Skip to main content
PMC home page
Occupational and Environmental Medicine logoLink to Occupational and Environmental Medicine
. 2002 Feb;59(2):92–97. doi: 10.1136/oem.59.2.92

Risk of birth defects by parental occupational exposure to 50 Hz electromagnetic fields: a population based study

K Blaasaas 1, T Tynes 1, A Irgens 1, R Lie 1
PMCID: PMC1740256  PMID: 11850551

Abstract

Objectives: To study the risk of birth defects by parental occupational exposure to 50 Hz electromagnetic fields.

Methods: The Medical Birth Registry of Norway was linked with census data on parental occupation. An expert panel constructed a job exposure matrix of parental occupational exposure to 50 Hz magnetic fields. Exposure to magnetic fields was estimated by combining branch and occupation into one of three exposure levels: <4 hours, 4–24 hours, and >24 hours/week above approximately 0.1 µT. Risks of 24 categories of birth defects were compared across exposure levels. Out of all 1.6 million births in Norway in the period 1967–95, 836 475 and 1 290 298 births had information on maternal and paternal exposure, respectively. Analyses were based on tests for trend and were adjusted for parents' educational level, place of birth, maternal age, and year of birth.

Results: The total risk of birth defects was not associated with parental exposure. Maternal exposure was associated with increased risks of spina bifida (p=0.04) and clubfoot (p=0.04). A negative association was found for isolated cleft palate (p=0.01). Paternal exposure was associated with increased risks of anencephaly (p=0.01) and a category of "other defects" (p=0.02).

Conclusion: The present study gives an indication of an association between selected disorders of the central nervous system and parental exposure to 50 Hz magnetic fields. Given the crude exposure assessment, lack of comparable studies, and the high number of outcomes considered, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (123.2 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Akamine T., Muramatsu H., Hamada H., Sakou T. Effects of pulsed electromagnetic field on growth and differentiation of embryonal carcinoma cells. J Cell Physiol. 1985 Aug;124(2):247–254. doi: 10.1002/jcp.1041240212. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Brent R. L. Reproductive and teratologic effects of low-frequency electromagnetic fields: a review of in vivo and in vitro studies using animal models. Teratology. 1999 Apr;59(4):261–286. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9926(199904)59:4<261::AID-TERA12>3.0.CO;2-K. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Delgado J. M., Leal J., Monteagudo J. L., Gracia M. G. Embryological changes induced by weak, extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields. J Anat. 1982 May;134(Pt 3):533–551. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dlugosz L., Vena J., Byers T., Sever L., Bracken M., Marshall E. Congenital defects and electric bed heating in New York State: a register-based case-control study. Am J Epidemiol. 1992 May 1;135(9):1000–1011. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116394. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Floderus B. Is job title an adequate surrogate to measure magnetic field exposure? Epidemiology. 1996 Mar;7(2):115–116. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199603000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Floderus B, Persson T, Stenlund C. Magnetic-field Exposures in the Workplace: Reference Distribution and Exposures in Occupational Groups. Int J Occup Environ Health. 1996 Jul;2(3):226–238. doi: 10.1179/oeh.1996.2.3.226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Joshi M. V., Khan M. Z., Damle P. S. Effect of magnetic field on chick morphogenesis. Differentiation. 1978 Jan 13;10(1):39–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1432-0436.1978.tb00943.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Juutilainen J., Hatfield T., Lärä E. Evaluating alternative exposure indices in epidemiologic studies on extremely low-frequency magnetic fields. Bioelectromagnetics. 1996;17(2):138–143. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-186X(1996)17:2<138::AID-BEM8>3.0.CO;2-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Kromhout H., Loomis D. P., Mihlan G. J., Peipins L. A., Kleckner R. C., Iriye R., Savitz D. A. Assessment and grouping of occupational magnetic field exposure in five electric utility companies. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1995 Feb;21(1):43–50. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lie R. T., Heuch I., Irgens L. M. Maximum likelihood estimation of the proportion of congenital malformations using double registration systems. Biometrics. 1994 Jun;50(2):433–444. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Lie R. T., Wilcox A. J., Skjaerven R. A population-based study of the risk of recurrence of birth defects. N Engl J Med. 1994 Jul 7;331(1):1–4. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199407073310101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lundsberg L. S., Bracken M. B., Belanger K. Occupationally related magnetic field exposure and male subfertility. Fertil Steril. 1995 Feb;63(2):384–391. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)57373-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Pauken C. M., LaBorde J. B., Bolon B. Retinoic acid acts during peri-implantational development to alter axial and brain formation. Anat Embryol (Berl) 1999 Dec;200(6):645–655. doi: 10.1007/s004290050311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Polednak A. P., Janerich D. T. Uses of available record systems in epidemiologic studies of reproductive toxicology. Am J Ind Med. 1983;4(1-2):329–348. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Robert E. Intrauterine effects of electromagnetic fields--(low frequency, mid-frequency RF, and microwave): review of epidemiologic studies. Teratology. 1999 Apr;59(4):292–298. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9926(199904)59:4<292::AID-TERA14>3.0.CO;2-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Skjaerven R., Wilcox A. J., Lie R. T. A population-based study of survival and childbearing among female subjects with birth defects and the risk of recurrence in their children. N Engl J Med. 1999 Apr 8;340(14):1057–1062. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199904083401401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Tynes T., Haldorsen T. Electromagnetic fields and cancer in children residing near Norwegian high-voltage power lines. Am J Epidemiol. 1997 Feb 1;145(3):219–226. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009094. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Törnqvist S. Paternal work in the power industry: effects on children at delivery. J Occup Environ Med. 1998 Feb;40(2):111–117. doi: 10.1097/00043764-199802000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Ubeda A., Leal J., Trillo M. A., Jimenez M. A., Delgado J. M. Pulse shape of magnetic fields influences chick embryogenesis. J Anat. 1983 Oct;137(Pt 3):513–536. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Vistnes A. I., Ramberg G. B., Bjørnevik L. R., Tynes T., Haldorsen T. Exposure of children to residential magnetic fields in Norway: is proximity to power lines an adequate predictor of exposure? Bioelectromagnetics. 1997;18(1):47–57. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Zusman I., Yaffe P., Pinus H., Ornoy A. Effects of pulsing electromagnetic fields on the prenatal and postnatal development in mice and rats: in vivo and in vitro studies. Teratology. 1990 Aug;42(2):157–170. doi: 10.1002/tera.1420420207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Occupational and Environmental Medicine are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES