Absorption of 5G sub-6 GHz electromagnetic radiation from base station to male reproduction system

References

• Adah AS, Adah DI, Biobaku KT, Adeyemi AB. 2018. Effects of electromagnetic radiations on the male reproductive system. Anat J Afr. 7(1):1152–1161. doi:10.4314/aja.v7i1.169488
   Google Scholar
• Bailey WH, Harrington T, Hirata A, Kavet RROB, Keshvari J, Klauenberg BJ, Legros A, Maxson DP, Osepchuk JM, Reilly JP, et al. 2019. Synopsis of IEEE Std C95.1™-2019 “IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields, 0 Hz to 300 GHz”. IEEE Access. 7:171346–171356. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2954823
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bamba A, Joseph W, Vermeeren G, Thielens A, Tanghe E, Martens L. 2014. A formula for human average whole-body SARwb under diffuse fields exposure in the GHz region. Phys Med Biol. 59(23):7435–7456. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/59/23/7435
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celaya-Echarri M, Azpilicueta L, Karpowicz J, Ramos V, Lopez-Iturri P, Falcone F. 2020. From 2G to 5G spatial modeling of personal RF-EMF exposure within urban public trams. IEEE Access. 8:100930–100947. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2997254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen SZ, Kang SL. 2018. A tutorial on 5G and the progress in China. Front Inf Technol Electron Eng. 19(3):309–321. doi:10.1631/FITEE.1800070
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christianto V. 2021. Magnificent seven: review of seven advanced methods to reduce impacts of 5G harmful radiations to human health and environment. Bio Sci Res Bull. 37(2):69–76. doi:10.5958/2320-3161.2021.00011.0
   Google Scholar
• Conil E, Hadjem A, Gati A, Wong MF, Wiart J. 2011. Influence of plane-wave incidence angle on whole body and local exposure at 2100 MHz. IEEE Trans Electromagn Compat. 53(1):48–52. doi:10.1109/TEMC.2010.2061849
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dasdag S, Taş M, Akdag MZ, Yegin K. 2015. Effect of long-term exposure of 2.4 GHz radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi equipment on testes functions. Electromagn Biol Med. 34(1):37–42. doi:10.3109/15368378.2013.869752
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Vocht F, Albers P. 2022. The population health effects from 5G: controlling the narrative. Front Public Health. 10:1082031. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.1082031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devi DH, Duraisamy K, Armghan A, Alsharari M, Aliqab K, Sorathiya V, Das S, Rashid N. 2023. 5G technology in healthcare and wearable devices: a review. Sensors. 23(5):2519. doi:10.3390/s23052519
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durney CH. 1980. Electromagnetic dosimetry for models of humans and animals: a review of theoretical and numerical techniques. Proc IEEE. 68(1):33–40. doi:10.1109/PROC.1980.11578
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elzanaty A, Chiaraviglio L, Alouini M-S. 2021. 5G and EMF exposure: misinformation, open questions, and potential solutions. Front Commun Netw. 2(April):1–7. doi:10.3389/frcmn.2021.635716
   Google Scholar
• Esra AT, Yetisir F, Adalsteinsson E, Gagoski B, Guerin B, Grant PE, Wald LL. 2020. Individual variation in simulated fetal SAR assessed in multiple body models. Magn Reson Med. 83(4):418–1428. doi:10.1002/mrm.28006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiedler TM, Ladd ME, Bitz AK. 2018. SAR simulations & safety. Neuroimage. 168:33–58. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.03.035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haider Abed Hachem H. 2021. 5G radiation and potential risks to the environment and human health. TURCOMAT. 12(6):1689–1693. doi:10.17762/turcomat.v12i6.3376
   Google Scholar
• Hancı H, Odacı E, Kaya H, Aliyazıcıoğlu Y, Turan İ, Demir S, Çolakoğlu S. 2013. The effect of prenatal exposure to 900-MHz electromagnetic field on the 21-old-day rat testicle. Reprod Toxicol. 42:203–209. doi:10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.09.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill DA. 1984. The effect of frequency and grounding on whole‐body absorption of humans in E‐polarized radiofrequency fields. Bioelectromagnetics. 5(2):131–146. doi:10.1002/bem.2250050203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. 2016. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction. 152(6):R263–R276. doi:10.1530/REP-16-0126
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller H. 2019. On the assessment of human exposure to electromagnetic fields transmitted by 5G NR base stations. Health Phys. 117(5):541–545. doi:10.1097/HP.0000000000001089
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar R, Geleta R, Pandey A, Sinwar D. 2021. Adverse effects of 5th generation mobile technology on flora and fauna: review study. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng. 1099(1):012031. doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1099/1/012031
   Google Scholar
• Mailankot M, Kunnath AP, Jayalekshmi H, Koduru B, Valsalan R. 2009. Radio frequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from GSM (0.9/1.8 GHZ) mobile phones induces oxidative stress and reduces sperm motility in rats. Clinics. 64(6):561–565. doi:10.1590/S1807-59322009000600011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maluin SM, Osman K, Jaffar FHF, Ibrahim SF. 2021. Effect of radiation emitted by wireless devices on male reproductive hormones: a systematic review. Front Physiol. 12:732420. doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.732420
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massoudi H, Durney CH, Barber PW, Iskander MF. 1982. Postresonance electromagnetic absorption by man and animals. Bioelectromagnetics. 3(3):333–339. doi:10.1002/bem.2250030305
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCredden JE, Weller S, Leach V. 2023. The assumption of safety is being used to justify the rollout of 5G technologies. Front Public Heal. 11(6):1058454. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1058454
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nagaoka T, Watanabe S. 2008. Postured voxel-based human models for electromagnetic dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 53(24):7047–7061. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/53/24/003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panagopoulos DJ, Johansson O, Carlo GL. 2013. Evaluation of specific absorption rate as a dosimetric quantity for electromagnetic fields bioeffects. PLOS One. 8(6):e62663. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062663
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rashed EA, Gomez-Tames J, Hirata A. 2019. Human head skin thickness modeling for electromagnetic dosimetry. IEEE Access. 7:46176–46186. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2904743
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sciorio R, Tramontano L, Esteves SC. 2022. Effects of mobile phone radiofrequency radiation on sperm quality. Zygote. 30(2):159–168. doi:10.1017/S096719942100037X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sofri T, A Rahim H, Abdulmalek M, Rani KA, Omar MH, Yasin MNM, Jusoh M, Soh PJ. 2022. Health effects of 5G base station exposure: a systematic review. IEEE Access. 10:41639–41656. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3139385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soleimani H, Gafori Ghadarijani M, Rafiei F, Bayat P. 2022. Comparison of the effect of changing the spatial distance with exposure time to mobile phones radiation on the structure and function of the testis in NMRI mice. J Microw Power Electromagn Energy. 56(2):87–102. doi:10.1080/08327823.2022.2066769
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taguchi K, Laakso I, Aga K, Hirata A, Diao Y, Chakarothai J, Kashiwa T. 2018. Relationship of external field strength with local and whole-body averaged specific absorption rates in anatomical human models. IEEE Access. 6:70186–70196. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2880905
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J, Chen B, Qi H, Zhang J, Chen S, Wang X. 2017. Dosimetric variation in human exposure to 20 MHz–3 GHz electromagnetic fields due to changes in dielectric properties. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 173(4):325–332. doi:10.1093/rpd/ncw010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu Q, Liang P, Chen X. 2018. Multiple-output antenna for 5G base stations with extra decoupling elements. J Commun Inform Netw. 3(1):31–37. doi:10.1007/s41650-018-0002-9
   Google Scholar
• Xue Y, Guo L, Lin J, Lai P, Rui G, Liu L, Huang R, Jing Y, Wang F, Ding G. 2022. Effects of 5.8 GHz microwaves on testicular structure and function in rats. Biomed Res Int. 2022:5182172. doi:10.1155/2022/5182172
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziegelberger G, Croft R, Feychting M, Green AC, Hirata A, d’Inzeo G, Jokela K, Loughran S, Marino C, Miller S. 2020. Guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). Health Phys. 118(5):483–524. doi:10.1097/HP.0000000000001210
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar