Meta-analysis of in vitro and in vivo studies of the biological effects of low-level millimetre waves
Open accessAbstract
Background: With the roll-out of new technologies such as 5G, there has been renewed community concern regarding the adequacy of research on possible health effects from associated radiofrequency radiation, mainly in the millimetre wave (MMW) band. Objective: We conducted a meta-analysis of in vitro and in vivo studies investigating bioeffects of MMWs at low exposure levels. Methods: We identified 107 in vitro and in vivo studies investigating MMWs and biological effects in which the power density employed has been below 100 W/m 2 , which is below the current standards for occupational local exposures. Where possible, we estimated the magnitude of the principal effect reported or set this magnitude to zero in studies reporting no significant effects. We also estimated the quality of the studies, based on a methodology used in previous analyses. Results: We show a negative correlation between effect size and both power density and specific absorption rate. There was also a significant negative correlation between effect size and quality score. A multivariate analysis revealed that there is an increase in the effect size for certain biological systems being investigated and laboratories in which the work was carried out whilst the quality score for some of these tends to be low. We note that many of the studies were motivated by a desire to elucidate the possible mechanisms in therapeutic devices rather than assessing the safety of telecommunications systems. Finally, it appears that the presence or absence of modulation does not influence the reported effect size. Significance: Many of the findings of this meta-analysis have not been reported before and have important implications for overall interpretation of in vitro and in vivo data. Overall, the results of this study do not confirm an association between low-level MMWs and biological effects.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The meta-analysis showed that the bulk of experimental studies had a quality score lower than 2 out of a possible 5, with only one study achieving a maximum quality score of 5.
“Our meta-analysis showed that the bulk of the studies had a quality score lower than 2 out of a possible 5, with only one study achieving a maximum quality score of 5 [9].”
From 5G mobile networks and health—a state-of-the-science review of the research into low-level RF fields above 6 GHz (2021) · cites this paper as [9]
The Discussion’s “Quality score” section says the bulk of studies scored 2 or lower, not lower than 2; studies scoring exactly 2 may therefore be part of that bulk. It confirms that only one study achieved 5/5. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredEstimated SAR values in many experimental studies were much higher than the ICNIRP SAR limits, so data from these studies should be treated with caution.
“However, as is shown in our meta-analysis, data from these studies should be treated with caution because the estimated SAR values in many of the studies were much higher than the ICNIRP SAR limits [9].”
From 5G mobile networks and health—a state-of-the-science review of the research into low-level RF fields above 6 GHz (2021) · cites this paper as [9]
The Discussion > Implications passage says data from studies below the ICNIRP power-density limits should be used with caution because estimated SAR values could be several orders of magnitude above corresponding limits. The Results report that most studies with SAR values exceeded the cited occupational whole-body restriction, but caution that those limits cannot be directly compared with in vitro values. The claim turns the paper’s qualified comparison into a definite statement that many values were much higher. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe meta-analysis showed that experimental studies with a low quality score were more likely to show a greater effect.
“The meta-analysis further showed that studies with a low quality score were more likely to show a greater effect.”
From 5G mobile networks and health—a state-of-the-science review of the research into low-level RF fields above 6 GHz (2021) · cites this paper as [9]
Studies with higher exposure tended to show a lower effect size, which is counterfactual.
“In fact, studies with a higher exposure tended to show a lower effect size, which is counterfactual.”
From 5G mobile networks and health—a state-of-the-science review of the research into low-level RF fields above 6 GHz (2021) · cites this paper as [9]
The meta-analysis of experimental studies in the companion paper showed no dose-response relationship between exposure (either PD or SAR) and effect size.
“The meta-analysis of the experimental studies in our companion paper [9] showed that there was no dose-response relationship between the exposure (either PD or SAR) and the effect size.”
From 5G mobile networks and health—a state-of-the-science review of the research into low-level RF fields above 6 GHz (2021) · cites this paper as [9]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Wu, T., Rappaport, T. S., & Collins, C. M. (2015) · IEEE Microwave Magazine · doi:10.1109/mmm.2014.2377587 · Cited by 243 · cited 12× · see citing works
“84 of the 88 studies reported PD values at or below the occupational 6-min average reference levels for local exposures, which ranges from 200W/m2 at 6 GHz, dropping down to 100W/m2 at 300 GHz [2].”
BackgroundInfluentialKaripidis, K., Mate, R., Urban, D., Tinker, R., & Wood, A. (2021) · Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology · doi:10.1038/s41370-021-00297-6 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- [2]International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP Guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz) Health Phys 2020 118 483 524 10.1097/HP.0000000000001210 32167495 · DOI · Paper page
- [4]Miller AB Sears M Hardell L Oremus M Soskolne CL Risks to health and well-being from radio-frequency radiation emitted by cell phones and other wireless devices Front Public Health 2019 7 223 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00223 31457001 PMC6701402 · DOI
- [7]Vijayalaxmi PrihodaTJ Comprehensive review of quality of publications and meta-analysis of genetic damage in mammalian cells exposed to non-ionizing radiofrequency fields Radiat Res 2019 191 20 30 30339042
- [8]Shapiro SS Wilk MB An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples) Biometrika 1965 52 591 611 10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591 · DOI · Paper page
- [9]Wood A. RF guidelines and standards. In: Wood AW, Karipidis K, editors. Non-ionizing radiation protection. Wiley: Hoboken, NJ; 2017. p. 195.
- [10]Durney CH Iskander MF Massoudi H Johnson CC An empirical formula for broad-band SAR calculations of prolate spheroidal models of humans and animals IEEE Trans Micro Theory Tech 1979 27 758 63 10.1109/TMTT.1979.1129720 · DOI
- [11]Vijayalaxmi PrihodaTJ Genetic damage in human cells exposed to non-ionizing radiofrequency fields: a meta-analysis of the data from 88 publications (1990–2011) Mut Res 2012 749 1 16 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2012.09.007 23022599 · DOI
- [12]Simko M Remondini D Zeni O Scarfi MR Quality matters: systematic analysis of endpoints related to “cellular life” in vitro data of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure Int J Environ Res Public Health 2016 13 701 10.3390/ijerph13070701 PMC4962242 27420084 · DOI
- [13]Werner R Knipe P Iskra S A comparison between measured and computed assessments of the RF exposure compliance boundary of an in-situ radio base station massive MIMO antenna IEEE Access 2019 25 170682 9 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2955715 · DOI
- [14]Cohen I Cahan R Shani G Cohen E Abramovich A Effect of 99 GHz continuous millimeter wave electro-magnetic radiation on E. coli viability and metabolic activity Int J Radiat Biol 2010 86 390 9 10.3109/09553000903567912 20397844 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Karipidis, K., Mate, R., Urban, D., Tinker, R., & Wood, A. (2021) · Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology · doi:10.1038/s41370-021-00297-6 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Wood, A., Mate, R., & Karipidis, K.
- Affiliations
- Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
- Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Wood, Andrew
- Venue
- Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology
- Published
- 2021-03-16
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 606-613
- ISSN
- 1559-0631 (ISSN-L)
- 1559-064X
- PMC
- PMC7962924
- OpenAlex
- W3139460839
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9
- FWCI
- 1.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Australian Government
- Medical Research Council
- National Health and Medical Research Council (1042464)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Electromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular and Laser Science Research
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Millimeter-Wave Propagation and Modeling
- Keywords
- millimeter wave, radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, biological effects, 5G, low-dose exposure, specific absorption rate, power density, effect size, study quality, modulation, in vitro and in vivo studies
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Radio Waves
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
