—_—_—_—_—_£_ vss . 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. e 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: e 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. e 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. e 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 17 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 2? Hi
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 BIO - PK FORM Session I.D. Viewer I.D. — Date: Start Time: Low Aim High Aim Comments: FIGURE 1 SAMPLE BIO-PK FORM 18 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). e 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-yl aliquot of the 10-4, 10-5, and 10-8 dilutions were then delivered in triplicate to the appropriate sections on the plate. The 10-1 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 19 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 to allow for growth and appearance of colonies. The colonies were then counted manually using a New Brunswick Scientific Bactronic Colony Counter, Model C110, and the data were recorded for each dilution. In all cases, the 10- bacterial dilution provided an acceptable number of nonoverlapping individual colonies to back-calculate the total number of bacteria in 1 ml of the overnight culture. The quantitation of the number of mutants (histidine independent cells) present in the overnight cultures was obtained according to the following set of procedures. First, a 100-1 aliquot (approximately 108 cells) of the undiluted culture was combined with two ml of molten (43°C) top agar in a 13-x-100-mm test tube. Vortexing of the cells in the top agar ensured even distribution of the cells when poured on the selective minimal glucose plates. Each culture was then plated in triplicate, and the plates were incubated at 37°C for 48 hours. When the incubation process was complete, revertant colonies were counted manually, and individual plate counts were recorded. For each of the eleven bacterial cultures, an average CFU for 10 ul of the 10-5 dilution was obtained and adjusted in terms of CFU per ml of the original culture. The mutation frequency was then calculated as 6 number mutant cells/ml 6 mutation frequency/10° cells = § ———————___-_ x 10 CFU/ml When all of the calculations for a given session were completed, the micro- biologist provided the monitor with an experimental data sheet detailing the growth rates of the biological samples and the pertinent experimental parameters involved in the biological procedures (see Figure 2). The most salient column to note on this form is the “Mutants/106Cells,” which is the number of cells per million cells per test tube that were able to grow in the absence of histidine. The most desirable outcome of a session was obtained if the subject’s “high-aim” test tubes exhibited the highest values from this column, and “low- aim” test tubes exhibited the lowest values. After obtaining the form for a given session, the monitor completed a session feedback sheet (see Figure 3). The test tube numbers of the subject’s choices for the IDS favorable condition (or the predetermined Numbers 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, and 9 for the IDS 20 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 Experiment: [D4 sd Innoculation pace: $e /9t et) tine: VBS he GM Broth Batch Date: Bacteria Stock Incubation Date: 9/2¢~ Start Time: /(: End Time: : Total Time:2 5 (ytife rh ag (V4) # P42 du Tosa) Survival (YC Plates) Incubation Start Time:/f' End Time: 2:47 ¢. ght Total Time: 4, Bio Platg Batch Date: Mutation (Bio Plates) Vote. Start Time: j/:20 4m End Time: Viso4u ye Total Time J6, 2. An Temp: 37° YC Plate Batch Date: %/a8/¢4- Saline Batch Date: YAs/24- colonies/ 10 .1 average muga 10 The 3pH i Tube # Mutants /.100 ml Aver. Mutant/.1 mi (dil: 10-° 107 1078 cells/ml ( |$3 67 62 | Of ree al we _| QF Gr 4 ope ela | a | 6 157 69 4 8 t 1D | FIGURE 2 BACTERIAL ASSAY FORM SAMPLE 21 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
+ Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 unfavorable condition) were written in the boxes below the appropriate low aim or high aim test-tube icons. The monitor then consulted the “Mutants/108 Cells” column on the form in order to rank, relative to each other, the mutation rates of the six chosen test-tube samples. To represent the results graphically, the boxes on the three-test tube icons corresponding to the three highest mutation rates were colored green, and the three boxes corresponding to the three lowest mutation rates were colored red. The monitor also colored the “High Mutation” box on the key green, and the “Low Mutation” box red, then filled in the appropriate session identification number. As mentioned above, the session feedback sheet was presented to the subject, whenever possible, just prior to the start of the subject’s next session. 22 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
i a7 a ‘ ’ Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 Session I.D. | Key | | High Mutation | | Low Mutation Low Aim High Aim FIGURE 3 SAMPLE FEEDBACK FORM 23 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
fe . Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION | Seven subjects participated in six experimental sessions each: three for the IDS condition, and three for the RA condition. Of the total of 378 test tubes used in these sessions, 63 tubes corresponded to the high-, low-, and no-aim condition, respectively, for the two hypotheses under test. Thus, for a given hypothesis, there were 126 tubes to test for differential aim effects. An estimate of the number of trials necessary for a sensitive test was derived from published work, and was calculated on the basis of a significant t-test assuming a magnitude of effect on the order of 0.5 o. That is, it was assumed a priori that for either the RA or IDS hypothesis, individuals would be able to produce an effect of 0.5 o. Because of the large standard deviation (0.46 mutation cells per million) observed in 187 baseline control tubes (cf. Figure 4), it was hypothesized that three sessions per subject in both the RA and IDS conditions would be sufficient to demonstrate a significant effect. Due to large “batch” variations (i.e., variation between sets of nine experimental test tubes), the normalization technique used by Nash was adopted. The measured mutation rate for each test tube was divided by the set-of-nine average and multiplied by the global average mutation rated for the 378 tubes in the experiment. Or, normalized mutation rate = mutation rate x global average set average Table 1 shows the normalized mutation rates observed during this experiment, summed across all subjects for the RA and the IDS conditions, respectively. Following the analysis done by Nash, pairs of t-tests between the various aims and conditions have been calculated. During the RA condition, there were no significant differences among the aims. When subjects were allowed to choose their test tubes, however, the low-aim condition was significantly lower than the no-aim condition (p < 0.05). While the low-high-aim difference was in the correct direction, the difference was not significant. There were no significant differences for various aims observed in the RA condition. 24 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
a Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 (1.58 + 0.04) x 10°6 = (0,456 + 0.032) x 10-6 ~ 15% ERRORS 7) Ke Zz Ww = Ww oc a) n zt ui = LL (@) cc LL ca =. D> Zz ° 0 1 2 3 MUTATION PROBABILITY X 10°6 FIGURE 4 DISTRIBUTION OF MUTATION PROBABILITY FOR 187 BASELINE TEST TUBES 25 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
‘ | *, Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 Table 1 NORMALIZED MUTATION RATES x 10 “6 FOR ALL SUBJECTS Remote Action (RA) Remote Action (RA) Remote Action (RA) Mean , t (Low < No) = -1.160 nis. Statistics’ =| (No < High) = 0.412 ns. t (Low < High) = -1.200 nas. ee eee Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS) Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS) Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS) Mean t (Low <No) = 1.690 0.0477 Statistics * t (No < High) = -1.190 nis. t (Low < High) = 0.550 nis, * Degrees of freedom = 124. t p-value. From this analysis, it can be concluded that psychoenergetic functioning occurred that was consistent with results reported by Nash. While the size of the effect observed in this experiment was small compared with Nash’s, it is consistent with the IDS hypothesis that certain subjects demonstrate a psychoenergetic ability to sort test tubes according to mutation rate. (It should be noted that an IDS channel was also present in Nash’s experiment, but that Nash’s significant result was interpreted exclusively within the RA hypothesis framework). 26 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9
a Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 There was no compelling evidence, however, that subjects are able to interact causally with this particular biological system. Tables 2 through 8 display the data contained in Table 1 in a subject—by-subject format. One subject (310) produced strong effects in the IDS condition: his low-aim condition was significantly lower than his high—aim condition (p < 0.003), and his low-aim condition was also significantly lower than the no-aim condition (p < 0.018). (U) In addition to the various t-tests, a multiway analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted as a second form of analysis (post hoc). Aim (low, no, and high) and condition (IDS and RA) were used as the two “main effects” for the analysis. When the ANOVA examines one “main effect,” it sums all the data in the other “main effects.” For example, to examine the IDS and RA condition, the ANOVA sums across all aims. Likewise, to examine an aim effect, the ANOVA sums across the IDS and RA conditions. No significance was anticipated in these two dimensions, and none was observed. Significance was observed, however, in the interaction term between the IDS and the RA condition (p < 0.05), which may indicate that there is some difference between the IDS and RA conditions when examined as a function of aim. This does not imply that IDS or RA is “more significant.” It should be noted that the interpretation of the ANOVA interaction term has been traditionally difficult, and Rosenthal has suggested that ANOVA with more than one “main effect” should | not be used in the social/psychological sciences.* The analysis has been included here merely for the sake of completeness. In summary, this experiment has produced a relatively weak, but statistically significant effect, which most readily supports the conclusion that subjects are able to acquire information, psychoenergetically, about the mutation rates of Salmonella, but are unable to cause physical perturbations in these bacteria. To reiterate the criteria set forth in the Introduction, a physical system will not be considered a candidate intrusion detector unless it registers energetic effects directly (as a result of intentional perturbation), or indirectly (as a result of concomitant acquisition of information). To first order, therefore, it must be concluded on the basis of this one experiment, that the Salmonella bacterium does not appear to be a promising intrusion detector. R. Rosenthal and R. Rosnow, Essentials of Behavioral Research, p. 254 (McGraw Hill Book Co., New York, 1984). 27 | Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 apt rr ments
le t | Se Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9 Table 4 NORMALIZED MUTATION RATES xX 10 — (Subject 310) L Remote Action (RA) Remote Action (RA) Remote Action (RA) Mean _ t (Low < No) = 0.394 ns. Statistics" + (No < High) = 0.976 nis. t (Low < High) = 1.485 ns. Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS) Intuitive Data Sorting (DS) Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS) Mean t (Low<No) = 2.298 0.0187 Statisticst’ t (No < High) = 0.677 nas. t (Low < High) il * Degrees of freedom = 16. t p-value. 30 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00789R003800290001-9