COMPARISON OF BLOOD PRESSURE AND THERMAL RESPONSES IN RATS EXPOSED TO MILLIMETER WAVE ENERGY OR ENVIRONMENTAL HEAT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electromagnetic fields at millimeter wave lengths are being developed for commercial and military use at power levels that can cause temperature increases in the skin. Previous work suggests that sustained exposure to millimeter waves causes greater heating of skin, leading to faster induction of circulatory failure than exposure to environmental heat (EH). We tested this hypothesis in three separate experiments by comparing temperature changes in skin, subcutis, and colon, and the time to reach circulatory collapse (mean arterial blood pressure, 20 mmHg) in male Sprague-Dawley rats exposed to the following conditions that produced similar rates of body core heating within each experiment: (1) EH at 42 degrees C, 35 GHz at 75 mW/cm, or 94 GHz at 75 mW/cm under ketamine and xylazine anesthesia; (2) EH at 43 degrees C, 35 GHz at 90 mW/cm, or 94 GHz at 90 mW/cm under ketamine and xylazine anesthesia; and (3) EH at 42 degrees C, 35 GHz at 90 mW/cm, or 94 GHz at 75 mW/cm under isoflurane anesthesia. In all three experiments, the rate and amount of temperature increase at the subcutis and skin surface differed significantly in the rank order of 94 GHz more than 35 GHz more than EH. The time to reach circulatory collapse was significantly less only for rats exposed to 94 GHz at 90 mW/cm, the group with the greatest rate of skin and subcutis heating of all groups in this study, compared with both the 35 GHz at 90 mW/cm and the EH at 43 degrees C groups. These data indicate that body core heating is the major determinant of induction of hemodynamic collapse, and the influence of heating of the skin and subcutis becomes significant only when a certain threshold rate of heating of these tissues is exceeded.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".