Article Text

This article has a correction. Please see:

Download PDFPDF
Risk of selected birth defects by maternal residence close to power lines during pregnancy
  1. K G Blaasaas1,
  2. T Tynes2,
  3. R T Lie3
  1. 1National Institute of Occupational Health, Oslo, Norway
  2. 2Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority, Østerås, Norway
  3. 3Section for Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Norway
  1. Correspondence to:
 K G Blaasaas
 Norwegian Armed Forces, Joint Medical Services, Bygning 0028A, N-2058 Sessvollmoen, Norway; kblaasaasmil.no

Abstract

Aims: To evaluate selected birth outcomes from a published Norwegian cohort study in a nested case-control design with improved exposure data.

Methods: Two controls matched for sex, year of birth, and municipality were selected randomly for children with the following defects: central nervous system (CNS) defects, cardiac defects, respiratory system defects, oesophageal defects, and clubfoot. The distances between maternal addresses, during pregnancy, and power lines were obtained from maps mainly of scale 1:5000. The magnetic fields in the residences were estimated based on distance, current, voltage, and configuration.

Results: The highest increased risks were seen for hydrocephalus (OR 1.73, 95% CI 0.26 to 11.64) and for cardiac defects (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.68).

Conclusion: This study does not support the hypothesis that residential exposure to electromagnetic fields from power lines causes any of the investigated outcomes.

  • birth defects
  • electromagnetic fields
  • power lines
  • GIS, geographical information systems
  • CNS, central nervous system

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • The Research Council of Norway supported this work

Linked Articles

  • Correction
    BMJ Publishing Group Ltd