AAWSAP DIRD, Anomalous Acute and Subacute Field Effects on Human Biological Tissues, March 2010

UNCLASSIFIED/}FOR: OFFIEIAL WSE &••LY
prestigious org anization known to be interested in field effect s. The aut hors consider
the case when the cha rge carri ers are ions in a fluid flowing t hrough a t ube . The ions
are free to move but obviously confined within a specific volume. The team then poses
the question: what happens when you app ly a static magnetic field modulated by
Johnson Noise (a function of calci um currents in closed t ubes, non -l inearl y dependent
on temperatu re in the presence of ULF).
The answer, t hey say, is a resonance effect in which the ion ic currents grow stronger.
The st rength of t he resonance depends on t he size of the capillary and the st rength of
the field . The aut hors have wo rked out how t hi s effect might play out in the human
body, and cause st asis under certain cond itions and sma ll vessel damage, as a function
of t he concentration of calcium in the microcirculation . A recent peer-review (well
beyond t he capabilities of th is author) has found t he work promising [31].
C. SOME THOUGHTS ON NEUROLOGICAL CORRELATES
From this brief summary it ca n be seen that not on ly are incident energies,
wavelengths, and durations of exposures independent variables of gross injury, but
they also are variables as to tissue type . This might be expected, because the injury to
nerve and othe r cell types must be seco ndary to alteration of the molecular and
biochemical structures. I n the case of nerves/neurons in peripheral or central nervous
system components, the action potentia ls and subseq uent release of end -plate,
ephaphtic, or synaptic neurotransmitters are known to be related to t he currents
induced across the membranes by direct EMF, or induced B-Fields.
The electrophysiology shou ld allow inferences to be made as to incident energies and
bandwidths to the extent we ca n infer or discover the near-field RF qualitative and
quantita t ive measures. What can not be overly emphasized, is that when one looks at
the literature of anomalous cases, including claims from the most reliable sources, the
extent and degree of injuries are consistent across patients who are injured, compared
to witnesses in the far-field, who are not.
For example, in the cases this reviewer has stud ied, the directionality and the times of
the known RF/ EM exposures and the inj ury severity and patterns are hig hl y
consistent: There are no significant differences in either the reported acute effects
(symptoms) or the physician -observed (signs) between the case of three antenna
engineers and the Cash -Landrum cases.
This pathophysiological observation is a convincing one: "Something" is causing these
near fieldxi injuries, the energy deposition and conditions follow our "real-world"
neurological experience. It seems highly unlikely that imag in ation or delusion of
laypersons cou ld m imic the science of thermal injury patterns, electrophysiology,
immunology, and neurology in a non-linear dose-response manner... and incorporate the
biophysics of wave length and eV effects (1 eV = 1.6 x 10-19 joules).
xi " Near-Field" as a term in this and companion stud ies refers to the subjective distance, in part, bet ween the
injured patient and the presumptive energy sou rce, be it an RF/ EM antenna, source of microwaves, or
unidentified object. We use the term also to imply relatively li mited spatio-temporal exposures (within ! Os of
meters), t imes before acute (minutes to hours to one day) or subacute (up to 72 hours) periods betwe en exposure
and signs and symptoms of actua l injury. An object, or in this case a human body in the near field where
electromagnetic waves are incident yet to be fu lly formed due to the perturbati on . But to fi rst and second orders,
inferences and ca lculations of wavelength and energy depositions can sometim es be made with good reporting and
data from the events.
UN CLASSI FIED/fFOA OFFIQIAL: Wili QP◄IL:¥
12