Effets sur la sant

des champs
lectromagntiques basse
frquence
Jean-louis Lilien (Ulg)
(with informations obtained from L. Verschaeve(VITO), M. De Ridder (RUG), G. Decat(Vito))

units
Volt : voltage unity (V)
Ampere : current intensity unity (A)
Tesla, Gauss : magnetic flux density
(1T=10 mG)
Rms (root mean square) : used in alternative
values. For sinusodal shape, rms value equal
peak value divided by 1.41

. for micro (x 1/1.000.000), ex : T

m for milli (x 1/1000) , ex : mV, mA
k for kilo (x 1000), ex : kV
M for Mega (x 1.000.000), ex : MHz
G for Giga (x 1.000.000.000), ex : GHz

Electromagnetic fields
What is a field ?
Electric field E (Volt/mtre)
Magnetic field H (Ampre/mtre)
Magnetic flux density B (Teslas)
B shortly named magnetic field and
expressed in microteslas (T)

Notion de champs E et B

Champs lectromagntiques
NON ionisants

Extremely low frequency fields

(ELF) =
NON ionising radiation
Non ionising = energy level such that it is
impossible to ionize molecules (in particular
living material).
Typical non-ionizing radiation :
Power electricity
Radio waves, infra-red, visible

Natural fields
Light : with a splendid sensor of
electromagnetic field : the eyes,
Earth magnetic field (30 60 T, direct),
lightning (10 T 1 km)
Earth electric field 100 V/m (10 kV/m during
thunderstorm, direct)

Natural fields
Human being : endogenous fields (electrocardiogram, encephalogram)
gamma wave(30 100 Hz)
Waves: alpha, beta, theta, delta (3 45 Hz)
Endogenous electric field : 0.1 V/m
No way to disturb human being below 1 mV/m
(1% of endogenous field)

Artificial fields
deliberate : radio emission, TV, GSM
(MHz, GHz)
Non-deliberate : overhead power lines(50
Hz) , railways catenaries, household
apparatuses,
Example : magnetic field of 10 T under a
400 kV and electric field of 5 kV/m at
ground level, (50 Hz)
For these two last cases : unknown human
sensors, if any.

Un exemple de mesure en continu

- trajet en tramway : 13.4 T
- machine caf : 0.06 T
- portique anti-vol dans un centre
commercial : 18.6 T
- moyenne au domicile : 0.1 0.2 T + bruit
de fond

Extreme low frequency (ELF) fields

CEM de trs faibles frquences
(<300 kHz)
Wertheimer & Leeper (1979)
leucmie chez lenfant

risque de

normment de recherches dans

tout les domaines (in vitro, in vivo,
pidmiologie, etc.)
ELF champs lectriques, ELF champs magntiques et
champs statiques

ELF: CEM de trs faibles frquences

Trs faibles nergies
Pas deffets thermiques
Champ magntique induit des
courants lectriques dans le
corps
dosimetrie:
()T plutt que V/m

Typical E-field under power lines

(400 kV)

Typical magnetic flux density under

HV power lines (400 kV, 2000 A)

B field in Belgium near lines

Magnetic fields in the 70 kV netw ork
Magnetic fields in the 150 kV netw ork
12
10

4
3
2
1
0
-30

6
4
2

-20

-10

10

20

0
-50

30

Distance to the axis of the line (m )

yearly mean

95%

-25

25

Distance to the axis of the line (m )

Magnetic fields in the 380 kV netw ork

rated (0.9 kA)

yearly mean

40
35
30
25
T

8
7
6
5

20
15
10
5
0
-80

-60

-40

-20

20

40

60

Distance to the axis of the line (m )

yearly mean

95%

rated (2.2 kA)

max (calculated)

80

95%

rated (1.1 kA)

50

Allure du champ dinduction magntique B en microteslas

(cas Tihange-Avernas, 150 kV, 1300 A, deux ternes,
SOUTERRAIN)

14

A: 150 kV, 1100 A

B :70 kV, 450 A

12

Horizontal disposal

B-field (T)

10
8
6

4
2
0
-20

-15

-10

-5
0
5
10
Distance to the axis of the cables (m)

15

20

exemples d'exposition aux ELF

champ lectrique (tension > 150 kV)
sous le conducteur 1000 - 6000 V/m
30 m de l'axe
100 - 2000 V/m
100 m de l'axe
10 - 200 V/m
champ magntique
Tension 0 m
30 m
400 kV
30 T
12 T
225 kV
20 T
3 T
90 kV
10 T
1 T
tlvision 1 m
perceuse 30 cm
microordinateur
couverture lec.

0,1
3
0,5
3,5

T
T
T
T

100m
1 T
0,3 T
0,1 T

Allure du champ dinduction magntique

B en microteslas (rsidentiel)

Relative number of
Residences

Residential Magnetic field

0,001

0,01

0,1

Magnetic field (T)

10

ELF (< 300 kHz)

Peut-on sattendre des
effets biologiques?
(< 300V/m et <50T)

Effets biologiques (et nuisibles) donc pas impossibles,

Cependant les mcanismes proposs sont peu plausibles
faibles doses

HYPOYHESES:
Most cited are:
the induction of electrical currents within tissues
free radical reactions
the effect of transients
The creation of a resonance condition on the cells surface
The presence of small magnetic particles (magnetite) in animal (including)
human tissues resulting in direct magnetic field effects

ELF: effets biologiques?

Oui, en situations extrmes: stimulation directe
du tissu nerveux ou musculaire qui est possible
partir dun certain seuil.
Une exposition faible (normale) peut influencer
les tissues biologiques dans certains cas prcis
(conditions exprimentales). Gnralement il ny
a pas deffets nuisible reconnus.

Effets in vitro?
Surtout champs magntiques et expositions
leves.

-Rsultats non concluants

-Peut tre le type cellulaire et le mode
dexposition peuvent-ils tre
importants?

tudes in vivo?
tudes court et long terme
Initiation, promotion,
cancer

Les tudes ne semblent pas

dmontrer que les ELFs
sont cancrignes (ni initiateur,
ni promoteur)

tudes in vivo?
Reproduction et dveloppement, immunologie,
hmatologie, neuroendocrinologie, gntique et autres
effets
La conclusion gnrale est que les CEM (ELF) nont pas
deffets biologiques dcelables dans ces domaines

Etudes chez lhomme?

Etudes en laboratoire sur volontaires

mlatonine
Rythme cardiaque
Electrophysiologie et tudes du sommeil
Effets sur le systme immunitaire et les
hormones & hypersensibilit
Rsultats ngatifs, controverss, non concluants

taux de mlatonine nocturne chez l'homme

exposition un champ de 50 Hz ; 10 T
mlatonine
(pg/ml)
70
champ
tmoin

60
50
40
30
2
0
10
0
10

12

14

16

18 20

22

00 02

04

06

08

heure

d'aprs Selmaoui 1996

Etudes chez lhomme?

Etudes pidmiologiques

Etudes pidmiologiques:
Beperkingen
van epi-studies: hoogspanningslijnen en kanker

-rsultats controverss
- rsultats positifs controverss
-nombre dindividus limit (statistiques!)
-mesures des champs? Quand? O? Pendant combien de temps?
-controverse entre valeurs mesures et le wire code
-influence dautres facteurs
-mcanisme daction inconnu

cancrogense
agents gnotoxiques
erreurs de replication de l'ADN

c. pr-cancreuses

c. normales

agents gnotoxiques
erreurs de replication de l'ADN
agents pigntiques

temps...
agents pigntiques

cancer

c. cancreuse

Two models for ALL

Step 1 Initiation
Prenatally, during fetal development a chromosome
translocation resulting in a fusion gene TEL + AML 1
A clinically silent and covert preleukaemic clone
Step 2 Promotion
In 1 in 100 : a conversion of the preleukaemic clone to a full
blown leukemia
2 months 14 years: an additional postnatal event

Causes of ALL
As ALL is not a single biological entity or disease (wide variety
of subtypes: precursors B-cell and T-cell)
it seems highly
improbable that its aetiology will be attributable to a single causal
mechanism.
The major causes of childhood cancer are unknown.
5 15 % : familial and genetic factors
5 10 % : known exogenous factors

A risk factor is a specific agent statistically associated with a

disease.
The weight of evidence can be:
established
suggestive
limited

Suggestive risk factors associated with ALL:

Maternal fetal loss
Mother older than 35 years at pregnancy, father older then 40 years
Birth weight > 4000 gram (RR = 1.26) (high rate of cell
proliferation)
First born

Limited evidence:
Paternal cigarette smoking before conception and maternal
marijuana use before and during pregnancy
Paternal occupational exposure to hydrocarbons, pesticides
Motor vehicle exhaust gases, pesticides
Postnatal chloramphenicol use
Decreased risk with breastfeeding (RR = 0.76)
50 Hz magnetic fields > 0,4 T (RR = 2)

Kroll et al 2006
ALL and influenza epidemics (UK)

ODDS ratio
L' odds ratio (OR) ou " rapport des cotes " est une
autre mesure de la force de l'association entre une
exposition et la survenue d'un vnement.
Soit Pt la probabilit d'avoir l'vnement dans le groupe
trait et Pc la probabilit d'avoir l'vnement dans le
groupe non expos.
L'odds ratio vaut: OR= [Pt x (1-Pc)] [Pc x (1-Pt)].
L'odds-ratio est une approximation acceptable du
risque relatif lorsque la probabilit de survenue de
l'vnement est faible (Pt<10%). (le cas des ELF)

mta-analyse leucmies de l enfant

Ahlbom 2000 Br J Cancer ODDS ratio

< 0,2 T

0,2 - < 0,4 T

0,4 T

Mesures
5 tudes

1,05
[0,86 - 1,28]

1,14
[0,85 - 1,53]

1,83
[1,08 - 3,11]

Calcul
4 tudes

1,58
[0,77 - 3,25]

0,79
[0,27 - 2,28]

2,13
[0,93 - 4,88]

Total
9 tudes

1,08
[0,89 - 1,31]

1,10
[0,83 - 1,47]

2,00
[1,28 - 3,14]

Exposed children in Belgium (Decat)

> 0.2 T : 5.7 %

> 0.3 T : 2.7 %
> 0.4 T : 1.3 %

RR = 1.7 Greenland
RR = 2.0 Ahlbom

If epidemiologic observation would be correct, that would mean an

increase of about 1.5 case of ALL leukaemia in Belgium per year.
Typical incidence being about 4 to 5 case/100.000 or 500 cases per year
two of them being potentially induced by ELF

Modelling EMF in living

environment

Measurements of EMF in
dynamic environment

Leucmie chez lenfant

> 0.4 T

IARC

Pas dautres effets

cancer chez ladulte
autres effets chez ladulte
autres effets chez lenfant
pas deffets des champs statiques
(sauf trs hautes intensits)
exposition > 0,4 T
- en Angleterre 0,4 % population
- dans 20 % des cas en raison de lignes HT

IARC classification into 4 groups:

Group 1: The agent (mixture) is carcinogenic to humans. The exposure

circumstance entails exposures that are carcinogenic to humans.
Group 2 (two classifications):
Group 2A: The agent (mixture) is probably carcinogenic to humans. The
exposure circumstance entails exposures that are probably carcinogenic to
humans.
Group 2B: The agent (mixture) is possibly carcinogenic to humans. The
exposure circumstance entails exposures that are possibly carcinogenic to
humans.
Group 3: The agent (mixture, or exposure circumstance) is unclassifiable as
to carcinogenicity in humans.
Group 4: The agent (mixture, exposure circumstance) is probably not
carcinogenic to humans.

Agents classified by IARC (834)

IARC classification
Carcinogenic to humans (75)
(usually based on strong evidence of
carcinogenicity in humans)

Probable carcinogenic to humans (59)

(usually based on strong evidence of
carcinogenicity in animals)

Possible carcinogenic to humans (225)

(usually based on evidence in humans
which is considered credible but for
which other explanations could not
be ruled out)

Examples of agents
Asbestos
Alcoholic beverages
Benzene
Mustard gas
Solar radiation
Tobacco
X-rays, gamma rays,

Creosotes
Diesel engine exhaust
Formaldehyde
PCB
Coffee

ELF magnetic fields

Gazoline exhaust
Glass wool
Pickled vegetables
styrene

Childhood leukemia
in Flanders 1997 - 2001
38 cases/ year (mean over 5 years)
75 % : ALL (Europe : 75 80 %)
Age-standardised incidence rate: 29,8/1.000.000
children < 15 years
(Europe: 27,9 46,5)
Cumulative risk to develop leukemia before the
age of 15 is about 0.05 % (1/2.000)
5 year-survival:
84,8 % boys
88,1 % girls

Incidence
High rates in North-West Europe, North America and
Oceania
Lower rates in Asia and Africa
Sharp incidence peak of ALL during childhood has
only been observed in the UK and USA since the
1930s
The age peak is absent in many developing or
underdeveloped countries, suggesting a leukemogenic
contribution from factors associated with
industrialisation
Yearly increase of incidence (0.7 1.4 %); now
plateau of incidence curve is reached

Health policy must be science based

A single study can form the basis
of an hypothesis, but does not
provide the basis for hazard
identification.
Confirmation of the results of
any study are needed through
replication and/or supportive
studies.
The resulting body of evidence
forms the basis for science-based
judgments by defining exposure
levels for
adverse health effects and
no observable adverse
effects.

CONCLUSIONS
Manque de rsultats clairs et sans quivoques
Gnralement les donnes sont insuffisantes pour
conclure que les CEM-ELF sont nuisibles. Des effets
biologiques ont nanmoins t observs.
Il existe un lien entre une exposition aux CEM-ELF et
la leucmie chez lenfant (>0.3-0.4T)
Les tudes pidmiologiques ne peuvent sexpliquer par
les rsultats dexpriences en laboratoire.
Etudes de rptition ncessaires.

http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop/cell-phone-health-FAQ/toc.html
http://www.icnirp.de/
http://health.fgov.be/CSH_HGR/
http://www.iegmp.org.uk/IEGMPtext.htm
http://www.rsc.ca/english/Rfreport.pdf
http://www.sante.gouv.fr/htm/dossiers/telephon_mobil/index.htm
http://www.who.int
http://www.bbemg.ulg.ac.be/
http://www.greenfacts.org/power-lines/index.htm
http://www.nrpb.org/index.htm