Some biological effects of electromagnetic fields (original) (raw)

1986, Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics

It has been known for some time that specific asymmetric electromagnetic fields can induce union in non-healing bones. Despite the clinical effectiveness of low frequency electromagnetic (e.m,) signals, virtually nothing is known concerning basic mechanisms in cells involved in bone healing, or other cells in soft tissue, which can also be affected by e .m. signals. It has thus become increasingly important to understand the molecular basis of a.m. field stimulation in order to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and the results of inadvertent environmental exposure. We have developed a test system to examine a fundamental cellular function, that of transcription, in Sciara polytene chromosomes. Since RNA synthesis is a basic cellular event, alterations arising from exogenous stimulation of cells by e .m. fields should be reflected in transcriptional patterns. Our results show this to be the case. e.m_ signals in the 72 Hz frequency range, both quasi-rectangular and sinusoidal, induce new RNA transcription in the 6-10S size class and augment a RNA size class in the 20-25S range. e .m. signals in the 1 .5 to 15 Hz frequency range result in either a similar response as that seen in 72 Hz signals, or one which is indistinguishable from non-stimulated control cells. Since translational effects would be expected to be reflected as a result of alterations in transcription, we examined protein biosynthesis following a.m. field stimulation. Changes in the form of augmentation, deletion, and appearance of new polypeptides are observed. Finally, we found that e .m. signals, even at some distance from the non-stimulated control samples, emit an undefined signal that is detected by the non-stimulated control cells. For this reason, we have shielded non-stimulated cells. Our ultimate goal is to correlate a specific parameter of the e.m. signal waveform with cellular induction of particular classes of RNA and/or molecular weight ranges of protein. To date, the data suggest that the 72 Hz range is an important frequency component and that waveshape may not be as crucial to clinical usefulness as previously supposed .