Human exposure to power frequency magnetic fields up to 7.6 mT: An integrated EEG/fMRI study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We assessed the effects of power-line frequency (60 Hz in North America) magnetic fields (MF) in humans using simultaneous electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Twenty-five participants were enrolled in a pseudo-double-blind experiment involving "real" or "sham" exposure to sinusoidal 60 Hz MF exposures delivered using the gradient coil of an MRI scanner following two conditions: (i) 10 s exposures at 3 mT (10 repetitions); (ii) 2 s exposures at 7.6 mT (100 repetitions). Occipital EEG spectral power was computed in the alpha range (8-12 Hz, reportedly the most sensitive to MF exposure in the literature) with/without exposure. Brain functional activation was studied using fMRI blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD, inversely correlated with EEG alpha power) maps. No significant effects were detected on occipital EEG alpha power during or post-exposure for any exposure condition. Consistent with EEG results, no effects were observed on fMRI BOLD maps in any brain region. Our results suggest that acute exposure (2-10 s) to 60 Hz MF from 3 to 7.6 mT (30,000 to 76,000 times higher than average public exposure levels for 60 Hz MF) does not induce detectable changes in EEG or BOLD signals. Combined with previous findings in which effects were observed on the BOLD signal after 1 h exposure to 3 mT, 60 Hz MF, this suggests that MF exposure in the low mT range (<10 mT) might require prolonged durations of exposure to induce detectable effects. Bioelectromagnetics. 38:425-435, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".