|
Fact is, I have deep concerns that radio frequency technologies are the major new covert battlefield where decisive moves in regard to the future of mankind and our freedoms will be fought at. Please take some time to peruse the rest of this page and the links we have.
At the top of this page, I have included several links to some dynamic ELF/RFR websites and government reports. Below these, you will find a handfull of diverse number of articles dealing with different ELF concepts.
Radio Radiation Dosimetry Handbook
Mind Control Archives
~’Yuans Acoustic Home Page
================================================================ MindNet Journal - Vol. 1, No. 75 ================================================================ V E R I C O M M "Quid veritas est?" ================================================================ Sender: Owner-MindNet@c2.org Precedence: bulk
The views and opinions expressed below are not necessarily the views and opinions of VERICOMM, or the editors unless otherwise noted.
The following is reproduced here with the express permission of the author.
Permission is given to reproduce and redistribute, for non-commercial purposes only, provided this information and the copy remain intact and unedited.
================================================================
War Monger of the New Millennium
By Armen Victorian
June 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------
Six years ago, John Alexander, in a paper submitted to "Forum for Military Applications of Directed Energy (F-MADE)" at Kirtland AFB, wrote:
"I submit that we will have to abandon the border-based concept of 'Fortress America' and recognise that our national interests may be endangered from within." In trying to sell his soft-kill policy option, he did not deny that its use on the American people is an option.
In submitting the above he further wrote: "The values of conflict are changing. The side that initiates change [presumably him with his so called non-lethal concept] usually holds a distinct advantage."
How? "To expend force option available to commanders and allow them to INFLICT control over people," by using:
- "Electromagnetic optional munitions" to blind them.
- "High Power Microwave" to cook their internal organs.
- "Pulsed power weapons" to cause dizziness, nausea and vomiting.
- "Infra-sound" to disorient them.
It doesn't matter if there are any pregnant women, children, or elderly there. After all, in the list of his 'New Conflict Values,' as he puts it: "Any target [is] OK."
Vietnam's 'Phoenix' raises again from the ashes.
A. Victorian, JUNE 1996
====================================================
MindNet Journal - Vol. 1, No. 88
V E R I C O M M sm "Quid veritas est?"
Sender: Owner-MindNet@c2.org Precedence: bulk
The views and opinions expressed below are not necessarily the views and opinions of VERICOMM or the editors, unless otherwise noted.
The following is reproduced here with the express permission of the publisher.
Permission is given to reproduce and redistribute, for non-commercial purposes only, provided this information and the copy remain intact and unaltered.
Copy formatted in ASCII. Netscape mail reader format: "Options/Mail & News Preferences/Appearance" =3D Fixed Width Font.
Editor's Note:
The following article originally appeared in _Solstice_ magazine, May 1989. _Solstice_ magazine is now defunct. Reproduced here with the express permission of Randolf Byrd, former editor of _Solstice_.
Please see Appendix A. for a description of "Project Argus," which was the high-altitude atmospheric nuclear weapon testing during the 1940s and 50s that created artificial radiation belts
(Van Allen) of charged particles ringing the earth. See also MindNet Journal, Vol. 1, No. 51 for a detailed description of these artificial radiation belts and their intended use by Project HAARP for communications and weather modification. MindNet Journal, Vol. 1, No. 28 further details the dangers of HAARP and the logical outcome of the predictions made by Walter Russell in the following article.
It is this editor's opinion, as well as a number of other writers and researchers, that HAARP is a possible delivery system for worldwide atmospheric mind control of all humans.
THE MACROBIOTIC GENIUS OF WALTER RUSSELL
By John David Mann
Copyright 1989 John David Mann
----------------------------------------------------------------
"The Times of July 21 [1930] contains an article stating that Walter Russell challenges the Newtonian theory of gravitation. This artist, who is admittedly not a scientist, goes on to say that the fundamentals of science are so hopelessly wrong and so contrary to nature, that nothing but a major surgical operation upon the present primitive beliefs can ever put them in line for a workable 'cosmogenetic synthesis'... "It seems to me it would be more fitting for an artist of Mr. Russell's acknowledged distinction in his own field, to remain in it, and not go trespassing on 'ground which even angels fear to tread'. "For nearly three hundred years no one, not even a scientist, has had the temerity to question Newton's laws of gravitation. Such an act on the part of a scientist would be akin to blasphemy, and for an artist to commit such an absurdity is, to treat it kindly, an evidence of either misguidance or crass ignorance of the enormity of his act..."
-- Dr. John E. Jackson, The New York Times, August 3, 1930.
"Dr. John E. Jackson's letter to you, a copy of which he graciously sent to me, is a perfectly natural letter of resentment for which I do not blame him in the least. "It is true that I have challenged the accurateness or completeness of the Newtonian laws of gravitation, and will just as vigorously attack the other "sacred laws" of Kepler, and any others, ancient or modern, that need rewriting... "I am sorry an artist had to do it, but Sir Oliver Lodge said that no scientist could make the supreme discovery of the one thing for which science is looking and hoping. He said that such a discovery would have to be the 'supreme inspiration of some poet, painter, philosopher or saint'... "Newton, for example, would have solved the other half of the gravitation problem if he had found out how that apple and the tree upon which it grew got up in the air before the apple fell. I challenge the world of science to correctly and completely answer that question..."
-- Dr. Walter Russell, The New York Times, August 17, 1930.
"I now wish to modify my statements and criticisms, for, since writing that letter, my viewpoint has somewhat changed... "What I considered to be the overnight inspiration of a 'crank' might be, instead, the result of an intelligent and prolonged study of Nature. "I am immensely intrigued by Russell's 'two-way' principle, for it gives this universe of motion a meaning to me that it did not have before. In fact, we know very little of the why of anything... "Why did not some scientist think of this instead of waiting
300 years for an artist to tell us about it?... I invite the collaboration and criticism of my fellow scientists at large to join me in this... If Russell is right, and he surely thinks he is, his claim that science needs 'a major surgical operation' is justifiable..."
-- Dr. John E. Jackson, The New York Times, November 9, 1930.
Dr. John E. Jackson was furious. What educated person would have the audacity to challenge Newton and Kepler? For months the debate raged in the New York Times' "Letters" page. Prompted by the release of an artist's heretical views on science, Nature and the universe, the Times' 1930 filibuster culminated in Dr. Jackson's dramatic reversal -- what began as a caustic attack was transformed into a call for his colleagues' support that had the fervent ring of religious conversion. Dr. Jackson, whoever he was, had caught a glimmer of the genius of Walter Russell. But in the end, Dr. Jackson notwithstanding, the world of science did not embrace Walter Russell, nor have sixty years of progress changed that position. Today, despite the wide sphere of contacts and influence generated by Russell and his wife and colleague, Lao, their teachings largely await unearthing. However, the time for that rediscovery may be at hand; for the Russells' vision suddenly has burning relevance to an acknowledged urgent matter of global health. And the role of advocate for the Russell perspective may best be fulfilled by those in the macrobiotic movement -- for the macrobiotic world view and Russell's practical cosmology have much in common.
Cloud Over the Ozone Our story begins some ten miles above the Earth's surface in the stratosphere, home of the planet's ailing ozone skin and birthplace of the emerging global awareness of the limits of man's technology. In
1974, two scientists at the University of California made an announcement that shocked the world. When Drs. Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina warned of possible global ozone depletion, they touched off a controversy that was to involve scientists, industry, policy-makers, the press and the public. The "Ozone War," as it came to be called, was principally responsible for ushering in a new era of planetary policy. [See sidebar.] Fifteen years later, the ponderous gears of human response are finally grinding into action. Aimed at coping with the infamous "ozone hole, a spate of local and global policy-making is pushing its way forward in an unprecedented atmosphere of international cooperation. Rep. Al Gore (D-TN), the seasoned environmental advocate who helped uncover Love Canal and has stalked the Greenhouse effect for years, recently introduced legislation to ban production of CFCs (the chemical generally thought responsible for the ozone crisis) within 5 years. As Gore observed this February: "The political sentiment is changing very rapidly... I think people are mad about this and ready for dramatic action." But are they the right actions? Not according to Walter Russell, who predicted the ozone dilemma 35 years ago -- a full
20 years before the Rowland/Molina research made headlines -- and ascribed it to an entirely different cause. If Russell's views were correct, then the chlorine chemistry of CFCs is not the prime culprit [see sidebar], and no one is looking in the one direction that matters most. In fact, according to Russell, there is one overarching solution to the atmospheric emergency: stop making nuclear stockpiles -- immediately.
A Different Scenario The year is 1954. Sherwood Rowland's ozone prognosis is two decades in the future; Three Mile Island is a quarter century still to come. To most of us, the "Greenhouse effect" connotes little more than a better way to grow tomatoes. The word "ecology" scarcely exists in the mainstream lexicon. This is the year atmospheric bomb testing has begun, both by the Soviet Union in Siberia and by the United States on the Bikini atoll. John Wayne and a company of actors and movie personnel are filming a Western in Nevada, and emerge from long days' of shooting covered with radioactive fallout. Years later, it will be discovered that nearly all of them have just received a death sentence. But all of that is many years away; for now, most of us are caught up in the promise of Eisenhower's "Atoms for Peace." This year, Walter and Lao Russell write their warning in a privately circulated newsletter to their students: Oxygen and radioactive stockpiles cannot coexist. Digging up the Earth's heavier elements, concentrating their reactions and releasing their products into the atmosphere is a recipe for disaster. Three years later the Russells publish a book, Atomic Suicide?, whose principle message is that the development of the nuclear weaponry and industry, if allowed to continue, will eventually destroy the planet's oxygen. "The element of surprise which could delay the discovery of the great danger, and thus allow more plutonium piles to come into existence, is the fact that scientists are looking near the ground for fallout dangers and other radioactive menaces. The greatest radioactive dangers are accumulating from eight to twelve miles up [in the stratosphere]. The upper atmosphere is already charged with death-dealing radioactivity, for which it not yet sent us its bill. It is slowly coming, however, and we will have to pay for it for another century, even if atomic energy plants ceased today." (Atomic Suicide?, page 18.) Later in the book, they predict that the oxygen-destroying effects of radiation would not be noticed "until the late seventies."
Atomic Prophesies It was an uncannily accurate forecast: ozone depletion was first noticed over the Antarctic in 1982 -- and scientists have since concluded that it first appeared in 1979. But then, as now, the Russells' voice received little notice. The somber prediction of Atomic Suicide? was not the first time Russell had gone out on a limb with scientific prophecy. His spiral charts of the atomic table, copyrighted in 1926, predicted the discovery of the transuranic elements Plutonium and Neptunium, as well as the now-familiar elements of "heavy water, Deuterium and Tritium" -- years before they were isolated in research labs. Some have claimed that the 1926 Russell charts (for which he later received an honorary doctorate from the American Academy of Sciences) and his years of New York City lectures on the subject led directly to the laboratory research that resulted in these elements' later discovery. It is difficult to document such a claim at a half century's distance, but this sequence certainly is feasible. Russell himself evidently exerted considerable energy for years urging the research labs of Union Carbide, Westinghouse, General Electric and others to verify his atomic findings. In any case, the exclusion from the mainstream of Russell's charts is perhaps one of the most unfortunate snafus in the history of science. For in neglecting to credit Russell with these pivotal atomic discoveries, the world also lost track of the other side of the Russell equation: the larger scientific understanding in the spiral charts, the pragmatic warnings that accompanied them, and the breathtaking scope of macrobiotic thought his life and work revealed.
Who Was Walter Russell? Russell's stunning achievements in science were but one facet of a career that was unconventional, astonishingly successful, dazzlingly versatile and unabashedly mystical. Often called "the 20th Century's Leonardo" and "the man who tapped the secrets of the universe," Russell maintained that a firm grasp of nature's universal principles would permit anyone to excel in any area of endeavor; thus genius was all human beings' birthright. His own accomplishments exemplify this belief. A largely self-taught Renaissance man, Russell carved out his first successful career as an artist, achieving international reputation in such diverse fields as portraiture, poetry, sculpture and architecture. His accomplishments as a portrait painter and sculptor, in particular, won him commissions from dozens of era notables, such as Mark Twain, Thomas Watson (the founder of IBM), both Roosevelts (Teddy and FDR), and Thomas Edison. He also designed buildings and urban layout -- New York City's famous Hotel Pierre, for example, is a Russell creation. Forays into the world of athletics earned him prestigious awards in figure-skating, horsemanship and race-horse training. To Russell, such bravura performance was significant mainly for its value as a demonstration that Divine Law and Balance could be tapped by human effort, and the world of art was only a starting point. Russell's yearning to imbue the social fabric of his era with principles of universal justice led to his long association with the Twilight Club, a contemporary "think tank" of artists and social philosophers. Through the Twilight Club, whose direction he assumed in
1895, Russell formed bonds that were to endure throughout his life; in the early decades of the century the work of the Twilight Club members, under the influence of Russell's teaching of Divine Law and Universal Order, produced a virtually endless procession of social innovations, such as the creation of child labor laws and child welfare laws, Better Business Bureau and the elimination of sweatshops.
The Living Universe It was in science, however, that Russell left his least known and perhaps his greatest legacy. While steeped in the discoveries and frontiers of his own time, Russell's science essentially is a thorough reworking of a Taoist or pre-Socratic world conception in modern terms. Freely blending mystic and religious imagery with rigorous mechanical logic, Russell's scientific cosmology is rooted in the idea that all phenomena, from star systems to atomic systems, arise from the same infinite source to live, grow and die by precisely identical processes. Hence, there is no fundamental difference between animate and inanimate matter in Russell's universe -- all are living manifestations of God's universe. "All bodies in all the universe are the same in all respects, whether they are electrons, cells, rocks, metals, trees, men, planets or suns. All of them live and die in the same manner. All breathe in the charging breath of life and breathe out the discharging breath of death. All of them compress heat and polarize when they breathe in, and expand, cool and depolarize when they breathe out." (Atomic Suicide?, p. 9.) Thus, Russell's universal mechanics hinges on a reinterpretation of the ancient "unified field" theorem of yin and yang. Life -- not only biological life, but the existence of planets, gases and metals as well -- is caused by increasing compression; and death, by expansion. These two processes, which he also terms "charging" and "discharging," are not seen as separate forces but as opposite stages and directions of one process, much like the winding up and subsequent unwinding of a spring. Life dominates every form from its inception to the point of maximum compression, when the spring cannot be wound any tighter; compression then begins to decrease, radiation assumes dominance, and the process of releasing life's charge -- of dying-- unfolds. To Russell, the elements of matter are also living entities in various stages of birth, growth and decay. "Carbon, the basis of organic life, is the expression of matter at maturity; elements of higher atomic weights are already dominated by the aging side of the pendulum's swing. In the heaviest elements, the force of decay reaches near-total dominance over the force of life -- thus radioactivity is death incarnate." [See sidebar, "The Spiral of Elements."]
The Secret Life of Plutonium The key to grasping Russell's understanding of radioactivity and ozone is the realization that all the elements, like all life forms, are ideally suited to existence within their own natural, local ecology. Thus, all the elements, when left in their natural dimension, serve beneficial and life-giving purposes, including Urium -- later dubbed "Plutonium." Put another way, each octave or dimension of matter has its own natural pressure zone. [For an explanation of the octave idea, see the sidebar, "The Spiral of Elements."] The five elements of organic life (C, H, N, O and Si) all need the normal pressures found at the Earth's surface to exist normally. The natural dimension for the supercompressed, naturally radioactive elements (radium, uranium, plutonium, et al.) is deep underground, where they are widely dispersed in solid rock. Here, far from being deadly or poisonous, they actually have made possible organic life on Earth's surface: through billions of microscopic explosions, they have gradually caused the surrounding rocky crust to break down and release water and other lower-octave elements -- something like a geological compost. "Water and soil are decayed and dying rock. They are, literally, dead rocks. Out of death in Nature life springs... Think of the hundreds of millions of years Nature has to work to decay solid rock and metal planets sufficiently to create enough decayed surface, and an atmosphere, for organic life to become possible. The radioactive metals made that possible. Radioactive metals are dead and dying bodies. They belong underground just as dead animal bodies belong underground. They are not poisons in their own environment... Man makes them poisonous by removing them from their purposeful environment." "Just as the slight decay of an overripe peach will not hurt you, while a fully decayed one might kill you, so, likewise, the 'overripe' chemical elements of the earth which are not too far from carbon [potassium, selenium, iodine, etc.] will not hurt you, while the further they are beyond carbon the more deadly they become, and the more impossible it is to guard yourself from their quick death." (Atomic Suicide?) In short, said the Russells, the only structures naturally suited to exist together with the radioactive elements are rocks. Even concrete, durable metals, "glassified" tombs or salt beds
-- structures presently considered to contain high-level radioactive wastes -- will eventually decay in proximity to the concentrated pressures of such supercompost. The soft tissues of the fourth and fifth octaves, including our bodies, vegetation and the atmosphere itself, certainly cannot endure such a powerful unwinding. So, then, what would happen? In Russell's estimation, the lighter pressures of the stratosphere would retain the majority of radioactive fallout, and would be the first region that would reveal the wholesale destruction of oxygen. That's oxygen, not just ozone: if played through to the end, the last act of the nuclear drama would see the disappearance of all oxygen on the planet, whether as ozone, water or the O2 we breathe. In this context, the ozone hole, as serious as it is in its own right, emerges as an early warning sign.
Our Depleted Personal Ozone In addition to destroying ozone, Russell's logic would also seem to predict other early effects, including the destruction of oxygen mechanisms within our bodies; for the body concentrates far more radiation within its tissues than exists freely in the atmosphere. Dr. Tim Binder, a leading spokesman for the Russells' work, has postulated that "radiation may affect the oxygen-ozone in our white blood cells that is one of the principal [immune system] mechanisms used to destroy pathogens." This line of thinking may already have been confirmed. For decades, a body of surprising data on health and radiation has been observed by a number of researchers, notably Dr. Alice Stewart in England and Dr. Ernest Sternglass in the US. Their figures show that long-term, relatively low-level level radiation may wreak up to 1,000 times more biological havoc than currently accepted "risk levels" predict. The mechanism responsible for this dramatic trend was first discovered in 1972 by a Canadian researcher named Abram Petkau, and has since been confirmed by other researchers. [This issue's article by Sara Shannon details the Petkau effect and its dietary implications -- Ed.] The little-publicized "Petkau effect" occurs through the creation of highly reactive oxygen molecules with a "negative charge" (the negative ion O2). But according to Russell, Nature produces no such thing as a "negative charge." All matter, he maintained, exhibits both charging and discharging properties; and all charges, whether of male or female polarity, are positive. In Russell's terms, what Petkau observed is not a "highly reactive negative ion" but a changed form of oxygen that is abnormally balanced towards discharging its energy rather than charging -- unwinding rather than winding. Thus, what Petkau first documented in 1972 and what Rowland and Molina first suggested two years later may prove to be precisely the same symptom, only on different scales. Perhaps we are already suffering from internal "ozone depletion;" or put another way, perhaps the Earth's ozone crisis amounts to radiation burn -- Gaia herself is already suffering from the Petkau effect.
Rx For Disaster A problem without solutions is not worth unearthing, and Russell's life was centered on practical solutions. As an immediate measure, Russell recommended that all nuclear stockpiles be dismantled and their materials dispersed in deep desert trenches. His reasoning here is three-fold. First, the goal ought to be to return these elements to their natural context -- that is, underground -- where they originally were harmless. Secondly, concentrating them in massed piles is a big mistake: they should be widely dispersed, as they occur in nature. Thirdly, remote desert regions should be selected as an added precaution, assuming that it will take some time for us to master Russell's atomic mechanics sufficiently to repatriate the volatile materials properly and, if possible, correct the existing stratospheric damage. The key to such proper treatment may lie in the intriguing science of atomic transmutation, which holds that elements can change into one another freely within normal conditions (i. e., not requiring the tremendous heat and pressures of a high-tech particle accelerator.) Also like Georges Ohsawa, Russell asserted that low-energy, "table-top" transmutation of elements was eminently possible. Fueled by an early conviction that the civilization of our present time would require new sources of energy, Russell developed an approach to derive free hydrogen from the atmosphere through atomic transmutation. [The recent claims of several teams of scientists to have achieved "table-top" nuclear fusion may finally have provided mainstream evidence of this claim; as of this writing, not enough information has been released to evaluate the nature of the news-making discoveries -- Ed.] Other energy sources suggested by Russell's work include devices using the winding-up "life principle" of nature, rather than the winding-down "death principle" exemplified by explosive technologies of combustion and atomic fission. In other words, Russell maintained that so far we have employed only half the possibilities the two-way universe presents. Examples of such technologies include an "implosion engine" and a logarithmic solar amplifier. [Forthcoming issues of Solstice will report on the present state of several of these technologies -- Ed.] This is a radical concept; it is not hard to see why the great electrical science pioneer Nikola Tesla once told Russell he should "lock up his work in a vault in the Smithsonian for a thousand years" to keep it for future generations who might be developed sufficiently to understand it.
Challenge to Science Meanwhile, back at the labs of established science and the chambers of policy-making, it is highly unlikely that anyone is talking about Russell's assessment of the problem -- let alone his suggestions for solving it. Achieving such a discussion is an undertaking even more ambitious than it would first appear. For scientists to consider the hypothesis, they will have to face its author. And taking a hard look at Dr. Walter Russell may not be a pill much easier for science to swallow in the 1990s than it was in the 1930s. This is not hard to understand. For one thing, in the eyes of most scientists Russell always remained an artist -- a non-scientist. Moreover, his work is not merely unconventional: it overturns many of the cherished tenets of science. But what makes Russell's work so difficult for mainstream acceptance is that it spurns all divisions between physics and metaphysics, and proposes a comprehensive, logical explanation for God and atomic physics in the same breath. What are scientists to make of a man who writes: "What is Atomic Energy? In answering this question let it be remembered that God is love, and that this universe is founded upon love. Every action and its reaction in Nature must be in balance with each other in order to carry out to the purposeful intent of the Creator. As we suggested earlier, those involved in macrobiotics may be best positioned to understand the scope and practicality of Russell's views, and thus to help break ground where established scientists hesitate to tread. A pivotal question, then: how has Russell fared in the macrobiotic world?
Walter Russell and The Macrobiotic Movement Considering the sheer scope of his vision and his remarkably practical understanding of the yin/yang principle, Russell would seem to cry out for macrobiotic attention. In fact, many of his most radical scientific positions have been echoed by the macrobiotic science of Georges Ohsawa and Michio Kushi. For example, Russell contended that matter is not held together by an attracting force generated from the center of mass, but by compression generating from the outside toward the center. This view, one of the Russell statements that flies most abruptly in the face of accepted scientific tenets (and the one that got Dr. Jackson's goat in 1930), is echoed precisely in Kushi's cosmology, where conventional "gravity" is discarded in favor of centripetal "Heaven's force." Moreover, the Russells' application of the yin/yang principal to physical entities, human relationships and the social order seems extraordinarily direct and simple to grasp, and as such would seem a valuable complement to the macrobiotic health/dietetic tradition. While he did not proselytize any specific dietary regimen, he was meticulous in his own personal habits. (For example, while he maintained a prodigious work schedule, he carefully rotated projects so that his focus changed to a different problem or medium every two hours -- a rhythm known in macrobiotic circles as corresponding to the energy cycle of acupuncture meridians.) To his strict adherence to natural law he credited his legendary ability to work long hours with ceaseless good humor and without fatigue -- quintessentially macrobiotic ideals, which he maintained until his peaceful passing, on his birthday, at the age of 92. The following passages from his 1957 Atomic Suicide? shed some light on Russell's views on diet and health: "The blood is of first importance of all the elements which compose the body. The nervous system could be entirely paralyzed and the body would still function, but the blood has deep instinctive awareness of its existence, and the body which does not have a happy, rhythmic blood condition cannot possibly retain its normalcy. Even the food one eats should be 'happy.' It should be cooked with love and eaten joyfully, and there should be a joyful realization of love in one's deep breathing and exaltation during the process of taking food into one's body. The food you eat becomes blood and flesh of your body, and the manner in which you eat it, and your mental attitude while eating it, decides your blood count, the balance between acidity and alkalinity of your digestive machinery, and your entire metabolism. Your Mind is you and your body is the record of your thoughts and actions. Your body is what your Mind electrically extends to it for recording." Curiously, though, his work has elicited little recognition even from within the nominal macrobiotic movement. This is a significant loss for a community purporting to be ever on the lookout for Western cultural and philosophical roots: for Dr. Walter Russell may well represent the apex of what the West has to offer in original macrobiotic thought.
===============================================================
MindNet Journal - Vol. 1, No. 59 V E R I C O M M / MindNet
REVIEW OF PATENTS RELATING TO SYNTHETIC TELEPATHY
By Judy Wall RESONANCE Newsletter of the Bioelectromagnetics Special Interest Group Judy Wall, Editor, 684 C. R. 535, Sumterville, FL 33585 USA Sample of Newsletter $4.00, Subscription (4 per year) $15.00. Number 30, March 1996 Pages 38 to 44. --------------------------------------------------------------- There are at least two patents dealing with the concept oftransmitting sound, voices, and other audio phenomena directly to the brain, bypassing the normal auditory processes commonlyassociated with the sense of "hearing." In a previous article this situation was called "synthetic telepathy," and literature reviewed at that time revealed only the most rudimentary research had been done to support the existence of this phenomenon. Synopsis: In 1961, Allen Fry documented the ability of the human brain to "hear" certain microwave pulses. Joseph Sharp and Mark Grove, in 1973, successfully performed an experiment in which words were modulated onto a microwave frequency and communicated directly to the human brain. A. W. Guy et al. stated that the most likely mechanism for the interaction of the electromagnetic (EM) field with the brain was by the conversion of the EM energy to acoustic energy through thermal expansion.(1) Mike Coyle updates Frey's research [MC: see Appendix A. for this update] elsewhere in this issue to include the possibility of other mechanisms, including direct interaction with the magnetic fields around neurons.
FLANAGAN PATENT
Dr. Gillis Patrick Flanagan has over 300 inventions to his credit. At the age of 11 he invented his first device, a "sleep machine." At the ripe old age of 14 he invented the Neurophone, a radio transmitter that, when connected to the body through electrodes, sends electrical impulses through the human nervous system directly to the brain. He says, "When I first applied for a patent on the device, no one at the patent office believed such a device could possibly work." As a result, it took six years before he received the first patent, and that was "only after we made a nerve-deaf employee at the patent office 'hear' for the first time in fifteen years."(2)
The patent here described is U. S. #3,393,279, applied for March 13, 1962 and granted July 16, 1968, entitled "Nervous System Excitation Device" and the abstract reads:
"A method of transmitting audio information to the brain of a subject through the nervous system of the subject which method comprises, in combination, the steps of generating a radio frequency signal having a frequency in excess of the highest frequency of the audio information to be transmitted, modulating said radio frequency signal with the audio information to be transmitted, and applying said modulation radio frequency signal to a pair of insulated electrodes and placing both of the said insulated electrodes in physical contact with the skin of said subject, the strength of said radio frequency electromagnetic field being high enough at the skin surface to cause the sensation of hearing the audio information modulated thereon in the brain of said subject and low enough so that said subject experiences no physical discomfort."
Excerpts from the patent read:
"The present invention involves the discovery that certain electromagnetic waves induce responses in the nervous systems of mammals. In human beings a response is produced when some or all of a person's nervous system is placed within a field of electromagnetic waves having a radio frequency above the audible range. In addition, when the nervous system of a person is contacted by modulated electromagnetic carrier waves of such a frequency, the nervous system is responsive to the modulation of the carrier waves. Each individual nervous system is at least somewhat selective in respect to the frequencies to which it is most responsive. ...
"In the method of the present invention, a response is initiated in the nervous system of a mammal by disposing at least a portion of that nervous system within a field of electromagnetic waves of a radio frequency above the aural range. ... In a particularly preferred embodiment of this invention, at least a portion of the nervous system of a person is exposed to audio modulated electromagnetic waves having a radio frequency such that the person experiences the sensation of hearing, substantially free of distortion, the information which is conveyed by the modulation.
"The present invention may be used as a hearing aid, as an aid to teaching speech to a person who was born deaf, as a means of communicating with persons in locations in which the noise level is high, as a device by which a person can listen to an audio signal that cannot be heard by the others, etc."
This last sentence presaged a later application of the Neurophone to save the lives of American soldiers during a Vietnam War. Ordinary communication devices with their high extraneous noise levels, when used in the stillness of tunnels, would give away the soldier's location to the enemy and result in his immediate death. The Neurophone granted our soldiers access to communications while cloaked in acoustic imperceptibility.
This remarkable device can enable people born deaf to "hear"
-- some immediately, others with some practice(5), but an amazing accomplishment nonetheless. At the time of invention Flanagan was offered one million dollars by a Corpus Christi company if he could adapt it to send visual images to the brain so that blind people could "see."(3)
The neurophone may be used for subliminal and/or superlearning as it transmits data directly into the brain's long-term memory storage banks, although Dr. Flanagan did not mention exactly when he first became aware of this remarkable property of the invention. He also said that the audio information could be modulated onto a microwave carrier, as in the following Stocklin patent.(5)
The original patent utilized vacuum tubes. Flanagan later applied for a patent on an improved digital version using transistors, U. S. #3,647,970, entitled "Method and System for Simplifying Speech Waveforms," patent applied for August 29,
1969, granted March 7, 1972. The abstract for the patent reads:
"A speech waveform is converted to a constant amplitude square wave in which the transitions between the amplitude extremes are spaced so as to carry the speech information. The system includes a pair of tuned amplifier circuits which act as high-pass filters having 6 decibel per octave slope 0 to 15,000 cycles followed by two stages, each comprised of an amplifier and clipper circuit, for converting the filtered waveform to a square wave. A radio transmitter and receiver having a plurality of separate channels within a conventional single side band transmitter bandwidth and a system for transmitting secure speech information are also disclosed."
Later in the patent we read:
"This invention is concerned with a method and system for simplifying a complex speech waveform so that it can be used for a multitude of applications... The simplified speech waveform can be transmitted directly through the earth or water as a pressure wave, and understood, either directly from the medium, or after simple amplification. The simplified waveform can easily be encoded by scrambling to provide secure voice communications..."
At this point, the Department of Defense slapped a secrecy order on Flanagan's invention and he was not allowed to work on it nor talk about it to anyone for the next five years.(4) He does not know why they did it nor was he compensated for the loss of time or money (as it was not yet in production, the argument went, there is no monetary value to be compensated for). He speculates it might have been for any of several possibilities, the "secure speech" being one.(5) Chuck Allen suggested it was for the "underwater communications possibilities" to contact submarines. An interesting thought occurred to me in comparing the date of the patent with the date of the Sharp and Grove experiment. Did those scientists for the military get their inspiration from young Flanagan's patent?
Patrick Flanagan states that he does not believe that the Neurophone can be used to accomplish a state of "mind control" as is so often associated with the idea of "artificial" or "synthetic" telepathy. That type of situation requires a person to be in a state of hypnosis or lessened awareness, and disconnectedness between the two halves of one's brain. The Neurophone, on the contrary, effects the synchronization of the brainwaves between the two halves of the brain, into a state of phase efficiency which makes the brain hemispheres coherent, approaching the Zen meditative state, thus facilitating a super awareness and the superlearning ability.(5)
After the secrecy order was lifted, the Neurophone was marketed, but with only about 1,000 being produced. The good news is that this remarkable invention will again be available to the public in about 3 to 6 months' time. Patrick and his wife Gale Crystal are now in the process of setting up production. See the end of the article on how to contact them for more information. STOCKLIN PATENT
A second quite remarkable patent, of more recent origin and complicated circuitry, by Philip L. Stocklin, is entitled simply "Hearing Device," dated August 22, 1989, and the patent number is U. S. #4,858,612. The abstract reads:
"A method and apparatus for simulation of hearing in mammals by introduction of a plurality of microwaves into the region of the auditory cortex is shown and described. A microphone is used to transform sound signals into electrical signals which are in turn analyzed and processed to provide controls for generating a plurality of microwave signals at different frequencies. The multifrequency microwaves are then applied to the brain in the region of the auditory cortex. By this method sounds are perceived by the mammal which are representative of the original sound received by the microphone."
This patent clearly picks up on the idea of beaming sounds directly to a person's brain by means of a microwave carrier frequency. Following are excerpts from the patent:
"Results of theoretical analysis of the physics of brain tissue and brain/skull cavity, combined with experimentally determined electromagnetic properties of mammalian brain tissue, indicate the physical necessity for the existence of electromagnetic standing waves, called "modes" in the living mammalian brain. The mode characteristics may be determined by two geometric properties of the brain; these are the cephalic index of the brain (its shape in prolate spherical coordinates) and the semifocal distance of the brain (a measure of its size). It was concluded that estimation of brain cephalic index and semifocal distance using external skull measurements on subjects permits estimation of the subject's characteristic mode frequencies, which in turn will permit a mode by mode treatment of the data to simulate hearing...
"... This invention provides for simulation of microwave radiation which is normally produced by the auditory cortex. ...
"Neural stimulation results in the generation of a broad band of microwave photons by the change in rotational energy state of protons integral to the neuron membrane of the auditory cortex. The physical size and shape of the brain/skull cavity, together with the (semi-conductor) properties (conductivity and dielectric constant) of the brain tissue provide an electromagnetic resonant cavity. Specific single frequencies are constructively reinforced so that a number of standing electromagnetic waves, each at its own single electromagnetic frequency in the microwave frequency region, are generated in the brain. Each such standing electromagnetic wave is called a characteristic mode of the brain/skull cavity. ...
"The auditory cortex in the normally functioning mammalian brain is a source of microwave modes. The auditory cortex generates these modes in accordance with the neural stimulation of the auditory cortex by the cochlear nerve. ...
"In this invention, the function of the ear, the cochlear nerve, and the auditory cortex are simulated. Microwaves simulating the mode matrix are inserted directly into the region of the auditory cortex. By this insertion of simulated microwave modes, the normal operation of the entire natural hearing mechanism is simulated..."
A block diagram is shown of Figures 1 and 2 of the patent
(here semi-combined), as well as Figures 8 and 10.
Basically, "A microphone pick-up is amplified and driven through a bank of 24 audio filters to produce 24 audio bands. These are used to amplitude modulate 24 RF milliwatt transmitters. The combined RF signals are transmitted through a suitable antenna into the person with impaired hearing due to damage to the ear, the cochlear nerve, or the auditory cortex." My thanks to Donald Stratton for this simplified version of the patent's operation. It appears to be much more complicated than the Flanagan patent. Those of you interested in the engineering details should obtain a complete copy of the patent for further perusal.
More excerpts from the patent concerning determination of the subject's microwave mode frequencies: The first method is by using a modified microwave hearing generator in which one oscillator signal is beamed at the subject and varied until the maximum perception value is discovered. "The perception, however, may consist of a buzzing or hissing sound rather than a tone because only one microwave frequency is being received. The first test of perception is to determine the subject's lowest modal frequency for audition (M=1). Once this modal frequency is obtained, the process is repeated for several higher modal frequencies..."
Another method is given: "Purely anatomical estimation of subject's modal frequencies is performed by first measuring the maximum lateral dimension (breadth) L Figure 8 of the subject's head together with the maximum dimension D (anterior to posterior) in the medial plane of the subject's head. D is the distance along Z axis as shown in Figure 10. The ratio L/D, called in anthropology the cephalic index, is monotonically related to the boundary value _E_o defining the ellipsoidal surface approximating the interface between the brain and the skull in the prolate spheroidal coordinate system. _E_o defines the shape of this interface: _E_o and D together give an estimate of a, the semi-focal distance of the defining ellipsoid. Using _E_o and a, together with known values of the conductivity and dielectric constants of the brain tissue, those wavelengths are found for which the radial component of the electric field satisfies the boundary condition that is zero at _E_o. These wavelengths are the wavelengths associated with the standing waves or modes; the corresponding frequencies are found by dividing the phase velocity of microwaves in brain tissue by each of the wavelengths." A third method: "A subject's microwave modal frequencies may also be determined by observing the effect of external microwave radiation upon the EEG. The frequency of the M equal 1 mode may then be used as a base point to estimate all other modal frequencies ... the subject is laterally irradiated with a monochromatic microwave field simultaneous with EEG measurement and the microwave frequency altered until a significant change occurs in the EEG, the lowest such frequency causing an EEG change is found. This is identified as the M+1 mode."REFERENCES1. See Resonance #28, May 1995, "Synthetic Telepathy," pp. 17-26. [MC: see also: MindNet Journal, Vol. 1, No. 32] 2. Begich, Dr. Nick and Manning, Jeane, _Angels Don't Play This HAARP_, Earthpulse Press, Anchorage, AK; 1995, p. 6. 3. Moeser, William, "Whiz Kid, Hands Down," _Life_, Vol. 53 (11), Sept. 14, 1962, p 69f. 4. Manning, Jeane, "Electronic Telepathy Device," unnamed source. 5. Telephone conversation by author with Patrick and Gale Crystal Flanagan, Feb. 24, 1996. For more information about the Neurophone and other inventions, write to: Patrick Flanagan, 1109 S. Plaza Way, Flagstaff, AZ 86001 U. S. A. Appendix A.
11/01/95 Judy Wall, editor Resonance 684 C. R. 535 Sumterville, FL 33585 Dear Ms. Wall, [...] I read "Synthetic Telepathy" with interest as you reference a paper written by Allan H. Frey in _Aerospace Med._, 1961. I possess a copy of a paper he wrote in 1962 for the _Journal of Applied Physiology_ on the same subject titled "Human Auditory System Response to Modulated Electromagnetic Energy." This article seems to be a result of Frey's further work in this area and modifies his earlier statements, made in the 1961 article, about the location and mechanisms of the RF detector in the auditory system. In your article it is stated, "This produces an acoustic stress wave that is conducted through the bone to the cochlea. From there it proceeds in the same manner as in conventional hearing." Frey's 1962 article states: "Another possible location for the detecting mechanism is in the cochlea. We have explored this possibility with nerve-deafpeople, but the results are inconclusive due to factors such astinnitus. We are currently exploring this possibility with animal preparations. "The third likely place for the detection mechanism is the brain. Burr and Mauro(6) presented evidence that indicates that there is an electrostatic field about neurons. Morrow and Sepiel (7) presented evidence that indicates the existence of a magnetic field about neurons. Becker (personal communication) has done some work indicating that there is longitudinal flow of charged carriers in neurons. Thus, it is reasonable to suspect that possibly the electromagnetic field could interact with neuron fields. As yet, evidence of this possibility is inconclusive. The strongest point against it is that we have not found visual effects although we have searched for them. On the other hand, we have obtained other nonauditory effects and have found that the sensitive area for detecting RF sounds is a region over the temporal lobe of the brain. One can shield, with a 2" x 2" piece of fly screen, a portion of the stippled area shown in Fig. 6 and completely cut off the RF sound. "Another possibility should also be considered. There is no good reason to assume that there is only one detector site. On the contrary, the work of Jones et al.(8), in which they placed electrodes in the ear and electrically stimulated the subject, is sufficiently relevant to suggest the possibility of more than one detector site. Also, several sensations have been elicited with properly modulated electromagnetic energy. It is doubtful that all of these can be attributed to one detector." As you can see, the third location that he is proposing does not involve simple mechanical effects on the cochlea via thermal expansion. Significantly, this seems to be related to the controversy that surrounds the debate over whether it is possible to affect the human organism with low-level RF and microwave energy that does not produce thermal effects. Of course, there have been many developments in the thirty years since these articles were written. I hope this information is of some use.
Sincerely yours, Mike Coyle PSYOPS- HTTP://WWW. TELEPORT. COM/~WALTER
================================================================
Title: Chronic exposure to ELF fields may induce depression.
Author(s): Wilson BW
Address: Chemical Sciences Department, Pacific Northwest
Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352.
Source: Bio-electromagnetics 1988;9(2):195_205
Abstract: Exposure to extremely_low_frequency (ELF) electric or magnetic fields has been postulated as a potentially contributing factor in depression. Epidemiologic studies have yielded
positive correlations between magnetic_ and/or electric_field strengths in local environments and the incidence of depression_related suicide. Chronic exposure to ELF electric or magnetic fields can disrupt normal circadian rhythms in rat pineal serotonin_N_acetyltransferase activity as well as in serotonin and melatonin concentrations. Such disruptions in the circadian rhythmicity of pineal melatonin secretion have been associated with certain depressive disorders in human beings. In the rat, ELF fields may interfere with tonic aspects of neuronal input to the pineal gland, giving rise to what may be termed "functional pinealectomy." If long_term exposure to ELF fields causes pineal dysfunction in human beings as it does in the rat, such dysfunction may contribute to the onset of depression or may exacerbate existing depressive disorders
Major Indexes:
Depression [etiology]
Electromagnetic Fields [adverse effects]
Electromagnetics [adverse effects]
Minor Indexes:
Circadian Rhythm [radiation effects]
Melatonin [biosynthesis]
Pineal Body [physiology] [radiation effects]
Reagent Names:
73_31_4 (Melatonin)
Language: English
Periodical Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE; REVIEW (85 references);
REVIEW, TUTORIAL
===============================================================
RF Radiation and Electromagnetic Field Safety
Preprinted from the Chapter 9 of the 1997 ARRL Handbook for Radio Amateurs, Copyright © 1996 American Radio Relay League, Inc. This material may be reproduced for noncommercial use, provided that credit is given.
Although Amateur Radio is basically a safe activity, in recent years there has been considerable discussion and concern about the possible hazards of electromagnetic radiation (EMR), including both RF energy and power frequency (50_60 Hz) electromagnetic fields. Extensive research on this topic is underway in many countries. This section was prepared by members of the ARRL RF Safety Committee and coordinated by Dr Robert E. Gold, WBØKIZ. It summarizes what is now known and offers safety precautions based on the research to date.
All life on Earth has adapted to survive in an environment of weak, natural low_frequency electromagnetic fields (in addition to the Earth's static geomagnetic field). Natural low_frequency EM fields come from two main sources: the sun, and thunderstorm activity. But in the last 100 years, man_made fields at much higher intensities and with a very different spectral distribution have altered this natural EM background in ways that are not yet fully understood. Much more research is needed to assess the biological effects of EMR.
Both RF and 60_Hz fields are classified as nonionizing radiation because the frequency is too low for there to be enough photon energy to ionize atoms. Still, at sufficiently high power densities, EMR poses certain health hazards. It has been known since the early days of radio that RF energy can cause injuries by heating body tissue. In extreme cases, RF_induced heating can cause blindness, sterility and other serious health problems. These heat_related health hazards are called thermal effects. In addition, there is evidence that magnetic fields may produce biologic effects at energy levels too low to cause body heating. The proposition that these athermal effects may produce harmful health consequences has produced a great deal of research.
In addition to the ongoing research, much else has been done to address this issue. For example, the American National Standards Institute, among others, has recommended voluntary guidelines to limit human exposure to RF energy. And the ARRL has established the RF Safety Committee, a committee of concerned medical doctors and scientists, serving voluntarily to monitor scientific research in the fields and to recommend safe practices for radio amateurs.
Thermal Effects of RF Energy
Body tissues that are subjected to very high levels of RF energy may suffer serious heat damage. These effects depend upon the frequency of the energy, the power density of the RF field that strikes the body, and even on factors such as the polarization of the wave.
At frequencies near the body's natural resonant frequency, RF energy is absorbed more efficiently, and maximum heating occurs. In adults, this frequency usually is about 35 MHz if the person is grounded, and about 70 MHz if the person's body is insulated from the ground. Also, body parts may be resonant; the adult head, for example is resonant around 400 MHz, while a baby's smaller head resonates near 700 MHz. Body size thus determines the frequency at which most RF energy is absorbed. As the frequency is increased above resonance, less RF heating generally occurs. However, additional longitudinal resonances occur at about 1 GHz near the body surface.
Nevertheless, thermal effects of RF energy should not be a major concern for most radio amateurs because of the relatively low RF power we normally use and intermittent nature of most amateur transmissions. Amateurs spend more time listening than transmitting, and many amateur transmissions such as CW and SSB use low_duty_cycle modes. (With FM or RTTY, though, the RF is present continuously at its maximum level during each transmission.) In any event, it is rare for radio amateurs to be subjected to RF fields strong enough to produce thermal effects unless they are fairly close to an energized antenna or unshielded power amplifier. Specific suggestions for avoiding excessive exposure are offered later.
Athermal Effects of EMR
Nonthermal effects of EMR may be of greater concern to most amateurs because they involve lower level energy fields. Research about possible health effects resulting from exposure to the lower level energy fields, the athermal effects, has been of two basic types: epidemiological research and laboratory research.
Scientists conduct laboratory research into biological mechanisms by which EMR may affect animals including humans. Epidemiologists look at the health patterns of large groups of people using statistical methods. These epidemiological studies have been inconclusive. By their basic design, these studies do not demonstrate cause and effect, nor do they postulate mechanisms of disease. Instead, epidemiologists look for associations between an environmental factor and an observed pattern of illness. For example, in the earliest research on malaria, epidemiologists observed the association between populations with high prevalence of the disease and the proximity of mosquito infested swamplands. It was left to the biological and medical scientists to isolate the organism causing malaria in the blood of those with the disease and identify the same organisms in the mosquito population.
In the case of athermal effects, some studies have identified a weak association between exposure to EMF at home or at work and various malignant conditions including leukemia and brain cancer. However, a larger number of equally well designed and performed studies have found no association. A risk ratio of between 1.5 and 2.0 has been observed in positive studies (the number of observed cases of malignancy being 1.5 to 2.0 times the "expected" number in the population). Epidemiologists generally regard a risk ratio of 4.0 or greater to be indicative of a strong association between the cause and effect under study. For example, men who smoke one pack of cigarettes per day increase their risk for lung cancer tenfold compared to nonsmokers, and two packs per day increase the risk to more than 25 times the nonsmokers' risk.
However, epidemiological research by itself is rarely conclusive. Epidemiology only identifies health patterns in groups_it does not ordinarily determine their cause. And there are often confounding factors: Most of us are exposed to many different environmental hazards that may affect our health in various ways. Moreover, not all studies of persons likely to be exposed to high levels of EMR have yielded the same results.
There has also been considerable laboratory research about the biological effects of EMR in recent years. For example, it has been shown that even fairly low levels of EMR can alter the human body's circadian rhythms, affect the manner in which cancer_fighting T lymphocytes function in the immune system, and alter the nature of the electrical and chemical signals communicated through the cell membrane and between cells, among other things.
Much of this research has focused on low_frequency magnetic fields, or on RF fields that are keyed, pulsed or modulated at a low audio frequency (often below 100 Hz). Several studies suggested that humans and animals can adapt to the presence of a steady RF carrier more readily than to an intermittent, keyed or modulated energy source. There is some evidence that while EMR may not directly cause cancer, it may sometimes combine with chemical agents to promote its growth or inhibit the work of the body's immune system.
None of the research to date conclusively proves that low_level EMR causes adverse health effects. Given the fact that there is a great deal of research ongoing to examine the health consequences of exposure to EMF, the American Physical Society (a national group of highly respected scientists) issued a statement in May 1995 based on its review of available data pertaining to the possible connections of cancer to 60_Hz EMF exposure. This report is exhaustive and should be reviewed by anyone with a serious interest in the field. Among its general conclusions were the following:
1. "The scientific literature and the reports of reviews by other panels show no consistent, significant link between cancer and powerline fields."
2. "No plausible biophysical mechanisms for the systematic initiation or promotion of cancer by these extremely weak 60_Hz fields has been identified."
3. "While it is impossible to prove that no deleterious health effects occur from exposure to any environmental factor, it is necessary to demonstrate a consistent, significant, and causal relationship before one can conclude that such effects do occur."
The APS study is limited to exposure to 60_Hz EMF. Amateurs will also be interested in exposure to EMF in the RF range. A 1995 publication entitled Radio Frequency and ELF Electromagnetic Energies, A Handbook for Health Professionals includes a chapter called "Biologic Effects of RF Fields." In it the authors state: "In conclusion, the data do not support the finding that exposure to RF fields is a causal agent for any type of cancer" (page 176). Later in the same chapter they write: "Although the data base has grown substantially over the past decades, much of the information concerning nonthermal effects is generally inconclusive, incomplete, and sometimes contradictory. Studies of human populations have not demonstrated any reliably effected end point." (page 186).
Readers may want to follow this topic as further studies are reported. Amateurs should be aware that exposure to RF and ELF (60 Hz) electromagnetic fields at all power levels and frequencies may not be completely safe. Prudent avoidance of any avoidable EMR is always a good idea. However, an Amateur Radio operator should not be fearful of using his equipment. If any risk does exist, it will almost surely fall well down on the list of causes that may be harmful to your health (on the other end of the list from your automobile).
Safe Exposure Levels
How much EM energy is safe? Scientists have devoted a great deal of effort to deciding upon safe RF_exposure limits. This is a very complex problem, involving difficult public health and economic considerations. The recommended safe levels have been revised downward several times in recent years_and not all scientific bodies agree on this question even today. A new Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) guideline for recommended EM exposure limits went into effect in 1991 (see ). It replaced a 1982 American National Standards Institute guideline that permitted somewhat higher exposure levels. ANSI_recommended exposure limits before 1982 were higher still.
This new IEEE guideline recommends frequency_dependent and time_dependent maximum permissible exposure levels. Unlike earlier versions of the standard, the 1991 standard recommends different RF exposure limits in controlled environments (that is, where energy levels can be accurately determined and everyone on the premises is aware of the presence of EM fields) and in uncontrolled environments (where energy levels are not known or where some persons present may not be aware of the EM fields).
The depicts the new IEEE standard. It is necessarily a complex graph because the standards differ not only for controlled and uncontrolled environments but also for electric fields (E fields) and magnetic fields (H fields). Basically, the lowest E_field exposure limits occur at frequencies between 30 and 300 MHz. The lowest H_field exposure levels occur at 100_300 MHz. The ANSI standard sets the maximum E_field limits between 30 and 300 MHz at a power density of 1 mW/cm2 (61.4 V/m) in controlled environments_but at one_fifth that level (0.2 mW/cm2 or 27.5 V/m) in uncontrolled environments. The H_field limit drops to 1 mW/cm2 (0.163 A/m) at 100_300 MHz in controlled environments and 0.2 mW/cm2 (0.0728 A/m) in uncontrolled environments. Higher power densities are permitted at frequencies below 30 MHz (below 100 MHz for H fields) and above 300 MHz, based on the concept that the body will not be resonant at those frequencies and will therefore absorb less energy.
In general, the IEEE guideline requires averaging the power level over time periods ranging from 6 to 30 minutes for power_density calculations, depending on the frequency and other variables. The ANSI exposure limits for uncontrolled environments are lower than those for controlled environments, but to compensate for that the guideline allows exposure levels in those environments to be averaged over much longer time periods (generally 30 minutes). This long averaging time means that an intermittently operating RF source (such as an Amateur Radio transmitter) will show a much lower power density than a continuous_duty station for a given power level and antenna configuration.
Time averaging is based on the concept that the human body can withstand a greater rate of body heating (and thus, a higher level of RF energy) for a short time than for a longer period. However, time averaging may not be appropriate in considerations of nonthermal effects of RF energy.
The IEEE guideline excludes any transmitter with an output below 7 W because such low_power transmitters would not be able to produce significant whole_body heating. (However, recent studies show that hand_held transceivers often produce power densities in excess of the IEEE standard within the head.)
There is disagreement within the scientific community about these RF exposure guidelines. The IEEE guideline is still intended primarily to deal with thermal effects, not exposure to energy at lower levels. A small but significant number of researchers now believe athermal effects should also be taken into consideration. Several European countries and localities in the United States have adopted stricter standards than the recently updated IEEE standard.
Another national body in the United States, the National Council for Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP), has also adopted recommended exposure guidelines. NCRP urges a limit of 0.2 mW/cm2 for nonoccupational exposure in the 30_300 MHz range. The NCRP guideline differs from IEEE in two notable ways: It takes into account the effects of modulation on an RF carrier, and it does not exempt transmitters with outputs below 7 W.
Cardiac Pacemakers and RF Safety
It is a widely held belief that cardiac pacemakers may be adversely affected in their function by exposure to electromagnetic fields. Amateurs with pacemakers may ask whether their operating might endanger themselves or visitors to their shacks who have a pacemaker. Because of this and similar concerns regarding other sources of electromagnetic fields, pacemaker manufacturers apply design methods that for the most part shield the pacemaker circuitry from even relatively high EM field strengths.
It is recommended that any amateur who has a pacemaker or is being considered for one discuss this matter with his or her physician. The physician will probably put the amateur into contact with the technical representative of the pacemaker manufacturer. These representatives are generally excellent resources and may have data from laboratory or "in the field" studies with pacemaker units of the type the amateur needs to know about.
One study examined the function of a modern (dual chamber) pacemaker in and around an Amateur Radio station. The pacemaker generator has circuits that receive and process electrical signals produced by the heart and also generate electrical signals that stimulate (pace) the heart. In one series of experiments the pacemaker was connected to a heart simulator. The system was placed on top of the cabinet of a 1_kW HF linear amplifier during SSB and CW operation. In addition, the system was placed in close proximity to several 1 to 5_W 2_meter hand_held transceivers. The test pacemaker connected to the heart simulator was also placed on the ground 9 meters below and 5 meters in front of a three_element Yagi HF antenna. No interference with pacemaker function was observed in this experimental system.
Although the possibility of interference cannot be entirely ruled out by these few observations, these tests represent more severe exposure to EM fields than would ordinarily be encountered by an amateur with an average amount of common sense. Of course prudence dictates that amateurs with pacemakers using hand_held VHF transceivers keep the antenna as far from the site of the implanted pacemaker generator as possible and use the lowest transmitter output required for adequate communication. For high power HF transmission, the antenna should be as far from the operating position as possible and all equipment should be properly grounded.
Low_Frequency Fields
Recently, much concern about EMR has focused on low_frequency energy rather than RF. Amateur Radio equipment can be a significant source of low_frequency magnetic fields, although there are many other sources of this kind of energy in the typical home. Magnetic fields can be measured relatively accurately with inexpensive 60_Hz dosimeters that are made by several manufacturers.
shows typical magnetic field intensities of Amateur Radio equipment and various household items. Because these fields dissipate rapidly with distance, "prudent avoidance" would mean staying perhaps 12 to 18 inches away from most Amateur Radio equipment (and 24 inches from power supplies with 1_kW RF amplifiers) whenever the ac power is turned on. The old custom of leaning over a linear amplifier on a cold winter night to keep warm may not be the best idea!
There are currently no non_occupational US standards for exposure to low_frequency fields. However, some epidemiological evidence suggests that when the general level of 60_Hz fields exceeds 2 milligauss, there is an increased cancer risk in both domestic environments and industrial environments. Typical home environments (not close to appliances or power lines) are in the range of 0.1_0.5 milligauss.
Determining RF Power Density
Unfortunately, determining the power density of the RF fields generated by an amateur station is not as simple as measuring low_frequency magnetic fields. Although sophisticated instruments can be used to measure RF power densities quite accurately, they are costly and require frequent recalibration. Most amateurs don't have access to such equipment, and the inexpensive field_strength meters that we do have are not suitable for measuring RF power density. The best we can usually do is to estimate our own RF power density based on measurements made by others or, given sufficient computer programming skills, use computer modeling techniques.
shows a sampling of measurements made at Amateur Radio stations by the Federal Communications Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency in 1990. As this table indicates, a good antenna well removed from inhabited areas poses no hazard under any of the various exposure guidelines. However, the FCC/EPA survey also indicates that amateurs must be careful about using indoor or attic_mounted antennas, mobile antennas, low directional arrays or any other antenna that is close to inhabited areas, especially when moderate to high power is used.
Ideally, before using any antenna that is in close proximity to an inhabited area, you should measure the RF power density. If that is not feasible, the next best option is make the installation as safe as possible by observing the safety suggestions listed in .
It is also possible, of course, to calculate the probable power density near an antenna using simple equations. However, such calculations have many pitfalls. For one, most of the situations in which the power density would be high enough to be of concern are in the near field_an area roughly bounded by several wavelengths of the antenna. In the near field, ground interactions and other variables produce power densities that cannot be determined by simple arithmetic.
Computer antenna_modeling programs such as MININEC or other codes derived from NEC (Numerical Electromagnetics Code) are suitable for estimating RF magnetic and electric fields around amateur antenna systems. (See the Handbook's Propagation chapter for more information about MININEC.) And yet, these too have limitations. Ground interactions must be considered in estimating near_field power densities. Also, computer modeling is not sophisticated enough to predict "hot spots" in the near field_places where the field intensity may be far higher than would be expected.
Intensely elevated but localized fields often can be detected by professional measuring instruments. These "hot spots" are often found near wiring in the shack and metal objects such as antenna masts or equipment cabinets. But even with the best instrumentation, these measurements may also be misleading in the near field.
One need not make precise measurements or model the exact antenna system, however, to develop some idea of the relative fields around an antenna. Computer modeling using close approximations of the geometry and power input of the antenna will generally suffice. Those who are familiar with MININEC can estimate their power densities by computer modeling, and those who have access to professional power_density meters can make useful measurements.
While our primary concern is ordinarily the intensity of the signal radiated by an antenna, we should also remember that there are other potential energy sources to be considered. You can also be exposed to RF radiation directly from a power amplifier if it is operated without proper shielding. Transmission lines may also radiate a significant amount of energy under some conditions.
Further RF Exposure Suggestions
Potential exposure situations should be taken seriously. Based on the FCC/EPA measurements and other data, the "RF awareness" guidelines of were developed by the ARRL RF Safety Committee. A longer version of these guidelines, along with a complete list of references, appeared in a QST article by Ivan Shulman, MD, WC2S (see References).
In addition, QST carries information regarding the latest developments for RF safety precautions and regulations at the local and federal levels.
RF Safety References
IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 KHz to 300 GHz, IEEE Standard C95.1_1991, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, 1992.
For an unbiased assessment of ELF hazards, read the series in Science, Vol 249 beginning 9/7/90 (p 1096), continuing 9/21/90 (p 1378), and ending 10/5/90 (p 23). Also see Science, Vol 258, p 1724 (1992). You can find Science in any large library.
An excellent and timely document is available on the Internet by an anonymous FTP from: rtfm.mit.edu, /pub/usenet_by_group/news.answers/powerlines_cancer_faq/part1 and part2.
The Environmental Protection Agency publishes a free consumer_level booklet entitled, "EMF in Your Environment," document 402_R_92_008, dated December 1992. Look for the nearest office of the EPA in your phone book.
W. R. Adey, "Tissue Interactions with Nonionizing Electromagnetic Fields," Physiology Review, 1981; 61:435_514.
W. R. Adey, "Cell Membranes: The Electromagnetic Environment and Cancer Promotion," Neurochemical Research, 1988; 13:671_677.
W. R. Adey, "Electromagnetic Fields, Cell Membrane Amplification, and Cancer Promotion," in B. W. Wilson, R. G. Stevens, and L. E. Anderson, Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields: The Question of Cancer (Columbus, OH: Batelle Press, 1989), pp 211_249.
W. R. Adey, "Electromagnetic Fields and the Essence of Living Systems," Plenary Lecture, 23rd General Assembly, International Union of Radio Sciences (URSI), Prague, 1990; in J. Bach Andersen, Ed., Modern Radio Science (Oxford: Oxford Univ Press), pp 1_36.
Q. Balzano, O. Garay and K. Siwiak, "The Near Field of Dipole Antennas, Part I: Theory," IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology (VT) 30, p 161, Nov 1981. Also "Part II; Experimental Results," same issue, p 175.
R. F. Cleveland and T. W. Athey, "Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) in Models of the Human Head Exposed to Hand_Held UHF Portable Radios," Bioelectromagnetics, 1989; 10:173_186.
R. F. Cleveland, E. D. Mantiply and T. L. West, "Measurements of Environmental Electromagnetic Fields Created by Amateur Radio Stations," presented at the 13th annual meeting of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, Salt Lake City, Utah, Jun 1991.
R. L. Davis and S. Milham, "Altered Immune Status in Aluminum Reduction Plant Workers," American J Industrial Medicine, 1990; 131:763_769.
F. C. Garland, et al, "Incidence of Leukemia in Occupations with Potential Electromagnetic Field Exposure in United States Navy Personnel," American J Epidemiology, 1990; 132:293_303.
A. W. Guy and C. K. Chou, "Thermograph Determination of SAR in Human Models Exposed to UHF Mobile Antenna Fields," Paper F_6, Third Annual Conference, Bioelectromagnetics Society, Washington, DC, Aug 9_12, 1981.
C. C. Johnson and M. R. Spitz, "Childhood Nervous System Tumours: An Assessment of Risk Associated with Paternal Occupations Involving Use, Repair or Manufacture of Electrical and Electronic Equipment," International J Epidemiology, 1989; 18:756_762.
D. L. Lambdin, "An Investigation of Energy Densities in the Vicinity of Vehicles with Mobile Communications Equipment and Near a Hand_Held Walkie Talkie," EPA Report ORP/EAD 79_2, Mar, 1979.
D. B. Lyle, P. Schechter, W. R. Adey and R. L. Lundak, "Suppression of T_Lymphocyte Cytotoxicity Following Exposure to Sinusoidally Amplitude Modulated Fields," Bioelectromagnetics, 1983; 4:281 _292.
G. M. Matanoski et al, "Cancer Incidence in New York Telephone Workers," Proc Annual Review, Research on Biological Effects of 50/60 Hz Fields, U.S. Dept of Energy, Office of Energy Storage and Distribution, Portland, OR, 1989.
D. I. McRee, A Technical Review of the Biological Effects of Non_lonizing Radiation, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC, 1978.
G. E. Myers, "ELF Hazard Facts" Amateur Radio News Service Bulletin, Alliance, OH, Apr 1994.
S. Milham, "Mortality from Leukemia in Workers Exposed to Electromagnetic Fields," New England J Medicine, 1982; 307:249.
S. Milham, "Increased Mortality in Amateur Radio Operators due to Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Malignancies," American J Epidemiology, 1988; 127:50_54.
W. W. Mumford, "Heat Stress Due to RF Radiation," Proc IEEE, 57, 1969, pp 171_178.
W. Overbeck, "Electromagnetic Fields and Your Health," QST, Apr 1994, pp 56_59.
S. Preston_Martin et al, "Risk Factors for Gliomas and Meningiomas in Males in Los Angeles County," Cancer Research, 1989; 49:6137_6143.
D. A. Savitz et al, "Case_Control Study of Childhood Cancer and Exposure to 60_Hz Magnetic Fields," American J Epidemiology, 1988; 128:21_38.
D. A. Savitz et al, "Magnetic Field Exposure from Electric Appliances and Childhood Cancer," American J Epidemiology, 1990; 131:763_773.
I. Shulman, "Is Amateur Radio Hazardous to Our Health?" QST, Oct 1989, pp 31_34.
R. J. Spiegel, "The Thermal Response of a Human in the Near_Zone of a Resonant Thin_Wire Antenna," IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Technology (MTT) 30(2), pp 177_185, Feb 1982.
B. Springfield and R. Ely, "The Tower Shield," QST, Sep 1976, p 26.
T. L. Thomas et al, "Brain Tumor Mortality Risk among Men with Electrical and Electronic Jobs: A Case_Controlled Study," J National Cancer Inst, 1987; 79:223_237.
N. Wertheimer and E. Leeper, "Electrical Wiring Configurations and Childhood Cancer," American J Epidemiology, 1979; 109:273_284.
N. Wertheimer and E. Leeper, "Adult Cancer Related to Electrical Wires Near the Home," Internat'l J Epidemiology, 1982; 11:345_355.
"Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields (300 kHz to 100 Ghz)," ANSI C95.1_1991 (New York: IEEE_American National Standards Institute).
"Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic fields," NCRP Report No. 86 (Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1986).
US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, "Biological Effects of Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields-Background Paper," OTA_BP_E53 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office), 1989.
Table 9.1-Typical 60_Hz Magnetic Fields Near Amateur Radio Equipment and AC_Powered Household Appliances
Values are in milligauss.
Item Field Distance Electric blanket 30-90 Surface Microwave oven 10_100 Surface 1_10 12" IBM personal 5-10 Atop monitor computer 0-1 15" from screen Electric drill 500-2000 At handle Hair dryer 200_2000 At handle HF transceiver 10-100 Atop cabinet 1-5 15" from front 1-kW RF amplifier 80-1000 Atop cabinet 1-25 15" from front
(Source: measurements made by members of the ARRL RF Safety Committee)
Table 9.2__Typical RF Field Strengths Near Amateur Radio Antennas
A sampling of values as measured by the Federal Communications Commission and Environmental Protection Agency, 1990
Antenna Type Freq Power E Location Field (MHz) (W) (V/m) Dipole in attic 14.15 100 7_100 In home Discone in attic 146.5 250 10-27 In home Half sloper 21.5 1000 50 1 m from base Dipole at 7-13 ft 7.14 120 8-150 1-2 m from earth Vertical 3.8 800 180 0.5 m from base 5-element Yagi at 21.2 1000 10-20 In shack 60 ft 14 12 m from base 3_element Yagi at 28.5 425 8-12 12 m from base 25 ft Inverted V at 7.23 1400 5-27 Below antenna 2-46 ft Vertical on roof 14.11 140 6-9 In house 35-100 At antenna tuner Whip on auto roof 146.5 100 22_75 2 m from antenna 15-30 In vehicle 90 Rear seat 5_element Yagi at 50.1 500 37-50 10 m from 20 ft antenna
Table 9.3__RF Awareness Guidelines
These guidelines were developed by the ARRL RF Safety Committee, based on the FCC/EPA measurements of and other data.
- · ! Although antennas on towers (well away from people) pose no exposure problem, make certain that the RF radiation is confined to the antennas' radiating elements themselves. Provide a single, good station ground (earth), and eliminate radiation from transmission lines. Use good coaxial cable, not open-wire lines or end-fed antennas that come directly into the transmitter area.
- · ! No person should ever be near any transmitting antenna while it is in use. This is especially true for mobile or ground_mounted vertical antennas. Avoid transmitting with more than 25 W in a VHF mobile installation unless it is possible to first measure the RF fields inside the vehicle. At the 1-kW level, both HF and VHF directional antennas should be at least 35 ft above inhabited areas. Avoid using indoor and attic-mounted antennas if at all possible.
- · ! Don't operate high_power amplifiers with the covers removed, especially at VHF/UHF.
- · ! In the UHF/SHF region, never look into the open end of an activated length of waveguide or point it toward anyone. Never point a high-gain, narrow-bandwidth antenna (a paraboloid, for instance) toward people. Use caution in aiming an EME (moonbounce) array toward the horizon; EME arrays may deliver an effective radiated power of 250,000 W or more.
- · ! With hand held transceivers, keep the antenna away from your head and use the lowest power possible to maintain communications. Use a separate microphone and hold the rig as far away from you as possible.
- · ! Don't work on antennas that have RF power applied.
- · ! Don't stand or sit close to a power supply or linear amplifier when the AC power is turned on. Stay at least 24 inches away from power transformers, electrical fans and other sources of high_level 60-Hz magnetic fields.
- · Go to · . This page, copyright ©1996 by the American Radio Relay League, Inc, was last updated at 12:00 PM Eastern time on August 7, 1996. Your communications about ARRL products and services are welcome at ; about ARRLWeb, at .
-
|
