A survey was done for electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency fields by Stuart Bagley, MS, CIH of EMF Testing USA with the assistance of personnel from Buckingham Coal Company.  Results indicate a number of the field measurements taken at The Buckingham Coal Mine exceeded Medtronic CRDM Guidelines for cardiac devices as shown in the tables below.

Chicago, IL

An electromagnetic field (EMF) and radiofrequency field (RF) survey was requested for a home located in Chicago, IL.  The area is in close proximity to high voltage overhead power lines.  The survey and report were done by Stuart Bagley, MS, CIH, CSP of EMF Testing USA .  The results indicated that there were only a few instances of exceeding of other states’ guidelines (The State of Illinois does not have guidelines.  See state guidelines below).

 State Transmission Power Line Guidelines
The following state transmission power line standards for EMF exposure are in effect.  There is no power line standard for the State of Illinois

 EMF Monitoring Results
Readings taken usually represent the peak reading at the location tested.  Using this table, the lowest acceptable exposure to low frequency power sources magnetic field is 150 mG measured at the edge of the Right of Way and 1 kV/m or 1000 volts per meter for the electric field.  This is the lowest published guideline for power line exposure in the table below. 
The United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) references a study indicating health issues at 3 to 4 MilliGauss (WHO | Electromagnetic fields and public health, Electromagnetic fields and public health, Exposure to extremely low frequency fields, Fact sheet N°322 June, 2007).  In 2002, IARC published a monograph classifying ELF magnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans”. This classification is used to denote an agent for which there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity in experimental animals (other examples include coffee and welding fumes). This classification was based on pooled analyses of epidemiological studies demonstrating a consistent pattern of a two-fold increase in childhood leukemia associated with average exposure to residential power-frequency magnetic field above 0.3 to 0.4 µT. (which equals 3 to 4 MilliGauss (mG)). 
Uncertainties in the hazard assessment include the role that control selection bias and exposure misclassification might have on the observed relationship between magnetic fields and childhood leukemia. In addition, virtually all of the laboratory evidence and the mechanistic evidence fail to support a relationship between low-level ELF magnetic fields and changes in biological function or disease status. Thus, on balance, the evidence is not strong enough to be considered causal, but sufficiently strong to remain a concern.”

Boise White Paper, LLC., International Falls, MN

International Falls, Minnesota is the coldest city in the mainland USA.  But that is just the temperatures.  It’s a bit warmer inside at Boise White Paper, LLC in Int’l Falls, MN. They requested a survey be done for electromagnetic field (EMI) and radiofrequency field (RFI) with regard to potential for interference with the proper functioning of a Boston Scientific cardiac defibrillator or pacemaker.  The survey and report were done by Stuart Bagley, MS, CIH, CSP of EMF Testing USA.          

 Boston Scientific CRDM, the cardiac device manufacturer, states that electromagnetic field exposures should not exceed limits as shown in the table below.  These limits were used to establish a benchmark for exposures acceptable to Boston Scientific CRDM. 

Chrome Plating Company employee at plating tanks

A Chrome Plating Company requested a survey be done for electromagnetic field (EMI) and radio frequency field (RFI) with regard to potential for interference with the proper functioning of a Medtronic implantable cardiac defibrillator or pacemaker.   

Summary  A survey was done for electromagnetic fields and radio frequency fields by Stuart Bagley, MS CIH CSP, of EMF Testing USA with the assistance of personnel from the Chrome Plating Company.  Results indicate a number of the field measurements exceeded Medtronic CRDM Guidelines for cardiac devices.  These areas require precautions for employees with cardiac implants.   

There were 6 types of machinery where Medtronic CRDM Guidelines were exceeded or likely to be exceeded at the Chrome Plating Company.  Note that the highest readings are taken at or near the electromagnetic field source and that readings drop off with distance from the component.  The readings taken represent current day exposures.  The exposure levels may be subject to change depending on the type and operating condition of the equipment.    

The following are three principal types of interference with implanted cardiac devices:    

1. Conducted interference occurs when the affected employee is in direct contact with the electrical source.  The most risk and actual accounts have occurred from poorly maintained electrical equipment.  Conducted currents should be avoided.  Physical interaction or manipulations with live circuits or switches is not recommended for anyone with a cardiac implanted device.
2.  Radiated fields are those signals which propagate through the air and may potentially induce current that can be detected by the implanted device.  Common sources of these fields include high-voltage power lines, radio transmission towers, or two-way wireless communication equipment.
3. Static magnetic fields are those produced by a permanent or direct current (DC) electro-magnet.   None were encountered on this visit.

 Normally equipment is operated with protective covers and shielding in place.  Energized equipment will tend to produce higher readings (both EMI and RF) when protective covers and other shielding are removed.  For purposes of estimating potential employee exposure to EMI, similar types of equipment not tested should be assumed to produce approximately similar results to those tested.  EMI of sufficient strength may lead to the following temporary device behaviors:

Recommendations   

Recommendations are made in an effort to comply with Medtronic CRDM Guidelines.  They are designed to prevent the subject employee with an implanted cardiac device from coming in contact with strong electromagnetic or radio frequency fields.  The final course of action with regard to the employee in the workplace is at the discretion of the employer, physician and employee.    

 Recommendations are as follows:   

1.  Because of the nature of electrical work, physical interaction or manipulations with live circuits or switches that have the potential for any electrical shock or inducing electrical current passing through the human body must be handled with adequate precautions.
2. Maintain a safe distance from EMF sources exceeding guidelines. 
3. The affected employee must take reasonable precautions or be restricted from entering the areas exceeding guidelines shown in the facility, based on EMI survey results. 
4. At a distance exceeding the safety distances listed in the table, the employee is considered to be at a safe distance from the above sources. Caution signs “Danger to Cardiac Pacemaker” can be placed on those machinery or components that exceed Medtronic CRDM guidelines in order to provide a warning to the affected employee.
5. Discuss this report with the affected persons including the employee and his physician.  Train the employee on the effects of exposure of his implanted cardiac device to strong electromagnetic and radiofrequency fields.  Training should include how to minimize EMF exposures during the course of their work such as maintaining adequate distance from the source as well as de-energizing and locking out of equipment.

If these measures are not adequate to modify their job duties so that they may avoid overexposure or it may be necessary to permanently reassign the employee to a position or job task where they will not have exposure to strong electromagnetic fields.   

Stuart Bagley, MS CIH CSP is a senior consultant at EMF Testing USA, a consulting firm in the testing of electromagnetic fields.   Mr. Bagley has extensive knowledge of heart device standards and potential problems resulting from excessive EMF.  He conducts electromagnetic field investigations at client sites throughout the United States.

In the case of cellular and PCS cell site transmitters, the FCC’s RF exposure guidelines recommend a maximum permissible exposure level to the general public of approximately 580 microwatts per square centimeter (1000 uW /cm2 for PCS). This limit is many times greater than RF levels typically found near the base of cellular or PCS cell site towers or in the vicinity of other, lower-powered cell site transmitters, according to the FCC.

Conclusion
Precautions are necessary when in the direct path of the broadcast signal and within five feet from it. We only saw one instance where the Guidelines were exceeded. Most areas as measured do not present a hazard to workers or building occupants or exceed FCC guidelines.

Inappropriate shocks occur because of supraventricular arrhythmias with rapid ventricular rates, T wave oversensing, lead malfunction, or electromagnetic interference. Inappropriate shocks occur in 12-36% of patients, with children having a higher likelihood (up to 47% in some series). Although rare, it has been associated with death, according to the report.

Read more from AccessMedicine.

According to Medtronic CRDM: Conducted interference occurs when the patient is in direct contact with the electrical source. The most risk and actual accounts have occurred from poorly maintained electrical equipment. Conducted currents should be avoided.”

Workers in industrial plants who have a heart device should avoid throwing large disconnect lines or “knife switches” and where there is a risk of an arc flash as defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Household and other 110 V switches are not likely to cause conducted interference with pacemakers or defibrillators.

Contact your heart device manufacturer for further information:
Medtronic CRM
Boston Scientific CRM
St. Jude Medical

Insulin Pump on a Patient, EMF expsure is minimal

Are Insulin Pumps a Concern for EMF Exposure?
This question was recently posed by a concerned diabetic patient with an insulin pump.

The amount of EMF from an insulin pump is tiny because the motor is tiny, and because the pump is worn on the outside, in a small self-contained housing. The glucose sensor puts out a very low power radio frequency signal. Today’s insulin pump is the size of a calculator, usually worn near the waste on a belt. Therefore the tiny motor is well-shielded by the pump housing itself. The amount of measurable EMF on the outside of the device is very tiny and fleeting (very fast). The pump only operates for short periods of time, only when insulin is called for by the glucose sensor. The value of this device is great to the diabetic patient as it closely regulates the insulin dose in the bloodstream, while the risk from EMF exposure is virtually non-existent.

Ask the Expert: More questions on EMF?

Stuart D Bagley, MS CIH CSP
Consulting Expert

Early Registration ends October 20, 2010. Register online below:

AIHA REGISTRATION click here
$295 (AIHA Member Number required)
Add $100 to Member Site Registration after Oct. 20

Non-member: $325
Add $100 to Member Site Registration after Oct. 20

Just when you thought it was safe to go back to basics in IH, the buzz picks up again: “Caution Required: The Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on Pacemakers and Defibrillators”, “Scientists declare that cell phones cause cancer,” “Hybrids are unsafe at any speed,” “Radiation levels from UV lamps cause burns to patients.” These presentations will question the science behind these and other alarming claims. One speaker will discuss magnetic field hazards in hybrid vehicles. Another will tackle some of the stranger claims for electromagnetic field (EMF) protective devices and equipment found on the Internet. A third will discuss potentially harmful exposures of individuals with medical implants such as pacemakers and defibrillators to various forms of non-ionizing radiation and how to minimize harmful effects. On the other end of the EMF spectrum, the use of UV germicidal radiation looms as an issue in hospitals and other health-care facilities. The last presentation will cover uses of UV radiation, concerns to be addressed by industrial hygienists, and measures needed to protect workers.

Important Certification Information
This TeleWeb will be ABIH approved for 0.42 IH certification maintenance (CM) points, has been awarded 0.25 continuance of certification (COCs) points and provides 0.25 continuing education units (CEUs).

The Distance Learning Program works with our accrediting bodies to insure compliance with all policies and (ANSI) standards. Please note the following information pertaining to participation verification and the continuing education. AIHA requires a final exam be completed for all Distance Learning Courses.

A $35 processing fee is required for exam processing, participation verification, record retention and educational transcripts.

All educational transcripts (certificates of completion) will be available for download from AIHA’s website 3-4 weeks after the TeleWeb. All transcripts will issue CM, CEU and COC points.

Presenter Bios
Stuart D. Bagley, MS, CIH, CSP
EMF Testing USA
Stuart D. Bagley is a Board Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) and a Certified Safety Professional (CSP) for IAQ Services Inc. He has over 28 years of experience in industrial hygiene, toxicology and safety. He is a senior consultant in Industrial Hygiene and is the president of EMF Testing Services. Mr. Bagley’s field experience includes serving as a Compliance Officer for US OSHA and working in corporate safety management for General Electric, General Dynamics and Tenneco Packaging. He has extensive experience with the commercial, government and industrial sectors. He has surveyed numerous locations for electromagnetic fields from ELF up to microwave frequencies.

Allene Butler, CIH, CSP, CHMM

Allene Butler (nicknamed ‘Scotty”) has a CIH, CSP and CHMM earned over the course of a 35+ year career in occupational health and safety. She worked in Cal/OSHA as a IH compliance officer, in aerospace, and is currently a consultant. Her interest in non-ionizing radiation was recently ‘sparked’ by her hobby of amateur radio.

Dave Baron, PE

Dave Baron is an electrical engineer with 25 years, more or less, experience in electromagnetic field safety. He is a registered electrical engineer in Minnesota and Texas, providing consulting services in the areas of electromagnetic field measurement and analysis, and providing specialized technical support and training services to the industrial hygiene community. Technical activities include the AIHA Non-Ionizing Radiation Committee, the IEEE International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety, and the IEC TC106 Committee on Methods for the assessment of electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields associated with human exposure.

Nancy Key

Nancy Key has a Masters of Science in Safety Management and works as an Industrial Hygiene Specialist at West Virginia University in Morgantown, WV. In addition to issues in non-Ionizing radiation, her work involves indoor air quality, respiratory protection, and hearing conservation. She is a member of the AIHA Non-Ionizing Radiation Committee and President of the West Virginia Chapter of the American Society of Safety Engineers