CC BY
4
M
http://dx.doi.org/10.35596/1729-7648-2022-20-l-55-64
Original paper
UDC 621.396.218:614.89.086.5
REFINED ANALYSIS OF THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE ACCEPTED MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE LEVELS OF RADIO FREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS FOR THE POPULATION AND THE LETHALITY RATE OF COVID-19
VLADIMIR I. MORDACHEV
Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics (Minsk, Republic of Belarus)
Submitted 13 September 2021
© Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics, 2022
Abstract. In this paper, the results of a refined analysis of the correlation, previously discovered by the author, between the accepted maximum permissible levels (MPL) of radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) for population and the mortality rate of COVID-19, carried out using the data samples from the World Health Organization (WHO), taken monthly from May 2020 to July 2021, are presented. To explain the results obtained, correlation between the accepted MPL for RF EMF, the level of vaccination of population against COVID-19, and the level of gross domestic product per capita in different countries were analyzed additionally. Analysis results confirm the presence of a noticeable correlation between the RF EMF MPLs and the COVID-19 mortality rate, especially in the first months of the analyzed period. The subsequent decrease in correlation between them by the end of analyzed period is a result of significantly larger efforts in struggle against COVID-19 in those countries where high RF EMF MPLs are adopted taking into account only the danger of thermal effects in human body, in comparison with countries where more stringent standards that take into account the danger of non-thermal bioeffects, are used. The first of these countries, having on average a higher level of economic development, ensured mass COVID-19 testing of population, imposition of tougher and longer restrictions (quarantines, lockdowns, etc.), as well as significantly higher rates of vaccination of the population. The presence of a confirmed correlation between these characteristics does not necessarily mean the existence of an unambiguous causal relationship between them. In countries of the first group with passive regulation of population protection from environmental factors, this principle is used not only in relation to RF EMF, but also in relation to the other factors. This determines the relevance of a deeper system analysis of the impact of the adopted legal systems for protecting the population from the entire set of anthropogenic factors on its health and collective immunity.
Keywords: COVID-19, lethality, habitat, electromagnetic pollution, regulations, correlation, mobile communications, 4G, 5G, 6G, electromagnetic ecology, electromagnetic safety, electromagnetic protection.
Conflict of interests. The author declares no conflict of interests.
For citation. Mordachev V.I. Refined Analysis of the Correlation Between the Accepted Maximum Permissible Levels of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields for the Population and the Lethality Rate of Covid-19. Doklady BGUIR. 2022; 20(1): 55-64.
Introduction
Differences in maximum permissible levels (MPL) of radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) accepted in different countries are determined by differences in approaches to ensuring the
electromagnetic safety of the population in these countries [1-3]. The first approach is based on the principle of passive regulation, which provides for the use of recommended RF EMF maximum permissible levels (MPL), exceeding which will cause harm to health. In countries where it is adopted, MPL values of RF EMF for the population are determined taking into account the danger of thermal bioeffects only and take on values 1000-4000 ^W/cm2, the burden of proof of possible harm from exposure to RF EMF has been transferred to the court. In a number of countries, this principle is implemented with particular socially-oriented additions aimed at limiting the RF EMF levels at socially significant objects, in places of residence, etc. An alternative second approach is based on the establishment of MPL values of RF EMF, that can guarantee the absence of harm to health, taking into account the long-term consequences of their impact on the human organism. In countries where it is adopted, the MPL values of RF EMF for the population are determined taking into account the danger of non-thermal bioeffects, and for continuous RF EMFs of the 0.3-300 GHz range they take on values 2.5-10 ^W/cm2; the state implements control and supervisory functions for their compliance.
Today, the main source of electromagnetic pollution of the habitat is electromagnetic radiation of base stations and a user's equipment of cellular (mobile) communication systems. At the same time, despite the very significant difference in the accepted restrictions on the RF EMF levels for the population, the differences in the degree of electromagnetic pollution of the habitat in countries with different approaches to ensuring the safety of the population were not so significant until recently [4-7, etc.] due to the prevalence of low-speed mobile telephony services, as well as the deterrent effect of the danger of massive lawsuits and huge costs of compensation for the damage caused. However, in conditions of extremely intensive development of wireless information systems and services and its penetration in all spheres of human life in the framework of the evolution 2G/3G^4G^5G^6G of mobile communications [8, 9], and in conditions of corporate pressure [10, 11], restrictions on RF EMF MPL for population adopted in different countries are associated undoubtedly with the potentially permissible levels of electromagnetic pollution of the environment in these countries.
In [12], the initial results of analysis of the correlation between the potential level of electromagnetic pollution of the environment and the danger of COVID-19 are presented, which confirmed the presence of a noticeable correlation between the RF EMF MPLs adopted in different countries and the relative mortality of the population from COVID-19 in these countries. The presence of a correlation does not mean the presence of an established causal relationship between analyzed characteristics, but an extremely high cost of the item determines the relevance of its further in-depth study.
The analysis performed in [12] was preliminary in nature, since the analyzed samples of data on relative lethality from COVID-19 were taken at intervals of only 7 days over 2 weeks and, therefore, were significantly correlated (Pearson's correlation coefficient 0.996-0.999 with a sample sizes of 31, their representativeness was ensured by approximately equal representation of countries using different approaches to ensuring the electromagnetic safety of the population). The analysis of correlated samples was justified by considerations of increasing the reliability of research results in conditions of varying degrees of reliability and regularity of data updating for different countries in WHO reports1.
A goal of the work is to perform a more detailed analysis of correlation between the accepted RF EMF MPs for the population in different countries and the lethality of COVID-19, for a more objective assessment of the possible relation between the potential danger of electromagnetic pollution of the environment and the danger of COVID-19 for the population.
Analysis results
A deeper analysis of correlation between considered characteristics was performed using samples of COVID-19 data in various countries taken at longer intervals and over a longer period. This paper presents the results of analysis of correlation between samples of RF EMF MPL values in various countries and fifteen WHO data samples from on COVID-19 infection and mortality taken at monthly intervals from May 2020 to July 2021. This analysis is supported by correlation analysis
1 WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. https://covidl9.who.int/table (on-line resource).
of associated factors (the level of vaccination against COVID-19, the level of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in various countries), which makes it possible to find an explanation of the nature of the time dependence of the analysis results.
The numbers of the data samples correspond to the following dates: No. 1: 05/18/2020; No. 2: 06/18/2020; No. 3: 07/19/2020; No. 4: 08/19/2020; No. 5: 09/18/2020; No. 6: 10/19/2020; No. 7: 11/18/2020; No. 8: 12/18/2020; No. 9: 01/19/2021; No. 10: 02/19/2021; No. 11: 03/19/2021; No. 12: 04/19/2021; No. 13: 05/18/2021; No. 14: 06/18/2021; No. 15: 07.20.2021.
MPL values for RF EMF adopted in various countries, correspond to the published data [1-3, 12, etc.] at the beginning of the analyzed period (May 2020). Changes in the hygienic standards of separate countries (Poland, Ukraine) during the analyzed period were not taken into account, since the processes of changing the electromagnetic environment and its influence on the collective immunity of population are quite inertial and are determined by rather slow processes of corresponding changes in the infrastructure of mobile radio networks, the legal system for protecting the population, etc.
Results of a refined analysis of the correlation between the potential level of electromagnetic pollution of the environment and the lethality of COVID-19 in relation to the number of detected infected and the population size are presented below in Tables 1, 2 (in a reduced volume with data samples at two-month intervals) and in full in graphical form on parts "a", "b" in Fig. 1. These parts of Fig. 1 show both the initial dependencies in the form of broken lines, which break points correspond to the obtained estimates of the Pearson's correlation coefficient, and the curves obtained by the root-mean-square smoothing of the estimated data.
To explain the results obtained, the following was additionally performed:
1. Analysis of the correlation between the adopted EMF RF MPL for the population and the level of vaccination of population against COVID-19 in the same countries according to the official WHO data. Samples of these data were also taken strictly at monthly intervals from the beginning of mass vaccination (12/20/2020) to 07/20/2021 (8 samples). The results of this analysis are presented in Table 3 and are illustrated by graphs in the original and smoothed form on the part "c" in Fig. 1.
2. Analysis of the correlation between the adopted RF EMF MPL for the population and the level of GDP per capita, calculated according to the various methods: GDP at purchasing power parity (PPP), estimated according to the methods of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB), and nominal GDP per capita (determining the level of the state economic development), estimated according to the methods of the IMF and the WB. Analysis results are shown in Table 4.
3. Analysis of the correlation between the relative level of vaccination against COVID-19 in various countries as of 07/20/2021 and the level of GDP per capita in these countries. Analysis results are presented in Table 5.
The presented results of the analysis indicate that countries using "thermal" hygienic standards for RF EMF MPL in combination with the principle of passive regulation in matters of population protection, on average, have a higher level of economic development compared to countries using significantly more stringent "non-thermal" EMF RF MPLs in combination with state control over their observance. This is confirmed by the presence of a noticeable correlation between the accepted value of the RF EMF MPL value and the level of GDP per capita in various countries. Depending on the methodology for GDP calculating, the coefficient of this correlation varies in the interval [0.418, 0.464]. It was the great economic opportunities of these countries that made it possible to provide:
- significantly more complete coverage of the population of these countries with testing for the presence of coronavirus infection, which significantly increased the number of detected infected and by the end of 2020 practically reduced to zero the correlation between the adopted MPL RF EMF for the population and the mortality rate determined in relation to the number of detected infected, and in the latter months of the analyzed period even provided a negative correlation between the analyzed characteristics (Table 1, part "b" in Fig. 1);
- the implementation of stricter and longer administrative restrictions (quarantines, lockdowns, entry/exit bans, etc.) in these countries aimed at limiting contacts between people in order to fighting the spread of infection, as well as, on average, significantly higher rates of vaccination of population , which is generally confirmed by the data in Tables 3, 4 and 5. Correlation between the relative level of vaccination against COVID-19 in different countries on the final day of the analyzed period (07/20/2021) and the level of GDP per capita in these countries exceeds 0.5 and, depending on the method of calculating this level, the correlation coefficient changes in the interval [0.540, 0.573].
Part "d" in Fig. 4 contains a graphical representation2 of the time dependence of the number of new infected according to WHO data, illustrating the nature and approximate periods of waves of the COVID-19 pandemic (first wave: October 2020 - January 2021, second wave: March - May 2021, third wave: from July 2021). For the convenience of joint analyzing dependences on parts "a", "b" and "c" in Fig. 1 and their mutual influence, part "e" in Fig. 1 shows, on a single time scale, the smoothed dependences of the Pearson's correlation coefficient on time for the lethality of COVID-19 in relation to the number of detected infected (curve 1) and in relation to the population size (curve 2), as well as the dependence of the Pearson's correlation coefficient in relation to the population vaccination rate (curve 3).
An analysis of the shape and mutual arrangement of these curves gives sufficient grounds to assume that the fact of a correlation between the degree of severity of the hygienic restrictions of the RF EMF MPL for population and the lethality rate of COVID-19 in various countries can be recognized as objectively proven based on the results of the refined analysis. At the same time, significantly larger efforts of economically developed countries to overcome the pandemic (stricter administrative restrictions, more massive testing of the population, higher rates of vaccination) contributed to a noticeable weakening of this correlation, already from the middle of the analyzed period.
Table 1. The results of the analysis of correlation between the severity of the hygienic restriction on the RF EMF MPL for population in different countries and the mortality rate from COVID-19 according to the official WHO data, determined in relation to the number of detected infected
MPL W/m2 The ratio of the total number of deaths from COVID-19 to the specified date, to the total
Country number of cases (infected) 2) in %
05/18/20 07/19/20 09/18/20 11/18/20 01/19/21 03/19/21 05/18/21 07/20/21
1. Azerbaijan 0.1 1.19 1.29 1.47 1.27 1.33 1.36 1.45 1.48
2. Belarus 0.1 0.56 0.751 1.03 0.91 0.70 0.695 0.718 0.766
3. Belgium 10 16.37 15.4 10.2 2.75 3.01 2.75 2.39 2.28
4. Bulgaria 1)1 0.01 4.92 3.46 4.01 2.26 4.03 4.00 4.18 4.30
5. Canada 4 7.48 8.06 6.58 3.65 2.54 2.45 1.88 1.86
6. Chile D 0.1 1.03 2.57 2.75 2.79 2.60 2.41 2.16 2.16
7. China 0.4 5.50 5.41 5.22 5.13 4.85 4.73 4.90 4.69
8. Denmark 10 5.01 4.64 2.97 1.19 0.95 1.07 0.936 0.828
9. France 10 20.04 18.3 7.84 2.30 2.45 2.22 1.85 1.92
10. Germany 10 4.54 4.51 3.50 1.57 2.32 2.83 2.40 2.44
11. Hungary 0.1 13.07 13.8 4.15 2.15 3.26 3.24 3.66 3.71
12. India 0.9 3.15 2.49 1.62 1.47 1.44 1.38 1.10 1.33
13. Ireland 10 6.40 6.81 5.59 2.90 1.50 2.00 1.94 1.76
14. Israel 0.9 1.63 0.822 0.678 0.842 0.73 0.735 0.761 0.756
15. Italy 0.1 14.15 14.3 12.2 3.75 3.45 3.14 2.99 2.98
16. Japan 10 4.59 4.00 1.91 1.58 1.36 1.93 1.69 1.78
17. Kazakhstan 0.1 0.53 0.533 1.45 1.45 1.37 1.26 1.19 1.52
18. Lithuania 0.1 3.63 4.18 2.48 0.81 1.48 1.66 1.55 1.57
19. Luxemburg 0.45 2.71 2.05 1.64 0.87 1.14 1.20 1.17 1.12
20. Netherlands 10 12.91 11.9 7.11 1.89 1.42 1.37 1.09 0.984
21. Poland 0.1 5.00 4.07 2.94 1.44 2.33 2.43 2.52 2.61
22. Portugal 10 4.19 3.48 2.84 1.54 1.62 2.05 2.02 1.85
23. Russia 0.1 0.94 1.60 1.75 1.73 1.84 2.12 2.35 2.50
24. Spain 10 11.95 10.9 4.86 2.30 2.40 2.27 2.20 1.95
25. Sweden 10 12.21 7.27 6.67 3.23 1.97 1.79 1.38 1.34
26. Switzerland 0.1 5.25 5.05 3.62 1.20 1.62 1.64 1.49 1.46
27. Turkey 0.56 2.77 2.50 2.45 2.78 1.53 1.01 0.877 0.914
28. UK 10 14.21 15.4 10.9 3.74 2.62 2.94 2.87 2.35
29. Ukraine 0.1 2.87 2.52 2.05 1.77 1.80 1.94 2.24 2.35
30. USA 10 6.09 3.88 2.98 2.21 1.67 1.82 1.78 1.79
31. Uzbekistan 0.025 0.43 0.511 0.834 0.848 0.79 0.767 0.692 0.667
Pearson's correlation coefficient: 0.551 0.485 0.431 0.189 -0.048 0.042 -0.071 -0.151
1) The lower limit of the range of normalized values.
2) The number of detected infected is given in accordance with the data of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health
Security (https://covid19.who.int/).
2 Daily new confirmed COVID-19 cases per million people: https://ourworldindata.org/ (on-line resource).
Table 2. The results of the analysis of correlation between the severity of the hygienic restriction on the RF EMF MPL for population in different countries and the mortality rate from COVID-19 according to the official WHO
data, determined in relation to the country's population
MPL W/m2 The ratio of the total number of deaths from COVID-19 to the specified date 2), to the total
Country country population 3), in %
05/18/20 07/19/20 09/18/20 11/18/20 01/19/21 03/19/21 05/18/21 07/20/21
1. Azerbaijan 0.1 3.85 34.4 56.3 99.1 298 327 473 493
2. Belarus 0.1 17.5 52.4 81.6 112 168 225 287 353
3. Belgium 10 781 846 857 1280 1766 1952 2133 2175
4. Bulgaria 11 0.01 15.8 43.0 107 347 1233 1701 2496 2616
5. Canada 4 151 234 244 292 477 598 661 702
6. Chile 1)1 0.1 23.5 442 635 779 918 1150 1461 1807
7. China 0.4 3.23 3.23 3.30 3.30 3.34 3.37 3.38 3.90
8. Denmark 10 94.4 105 110 133 312 414 432 439
9. France 10 430 460 474 704 1077 1397 1640 1693
10. Germany 10 94.7 108 112 157 568 887 1031 1091
11. Hungary 0.1 47.8 61.7 69.3 350 1193 1847 3031 3108
12. India 0.9 2.19 19.4 61.1 94.9 111 115 202 300
13. Ireland 10 312 355 362 404 530 925 1001 1016
14. Israel 0.9 31.3 45.6 134 316 466 701 738 745
15. Italy 0.1 528 580 590 768 1365 1718 2058 2115
16. Japan 10 5.92 7.79 11.7 15.1 36.0 69.2 91.6 119
17. Kazakhstan 0.1 1.81 20.0 106 126 157 187 263 435
18. Lithuania 0.1 20.6 29.4 32.0 110 916 1268 1516 1618
19. Luxemburg 0.45 171 177 198 377 890 1126 1291 1312
20. Netherlands 10 331 358 365 502 762 945 1019 1038
21. Poland 0.1 24.4 42.8 59.5 287 890 1290 1900 1987
22. Portugal 10 119 165 185 348 885 1642 1668 1688
23. Russia 0.1 18.5 84.1 131 234 454 642 794 1021
24. Spain 10 591 608 650 872 1135 1557 1699 1735
25. Sweden 10 364 556 581 616 1022 1311 1414 1450
26. Switzerland 0.1 185 195 204 380 930 1090 1170 1192
27. Turkey 0.56 49.1 64.9 86.7 139 286 353 533 600
28. UK 10 510 667 614 777 1324 1855 1881 1896
29. Ukraine 0.1 12.7 35.2 82.3 240 499 700 1150 1251
30. USA 10 263 416 591 741 1186 1610 1754 1824
31. Uzbekistan 0.025 0.359 2.51 12.5 17.9 18.5 18.6 20.1 24.1
Pearson's correlation coefficient: 0.60 0.570 0.522 0.442 0.289 0.315 0.137 0.1
1) The lower limit of the range of normalized values
2) The number of detected infected is given in accordance with the data of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health
Security (https://covid19.who.int/). 3) The population of countries is given as of 05/04/2020 in accordance with the data of the electronic resource
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/.
Table 3. The results of the analysis of correlation between the severity of the hygienic restriction on the RF EMF MPL for population in various countries and the relative level of vaccination against COVID-19 according to the official WHO data (full cycle of vaccination with two injections)
Country MPL Rates of vaccination against COVID-19 in % of country population 2)
W/m2 12/20/20 01/20/21 02/20/21 03/20/21 04/20/21 05/20/21 06/20/21 07/20/21
1. Azerbaijan 0.1 0 0 0 0 4.43 8.04 10.16 17.50
2. Belarus 0.1 0 0 0 0.11 0.28 1.59 3.91 7.98
3. Belgium 10 0 0.01 2.53 3.94 6.42 13.92 30.54 49.49
4. Bulgaria 11 0.01 0 0.06 0.39 1.03 1.96 6.96 10.87 12.79
5. Canada 4 0 0.14 1.06 1.64 2.48 4.02 18.59 51.01
6. Chile 11 0.1 0 0.04 0.29 14.93 29.70 39.90 49.66 61.65
7. China 3) 0.4 0 0.10 0.50 1.00 3.00 7.50 15.00 25.00
8. Denmark 10 0 0.12 3.00 5.36 9.21 19.69 28.36 47.55
9. France 10 0 0 1.77 3.71 7.41 14.71 25.71 44.24
10. Germany 10 0 0.14 2.11 4.00 6.75 13.10 30.99 46.87
11. Hungary 0.1 0 0.04 1.98 4.93 14.79 29.96 46.62 55.30
12. India 0.9 0 0 0.06 0.54 1.25 2.96 3.57 6.22
13. Ireland 10 0 0.20 2.61 3.68 7.25 10.31 20.01 43.86
End of Table 3
14. Israel 0.9 0 7.86 31.42 48.58 53.53 54.82 55.24 56.39
15. Italy 0.1 0 0.02 2.23 4.08 7.77 15.85 26.28 45.24
16. Japan 10 0 0 0 0.02 0.64 1.95 8.69 24.36
17. Kazakhstan 0.1 0 0 0 0.1 0.65 4.37 8.69 15.12
18. Lithuania 0.1 0 0.32 2.52 4.67 8.06 18.71 32.96 44.36
19. Luxemburg 0.45 0 0 1.11 2.74 7.29 14.70 29.04 42.83
20. Netherlands 10 0 0 0.90 2.87 5.79 11.58 30.33 46.42
21. Poland 0.1 0 0.07 2.45 4.71 6.20 13.82 29.60 43.50
22. Portugal 10 0 0.18 2.44 4.39 6.90 14.55 28.51 48.38
23. Russia 0.1 0 0 1.16 1.86 4.27 7.04 10.44 14.78
24. Spain 10 0 0.03 2.50 4.03 7.38 16.82 30.85 52.81
25. Sweden 10 0 0 1.85 3.77 6.76 10.43 27.40 37.58
26. Switzerland 0.1 0 0.5 1.79 5.13 8.97 16.62 29.86 44.78
27. Turkey 0.56 0 0 1.21 5.88 9.21 13.57 16.98 24.87
28. UK 10 0 0.68 0.90 3.27 15.79 31.73 46.06 53.32
29. Ukraine 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.15 0.87 3.63
30. USA 10 0 0.65 5.37 12.92 25.89 38.01 44.93 48.52
31. Uzbekistan 0.025 0 0 0 0 0 0.84 2.95 3.01
Pearson's correlation coefficient: --- -0.091 -0.015 -0.046 0.014 0.095 0.277 0.445
1) The lower limit of the range of normalized values.
2) The percentage of vaccinated is given in accordance with the data of the electronic resource
https://index.minfin.com.ua/reference/coronavirus/vaccination/.
3) Estimated data based on total vaccine doses injected.
Table 4. The results of the analysis of correlation between the severity of the hygienic restriction on the RF EMF MPL for population in various countries and the level of GDP per capita in these countries
MPL W/m2 GDP per capita
Country Specific GDP PPP Nominal GDP per capita
IMF List 2) 2020 WB List 3) 2019 IMF List 4) 2018 WB List 5) 2017
1. Azerbaijan 0.1 14431 15001 4569 4132
2. Belarus 0.1 20187 19943 6306 5726
3. Belgium 10 51096 54545 50050 43324
4. Bulgaria 0.01 23817 24561 9267 8032
5. Canada 10 48720 51342 45870 45032
6. Chile D 0.1 23366 25155 16078 15346
7. China 10 17192 16785 9608 8827
8. Denmark 10 58933 59830 63640 56307
9. France 0.9 46062 49435 44770 38477
10. Germany 0.9 54046 56052 51970 44470
11. Hungary 10 33030 33979 15923 14225
12. India 10 6461 7034 2036 1940
13. Ireland 0.1 94392 88241 90480 69331
14. Israel 0.1 40547 42194 43440 40270
15. Italy 4 40861 44197 35060 31953
16. Japan 0.4 42248 43236 40730 38428
17. Kazakhstan 0.1 26565 27444 9236 8837
18. Lithuania 0.45 38824 38214 19143 16681
19. Luxemburg 10 118002 121293 125920 104104
20. Netherlands 0.1 57534 59687 58030 48223
21. Poland 10 34103 34218 15430 13812
22. Portugal 0.1 34043 36471 25100 21136
23. Russia 10 27930 29181 11326 10743
24. Spain 0.56 38392 42214 31180 28157
25. Sweden 0.025 54146 55815 57660 53442
26. Switzerland 0.1 72874 70989 90360 80190
27. Turkey 10 30253 27875 9346 10541
28. UK 0.1 44117 48710 42240 39720
29. Ukraine 0.1 13110 13341 2963 2640
30. USA 10 63416 65281 66140 59532
31. Uzbekistan 10 7449 7289 1262 1504
Pearson's correlation coefficient: 0.418 0.441 0.457 0.464
End of Table 4
11 The lower limit of the range of normalized values.
2) International Monetary Fund: World Economic Outlook database: April 2021.
3) The World Bank: GDP per capita, PPP (current international $): 2020.
4) International Monetary Fund: World Economic Outlook database: April 2019.
5) The World Bank: GDP per capita (current US$): 2018._
Table 5. The results of the analysis of correlation between the relative level of vaccination against COVID-19 in various countries as of 07/20/2021 1)1 and the level of GDP per capita in these countries
Percentage of fully GDP per capita
Country vaccinated as of Specific GDP PPP Nominal GDP per capita
07/20/2021 D IMF List 2) 2020 WB List 3) 2019 IMF List 4) 2018 WB List 5) 2017
32. Azerbaijan 17.50 14431 15001 4569 4132
33. Belarus 7.98 20187 19943 6306 5726
34. Belgium 49.49 51096 54545 50050 43324
35. Bulgaria 12.79 23817 24561 9267 8032
36. Canada 51.01 48720 51342 45870 45032
37. Chile 61.65 23366 25155 16078 15346
38. China 6) 25.00 17192 16785 9608 8827
39. Denmark 47.55 58933 59830 63640 56307
40. France 44.24 46062 49435 44770 38477
41. Germany 46.87 54046 56052 51970 44470
42. Hungary 55.30 33030 33979 15923 14225
43. India 6.22 6461 7034 2036 1940
44. Ireland 43.86 94392 88241 90480 69331
45. Israel 56.39 40547 42194 43440 40270
46. Italy 45.24 40861 44197 35060 31953
47. Japan 24.36 42248 43236 40730 38428
48. Kazakhstan 15.12 26565 27444 9236 8837
49. Lithuania 44.36 38824 38214 19143 16681
50. Luxemburg 42.83 118002 121293 125920 104104
51. Netherlands 46.42 57534 59687 58030 48223
52. Poland 43.50 34103 34218 15430 13812
53. Portugal 48.38 34043 36471 25100 21136
54. Russia 14.78 27930 29181 11326 10743
55. Spain 52.81 38392 42214 31180 28157
56. Sweden 37.58 54146 55815 57660 53442
57. Switzerland 44.78 72874 70989 90360 80190
58. Turkey 24.87 30253 27875 9346 10541
59. UK 53.32 44117 48710 42240 39720
60. Ukraine 3.63 13110 13341 2963 2640
61. USA 48.52 63416 65281 66140 59532
62. Uzbekistan 3.01 7449 7289 1262 1504
Pearson's correlation coefficient: 0.545 0.573 0.540 0.56
1)1 The percentage of vaccinated is given in accordance with the data of the electronic resource
https://index.minfin.com.ua/reference/coronavirus/vaccination/
2) International Monetary Fund: World Economic Outlook database: April 2021.
3) The World Bank: GDP per capita, PPP (current international $): 2020.
4) International Monetary Fund: World Economic Outlook database: April 2019.
5) The World Bank: GDP per capita (current US$): 2018.
6) Estimated data based on total vaccine doses injected._
c
0.7 0.6
I 05
o £
g 0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
P 0
Ph
-0.1
-0.2
1
3/
o o o o o o o o i—t .—1 --1 f-1 r—i 1—1
<N CI <N CN <N CN CN CN CN CN CN (N CN CN (N
O o o o O o o o o O o O O O o
CN CN CN <N <N CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN
in r^ 00 cK © r—H CN CN r<~. ^ iri ■o K
o o o o o —1 O o O O O o o
Fig. 1. Time dependences of the correlation coefficient between the potential level of electromagnetic pollution of the environment (the adopted EMF RF MPL for the population) and a - the lethality of COVID-19 in relation to the population size, b - the lethality of COVID-19 in relation to the number of detected infected, and c - the level of vaccination of population against COVID-19; d - well-known representation of the time dependence of
the number of new infected according to WHO data, illustrating the nature and periods of waves of the COVID-19 pandemic; e - smoothed dependences of parts a, b, c for comparison placed jointly in a single scale; here the first, second and third waves of the pandemic are indicated by shading
b
e
Conclusion
1. Presented results of the analysis, despite some doubts about the reliability and comparability of the medical statistics of some countries in the information sources used, due to its integral nature with a relatively low sensitivity to such factors, in general, confirm the presence of a noticeable correlation between the RF EMF MPL for the population adopted in different countries (which determine the potential levels of electromagnetic pollution of the environment), and relative lethality of COVID-19. Before the beginning of the intensive struggle against the pandemic (at the arrival of its first wave), carried out through the implementation of strict administrative restrictions, mass testing and vaccination of the population, the Pearson correlation coefficient between these characteristics was 0.5-0.6.
2. The decrease in correlation between these characteristics by the end of the analyzed period, especially with the arrival of the second wave of the pandemic, can be explained by the larger efforts in struggle against the COVID-19 by countries where the first approach to protecting the population from RF EMF is used, compared to countries where significantly more stringent "non-thermal" hygienic standards for RF EMF MPL have been adopted. Countries that use the principle of passive regulation of the protection of the population from RF EMF and its socially oriented modifications, on average, are characterized by higher levels of economic development (the level of nominal GDP) and have more economic opportunities to struggle with the pandemic. It is reflected in significantly higher volumes of COVID-19 testing of the population, it's implementation of stricter and longer restrictions (quarantines, lockdowns, etc.), as well as in ensuring the highest rates of vaccination of the population.
3. The presence of a correlation between the adopted RF EMF MPLs for the population in different countries (which determine the boundaries of possible electromagnetic pollution of the environment during the implementation of extremely ambitious declarations and scenarios [8, 9] of the development of 4G/5G/6G mobile communications), and the relative lethality of COVID-19, is not the evidence of obligatory existence of an unambiguous causal relationship between these characteristics. The fact is that in countries that use the principle of passive regulation and its socially oriented modifications, this principle is used not only in relation to RF EMF, but also in relation to other environmental factors that determine the overall level of ecology and their impact on collective immunity of the population but not taken into account in this analysis. Therefore, the detected correlation can be interpreted as a correlation between the lethality of COVID-19 and the degree of passivity (the presence of passive regulation) in protecting the population from the effects of factors that worsen the environment.
In this interpretation, the results of this analysis can serve as indirect evidence of the advantages of an alternative second approach to protecting the population from these factors (adopting MPLs that guarantee the absence of harm to health) at an intensity of their impact close to critical. Some confirmation of this assumption may be the Decision No. 20-1025 dt. Aug. 13, 2021, of the United States Court of Appeals (mandatory for the US Federal Communications Commission), on the need to abandon the "thermal" RF EMF standards, similar to [3], and develop more stringent standards that take into account the "non-thermal" effects of RF EMF exposure on public health.
4. The hypothesis [12] about the presence of a noticeable correlation between the potential levels of electromagnetic pollution of the environment and the relative mortality of COVID-19, confirmed by the results of this work, indicates the presence of a potential danger for the population of the declared development of 4G/5G/6G mobile communications. And since this development is global in nature and can both significantly enrich all areas of human existence, and significantly change the characteristics of the environment for the worse, further analysis of the possibility of actual existence of a causal relationship between these important characteristics is rather relevant.
In particular, to confirm or refute the presence of a causal relationship between the factors considered, it is of interest to analyze the actual level of electromagnetic and other pollution of the environment in the considered group of countries, as well as deep and independent studies of the influence of RF EMF created by the basic and user's radio equipment of 4G/5G/6G systems of all allocated frequency bands and modes of operation, on population health and collective immunity.
In general, the results obtained indicate the relevance of a more careful attitude to the habitat at the increasing efforts to provide information services to all aspects of human life within
the framework of 4G/5G/6G evolution, using, whenever possible, alternative technologies and
technical solutions where wireless data transmission is not the only possible one.
References
1. Grigoriev O., Goshin M., Prokofyeva A., Alekseeva V. Features of national policy in approaches to electromagnetic field safety of radio frequencies radiation in different countries. Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2019; 98(11):1184-1190. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.18821/0016-9900-2019-98-11. (In Russ.)
2. Grigoriev O.A., Nikitina V.N., Nosov V.N., Pekin A.V., Alekseeva V.A., Dubrovskaya E.N. Electromagnetic radiation safety: Russian national and international regulatory frameworks for radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Zdorov'e Naseleniya i Sreda Obitaniya. 2020;10(331):28-33. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.35627/2219-5238/2020-331-10-28-33. (In Russ.)
3. International commission on non-ionizing radiation protection (ICNIRP): Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). July 6, 2020.
4. Ozdemir A.R., Alkan M., Gulsen M. Time dependence of environmental electric field measurements and analysis of cellular base stations. IEEE EMC Magazine. 2014;3:43-48.
5. Gajsek P., Ravazzani P., Wiart J., Grellier J., Samaras T., Thuroczy G. Electromagnetic field exposure assessment in Europe radiofrequency fields (10MHz-6GHz). J Expo Sci Env. Epidem. 2015;(25):37-44.
6. Ibrani M., Hamiti E., Ahma L., Halili R., and Dragusha B. Comparative analysis of downlink signal levels emitted by GSM 900, GSM 1800, UMTS, and LTE Base Stations, 16th Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop, June 28-30, 2017, Budva, Montenegro.
7. Karpowicz J., Miguel-Bilbao S., Ramos V., Falcone F., Gryz K., Leszko W. and Zradzinski P. The evaluation of stationary and mobile components of radiofrequency electromagnetic exposure in the public accessible environment. Proc. of the Int. Symp. EMC Europe 2017, Angers, France, Sept. 4-8, 2017.
8. IMT Vision. Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond, Rec. ITU-R M.2083.
9. Zhang Z., Xiao Y., Ma Z., Xiao M., Ding Z., Lei X., Karagiannidis G.K. and Fan P. 6G Wireless Networks: Vision, Requirements, Architecture, and Key Technologies. IEEE VTMagazine. 2019;14(3):28-41.
10. Hardell L., Carlberg M. Health risks from radiofrequency radiation, including 5G, should be assessed by experts with no conflicts of interest. Oncology Letters 20:15. 2020;1-11. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2020.11876.
11. Buchner K and Rivasi M: The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Conflicts of interest, corporate capture and the push for 5G. 98 p. https://www.michele-rivasi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ICNIRP-rapport-FR-FINAL-JUIN-2020.pdf.
12. Mordachev V.I. COVID-19 lethality rate may be affected by electromagnetic radio frequency pollution. 4G/5G/6G can be safe for people. Doklady BGUIR = Doklady BGUIR. 2020;18(4):96-112.
Information about the author
Mordachev V.I., Cand. of Sci., Associate Professor, Leading Researcher of the Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics.
Address for correspondence
220013, Republic of Belarus, Minsk, P. Brovka st., 6, Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radioelectronics; tel. +375-17-293-84-38;
e-mail: mordachev@bsuir.by, www.emc.bsuir.by Mordachev Vladimir Ivanovich
