The need for consensus guidelines to address the mixed legacy of genetic damage assessments for radiofrequency fields

Abstract

Overview

This review explores over 300 publications from the past three decades that examine the potential genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on human and animal tissues. It emphasizes the evolution of consensus guidelines for genotoxicity testing and the significance of employing systematic reviews in evaluating scientific studies for health risk assessments.

Findings

• The literature presents mixed results for the genotoxic effects of RF-EMF, with most studies showing no significant effects. However, a significant minority, primarily in vivo studies, indicated statistically significant effects.
• The study quality varied greatly, with several studies being meticulously executed. Nonetheless, none complied with current guidelines like those of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
• Risk of bias assessments displayed that higher quality studies were less likely to find statistically significant results than lower quality studies.

Conclusion

The authors caution against solely relying on statistical significance for evaluating bioeffects studies. They argue for a comprehensive synthesis of evidence that includes assessing the study validity, the biological significance of reported effects, and coherence with other studies. Future studies should adhere to rigorous guidelines such as OECD for genotoxicity testing and PRISMA for literature reviews.
They further recommend that studies reporting positive results undergo rigorous quality reassessment to establish reliable findings.