Table 1 Comparison between participants with idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF) and normal controls
Variable | IEI-EMF n = 58 (%) | Control n = 92 (%) | P |
|---|---|---|---|
Sex |  |  |  < 0.01 |
 Male | 21 (36.2) | 65 (70.7) |  |
 Female | 37 (63.8) | 27 (29.3) |  |
Age (years) |  |  |  < 0.01 |
 20–29 | 18 (31.0) | 64 (69.6) |  |
 30–39 | 20 (34.5) | 19 (20.7) |  |
 40–49 | 14 (24.1) | 7 (7.6) |  |
 50–59 | 5 (8.6) | 1 (1.1) |  |
 60–69 | 1 (1.7) | 1 (1.1) |  |
Education | Â | Â | 0.22 |
 High school | 6 (10.3) | 15 (16.3) |  |
 Partial college | 12 (20.7) | 10 (10.9) |  |
 Bachelor | 28 (48.3) | 53 (57.6) |  |
 Graduate | 12 (20.7) | 14 (15.2) |  |
Occupation | Â | Â | 0.03 |
 Student | 12 (21.1) | 39 (42.4) |  |
 Business | 12 (21.1) | 10 (10.9) |  |
 Law | 2 (3.5) | 0 (0.0) |  |
 Public service | 7 (12.3) | 6 (6.5) |  |
 Service | 12 (21.1) | 20 (21.7) |  |
 Others | 12 (21.1) | 17 (18.5) |  |
Self-perceived health status |  |  |  < 0.01 |
 Very poor | 1 (1.7) | 0 (0.0) |  |
 Poor | 18 (31.0) | 7 (7.6) |  |
 Average | 25 (43.1) | 51 (55.4) |  |
 Good | 12 (20.7) | 29 (31.5) |  |
 Excellent | 2 (3.4) | 5 (5.4) |  |
Baseline blood pressure (mmHg) | |||
 Systolic (provocation) | 121.1 ± 2.7 | 123.5 ± 1.7 | 0.44 |
 Systolic (sham) | 125.4 ± 2.9 | 124.2 ± 1.5 | 0.71 |
 Diastolic (provocation) | 76.9 ± 1.9 | 81.0 ± 1.3 | 0.07 |
 Diastolic (sham) | 80.4 ± 3.0 | 81.1 ± 1.4 | 0.84 |
 Mean arterial (provocation) | 92.0 ± 2.0 | 93.7 ± 1.4 | 0.50 |
 M arterial (sham) | 96.8 ± 2.9 | 94.9 ± 1.3 | 0.53 |
Baseline heart rate (/min) | |||
 Provocation | 77.7 ± 2.4 | 76.2 ± 1.2 | 0.57 |
 Sham | 78.5 ± 1.8 | 75.6 ± 1.1 | 0.17 |
Baseline heart rate variability | |||
 LF (provocation) | 0.70 ± 0.02 | 0.71 ± 0.02 | 0.63 |
 LF (sham) | 0.72 ± 0.02 | 0.71 ± 0.02 | 0.87 |
 HF (provocation) | 0.31 ± 0.02 | 0.29 ± 0.02 | 0.58 |
 HF (sham) | 0.29 ± 0.02 | 0.29 ± 0.02 | 0.90 |
 LF/HF (provocation) | 3.07 ± 0.32 | 3.24 ± 0.26 | 0.68 |
 LF/HF (sham) | 3.30 ± 0.32 | 3.40 ± 0.29 | 0.83 |