Collection of Internet/Collection of Internet.iso/faq/sci/powerlin/part4

Text File | 1994-03-27 | 20.3 KB | 419 lines

Path: bloom-beacon.mit.edu!hookup!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!post.its.mcw.edu!admin-one.radbio.mcw.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (John Moulder)
Newsgroups: sci.med.physics,sci.answers,news.answers
Subject: Powerlines and Cancer FAQs (4 of 4)
Supersedes: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: sci.med.physics
Date: 27 Mar 1994 19:59:18 GMT
Organization: Medical College of Wisconsin
Lines: 396
Approved: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Expires: 30 April 1994 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John Moulder)
NNTP-Posting-Host: admin-one.radbio.mcw.edu
Summary: Q&As on the connection between powerlines, electrical
  occupations and cancer (continued)
Keywords: powerlines, magnetic fields, cancer, EMF, non-ionizing
  radiation, FAQ
Xref: bloom-beacon.mit.edu sci.med.physics:1309 sci.answers:1019 news.answers:16898

Archive-name: powerlines-cancer-FAQ/part4
Last-modified: 1994/3/27
Version: 2.4

FAQs on Power-Frequency Fields and Cancer (part 4 of 4)

G) Laboratory Studies of Power-Frequency Fields and Cancer

G1) MM Cohen et al:  Effect of low-level, 60-Hz electromagnetic fields on
human lymphoid cells: I. Mitotic rate and chromosome breakage in human
peripheral lymphocytes. BEM 7:415-423, 1986.
  1 and 2 G (0.1 and 0.2 mT) fields had no effect on chromosome
abnormalities or mitotic index of human lymphocytes.  Also no effect for
E-field or combined E- and H-fields.

G2) MM Cohen et al: The effect of low-level 60-Hz electromagnetic fields
on human lymphoid cells. II: Sister-chromatid exchanges in peripheral
lymphocytes and lymphoblastoid cell lines. Mut Res 172:177-184, 1986.
  1 and 2 G (0.1 and 0.2 mT) fields had no effect on rates of SCEs in human
lymphocytes.  Also no effect for E-field or combined E- and H-fields.

G3) J Juutilainen & A Liimatainen: Mutation frequency in Salmonella exposed
to weak 100-Hz magnetic fields. Hereditas 104:145-147, 1986.
  0.125 microT (1.25 mG) to 0.125 mT (1.25 G) 100 Hz fields were not
mutagenic in the Ames test, and did not increase the mutagenicity of known
mutagens in the Ames test.

G4) JA Reese et al: Exposure of mammalian cells to 60-Hz magnetic or
electric fields: Analysis for DNA single-strand breaks. BEM 9:237-247,
1988.
  0.1 and 0.2 mT (1 and 2 G) 60 Hz field had no effect on single-strand
breaks.  Also no effect with E-field or combined E- and H-fields.

G5) RAE Thomson et al: Influence of 60-Hertz magnetic fields on leukemia.
BEM 9:149-158, 1988.
  1.4, 200, 500 microT (14 mG, 3G, 5G) 60 Hz fields had no effect on
leukemia progression in mice.

G6) M Rosenthal & G Obe: Effects of 50-Hertz EM fields on proliferation and
on chromosomal aberrations in human peripheral lymphocytes untreated and
pretreated with chemical mutagens. Mutat Res 210:329-335, 1989.
  5 mT (50 G) 50 Hz field had no effects on chromosome or chromatid breaks
or exchanges, and no effects on SCE rate.  Some increase in SCE rates were
seen for cells pretreated with other mutagens. Enhanced progression though
the cell cycle was seen.

G7) A Cossarizza et al: DNA repair after gamma-irradiation in lymphocytes
exposed to low-frequency pulsed electromagnetic fields. Radiat Res
118:161-168, 1989.
  2.5 mT (25 G) pulsed field (50 Hz) had no effect on repair of
radiation-induced DNA damage in human lymphocytes.

G8) ME Frazier et al: Exposure of mammalian cells to 60-Hz magnetic or
electric fields: analysis of DNA repair of induced, single-strand breaks.
BEM 11:229-234, 1990.
  1 mT (10 G) 60 Hz fields had no effect on repair of radiation-induced DNA
damage in human lymphocytes.  Also no effect for E-field or combined E- and
H-fields.

G9) MR Scarfi et al: Spontaneous and mitomycin-C-induced micronuclei in
human lymphocytes exposed to extremely low frequency pulsed magnetic
fields. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 176:194-200, 1991.
  2.5 mT (25 G) pulsed 50-Hz field showed no genotoxicity alone, and did
not enhance drug-induced genotoxicity in human lymphocytes.

G10) JRN McLean et al: Cancer promotion in a mouse-skin model by a 60-Hz
magnetic field: II. Tumor development and immune response. BEM 12:273-287,
1991.
  20 mT (200 G) 60-Hz fields did not promote or co-promote (with TPA)
cancers in DMBA-induced skin tumor model.  Also no effect on progression of
skin tumors, and no effect on NK cells or spleen size.

G11) GK Livingston et al: Reproductive integrity of mammalian cells exposed
to power-frequency EM fields. Environ Molec Mutat 17:49-58, 1991.
  0.22 mT (2.2 G) 60 Hz fields had no effect on SCEs, growth rates, cell
cycle kinetics, or micronucleus formation rates in human lymphocytes or CHO
cells.  No effects were seen for E-fields.

G12) AM Khalil & W Qassem: Cytogenetic effects of pulsing electromagnetic
field on human lymphocytes in vitro: chromosome aberrations,
sister-chromatid exchanges and cell kinetics. Mut Res 247:141-146, 1991.
  1.05 mT (10.5 Gauss) fields pulsed at 50 Hz caused chromosome
abnormalities, and a decrease in the mitotic index in human lymphocytes.

G13) A Bellossi: Effect of pulsed magnetic fields on leukemia-prone AKR
mice. No effect on mortality through five generations. Leuk Res 15:899-902,
1991.
  6 mT (60 G) exposure of leukemia-prone mice to 12 and 460 Hz pulsed
fields over five generations of exposure resulted in no effect on leukemia
rates.

G14) MA Stuchly et al: Modification of tumor promotion in the mouse skin by
exposure to an alternating magnetic field. Cancer Letters 65:1-7, 1992.
  A 20 G (2 mT) 60-Hz field did not increase the number of
chemically-induced skin tumors in mice, although the tumor appeared
earlier.

G15) DD Ager & J A Radul: Effect of 60-Hz magnetic fields on ultraviolet
light-induced mutation and mitotic recombination in Saccharomyces
cerevisiae. Mut Res 283:279-286, 1992.
  10 G (1 mT) 60-Hz fields do not cause mutations or chromosome damage in
yeast, and do not affect UV-induced DNA damage.

G16) M Fiorani et al: Electric and/or magnetic field effects on DNA
structure and function in cultured human cells. Mut Res 282:25-29, 1992.
  2-2,000 mG (0.2-200 microT ) 50-Hz fields did not cause DNA damage in
human cells, and did not affect the growth of human cells in culture.  Also
showed no effect for E-fields.

G17) J. Nafziger et al: DNA mutations and 50 Hz EM fields. Bioelec Bioenerg
30:133-141, 1993.
  10 and 100 mG (1 and 10 microT) 50-Hz fields did not cause mutations in
bacteria or mammalian cells, and did not increase the amount of DNA damage
in virus-transformed cells.

G18) Y Otaka et al: Sex-linked recessive lethal test of Drosophila
melanogaster after exposure to 50-Hz magnetic fields. BEM 13:67-74, 1992.
  5 and 50 G 50-Hz fields do not cause mutations in fruit flies.

G19) A. Rannug et al: A study on skin tumor formation in mice with 50 Hz
magnetic field exposure. Carcinogenesis 14:573-578, 1993.
  0.5 and 5 G 50-Hz fields do not increase the incidence of skin tumors or
leukemia in mice, and did not increase the frequency of DMBA-induced skin
tumors.

G20) R. Zwingelberg et al: Exposure of rats of a 50-Hz, 30-mT magnetic
field influences neither the frequencies of sister-chromatid exchanges nor
proliferation characteristics of cultured peripheral lymphocytes. Mutat Res
302:39-44, 1993.
  300 G 50-Hz field did not cause chromosome damage in human cells, and did
not affect the growth of human lymphocytes in culture.

G21) A Rannug et al: Rat liver foci study on coexposure with 50 Hz magnetic
fields and known carcinogens. BEM 14:17-27, 1993.
  5 mG (0.5 microT) and 5 G (500 microT) 50-Hz fields did not increase the
frequency of chemically-induced liver tumors.

G22) W Loscher et al: Tumor promotion in a breast cancer model by exposure
to a weak alternating magnetic field. Cancer Letters 71:75-81, 1993.
  1 G 50-Hz field increased the frequency of chemically-induced mammary
tumors.

G23) M Mevissen et al: Effects of magnetic fields on mammary tumor
development induced by 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene in rats. BEM
14:131-143, 1993.
  300 G (30 mT) 50-Hz fields did not increase the frequency of DMBA-induced
mammary tumors.

G24) A Rannug et al: A rat liver foci promotion study with 50-Hz magnetic
fields. Environ Res 62:223-229, 1993.
  5, 50, 500 and 5,000 mG (0.5, 5, 50 and 500 microT) 50-Hz fields did not
increase the frequency of chemically-induced liver tumors.

H) Laboratory Studies Indirectly Related to Power-Frequency Fields and
Cancer

H1) AR Liboff et al: Time-varying magnetic fields: Effects on DNA
synthesis. Science 223:818-820, 1984.
  15-4000 Hz, 0.0016-0.4 mT (16 mG-4 G) fields increased tritiated
thymidine uptake in human embryonic fibroblasts.  Effect appears to be
independent of frequency and field strength.

H2) WC Parkinson & CT Hanks: Experiments on the interaction of
electromagnetic fields with mammalian systems. Biol Bull 176(S):170-178,
1989.
  3 mT (30 G) 60-Hz field had no effects of mammalian cell growth.  No
effects on Ca transport under cyclotron resonance conditions, or under any
conditions tested.

H3) S Baumann et al: Lack of effects from 2000-Hz magnetic fields on
mammary adenocarcinoma and reproductive hormones in rats. BEM 10:329-333,
1989.
 0.1, 1, 2 mT (1,10, 20 G) 2000 Hz field had no effect on the growth of
transplanted mammary tumors.

H4) R Goodman & A Shirley-Henderson: Transcription and translation in cells
exposed to extremely low frequency EM fields. Bioelec Bioenerg 25:335-355,
1991.
  Pulsed and sinusoidal fields of different types and intensities caused
alterations in transcription of genes in human leukemia and dipteran
salivary gland cells.  Effect showed frequency, intensity and duration
windows.

H5) JL Phillips et al: Magnetic field-induced changes in specific gene
transcriptions. Biochim Biophys Acta 1132:140-144, 1992.
 60-Hz field of 1 G (100 microT) and above produced changes in gene
transcription.

H6) RJ Reiter & BA Richardson: Magnetic field effects on pineal indoleamine
metabolism and possible biological consequences. FASEB J 6:2283-2287, 1992.
  Review of the hypothesis linking emf effects with effects on melatonin
production.  Notes that pulsed fields are the most effective.  No mention
of power-frequency fields.

H7) RP Liburdy et al: ELF magnetic fields, breast cancer, and melatonin:
60-Hz fields block melatonin's oncostatic action on ER+ breast cancer cell
proliferation. J Pineal Res 14:89-97, 1993.
  2 and 10 mG (0.2 and 1 microT) 60-Hz fields did not affect the growth of
human breast cancer cells in culture.  Melatonin caused inhibition of
growth that was blocked by a 12 mG field.

H8) S Paradisi et al: A 50-Hz magnetic field induces structural and
biophysical changes in membranes. BEM 14:247-255, 1993.
  A 35 G (3.5 mT) 50-Hz field did not affect the growth of mammalian cells
in culture.

H9) M Kato et al: Effects of exposure to a circularly polarized 50-Hz
magnetic field on plasma and pineal melatonin levels in rats. BEM
14:97-106, 1993.
  50-Hz fields at 10, 50, 500, 2500 mG (1, 5, 50, 250 microT) caused a
small decrease in melatonin that is unrelated to field strength.

H10) JM Lee et al: Melatonin secretion and puberty in female lambs exposed
to environmental electric and magnetic fields. Biol Reproduc 49:857-864,
1993.
  Exposure to a 500 kV transmission line field (40 mG, 4 microT, 6 kV/m)
had no effect on melatonin levels.

J) Laboratory Studies of Power-Frequency Fields and Reproductive Toxicity

J1) LJ Dlugosz et al: Congenital defects and electric bed heating in New
York State: A register-based case-control study. Am J Epidem 135:1000-1011,
1992.
  A case-control study that found no statistically significant relationship
between the use of electric bed heating and any type of congenital defects.

J2) M Lindbohm et al: Magnetic fields of video display terminals and
spontaneous abortion. Am J Epidem 136:1041-1051, 1992.
  Case-control study of spontaneous abortions in clerical workers who use
VDTs.  The use of VDTs alone had no effect, but when high-field VDTs were
compared to low-field VDTs there was a statistically significant increase
in spontaneous abortions.

J3) CF Cox et al: A test for teratological effects of power-frequency
magnetic fields on chick embryos. IEEE Tran Micro Theory Tech 40:605-610,
1993.
  50-Hz 100-mG fields had no effects on the incidence of developmental
abnormalities in chick embryos.  The paper also analyzes the other
published studies and concludes that there was, at best, a very weak
statistical basis to hypothesize that magnetic fields cause malformations
in chick embryos.

J4) H Huuskonen et al: Effects of low-frequency magnetic fields on fetal
development in rats. BEM 14:205-213, 1993.
  360 mG (36 microT) 50-Hz field has no significant effect on fetal
development in rats.

J5) J Juutilainen et al: Early pregnancy loss and exposure to 50-Hz
magnetic fields. BEM 14:229-236, 1993.
  Case-control study of early pregnancy loss and residential exposure to 50
Hz fields (fields measured at the front door) found an increase in the rate
of early pregnancy loss in exposed cases.

J6) E Robert: Birth defects and high voltage power lines - An exploratory
study based on registry data. Repro Tox 7:283-287, 1993.
  Case-control study of the association between maternal residential
proximity to powerline magnetic fields and congenital anomalies found no
excess malformations, and a lower rate of skeletal and cardiac
malformations in the exposed group.

K) Reviews of Laboratory Studies of Power-Frequency Fields

K1) TS Tenforde: Biological interactions and potential health effects of
extremely-low-frequency magnetic fields from power lines and other common
sources. Ann Rev Publ Health 13:173-196, 1992.
  Review of ELF magnetic field effects from a biologist's perspective

K2) J Walleczek: Electromagnetic field effects on cells of the immune
system: the role of calcium signaling. FASEB J 6:3177-3185, 1992.
  Review of ELF effects on immune system and the possible role of calcium.
Suggests that threshold for proliferation effects for 50/60 Hz fields is
between 0.2 mT (2 G) and 5 mT (5 G).

K3) J McCann et al: A critical review of the genotoxic potential of
electric and magnetic fields. Mut Res 297:61-95, 1993.
  "The preponderance of evidence suggests that neither ELF nor static
electric and magnetic fields have a clearly demonstrated potential to cause
genotoxic effects.  However, there may be genotoxic activity from exposure
under conditions where phenomena auxiliary to an electric field, such as
spark discharges, electrical shocks or corona can occur."

K4) JC Murphy et al: Power-frequency electric and magnetic fields: A review
of genetic toxicology. Mut Res 296:221-240, 1993.
  "Considering the total body of available information, there is little
evidence that exposure to [power-frequency electric or magnetic fields]
directly causes genetic changes in biological systems."

K5) N Chernoff et al: A review of the literature on potential reproductive
and developmental toxicity of electric and magnetic fields. Toxicol
74:91-126, 1992.
  "From our review we conclude that laboratory experimental and
epidemiological results to date have not yielded conclusive data to support
the contention that such fields induce adverse reproductive effects under
the test or environmental conditions studied."

L) Miscellaneous Studies

L1) RB Goldberg & WA Creasey: A review of cancer induction by extremely low
frequency EM fields. Is there a plausible mechanism? Medical Hypoth
35:265-274, 1991.
  Review of evidence for and EMF-cancer connection, including the
suggestion that the fields might be promoters.

L2) RG Stevens et al: Electric power, pineal function, and the risk of
breast cancer. FASEB J 6:853-860, 1992.
  Presentation of the EMF-melatonin-breast cancer hypothesis.

L3) H Kung & CF Seagle: Impact of power transmission lines on property
values: A case study. Appraisal J 60:413-418, 1992.
  Survey of homeowners who lived along transmission lines. None "had any
knowledge of possible evidence connecting power transmission lines to
health risks"; but 87% said that if they had known of potential health
risks, it would have adversely affected then price they were willing to
pay.  The values of comparable houses adjacent to, and not adjacent to, the
powerlines were found to be similar.

L4) DE Martin: A highlight summary of the impact of electrical transmission
lines on improved real estate values. EEI EMF Taskforce Meeting, Seattle,
April, 1993.
  A utility study in Kansas City found no sale price or rental fee evidence
for impacts of transmission lines on commercial property, apartment
complexes, or single-family developments.  However, a substantial fraction
of the residential owners thought that future prices would be impacted.

M) Regulations and Standards for Ionizing and Non-ionizing EM Sources.

M1) [Safety of electromagnetic fields: Limits of field strengths for the
protection of persons in the frequency range from 0 to 30 kHz], Technical
Help to Exporters, British Standards Institution, Milton Keynes, 1989.
  Standard of Verband Deutscher Elektrotechniker (not a national standard).
 For 50/60 Hz electrical field: 2 V/m. For 50/60 Hz magnetic field: 5 mT
(50 G).  Based on prevention of acute health effects.  States that "long
term and delayed effects are considered unlikely to occur because many
people have been exposed . . . over a long period of time without negative
effects having come to light"

M2) RC Petersen: Radiofrequency/microwave protection guides. Health Phys
61:59-67, 1991.
  A summary of RF/MW protection guidelines.

M3) International Commission on Radiation Protection: Recommendations.
Report 60, New York, Pergamon Press, 1991.
  Current recommendations for occupational and public protection standards
for ionizing radiation

M4) AS Duchene et al: IRPA guidelines on protection against non-ionizing
radiation. Pergamon Press, New York, 1991.
  Current recommendations for occupational and public protection standards
for non-ionizing electromagnetic sources.

M5) Restriction on human exposures to static and time varying EM fields and
radiation. Documents of the NRPB 4(5): 1-69, 1993.
  Exposure limits for power-frequency fields, as well as static fields and
MW/RF frequencies; the standards apply to both residential and occupational
exposure.  For 60-Hz the limits recommended are 10 kV/m for the E-field and
13.3 G for the H-field.

M6) Sub-radiofrequency (30 kHz and below) magnetic fields, In:
Documentation of the threshold limit values, ACGIH, pp. 55-64, 1992.
  For 60-Hz fields the standard is 1 G (100 microT) for pacemaker users and
10 G (1 mT) for everyone else, this standard is applied only to
occupational settings.  Similar documentation is available for other
frequencies.

M7) HP Jammet et al: Interim guidelines on limits of exposure to 50/60 Hz
electric and magnetic fields. Health Physics 58:113-122, 1990 [this is the
1990 ICNIRP interim guidelines that were approved in 1993].
  For the general public the 50/60 Hz exposure standard is 1 G (100 microT)
for continuous exposure and 10 G (1 mT) for short-term exposure.  For
occupational exposure the standard in 5 G (500 microT) for continuous
exposure and 50 G (5 mT) for short-term exposure.  In 1993, the
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)
confirmed these guidelines (ICNIPR Press Release dated 12 May 1993).

------
Acknowledgments: This FAQ sheet owes much to the many readers of
sci.med.physics who have sent me comments and suggestions, including:
[e-mail] (mechanisms of non-ionizing EM bioeffects and
"do powerlines radiate"); [e-mail] (adding a
quantum approach); [e-mail] (suggestions on thermal effects and
confounders); [e-mail] (SI units, suggesting the pro/con
arguments section); [e-mail] (a start on the property
value question); [e-mail] (how to measure fields)

Notice: This FAQ is Copyright (C) by John Moulder, and is made available as
a service to the Internet community.  Permission is granted to copy and
redistribute this document electronically as long as it is unmodified.
Notification of such redistribution would be appreciated.  This FAQ may not
be sold in any medium, including electronic, CD-ROM, or database, or
published in print, without the explicit, written permission of John
Moulder.

John Moulder ([e-mail])          Voice: 414-266-4670
Radiation Biology Group                      FAX: [phone]
Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
End:  powerlines-cancer-FAQ/part4