Обзорная статья

The Critical Importance of Molecular Biomarkers and Imaging in the Study of Electrohypersensitivity. A Scientific Consensus International Report

D BelpommeAssociation for Research Against Cancer (ARTAC), 57/59 rue de la Convention, 75015 Paris, FranceGeorge L. CarloThe Science and Public Policy Institute, Washington, DC 20006, USAPhilippe IrigarayAssociation for Research Against Cancer (ARTAC), 57/59 rue de la Convention, 75015 Paris, FranceDavid O. CarpenterChild Health Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, South Brisbane, QLD 4101, AustraliaLennart HardellMichael KundiCenter for Public Health, Department of Environmental Health, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, AustriaIgor BelyaevBiomedical Research Center, Slovak Academy of Science, 845 05 Bratislava, SlovakiaMagda HavasEuropean Cancer and Environment Research Institute (ECERI), 1000 Brussels, BelgiumF. AdlkoferVerum-Foundation for Behaviour and Environment c/o Regus Center Josephspitalstrasse 15/IV, 80331 München, GermanyG.F. HeuserFormerly UCLA Medical Center, Department of Medicine, P.O. Box 5066, El Dorado Hills, Los Angeles, CA 95762, USAAnthony B. MillerDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S, CanadaDaniela CaccamoChiara De LucaL. von KlitzingMedical Physicist, Institute of Environmental and Medical Physic, D-36466 Wiesenthal, GermanyMartin L. PallSchool of Molecular Biosciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USAPriyanka BandaraYael SteinFaculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91905, IsraelCindy SageMorando SoffrittiCollegium Ramazzini, Castello di Bentivoglio, via Saliceto, 3, 40010 Bentivoglio, ItalyDevra Lee DavisEnvironmental Health Trust, P.O. Box 58, Teton Village, WY 83025, USAJoel M. MoskowitzSchool of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USASeyed Mohammad Javad MortazaviIonizing and Non-ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC), Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz P.O. Box 71348-14336, IranMartha R. HerbertA.A. Martinos Centre for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Neurology, MGH, Harvard Medical School, MGH/MIT/Harvard 149 Thirteenth Street, Charlestown, MA 02129, USAHanns MoshammerCenter for Public Health, Department of Environmental Health, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, AustriaGérard LedoigtRobert P. TurnerClinical Pediatrics and Neurology, School of Medicine, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29209, USAAnthony C. TweedaleRebutting Industry Science with Knowledge (R.I.S.K.) Consultancy, Blv. Edmond Machtens 101/34, B-1080 Brussels, BelgiumPilar Muñoz-CaleroIris UdasinEOHSI Clinical Center, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USATarmo KoppelAI Institute, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USAErnesto BurgioA. Vander Vorst

International Journal of Molecular Sciencesjournal2021en

ABI

Аннотация

Clinical research aiming at objectively identifying and characterizing diseases via clinical observations and biological and radiological findings is a critical initial research step when establishing objective diagnostic criteria and treatments. Failure to first define such diagnostic criteria may lead research on pathogenesis and etiology to serious confounding biases and erroneous medical interpretations. This is particularly the case for electrohypersensitivity (EHS) and more particularly for the so-called "provocation tests", which do not investigate the causal origin of EHS but rather the EHS-associated particular environmental intolerance state with hypersensitivity to man-made electromagnetic fields (EMF). However, because those tests depend on multiple EMF-associated physical and biological parameters and have been conducted in patients without having first defined EHS objectively and/or endpoints adequately, they cannot presently be considered to be valid pathogenesis research methodologies. Consequently, the negative results obtained by these tests do not preclude a role of EMF exposure as a symptomatic trigger in EHS patients. Moreover, there is no proof that EHS symptoms or EHS itself are caused by psychosomatic or nocebo effects. This international consensus report pleads for the acknowledgement of EHS as a distinct neuropathological disorder and for its inclusion in the WHO International Classification of Diseases.

Перевод пока недоступен

Темы

Electromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects Noise Effects and Management Human Health and Disease

Идентификаторы

DOI: 10.3390/ijms22147321

Цитирования и источники

Цитирований: 0Использованных источников: 149

Показатели — AkademScholar