ACUTE HUMAN NEUROVESTIBULAR, NEUROCOGNITIVE, PHYSIOLOGICAL, AND DEVICE-INTERACTION EFFECTS OF HIGH STATIC MAGNETIC FIELDS
Evidence from Ultra-High-Field Magnetic Resonance Environments
Abstract
Human exposure to high static magnetic fields (SMFs) has been investigated extensively in the context of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), particularly as whole-body systems have progressed from conventional clinical field strengths of 1.5–3 T to ultra-high-field platforms operating at 7 T, 9.4 T, and experimentally 10.5 T.
Available human data indicate that the most reproducible acute biological effects of high-field SMF exposure are vestibular rather than anesthetic, amnestic, or globally neurodepressive. Reported phenomena include vertigo, illusory self-motion, nystagmus, postural disequilibrium, nausea, metallic taste, and magnetophosphenes [1–4].
The dominant mechanistic model for static-field-induced vestibular stimulation invokes Lorentz forces acting on endogenous ionic currents within the endolymph of the semicircular canals. These forces generate a trans-cupular pressure differential sufficient to alter vestibular afferent signaling and activate the vestibulo-ocular reflex [1,2].
A mechanistically distinct exposure component arises when the head or body moves through a spatially nonuniform static magnetic field. Movement converts spatial magnetic-field gradients into effective time-varying exposure, conventionally described by dB/dt, and may induce electric fields within conductive biological tissues. Controlled crossover studies performed in the fringe field of 7-T MRI systems have demonstrated transient decrements in attention, concentration, visuospatial processing, and verbal-memory task performance under combined SMF and movement-induced time-varying magnetic-field conditions [5,6].
The available human evidence does not establish general anesthesia, loss of consciousness, selective erasure of episodic memory, or prolonged amnesia as consequences of high static magnetic-field exposure. Likewise, controlled exposure at 8–10.5 T has not demonstrated consistent clinically significant deterioration of cardiovascular vital signs or persistent cognitive function in healthy volunteers [7–10].
The present review summarizes the principal acute human effects, exposure metrics, neurovestibular mechanisms, neurocognitive observations, cardiovascular interactions, and device-related hazards associated with strong static and movement-induced magnetic fields.
1 | ACUTE HUMAN EFFECTS OF HIGH STATIC MAGNETIC FIELDS
The most consistently documented acute perceptual consequence of high static magnetic-field exposure is vestibular disturbance.
Symptoms observed in human ultra-high-field MRI studies include:
vertigo;
dizziness;
illusory angular or linear self-motion;
nystagmus;
postural disequilibrium;
unsteady gait;
nausea;
metallic taste;
magnetophosphenes.
These phenomena become more frequent as magnetic-field strength increases and are particularly prominent during entry into, withdrawal from, or movement through high-field fringe regions.
In a controlled blinded study of 44 healthy participants exposed to both a 7-T whole-body static field and a realistic zero-field mock scanner, vertigo during gantry entry was reported by 38.6% of subjects. Phosphenes were reported by 18.2%, thermal or heat sensation by 15.9%, unsteady gait after exposure by 13.6%, and dizziness by 13.6%. Nine participants, representing 20.5% of the cohort, reported no sensory perception under either condition [3].
These effects were acute and transient. They did not constitute persistent neurological deficits.
Earlier human exposure studies at 4 T similarly demonstrated field-dependent increases in vertigo, nausea, and metallic taste without evidence of persistent deterioration attributable to exposure [11].
Occupational studies involving personnel working around MRI systems are broadly concordant with laboratory observations. Transient sensory symptoms have been reported during work around high-field systems, with vertigo and metallic taste among the characteristic complaints.
Current international safety guidance therefore treats vertigo and nausea as established transient sensory effects of sufficiently strong static magnetic fields. They may impair normal functioning even though they are not regarded, in themselves, as evidence of persistent tissue injury [12,13].
2 | MOVEMENT WITHIN A STATIC FIELD AND TIME-VARYING EXPOSURE
Magnetic exposure cannot be characterized adequately by static magnetic-flux density B alone.
A stationary subject located within an approximately homogeneous field experiences a nearly time-invariant magnetic environment.
A moving subject traversing a spatial field gradient does not.
For translational motion, the effective temporal variation experienced by the subject may be represented approximately as:
dB/dt = v · ∇B
where:
v = translational velocity of the subject or tissue,
∇B = spatial magnetic-field gradient.
Movement through an inhomogeneous SMF therefore produces an effective movement-induced time-varying magnetic field (TVMF).
By Faraday's law:
∇ × E = -∂B/∂t
a temporally changing magnetic flux can generate electric fields within conductive tissues.
This distinction is experimentally important.
In a double-blind randomized crossover study using the stray field of a 7-T MRI system, 36 healthy volunteers underwent exposure to:
1.0 T static magnetic field alone,
or
1.0 T static magnetic field combined with standardized head movements producing movement-induced TVMF up to 2.4 T/s.
Static exposure alone produced no significant impairment on the tested neurocognitive tasks.
Combined SMF + TVMF exposure significantly reduced verbal-memory performance and altered visual acuity. Attention and concentration were negatively affected with borderline statistical significance [6].
A related randomized crossover study involving 31 healthy volunteers employed sham, approximately 0.5-T, and approximately 1.0-T stray-field conditions with standardized head movements. Attention and concentration demonstrated exposure-related decrements ranging from approximately 5.0% to 21.1% per tesla, particularly under conditions of high working-memory demand. Visuospatial orientation also showed an exposure-related effect, estimated at approximately 46.7% per tesla at the boundary of conventional statistical significance [5].
Accordingly, the biologically relevant exposure variables include not only:
B0
but also:
spatial field gradient ∇B;
velocity v;
dB/dt;
head orientation;
trajectory through the field;
duration of exposure.
ICNIRP specifically distinguishes movement-related induction from static-field magnitude alone.
For relatively slow motion in a static magnetic field, ICNIRP recommends that the change in magnetic flux density, ΔB, should not exceed 2 T during any 3-s interval when the objective is to prevent movement-induced vertigo.
For rapid transient movements, a reference level of approximately 2.7 T/s for peak dB/dt is specified to limit induced electric fields and peripheral nerve stimulation [13].
3 | VERTIGO, DISEQUILIBRIUM, AND AN INTOXICATION-LIKE PHENOMENOLOGY
The subjective phenomenology of high-field exposure may superficially resemble motion sickness or mild intoxication.
The physiological mechanism is different.
Relevant acute manifestations include:
rotational vertigo;
false perception of self-motion;
directional body sway;
impaired postural stabilization;
unsteady gait;
nausea;
visual-vestibular incongruence;
transient dizziness;
nystagmus.
Theysohn et al. quantitatively examined vestibular performance before and after several 7-T exposure paradigms.
A total of 46 volunteers underwent different conditions including:
7-T head MRI;
7-T exposure without RF;
7-T static-field-only exposure;
brief entry into and withdrawal from the 7-T B0 field;
1.5-T exposure;
0-T sham exposure.
After prolonged 7-T exposure, closed-eye sway path was significantly increased 2 min after leaving the scanner and returned approximately to baseline by 15 min.
Body-axis rotation measured during the Unterberger stepping test was also significantly altered after 7-T exposure. In contrast to sway-path changes, normalization of rotational deviation remained incomplete at 15 min.
Equivalent changes were not detected after 1.5-T or 0-T exposure [4].
Such observations are compatible with a temporary conflict among:
vestibular reference signals;
visual orientation;
proprioceptive input;
internal estimates of body motion.
A subject may therefore experience a coherent but physically false sense of rotation or translation.
Descriptive terms such as:
light-headedness;
disorientation;
motion-sickness-like sensation;
intoxication-like disequilibrium
may adequately characterize subjective experience.
They should not be interpreted as evidence of pharmacological sedation.
The physiological relation is therefore:
high-field vestibular disturbance
≠
global cortical sedation.
4 | EFFECTS ON ATTENTION, CONCENTRATION, AND NEUROCOGNITIVE PERFORMANCE
Evidence for direct neurocognitive effects of static magnetic fields is heterogeneous and highly dependent on exposure protocol.
A meta-analysis of human SMF studies evaluating reaction time, visual processing, hand-eye coordination, working memory, sensory effects, and vital signs found that the visual-system data were sufficiently homogeneous to demonstrate a statistically significant impairment.
The pooled standardized effect size was approximately:
Cohen's d = -0.415
for visual-system performance under static magnetic-field exposure.
Vital signs were not significantly altered in the pooled analysis.
Sensory effects, particularly dizziness and vertigo, increased, with movement through field gradients contributing substantially to these outcomes [14].
Studies attempting to isolate static-field exposure from movement-related effects have generally demonstrated weaker evidence for generalized cognitive impairment.
A case-crossover investigation involving 41 healthy subjects compared performance under:
0 T;
1.5 T;
3.0 T;
7.0 T.
The neuropsychological battery included:
memory;
attention;
reaction time;
eye-hand coordination;
visual discrimination.
The experiment did not demonstrate a broad, field-strength-dependent deterioration across cognitive domains attributable to static exposure alone [15].
By contrast, experiments combining high SMF exposure with standardized head motion have identified measurable changes in:
attention;
concentration;
visuospatial orientation;
visual acuity;
verbal-memory task performance [5,6].
The most defensible interpretation is therefore:
SMF alone
→ limited and inconsistent evidence for generalized cognitive impairment
whereas:
SMF + movement-induced TVMF
→ transient modulation of selected neurocognitive domains.
5 | MEMORY PERFORMANCE VERSUS CLINICAL AMNESIA
Reduced performance on a memory task is not equivalent to clinical amnesia.
This distinction is essential.
Experimental evidence exists for transient deterioration in verbal-memory task performance during combined static and movement-induced magnetic exposure [6].
It does not establish:
several-hour gaps in autobiographical memory;
selective deletion of event sequences;
generalized anterograde amnesia;
selective retrograde amnesia;
persistent episodic-memory loss;
loss of autobiographical identity;
prolonged confusional states.
In the van Nierop et al. crossover experiment, verbal-memory performance decreased significantly during combined exposure to:
1.0 T SMF
+
movement-induced TVMF up to 2.4 T/s.
The static-field-only condition did not produce significant deterioration in the tested tasks [6].
The appropriate inference is therefore limited.
The experiment demonstrates that defined magnetic-exposure conditions can transiently modify performance on a verbal-memory test.
It does not demonstrate that memories formed during exposure are subsequently inaccessible for hours, nor that encoded episodic information has been erased.
The scientifically conservative formulation is:
High-field magnetic exposure, particularly when accompanied by movement-induced low-frequency time-varying magnetic fields, may transiently reduce performance on selected attention and memory tasks. Clinically significant episodic amnesia has not been established as a consequence of static magnetic-field exposure.
6 | HUMAN EXPOSURE AT 8–10.5 TESLA
Ultra-high-field human MRI provides a direct experimental framework for evaluating biological tolerance of static magnetic fields in the multi-tesla range.
At field strengths up to 8 T, Chakeres et al. examined 25 healthy subjects aged 24–53 years.
Measurements included:
heart rate;
respiratory rate;
systolic blood pressure;
diastolic blood pressure;
pulse oxygenation;
auditory-canal temperature;
sublingual temperature;
electrocardiography.
Measurements were obtained sequentially at:
1.5 T;
3 T;
4.5 T;
6 T;
8 T.
The only statistically significant field-strength-dependent physiological effect was a change in systolic blood pressure.
At 8 T the mean increase was approximately:
+3.6 mmHg.
The authors considered this change clinically insignificant [7].
At 9.4 T, Atkinson et al. compared healthy volunteers before and after sodium MRI performed at 105.92 MHz.
Exposure to the 9.4-T static field did not produce statistically significant alterations in:
vital signs;
cognitive ability
relative to control conditions [8].
At 10.5 T, Grant et al. evaluated cognitive, vestibular, sensory, and physiological endpoints in 29 participants.
Twenty-six returned for a second exposure 2–4 weeks later.
Across 79 statistical comparisons, 73 variables were unchanged or demonstrated small improvements.
Observed exceptions included:
increased spontaneous eye movements;
videonystagmographic abnormalities;
small mixed blood-pressure changes;
increased metallic-taste reporting;
limited differences in selected same-day executive-function measures.
The investigators did not interpret these changes as compromising participant safety [9].
These observations impose an important boundary condition.
Fields in the 7–10.5-T range can produce measurable vestibular and sensory phenomena.
They do not ordinarily produce:
unconsciousness;
profound cognitive disorganization;
generalized neurological suppression;
gross cardiovascular collapse
in healthy subjects under controlled research conditions.
ICNIRP's static-field exposure guidance reflects this distinction.
For occupational exposure, the recommended limit for head and trunk is:
2 T.
Exposure of limbs may extend to:
8 T.
For specific controlled occupational applications, exposures of head and trunk above 2 T and up to 8 T may be justified when appropriate work practices are implemented to control movement-induced effects [12].
7 | MAGNETIC-FIELD MAGNITUDE: GEOMAGNETIC, CLINICAL, AND ULTRA-HIGH-FIELD SCALES
Magnetic-field scales relevant to geophysics and human MRI differ by many orders of magnitude.
The Earth's surface magnetic field is approximately:
25,000–65,000 nT
or:
25–65 µT.
The unit relations are:
1 T = 10^6 µT
1 T = 10^9 nT
Representative field strengths are:
Earth's magnetic field:
25–65 µT
Clinical MRI:
1.5 T
High-field clinical MRI:
3 T
Ultra-high-field MRI:
7 T
Experimental human ultra-high-field MRI:
9.4 T
Experimental whole-body research MRI:
10.5 T
For numerical comparison:
7 T = 7 × 10^9 nT.
A localized anomaly of 50 nT corresponds to:
50 nT = 5 × 10^-8 T.
The ratio between 7 T and 50 nT is therefore:
7 / (5 × 10^-8)
= 1.4 × 10^8.
A 7-T magnetic field is approximately 140 million times larger than a 50-nT anomaly when expressed purely as magnetic flux density.
Accordingly:
magnetometric detectability
≠
biological potency.
A geomagnetic anomaly measured in tens of nanotesla cannot be physiologically equated with a multi-tesla MRI environment [16].
8 | MECHANISM OF MAGNETIC VESTIBULAR STIMULATION
The most developed mechanistic explanation for high-field-induced vertigo is magnetic vestibular stimulation (MVS).
The relevant electromagnetic interaction is represented by the Lorentz-force density:
f = J × B
where:
J = endogenous ionic current density;
B = externally applied magnetic flux density;
f = force per unit volume.
The endolymph of the semicircular canals is an electrically conductive ionic fluid.
Physiological epithelial currents are present across vestibular tissues in the absence of any externally applied magnetic field.
When those endogenous currents are exposed to a sufficiently strong static field, Lorentz forces act on the conductive fluid.
The resulting hydrodynamic force produces a pressure difference across the cupula.
Cupular displacement is interpreted by vestibular sensory hair cells as angular acceleration despite the absence of actual head rotation.
Mian et al. examined 25 visually deprived healthy adults in a 7-T static field.
Persistent nystagmus and subjective vertigo were observed under stationary conditions, demonstrating that gross translational movement through the magnetic field was not required for vestibular stimulation [1].
Antunes et al. subsequently constructed a three-dimensional numerical model of ionic-current-induced Lorentz forces within the utricle and semicircular canal.
At 7 T, their model produced a maximum trans-cupular pressure difference of approximately:
1.6 mPa
for the modeled physiological current distribution.
The calculation used combined ampullar and utricular current sources and yielded pressures compatible with the magnitude required to produce experimentally observed vestibular responses [2].
Further physiological support comes from subjects with labyrinthine dysfunction.
Individuals lacking bilateral labyrinthine function do not exhibit the normal magnetic-field-induced nystagmus pattern.
Patients with unilateral vestibular deficits produce altered responses consistent with the remaining functional labyrinth [17].
The mechanistic sequence may therefore be represented as:
B0
→
J × B
→
Lorentz force on endolymph
→
trans-cupular pressure
→
cupular displacement
→
vestibular afferent activation
→
nystagmus / illusory self-motion / disequilibrium.
This mechanism is fundamentally different from direct magnetic induction of generalized unconsciousness.
9 | CARDIOVASCULAR AND MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMIC EFFECTS
Blood is an electrically conductive fluid.
Movement of conductive blood through a static magnetic field generates an electromotive component described approximately by:
E_MHD = v × B
where:
v = blood-flow velocity;
B = magnetic flux density.
This magnetohydrodynamic effect is readily observable in electrocardiography.
Blood flow through the aortic arch within a magnetic field produces an induced voltage that becomes superimposed on the surface ECG, particularly within the ST/T-wave region.
Jekic et al. measured ECG distortion in six human subjects at local magnetic flux densities ranging from:
6.4 mT
to:
652 mT.
Under their experimental accuracy criterion, ECG recordings remained acceptably accurate below approximately:
70 mT.
At higher local field strengths, magnetohydrodynamic waveform distortion became progressively more pronounced [18].
The distinction between electrical measurement distortion and physiological dysfunction is critical.
MHD-related ECG distortion does not imply equivalent myocardial impairment.
Human exposure studies at 8–10.5 T have generally failed to demonstrate clinically important acute deterioration in:
heart rate;
oxygen saturation;
respiratory rate;
body temperature;
blood pressure
in healthy subjects [7–10].
Thus:
MHD signal distortion
≠
cardiac toxicity.
10 | ELECTRONIC AND MEDICAL-DEVICE INTERACTIONS
Strong magnetic-field environments can interfere with devices through multiple distinct mechanisms.
Static-field force and torque
Ferromagnetic objects exposed to a static magnetic field can experience:
translational force;
rotational torque.
A magnetic object within a field gradient may therefore accelerate toward the region of higher field strength.
This is the physical basis of the MRI projectile hazard.
A magnetically susceptible implanted or external device may also experience mechanical displacement or torque.
Time-varying-field induction
Temporal variation in magnetic flux can induce voltage within conductive loops, leads, cables, electrodes, and elongated conductive structures.
FDA guidance specifically recognizes that MR gradient fields can induce electrical potentials in the leads of active implantable medical devices.
These induced voltages may generate unintended currents capable of causing:
unintended physiological stimulation;
device malfunction;
failure of intended therapy [19].
Magnetically sensitive sensors
Systems containing:
electronic compasses;
magnetometers;
Hall-effect sensors;
reed switches;
ferromagnetic actuators;
magnetically triggered switches
may become unreliable, saturate, or change operating state in sufficiently strong fields.
Implantable and external electronic systems
Devices requiring specific MR-safety evaluation include:
cardiac pacemakers;
implantable cardioverter-defibrillators;
cochlear implants;
neurostimulators;
insulin pumps;
monitoring systems;
external support equipment.
FDA guidance recognizes several independent MR-related hazards, including:
static-field displacement and torque;
RF-associated heating;
time-varying-field effects;
induced voltages;
electrically active device malfunction [19,20].
The relevant scientific distinction is:
electromagnetic interference
→
physical alteration of signals, sensor states, voltages, currents, heating, or device operation
whereas:
electromagnetic interference
≠
autonomous generation of semantically coherent information.
There is no established physical mechanism by which a static magnetic field independently generates meaningful digital language, structured images, or selectively rewritten semantic data.
11 | CURRENT MEDICAL INTERPRETATION
The aggregate human evidence supports several relatively robust conclusions.
First, multi-tesla static magnetic fields can produce acute vestibular effects.
Experimentally reproducible manifestations include:
vertigo;
nystagmus;
false self-motion;
nausea;
postural disequilibrium.
These effects become particularly relevant at approximately 2–3 T and above and are prominent in ultra-high-field environments [1–4,12].
Second, movement is an important exposure modifier.
Movement of the head or body through a spatially varying static magnetic field produces an effective low-frequency time-varying magnetic exposure and induced electric fields.
Controlled human experiments indicate that movement-induced components are important in producing selected neurocognitive changes that are absent or substantially weaker under static-only exposure [5,6].
Third, selected neurocognitive domains may be transiently modified.
Reported domains include:
attention;
concentration;
visuospatial processing;
visual acuity;
verbal-memory task performance.
The effects are generally:
acute;
modest;
protocol dependent;
reversible.
Fourth, profound central-nervous-system suppression has not been established.
Current controlled human evidence does not demonstrate that static magnetic fields produce:
general anesthesia;
loss of consciousness;
selective erasure of specific memories;
hours-long episodic amnesia;
persistent cognitive deterioration after brief exposure.
Fifth, very high magnetic-field strength does not automatically imply systemic physiological collapse.
Human exposure studies at:
8 T;
9.4 T;
10.5 T
have generally demonstrated transient sensory and vestibular phenomena without consistent clinically significant deterioration of vital signs or persistent cognitive function [7–10].
The most evidence-consistent formulation is therefore:
Exposure to multi-tesla static magnetic fields can perturb the human vestibular system and, particularly when combined with movement-induced time-varying magnetic fields, may transiently alter selected neurocognitive functions.
The available human evidence does not establish magnetic-field-induced general anesthesia, loss of consciousness, or clinically significant episodic amnesia.
Evidence Boundaries
Well supported in human studies:
vertigo;
nystagmus;
illusory self-motion;
nausea;
postural instability;
metallic taste;
magnetophosphenes;
movement-dependent sensory effects;
magnetic vestibular stimulation;
transient alterations in selected attention and cognitive tasks;
magnetohydrodynamic ECG distortion;
interference with susceptible medical and electronic devices.
Supported but protocol dependent and less consistently replicated:
reduced attention and concentration;
visuospatial-orientation changes;
reduced verbal-memory task performance;
visual-acuity changes;
limited transient executive-function differences at ultra-high field.
Not established by current human evidence:
general anesthesia;
pharmacological-equivalent sedation;
loss of consciousness;
hours-long episodic amnesia;
selective erasure of specific memories;
permanent cognitive impairment after brief exposure;
semantic generation of digital information by magnetic fields;
meaningful selective rewriting of text or image data by static magnetic exposure.
References
1. Mian OS, Li Y, Antunes A, Glover PM, Day BL.
On the Vertigo Due to Static Magnetic Fields.
PLoS One. 2013;8(10):e78748.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0078748.
PMID: 24205304.
2. Antunes A, Glover PM, Li Y, Mian OS, Day BL.
Magnetic field effects on the vestibular system: calculation of the pressure on the cupula due to ionic current-induced Lorentz force.
Phys Med Biol. 2012;57(14):4477–4487.
doi:10.1088/0031-9155/57/14/4477.
PMID: 22722424.
3. Friebe B, Wollrab A, Thormann M, et al.
Sensory perceptions of individuals exposed to the static field of a 7T MRI: a controlled blinded study.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;41(6):1675–1681.
doi:10.1002/jmri.24748.
PMID: 25236353.
4. Theysohn JM, Kraff O, Eilers K, et al.
Vestibular effects of a 7 Tesla MRI examination compared to 1.5 T and 0 T in healthy volunteers.
PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e92104.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0092104.
PMID: 24658179.
5. van Nierop LE, Slottje P, van Zandvoort MJE, de Vocht F, Kromhout H.
Effects of magnetic stray fields from a 7 tesla MRI scanner on neurocognition: a double-blind randomised crossover study.
Occup Environ Med. 2012;69(10):759–766.
doi:10.1136/oemed-2011-100468.
PMID: 22930737.
6. van Nierop LE, Slottje P, van Zandvoort M, Kromhout H.
Simultaneous exposure to MRI-related static and low-frequency movement-induced time-varying magnetic fields affects neurocognitive performance: a double-blind randomized crossover study.
Magn Reson Med. 2015;74(3):840–849.
doi:10.1002/mrm.25443.
PMID: 25224577.
7. Chakeres DW, Kangarlu A, Boudoulas H, Young DC.
Effect of static magnetic field exposure of up to 8 Tesla on sequential human vital sign measurements.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;18(3):346–352.
doi:10.1002/jmri.10367.
PMID: 12938131.
8. Atkinson IC, Renteria L, Burd H, Pliskin NH, Thulborn KR.
Safety of human MRI at static fields above the FDA 8 T guideline: sodium imaging at 9.4 T does not affect vital signs or cognitive ability.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;26(5):1222–1227.
doi:10.1002/jmri.21150.
PMID: 17969172.
9. Grant A, Metzger GJ, Van de Moortele PF, et al.
10.5 T MRI static field effects on human cognitive, vestibular, and physiological function.
Magn Reson Imaging. 2020;73:163–176.
doi:10.1016/j.mri.2020.08.004.
PMID: 32822819.
10. Kangarlu A, Burgess RE, Zhu H, et al.
Cognitive, cardiac, and physiological safety studies in ultra high field magnetic resonance imaging.
Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;17(10):1407–1416.
PMID: 10609989.
11. Schenck JF, Dumoulin CL, Redington RW, et al.
Human exposure to 4.0-Tesla magnetic fields in a whole-body scanner.
Med Phys. 1992;19(4):1089–1098.
PMID: 1518472.
12. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection.
Guidelines on Limits of Exposure to Static Magnetic Fields.
Health Phys. 2009;96(4):504–514.
13. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection.
Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Electric Fields Induced by Movement of the Human Body in a Static Magnetic Field and by Time-Varying Magnetic Fields below 1 Hz.
Health Phys. 2014;106(3):418–425.
14. Heinrich A, Szostek A, Nees F, et al.
Effects of static magnetic fields on cognition, vital signs, and sensory perception: a meta-analysis.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;34(4):758–763.
doi:10.1002/jmri.22720.
PMID: 21751291.
15. Chakeres DW, de Vocht F.
Static magnetic field effects on human subjects related to magnetic resonance imaging systems.
Radiology. 2013;266(1):236–245.
PMID: 23091174.
16. National Centers for Environmental Information.
Geomagnetism Frequently Asked Questions.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Earth's surface magnetic-field intensity: approximately 25,000–65,000 nT.
17. Ward BK, Otero-Millan J, Jareonsettasin P, et al.
Magnetic vestibular stimulation in subjects with unilateral labyrinthine disorders.
Front Neurol. 2014;5:28.
PMID: 24659983.
18. Jekic M, Ding Y, Dzwonczyk R, Burns P, Raman SV, Simonetti OP.
Magnetic field threshold for accurate electrocardiography in the MRI environment.
Magn Reson Med. 2010;64(6):1586–1591.
doi:10.1002/mrm.22419.
PMID: 20890989.
19. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Testing and Labeling Medical Devices for Safety in the Magnetic Resonance (MR) Environment.
Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.
20. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): Benefits and Risks.
MR safety information concerning static-field force and torque, RF heating, time-varying magnetic fields, implanted devices, and electrically active device malfunction.