𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Effects function analysis of ELF magnetic field exposure in the electric utility work environment

✍ Scribed by Jun Zhang; Indira Nair; Jack Sahl


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1997
Tongue
English
Weight
117 KB
Volume
18
Category
Article
ISSN
0197-8462

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


The incomplete understanding of the relation between power-frequency fields and biological responses raises problems in defining an appropriate metric for exposure assessment and epidemiological studies. Based on evidence from biological experiments, one can define alternative metrics or effects functions that embody the relationship between field exposure patterns and hypothetical health effects. In this paper, we explore the application of the ''effects function'' approach to occupational exposure data. Our analysis provides examples of exposure assessments based on a range of plausible effects functions. An EMDEX time series data set of ELF frequency (40 -800 Hz) magnetic field exposure measurements for electric utility workers was analyzed with several statistical measures and effects functions: average field strength, combination of threshold and exposure duration, and field strength changes. Results were compared for eight job categories: electrician, substation operator, machinist, welder, plant operator, lineman/splicer, meter reader, and clerical. Average field strength yields a different ranking for these job categories than the ranks obtained using other biologically plausible effects functions. Whereas the group of electricians has the highest exposure by average field strength, the group of substation operators has the highest ranking for most of the other effects functions. Plant operators rank highest in the total number of field strength changes greater than 1 mT per hour. The clerical group remains at the lowest end for all of these effects functions. Our analysis suggests that, although average field strength could be used as a surrogate of field exposure for simply classifying exposure into ''low'' and ''high,'' this summary measure may be misleading in the relative ranking of job categories in which workers are in ''high'' fields. These results indicate the relevance of metrics other than average field strength in occupational exposure assessment and in the design and analysis of epidemiological studies.


πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Leukemia in electric utility workers: Th
✍ Paul J. Villeneuve; David A. Agnew; Anthony B. Miller; Paul N. Corey; James T. P πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2000 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 157 KB πŸ‘ 2 views

## Background: Epidemiological studies have inconsistently demonstrated a positive relationship between magnetic and/or electric fields and leukemia. although exposure to both 60 hz electric and magnetic fields can be characterized in many ways, to date, risk assessment has been performed by using

Summary of measured radiofrequency elect
✍ Edwin D. Mantiply; Kenneth R. Pohl; Samuel W. Poppell; Julia A. Murphy πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1997 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 260 KB

We have plotted data from a number of studies on the range of radiofrequency (RF) field levels associated with a variety of environmental and occupational sources. Field intensity is shown in units of volts/meter (V/m) for electric field strength and amps/meter (A/m) for magnetic field strength. Dut

Exposure to ELF magnetic and ELF-modulat
✍ C.M. Cook; D.M. Saucier; A.W. Thomas; F.S. Prato πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2006 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 139 KB πŸ‘ 1 views

## Abstract In 2002, we published a review of the cognitive and physiological effects of extremely low frequency magnetic fields (ELF MFs) and ELF‐modulated radiofrequency fields associated with mobile phones. Since the original preparation of that review, a significant number of studies have been

Extremely low frequency (ELF) electric a
✍ Andrew W. Wood πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2008 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 239 KB πŸ‘ 1 views

## Abstract There are large disparities between basic restrictions for exposure to extremely low‐frequency (0–3 kHz) Electric and Magnetic Fields set by two major international bodies. Both bodies agree that these basic restrictions should prevent neuro‐stimulatory effects: the retinal phosphene at