arXiv blog

How Magnetic Fields May Affect Biological Tissue

Magnetic fields may set up damaging currents within blood vessels, physicists argue.

kfc 04/09/2009

  • 9 Comments

How do magnetic fields affect biological tissue? An entire field of science called bioelectromagnetics has grown up to study this problem and yet nobody is quite sure how to answer this question.

It's possible that several mechanisms may be at work and today Zakirjon Kanokov from the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Dubna, Russia, and a few pals suggest a new one. They start by considering the way in which heat jiggles charge carriers in any system above absolute zero. This gives rise to tiny, unpredictable and rapidly varying changes in any current, a phenomenon known as Johnson noise.

Kanokov and co consider the case when the charge carriers are ions in a fluid flowing through a tube. The ions are free to move but obviously confined within a specific volume. The team then poses the question: what happens when you apply a static magnetic field?

The answer, they say, is a resonance effect in which the ionic currents grow stronger. The strength of the resonance depends on the size of the capillary and the strength of the field.

Kanakov and co have worked out how this effect might play out in the human body; after all the body is filled with calcium ions in a fluid flowing through narrow tubes.

They say that this kind of resonance can occur in the aorta at magnetic field strengths of a few picoteslas (10^-12 T) and in narrower capillaries at a few hundred microteslas. The Earth's field is a few tens of microteslas.

That's an interesting calculation that will need some careful testing.

The team go further and speculate that these ionic currents may disrupt blood flow and cause tissue damage. That's a big jump that is not backed up by their calculations but an interesting conjecture nonetheless. But finding this effect against a background of all the other ways in which tissue becomes damage is going to be a devil of a task.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0904.1198: On the Influence of Weak Magnetic and Electric Fields on the Fluctuations of Ionic Electric Currents in Blood Circulation

TRSF: Read the Best New Science Fiction inspired by today’s emerging technologies.

Print

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

lasertekk

146 Comments

  • 1042 Days Ago
  • 04/09/2009

Jury is still out

I've been pondering this for almost 20 years.  I work in very close proximity to half a dozen very strong magnetic fields in the complex.  While the study looked at the effects of static B fields on tissue, my situation is just a little different.  While the fields are static,  I'm not.  My exposure location and proximity is quite random and varies greatly, due to my daily 'route'.  I'm happy to report no genetic side effects in my  children.

Reply

DougSmith

1 Comment

  • 1041 Days Ago
  • 04/10/2009

Re: Jury is still out

No kids, so I can't comment on what effect (if any) it has had on my genes, but a few years back, after my leg was badly broken in a car accident (but wouldn't heal using usual treatments) my doctor used a device that surrounded the fracture site with a magnetic field similar to the one generated by the human body as it heals. Two months of daily 10 hour long sessions somehow convinced the cells in my bones that they were healing. The x-rays were amazing - they showed a solid fusion in a place where three previous bone grafts had failed to mend my fracture.

I doubt that any of the side effects (pain, numbness) I have suffered in that area since then were caused by the exposure to the magnetic field. It is much more likely that they are caused by the original trauma and the 16 operations that were required to rebuild my leg.

Reply

mkogrady

425 Comments

  • 1042 Days Ago
  • 04/09/2009

Can the Bioelectrical Calculation Determine Cell Tower EMF Damage

Per the Cellular Industry "The telecommunications industry claims cellular antennas are safe because the radiation they produce is too weak to cause heating, a "thermal effect." They point to "safety standards" from groups such as ANSI/IEEE or ICNIRP to support their claims. But these groups have explicitly stated that their claims of "safe levels of exposure" are based on thermal levels.(3) Thus the claim that the RF exposure is harmless rests on the fact that it is too weak to produce a rise in temperature, a "thermal effect."


Now take a step back and ask the question regarding other damages to the living tissues. There may not be enough power to cause thermal damages like a microwave oven popping a bag of popcorn, but perhaps less noticable damages in the smaller arterial pathways in the body.

Reply

GaryB

119 Comments

  • 1042 Days Ago
  • 04/09/2009

Re: Can the Bioelectrical Calculation Determine Cell Tower EMF Damage

Doesn't really matter, as with most people, they'll have to pry my cellphone from my cold, dead, cancerous ear lobe.

Reply

alexme

2 Comments

  • 1041 Days Ago
  • 04/10/2009

Re: Can the Bioelectrical Calculation Determine Cell Tower EMF Damage

Talking about cell phones, I saw some leading world "experts" arguing pro and against research regarding microwave radiation from cell phones causing localised brain tumours (on Fox/CNN?).

One side saying plenty of evidence/other not, when asked if any of the 4 of them held their mobile to their ear? All said "Of course not I use a cord extension or speaker phone!"(It does depend on minutes used per day/ per use etc.)

Anyone seen the popping corn/cell phone videos? Are they real?...I don't of course hold my phone to my head either!...Cheers.

Reply

dunker59

1 Comment

  • 1041 Days Ago
  • 04/10/2009

Re: Can the Bioelectrical Calculation Determine Cell Tower EMF Damage

I have seen two different popcorn popping videos.  Checked them out on TruthOrFiction.com and both were deemed to be false.  Same on Snopes.

My question is: are Blue Tooth units safe next to one's ear/brain?  They also emit radio energy.  Is the level lower or higher than cell phones, and by how much?

Reply

steveDH

15 Comments

  • 1041 Days Ago
  • 04/10/2009

pT?

So these resonances are supposed to occur in the aorta in a field of pico-teslas?  As the article says, the earths magnetic field is on the order of micro-teslas, so how are we surviving with these resonances?  The resonance condition is 8 orders of magnitude smaller than the ambient field!  One would think that life has evolved to survive in the ambient magnetic field. 

Someone explain how this makes sense.  Regardless of what a calculation says.

Reply

Advertisement

Pjazzz

14 Comments

  • 1041 Days Ago
  • 04/10/2009

aren't we fogetting somehting?

Ca+2 ions are one thing, and that may lend to a small paramagnetic or superparamagnetic effect, but the bigger contributor to effects in human tissue come from the primary magnetizable component of human tissue.....the iron at the core of Hemoglobin. If you're looking for effects, that's the molecule to track. The magnetic fields generated simply through normal blood flow are at least an order of magnitude stronger than reported here.

Reply

mbloore

39 Comments

  • 1038 Days Ago
  • 04/13/2009

Re: aren't we fogetting somehting?

hemoglobin with oxygen is diamagnetic.  without, it is paramagnetic.  it is never ferromagnetic.
(http://users.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~peterj/lectures/hbm_2/sld015.htm)  think what an MRI scan would do to blood flow were things otherwise.

Reply

Bio

The Physics arXiv Blog produces daily coverage of the best new ideas from an online forum called the Physics arXiv on which scientists post early versions of their latest ideas. Contact me at KentuckyFC @ arxivblog.com

Follow The Physics arXiv Blog on Twitter

Subscribe to the arXiv blog RSS Feed

Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement