Authored By:
Sauter C, Eggert T, Dorn H, Schmid G, Bolz T, Marasanov A, Hansen ML, Peter A, Danker-Hopfe HThis human provocation study investigated whether the radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMF) emitted by terrestrial trunked radio (TETRA) cause any adverse health effects. A total of 30 participants were randomly exposed to a TETRA-like signal of 385 megahertz (MHz) at three different exposure conditions - Sham, at a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of 1.5 Watts per kilogram (W/kg), and at SAR of 6 W/kg, for 2.5 hours each. The study found that the TETRA's short-term EMF exposure did not negatively impact the cognitive function, mood and well-being of the human participants.
Published In:
Environ Res 2015; 140: 85 - 94The EMF exposure from a TETRA handset can be higher than that of mobile phones, depending on the output power of the transmitter, the distance between the handset and the head and the time period of the device operating (duty cycle). A study by Gabriel et al (2000) that estimated the SAR produced in a phantom head due to TETRA using modelling found that the SAR at some parts of the head could exceed the basic restrictions for public exposure for some exposure situations. For example, with TETRA Class 3 radio (transmitter-s peak output power of 3 W) when transmitting at maximum power (cited by a report by Health Protection Agency in 2012 on Health Effects from RF EMF).
In this study by Sauter et al, there was one exposure condition where participants were exposed to TETRA signal as high as a SAR of 6 W/kg, which is three times the basic restriction for public exposure. The study did not find any significant difference in the cognitive performance, mood, and subjective complaints of the participants when exposed in three situations - sham, 75% of public exposure limit or three times the public exposure limit. Moreover the participants and the researchers were both blinded to the exposure which eliminates the nocebo effects.
Previous human studies on TETRA (Riddervold et al, Wallace et al, and Nieto-Hernandez et al) also did not find any significant difference between the exposed and non-exposed group.
Many previous provocation studies have not been able to establish a causal relation between EMF exposure below current exposure limits and adverse health effects. This includes the non-specific symptoms reported by individuals claiming to have electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS). See ARPANSA's commentary on January 2010's literature report.
ARPANSA has recently issued a fact sheet about EHS (http://www.arpansa.gov.au/RadiationProtection/Factsheets/is_ehs.cfm)
