Remote Effects of Electromagnetic Millimeter Waves on Experimentally Induced Cold Pain: A Double-Blinded Crossover Investigation in Healthy Volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The hypoalgesic effect of electromagnetic millimeter waves (MW) is well studied in animal model; however, the results of human research are controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of various frequency ranges of MW on hypoalgesia using the cold pressor test (CPT). METHODS: Experimental pain was induced using standardized CPT protocols in 20 healthy male volunteers. The skin of the lower part of sternum was exposed to MW with a frequency of 42.25 GHz (active generator); MW within 50-75 GHz frequency range (noise generator); or an inactive MW device (placebo generator) in a random crossover double-blinded manner. Pain threshold, measured using the CPT, was the primary outcome. Other CPT parameters, heart rate, blood pressure, incidence of subjective sensations (paresthesia) during exposure, as well as quality of volunteers' blinding were also recorded. The end points of the condition with exposure to 42.25 GHz, were compared with baseline; exposure to noise 50-75 GHz; and placebo generators. RESULTS: Pain threshold increased during exposure to the 42.25 GHz generator when compared with baseline: median difference (MD), 1.97 seconds (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-3.73) and noise generator: MD, 1.27 seconds (95% CI, 0.05-2.33) but not compared with the placebo generator. Time to onset of cold and increasing pain sensations as well as diastolic blood pressure increased under the exposure to the 42.25 GHz generator when compared with baseline and noise generator. Other outcome measures were comparable among the study conditions. CONCLUSIONS: We were able to partially confirm the previously suggested hypoalgesic effects of low-intensity electromagnetic MW. However, the effect was indistinguishable from the placebo condition in our investigation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".