# RF-019 — Sperm motility and fragmentation in paired samples

Why this matters
By dividing each semen sample, researchers compared exposed and control portions from the same donor. They reported poorer forward movement and more fragmented sperm DNA after exposure. That design is useful for investigating sperm function, but different temperature-controlled chambers and unmeasured sample dose leave important alternative explanations.

Id: RF-019

Author: Gorpinchenko et al.

Year: 2014

Title: The influence of direct mobile phone radiation on sperm quality

Journal: central european journal of urology

Citation: Gorpinchenko I, Nikitin O, Banyra O, Shulyak A. The influence of direct mobile phone radiation on sperm quality. Central European Journal of Urology. 2014;67(1):65-71. doi:10.5173/ceju.2014.01.art14.

Doi: 10.5173/ceju.2014.01.art14

Pmid: 24982785

Topic: Reproduction

Verification Group: Original text reviewed

Record Role: Original text reviewed

Featured: False

Exposure: GSM900/1800 MHz phone,5 cm,5 h; no sample SAR or incident-field measurement reported.

Design: Paired aliquots from 32 normozoospermic men,aged 27-40;5 h in separate thermostats at 27°C. GSM900/1800 MHz phone 5 cm from exposed samples,standby with calls every 10 min.

Finding: After 5 h,progressive motility 66.5±6.3% exposed versus 81.3±7.2% control; SCD fragmentation 8.8±2.2% versus 4.2±1.8%,both P<.05. Vitality,count,morphology and immotile fraction unchanged.

Boundary: Separate thermostats may confound treatment; no sample dose or continuous temperature monitoring; nonphysiological 27°C culture. Ejaculate exposure is not in-vivo testis exposure or clinical fertility.

Protection Question: Are the reported semen effects attributable to RF under adequately characterised chamber and temperature conditions? This independent human-sample strand remains limited by the original exposure information available.

Access: Original full PMC XML,Table 2 and results reviewed; upgraded from abstract.

Locator: Methods; Table 2; Figures 4-5.

Notice: Primary PubMed linked-notice record checked 20 Oct 2026; no correction, concern or retraction linked at check. This is not an exhaustive publisher-history certification.

Funding: No funding statement located in original.

Conflicts: Not established from original.

Source Url: https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2014.01.art14

Retrieval Links: https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2014.01.art14 | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4074720/ | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24982785/

Verification Date: 2026-10-20