| ARPANSA

Good quality research shows no environmental effects from radio waves

22 August 2024

Australian government research scientists and Swinburne University have published a new paper that finds good quality studies show no effect from radio waves on plants and animals, while poor-quality studies show an effect.

The systematic map, published in The International Journal of Environmental Studies in July 2024, was led by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency’s (ARPANSA) Health Impact Exposure Assessment Assistant Director Associate Professor Ken Karipidis.

‘The findings indicate that there is no substantiated evidence that radio wave exposure below safety limits adversely affect plants and animals,’ A/Prof Karipidis said.

From a pool of over 26,000 studies, only 334 articles were identified as being eligible to be included into the systematic map and for further analysis in this study. Out of those 334 studies, only a few were deemed good quality by the authors.

Good quality studies used rigorous scientific methods such as appropriate exposure assessment and suitable comparison/control groups.

The poor-quality studies in the paper had flaws such as having no controls in the experiments, using poor radiation exposure assessment, and not considering other environmental factors like pollution.

ARPANSA’s Dr Chris Brzozek was the review’s lead author.

‘While the good quality studies add to the international scientific community’s consensus on radio wave effects on plants and animals, the number of those studies was limited and that's why we need more research to resolve any doubts,’ Dr Brzozek said.

‘It is ARPANSA’s assessment and the international scientific consensus that there are no health effects to plants and animals from low level radio wave exposure.’

You can read a research summary on our website.

ARPANSA approaches 40 years of collaboration with World Health Organization

20 August 2024

The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) is continuing its almost 40-year-old partnership with the World Health Organization (WHO) by extending its formal agreement as a radiation protection collaborating centre for another 4 years.

ARPANSA’s Chief Radiation Health Scientist, Dr Rick Tinker, says they have been supporting WHO’s radiation protection activities since 1985.

‘The partnership we have in place with WHO means they are able to access resources at ARPANSA such as technical advice to support the delivery of their radiation protection programs,’ Dr Tinker said.

‘ARPANSA has supported many of WHO’s activities in radio wave and ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure, emergency preparedness and health physics.

‘It’s a mutually beneficial partnership where we too use WHO’s public health advice to support our work in ensuring Australians are protected from the harmful effects of radiation,’ said Dr Tinker.

ARPANSA has recently supported WHO with key programs including systematic reviews to inform an updated health risk assessment of radio wave exposure and delivery of medical radiation response training.

‘We’re proud of what we’ve been able to deliver in our role as a WHO collaborating centre,’ said Dr Tinker.

WHO has established more than 800 collaborating centres globally for the benefit of its 194 member states.

ARPANSA’s formal agreement as a WHO collaborating centre is in place until June 2028.

Solar ultraviolet radiation and ocular melanoma in the United States

Article review data

August 2024

Article publication date

June 2024

ARPANSA summary

This cohort study, conducted in the USA, examined the impact of ambient ultraviolet radiation (UVR) on the incidence of ocular melanoma. The study included 18,089 cases of ocular melanoma collected from 21 of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) population-based cancer registries from 2000-2019. Cases were stratified by county of residence, sex, age at diagnosis and year of diagnosis (2000–2003, 2004–2007, 2008–2011, 2012–2015, 2016–2019). The UVR exposure used in the study was based on cloud adjusted UVR measurements from 2000 different locations that are meant to represent high population areas.

The authors reported no association for the highest quartile of UVR exposure and total ocular melanoma (UVR Q4 versus Q1 incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI):0.94-1.03). However, there was an association for the highest quartile of UVR exposure and ocular melanoma in ciliary body/iris cases specifically (IRR = 1.63; 95%CI:1.43-1.87). The authors concluded there was association between solar UVR and ocular melanoma in the ciliary body/iris, but not for all anatomical sites when using the highest exposed category of solar UVR.

Link to study

Ambient ultraviolet radiation and ocular melanoma incidence in the United States, 2000−2019

Published in

Eye

ARPANSA commentary

This study indicated an association between high solar UVR exposure and ocular melanoma in the ciliary body/iris. For the highest exposed category there was no association for total ocular melanoma cases. The observed lack of an association is contrary to the well-established link between UVR and skin melanoma (Olsen et al 2015). The lack of an association in total ocular melanoma could be due to a number of confounders relating to the lack of individualised exposure assessment in this study. The actual ocular UVR a person is exposed to could deviate significantly from the UVR depending on how much time they spend outside each day, usage of eye protection (sunglasses) and their occupation. None of these factors were considered by the authors. This could result in misclassification bias where the people in the low exposure group could have high exposure and those in the high exposure group could have low exposure. While the study does provide interesting results for how solar UVR might impact ocular melanoma no firm conclusions can be drawn from their findings. An Australian study that looked at ocular melanoma reported a higher age-standardized incidence rate in people 55 and older between 2008-2013 (ASR) in Queensland (ASR 3.9, 95% CI 3.3–4.5) that has a higher average UV index compared to Victoria (ASR 2.8, 95% CI 2.4–3.1) (Chalada et al 2021). However, this study also suffers from misclassification bias as it also does not present individual exposure data or account for sun protective behaviours.

ARPANSA approves siting licence for ASA Controlled Industrial Facility

17 July 2024

ARPANSA has issued a licence to the Australian Submarine Agency to prepare a site for the prescribed radiation facility known as the ‘Controlled Industrial Facility’. The proposed Controlled Industrial Facility will provide low-level waste management and maintenance services to support the Submarine Rotational Force – West program, which is being planned at the existing HMAS Stirling Navy Base, Garden Island, Rockingham, Western Australia.

ARPANSA is responsible for licensing Commonwealth entities that use or produce radiation and applies a
strict review and assessment process once a licence application is received.

The ARPANSA CEO elected to invite public comment in relation to the application due to the level of public interest and as this is the first licence application to ARPANSA from the newly formed Australian Submarine Agency (ASA).

ARPANSA received 165 submissions in relation to the ASA licence application. These submissions were reviewed and considered alongside the regulatory assessment of the licence application. A summary of the submission themes and ARPANSA responses is available on the ARPANSA website.

The siting licence approval is the first stage of a stringent licencing process that requires separate applications for siting, construction, operation and decommissioning.

Parliament is considering legislation to establish a dedicated naval nuclear power safety regulator, the Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Regulator (ANNPSR). Until the new regulator is established, ARPANSA will regulate nuclear and radiological safety for ASA.

Future applications for the Controlled Industrial Facility are likely to be made while ARPANSA remains the regulatory authority for nuclear and radiological safety for ASA. The CEO has committed to continuing to invite public comment on all future ASA facility licences considered by ARPANSA.

ARPANSA undertakes comprehensive regulatory assessment and applies appropriate licence conditions to ensure the protection of people and the environment from the harmful effects of radiation.

ARPANSA responses to public comments ASA licence application

Personal UVR exposure measurements

ARPANSA scientists are currently collecting measurements of an individual’s exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR).

They’re collecting these measurements to understand how different factors like the environment and the use of sun protection influence a person’s UVR exposure. You might spot our scientists wearing distinctive suits with UV sensors as they take measurements. If you see them, have a yarn with them and ask them about their research.

Why this study is important

Australia has the highest skin cancer rates globally with more than two in three Australians diagnosed with skin cancer in their lifetime. The more an individual is exposed to UV radiation, the greater their risk of developing skin cancer. But skin cancer is preventable. Protecting your skin from UV exposure reduces your risk. With this new measurement study and associated public engagement campaign, we hope that our evidence-based public health advice protects Australians from developing skin cancer.

How we are undertaking this study

To measure UVR, the scientists are wearing suits that are fitted with sensors which specifically absorb the UV from sunlight and then convert that to an electric current.

That electrical current can be measured and recorded for comparison against the data in our UVR monitoring network, which then gives the scientists the UV index value for each sensor on the suit.

The sensor suits can show how UVR exposure varies over the body and how environmental factors like shade and reflective surfaces effect exposure.

Results

Data breakdown in both table format and pictorial representation of the data as a full body-suit showing where on the body different measurements were taken

Ratio of ultraviolet radiation exposure on sand to ultraviolet radiation exposure on grass

Sun protection advice

ARPANSA recommends that sun protection is used whenever the UV index is 3 or above:

slip on some sun-protective clothing that covers as much skin as possible

slop on broad spectrum, water resistant SPF50 or higher sunscreen. Put it on 20 minutes before you go outdoors and every two hours afterwards

slap on a hat – broad brim or legionnaire style to protect your face, head, neck and ears

seek shade

slide on some sunglasses – make sure they meet Australian Standards.

As the Australian Government’s primary authority on radiation protection, ARPANSA contributes to the development of sun protection standards, undertakes research, and works with organisations such as the Cancer Councils of Australia to raise awareness of the harmful effects of sun exposure.

WHO systematic review and meta-analysis of RF EME exposure and long-term impacts on cognition

Review date

June 2024

Article publication date

June 2024

Summary

This systematic review evaluated the evidence on exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic energy (RF EME) and the long-term impacts on cognition in epidemiological studies. The review screened 3945 research papers and of these 5 prospective cohort studies were included in the final analysis. These studies were conducted between 2006 and 2017 and included 4639 participants consisting of 2808 adults and 1831 children across three countries (Australia, Singapore and Switzerland). The main source of RF EME was mobile phone use which was measured by the self-reported number of calls per week or minutes per day. Of the included studies only two, that investigated the effects of RF EME on cognition in children, were similar enough to be included in a meta-analysis (Bhatt et al. 2017 and Thomas et al. 2017).

The meta-analysis found little to no effect of RF EME on learning and memory, executive function and complex attention in children with low or very low certainty of evidence. The review also assessed the effects of RF EME in elderly people and also found no evidence of an effect in any of the examined cognitive domains with very low certainty of evidence. An exposure–response relationship was not identified for any of the cognitive outcomes. The authors concluded that further studies are needed to address all types of populations, exposures and cognitive outcomes.

Link to

The effects of radiofrequency exposure on cognition: A systematic review and meta-analysis of human observational studies

Published in

Environment International

Commentary by ARPANSA

The review found no consistent evidence of an effect of RF EME on cognition. However, there were limitations in the available evidence. One issue with the available literature is that the majority of the previous studies are cross-sectional studies, and these were not included in the systematic review. This is because they are unable to assess the long-term impact of exposure as they assess exposure and effect simultaneously by design. While the number of included studies was reduced, inclusion of cross-sectional studies would not have increased the certainty of the evidence. Previous narrative reviews that included cross-sectional studies reported inconsistent associations, with some finding improved cognition (Ishihara et al, 2020; ARPANSA, 2014).

There were several other limitations in the evidence including the fact that the effects of RF EME on cognition could not be separated from the effects of mobile phone use on cognition. This includes the impact that behaviours such as texting, gaming and social media use have on cognition. Another limitation in the evidence is exposure assessment being based on self-reported mobile phone use which can result in recall bias.

Another major issue is that all of the studies used different tests to examine cognition. One of the main recommendations of this systematic review is that in future studies a consistent set of cognitive function tests for evaluation of each cognitive domain should be used.

Overall, while there is no consistent evidence of an effect of RF-EMF exposure on cognition more long-term observational studies are needed to address important knowledge gaps.

The effect of RF EME on cognition has been reviewed by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) in their 2020 guidelines and they concluded there is no substantiated experimental or epidemiological evidence that exposure to RF EME affects cognition. Overall, there remains no consistent scientific evidence that exposure to RF EME below the limits set in ARPANSA safety standard which is aligned with the ICNIRP guidelines is a hazard to human cognition or any other health effects.

This review is part of the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) ongoing project assessing the health effects of RF-EMF. ARPANSA is supporting this WHO review process. One of the ongoing WHO systematic reviews will be examining cognitive impairment in human experimental studies (Pophof et al, 2021). This review will include an examination of the acute effects that RF EME has on cognition.

Rehabilitation of Australian nuclear test site features in international guide

25 July 2024

Rehabilitation of the historical nuclear test site at Maralinga, South Australia is being featured in a report on radiation protection in areas contaminated by past radiation incidents.

The British Government conducted nuclear weapons tests at 3 locations in Australia in the 1950s and 60s.

ARPANSA’s Assistant Director Health Physics Measurements Dr Stephen Long gave a presentation to over 700 people last month about the Maralinga case study.

Dr Long says the successful rehabilitation of Maralinga is an excellent example and will be included in the International Commission on Radiological Protection’s (ICRP) new publication Radiological Protection in Areas Contaminated by Past Activities.

‘The efforts the Australian Government has made in collaboration with the Maralinga Tjarutja Traditional Owners to remediate the site alongside the community is a case study in international best practice,’ Dr Long said.

‘Many international organisations are looking at ARPANSA’s rehabilitation efforts at Maralinga as the gold standard for remediation of radiologically contaminated areas due to the substantial involvement of the Traditional Owners in driving the outcome.’

Between 1952 and 1963, 12 atomic detonations of nuclear devices occurred across Southern and Western Australia in areas including Maralinga and the Montebello Islands.

The Australian Government’s efforts to remediate the site began in 1995. The site was handed back to Traditional Owners in 2009.

‘We continue to undertake environmental radiation monitoring every three years,’ Dr Long said.

‘We want the Maralinga Tjarutja peoples to feel confident to live on and fully engage with the land. Our team, working with Maralinga Tjarutja, the Department of Industry, Science and Resources and the South Australian Government, is committed to building the trust and knowledge to enable this to happen.’   

As the Australian Government’s primary radiation protection authority, we work with leading international authorities like the ICRP whose radiation protection principles and exposure limits form the basis for our national regulations governing the exposure of radiation workers and the general public.

The ICRP’s draft report, Radiological Protection in Areas Contaminated by Past Activities, is available for public consultation until September 20, 2024, before it is published: https://icrp.org/consultation.asp?id=830FF4FB-8446-42DF-98AD-85DFAA3B11B2

A recording of Dr Long’s presentation can be accessed here.

New data shows occupational exposure to radiation is well below safety limit

4 July 2024

Australian dose records from 2021 - 2022 show that occupational exposure to ionising radiation is well below the safety limit.

The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) maintains the Australian National Radiation Dose Register (ANRDR), which houses data from uranium mining, workers at Commonwealth entities and some medical facilities.

The ANRDR monitors occupational radiation exposures nationally to ensure workers in these sectors are receiving below the 20 mSv annual limit.

ARPANSA’s Public and Occupational Exposures Assistant Director, Cameron Lawrence, leads the ANRDR, which compiles annual reports on occupational exposure.

‘We recently audited and reconciled our 2021-2022 annual report following new dose records from our licensees such as ANSTO, as well as from the uranium industry and other workplaces that use or produce radiation like veterinary clinics,’ Dr Lawrence said.

‘In 2021, 87% of workers received a dose of less than 1 mSv and approximately 99% received a dose less than 3 mSv.

‘The data was similar in 2022. Approximately 79% of workers received a dose less than 1 mSv and approximately 99% received a dose less than 3 mSv.

‘This data helps us monitor individual doses so that we can ensure people are safe throughout their career, even when they change employer.’

The ANRDR holds dose records for more than 60,000 individuals, primarily from the uranium industry.

The updated summary of the 2021 – 2022 dose records is available on our website: https://www.arpansa.gov.au/our-services/monitoring/australian-national-radiation-dose-register/publications/anrdr-review-20212022

The 2021 - 2022 records were updated in June 2024, with summary data for 2023 expected to be published later this year.

ARPANSA is the regulator of Commonwealth entities that use or produce radiation and works with state and territory regulators and industry to protect workers, communities and the environment.

Calling cosmetic providers to participate in health study

18 June 2024

ARPANSA and Monash University are seeking service providers to facilitate participant recruitment for a study on health impacts of non-ionising radiation cosmetic treatments, such as laser hair removal.

ARPANSA’s Health Impact Assessment Assistant Director Ken Karipidis and researchers from Monash University are supervising the study, which will gather data on cosmetic procedures.

The data collected will be used to understand if greater regulation is required for certain types of cosmetic procedures across Australia.

A/Prof Karipidis says that only Tasmania, Queensland and Western Australia have regulatory controls in place for cosmetic use of non-ionising radiation, although this is limited to certain light-based cosmetic applications like laser and intense pulsed light (IPL).

‘As the Australian Government’s primary authority on radiation protection, we want to ensure that appropriate measures are in place to keep people safe when undergoing cosmetic procedures that involve the use of non-ionising radiation,’ A/Prof Karipidis said.

The researchers are aiming to recruit businesses and service providers to help them identify individuals at their cosmetic clinics who they can survey as they receive treatments.

With the survey data, PhD student Zoe Thomas will investigate the types of adverse effects that can occur, how frequently they occur, and in what circumstances.

‘As well as helping us understand the rate and type of injuries occurring, this study may also help to improve safety standards across the industry and provide greater assurance to potential clients,’ she said.

To learn more about participating in this study please read the explanatory statement and complete the expression of interest form: https://monashred.au1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9YMMM7CUv1647ie

ARPANSA welcomes IAEA mission report

14 June 2024

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has acknowledged Australia’s commitment to nuclear safety in a report published June 2024.

The report outlines the findings of the October 2023 IAEA Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS) follow-up mission to Australia. The mission reviewed progress in national, legal and governmental frameworks for nuclear and radiation safety since the 2018 IRRS mission.

ARPANSA Chief Executive Officer Dr Gillian Hirth AO welcomed the report, which found ARPANSA had addressed all previous recommendations for the agency. The IAEA also highlighted two areas of ‘good practice’ by ARPANSA, which it considers go above international best practice.

‘With the changing nuclear landscape it’s now even more important than ever that Australia has consistent and comprehensive regulation to protect people and the environment from any harmful effects of radiation,’ Dr Hirth AO said.

‘As the Australian Government’s primary authority on radiation protection, we promote consistent radiation protection for all Australians and comprehensive review of regulatory frameworks plays a critical role in delivering this vision.’

An IRRS mission is a valuable regulatory benchmarking exercise involving peer review by overseas experts against IAEA Safety Standards.

The IRRS team comprised seven international experts and three IAEA staff members, who worked together to review relevant reference material and interview ARPANSA, the Australian Radioactive Waste Agency and State and Territory regulatory bodies.

The report noted that substantial progress had been made in response to the 2018 IRRS mission findings across all Australian Government and State and Territory participants. Out of the 23 recommendations and 12 suggestions from 2018, 16 recommendations and 10 suggestions have been successfully addressed and closed.

The report was presented to the Australian Government and is now published on the ARPANSA website.

Subscribe to