Dh. Pfluger et Ce. Minder, EFFECTS OF EXPOSURE TO 16.7 HZ MAGNETIC-FIELDS ON URINARY 6-HYDROXYMELATONIN SULFATE EXCRETION OF SWISS RAILWAY WORKERS, Journal of pineal research, 21(2), 1996, pp. 91-100
The aim of our study was to examine the effects of 16.7 Hz electromagn
etic-field exposure on pineal melatonin production in healthy humans.
The study was based on comparing urinary 6-hydroxymelatonin sulfate (6
-OHMS) levels of 108 male railway workers between leisure periods and
days following the start of service on electrically powered engines (6
6 engineers) or working beneath transmission lines (42 railway employe
es such as train attendants and station managers; controls). A repeate
d measures design was used, i.e., each volunteer served as his own con
trol. The exposure averaged 20 mu Tesla in the most exposed workers an
d around 1 mu Tesla in the least exposed. Apart from magnetic exposure
the workers were subject to a shift work schedule with daily advances
between 15 min and 1 hr. Melatonin was assessed by sampling urinary 6
-OHMS both in the morning and the early evening. Evening 6-OHMS values
appeared to be lowered by a factor of 0.81 (95%Cl: 0.73-0.90) during
work days compared to leisure days among engine drivers, but not in th
e controls. The lowering was not confined to certain types of shift wo
rk such as early, normal, or late shifts. During subsequent leisure pe
riods evening values recovered significantly, mean ratio=1.27 (95%Cl:
1.03-1.56), i.e., the effects appeared to be reversible. In contrast,
morning 6-OHMS samples of engineers and controls did not differ much b
etween work and leisure days. There was, however, a tendency for a reb
ound of morning values in a leisure period following a work period bot
h for engineers and controls. The observed pattern appears to be in li
ne with predictions of the ''phase response curve.'' No evidence for a
dose-response relation was found. The results support the hypothesis
that 16.7 Hz magnetic fields alter 6-OHMS excretion in humans exposed
to magnetic fields. An alternative explanation that cannot be excluded
in this study is that the difference between engineers and controls i
s due to differential exposure to day light at work.