Electromagnetic Sensitivity

The electromagnetic sensitivity (or electro-over-sensitiveness, HSEM ) is a disorder recognized since 2004 by the the World Health Organization (WHO), and is officially regarded as a handicap (and not a disease) in Sweden. As opposed to what one can often read, the British government forever recognized this disorder officially. It is about a sensitivity increased to the electromagnetic and other electric fields or magnetic Ondes, inducing physical and/or psychological Symptômes on levels of exposure generally considered as being inoffensive for the majority of the people. In certain cases, the people are so affected that they are insulated and are brought to cease work and to change their lifestyle, whereas other people report less severe symptoms which actuate an avoidance of certain sources of electromagnetic fields.

The first scientific research on this subject related to the exposure to the Moniteurs of computer, but of the recent studies were interested in the Antenna-relay of the Mobile telephony, in the Lignes with high voltage, of the Electric transformers or of the cellphones themselves.

Symptoms

The reported symptoms are very diverse. They can be:

of the dermatological type: Certain électrosensibles patients report rednesses to the level of the face during work on screen, of the tinglings or the feelings of burn near electricals appliance.

of the Depressed type and Vegetative: Certain électrosensibles patients report tiredness, headaches, sleep disorders, pains muscular, anxiety, digestive disorders (nauseas), disorders of the concentration and memory, giddinesses…

others: Certain électrosensibles patients report disorders of the sphere " nose-throat-oreilles" such as for example of the tinglings in the throat. Other patients also report irritations to the level of the eyes.

There does not exist specific profile symptomatic, which means that the symptoms can be connected with others turbid or diseases. These symptoms are also frequently met in the general population.

Several authors analyzed the symptoms described by the électrosensibles ones. In the study of Hillert and its colleagues (2002), the symptom most frequently quoted is the tiredness, followed dermatological problems to the face, feelings of heaviness in the head, irritation of the eyes, stopped or encumbered nose, difficulty headaches of concentration… Röösli and its colleagues (2004), as for them, describe in decreasing order of the pain, giddiness, tinnitus, headache, nervousness/distresses, tiredness, difficulty sleep disorders of concentration in the members… These authors do not observe differences between the symptoms quoted by the men and the women.

The results of Schüz and his/her colleagues (2006) also join what has just been presented: the quoted symptom most frequently is tiredness, followed difficulties of concentration, bad mood, lassitude, sleep disorders, of unconsciousness, headaches, feelings of weakness…

At certain people, one observes an evolution of the electrosensibility towards chronicity. The consequences are very diverse:

physical and psychological Sufferings (occupation of the thoughts, anxiety, depressive state, stress…)
Behaviors of avoidance of the exposure
Organization of the life of the patient around this problem
Absenteeism, disability
social Insulation
Financial problems due to the removals and electric installations of the house…

Sometimes, an incomprehension of the professional and family entourage and it not recognition of the medical world still worsen the insulation of the électrosensible person.

Several authors speak about a vicious circle where symptoms, associations of the latter to one (of) source (S) electromagnetic and behaviors of avoidance follow one another, develop and car-discuss.

Sources

The accused sources are increasingly more widespread in our modern societies. Röösli and its colleagues (2004) analyzed the suspectées causes of the symptoms.

In the study of Röösli and his/her colleagues (2004), the suspectées causes quoted by the 167 électrosensibles ones questioned were in decreasing order, the antennas of mobile telephony, followed GSM, cordless phones (standard DECT), of the lines with high voltage, the transmitters of broadcasting, the screens of computer, the lines of train/tram, the transformers, the screens of TV, the electricals appliance and lighting.

There does not exist real specificity of the symptoms according to the source. Schreier and coll (2006) note that concerns are more often expressed with regard to the antennas of mobile telephony and the lines with high voltage compared to the GSM, electricals appliance and cordless phone. Similar results were obtained in another study (Siegrist and coll, 2005) and in Austria (Hutter and coll, 2004).

Prevalence of the electrosensibility

A European study (Bergqvist and Al, 1997) described more case in Sweden, in Denmark and in Germany and less case in France, Austria and in the United Kingdom (North-South gradient). In this same study, the sources of exposure were interior (e.g.: screens of computer) in the Scandinavian and external countries (e.g.: lines with high voltage and antenna GSM) in our areas.

The électrosensibles proportions of people vary few people per million with 8% of the questioned people. Here some results:

3,2% électrosensibles people among the people questioned by Levallois and Al (2002) in California.
1,5% of the guarantors is said électrosensibles in the study of Hillert and Al (2002) in Sweden.
6% of the German population known as électrosensible in the study of Schroeder (2002).
4,2% from the women and 1,7% of the men in the studied population is " electromagnetic sensible" in the study of Leitgeb & Schröttner (2003). This sensitivity is defined starting from a threshold of feeling of the current.
2,7% of the population studied (in Switzerland) by Schreier and Al (2006) bring back negative effects on health allotted to the electric fields and magnetic. 2,2% pay to have undergone such effects in the past.
In the investigation of the European commission (Bergqvist et al., 1997), the questionnaires were sent in 138 centers of occupational medicine and 15 groups of mutual aid (rate of answer from respectively 49 and 67%). The frequency varies few people per million (in England, Italy and France, according to the company doctors) with some tenth of pourcent (in Denmark, in Ireland and Sweden, according to the groups of mutual aid).

Diagnosis

It is difficult to establish a diagnosis of electrosensibility because there do not exist objectified specific clinical signs or specific or sensitive pathophysiological markers making it possible to characterize this intolerance. We do not know any mechanism plausible biophysics.

It is important to stress that these symptoms are real and that the suffering of these people should never be called in question. However, they cannot objectively be allotted to the electromagnetic fields. Indeed, to date:

the epidemiological studies do not make it possible clearly to determine the real cause of the reported symptoms (effects related to the exposure to the fields or dependant on perception of a risk and generated fears?).

the studies of provocation did not make it possible to draw up a direct cause and effect link between the appearance of the symptoms and the exposure to the electric fields, magnetic or electromagnetic, some is their frequency: the exposure to these fields always does not involve symptoms, and conversely the latter also appear in the absence of the fields.

Note:

The epidemiological studies analyze the frequency of the symptoms in the long run exposed populations with certain types of fields, because for example of the presence of a line with high voltage or antenna-relay of mobile telephony near their residence.

In the studies of provocation, the volunteers are exposed in laboratory to electric fields and/or magnetic. They must determine if they were exposed (detection of the field) and bring back possible symptoms. They can also be subjected to various tests of memory and attention. According to the studied frequency, equipment is different. In order to validate the experimentation, volunteers and researchers are unaware of if the exposure real or is simulated. One speaks about double blind studies.

According to the group of expert of the European commission (Bergqvist et al., 1997) and the work group of WHO (see memorandum n°296), the " term; électrosensibilité" do not imply a relation established between the electromagnetic fields and a reaction of health because the studies of provocation did not show a clear relation between the subjective feelings and the exposure to the electromagnetic fields.

However, the studies of provocation which test immediate and acute effects of the exposure present limitations. For example, these studies do not take account of the latency of appearance of the symptoms because one relatively short exposure time, present only one source of electromagnetic fields or of the artificially generated harmonics, involves an additional stress (effect of anticipation).

Treatment

In the absence of demonstration of a cause and effect link and defined diagnostic criteria, the first stage consists in rejecting any known medical pathology which could explain the symptoms. Starting from the identification of the medical conditions, psychosocial and environmental of the électrosensible person, an individualized, multidisciplinary and total assumption of responsibility should be privileged.

The choice of a therapy must be based on the clinical presentation, like on the answer to the treatment. Many therapeutic techniques were the publication object and among those, the cognitivo-behavioral Thérapies prove to be most effective (Rubin and Al, 2006; Irvine, 2005; Hillert and Al, 2002).

Hillert and Al (2002) indicate that the forecast is better when the assumption of responsibility is carried out precociously and when the symptoms are associated with work on display screen. Still let us underline that a spontaneous remission is observed in a certain number of cases.

Röösli and Al (2004) analyzed the means implemented to avoid the symptoms. To reduce the exposure is often regarded as a temporarily or partially effective means in the improvement of symptomatology by the people who complain some. But the reduction of the exposure seems to involve the électrosensible person in a spiral of avoidances and installations which have sometimes important consequences in term of costs, insulation social and professional and of quality of life.

Since the reported complaints are it generally for levels of exposure usually met in our daily life, this solution would maturely owe, au préalable, being considered in the light of the evaluations of the exposure and the scientific data in the field.

Prospects for research

Research is still necessary in order to better include/understand the causes and other aspects of symptomatology as to test the effectiveness of the therapeutic methods intended to help the people who complain about electrosensibility.

The assumption according to which the électrosensibles ones would have a greater reactivity of the nervous system central (Wang and coll, 1994; Sandström, 1997; Lyskov and coll, 2001) are also to follow. It would be about a physiological predisposition which would involve a larger sensitivity to the environmental stresseurs.

Antenna-relay and EHS vis-a-vis the legislation

Several associations and scientists ensure that the systems of portable telephony pose problems for the health of certain groups of individuals (expectant mothers or young children, for example). In Prague in 2004 the congress of WHO concluded that the concept of over-sensitiveness to the electromagnetic fields did not rest on scientific bases, it was that the causes of these evils would be rather related to the environment, in addition the fear related to the installation of new antennas relay could cause psychosomatic pathologies of order. Thus, the magistrates' court of Strasbourg was to hear living in September 2006 one affirming to be reached of electro-over-sensitiveness, a pathology recognized in 2004 by WHO like in Great Britain and Sweden, but not in France. The plaintiff intends to call upon with the lawsuit a Jurisprudence of June 2003 according to which the Court of Bankruptcy (TGI) of Grasse (the Alpes-Maritimes) had estimated that “the identification of potentially negative effects rising from a phenomenon, a product or a process, as well as uncertainty in the estimate of their risk, must lead to the application of the Precaution principle”. The mayor of the Roquette-sur-Siagne (the Alpes-Maritimes), had assigned SFR to have built near a school a pylon of 12 meters intended for the installation of two antennas of mobile telephony. The users of the school presented Migraine S, Sleep disorder and a increased Fatigue. The state of knowledge concerning the possible hazards for the children (of which the Brain, under development full, is more sensitive to the disturbances), is close to null.

References

Random links: