Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
III METHODS OF APPROACH
In
this chapter, we present a few concepts that are preparatory to a discussion of
the actual protocols used in our experiment.
The preliminary or background concepts are
presented in two separate sections:
“Definition of Terms,” and "Biological Background.”
The third section, “Experimental Design,” provides an overview of the experiment in terms of
how
it was designed to address the proposed theoretical concerns.*
The fourth section,
“Protocols,”
is a detailed summary of
all presession,
session, and postsession procedures.
A.
Definition of Terms
In order to provide a framework for discussing the essential components of this
experiment, working definitions of the most salient and most frequently encountered
biological- and protocol-related terminology are provided below.
1.
Biological Terms
The following are the most common biological terms:
•
Bacteria—Microscopic, unicellular organisms used as the target biological
system in this experiment.
The specific species employed was Salmonella
typhimurium,
a short, rod-shaped bacterium that
is actively motile.
•
Histidine—An amino acid essential for the growth of Salmonella
typhimurium.
•
Mutation—A genetic change occurring in a small subset of Salmonella that
allows them to grow and divide in the absence of histidine.
Such cells are
termed mutant cells or revertants.
•
Mutation Frequency—Number of mutant cells per total number of
cells—normalized,
for comparison purposes, to number of mutants per
million
cells.
•
Plating—A process whereby diluted samples of the bacterial cultures in the
experimental test tubes were placed on complete medium plates
(i.e., plates
Our theoretical considerations have been
fully addressed in the “Executive Summary.”
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
with medium containing histidine)
, and selective minimal glucose plates
(i.e., plates with medium lacking histidine)
to allow for the growth and
appearance of bacterial colonies.
2.
(U)
Procedural Terms
The following are the most common procedural terms:
•
Subject—One of seven volunteers who undertook to psychoenergetically
influence the mutagenicity of the bacterial samples.
•
Monitor—The individual recording the events that transpired during an
experimental session, and supervised the subject’s activities.
•
Technician—The microbiologist who was responsible for
all aspects of the
pre- and post-session preparation of the biological samples.
•
Session—A single
sitting in which the subject attempted to
(1) increase the
mutation rate of bacteria placed in three test tubes,
(2) decrease the
mutation rate of those placed in three different test tubes, and
(3) leave yet
a different group of three uninfluenced as “controls."
Each of the seven
subjects contributed six such sessions.
•
Trial—An attempt by a subject to psychoenergetically influence
(or not
influence,
as in the case of control test tubes) the bacterial culture in a
single test tube.
There were nine such trials in each experimental session.
•
Controls—Two types of controls were employed in this experiment:
intrasession and extrasession.
Intrasession control test tubes consisted of
three bacterial test tubes, which the subject was instructed not to attempt to
actively influence, from among the set of nine session test tubes.
Extra-
session controls consisted of two tubes per session that were prepared by the
technician in exactly the same manner as the session test tubes, but were
not used as part of the experimental session set of nine tubes.
The
extrasession controls remained at
all times in the Microbial Genetics
Laboratory, and provided the requisite data for establishing an independent
measure of mutation rate.
•
Feedback—A drawing presented to the subject that indicated his/her
performance on a given session.
Feedback for a given session was typically
administered prior to the
start of the subject's next session.
B.
Biological Background
In this section, we will give a general overview of the Ames Salmonella assay
that
is used routinely by SRI’s Microbial Genetics Department, and that was adapted for use
in this experiment to study psychoenergetic effects on mutation frequency.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
The heritable material of living organisms
is contained in the DNA (RNA in some
viruses),
a large molecule so constructed that
it can replicate
itself in
a most exact fashion one
cell generation after another.
This
is the basis of biological continuity and unity.
It
is
also,
however, the basis
for biological diversity, which occurs through mutations.
Each mutation
alters the action of a specific gene, which
is a genetic entity with
its own specific end product,
or protein.
Genes are very stable structures, but each has
its own spontaneous mutation
frequency.
The probability that a spontaneous mutant
cell
will be obtained every time a
cell
divides
is constant, provided the environmental conditions are unchanged.
Changes in the
environment are known to influence the mutation frequency.
Such changes include the
presence or absence of certain trace elements
(e.g., selenium), plus the presence of physical
or chemical agents (mutagens).
Bacteria provide a convenient way to study mutations because millions of cells
can be grown in a very short period of time.
Over the past few years, several bacterial assays
have been developed to screen chemicals for their
ability to induce mutation.
Because there
is a close correlation between mutagenesis and carcinogenesis, such mutagenicity assays are
very often used together with the in
vitro
tests that employ single microbial and/or mammalian
cells,
as well as in vivo
tests that employ multicell organisms from insects
(fruit
fly)
to
mammals
(rodents).
One of the best known bacterial mutagenesis assays
is the Salmonella!
mammalian microsome histidine reverse mutation assay developed by Dr. Bruce Ames at the
University of California in Berkeley.
The Microbial Genetics Department at SRI International
is using this assay system on a daily basis for Government agencies and commercial clients to
determine the mutagenic potential of chemicals; they have performed such testing over a
period of more than
10 years.
The Salmonella assay employs several tester strains of Salmonella typhimurium f
each with a unique
specificity
for detecting chemical mutagens.
The Salmonella
strains, under
optimum conditions, have a generation time of less than 30 minutes.
The bacterial strains are
unable
to grow in the absence of the essential amino acid histidine because of a mutation in
one
of the genes that
is needed
for histidine synthesis.
When these bacteria are plated on
defined selective medium having
little or no histidine,
little or no growth occurs except those
few bacteria that spontaneously mutate back to histidine independence
(ability to grow in the
absence of histidine).
In this case,
a nonfunctional gene product
is reverted back to a
functional one.
This event allows the mutant cells to grow and divide.
Because a mutation
is
stably inherited,
all progeny of the mutated
cells retain the
ability to grow in the absence of
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
histidine.
Distinct individual colonies
will appear on the solid selective growth medium, with
each colony containing billions of progeny of the spontaneously mutated
cells.
Exposure of
the bacteria to a chemical mutagen
will result in an increased number of colonies appearing
on the solid selective growth medium, due to an increase
in mutation induction.
In the Ames Salmonella
assay,
a small amount of histidine
is added to the growth
medium to allow for a few
cell divisions of
all the plated histidine requiring mutants (~10*).
Such growth
is often necessary for chemical mutagenesis to occur.
The results of the
Salmonella assay are usually expressed in terms of the number of revertant colonies per
amount of chemical added to the selective growth medium, which
is usually delivered to the
plate
in 25-ml volumes.
Because of the presence of limited histidine in the selective medium,
the
results of the Ames Salmonella. are considered “semiquantitative,”
since residual growth
on
all plates
(control as well as chemical treated) does not allow for quantitative survival
determination.
A quantitative mutation frequency, however, can be determined.
It
is more
labor intensive than the standard Ames assay, because survival determination requires diluting
of the
cell cultures, and a different growth medium
is needed for determining
(1) the mutant
fraction and survivors
for each of the controls, and
(2) the different exposure concentrations
of the
test chemical.
The mutation frequency
is defined in terms of number of mutants per
given number of surviving cells, usually per 106
cells.
Because of
its simplicity and the rapid response time of about two days, the
Ames Salmonella assay can readily be adapted to study the effect of RA on the mutation
frequency.
Such an adaptation was established by SRFs Microbial Genetics Department
for
use
in this experiment; a detailed discussion of the specific biological procedures that were
followed can be found in Section D, Protocols,
C.
Experimental Design
1.
Conceptual Replication
The experiment undertaken in this study represents a conceptual replication
of the Nash experiment described in our Introduction chapter.
The replication presented here
is termed conceptual, because several of the experimental details of the Nash experiment
have been changed and improved.
First, two potential mechanisms have been postulated that
could account for the acquisition of a
statistically significant effect—that
is, an IDS hypothesis
has been advanced,
in addition to the more established RA hypothesis.
Second, Salmonella
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
typhimunum rather than Escherichia
coli were used as the target bacterial cultures.
Because
this particular species of Salmonella
is used most frequently by SRI’s Microbial Genetics
Department in toxicity studies,
its behavior
is particularly well understood in terms of assay
conditions and experimental protocols.
Finally, the Nash analysis was extended to include
multiple analyses of variance.
As in the Nash experiment, nine
test tubes
filled with dilute bacterial
culture were used per session.
Mutation from histidine dependence to histidine independence
was mentally promoted by the subject in three of the tubes, mentally inhibited in three, and
the remaining three tubes served as controls.
For the purposes of obtaining baseline data, two
additional control test tubes
(for a total of eleven altogether per session) were prepared in the
same manner as the session test tubes, but were kept in the Microbial Genetics Laboratory.
2*
Model Testing Criteria
a.
The IDS Model
As mentioned previously, there were two primary models under
investigation in this experiment. A pivotal concept to the
first, or IDS favorable model,
is
freedom of choice: namely, that by using some type of psi-mediated informational processes,
subjects have the opportunity to select out locally-deviant subsequences from a larger random
sequence.
For example,
in half of the sessions, the subjects were allowed to select the three
test tubes in which they wished to promote mutation, and the three
test tubes in which they
wished to inhibit mutation. A statistically significant deviation from mean chance expectation
(MCE)
in this condition, therefore, could be interpreted theoretically in two ways:
(1) the
subjects somehow mentally “forced” genetic changes to occur in the bacteria in accordance
with their desires to either promote or inhibit mutation rates
(the RA hypothesis); or
(2)
given
the natural spread of mutation rates in a biological system, the subject was able to psycho-
energetically sort those test tubes containing bacteria with high mutation rates from those
tubes containing bacteria with low mutation rates
(a session-by-session IDS hypothesis).
k*
The RA or IDSU Model
The second model under investigation has been termed the Remote
Action (RA)
or Intuitive Data Sorting Unfavorable (IDSU) model.
In this condition, the
conduits by which either the subject or experimenter are able to select test tubes are rendered
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
as inaccessible as possible by the experimental protocols, such that the most direct
explanation of a potentially significant effect
is a remote-action mechanism.
For the
experiment presented here, the
test tubes were
fixed and predetermined as to aim for half of
the sessions—that
is, Test Tubes
1,
2, and
3 were a priori assigned as those tubes in which
mutation rates were to be inhibited
(low aim), Tubes
4,
5, and
6 were designated as controls
(no aim), and Tubes
7,
8, and 9 were assigned as those in which mutation rates were to be
promoted
(high aim).
In
this way, the subject’s potential IDS
ability to sort tubes psycho-
energetically according to the natural spread of mutation rates was precluded in half of the
sessions.
A second possibility also had to be accounted for—namely, that experi-
menters, who are desirous of a certain outcome to the experiment, might use their own IDS
ability to psychically scan the
future.
They could thus assign the IDSU sessions to days on
which,
for whatever reason
(e.g. systematic sequential pipetteing bias in preparation of the
cultures), Tubes
1,
2, and
3 might possess, on average, naturally lower mutation rates than
Tubes
7,
8, and
9.
To preclude
this possibility, a balanced binary random protocol, with
certain states disallowed, was formulated to determine session sequence.
The disallowed
sequences included
(1)
three RA sessions followed by three IDS sessions (“aaabbb”);
(2)
three IDS sessions followed by three RA sessions (“bbbaaa”); and
(3)
alternating IDS and RA
sessions (“ababab”
or "bababa”).
The six-session sequence that was actually generated was
RA, RA, IDS, RA, IDS, IDS
(i.e,, “aababb”),
a protocol that was fixed for
all subjects prior
to the
start of the experiment.
The
final possibility that had to be considered was the degree to which the
biological technician should be allowed to know the overall purpose of the experiment,
in
general, and to know specific experimental protocols,
in particular.
It was hypothesized that
the technician’s knowledge concerning experimental goals could potentially introduce
his
(the
technician’s own) IDS
ability into the experiment as an undesirable variable.
For example,
had the technician been cognizant of the aims of the IDSU condition,
it
is possible that he
could have used his own IDS capabilities either consciously or subconsciously to position the
test tubes
in the rack, such that Tubes
7,
8, and 9 possessed the high mutation rate cultures,
and Tubes
1,
2, and
3 the low mutation rate
cultures.
Rather than precluding or,
at the very
least,
greatly inhibiting IDS channels
(in accordance with the original aim of
its design) the
IDSU condition would have created a new, unintended conduit by which IDS could operate
directly.
To preclude the potential introduction of this third possible IDS variable into the
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
experiment, the technician was kept blind as to
all aspects of experimental goals and protocols
until the conclusion of the experiment.
Given the caveats introduced by the experimental design considerations
detailed above,
a
statistically significant deviation from MCE
in the RA or IDSU condition
could be interpreted,
theoretically,
as follows:
(1) the subject somehow mentally “forced”
genetic changes to occur in the bacteria in accordance with
his desires to promote mutation
in
Test Tubes
7,
8, and
9, and inhibit mutation in Tubes
1,
2, and
(the RA hypothesis); or
(2) IDS
is able to operate
in a goal-oriented mode, such that either the experimenter or the
technician or both were able to adjust their actions in “real time” based on their global scan
of a successful outcome of the experiment in the future
(the global IDS hypothesis).
To
cite
a specific example,
if,
at the conclusion of the experiment, the technician were
finally told the
purpose of the experiment, and that the result had been significant in the IDSU condition,
there exists the following rather circuitous pathway by which his global IDS
ability might be
operative:
(a) the technician could continually .scan his future and determine that by pipetteing
the cultures a certain way in real time, the IDSU condition would not show overall
significance
(that
is,
future “a” determines action “a”
in real time);
(b) he might discover,
however, that by adjusting his real-time pipetteing strategy on certain sessions
(e.g., by placing
more dilute culture in Tubes
1,
2, and
3 as opposed to Tubes
7,
8, and 9), the IDSU
condition would become significant overall
(future “b” determines action “b”
in real-time).
It should be noted that the concept of global IDS
is predicated on an “alternative futures”
model, and
it cannot be determined at present whether such a model possesses any validity.
In any event, given the torturous nature of the pathway that must be postulated for global IDS
to occur, we believe that a
statistically significant result in the IDSU condition would be
explained most parsimoniously by the RA hypothesis.
D.
Protocols
1.
Preexperiment Protocols
a.
Subject Selection
A total of seven subjects were chosen primarily on the basis of their
expressed interest in the
field of psychoenergetics.
None of the seven participants had ever
taken part in a psychoenergetic experiment involving biological systems, and three of the
group were true neophytes—having never participated in any type of psi experiment.
Four of
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
the seven had been participants in previous psychoenergetic experiments—i.e.,
all four had
demonstrated some
ability in remote viewing.
One of these four subjects also scored
significantly in an earlier SRI random number generator PK experiment, and another had
demonstrated some
ability previously in Computer-Assisted Search (CAS)
tasks.
All of the
participants were SRI employees: one was a
statistician, two were secretaries, and the
remainder were research professionals
in either physics or computer science.
b.
Experiment Site Locations
For reasons stated in Section C.2.a,
it was determined that the
biological technician should be kept entirely blind as to
all facets of the experiment, and that,
m order to
facilitate
this situation,
the psychoenergetic testing should occur in a location that
was different from the one used for the biological preparations.
The Microbial Genetics
Laboratory,
therefore, was used for
all aspects of preparation of the biological cultures, and a
room in another building at SRI was used for the psychoenergetic sessions.
C *
Hardware Construction
Once
it had been determined that two separate
facilities were
necessary for conducting the experiment,
a container had to be constructed that was suitable
for transporting the biological samples from the Microbial Genetics Laboratory to the
psychoenergetics
facility.
There were three primary factors that dictated the design of the
container:
(1)
the biological samples had to be protected from extreme variations in
temperature;
(2) the samples had to be protected from sunlight; and
(3) the container had to
be lockable.
To control against extreme variations in temperature, which can greatly
affect the mutagenicity of Salmonella,
a Coleman® ice chest was chosen as the transport
container.
Tnple-paned insulated glass windows were specially installed in the top and front
side of the
ice chest to allow an unobstructed view of the experiment test tubes.
Because
sunlight also affects the mutagenicity of the bacteria, a tarpaulin was used to completely cover
the cooler during transport between the biological laboratory and the psychoenergetics
facility.
A lock was installed; the key was retained exclusively by the biological technician, to preclude
the possibility of tampering with the biological samples once they had been removed from the
Microbial Genetics Laboratory.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
2.
Presession Protocols
A series of activities took place prior to the start of every experimental session.
First, the experiment monitor identified the session type from the fixed session sequence,
“aababb,”
(cf. Section C.2.b),
to determine whether the session would be an IDS favorable or
an IDS unfavorable (RA or IDSU)
condition.
Second, the technician in the Microbial Genetics Laboratory prepared the
bacterial cultures for the session (see Appendix).
Eleven numerically-labelled,
sterile,
16-X-i50-mm test tubes were aseptically
filled with 2.5 ml of glucose minimal broth.
Fifty
jjlI of a 37°C overnight culture of strain TA100 of Salmonella typhimurium was then added to
each tube.*
In a standardized manner, the
first nine tubes were arranged in a test-tube rack,
which was placed in the specially designed ice chest, and then locked.
The remaining two
control cultures were shielded from visible
light by a covering of aluminum
foil, and were
maintained
at room temperature in the Microbial Genetics Department laboratory.
The ice chest, with
its enclosed cultures, was placed on a cart and covered with
a tarpaulin to ensure that the mutation rate of the cultures was not affected by sunlight during
transportation from the laboratory to the experimental
facility.
Third, the experiment monitor transported the covered ice chest on the cart
from the biological laboratory to another
facility at SRI, where the psychoenergetic portion of
the experiment was performed.
Prior to the arrival of the subject, the monitor wheeled the
ice chest into a room equipped with a table and two chairs.
The ice chest was then
uncovered and positioned in such a way that a seated subject could readily view the nine
numbered test tubes through the
glass.
3.
Session Protocols
For other than the
first session for each subject,
a session usually commenced
with feedback to the subject of the previous session’s results
(to be discussed in
Postsession
*(U)
It should be noted that there was no visible evidence of “cloudiness” caused by the
bacterial culture in any of the prepared test tube solutions.
The appearance of the liquid
was uniformly that of clear tap water.
Thus, there were no visual cues available to the
subject,
as to which test tubes might contain greater amounts of the bacterial culture.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Protocols” below).
After the presentation of feedback, the subjects were informed whether
they would select the
test tubes they wished to influence (IDS favorable), or whether the tubes
had been predetermined as to aim by the protocol (IDS unfavorable)
for the current day’s
session.
For the IDS favorable session, the subjects were specifically instructed to select
three
test tubes that they thought were most susceptible to a decrease in mutation rate,
three
most susceptible to an increase
in mutation rate, and three that they wished to leave
uninfluenced as controls.
It should be emphasized that in
all cases where we use the term
select,” we mean that the subjects simply indicated to the monitor the number of the
test
tube they were going to attempt to influence.
At no time did the subjects have physical
contact with the
test tubes, because they were
in the locked ice chest—to which the biological
technician,
alone, possessed the key.
The subjects were informed by the monitor that the set of nine test tubes,
as
with
all biological systems, represented a natural spread of mutation rates, and that their task
would most likely be
facilitated
if they tried to mentally influence the tubes in the direction
they were already naturally inclined.
A typical experimental session proceeded as
follows:
•
The subject chose whether he/she wished to begin the session with either
the high-aim or low-aim condition.
•
Having decided upon the condition, the subject was directed
first to
“select”
(i.e., psychoenergetically identify) a test tube that already exhibited a
mutation rate in the direction of the chosen condition, and then to mentally
promote
it
(i.e.,
via some type of Remote Action mechanism)
in that
direction.
For example,
in the low-aim condition,
a subject would be
encouraged to "psychically scan” the session set of nine test tubes, and to
select one that was predisposed toward producing a low mutation rate
The
subject then attempted to mentally influence the biological culture
in the
tube,
in an effort to further inhibit the mutation rate.
•
For a given condition,
a subject selected a tube and attempted to influence
it for as long as he/she deemed necessary
(usually 30 to 60 seconds),
selected a second tube to concentrate on, then selected a third tube and
concentrated on
it.
The strategies employed in the attempts at influencing
the cultures were
left to the subject’s discretion.
In the low-aim condition,
ior example, several subjects envisioned or “willed” that the Salmonella
were dying,
or would starve to death once they were plated in a histidine-
tree medium.
In the high-aim condition, several subjects reported that they
envisaged the bacteria dividing and multiplying at an extremely rapid rate,
or that they were changing somehow into a new strain of bacteria that grew
well in the absence of histidine.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
•
The subjects were encouraged to complete their efforts with
all three
test
tubes in a given condition before moving on to the other condition, so as to
avoid dividing their attention between the selection of high- and low-aim
test tubes, and to maintain continuity of imagery strategies during the
“influence” phases.
The subjects were also admonished to avoid excessive
strategy searching during the influence phase,
in order to ensure that their
attention would be focused on the actual task
at hand rather than on the
strategy employed.
•
After having finished with three tubes in one condition, the subject was
encouraged to take a brief rest.
The same selection and concentration
process was then carried out with three test tubes of the subject s choice in
the other condition.
For every IDS unfavorable session, the protocol dictated a priori that Test
Tubes
1,
2, and 3
(the
first three tubes on the
left as the subject faced the ice chest) were
“low aim,” Tubes
4,
5, and
6 were “no aim"
or controls, and Tubes
7,
8, and 9
(the
last
three tubes on the right) were “high aim.”
The subject was specifically instructed to
“mentally cause”
a decreased mutation rate
in- Tubes
1,
2, and
3 and an increased mutation
rate
in Tubes
7,
8, and 9, and not to attempt to actively influence the mutation rates of
Tubes
4,
5, and
6. A typical experimental session proceeded as follows:
•
As in the case of the IDS favorable session, the subject chose whether
he/she wished to begin the session with either the high-aim or low-aim
condition.
•
In the low-aim condition, the subject attempted to inhibit the mutation rates
in Test Tubes
1,
2, and
3, one
at a time and in the order of his choosing.
Again, the subject determined the time of “concentration effort” per tube,
which lasted from approximately 30 to 60 seconds.
In the high-aim
condition, the subject endeavored to increase the mutation rates in Tubes
7,
8, and 9, one at a time and in the order of his/her choosing.
The
strategies employed in these attempts at mentally influencing mutation rates
were the same as those discussed for the IDS favorable session above.
•
As in the IDS favorable condition, the subject was directed to complete the
effort with
all three test tubes in one condition before shifting attention to
the other condition;
a rest period between the two conditions was also
encouraged.
The monitor’s principal task during both IDS favorable and IDS unfavorable
sessions was to
fill out a Bio-PK Form
(see Figure
1)
.
Prior to start of the session, the
“Session I.D.,” “Viewer I.D.,” and “Date” portions of the form were completed.
Once the
subject began his process of selection,
a session “Start Time” was noted, and the test-tube
selections were recorded by
filling in the boxes (provided on the form’s test-tube icons) with
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
FIGURE
SAMPLE
BIO-PK FORM
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
the appropriate test-tube-selection numbers.
The order of selection and an estimate of the
duration of effort per each test tube were noted in the “Comments”
section.
Upon debriefing
the subject at the end of a session, the monitor also recorded any comments the subject
wished to make regarding possible strategies employed in the performance of the task, and
any personal statements the subjects wished to volunteer pertaining to their state-of-mind,
health, and so
forth.
4.
Postsession Protocols
At the conclusion of the session, and after the departure of the subject
from the psychoenergetics
facility, the monitor once again covered the ice chest, then
transported
it on the cart back to the Microbial Genetics Laboratory.
The microbiologist removed the nine bacterial cultures from the ice chest and
placed them, together with the additional two extrasession control cultures,
in an incubator
(G24 Environmental Incubator Shaker, New Brunswick Scientific Company,
Inc., Edison,
New Jersey).
The bacterial cultures were shielded from visible
light by aluminum
foil, and
grown with gentle shaking (100 rpm)
for about 24 hours.
Following the incubation period, testing of the eleven bacterial cultures to
determine the extent of mutation induction was initiated.
The testing was divided into two
parts:
•
Quantitation of number of cells plated, which measures the number of
plated
cells that are able to form colonies (CFU) on medium containing
histidine
(yeast complete medium).
•
Quantitation of mutant
cells, which measures the number of cells that are
able to grow in the absence of histidine.
The quantitation of CFU was accomplished according to a standardized set of
laboratory procedures.
First, each of the eleven bacterial cultures
(i.e., the cultures contained
in the nine-session test tubes plus the two controls) was
serially diluted by combining 0.20 ml
of the culture with 1.80 ml of sterile saline until an overall million-fold dilution was obtained
(10-6 ).
Complete medium plates were then divided into three sections with a marking pen,
and a
10-jxl aliquot of the
10-4
,
10-5
, and
10-6 dilutions were then delivered in triplicate to
the appropriate sections on the plate.
The 10— p.1 spots were allowed to dry on the surface of
the solid medium in the plates.
The plates were then incubated at 37 °C
for up to 24 hours
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Table
NORMALIZED MUTATION RATES X 10
~ 6
(Subject 531)
Condition
Aim
Low
No
High
Remote Action (RA)
2.75
3.18
3.37
Remote Action (RA)
3.17
2.95
2.95
Remote Action (RA)
3.54
2.70
2.91
Mean
3.15
2.86
3.08
Statistics*
t (Low < No)
=
-1.494
n.s.
t (No < High)
=
1.059
n.s.
t (Low < High) =
-0.333
n.s.
Condition
Aim
Low
No
High
Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS)
2.94
3.96
3.30
Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS)
3.19
2.84
3.19
Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS)
2.96
3.52
2.82
Mean
3.03
3.44
2.77
Statistics*
t (Low < No)
t (No < High)
t (Low < High)
1.281
n.s.
-2.119
0.050
-1.123
n.s.
* Degrees of freedom =
16.
^ p-value;
2-tailed
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9