Article publication date

8 March 2025

ARPANSA review date

March 2025

Summary

This European study reports on the creation of a new Job exposure matrix (JEM) for solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure to outdoor workers. The JEM was created by combining occupational UVR exposure measurements with estimations of the time workers spend outdoors. The exposure measurements were sourced from 12 studies published between 2005 and 2022 which detailed personal UVR exposure for 49 different occupations. The JEM estimates also included an expert assessment rating representing 3 regions of Europe based on latitude (Northern, Central and Southern Europe). The expert assessment rated the average duration of outdoor work for 372 occupations as 0, 1 to 2, 3 to 4, or ≥5 hours per workday. These exposure times were then adjusted based on latitude and on the time of the year (spring, summer, autumn or winter). This JEM will be able to be used in epidemiological studies to estimate occupational UVR exposure when participants’ work histories, and the latitude of worksites and time of year is known. 

Published in

Annals of Work Exposures and Health, 2025

Link to study

A European job-exposure matrix for solar UV exposure 

Commentary by ARPANSA

This study provides the details of the first quantitative measurement-based JEM for UVR exposure. This JEM will improve occupational assessment of UVR exposure in epidemiological studies. However, there are a number of limitations of the JEM, in particular, that 86% of included occupations are not based on measurements, but on expert assessment alone. Other JEMs that have characterised occupational UVR exposure have been solely based on expert assessment (Kauppinen et al, 2009; Peters et al, 2012) and this makes it difficult to accurately quantify exposure–response relationships in subsequent epidemiological studies.

In Australia the impact of UVR exposure has been assessed previously based on ambient UVR at specific latitudes or based on region (Green et al, 1996; Lucas et al, 2013; Sun et al, 2014). This type of exposure characterisation may not accurately reflect UVR exposure due to worker behaviours or other occupational factors. The use of a UVR JEM could improve the exposure characterisation and provide a better understanding of how occupational UV impacts diseases like skin cancer in Australia. However, a different JEM for Australian workers would be required for this purpose as this study restricts its analysis to defined latitudes of Europe. There are distinct differences in UV intensity between latitudes and also between the northern and southern hemispheres.

Australia has some of the highest rates of melanoma and skin cancer in the world and two-thirds of Australians will receive a skin cancer diagnosis of some type in their lifetime. As such, skin cancers, including melanoma, continue to constitute a large public health burden. One of the best way for Australian to protect themselves from the sun is by following the Slip, Slop, Slap, Seek and Slide messaging. More information on UV protection can be found on the ARPANSA Sun Protection factsheet. 

Article publication date

January 2025

ARPANSA review date

26 February 2025

Summary

This systematic review evaluated the association between exposure to low dose ionising radiation (LDIR) and thyroid function among occupational populations. A total of 15 studies (6 case-control studies and 9 cohort studies) published between 1997 and 2022, which included a total of 1,040,763 participants, were included in the review. The effect on thyroid function were evaluated in terms of risk of thyroid cancer, thyroid nodules, and changes in thyroid hormones. Quality assessment of the included studies was also conducted according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). A qualitative evaluation of the studies was conducted to assess the effect of LDIR on thyroid function. The review showed some evidence of increased thyroid gland volume and nodule formation following the exposure to LDIR, however, this was not shown with certainty. The studies showed a reduction in triiodothyronine (fT3) and an increase or reduction in thyroxine (fT4), while thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) level did not change following the exposure. Based on the analysis in the review, the authors conclude that even at low doses the function of the thyroid is negatively affected. 

Published in

Journal of Clinical Medicine

Link to study

Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation and Thyroid Diseases and Functional Modifications in Exposed Workers: A Systematic Review 

Commentary by ARPANSA

This review provides an evaluation of whether thyroid function changes following occupational exposure to LDIR. The findings indicate that exposure to LDIR may be a potential risk factor for some aspects of thyroid function. The study shows a few strengths and limitations, which should be considered while interpretating the findings of the review. The review presents only a narrative synthesis of results evaluating multiple health outcomes of thyroid gland e.g., cancer, nodules, and hormones in relation to LDIR exposure; and quantitative meta-analyses of the included studies were not conducted. The cohort studies included in the review had a relatively large sample size. 

The quality assessment of the included studies showed moderate quality, however, the review did not conduct a risk of bias (ROB) assessment of the included studies. ROB assessment has been regarded as an essential critical step in a systematic review to inform the findings and interpretation of the review (NHMRC, 2019). It should be noted that the NOS quality assessment involves the evaluation of the extent to which included studies were designed, conducted, analysed, and reported to avoid systematic errors; while ROB assessment involves the evaluation of bias judgments based on the quality assessment (Furuya-Kanamori et al., 2021). The review also did not undertake a certainty in evidence assessment, which is another important aspect of a properly conducted systematic review. Similarly, although the included studies represent some heterogeneity, it was not assessed in the review. For example, the included studies were conducted in diverse occupational setting (e.g., hospital, nuclear power plants, war industry, and barracks) where the approach to collecting workers’ data would have been different. The findings highlighted in the review are consistent with some comparable studies (e.g., Gudzenko et al., 2022; El-Benhawy et al., 2022; Cioffi et al., 2020). However, there are no similar data available to compare these findings in the Australian context. It is unclear if the review accounted for potential differences in calculating the dose to the thyroid; for example, changes in radiation weighting factors (e.g., ICRP60 to ICRP103), changes in dose conversion factors (e.g., ICRP68 to ICRP137) or inference of thyroid doses based on whole body monitoring. It is our assessment that there is insufficient evidence within this review to definitively conclude that thyroid function is adversely affected by LDIR.

In Australia, The Code for Radiation Protection in Planned Exposure Situations  sets out the requirements for the protection of occupationally exposed persons in all planned exposure situations. All Australian jurisdictions have uniform annual limits (20 mSv) for occupational exposure to ionising radiation. In addition to the dose limits, optimisation of radiation protection and safety involves practising ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ (ALARA) considering economic and societal factors. The Australian system for radiation protection from ionising radiation is closely aligned with international best practice as laid out in the Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.

Date of review by ARPANSA

February 2025

Article publication date

February 2025

Summary

The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) have published a new document that outlines gaps in scientific knowledge that are relevant to setting limiting values for exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). To maintain relevance to exposure guidelines, the ICNIRP specifically highlighted gaps in knowledge where there exists sufficient support in the scientific literature for a link between RF-EMF exposure and an endpoint and between that endpoint and health. These gaps were identified during the development of the 2020 guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz) and with consideration of literature that has been published since. 

The identified research gaps cover shortfalls in knowledge in various areas of dosimetry and on adverse effect exposure thresholds for eye damage, contact currents and heat-induced pain. The document also provides brief analyses on other topical areas of research related to RF-EMF and health outcomes while additionally providing justifications for why they are not prioritised in the identified research gaps.

Commentary by ARPANSA

Although research into health outcomes related to RF-EMF covers an extremely broad cross-section of various aspects of health, currently there are only a few effects that have been substantiated by the scientific literature. ICNIRP’s statement does not aim to establish new links between RF-EMF exposure and health outcomes but to further inform the numerical levels and exposure assessment methodology of the existing guidelines. Additional research investigating other health outcomes is ongoing and such research is warranted but it is not of immediate relevance to setting exposure guidelines. The state of the science in these other areas is best summarised by the set of systematic reviews that have been recently published as part of an ongoing World Health Organization project reviewing the topic.

The Australian radiofrequency standard RPS-S1 outlines limit values for RF-EMF exposure in Australia. RPS-S1 is aligned with the ICNRIP 2020 guidelines mentioned above. ARPANSA continues to monitor and evaluate research developments to ensure that the limits outlined in RPS-S1 remain fit for purpose and are aligned with international best practice. ARPANSA has research recommendations, and a research framework that informs how and what research should be conducted in Australia. These recommendations are part of the ARPANSA EME action plan that aims to promote health and safety and address misinformation about EME emissions. 

26 February 2025

Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998
Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Regulations 2018

As required by subsection 48(2) of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Regulations 2018, the CEO of ARPANSA hereby gives notice of her intention to make a decision under section 32 of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998 regarding the following application for a facility licence: 

Application No. A0347 by the Department of Defence to operate a prescribed radiation facility at Port Wakefield in South Australia.

The facility is an industrial X-ray machine called a linear accelerator that uses electricity to generate the X-ray beams to image materials and equipment.  The 4 MeV Linear Accelerator, replaces the previously decommissioned linear accelerator used for the same purpose in Port Wakefield, South Australia, by the applicant. 

 

27 February 2025

The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) recently delivered a comprehensive five-day training workshop to expand its emergency response capabilities.

ARPANSA scientist, Callum Watson, said the training was informed by insights gained from an ARPANSA-led response to a radiological incident in Western Australia in January 2023. 

‘One of the key learnings from that incident was the importance of real-time radiation measurement data transfer and effective field communications. This was integrated into the training curriculum,’ said Mr Watson.

Conducted in collaboration with the US Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), ARPANSA participants gained extensive knowledge about how to use the Spectral Advanced Radiological Computer System (SPARCS).

SPARCS is radiation detection equipment and software that ARPANSA uses when responding to radiation emergencies. ‘A capstone of the training was a two-phase simulated source recovery exercise. This practical exercise allowed participants to apply and practice their newly acquired skills in a controlled and realistic environment,’ said Mr Watson. 

The exercise also marked a leap in ARPANSA’s technical capabilities – the Australian Government’s primary radiation protection authority now has additional vehicle-mountable detector units capable of simultaneously transmitting real time data to a central platform for analysis and support.

ARPANSA senior executive, Dr Ivan Williams, says that regular training exercises like this keep ARPANSA at the forefront of radiological emergency management. 

‘This training not only improves our agency's technical prowess but also strengthens our collaboration with international partners, ensuring a cohesive and robust response to future incidents,’ said Dr Williams.

ARPANSA is the Australian Government’s lead agency for any national radiation or nuclear emergencies. 

For more information about ARPANSA's emergency response initiatives, please visit https://www.arpansa.gov.au/research/radiation-emergency-preparedness-and-response

Date of review by ARPANSA

February 2025

Article publication date

1 February 2025

Summary

This study measured the personal radiofrequency-electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposures associated with mobile networks (including 5G) across different micro-environments in Switzerland. The exposure was measured during three different mobile use scenarios: with an inactive device (environmental), while a device is continuously uploading (max UL) and while a device is continuously downloading (max DL). The highest levels were measured during the max UL measurements, particularly in rural micro-environments. Compared to environmental exposure (e.g., median 1 mW/m² for urban business areas), exposure levels increased considerably during the max DL measurements due to the 5G band at 3.5 GHz mostly in urban areas (e.g., median 12 mW/m² in an industrial area). The highest RF-EMF levels (e.g., median 37 mW/m² in a rural centre) were observed during the max UL scenarios in rural areas. In conclusion, inducing mobile DL and UL traffic networks substantially increased personal RF-EMF exposures. 

Published in

Environmental Research

Link to the study

Exploring RF-EMF levels in Swiss microenvironments: An evaluation of environmental and auto-induced downlink and uplink exposure in the era of 5G 

ARPANSA's commentary

This study generated new knowledge by pioneering an activity-based approach to exposure assessment. The findings indicate the relevance of including near-field and far-field personal exposures to estimate cumulative RF-EMF exposures in future epidemiological studies. This has been highlighted in some recent literature (e.g., van Wel et al., 2021; Birks et al., 2021), which estimated personal RF-EMF exposures originating from near-field RF-EMF sources. A key strength of this study is that it characterized exposures associated with different types of mobile use scenarios such as no mobile phone use, and phone use with continuously downloading and uploading a file. Further, this study supports the application of its methodology to a larger European study, which is expected to provide more comprehensive exposure assessments. A notable limitation of the study is that the use of the measurement device on a specific body area to estimate the personal exposure might have resulted in some measurement uncertainties. Importantly, while mobile handset originated (i.e., auto-induced UL) exposures contributed the highest amount of personal RF-EMF exposure levels, these levels lie below the safety limits recommended by the 2020 ICNIRP guidelines and Australian standard (RPS-S1). According to the standard, the general public safety limit is 2-10 W/m² depending on the operating frequency of telecommunication infrastructure. RF-EMF exposures in Australian public environments are generally far below the limits given in the standard (Henderson et al., 2023; Bhatt et al., 2024). The standard is designed to protect people of all ages and health statuses from the adverse health effects of exposure to RF-EMF exposures. Furthermore, it is ARPANSA’s assessment that such low-level RF-EMF exposures do not pose any health risk in populations.

Date of review by ARPANSA

30 January 2025

Article publication date

13 January 2025

Summary

This in vivo study explored the effects of high power 28 gigahertz (GHz) radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on the ocular response and corneal damage threshold of rabbit eyes. Thirty-five male rabbits were first anaesthetised and immobilised before their right eyes were exposed to RF-EMF (28 GHz) for 6 minutes with power densities ranging from 2 to 7.5 kW/m². The corresponding left eyes were not exposed and served as controls. The eyes were assessed prior to exposure and at 10 minutes, 1, 2 and 3 days following exposure. 

No eye damage was observed at incident power densities of 3 kW/m² and below. Some types of eye damage were observed beginning at 3.5 kW/m² with their prevalence increasing with power density. The study estimated that the threshold for eye damage from a 6-minute exposure to 28 GHz RF-EMF is between 3.5 and 3.8 kW/m².

Published in

Health Physics

Link to study

Investigation of the Ocular Response and Corneal Damage Threshold of Exposure to 28 GHz Quasi-millimeter Wave Exposure 

ARPANSA's commentary

RF-EMF at high power levels can heat biological tissue which can lead to heat-related damage. The eyes are particularly sensitive to RF heating. In their 2020 RF safety guidelines, the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP, 2020) acknowledge a shortage of studies that use sufficiently high power to cause heat-induced injury.  The lack of information on eye damage thresholds was also recently reiterated in an updated knowledge gap analysis document (ICNIRP, 2025). These types of studies are considered difficult to conduct because they must be carefully designed in order to remain within the bounds of ethical guidelines for animal research (ARVO, 2024) while still providing relevant information. 

This study pioneers knowledge in this area by exploring how high-power 28 GHz RF-EMF may cause eye damage, establishing a threshold level for cornea damage. Together with other studies by the same research group on higher frequencies (Kojima et al., 2018; 2020; 2022), this body of research provides more clarity on the levels at which RF-EMF causes damage to the eyes. Such research on eye exposure is important for frequencies above 6 GHz due to the fact that RF-EMF at these frequencies is mostly absorbed on the outer surface of the skin or eyes (Sasaki et al., 2017).

In Australia, exposure to RF-EMF is governed by the Australian radiofrequency safety standard RPS-S1. Under the standard, exposure of the general public to RF-EMF at 28 GHz is restricted to 10 W/m² for whole body exposure and 30 W/m² for localised exposure. These levels are far below the threshold for ocular damage estimated by this study, confirming the effectiveness of RPS-S1 for protecting against the adverse effects of RF-EMF. 

4 February 2025

21 January 2025

9 January 2025

ARPANSA is seeking nominations for two part-time members to join its peak advisory body, the Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council (the ‘Council’). 

The Council is seeking one member to represent the interests of the general public, and one member with relevant expertise in, or knowledge of, radiation protection and nuclear safety.

The Council advises the CEO on emerging issues and matters of major public concern relating to radiation protection and nuclear safety, as well as the adoption of recommendations, policies, codes and standards relating to radiation protection and nuclear safety.

Members of the Council are part-time, with 3 meetings held annually, and working groups collaborating on key issues between meetings. Terms run for 3 years from the date of appointment.

If you’re interested in joining the Council in either role, you can learn more about its function and current membership:

• Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Council

Candidates with an understanding of technical radiation issues are encouraged to apply, as well as those with backgrounds in related areas such as public health, community advocacy, sciences, law or engineering. 

Nominations should be submitted prior to Friday 31 January 2025. 

For details on how to put forward a nomination: