Original Findings Confirmed in Replication Study: Provocation with 2.4 GHz Cordless Phone affects Autonomic Nervous System as measured by Heart Rate Variability

Abstract

Original Findings Confirmed in Replication Study: Provocation with 2.4 GHz Cordless Phone affects Autonomic Nervous System as measured by Heart Rate Variability Magda Havas, Jeffrey Marrongelle. Original Findings Confirmed in Replication Study: Provocation with 2.4 GHz Cordless Phone affects the Autonomic Nervous System (ANS) as measured by Heart Rate Variability (HRV). Medical Research Archives. 9(11). Nov. 2021. doi: 10.18103/mra.v9i11.2605. Abstract This is a double-blind, placebo-controlled replication of a study that we previously conducted in Colorado with 25 subjects designed to test the effect of radio frequency radiation (RFR) generated by the base station of a cordless phone on heart rate variability (HRV). In this study, we analyzed the response of 69 subjects between the ages of 26 and 80 in both Canada and the USA. Subjects were exposed to radiation for 3-min intervals generated by a 2.4-GHz cordless phone base station (3–8 microW/cm2). Prior to provocation we conducted an orthostatic test to assess the state of adrenal exhaustion, which interferes with a person’s ability to mount a response to a stressor. A few participants had a severe reaction to the RFR with an increase in heart rate and altered HRV indicative of an alarm response to stress. Based on the HRV analyses of the 69 subjects, 7% were classified as being “moderately to very sensitive”, 29% were “little to moderately sensitive”, 30% were “not to a little sensitive” and 6% were “unknown”. These results are not psychosomatic and are not due to electromagnetic interference. Twenty-five percent of the subjects’ self-proclaimed sensitivity corresponded to that based on the HRV analysis, while 32% overestimated their sensitivity and 42% did not know whether or not they were electrically sensitive. Of the 39 participants who claimed to experience some electrical hypersensitivity, 36% claimed they also reacted to a cordless phone and experienced heart symptoms and, of these, 64% were classified as having some degree of electrohypersensitivity (EHS) based on their HRV response. Novel findings include documentation of a delayed response to radiation. This protocol underestimates the reaction to electromagnetic radiation and may provide a false negative for those with a delayed reaction and/or with adrenal exhaustion. Orthostatic HRV testing combined with provocation testing may provide a useful diagnostic tool for some sufferers of EHS when they are exposed to electromagnetic radiation. It can be used to confirm EHS but not to reject EHS as a diagnosis since not everyone with EHS has an ANS reaction to electromagnetic radiation. Conclusions Our results show that 36% of the individuals tested reacted via altered heart rate variability (HRV) to the non- ionizing radiation generated by a cordless phone base station in this double-blind, placebo-controlled study. These reactions were not psychosomatic. In this study, we document an increased heart rate (HR), altered HRV and changes in the sympathetic and parasympathetic control of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) typical of a fight-or-flight stress response. These results are similar to our previous study. The results are not due to electromagnetic interference (EMI), since we have examples of a delayed response after the radiation was turned off and have tested EMI with much higher exposure using the same technology with no reactions noted. Our results demonstrate that the radiation from a 2.4-GHz cordless phone affects the ANS and may put some individuals with pre-existing heart conditions at risk when exposed to electromagnetic frequencies to which they are sensitive. Individuals fell into 3 categories: those who had a healthy ANS and were able to tolerate the stress without reactions; those who reacted; and those who had a compromised ANS with adrenal exhaustion and were unable to mount a response leading, in some cases, to a false negative result. Although documenting a response is relatively simple, determining the degree of EHS is quite complex and requires further study especially for those with a compromised ANS. Open access paper: esmed.org

AI evidence extraction

Main findings

Double-blind, placebo-controlled provocation with a 2.4-GHz cordless phone base station (3–8 microW/cm2) was reported to alter HRV and increase heart rate in a subset of participants, consistent with a stress (fight-or-flight) response. The authors report that 36% of individuals tested reacted via altered HRV, and describe delayed responses in some participants.

Outcomes measured

• heart rate variability (HRV)
• heart rate (HR)
• autonomic nervous system (ANS) sympathetic/parasympathetic control
• electrohypersensitivity (EHS) classification/self-reported sensitivity correspondence
• delayed response to radiation

Limitations

• Exposure metric reported as power density (3–8 microW/cm2) without SAR
• Details of randomization procedure, allocation, and statistical methods are not provided in the abstract
• Some participants were described as having adrenal exhaustion/compromised ANS which may affect provocation test sensitivity and could lead to false negatives
• Outcome classification includes an 'unknown' category and relies on HRV-based sensitivity categorization described in the abstract

Suggested hubs

• electrohypersensitivity (0.9)
  Provocation study assessing EHS using HRV/ANS responses to RF exposure.

{
    "study_type": "randomized_trial",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "RF",
        "source": "cordless phone base station",
        "frequency_mhz": 2400,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": "3-min intervals"
    },
    "population": "69 subjects ages 26–80 in Canada and the USA",
    "sample_size": 69,
    "outcomes": [
        "heart rate variability (HRV)",
        "heart rate (HR)",
        "autonomic nervous system (ANS) sympathetic/parasympathetic control",
        "electrohypersensitivity (EHS) classification/self-reported sensitivity correspondence",
        "delayed response to radiation"
    ],
    "main_findings": "Double-blind, placebo-controlled provocation with a 2.4-GHz cordless phone base station (3–8 microW/cm2) was reported to alter HRV and increase heart rate in a subset of participants, consistent with a stress (fight-or-flight) response. The authors report that 36% of individuals tested reacted via altered HRV, and describe delayed responses in some participants.",
    "effect_direction": "harm",
    "limitations": [
        "Exposure metric reported as power density (3–8 microW/cm2) without SAR",
        "Details of randomization procedure, allocation, and statistical methods are not provided in the abstract",
        "Some participants were described as having adrenal exhaustion/compromised ANS which may affect provocation test sensitivity and could lead to false negatives",
        "Outcome classification includes an 'unknown' category and relies on HRV-based sensitivity categorization described in the abstract"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "unknown",
    "keywords": [
        "2.4 GHz",
        "cordless phone",
        "base station",
        "radiofrequency radiation",
        "provocation study",
        "double-blind",
        "placebo-controlled",
        "heart rate variability",
        "autonomic nervous system",
        "electrohypersensitivity",
        "delayed response"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "electrohypersensitivity",
            "weight": 0.90000000000000002220446049250313080847263336181640625,
            "reason": "Provocation study assessing EHS using HRV/ANS responses to RF exposure."
        }
    ]
}

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.