I will have one oral podium presentation and two poster presentations at the ARPS Conference, Coffs Harbour, NSW, Australia, 20 – 24, 10. 2024.
Below are the abstracts of my presentations. Posters as pdf and slides of my presentations will be made available here after the conference.
Oral podium presentation
The to-date proposed biomarkers of EHS are not known/proven to be affected by RF-EMF exposures
Dariusz Leszczynski
Adjunct Professor of Biochemistry, University of Helsinki, Finland, and Specialty Chief Editor, Frontiers in Public Health, Lausanne, Switzerland; [email protected]
Part of the population self-declares as sensitive to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) emitted by wireless communication devices and networks. Sensitivity, known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is not recognized as a disease and there are no diagnostic criteria for EHS.
Attempts of EHS diagnosis using physiological and biochemical tests are inadequate.
In some research studies biochemical tests analyzed biological endpoints thought to correlate with the symptoms experienced by self-diagnosed EHS persons: high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), vitamin D2-D3, histamine, IgE, protein S100B, nitrotyrosine (NTT), heat shock protein 70 (HSP70), heat shock protein 27 (HSP27), anti-O-myelin autoantibodies, hydroxy-melatonin sulfate, 6-Ω-creatinine. In addition to the biochemical tests, the blood flow in the temporal lobes of the brain was examined with a non-invasive method of ultrasonic tomosphygmography.
The observed changes in expression of the examined biochemical endpoints did occur only in the minority of the self-declared EHS persons.
Only 40% of self-declared EHS persons had an increase in histamine level. None of the proposed biomarkers was prevalent in EHS persons: hs-CRP increased in 15% of EHS, vitamin D2–D3 declined in 23.2% of EHS, histamine increased in 40% of EHS, IgE increased in 22% of EHS, protein S100B increased in 15.5% of EHS, nitro-tyrosine (NTT) increased in 29% of EHS, Hsp27, Hsp70 detected in 7–19% of EHS, antibody to O-myelin detected in 17–29% of EHS, melatonin to creatinine ratio declined in EHS but the variation was too large to provide a specific number for the ratio.
Brain blood flow, examined with ultrasonic tomosphygmography, was claimed to decline in 50.5% of self-declared EHS persons, but the actual results of the tests were never shown.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that any of the proposed biomarkers was affected by RF-EMF exposure in vitro or humans. Only two of the examined proposed biomarkers, Hsp70 and Hsp27, are known to be affected by RF-EMF exposures in cells grown in vitro. However, it is not known if the same occurs in living humans.
In summary, research studies examining a variety of potential biomarkers of EHS have the problem of the lack of evidence showing a correlation between the RF-EMF exposures and the changes in the expression of the biomarkers proposed to be the biomarkers of EHS.
In conclusion, there is a need for human volunteer studies where the changes in proposed and other potentially useful biomarkers would be examined in control and in persons ethically exposed to RF-EMF.
Poster presentation #1
The lack of diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis of electromagnetic hypersensitivity: A volunteer questionnaire study
Dariusz Leszczynski
Adjunct Professor of Biochemistry, University of Helsinki, Finland, and Specialty Chief Editor, Frontiers in Public Health, Lausanne, Switzerland; [email protected]
Part of the population considers themselves sensitive to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) emitted by wireless communication devices and networks. This sensitivity, commonly called electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), is not recognized by the WHO as a disease, and there are no approved medical procedures for its diagnosis.
Experimental proof of EHS remains scientifically inadequate, but logically, it is plausible that individual sensitivity to RF-EMF exists in the same way as individual sensitivities to other environmental factors.
Currently, medical professionals are unprepared to deal with self-declared EHS persons because physicians are not taught about EHS and the possible physiological effects of human exposure to RF-EMF.
Lacking assistance from medical professionals, self-declared EHS persons attempt to avoid RF-EMF-emitting devices. However, avoidance of RF-EMF emitting devices is already problematic, and it will become virtually impossible after the full deployment of the 5G and 6G wireless networks. The health problems of self-declared EHS persons, no matter whether these are real or imaginary, as some claim, have to function in a society that more and more relies on wireless technologies. Hence, besides cancer epidemiology, research aimed at elucidation of physiological and biochemical effects of RF-EMF exposures on humans that is still scarce (sic!) is urgently needed. This new research is necessary to determine who might be the RF-EMF-sensitive individuals.
The executed questionnaire project aimed to determine what criteria and tests are currently used for the diagnosis of EHS and what is the reliability of diagnoses.
The project analyzed responses of 142 self-declared EHS persons from 21 countries. Analysis has shown that the so-called “medical diagnoses” of EHS, claimed by some self-declared EHS persons, are based solely on the subjective anecdotal evidence presented by the self-declared EHS persons themselves. Sometimes, diagnoses were based on tests lacking scientific proof of validity as EHS diagnostic tools. The extensive listing of symptoms presented by the self-declared EHS persons and the performed diagnostic tests will be shown. In summary, the project conclusion indicates that it is not possible to objectively diagnose EHS.
In conclusion, research in volunteers, using biochemical methods and controlled RF-EMF exposures, is necessary to identify biomarkers of individual sensitivity to RF-EMF exposures, including the biomarkers for EHS. The WHO should recognize EHS as a probable health impairment to stimulate the currently stagnant but urgently needed research on individual sensitivity to RF-EMF.
Poster presentation #2
Twenty years later: Proteomics as a tool in search of physiological effects of exposures to wireless radiation
Dariusz Leszczynski
Adjunct Professor of Biochemistry, University of Helsinki, Finland, and Specialty Chief Editor, Frontiers in Public Health, Lausanne, Switzerland; [email protected]
Twenty years ago, in 2004, I began organizing the first scientific meeting on the physiological effects of wireless radiation exposures using proteomics and transcriptomics methods. The conference took place in Helsinki in 2005. In 2006, a special issue of the journal ‘Proteomics’ (Editor: D. Leszczynski) published the articles based on the conference presentations. In the editorial article to this special issue, I stated what was valid in 2006, and what is still valid today, in 2024, that epidemiological studies are often expected to provide the answer to whether wireless radiation exposures are hazardous to humans. However, finding and scientific validation of health hazards using the epidemiological approach alone might not be possible because the low sensitivity of the epidemiological methodology is likely insufficient to reliably detect the health impact of the weak biological effects induced by low-energy wireless radiation. Hence, studies examining the impact of wireless radiation exposures on human physiology by executing biochemical studies in human volunteers are of paramount necessity and importance.
Proteomics studies the interactions, function, composition, and structures of proteins and their cellular activities. Proteomics provides a better understanding of the structure, function, and physiology of the organism than genomics. Changes in gene expression do not affect the physiology of the organism for as long as these gene expression changes are not translated into changes in the expression and activity of proteins. The level of transcription of a gene gives only a rough estimate of its level of expression into a protein because of the physiological regulation of mRNA production, translation, and degradation.
In a situation, when the knowledge of the effects of wireless radiation on the human body is very limited, it seems advantageous to begin research with a proteomics approach.
Despite the advantages of research using proteomics methodology, over the last 20 years, only 23 proteomics studies have examined proteome changes in response to wireless radiation exposures. Of these studies, only one (sic!) has been performed in human volunteers. A review of these 23 studies shows that the knowledge about the physiological impact of long and short-term exposures to wireless radiation is extremely limited. Concomitantly, the knowledge about the potential effects of wireless radiation exposures on the physiological processes within the human body is close to non-existent. A review of the impact of exposures to wireless radiation on proteome and the way forward with proteomics research will be presented.
See you there!