Assessment of Risk of Carrier Waves in the Assisted Reproductive Laboratory

Samuel D. Prien^1,2, Jessica Smith², Christy Barron², Joseph Martin², Naghma Farooqi¹, Alita Loveless¹, Amy Van Gheem¹, Lindsay L. Penrose¹

¹Department of Animal and Food Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, USA.
²Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ojog.2015.510077                

Abstract

Assisted reproductive technology (ART) laboratories represent the marriage of the most basic of biological activities with the most cutting edge technologies. While this association has worked well, the mixture of biology and technology can create risks to normal embryo development. Recently a significant amount of literature has explored the risks of manmade, electrically induced magnetic fields and carrier waves on reproduction, which some studies have suggested will lower functional gamete numbers in the males and potentially induce genetic issues in embryos. However, little is known about these phenomena within the ART laboratory, a laboratory filled with electronic equipment. The object of the present study was to explore the potential exposure of gametes and early stage embryos to two of the most prevalent fields and waves utilized in manmade technologies seen in the general environment, electromagnetic fields (EMF) and radio frequency waves (RF), and determine the effect varying levels of these energetic forces had on gamete function and embryo development. Results indicated that while extremely high concentrations of EMF (approximately 50-100X of laboratory background) caused negative outcomes in both gametes and embryos, levels consistent will the majority of lab equipment did not appear to impact growth, or function. Further, even extremely high RF appeared to have no impact cellular function. Results suggest few issues with EMF or RF on gamete and embryo function at normal laboratory levels for the relatively short exposure times seen in the ART laboratory.

Keywords

Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Electromagnetic Fields, Radio Frequency Waves, Embryos, Sperm

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Johansen, C. (2004) Electromagnetic Fields and Health Effects—Epidemiologic Studies of Cancer, Diseases of the Central Nervous System and Arrhythmia-Related Heart Disease. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 30, 1-30.
[2]	Consales, C., Merla, C., Marino, C. and Benassi, B. (2102) Electromagnetic Fields, Oxidative Stress, and Neurodegeneration. International Journal of Cell Biology, 2012, Article ID: 683897.
[3]	Coureau, G., Bouvier, G., Lebailly, P., Fabbro-Peray, P., Gruber, A., Leffondre, K., et al. (2014) Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumours in the CERENAT Case-Control Study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 71, 514-522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2013-101754
[4]	Li, C.Y., Liu, C.C., Chang, Y.H., Chou, L.P. and Ko, M.C. (2012) A Population-Based Case-Control Study of Radiofrequency Exposure in Relation to Childhood Neoplasm. Science of the Total Environment, 1, 435-436, 472-478. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.06.078
[5]	Kesari, K.K., Kumar, S., Nirala, J., Siddiqui, M.H. and Behari, J. (2013) Biophysical Evaluation of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Effects on Male Reproductive Pattern. Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics, 65, 85-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12013-012-9414-6
[6]	Liu, K., Li, Y., Zhang, G., Liu, J., Cao, J., Ao, L. and Zhang, S. (2014) Association between Mobile Phone Use and Semen Quality: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis. Andrology, 2, 491-501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2047-2927.2014.00205.x
[7]	Hanci, H., Odaci, E., Kaya, H., Aliyazicioglu, Y., Turan, I., Demir, S., et al. (2013) The Effect of Prenatal Exposure to 900-MHz Electromagnetic Field on the 21-Old-Day Rat Testicle. Reproductive Toxicology, 42, 203-209.
[8]	Lee, S.K., Park, S., Gimm, Y.M. and Kim, Y.W. (2014) Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Fields Induce Spermatogenic Germ Cell Apoptosis: Possible Mechanism. BioMed Research International, 2014, Article ID: 567183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/567183
[9]	Rezk, A.Y., Abdulqawi, K., Mustafa, R.M., Abo El-Azm, T.M. and Al-Inany, H. (2008) Fetal and Neonatal Responses Following Maternal Exposure to Mobile Phones. Saudi Medical Journal, 29, 218-223.
[10]	de Vocht, F. and Lee, B. (2014) Residential Proximity to Electromagnetic Field Sources and Birth Weight: Minimizing Residual Confounding Using Multiple Imputation and Propensity Score Matching. Environment International, 69, 51-57.
[11]	Mortazavi, S., Parsanezhad, M., Kazempour, M., Ghahramani, P., Mortazavi, A. and Davari, M. (2013) Male Reproductive Health under Threat: Short Term Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiations Emitted by Common Mobile Jammers. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 6, 124-128. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.117178
[12]	Kelley-Quon, L.I., Tseng, C.H., Janzen, C. and Shew, S.B. (2013) Congenital Malformations Associated with Assisted Reproductive Technology: A California Statewide Analysis. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 48, 1218-1224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.03.017