4.3 Article

Extremely low-frequency magnetic field exposure, electrical shocks and risk of Parkinson's disease

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00420-014-0949-2

Keywords

Parkinson's disease; Extremely low-frequency magnetic fields; Electrical shocks; Case-control study; Job-exposure matrix

Funding

  1. Stichting International Parkinson Fonds (The Netherlands)
  2. Netherlands Organization for Health Research (ZonMW) within the program Electromagnetic Fields and Health Research [85800001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Previous studies did not provide strong evidence for an increased Parkinson's disease (PD) risk after exposure to extremely low-frequency magnetic fields (ELF-MF), but were limited in their scope to address other exposures related to the use of electricity such as electrical shocks. We evaluated the associations of PD with exposure to ELF-MF, electrical shocks and having worked in electrical occupations. We conducted a hospital-based case-control study, including 444 PD patients and 876 age- and sex-matched controls. Occupational histories were collected in telephone interviews and were linked to job-exposure matrices on ELF-MF exposure and on electrical shocks. In addition, questions on use of household appliances involving ELF-MF exposure, experienced electrical shocks and potential confounders were asked. No association of PD risk with any of the evaluated exposures related to electricity was observed. We did, however, observe quite consistently reduced risk estimates across the majority of the exposure categories explored. Given the results of the previous studies and the absence of any postulated mechanism, this is unlikely to represent a true protective effect of ELF-MF or electrical shocks on the occurrence of PD. The results of this study suggest that no association exists between PD and exposure to ELF-MF, electrical shocks or having worked in electrical occupations..

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available