Radiation literature survey

Authored By:

This cross-sectional study investigated the effect of using a GSM mobile phone on auditory brainstem responses (ABR). In the study the ABR of 40 subjects using mobile phones for the past 5 and 10 years was measured and compared to that of 20 subjects who never used a mobile phone. There was no difference in the ABR between subjects using a phone for 5 years and the controls however there was a difference for subjects using a phone for 10 years. The authors conclude that long term exposure to mobile phones may affect brain function related to a deterioration in hearing.

PubMed link

Published In:

Authored By:

This in-vitro study investigated whether exposure to high ELF magnetic fields causes DNA damage to cells. In the study, cells that were exposed to a 100 Hz magnetic field, at a strength of 5.6 mT for 45 minutes were compared to non-exposed cells. The authors reported higher DNA damage in cells that were exposed to the magnetic field.

PubMed link

Published In:

It must be noted that the strength of the magnetic field used in this study is almost never experienced by the general public and is much higher than the limit of 0.2 mT prescribed in human exposure guidelines by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection.

Authored By:

Pettersson D, Mathiesen T, Prochazka M, Bergenheim T, Florentzson R, Harder H, Nyberg G, Siesjö P, Feychting M

Summary:

This epidemiological case-control study investigated whether mobile phone use is associated with acoustic neuroma. The study compared the mobile phone use between 451 people diagnosed with acoustic neuroma between 2002 and 2007 (the cases) and 710 people without the disease (the controls). There was no statistically significant association between using a mobile phone regularly (defined as using a phone at least once a week for at least 6 months) and acoustic neuroma (odds ratio, OR, of 1.18; 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.88-1.59). The association was weaker when using a mobile phone for more than 10 years (1.11 [0.76-1.61]) and for using the phone on the same side as the tumour (0.98 [0.68-1.43]). There was a higher but not statistically significant association when using a mobile phone more than 680 hours (1.46 [0.98-2.17]). The authors reported similar results for cordless phone use. They conclude that the findings do not support the hypothesis that long-term mobile phone use increases the risk of acoustic neuroma.

PubMed link

Published In:

Commentary by ARPANSA:

There have been several previous epidemiological studies that have investigated whether using a mobile phone is associated with acoustic neuroma. The INTERPHONE study is a series of case-control studies conducted in 13 different countries (including Australia) investigating possible associations between using a mobile phone and different cancers of the head and neck. A pooled analysis of the INTERPHONE studies for acoustic neuroma (presented in the August 2011 report) showed no overall association with mobile phone use. There were suggestions of an association in the group representing individuals with the highest cumulative call time. The authors note that limitations of the methodology prevent conclusions of causality being drawn from these observations.

In May 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) assessed the possible carcinogenicity (ability to produce or promote cancer) of radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (presented in the June 2011 report). Based primarily on the epidemiological studies of glioma and acoustic neuroma IARC classified RF EMF as a Group 2B carcinogen - “ possibly carcinogenic to humans ”.

The classification by IARC does not provide estimates of what risk of cancer might by posed by any given level of exposure to RF fields if the risk is true. An assessment of this and other possible health effects will be undertaken by the World Health Organization in 2014.

Authored By:

This is a meta-analysis of 9 case-control studies investigating whether exposure to ELF magnetic fields is associated with childhood leukaemia. The meta-analysis included 11,699 cases and 13,194 controls. There was an increased risk of childhood leukaemia for magnetic field exposures more than 0.4µT (OR=1.57, 95% CI=1.03-2.40); there was a higher risk specifically for acute lymphocytic leukaemia (OR=2.43, 95% CI=1.30-4.55). The authors conclude that these results agree with previous research that exposure to higher than normal magnetic fields may be associated with childhood leukaemia.

PubMed link

Published In:

Authored By:

This cross-sectional study investigated whether occupational exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields affects neurobehaviour. In the study neurobehavioural tests were conducted on 310 electrical utility workers (exposed group) and 300 office workers (control group). There were no statistically significant differences in neurobehavioural parameters between the exposed workers and the controls. The authors conclude that occupational exposure to ELF magnetic fields does not appear to disrupt normal neurobehaviour.

PubMed link

Published In:

Authored By:

This study reviewed the radiation doses of mining and ore processing workers to naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) in Western Australia. NORM is commonly encountered in mining and mineral operations in Western Australia. Worker exposure to NORM is routinely monitored as part of normal safety precautions. In this study the authors examined the radiation exposure of mining operation workers in 2018-19 and compared it to exposure in 2019-2020. They found that the mean effective dose reported increased by 32% from 0.71 mSv to 0.94 mSv, indicating that mean doses are approaching the 1 mSv annual dose estimate where regulatory intervention should be considered (Ralph and Cattani, 2022). In addition, there was a 36.4% increase in the maximum effective dose of workers from 4.4 mSv to 6.0 mSv. This was the first time in 10 years that an increase in the effective dose has been observed above 5 mSv; this is the threshold level where additional institutional controls and personal monitoring are required (Ralph and Cattani, 2022). The authors also noted that there has been a trend of decreased monitoring for internal exposure to NORM and that this should be reversed to provide increased confidence in the reported dose estimates.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34814129/

Published In:

This is the latest paper in a series (Ralph et al 2020a, 2020b) by the authors that have demonstrated that worker effective doses have increased due the revision of the dose coefficients for occupational intakes of radionuclides by International Commission for Radiological Protection (ICRP). The increase is observed because of the updates in how the dose from inhalation of radionuclides, particularly of the uranium-238 and thorium-232 and radon-222 and their progeny nuclides, are calculated. The updates to how ICRP now calculates doses can be found in the ICRP 130, 134, 137 & 141. 

To ensure workers are protected from the harmful effects of radiation and our guides reflect international best practice, ARPANSA is currently updating RPS 9 and RPS 9.1 to reflect the changes to the dose coefficients by the ICRP. Information on these updates can be found on ARPANSA’s NORM Dose conversion factor update webpage. Making these changes should provide an easy mechanism for implementation by State and Territory radiation regulators.

More information on worker exposure to ionising radiation and the controls in place to protect workers in the mining industry can be found in the ARPANSA factsheet Occupational exposure: Uranium mining and milling workers.