mobile communication

Limitations

No quantitative exposure metrics (e.g., frequency, SAR, duration) reported in the abstract.
Methods and data sources for the comparative risk estimation are not described in the abstract.
No specific health endpoints are specified in the abstract.

Suggested hubs

who-icnirp (0.35)
Discusses comparative risk and potential harm of RF EMF exposure at population level, relevant to exposure guideline debates.

View raw extracted JSON

{
    "study_type": "review",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "RF",
        "source": "mobile phone",
        "frequency_mhz": null,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": "population",
    "sample_size": null,
    "outcomes": [
        "comparative risk estimation of ionizing vs non-ionizing radiation",
        "potential harm from RF EMF exposure from mobile communication"
    ],
    "main_findings": "A comparative risk estimation (considering \"real conditions of influence\") concluded that RF EMF exposure under widespread mobile communication use is potentially more harmful for the population than ionizing radiation influence.",
    "effect_direction": "harm",
    "limitations": [
        "No quantitative exposure metrics (e.g., frequency, SAR, duration) reported in the abstract.",
        "Methods and data sources for the comparative risk estimation are not described in the abstract.",
        "No specific health endpoints are specified in the abstract."
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
    "confidence": 0.61999999999999999555910790149937383830547332763671875,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "mobile communication",
        "mobile phone",
        "RF EMF",
        "non-ionizing radiation",
        "ionizing radiation",
        "comparative risk",
        "population exposure"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "who-icnirp",
            "weight": 0.34999999999999997779553950749686919152736663818359375,
            "reason": "Discusses comparative risk and potential harm of RF EMF exposure at population level, relevant to exposure guideline debates."
        }
    ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract/metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.

Comments

No comments yet.