Neurophysiological effects of flickering light in patients with perceived electrical hypersensitivity

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 15-22

  Sandström, Monica ^a,b   Lyskov, Eugene ^c   Berglund, André ^b   Medvedev, Sviatoslav ^c   Hansson Mild, Kjell ^b  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR WORKING LIFE   (Sweden)

^c Brain Ctr and Inst for Human Brain   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; ELECTRORETINOGRAPHY; EVOKED CORTICAL RESPONSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PHOTOALLERGY; PHOTOSTIMULATION; REVIEW; SKIN IRRITATION; SWEDEN; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADULT; COMPUTER TERMINALS; DERMATITIS; ELECTRICITY; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS; ELECTRORETINOGRAPHY; ENVIRONMENTAL ILLNESS; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIGHT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NERVOUS SYSTEM DISEASES;

EID: 0031017904     PISSN: 10762752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00043764-199701000-00006     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Rea WJ, Pan Y, Fenyves EJ, Sujisawa I, Samadi GHM, Ross GH. Electromagnetic field sensitivity. J Bioelectricity. 1991;10:241-256.
2. Bergdahl J, Anneroth G, Stenman E. A description of persons with presumed electricity or video display unit (VDU) induced symptoms - oral aspects in focus. Stand J Dent Res. 1993;101:41-45.
3. Arnetz B, Berg M, Andersen I, Anderzén I, Lundeberg T, Haker E. A nonconventional approach to the treatment of environmental illness. J Occup Environ Med. 1995;377:838-844.
4. SWEDAC. User's Handbook for Evaluating Visual Display Units. Borås, Sweden: MPRII Publications by Swedac; 1990;10.
5. TCO. TCO '95 Certification. Requirements for Environmental Labelling of Personal Computers, Report No. 1, 3rd ed. Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees; 1996.
6. Sandström M, Hansson Mild, K, Stenberg B, Wall S. A survey of electric and magnetic fields among VDT operators in offices. IEEE Trans EMC. 1993;35:394-397.
7. Sandström M, Hansson Mild K, Stenberg B, Wall S. Skin symptoms among VDT workers related to electromagnetic fields - a case referent study. Indoor Air. 1995;5:29-37.
8. Stenberg B, Eriksson N, Hansson Mild K, et al. Facial skin symptoms in visual display terminal (VDT) workers. A case-referent study of personal, psychosocial, building- and VDT-related risk indicators. Int J Epidemiol. 1995;24:796-803.
9. Sjöberg, P, Hamnerius, Y. Study of provoked hypersensitivity reactions from a VDT. In: Grieco A, Molteni G, Occhipinti E, Piccoli B, eds. Book of Short Abstracts, Work With Display Unit. Milan: Elsevier North-Holland; 1994:D 17.
10. Wennberg A, Franzén O, Paulsson L-E. Reaction by exposing to electric and magnetic fields. Provocation of persons with and without "electric hypersensitivity." In: Arbete och Hälsa. Stockholm, Sweden: Arbetsmiljöinstitutet; 1994:9.
11. Andersson N, Sandström M, Berglund A, Hansson Mild K. Amplitude modulation of light from various sources. Light Res Technol. 1994;26:157-160.
12. Küller R, Wetterberg L. Melatonin, cortisol, EEG, ECG, subjective comfort in healthy humans: impact of two fluorescent lamp types at two light intensities. Light Res Technol. 1993;25:71-81.
13. Sternheim CE, Cavonius CR. Sensitivity of the human ERG and VECP to sinusoidally modulated light. Vision Res. 1972; 12:1685-1695.
14. Eysel UT, Burandt U. Fluorescent tube light evokes flicker responses in visual neurons. Vision Res. 1984;24:943-948.
15. Sokol S, Riggs L. Electrical and psycho-physical responses of the human visual system to periodic variation of luminance. Invest Ophthalmol. 1971;10:171-180.
16. Berman SM, Greenhouse DS, Bailey IL, Clear RD, Raasch TW. Human electro-retinogram responses to video displays, fluorescent lightning and other high frequency sources. Optometry Vis Sci. 1991; 58:645-662.
17. Brundrett GW. Human sensitivity to flicker. Light Res Technol. 1974;6:127-143.
18. AEEGS Guidelines on evoked potentials. Recommended standards for visual evoked potentials. J Clin Neurophysiol. 1994;11:40-73.
19. Celesia GG. Steady-state and transient visual evoked potentials in clinical practice. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1982;388:290-307.
20. Coupland SG, Janaky M. ERG electrode in pediatric patients: comparison of DTL fiber, PVA-gel and non-corneal skin electrodes. Documenta Ophthalmologica. 1989;71:427-433.
21. Harden A. Non-corneal electroretinogram. Parameters in normal children. Br J Ophthalmol. 1974;58:811-816.
22. Draper NR, Smith H. Applied Regression Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1981:127-143.
23. Lloyd E, Ledermann W. Handbook of application mathematics. Statistics, volume VI. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1984.
24. Brownlee KA. Statistical Theory and Methodology in Science and Engineering. Moscow: Science; 1977 (in Russian).
25. Van der Tweel LH, Verduyn Lunel HLV. Human visual responses to sinusoidally modulated light. Electroencephalography Clin Neurophysiol. 1965;18:587-598.
26. Cavonius CR, Sternheim CE. A comparison of electrophysiological and psychophysical temporal modulation transfer functions of human vision. In: Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. New York: Plenum Press; 1972:223-236.
27. Berg M, Arnetz B, Lidén S, Eneroth P, Kallner A. Techno-stress. A psychophysiological study of employees with VDU-associated skin complaints. J Occup Med. 1992;34:698-701.