Study type: Medical/biological study (observational study)

Impact of cell phone use on men's semen parameters med./bio.

Published in: Andrologia 2011; 43 (5): 312-316

Aim of study (acc. to author)

To study the effects of cell phone use on semen parameters in men.

Background/further details

2110 men attending the author's infertility clinic were examined from 1993 to 2007. The information on cell phone use of the patients was recorded and the subjects were divided into two groups according to their cell phone use: group A: cell phone use (n=991); group B: no use (n=1119).



No exposure details are available.

Exposed system:

Methods Endpoint/measurement parameters/methodology

Investigated system:
Investigated organ system:
Time of investigation:
  • after exposure

Main outcome of study (acc. to author)

A significant difference was found in sperm morphology between the two groups. In the patients of group A (cell phone use), 68% of the spermatozoa exhibited a pathological morphology compared to 58.1% in the subjects of group B. The proportion of rapid progressive motile spermatozoa was also significantly decreased in group A (23.98%) versus 25.19% in group B. No significant difference was observed regarding sperm count.
Patients with cell phone use showed significantly higher testosterone and lower luteinizing hormone levels than those who did not use a cell phone. No significant difference between the two groups was observed regarding follicle stimulating hormone and prolactin values.
The authors conclude that cell phone use negatively affects sperm quality in men. Further studies with a careful design are needed to determine the effect of cell phone use on male fertility.
Remark EMF-Portal editor: Although smoking or alcohol consumption as well as systemic diseases, orchitis or varicocele were exclusion critera, no other confounders were investigated. Investigated endpoints were not correlated with duration of daily cell phone use. Cell phone technology changed substantially from 1993 to 2007, but start of cell phone ownership was not considered.

Study character:

Study funded by

Related articles