CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
68
Final Report- - Objective E, Task 2
December 1987
EXPERIMENTAL PROTOCOL FOR HEMOLYSIS:
CONFIRMATION EXPERIMENT
By:
G. SCOTT HUBBARD
JESSICA M. UTTS
SRI International
WILLIAM W. BRAUD
Mind Science Foundation
Prepared for:
PETER J. McNELIS, DSW
CONTRACTING OFFICER'S TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo Park, California 94025 U.S.A.
(415) 326-6200
Cable: SRI INTL MPK
STOved For Release 12060/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
International
®

LF
SRI International
SRI
1
R
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Final Report -- Objective E, Task 2
Covering the Period 1 October 1986 to 30 September 1987
December 1987
EXPERIMENTAL PROTOCOL FOR HEMOLYSIS:
CONFIRMATION EXPERIMENT
By:
G. SCOTT HUBBARD
JESSICA M. UTTS
SRI International
WILLIAM W. BRAUD
Mind Science Foundation
Prepared for:
PETER J. McNELIS, DSW
CONTRACTING OFFICER'S TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE
SRI Project 1291
Approved by:
MURRAY J. BARON, Director
Geoscience and Engineering Center
333 Ravenswood Avenue . Menlo Park, California 94025 . U.S.A.
SRI INTL MPK . TWX: 910-373-2046
Internationaloved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
:
ABSTRACT
An experiment was conducted by the Mind Science Foundation to study the possible
relationship between intent to remotely influence a biological system and actual changes in the
system. Three phases of the investigation were conducted, including a pilot study, an
intermediate study, and a confirmation study. The first two were used to test and refine the
protocol for the third and final study. As a result of these preliminary studies and further input
from various experts, the confirmation study appears to have been extremely well conducted.
Thirty-two subjects participated in the confirmation study. Their task was to attempt to
retard the rate of hemolysis (destruction) of red blood cells which had been placed into a tube of
distilled water and saline in a distant room. Each subject participated for one hour, broken into
four 15-minute periods. Of these four periods, two were identified as control periods and two as
protect periods. The experimenter who was measuring the rate of hemolysis was blind to this
condition. During the protect periods, subjects used visualization and other intention strategies
to try to protect the blood cells. During the control periods, subjects were to try to think of other
matters. In one control and one protect period, eight tubes of blood were processed, and in the
other periods two tubes were processed. Subjects were blind to this condition. It was used to
attempt to ascertain whether observed effects could be attributed to causal relationships, or to
intuitive data sorting. To see whether or not blood source was important, 14 of the subjects were
trying to protect their own blood, and 18 were trying to protect that of another. Both subject and
experimenter were blind as to the source of blood.
Results showed that nine of the 32 subjects were able to achieve a significant difference in
the rate of hemolysis for the protect periods versus the control periods. The probability of such
an extreme result by chance alone is 1.9 x 10-5. There was no significant difference between
those trying to protect their own blood and those trying to protect that of another.
The study was designed to try to determine whether causal forces or intuitive data sorting
were responsible for any observed psi results. The extreme heterogeneity in the data made it
impossible to make that determination. It is recommended that future studies of this type be
designed in such a way that data from each subject can be analyzed separately. It appears that
level of psychic functioning, whatever the underlying mechanism, is highly individualized, making
it difficult to test a specific theory using data combined across subjects.
ii
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
ii
LIST OF TABLES
iv
LSIT OF FIGURES
iv
I.
INTRODUCTION
1
A.
Background
1
B.
Overview
2
II.
METHOD OF APPROACH
3
A.
Methodology
3
B.
Analysis
4
C.
Simulation of RA with Salinity Data
6
III.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
8
A.
ANOVA Results
8
B.
RA versus IDS Results
9
REFERENCES
12
APPENDIX
A-1
iii
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
*
LIST OF TABLES
1.
Expected Values and Variances for Standardized Protect Period Means
6
2.
Means and Standard Deviations for Standardized Protect Data
10
FIGURE
1.
RA Simulation Based on Salinity Data
7
iv
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
I INTRODUCTION
A.
Background
For several years, the Mind Science Foundation (MSF) in San Antonio, Texas, has been
investigating the relationship between intent to influence biological systems remotely, and actual
changes in the systems. Until recently, it was assumed that any changes observed (beyond
chance) were actually caused by the subject through a form of remote action (RA). In 1985, a
new theory was proposed,1* called Intuitive Data Sorting (IDS), which could account for much
of the data previously attributed to RA. One postulate of the IDS theory is that observed changes
are a result of psi-mediated sorting of the data into experimental and control conditions, and are
not the result of a causal remote action.
In FY 1986, SRI International (SRI) awarded a subcontract to MSF to study the distant
influence of one individual on the electrodermal activity of another. One of the purposes of the
study was to differentiate between results due to RA and those due to IDS. Unfortunately, the
experimental protocol allowed for IDS effects to enter the data under the condition that was
supposed to isolate RA. Thus, although significant psi effects were observed, it was impossible to
determine their source.2
In FY 1987, MSF was given a new one-year contract to investigate the relationship
between intent to remotely influence the rate of hemolysis of human red blood cells and actual
rate of hemolysis. A successful preliminary experiment of this type had been reported in 1979,3
but that study involved only a small number of trials with one subject who had previously
demonstrated apparent psi ability. In contrast, the present investigation included 32 subjects. As
part of the new experiment, a condition was built in to provide some information about whether
RA or IDS could account for any observed psi results.
A report by William Braud of MSF is attached as the Appendix. It gives a detailed
account of the investigation for FY 1987, except for an analysis of whether RA or IDS is more
likely to have been the source of any observed psi. The balance of this report contains that
analysis, as well as a summary of the entire investigation.
*
References may be found at the end of this report.
1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
B.
Overview
There were three phases to this investigation. The first phase was a pilot study, conducted
to determine how well the proposed methodology would work, and to ascertain whether or not it
was important to have a subject trying to influence his or her own blood instead of that of
another person. The purpose of the second (intermediate) phase was to construct the
parameters necessary to test RA versus IDS. It consisted of a salinity study designed to mimic the
anticipated psi-induced changes and a Monte Carlo study, which used the salinity study results to
determine the appropriate parameters. The data from the salinity study were also used at SRI to
simulate what experimental results might occur in a study where RA was operating. The final
phase was the confirmation study. Changes indicated by the results of the first two phases were
incorporated into the methodology, as were suggestions from members of the Scientific Oversight
Committee (SOC). A site visit by SRI personnel resulted in further minor changes. The resulting
protocol for the confirmation study appears to have been extremely sound.
2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

:
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
II METHOD OF APPROACH
A.
Methodology
A complete description of the methodology for all three phases of the investigation is given
in the report by Braud (see Appendix). Because the main purpose of the first two phases was to
establish the final protocol for the confirmation study, those details are omitted from this report.
The methodology for the confirmation study can be summarized as follows.
Thirty-two subjects participated in one experimental session each. A session consisted of
four consecutive 15-minute periods. Two of these were designated as control (C) periods, and
the other two as protect (P) periods. During the P periods, each subject was encouraged to
"heal" the blood (i.e., retard the hemolysis rate). During the C periods the subject was
instructed to think of other matters. Half of the subjects followed a pattern of PCCP, while the
remaining half followed the pattern CPPC. One of the P periods and one of the C periods for
each subject was designated as a two-trial period, and the other was designated as an eight-trial
period (a trial is defined below). This distinction was necessary to try to differentiate between
RA and IDS effects. The subject was blind to the number of trials in the period, and the
experimenter was blind to the pattern of P and C periods. All of these assignments were
prepared by another staff member at MSF before the experiment began by consulting a random
number table.
Blood samples were collected from each subject 14 to 42 hours prior to the experimental
session, and stored at 4ºCelsius. The registered nurse who drew the blood was supposed to label
half of the samples with the name of the actual donor, and the other half with the name of one of
the other donors. Because of a scheduling change and resulting confusion, 14 samples were
labeled with the donors' own names, while 18 were labeled with the names of others. Thus,
during the protect periods, 14 subjects were trying to protect their own blood and 18 subjects
were trying to protect the blood of another. Both the experimenter and the subject were blind to
the source of the blood until after all 32 sessions were completed.
To begin the experimental session, the subject and the experimenter were isolated in
rooms in different parts of the building. During each of the four 15-minute periods, the
experimenter sequentially conducted either two or eight trials, based on the preassigned scheme.
3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
For each trial, a fixed amount (100 ul) of whole blood was added to a prepared tube of 0.425%
saline in 6.0 ml of distilled water. Saline solution causes red blood cells to deteriorate through
the liberation of the hemoglobin contained in them. This process is called hemolysis. The
purpose of this study was to see if psi could be used to slow down the rate of hemolysis.
To measure the rate of hemolysis for each trial, the experimenter placed the tube in a
spectrophotometer which recorded the percent light transmittance for each of 60 seconds. The
data used for analysis was the difference between the average for the first five seconds and the
average for the last five seconds. If the subject was successfully protecting the blood, the
difference should be smaller during the protect periods than during the control periods, because
red blood cells retaining more hemoglobin should transmit less light. Using this procedure, either
two or eight tubes were consecutively processed in each period. Strict measures, described in the
appended MSF report, were used to ensure that the timing was consistent over all sessions.
Meanwhile, the subject was signaled at the beginning of each of the 15-minute periods,
but did not know whether data for two or eight trials (tubes) were being collected in that period.
The subject consulted the preassigned order to determine whether each period was a protect or a
control condition. Several possible techniques for trying to protect the blood in the other room
had been given to each subject at the beginning of the experiment. A 35-mm slide of intact red
blood cells was available for viewing, as an aid to visualization. Subjects were blind as to the
number of trials being conducted and subjects were simply instructed to spend the entire 15
minutes of the protect periods trying to slow down the rate of hemolysis. During the two control
periods, they were to try to think of other matters or, if that proved to be impossible, to imagine
the hemolysis proceeding at its normal rate.
After the completion of the session, the experimenter escorted the subject to his office,
and the subject described the techniques he or she used during the protect periods. In return,
the experimenter calculated the session results and gave the subject both verbal and numerical
feedback for the 20 tubes used in the four periods.
B.
Analysis
The confirmation study was designed to explore the following questions:
(1) Does the rate of hemolysis differ during the protect and the control periods?
(2) Does the magnitude of the effect depend on whether one is trying to protect his
or her own blood versus that of another?
(3) Can any observed psi effects be attributed to RA or IDS?
4
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

--
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
The first two of these questions can be explored by performing an analysis of variance
(ANOVA) using.the change scores for each of the 20 tubes as the dependent variable. There
are three factors: Blood Source (own versus another, fixed, between); Condition (protect versus
control, fixed, within); and Subjects (random, nested under blood source). The procedure for
answering the first question depends on whether or not the results show a significant interaction
between Condition and Subjects. If not, the question can be answered by looking at the main
effect for Condition. A significant interaction indicates that the contrast between the protect and
control periods differs for each subject. Thus, it is meaningless to consider an overall Condition
effect. Instead, individual t-tests to compare protect and control period means should be
performed for each subject. If it appears that within subject variability is homogeneous, then an
overall estimate of that variability can be used in these tests, with the resulting increase in degrees
of freedom. Otherwise, the usual two-sample t-test should be used for each subject.
The procedure for answering the second question is similar to that for the first. If there is
a significant Source by Condition interaction, then the results for one's own versus another's
blood should be compared within each condition. Otherwise, the question can be answered by
examining the main effect for Source.
The third question cannot be answered with the ANOVA results. The extent to which IDS
or RA can be used to explain observed psi results can be examined by comparing the results to
those predicted by each of the two theories. In this experiment, results can be compared by
using each subject's control period data to standardize the protect period data, then comparing
means and variances of the two-trial and the eight-trial periods to those predicted by each of the
theories. The RA theory predicts that there will be a significant shift in means away from what
would be expected by chance, while the IDS theory predicts that there will be an increase in
variance, but that the rate of that increase will be a function of the number of trials.
Theoretical calculations have been done to find the expected means and variances of the
standardized means for the two-trial and eight-trial protect period data, under the hypotheses of
chance, RA, and IDS. Since the standardization must be done using control data based on only
ten trials per subject, these calculations involved central and noncentral t distributions instead of
the more familiar normal distribution. Table 1 gives the expected means and variances for each
of the three theories. The parameter I in the variance formula for the IDS theory is called the
IDS strength parameter. The assumption is that, as a result of psi-biased data collection, the
variance of the usual standardized distribution will be (1 + I)2 instead of 1. The parameter Au
represents the difference between the protect and control period population means; o is the
standard deviation for the control period. Notice that all three theories predict that the variance
for the mean of two trials should be four times the variance for the mean of eight trials.
5
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Table 1
EXPECTED VALUES AND VARIANCES
FOR STANDARDIZED PROTECT PERIOD MEANS
CHANCE
RA
IDS
Mean
0
1.094 ( Δμ/σ)
0
2 Trials
Variance
0.707
0.707 + 0.044 ( AM/O ) 2
0.64 [ (1+I) 2 +.1 ]
Mean
0
1.094 ( Δμ/σ)
0
8 Trials
Variance
0.177
0.177 + 0.011 (Δμ/σ)2
0.16 [ (1+I) 2 +.1 ]
C.
Simulation of RA with Salinity Data
The data from the salinity study conducted as the intermediate phase of this investigation
provided an ideal opportunity to examine the soundness of the proposed methodology for testing
for an RA effect. Because of the manner in which the data were collected, they should mimic
the causal influence that would occur with remote action. Thus, if the methodology proposed
for testing RA were to be used with these data, the results should mimic those hypothesized when
RA is operational. A study was carried out at SRI to see if this would be the case.
It seems reasonable to expect that if RA is used to slow down the rate of hemolysis, the
same effect could be achieved naturally by simply changing the salinity level of the solution
before adding the red blood cells. This is what was done in the salinity study. (The main
purpose of the study was to see if changes dictated by the pilot study had reduced the large
variability in measurement under control conditions.) Thus, comparing data from two different
levels of salinity should be similar to comparing data from control and protect periods if RA was
used during the protect periods.
Two levels of salinity, 0.425% and 0.442%, were used for this simulation. The lower
salinity level (0.425%) was used as the "protect period" data. Twenty sample points were
available at each salinity value. All values were standardized by subtracting the mean of the
entire "control period" data, and dividing by the corresponding standard deviation. The
resulting mean for the "protect period" data was 3.365, so this value was used as the
hypothesized parameter for the RA model. In other words, it was assumed that each value in the
"protect period" came from a population with a mean that was 3.365 standard deviations higher
6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
than the mean of the undisturbed population, but that the standard deviation in the protect
period was the same as for the undisturbed population. This is the usual RA hypothesis.
Five random samples of size two and five of size eight were generated from each
condition. The means of these samples are plotted in Figure 1, along with error bars
representing one standard error of the mean in each direction. The horizontal axis represents
sequence length, which was either two or eight. Both axes are represented on log scales. The
horizontal and diagonal lines drawn in the body of the plot represent the theoretical predictions
for the RA hypothesis, and for chance, respectively. The values resulting from the random
sampling are well within the range predicted by the theories. This provides a confirmation of the
methodology for testing each of these theories, by showing that situations that should mimic RA
and chance do indeed result in the predicted relationship between sequence length and mean.
5
I
RA
Change in Transmission (Normalized)
-
0.5
CHANCE
0.1
1
5
10
50
Trials
FIGURE 1 RA SIMULATION BASED ON SALINITY DATA
7
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

--
;
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A.
ANOVA Results
Although 60 data points were recorded for each trial, the only information used in the
analysis was the difference between the averages of the first five and the last five points. This
measure represented the amount of change in the red blood cells during the one-minute trial.
For each of the 32 subjects, 20 of these change scores were computed, with 10 collected during
the two control periods and 10 collected during the two protect periods. In addition, the
information on blood source (own versus another) was available for each subject.
A three-factor ANOVA on these data was carried out at SRI International, using the
Unix|Stat computer package. Source of blood (own versus another) and Condition (protect
versus control) were fixed effects, while Subject was a random effect, nested under Source. The
dependent variable was the change score, giving ten observations in each cell.
The ANOVA results are given in Table 1 of the Appendix. The most significant effect is
due to overall differences among subjects (p < 10-16 ). This heterogeneity among the red blood
cells of individuals is well known, and was the motivation for collecting control period data for
each subject. The only other significant effect was the Condition by Subject interaction (p = 6.3
x 10-5). This implies that the difference between the protect and control period means varied
depending on the subject. As a consequence, comparisons must be done for each subject
individually instead of over all subjects. These are done using two-sample t-tests with the ten
control period tubes and the ten protect period tubes for each subject.
There was also a wide spread among the variances across subjects. For the control period
data, the minimum and maximum variances for individuals were 0.304 and 9.333, respectively.
Because of this heterogeneity, individual t-tests were done using separate estimates of variance
instead of using the combined estimate of 2.0248 from the ANOVA table.
Results for the 32 separate t-tests are given in Table 3 of the Appendix. Two-tailed tests
were used to account for the possibility of actually increasing the hemolysis rate instead of slowing
it down. Nine subjects showed a significant difference (p < . 05, df = 18, |t| > 2.101). Of these,
seven showed evidence in the direction of slowing down the rate of hemolysis, and two appeared
to have increased the rate. Both of the individuals in the latter group were trying to influence the
8
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
blood of another, while five of those in the former group were working with their own blood and
two were working with another's. This is an interesting but post hoc observation, and the sample
sizes are too small to attempt any conclusions. The ANOVA results did not indicate that the
difference between those working on their own blood and those working on another's blood was
statistically significant.
Overall, these results indicate a highly significant level of psi performance. The probability
of observing 9 or more independently significant results out of 32 is only 1.9 x 10-5. If
one-tailed tests (in the direction of slowing the rate of hemolysis) had been performed, eight
individuals would have shown significant results (t > 1.73), and the overall significance of the
experiment would have been 1.4 x 10-4.
The correction of several problems and the introduction of further measures suggested by
the SOC and by SRI personnel appeared to eliminate extraneous sources of variability which had
been observed in the pilot study. Apparently the noise reduction was sufficient to allow the psi
signal to be detected. Contrary to what some critics of psi research have implied, tightening the
protocol enhanced the psi results instead of reducing them to chance.
B.
RA Versus IDS Results
Because of the extreme variability in the characteristics of human red blood cells and the
wide range of times (14 to 42 hours) between blood collection and testing, it is impossible to
determine what rate of hemolysis should be expected by chance alone. For this reason, separate
control periods were interspersed with the protect period for each subject. To examine the RA
and IDS hypotheses, the protect period data first needed to be standardized, so that they could
be compared across subjects. To do this, the mean and standard deviation of the ten control
period tubes were computed for each subject.
Standardized protect period scores were
computed by subtracting these means and dividing by the standard deviations for each of the ten
protect period values for each subject. Assuming that a given individual's control and protect
period data came from the same distribution, these standardized scores (modified slightly by a
constant) would follow a Student's t distribution with nine degrees of freedom. This assumption
was used to compute the theoretical mean and variance shown in Table 1 under the chance
hypothesis.
It was assumed that if RA occurred, it would take the form most commonly accepted, i.e.,
the mean for the protect period would differ from the mean for the control period but the
variance would not. The magnitude of this mean shift is denoted in Table 1 by Au.
9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

+
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
It was also assumed that if IDS occurred, it would take the form of inflating the variance of
the final z-score distribution from 1.0 to (1.0 + I)2, but the amount of inflation would be
independent of the number of trials used to compute the z-score. In this case, that was
equivalent to assuming that the average of the unstandardized protect period scores would have
the same mean as the control period scores, but they would have a variance of (1 + I)2 02/n,
where o2 is the variance of the control scores.
The usual procedure for comparing RA and IDS is to plot the log of the mean shift for
various sequence lengths against the log of the sequence length. IDS theory predicts that the
slope of the resulting line would be -0.5.
In order for this procedure to be able to distinguish between the two hypotheses, however,
the data must conform to certain results which are predicted by both theories. One is that the
ratio of the variances of the means for two sequence lengths should be inversely proportional to
the ratio of the sequence lengths. As can be seen in Table 1, for this experiment the ratio of
variances for the mean of two trials versus the mean of eight trials should be close to four. This
result should hold for any of the three hypotheses proposed.
Table 2 shows the sample means and standard deviations across all 32 subjects, for the
averages of the tubes collected in the two- and eight-tube protect periods, respectively. The
change scores were standardized as described above before these averages were computed.
Table 2
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR STANDARDIZED PROTECT DATA
N of Tubes
Mean
Standard Deviation
2
-0.387
1.071
8
-0.134
0.810
As can be seen by these values, the ratio of variances for the two sequence lengths is only
1.75, which is much smaller than the value of 4.0 predicted by all three hypotheses. This implies
that the data contain anomalies not covered by any of the theories. One obvious possibility is
that the level of psi functioning is different for each individual. The calculations for each of the
10
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
theories must necessarily assume that if that mechanism is at work, it is functioning at the same
level for each individual. Results in other areas of psi research have indicated that level of psi
functioning is extremely heterogeneous across individuals, so this assumption may be too
restrictive. If either IDS or RA is functioning in different amounts for each subject, it would be
impossible to predict what to expect in the combined results under investigation. Future studies
of this type should be conducted using a single subject, or at least analyzing the data from each
subject separately. In the present study, the data available are insufficient to ascertain whether
an individual was following the RA or the IDS model.
It is interesting to estimate the psi parameters by comparing the formulas in Table 1 with
the values in Table 2. This provides further evidence that the data do not support either theory.
The IDS strength parameter, I, would be estimated to be 0.298 or 0.996, based on the standard
deviations for the two- and eight-tube conditions, respectively. The standardized mean shift,
Ap/o, is estimated to be -0.354 or -0.122 based on the means in Table 2, and -3.16 or -6.60
based on the standard deviations. Such large inconsistencies would not occur if either theory
were valid for this experiment uniformly across subjects.
11
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

1
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
REFERENCES
1.
May, E. C., Radin, D. I., Hubbard, G. S., Humphrey, B. S., and Utts, J. M., "Psi
Experiments with Random Number Generators: An Informational Model," Proceedings
of the 28th Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association, pp. 343-354, Tufts
University, Medford, Massachusetts, August, 1985.
2.
Hubbard, G. S., and Braud, W. W., "An Experiment to Test Apparent Remote Action
(RA) Effects on Electrodermal Activity," Final Report, SRI Project 1291, SRI
International, Menlo Park, California, December, 1986.
3.
Braud, W. W., Davis, G., and Wood, R., "Experiments with Matthew Manning," Journal
of the Society for Psychical Research, Vol. 50, pp. 199-223, 1979.
12
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
APPENDIX
A-1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
ABSTRACT:
A formal investigation was conducted in order to determine whether a
relatively
large number of unselected subjects would be able to exert a distant
mental influence upon the rate of hemolysis of human red blood cells.
For each
of 32 subjects,
red blood cells in 20 tubes were submitted to osmotic stress
(hypotonic saline).
The
subjects attempted to protect the cells in 10 of the
tubes, using visualization
and
intention strategies; the remaining 10 tubes
served as non-influence controls.
For each tube, rate of hemolysis was
measured
photometrically
over
a
1-minute trial period.
Subjects and
experimenter
were
"blind"
regarding
critical
aspects of the procedure, and
subjects and tubes were
located
in separate
rooms in order to eliminate
conventional
influences.
Results indicated that a significantly greater number
of subjects than
would
be
expected on the
basis of chance alone showed
independently significant
differences
between their "protect" and "control"
tubes (p = 1.91 x 10"
).
Overall, blood source (i.e., whether the influenced
own
cells
or
those of another person) did not
cells
were the
subject's
significantly
influence
the outcome.
Additional analyses of the results were
performed by
SRI
International researchers to determine whether the data were
better described by remote
action
(causal)
or by intuitive data sorting
(informational)
predictions;
results of
those analyses are presented in an
appended paper.
A-2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
REMOTE INFLUENCE OF HEMOLYSIS RATE: A CONFIRMATION STUDY
William Braud
1
Mind Science Foundation
I
INTRODUCTION
In a preliminary experiment conducted in our laboratory several years ago,
a selected subject was able to mentally
influence (retard) the rate of
hemolysis of human red blood cells (Braud, Davis & Wood, 1979). In that
experiment, the blood cells were stressed osmotically by a hypotonic saline
solution,
and rate of hemolysis was measured photometrically.
The significant
in vitro effect was interpreted as a successful psychokinetic influence upon a
living target system.
Throughout this past year, additional experiments were
conducted in order to test the generality of this remote influence effect, and
to determine whether the effect might be most parsimoniously explained as a
true psychokinetic (remote action) effect or, alternatively, as an instance of
intuitive data sorting (see May, Radin, Hubbard, Humphrey & Utts, 1985).
The preliminary experiment had involved a single selected subject and a
relatively small number of trials. The present experiments involved many more
trials,
a
large number of unselected subjects, and an improved methodology.
Briefly,
subjects attempted to mentally retard the rate of hemolysis of
osmotically
stressed human red blood cells which were isolated from all
conventional
influences.
The subjects and the target system were kept in
hemolysis
was accurately
monitored by a
separate
rooms.
Rate
of
interfaced by means of an analog-to-digital converter to a
spectrophotometer
microcomputer.
The experimenter operating the equipment was blind regarding
the timing of the influence (protect) versus noninfluence (control) attempts.
Both experimenter and subject were blind regarding the blood source (subject's
own blood versus another person's blood).
Summary of the Pilot Phase
Thirty-two unselected subjects participated in a Pilot study designed to
explore the new methodology and to determine whether blood source (own blood
cells versus another
person's blood cells)
was an important factor.
An
experimental session involved hemolysis measurements for ten blood tubes. The
subject attempted to retard the rate of
hemolysis of five of these tubes,
mentally and at a distance. The remaining five tubes served as control tubes
which the subject did not attempt to influence. The five influence and five
control
tubes were scheduled according to a random sequence which was prepared
by a third party and which
was
unknown to the experimenter who made the
hemolysis
measurements,
Light transmission through each tube (which is
proportional to hemolysis)
was measured for each second of a two-minute
sampling period; the difference between the mean of the initial five seconds
and the final five seconds of light measurements yielded a change score which
served as the hemolysis measure.
Following the completion of the experimental
A-3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Hemolysis influence
Page 2
session,
ten
additional
blood-containing tubes were measured for hemolysis
rate.
It
was
intended that
these ten measurements would provide additional
"non-local"
baseline data, and would also be useful in comparing remote action
(RA)
versus
intuitive
data sorting (IDS)
predictions of the experimental
outcome.
According to the RA hypothesis, the mean of the five "local" control
tubes should be equivalent to the mean of the ten nonlocal baseline tubes, and
the mean of the five influence tubes should be lower (i. e., in the direction of
less hemolysis or greater protection of the cells) than both of the former
means.
According to the IDS hypothesis, the mean of the local controls should
be above, and that of the influence tubes should be below, that of the nonlocal
baseline tubes;
the grand mean of the ten tubes for the experimental session
should not differ from the mean of the ten nonlocal baseline tubes.
An
analysis of variance of the hemolysis scores indicated extremely great
and highly significant variability among the subjects, but no other significant
main effects
or interactions.
Therefore, significant evidence for a remote
influence of the blood cells was not obtained in the Pilot study. There was,
however,
a nonsignificant tendency for a slight "protection" effect in the
"another's blood" condition,
while the opposite effect (i.e., less protection
during
the influence trials)
occurred in the "own blood" condition.
The
nonlocal
baseline measurements were found to be inadequate for their intended
purpose
since, in every case but
one, the mean percent light transmittance
change
score
for the ten nonlocal baseline tubes was lower than both
experimental
sessions means (i. e., consistently lower than both the control and
the influence tube means). It was determined that this consistent reduction in
hemolysis for the nonlocal baseline tubes (and, to a lesser extent, for the
tubes
later
in the experimental
sessions
as well) was due to a progressive
change in the blood cells contributed by several environmental factors which
increased the "noise" level
of
the experiments and which included higher
apparatus
(i. e., spectrophotometer tube holder)
tests, and
increasing exposure of the blood cells to temperature changes, air,
temperatures during later
and mechanical
trauma (i.e., mechanical agitation) during the course of
repeated tests of a single blood sample (1.e., multiple tests of the contents
of a single Vacutainer blood collection
tube).
As a result of the Pilot
sessions themselves, as well
as additional tests conducted concurrently with
and subsequent to the Pilot
experiment, the sources of these interfering
factors were identified and steps could be taken to eliminate or greatly reduce
them in the Confirmation study.
Temperature changes in the spectrophotometer tube holder were controlled
through
(a) the addition of an external cooling fan to the apparatus, (b)
reducing the durations of the hemolysis measurement periods, and (c) turning
off the apparatus except when measurements were actually being made. The
substitution of a more effective anticoagulant (acid-citrate-dextrose) for that
used in the Pilot study (heparin) greatly diminished the effects of progressive
exposure to room temperature, air, and mechanical trauma during repeated
pipette samplings, so that hemolysis rate now remained relatively stable over
the course
of twenty
measurements from a given main Vacutainer source tube.
When between 20 and 30 samples had been taken from a main Vacutainer tube, this
stability began to deteriorate.
Summary of the Intermediate Phase of Salinity Tests
Following the completion of the Pilot study, salinity tests were conducted
A-4
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Hemolysis influence
Page 3
in order to determine salinity values that might mimic anticipated psi-induced
hemolysis rate changes.
These tests provided the basis for Monte Carlo
analyses at SRI International,
which were designed to determine appropriate
parameters for an adequate differential test of the IDS versus RA predictions
of psi functioning which was to be conducted in the Confirmation study.
A
total of 332 hemolysis trials were completed, using whole blood samples
collected
from ten different persons. For these tests, the "noise-reducing"
improvements mentioned above were incorporated. Hypotonic salinity values of
0.425%, 0.429%, 0.434%, 0.442%, and 0.450% (corresponding, respectively, to
50%,
50.5%, 51%,
52%, and 53.33% of 0.85% Normal physiological saline) were
tested.
Sampling epochs of one-minute duration were used, rather than the two-
minute
periods of the Pilot study.
All other procedures were identical to
those
of the Pilot study.
These were all, of course, "control" tests in which
no subjects attempted to influence the hemolysis process.
As anticipated, the "noise-reducing" improvements resulted in the virtual
elimination of the extreme variability seen in the Pilot study, and yielded
much greater stability (less degradation) of the blood samples. The optimum
salinity value for mimicking an anticipated psi-induced reduction of hemolysis
rate of approximately 1. 0 standard deviation was found to be in the vicinity of
0.429%
-
0. 434% saline
(equivalent to 50.5% - 51.0% of Normal 0.85%
physiological saline).
Monte Carlo simulation analyses conducted on these
salinity data by Scott Hubbard and Ed May at SRI International indicated that,
these
on
the
basis
of the magnitudes of hemolysis changes observed
in
2 versus 8 samples (tubes)
Intermediate Phase salinity tests, the use of
distributed
throughout equivalent "psi effort" periods would provide adequate
measurements for
a differential
test of the IDS versus RA interpretations of
any
obtained psi effects in
the Confirmation experiment.
Details of these
Monte Carlo simulations are provided in Appendix A.
Overview of the Confirmation Study
On the basis of the findings of the preliminary study, the Pilot study,
and the Intermediate Phase experiments, a formal protocol for the Confirmation
study was developed which included the following features.
1. Thirty-two subjects (from the same population, and selected in the same
manner,
as in the Pilot) would each participate in one experimental session.
Hemolysis measurements would be made by the experimenter, W. B.
2.
cells,
Sixteen subjects would attempt to influence (protect) their own blood
and sixteen would attempt
to influence the cells of another person.
Both subject and experimenter would be blind regarding the source of the blood
until
all
32
sessions had been completed. This "own versus other" factor is
retained
in
the Confirmation study because of the trend toward different
outcomes in those two conditions observed in the Pilot study.
3.
Blood samples would be collected in Vacutainer tubes containing acid-
citrate-dextrose
(ACD)
anticoagulant and would be refrigerated immediately
after
the
blood was drawn.
Blood samples would be stored at 4 degrees Celsius
and
would
be removed from the refrigerator only briefly, before each hemolysis
trial.
4.
Hemolysis trials would be conducted between 14 and 42 hours following
a
blood draw.
The ACD anticoagulant permits cold storage of blood cells for as
long as three to four weeks with minimal deterioration of red blood cells.
5.
The
temperature increase of the spectrophotometer would be minimized
A-5
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

..
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Page 4
by
means
of an external cooling fan, the use of shorter sampling epoche, and
allowing the apparatus to remain on only during hemolysis measurement periods.
6.
A session would consist of four fifteen-minute periods -- two control
(C) periods and two protect (P) periods.
For half of the subjects, these
periods would be scheduled in a CPPC order; for half of the subjects, a PCCP
order would be used. This block-counterbalancing design is employed in order
to assure that any reasonably linear potential progressive error (such as
changes in hemolysis rate due to slight progressive warming of the apparatus)
would contribute equally to the two
(C and P) conditions and therefore not
introduce a systematic bias.
Whether a given subject's sequence is CPPC or
PCCP
would be randomly determined by an associate (M. S. ) through use of a RAND
table of random numbers.
The experimenter doing the hemolysis measurements
would,
of course, be blind regarding these sequences. A subject would learn
his
or
her proper sequence by consulting a sealed envelope delivered to the
subject
after the experimenter's interactions with the subject had been
completed and the experimenter had returned to his equipment room.
7.
The beginning of each fifteen-minute period would be signalled by an
appropriate number of tones delivered to the subject's headphones.
The subject
would have been instructed to attempt to mentally decrease
the rate of
hemolysis of the distant red blood cells during the two fifteen-minute protect
periods.
During the two
fifteen-minute control periods, the subject would
attempt
not to think about the experiment and would allow the cells to hemolyze
at
their normal, rapid rate.
During the two protect periods, the subject would
view a projected color slide of healthy, intact red blood cells as an aid to
visualization and intention.
During the two control periods, the subject would
close the eyes and think about matters unconnected with the experiment.
8.
During each fifteen-minute period, either two or eight hemolysis tubes
(samples)
would
be
measured.
Monte Carlo analyses conducted at SRI
International have indicated that curves derived from two versus eight tubes
(samples)
would be sufficient
for an adequate test of the IDS versus RA
interpretations of any
obtained psi effect.
The subject would be blind
regarding the number of tubes being measured during any fifteen-minute period,
and would have been instructed to apply mental effort as steadily and as
consistently as possible throughout the entire fifteen-minute protect periods,
The experimenter would learn whether to measure two or eight hemolyis tubes
during each fifteen-minute period by consulting a sealed envelope delivered to
him just before the beginning of his measurement
session.
This random,
balanced tube sequence would have been determined earlier by M. S., again using
the RAND table of random numbers.
9.
Because the subjects must remain blind regarding the number of tubes
being
measured during each fifteen-minute period, it would not be possible to
provide them with real-time auditory feedback of the progress of hemolysis, as
we had hoped to
do.
Such feedback would provide subjects with information
about the number of tubes and would therefore violate the blindness requirement
and add a psychological confound to the experiment.
However, the subject would
receive
numerical
feedback about
hemolysis outcomes at the conclusion of the
session.
10.
The subject's session would be preceded by eight minutes of tape-
recorded
instructions for relaxation and guided imagery, designed to help
reduce
distractions and focus attention upon the desired goal event -- viz.,
decreased hemolysis during effort (protect) periods.
11.
Hemolysis measurements would be accomplished using a procedure
identical
to that used in the Pilot study, with the following exceptions: (a)
the recording epochs would be one minute rather than two minutes in duration,
A-6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

**
' Hemolysis Influenc
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090991-15
and
(b) the subject
would not hear tones signalling the beginning and end of
each
tube measurement
(as in the Pilot study), but rather would hear tones
signalling the beginning of each of the four fifteen-minute periods.
12.
Hemolysis scores would
be analyzed in a manner identical to that
described in the Pilot study.
A
similar ANOVA would be used to assess the
presence of a psi effect.
In addition, all hemolysis percent change scores
would be normalized for purposes of additional IDS versus RA analyses.
II
METHOD OF APPROACH
Subjects
Thirty-two subjects participated in the study.
Participants were selected
from a pool of normal, healthy individuals and were screened to eliminate those
with known allergic or immunological disorders or other illnesses, and those
currently taking
medication (other than oral contraceptives and/or occasional
cold medicines).
A screening form is included as Appendix B. Twenty-one of
the subjects had
already participated in the Pilot investigation, and were
asked to participate again because of their familiarity with the procedure.
Eleven subjects were first-time participants who substituted for Pilot subjects
who were unable to take part in the Confirmation.
The final sample consisted
of seventeen
females and fifteen males, ranging in age from 23 to 53 years.
Each subject
was paid twenty dollars as
token of appreciation for the
inconvenience
and slight discomfort of donating a blood sample, and for
participating in the subsequent one and one half hour laboratory session.
Procedure
On
a
Monday evening, the experimenter met
with
a group of
four
participants in order to explain the experiment
in detail and to have the
subjects complete an Informed Consent Form (included as Appendix C), donate a
10
ml venous blood sample, and schedule an appointment for an experimental
session for later that same week (i. e., on either the next day (Tuesday] or the
day after [ Wednesday] ).
An attempt was made to schedule two experimental
sessions on Tuesday (at 10:00 am and at 2:00 pm) and two sessions on Wednesday
(at 10:00 am and at 2:00 pm). On the Monday evening, the participant was given
two-page written description of the procedure and was asked to read the
description at
home
and become familiar with it. This description is included
as Appendix D.
2
The
four blood samples were
drawn by a Registered Nurse.
The blood
collection
tubes
(Becton Dickinson
Vacutainer tubes containing acid-citrate-
dextrose anticoagulant) were
labeled with the names of the blood donors and
were placed in
a small refrigerator immediately after the blood draws. The
refrigerator was
maintained at
4 degrees Celsius throughout the experiment.
When all four blood samples had been drawn, the nurse switched the name labels
on two of the tubes, using a randomizing schedule which had been prepared ahead
of time by an associate of the experimenter (M. S. ).
This schedule was always
kept by the
nurse
(and a copy kept by M. S. > and was
unknown to the
experimenter until the study had been completed. The purpose of switching the
labels of two tubes was to permit two subjects to attempt to influence their
own
blood and two to attempt to influence another person's blood that week, and
to keep the subjects and the experimenter blind regarding the blood source
until all thirty-two sessions of the study had been completed.
A-7
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Hemolysis influence
Page 6
Following his or her arrival for the experimental session on Tuesday or
Wednesday, the
experimenter showed the subject the equipment at the target
site, emphasizing the spectrophotometer tube holder in which the target tubes
later
would be placed' sequentially, and then escorted the subject to the
distant subject room,
located in another part of the building (see floor plan
included as Appendix E). The subject sat in a comfortable arm chair, and was
told that shortly after the experimenter left the subject's room, an assistant
would slip an envelope under the subject's door. The subject was to retrieve
that envelope and open it to find the random sequence of the four fifteen-
minute periods of the experiment. [The thirty-two period-sequence envelopes
had been prepared beforehand by M. S. using a RAND table of random numbers and
Throughout the experiment, the envelopes remained hidden
a private algorithm.
from the experimenter.
M. S. retained a copy of the period sequences for the
thirty-two envelopes. ]
During each of the two fifteen-minute control periods,
the subject was to attempt to keep her or his mind off of the experiment and to
think of other matters;
if
she or he could not help thinking about the
experiment, the subject
was asked to imagine hemolysis proceeding at its
normal, rapid rate.
During each of two fifteen-minute protect periods, the
subject
was to attempt to mentally retard the rate of hemolysis of the red
blood cells
in the tubes for that period, using any of the mental strategies
described
on
the instruction sheet
(see Appendix D).
The experimenter
demonstrated a slide projector which could be used by the subject during the
two protect periods.
The 35 mm color slide depicted healthy, intact red blood
cells, and was included as a helpful aid to the subject's visualization of the
desired goal. The subject was told that the beginning of each period would be
signalled by an appropriate number of tones (one for Period 1, two for Period
2, and so on) presented through headphones. The subject was also told that the
first period would be preceded by an eight-minute progressive relaxation and
guided imagery exercise designed to help the subject reduce distractions and
focus attention upon the desired goal event, i. e., decreased hemolysis during
the protect periods. A transcript of this exercise is included as Appendix F.
The exercise was accompanied by low volume, ambient music and ocean sounds.
Low volume ambient music was also presented through the subject's headphones
throughout the four periods of the experiment, and was interrupted only for the
four period-signalling tone presentations.
The conclusion of the experiment
was indicated to the subject by the cessation of the music. At that time, the
subject was to sign and date his or her period sequence sheet (see Appendix G),
and then be escorted back to the apparatus room by an assistant.
The experimenter returned to the apparatus room, where the equipment had
already been readied for use. Just before entering this room and closing the
door, he indicated to an assistant that the experiment was about to begin. The
assistant gave him a sealed envelope that contained information about his two-
versus eight-tube sequence for that session, and then delivered another sealed
envelope to the subject; this latter envelope contained the subject's protect
versus control period sequence for that session. The experimenter started the
audio tape which presented the preliminary exercises to the subject. He then
conducted the twenty hemolysis measurements for the session. From his point of
view,
there were also four fifteen-minute periods of measurements; two of the
periods
(indicated on a sheet within his envelope) were to involve measurements
of
two
tubes, and two of the periode were to involve measurements of eight
tubes.
This tube-number factor was included to provide data for a differential
test
of
the IDS and RA predictions of
psi performance (see below). The
A-8
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Hemolysis influence
Page 7
subjects remained blind regarding the tube number schedule for the session.
Each
of
twenty identical 10-ml glass spectroscope tubes had been filled
beforehand with 6.0 ml of 0.425% saline, and had been kept in the refrigerator
at 4 degrees Celsius. The saline for all tubes for all sessions came from the
same stock solution of 0.85% normal physiological saline, purchased in 20 liter
quantity from Fisher Scientific Supply Company and diluted with distilled water
to 0.425% by
the experimenter before the study began. This use of solution
from the
same stock eliminated variability that otherwise might have been
contributed by that factor. The experimenter removed the main blood collection
(Vacutainer)
tube bearing that subject's name from the refrigerator, inverted
the tube eight time in order to assure a homogeneous suspension of its blood
cells, opened the tube, and placed it in a test tube rack on the equipment
table.
He then removed the first of the hypotonic saline tubes from the
refrigerator and allowed it to stand at room temperature and warm slightly so
that moisture from the warmer room-temperature air no longer condensed on the
tube
after the latter was wiped with tissue.
He placed the now frost-free
saline tube into the holder of the spectrophotometer and adjusted the controls
f the device so that a digital reading of precisely 100.0% light transmission
was obtained for this blank tube.
He pressed a computer keyboard key to
initiate a subroutine
that signalled the subject in the distant room that a
fifteen-minute period
was about to begin. He next removed the tube from the
holder
and added to the tube 100 ul of whole blood from the main Vacutainer
tube.
He quickly stoppered the saline tube with a rubber stopper, inverted the
tube
twice to assure homogeneity of its contents, and quickly replaced the tube
in the
spectrophotometer holder.
When the holder cover was closed, the chart
recorder pen moved to indicate minimal light transmittance; at the point of
greatest excursion of the pen, the experimenter pressed a keyboard key to
initiate the one-minute sampling epoch for that tube. The Vacutainer blood
collection tube was then returned to the refrigerator, and the next hypotonic
saline
tube was placed in the test tube holder, so that it might warm slightly
for the next trial. The precise timing of all procedural events was controlled
by the experimenter through the use of several procedural cues and by means of
extreme stereotypy of responding.
Throughout the sampling epoch, the chart
recorder and the digital readout of the spectrophotometer were shielded so that
they could not be observed by the experimenter.
This was done in order to
eliminate
immediate feedback
to
the experimenter
in hopes that this might
reduce the latter's own psi contribution to the experimental outcome.
Percent light transmittance measures at a
wavelength of 660 mp (an
absorbance minimum for hemoglobin) relative to the blank tube containing saline
alone were taken by means of a Sequoia-Turner Model 390 spectrophotometer with
digital and chart recorder readouts. The spectrophotometer provided an analog
output that varied from 0 to 1.0 v DC and was linearly related to percent light
transmittance
(with 0 v DC = 0% T and 1.0 v DC = 100% T). This output was
increased
by
a
factor of 10, by means of a differential amplifier, and the
installed
in
an
IBM PC-XT compatible computer.
The A/D converter (CGRS
resulting
0
to 10.0 v DC signal was fed into an analog-to-digital converter
Microtech PC
DIADAC
1) uses an industry standard AD 574A 12-bit A/D chip with
0.0024
volt accuracy
and 35 psec conversion speed. A software program was
written
which sampled the A/D converter at the end of each second of the one-
minute
trial period.
Thus, the system automatically provided 60 measurements
of
the time course of hemolysis (i. e., percent transmittance) during each one-
minute
trial.
The 60 values were written to a floppy disk file and were also
A-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

4
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Hemolysis influence
Page 8
printed out at the end of the
trial.
In
addition
to this digital data
collection, an analog chart record was obtained for each trial (using a Markson
Model 1202 pen recorder),
tube
At
the end of the one-minute sampling epoch, the experimenter removed the
from the holder and began his preparations for the remainder of the
trials.
Approximately one minute elapsed between trials. If a period called
for
the
measurement of two tubes, those two tubes were measured at the middle
of
the
fifteen-minute period, i.e., at times corresponding to the measurement
of
tubes 4 and 5 of an eight-tube period. The main Vacutainer blood collection
tube and the hypotonic saline tubes remained in the refrigerator except when
needed for the measurements.
The completion of the hemolysis measurements for
the twenty tubes of an experimental session required one hour.
When
the twentieth and final tube had been measured, and the results had
been
printed, the experimenter notified his assistant that the session was
over.
While the assistant went to the subject's room, the experimenter made
photocopies of
the data sheets and of his tube-number schedule.
When the
assistant returned with the subject, the assistant photocopied the subject's
control/protect period sequence sheet. The assistant and the experimenter then
exchanged copies of their respective sequence sheets and data printouts. These
duplicate records
were filed for safekeeping by the assistant and by the
experimenter.
The experimenter and the subject then went to the experimenter's office
and the subject described the techniques used to attempt to influence the blood
cells.
After this interview, the experimenter calculated the results for the
experimental session and provided the subject with information about the
session
outcome.
This information consisted of verbal and numerical feedback
about the hemolysis rates for the twenty tubes. The experimenter thanked the
subject for his or her participation, and the subject left the laboratory.
III
RESULTS
When all
32 experimental
sessions had been completed, the blood source
information was decoded so that a determination could be made of which subjects
attempted to influence their own blood and which attempted to influence blood
from
another person. For each session, change scores were calculated for each
of
the
20 blood sample tubes (trials). For each tube (trial), the mean of the
initial
five
A/D converter
values was subtracted from the mean of the final
five A/D converter values.
This change score represented the change in percent
light
transmittance from the first five seconds to the last five seconds of the
one-minute
trial and provided a quantitative measure of the rate of hemolysis
for
a specific blood sample tube.
For each subject, change scores were
available for ten control tubes and ten influence (protect) tubes, and for each
tube condition, scores were available for either two or eight tube measurements
during each
fifteen-minute period. Using these change scores, a three-factor
analysis of variance
was used to test the major hypotheses of the study. In
this ANOVA,
three factors
were:
blood Source (own versus another's,
between); Subjects, random and nested under Source; and Condition (protect
versus control, within).
The three experimental questions explored in this
confirmation study were the following.
1.
Would the rate of hemolysis
(change scores) for the protect tubes
differ from that for the control tubes?
Such an effect would be indicated, in
A-10
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Hemolysis influence
Page 9
the
absence of a significant Condition x Subjects interaction, by a significant
Condition main effect in the ANOVA. Should the Condition x Subjects interaction
effect prove significant, the condition effect would be examined separately in
each
of the individual subjects,
using appropriate within-subject error
estimates.
2.
Would
the degree of influence of hemolysis rate differ for the two
blood
sources
(own cells versus
another's cells)? Such an effect would be
indicated
by
a
significant interaction of the Source and Condition factors of
the ANOVA.
3. Would results for the two-tube measuring periods differ from those for
the eight-tube measuring periods, and would the function describing this two-
versus
eight-tube effect match more closely the RA or the IDS prediction? This
third (tube number) experimental question is treated by Scott Hubbard in an
appended document and will not be discussed further in this paper.
For tests of significance, alpha was set at p = . 05.
The
summary table
for
the
ANOVA
is given in Table 1, and means and
standard
deviations for the
various groups and conditions are given in Table
2.4
The
main effects for Condition and Source did not reach significance, nor
did
the
Source x Condition interaction. However, the main effect for Subjects
and
the
Condition
x Subjects interaction were highly significant. The former
effect,
of course,
indicates significant variability in performance among the
32
subjects
of
the experiment.
The
significant Condition
x Subjects
interaction
indicates
that the effect
of condition (protect versus control)
differed from subject to subject; therefore, an interpretation of the Condition
main effect
was
inappropriate and individual, subject by subject condition
comparisons were called
for. These individual comparisons were made by means
of matched t
tests, computed for each of the 32 subjects, and calculated by
comparing the hemolysis (change) scores for a subject's ten protect tubes with
the scores for his or her ten control tubes. The t scores for the individual
subjects are presented in Table
3.
The independently significant subjects
(i. e.,
those
with [ t ] > 2. 101, 18 df, p < . 05, two-tailed) are indicated by
asterisks. 5
The condition effect was significant in nine of the 32 subjects.
In seven of those subjects, scoring was in the direction of psi-hitting (i. e.,
slower hemolysis in the protect than in the control tubes); in two subjects,
scoring
was
in
the direction of psi-missing (i.e., faster hemolysis in the
protect than in the control tubes).
This
is to be compared with the 1.6
significant scorers expected on the basis of chance alone. The probability of
observing
nine independently significant
scorers among 32 subjects is 1.91 x
10
- 5
(binomial
test).
In order to determine whether these nine independently
significant subjects show
a general tendency toward hitting, a single-mean t
test
may be calculated for the nine t values, comparing them with MCE = zero;
such
a
test
yields evidence for significant hitting (X = 1.63, SD = 2.23, t =
2.07, 8 df, p = . 035, one-tailed).
In
the
overall
(ANOVA)
analysis, no effect
was found for the Source
variable:
Scores
for
the
"own"
and
"another's"
groups were virtually
identical.
The Source
x
Condition effect, which
would have indicated a
dependence
of
the protect versus control effect upon the source of the blood,
was clearly nonsignificant. Therefore, we must conclude that blood source was
not an important variable in this investigation. However, an interesting trend
emerges when
we examine
blood source for the nine independently significant
subjects.
For this subgroup (for which there was evidence for a psi effect), a
comparison
of the t scores of the five subjects who influenced their own blood
A-11
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Page 10
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090091-1
Hemolysis influence
with those of the four subjects who influenced another person's blood yields a
trend of greater positive scoring (i.e., psi-hitting) for the "own blood"
subjects
(see
Table 4).
Because of the small number of subjects involved in
the comparison, this trend is not significant (t = 1.73, 7 df, p = 0.12, two-
tailed).
The large
magnitude of the difference, however, suggests that blood
source would
be
an
interesting variable to explore in future studies of this
type.
IV
DISCUSSION
As expected, within- and between-subjects variability in this Confirmation
experiment
was
greatly reduced by the changes in experimental protocol that
in
resulted
from
observations
made
the Pilot
and
Intermediate
Phase
experiments.
This
reduction
in the experiment's "noise" level permitted the
observation
here of psi effects which could not be detected iin the Pilot
study.
Significant differences
in rate of hemolysis between experimental
(i.e.,
mentally "protected") and control blood samples were found in an extra-
chance number of subjects.
It may be possible to discover important differences between subjects who
exhibited significant positive scoring and those who exhibited significant
negative scoring
or chance scoring through detailed psychological analyses
which would consider both short-term ("state") and more persistent ("trait")
characteristics of the subjects. State analyses could focus upon the types of
mental
strategies used by the subjects in their attempts to influence the
target
cells.
Some subjects,
for example, employed a direct strategy of
visualizing the
blood cells in a very realistic manner, while other subjects
employed a more indirect strategy of visualizing objects that were similar to
the blood cells and possessed characteristics similar to those that protected
cells might possess.
Are more direct strategies more effective than indirect
strategies
based
upon associations and symbolic representations?
Trait
analyses could be
accomplished by asking all participants of the Confirmation
study to return to
the laboratory for various personality assessments.
Such
assessments would, of course,
be carried out by laboratory personnel who are
blind to the subjects' hemolysis results.
Initial assessments might involve
psychological instruments such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the
Participant Information Form which have already been shown to correlate with
other types of
psi performance (e.g., Berger, Schechter, & Honorton, 1985;
Honorton, Barker, Varvoglis, Berger & Schechter, 1985).
In
the present study,
several
factors may have interfered with the
emergence
of even stronger psi effects.
These factors were (a) the presence of
relatively
large individual differences in the characteristics of the subjects,
(b)
the
long durations of the psi "effort" periods and of the experimental
sessions as a whole, and (c) the absence of real-time feedback to the subjects
concerning the state of the target system. Factor (a) could be minimized in
future studies by more stringent selection of participants in terms of prior
histories
of
successful bio-PK performance and of personality characteristics
known to
be
correlated
with psi performance.
Factors (b) and
(c) were
by the "tube number" component of the present design (i. e., the
necessitated
assessment
of two versus eight tubes in each fifteen-minute protect or control
period).
Lengthy "effort" periods were required to accommodate the measurement
of
eight
tubes,
and the requirement of
keeping the subject "blind" to the
number
of
tubes prevented the administration
of feedback, since the latter
A-12
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090091-1 11
Hemolysis influence
would have allowed the subject to keep track of the number of tubes measured.
Future experiments unconcerned with a tube-number factor could include briefer
psi-influence periods and could also provide feedback.
It should be noted,
however, that there exists a growing body of evidence that suggests that real-
time sensory
feedback to the subjects is not a necessary condition for the
occurrence of strong psi effects (e.g., Berger, 1986, 1987; Braud, 1978).
The major purpose
of the present study was to determine whether a
significant psi effect involving hemolysis could be observed using a large
number of unselected subjects and an improved experimental protocol. The extra-
chance number of independently significant subject performances provides an
affirmative answer to this question.
A
secondary goal of the study was to
explore the issue of whether an intuitive data sorting (IDS) interpretation or
a remote
action (RA) interpretation provides a better explanation of the
According to an RA interpretation, the subjects (or the experimenter)
results.
actually
retard hemolysis rate in a causal or quasicausal manner, yielding
values which would not have occurred in the absence of influence attempts.
According to an IDS interpretation, the experimental personnel take advantage
of already existing fluctuations of hemolysis rate among different blood
samples, "sorting" those values by the scheduling and timing of their trials so
as to produce an effect which simulates a causal effect. It is important to
remember that an IDS effect is still a psi effect, but an informational rather
than a causal one.
There were several opportunities for intuitive data sorting in the present
experiment.
The person (M.
S. ) who provided the random schedule for blood
source, tube condition, and tube number
used
a fixed rule which involved
converting published weather information into an entry point for a table of
random numbers.
However, arbitrary decisions were still possible in assigning
odd or even
digits to the various sources, conditions, and tube numbers, and
such decisions by M. S. provided possible entry points for IDS which could
influence both between- and within-subject effects. A second possible source
of sorting
involved subject scheduling for the initial blood drawing sessions.
Which subjects happened to arrive at the laboratory on a given Monday evening
for
blood drawing would determine their places or positions in the test
schedule,
them;
and hence the particular blood samples that would be assigned to
this could provide additional IDS entry points. Subject-scheduling IDS
effects could be mediated by the experimenter
(W. B. ), by the laboratory
personnel who suggested and scheduled potential
subjects
themselves.
A
third possible
source
of
sorting involved the
experimenter's
hemolysis
measurements.
By
consciously or
unconsciously
subjects,
and/or
the
altering
measured
the timing of his actions, he could determine the start point of the
hemolysis curve and this in turn could influence the hemolysis rate
measure.
The experimenter
was
aware of
this possibility and therefore
exercised
great caution in maintaining the consistency and stereotypy of his
laboratory
technique in an attempt to obviate this factor. Only automated
procedures
could eliminate this factor, and even then, the elimination may or
may not be absolute, depending upon the completeness of the automation. It is
important to note that deliberate timing changes could influence only the tube
number
effect in the present experiment, since this was the only independent
variable for which the experimenter was not blind. Since he was unaware of the
blood source or of the scheduling of the protect versus control periods, any
timing changes that could influence those two effects would necessarily have to
be psi-mediated.
It should be added that subjects may have influenced
A-13
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Hemolysis influence
Page 12
hemolysis rate indirectly by
exerting a true, causal remote action influence
upon the
experimenter's timing behavior, so that what appears to be IDS by the
experimenter could in reality be RA by the subject. As the reader will begin
to appreciate,
a truly definitive test of the IDS model, or even a definitive
identification of IDS and RA components is an exceedingly complex and difficult
task.
The issue of whether the results of this experiment are described more
closely by an IDS model or by an RA model is treated in an Addendum prepared by
Scott Hubbard of SRI International, and will not be addressed further in this
Discussion.
In
the blood experiments reported here, the hemolysis process occurred in
and
vitro
was
produced by osmotic stress.
Caution should be exercised in the
generalization of the results of this study to in vivo hemolysis.
In the body,
red blood cell lysis can occur
through osmotic stress, but is more often
contributed by other factors (Hillman & Finch, 1974; Ponder, 1971).
The
rationale for selecting blood cells was that perhaps material which
had
once
been part of the body might be more susceptible to distant mental
influence
than would be the case for more "alien" biological materials.
At the
very least, the use of such "familiar" material would be expected to increase
the participants'
motivational levels and hence increase the likelihood of
positive results.
Red blood cells were chosen as "targets" for these initial
bio-PK
investigations since their rate of hemolysis could be measured by means
of
the
equipment and facilities available to us.
However, this choice was not
without
its difficulties since
the biological
status of red blood cells is
somewhat
peculiar. On the one hand, human mature red blood cells have no
nucleus,
cannot reproduce, and have Imiited lifespans (approximately 120
days).
On the other
hand, as Ponder (1971) notes, "On metabolic grounds,
mammalian erythrocytes are living cells; although in absolute terms the rates
of respiration and of glycolysis are small, from the standpoint of cellular
physiology the metabolism
is far from negligible" (p. 366). Red blood cells
certainly
qualify
as
biological
systems.
In future cellular bio-PK
investigations,
however,
perhaps
the use of white blood cells or of
artificially cultured neural cells may yield more dramatic results than those
obtained in the present study (see Braud, 1986).
i
A-14
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

· Hemo 1Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090991-113
REFERENCES
BERGER, R. E. (1986). Psi effects without real-time feedback using a PsiLab ][
video game experiment. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Convention of the
Parapsychological Association.
Rohnert Park, CA, 111-128.
BERGER, R. E. (1987). Psi effects without real-time feedback.
Proceedings of
the 30th Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association.
Edinburgh, Scotland, 221-235.
BERGER, R. E., SCHECHTER, E. I. & HONORTON, C. (1985). A preliminary review of
performance across three computer psi games.
Proceedings of the 28th
Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association.
Medford, MA, 307-
332.
BRAUD, W. G. (1978). Recent investigations of microdynamic psychokinesis, with
special emphasis on the roles of feedback, effort, and awareness.
European Journal of Parapsychology, 2, 137-162,
BRAUD, W. (1986). PSI and PNI: Exploring the interface between parapsychology
and psychoneuroimmunology.
Parapsychology Review, 17 (2), 1-4.
BRAUD, W., DAVIS, G. & WOOD, R. (1979). Experiments with Matthew Manning.
Jounal of the Society for Psychical Research, 50, 199-223.
HILLMAN, R. S. & FINCH, C. A. (1974).
Red Cell Manual.
Philadelphia, PA:
F. A. Davis Company.
HONORTON, C., BARKER, P., VARVOGLIS, M. P., BERGER, R. E. & SCHECHTER, E. I.
(1985). "First-timers:" An exploration of factors affecting initial psi
ganzfeld performance.
Proceedings of the 28th Annual Convention of the
Parapsychological Association. Medford, MA, 39-58.
MAY, E. C., RADIN, D. I., HUBBARD, G. S., HUMPHREY, B. S. & UTTS, J. M. (1985).
Psi experiments with random number generators: An informational model.
Proceedings of the 28th Annual Convention of the Parapsychological
Association.
Medford, MA, 237-266.
PONDER, E. (1971).
Hemolysis and Related Phenomena.
New York: Grune &
Stratton.
A-15
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

. Hemolysis influ
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090689-114
FOOTNOTES
1
I
am indebted to Rick Berger, Steve Dennis, Scott Hubbard, Kay Mangus,
Diane
Morton,
Julie Nixon, Marilyn Schlitz, Winona Schroeter, and Jessica Utts
for their important contributions to various phases of this investigation.
2
The order in which the subjects' blood was drawn, and hence their
subject
numbers for the blood source factor (i. e., whether they subsequently
attempted to influence their own or another person's blood) was determined by
the alphabetical sequence of the surnames of the four subjects who assembled on
any given Monday evening blood-drawing session.
3
On one Monday evening, a last-minute cancellation by a subject resulted
in three, rather than the usual four, blood draws that evening. The next week,
the subject
who had cancelled
for the previous week appeared; there also
appeared an additional subject who was not expected, resulting in six subjects
that evening.
For
the two subjects who did not conform to the schedule that
evening,
blood
tubes
were
inadvertently switched, when they should not have
been.
This
resulted
in
a total
of 18 subjects in the "another's blood"
condition and 14 subjects in the "own blood" condition.
4
The ANOVA was computed at SRI International by Jessica Utts.
5
In order to identify significant scorers, a two-tailed test was used,
allowing
for the possibility of significant psi-missing. This was done because
the Pilot
study had yielded a considerable number of scores in the missing
direction.
If one wishes to predict only psi-hitting, a critical t = + 1.73 (p
. 05, one-tailed) could be used. By such a hitting-alone criterion, eight
<
independently significant hitters may be indentified (Subject No.
26 now
reaches
significance).
The
probability of observing eight out of 32
independently significant hitters is 1.39 x 10 " .
A-16
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

15
HemApproved ForRelease 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Table 1
Analysis of Variance Summary Table
SOURCE
df
SS
MS
F
P
Source
1
.3480
.3480
. 001
.981
(own vs another's)
Condition
1
2.2278
2.2278
. 461
.503
(protect vs control)
Subjects
30
18078.7369
602.6247
297.626
.0000
Source x Condition
1
2.6061
2.6061
.539
469
Condition x Subjects
30
145.1072
4.8369
2.389
. 000063
Error
576
1166.2668
2.0248
A-17
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

1
HemolysApproved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090009f-116
Table 2
Means and Standard Deviations for the Percent
Change Scores for the Various Conditions
CONTROL
PROTECT
X = 43.63
X = 43.36
X = 43.50
OWN
SD = 5.07
SD = 5.10
SD = 5.08
X = 43.45
X = 43.45
X = 43.45
ANOTHER' S
SD = 5.94
SD = 5.73
SD = 5.83
X = 43.53
X = 43.41
X = 43.47
SD = 5.57
SD = 5.46
SD = 5.51
A-18
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300099991-17
Hemolysis influence
Table 3
Scoring Rates (t Tests) for Individual Subjects
Subject
t
Subject
t
1
-2.17 *
17
1.24
2
1.47
18
-0.98
3
0.31
19 o
2.14
*
4 0
-1.26
20 0
-0.68
5 0
-0.51
21 0
-1.04
6
1.28
22
-1.14
7
0.39
23 o
3.39 *
8
-1.15
24
0.26
9
-0.51
25 o
3.04
*
10 0
-0.25
26 o
1.96
11
-0.84
27
-1.46
12 0
2.52
*
28
-0.70
13
2.96
*
29
3.08
*
14
0,17
30 0
2.53 *
15
-2.79 *
31 o
-1.24
16 o
-1.52
32
1.10
* independently significant (p < . 05)
o indicates "own blood" condition
A-19
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001
Hemolysis influence
Table 4
Comparison of Own vs Another's t Scores for
Independently Significant Subjects
OWN
ANOTHER'S
2.52
2.17
2.14
2.96
3,39
- 2.79
3.04
3.08
2.53
X = 2.72
X = 0.27
SD = 0.44
SD = 2.76
A-20
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10/P CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
SRI
International
19 June 1987
Dr. William Braud
Mind Science Foundation
8301 Broadway
Suite 100
San Antonio, TX 78209
Dear William:
We have run the control data you provided through the IDS Monte Carlo program. Without
belaboring the details of that analysis, we can summarize the outcome in three categories:
Assumptions, Conclusions and Proposed Protocol.
Assumptions:
1)
Each subject contributes only one experimental visit; 32 subjects planned in
all; 16 in each condition (own vs other).
2)
At least twenty samples can be utilized from each blood draw, although no
more than 10 can be processed in any experimental period.
3)
We can normalize change scores across subjects (see below) in order to sum
data and reduce error bars. We are planning to sum all 32 subjects for the
the IDS vs RA test.
Conclusions:
1)
The experiment should have an independent measure that psi occurred
(e.g. your planned ANOVA).
2)
We should be able to distinguish IDS from MCE (at the 0.02 level) for an
IDS strength parameter of 0.5 (an observed standard deviation in the
experimental Z-scores, as compared to the control data, of 1.5 instead of
1.0). For comparison, the RNG data-IDS strength parameter is about 0.4.
3)
We should be able to distinguish IDS from RA for a mean shift of about
0.3 o. The exact value will depend on the error bars of the data. Control
data you sent us comparing 50% and 50.5% saline shows a mean shift of
about this value (0.2 - 0.3 o).
SRI International
A-21
333 Ravenswood Ave. . Menlo Park, CA 94025 . (415: 326-6200 . TWX: 910-373-2046 . Telex: 334 486 . Facsimile: 1415. 326-5512
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Proposed Protocol:
1)
Four trial periods for each subject visit, consisting of two effort and two
control, intermixed on a counterbalanced basis. W.B. blind to type of trial
period during measurements.
2)
Two control periods identical in time, but consisting of 2 and 8 tubes
respectively. Subject blind to the number of tubes.
2)
Two effort periods identical in time, but consisting of 2 and 8 tubes
respectively. Subject blind to the number of tubes.
3)
Each measurement to be entered and normalized as indicated on the
attached data sheets.
I have included the Monte Carlo and theoretical calculations, as well as the "design sheets" Ed has
constructed for generalized applications. Rather than writing a long-winded explanation, it would be
best to discuss these details over the phone.
In parallel with getting your confirmation experiment going, we need to submit the protocol to our
SOC. When we have confirmed the details by phone, please send me a printed version of the
handwritten protocol you gave me at the SSE meeting.
Thanks and Good Luck - will be speaking to you soon.
Best Regards,
G. Scott Hubbard
Sr. Research Physicist
Geoscience and Engineering Center
cc: Ed May
A-22
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
MIND SCIENCE FOUNDATION
BLOOD HEMOLYSIS EXPERIMENT
EFFORT GROUP
TUBE NUMBER
% CHANGE (Y)
NORMALIZED
VALUE (E)
Tube 1
E =
1
Tube 2.
Y=
E=
2
Tube 3
Y3 =
E =
3
Tube 4
Y =
E =
4
Tube 5
Y5=
E=
5
Tube 6
Y6 =
E=
6
Tube 7
Y7 =
E =
7
Tube 8
Y8 =
E3=
Tube 9
Y9 =
Tube 10
E,
M =
0
Y-HY
E
A-23
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

-
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
MIND SCIENCE FOUNDATION
BLOOD HEMOLYSIS EXPERIMENT
CONTROL GROUP
TUBE NUMBER
% CHANGE (X)
NORMALIZED
VALUE (C)
Tube 1
X =
C =
Tube 2
X2 =
C2 =
2
Tube 3
×3 =
C3 =
Tube 4
X4 =
C =
Tube 5
X5 =
C =
5
Tube 6
X6 =
C. =
6
Tube 7
×2 =
C2 =
Tube 8
×8 =
C3 =
Tube 9
C =
Tube 10
X10 =
Go =
H x =
0x =
C= =
A-24
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
!
e.
:
3
2
ESCALC OADING CHARTS]
GRAPHIC CONTROLS CORPORATION
BUFFALO NEW YORK
,10
8
7
6
5
4
3
In LAYI
18
GRF AL0953
LOGARITHMIC
3 CYCLES . 3 CYCLES
7
6
5
2
.
-
100
4
5 6 7 8 910'
3
4
5 6 7 8 9 /02
3
4
5 6
7 8 9/0
n
FIGURE
SELECTION
PREDICTIONS of THE IDS MODEL
A-25
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
TH
..
-
1
-

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
in im
€
PARENT DISTRIBUTION
4.70.0
3
2
GRAPHIC CONTROLS CORPORATION
BUFFALO NEW YORK
10
e
7
€
5
0,5000
3
2
10
9
8
GRF AL0953
LOGARITHMIC
3 CYCLES . 3 CYCLES
7
6
5
A
3
2
10
10
2
4
5
6 7
-
2
3
4
5
6
78 9 1
102
10
n
FIGURE
REMOTE ACTION PREDICTIONS OF THE IDS MODEL
A-26
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
5
6
-
2
3
4
In IAYI
E

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Data File
***
MONTI.ids
Analyzed Fri Jun 19 13:00:47 1987
Sequence Order :
2
8
Overall Trials
-
64
Overall Z-mean
-0.3030
Overall Z-variance
1.7196
Overall z-max
3.8297
Overall z-min
= - 3.1769
I = 0.5
Overall Chi-sqr
108.3333
(df = 63
)
Overall z(Chi)
3.5393
Overall p-value
0.000201
(1-tailed)
Linear Corr. Coef.
= - 0.1549
(df = 62
)
LINEAR LEAST SQUARES FIT TO THE DATA
y = a+b(x-xbar) : a
= - 0.9993 +/- 0.1386
b
-0.2468 +/- 1.5866
MCE-LINE:
a
=
-1.3283
b
= - 0.5000
ybar = - 0.9993
xbar =
1.3863
MCE-LINE
(n, delta_p):
(2
, 3.75e-01)
( 4
2.65e-01)
:
(8
, 1.87e-01)
DATA-LINE (n,delta_p):
(2
,
4.37e-01)
,
3.68e-01)
..
(4
(8
, 3.10e-01)
SLOPE AND INTERCEPT TEST
Slope
( -. 5000) : F
= 1.6298
(dfl = 1; df2 = 62
)
slope
: p
0.2065
Intcp
(-1.328) : F
=
5.6402
(dfl = 1; df2 = 62
)
Intop
0.02066
JOINT SLOPE AND INTERCEPT TEST
Joint
..
F
3.6223
(dfl = 2; df2 = 62
)
Joint
:
P
- 0.03252
32 TRIALS at
n = 2 AND
n= 8
(MONTE CARLO SIMULATION)
A-27
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
TOTAL Z-SCORE DISTRIBUTIONS
Z-Cent
Total
2
8
-3.3
1
0
1
-3.0
0
0
0
-2.7
1
0
1
-2.4
0
0
0
-2.1
4
3
1
3
-1.8
1
2
-1.5
4
2
2
-1.2
8
5
3
-0.9
8
3
5
-0.6
3
2
1
-0.3
5
5
0
0.0
6
4
2
0.3
4
1
3
0.6
2
1
1
0.9
6
3
3
1.2
3
1
2
1.5
1
1
0
1.8
2
0
2
2.1
1
1
0
2.4
1
1
0
2.7
0
0
0
3.0
0
0
0
3.3
1
0
1
Z-SCORE by SEQUENCE LENGTH
SQ L Trials
Mean
Var
Max
Min
-2.078
Chi ** 2
37.980
Z Chi
p_value
2
32
-0.208
1.225
2.464
0.1827
8
32
-0.398
2.251
3.830
-3.177
69.778
0.905
4.003
3.127e-05
A-28
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
10
B
7
6
5
4
3
2
BUFFALO. NEW YORK
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
en IAY/
10%
GRF AL0953
LOGARITHMIC
3 CYCLES , 5 CYCLEB
6
6
3
2
10
1
2
3
4
5678000
2
3
4
5 6 7 8 9 10'
2
3
-
5 6 7891
n
A-29
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
GRAPHIC CONTROLS CORPORATION
1002,626
L
7

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
..
1
102
,
TRIALS
10
€
.. ...
3
2,000
P.S
10º
10-2
..
3
4
5
€ 78810
3
1 5 6 7 6 1 /00
..
3
.
.
I (IDS STRENGTH PARAMETER)
ESTIMATED SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS FOR TRIALS
VS. IDS STRENGTH PARAMETER
A-30
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
Jun 19 12:58 1987
MONTI.ids Page 1
MONTI CARLO
RAW DATA
2 1.000000
2.0
8.0
2
0.04782
-0.0676
2
0.99439
-1.4063
2
0.76937
-1.0881
2
0.90805
-1.2842
2
1.46957
-2.0783
2
0.93610
-1.3238
2
1.19693
-1.6927
2
0.16107
-0.2278
2
0.36642
0.5182
2
0.70443
0.9962
2
0.59823
0.8460
2
1.74219
2.4638
2
0.78434
1.1092
2
0.16503
-0.2334
2
0.09396
0.1329
2
0.26589
0.3760
2
0.33151
-0.4688
2
0.68412
0.9675
2
1.58424
2.2404
2
0.49322
-0.6975
2
0.06396
0.0905
2
0.60705
-0.8585
2
0.66750
-0.9440
2
0.75755
-1.0713
2
0.83861
-1.1860
2
0.57736
-0.8165
2
0.11964
-0.1692
2
0.13851
-0.1959
2
0.10115
-0.1430
2
1.14132
-1.6141
2
0.95538
1.3511
2
0.13104
-0.1853
8
0.73697
-2.0845
8
1.35400
3.8297
8
0.39047
-1.1044
8
0.14406
0.4075
8
0.28278
0.7998
8
0.38133
1.0786
8
0.67739
1.9159
8
0.36532
-1.0333
8
0.71252
-2.0153
8
0.27552
-0.7793
8
0.74209
-2.0990
8
1.12322
-3.1769
8
0.10238
0.2896
8
0.28142
0.7960
8
0.59737
1.6896
8
0.38356
-1.0849
8
0.03636
0.1028
8
0.40915
1.1573
8
0.23196
0.6561
8
0.60384
-1.7079
8
0.00198
0.0056
8
0.27758
-0.7851
A-31
?
1
1
AY
2
32 TRIALS at
Two Sequence Lengths
I = 0.5
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

.
Jun 19 12:
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
MONTT. 1ds
8
0.60023
-1.6977
8
0.33072
-0.9354
8
0.06705
0.1896
8
0.45164
-1.2774
8
0.20785
-0.5879
8
0.35908
1.0156
8
0.28114
-0.7952
8
0.49283
-1.3939
8
0.49233
-1.3925
8
0.95888
-2.7121
A-32
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

.
APPENDIX B
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
APPLICATION FOR PARTICIPATION
In order to assure program requirements and avoid exacerbating pre-existing
conditions, we ask you to provide the following confidential medical
information.
NAME
AGE
HEIGHT
WEIGHT
YES
NO
1. (Females only) I am pregnant.
2. I have received treatment (including out-patient and hospital care) for,
or have a diagnosed history of, the following:
Seizure disorder
Mental disorder
Drug or alcohol addiction
Use of amphetamines, hallucinogens,
or other mind-altering drugs
Metabolic disorder
Immunological disorder
Any chronic debilitating disease
3. I am currently taking medication for:
Seizure disorder
Mental disorder
Drug or alcohol addiction
Use of amphetamines, hallucinogens,
or other mind-altering drugs
Metabolic disorder
Immunological disorder
Any chronic debilitating disease
-
4. I have taken the following prescribed medications during the last 12 months:
5. I have had a serious cold, flu, sinus problem, or allergy episode
within the past two weeks
Yes
No
6. I consider myself to be in poor
fair good excellent
health (circle one)
7. I agree to notify the project director if I receive diagnoses or treatments
for any of the above during my participation in proposed experiments.
I believe that the above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
I also understand that this information is confidential and will not be
disseminated beyond this project.
Signature
Date
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Name
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R800300090001-1
Address
Time
Phone
CONSENT BY THE PARTICIPANT FOR STUDY UNDER INVESTIGATION KNOWN AS
HEMOLYSIS EXPERIMENT
1. I, the undersigned participant, have been informed of the nature, duration and
purpose of the study under investigation listed above, and I voluntarily consent
to my participation in that study.
2. I understand that
A. A small ( 10 ml) venous blood sample will be drawn from my arm by a registered
nurse. I will return to the lab this week for a session (about 1 hr. ) during
which I will attempt to exert a distant mental Influence upon my own or
another person's red blood cells, using visualization techniques.
Confidentiality of records will be maintained.
B. The risks and discomforts which may be associated with the above study are
Slight discomfort associated with the drawing of blood. I understand that obtaining
venous blood is a routine procedure, carried out daily in physicians' offices and
hospitals. I was told that it is not a life-threatening procedure and yet there is
no absolute guarantee of safety on this or other procedures. Individual sterile
needles will be used only once then discarded, to eliminate infection.
C. While no assurance or guarantee can be or has been made or given as to the
benefits of this study or procedure, there is a reasonable expectation of
the following benefits to me in taking part in this study:
The study has implications for a possible role of psychic functioning in
self-healing. I will learn about psychoneuroimmunology and about psycho-
kinesis, and about my own abilities to perform the latter under controlled
laboratory conditions.
D. I agree to inform the Investigator(s) of any deviation(s) from the established
procedures of this experiment.
E. I an free to withdraw consent and to discontinue participation in this
study at any time for any reason.
SIGNED X
(Participant)
WITNESS
INVESTIGATOR'S STATEMENT
In addition to advising the participant of the study, I have offered an
opportunity for further explanation and answering questions relating to it.
SIGNED
(Investigator)
8301 Broadway Sulte 100 San Antonio, TX 78209
821-6094
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

,
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10SIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
INSTRUCTIONS TO PARTICIPANT
If
human
red blood cells are maintained in fluids having a salinity (salt
content)
similar to that of the blood plasma, the cells survive intact for long
periods.
However,
if placed in a fluid having a salinity which is lower than
that of
the plasma (e. g., very dilute saline
or
distilled water), the
corpuscles swell due to the movement of water through their semi-permeable
membranes.
Eventually they rupture and release their contents (hemoglobin)
into the surrounding medium.
The process by which the red blood cells die in
this manner is called "hemolysis." Hemolyis can be measured by passing a beam
of light through a test tube containing a suspension of red blood cells.
the cells are healthy and intact, they are opaque to light and very little
light passes through the tube. If the cells are injured, however, they become
more
transparent to light and much more light passes through the tube.
The
intensity of
the light can be measured by means
of
a device called a
spectrophotometer.
The spectrophotometer is connected to a computer which
provides a permanent record of the change in light intensity over a period of
time (i.e., the time course of hemolysis).
In this experiment, we are studying the degree to which persons can protect
red blood
cells (i.e., slow down the rate of hemolysis), mentally and at a
distance.
We will measure the rate of hemolysis of blood cells in several test
tubes.
Some
of the tubes will be CONTROL tubes which you will not attempt to
influence; these control tubes will provide baseline measures of how hemolysis
normally proceeds.
Other
tubes
will
be PROTECT tubes.
You will attempt to
protect the red blood cells
in
the PROTECT tubes and slow down the rate of
hemolysis of those cells.
For
the
PROTECT tubes, here are some mental
strategies you can use:
- firmly and confidently intend for the red blood cells to be
protected and hemolysis retarded;
- confidently believe that the desired outcome will occur;
- vividly image or visualize any one or any combination
of the following:
* the red blood cell membranes intact and healthy
* the red blood cells normally thin, disk-shaped,
and perfectly healthy
* little or no water flowing through the membranes
and into the cells
* very little light passing through the test tube
containing the red blood cells
* computer printouts of very low percent light
transmittance numbers
- gently wish for a successful outcome for each tube
D-1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
The sealed envelope contains the
proper sequence for the CONTROL and the
PROTECT
periods. When you notice the envelope being slipped under the door,
retrieve the envelope and open it.
The sheet of paper inside of the envelope
will indicate what you are to do during each of the four periods of the
experiment. Each period will last approximately fifteen minutes. There will
be two CONTROL periods and two PROTECT periods; you will find these given in a
random order on your sheet of paper. Keep the paper handy so you can refer to
it at the proper times.
Next, put on the headphones. Soon, you will hear
instructions and relaxation exercises through the headphones. Simply follow
the
instructions.
Beeping sounds will signal the beginning of each period.
Period
1 will be signalled by one beep, Period 2 by two beeps, and so on.
When
you hear the first beep, consult your sheet and follow that instruction (either
CONTROL or
throughout the fifteen-minute period until you hear the
next beeps, which signal the beginning of the next period.
Follow the
appropriate instructions until all four periods have been completed.
During the two fifteen-minute PROTECT periods, visualize and intend for the red
blood cells being measured during those periods to be protected from hemolysis,
to experience very slow rates of hemolysis. Think about and visualize this
intended outcome throughout the periods.
Continue to relax and flow with the
music and look at the color slide of healthy cells during those two PROTECT
periods. Use one or more of the mental strategies given on Page 1.
During the two fifteen-minute CONTROL periods, keep your mind off of the blood
cells and think about other things. If you do think of the experiment, imagine
and intend for hemolysis to proceed at its normal rapid rate during those two
CONTROL periods.
Do not look at the color slide during CONTROL periods.
Remain relaxed, yet attentive and alert throughout the experiment.
Someone
will notify you when the experiment is over, and will accompany you back to the
equipment room. There, you will meet with the experimenter and discuss the
results of the experiment.
Enjoy the experiment . . . and GOOD LUCK !
D-2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

SUBJECT
LABORATORY
FLOOR
PLAN
1/8 INCH = 1 FOOT
APPENDIX E
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
APPARATUS
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
E-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
APPENDIX F
Narration for HEMOLYSIS INDUCTION TAPE
Begin by relaxing your body, and quieting your mind. Establish a mental
connection
with the blood cells in the spectrophotometer in the other room, as
you take several deep breaths.
With each inhalation and exhalation, let
yourself relax more and more deeply, and let the connection between you and the
blood
cells increase.
Give yourself a strong and confident suggestion, right
now,
in the form of a gentle wish and a firm expectation, that this session
will
have a very successful outcome. Give yourself permission to influence the
blood cells in the desired way.
Let go of all tension. .. let all tension and strain melt away. Your
ability to influence the blood cells will increase, as you relax more and more
deeply. .. more completely.
Slightly tense the muscles of your feet and legs. . . hold that tension. . . now
relax completely. Let all tension flow out of your legs and feet, and into the
air around you. Let your lower body relax completely.
Tense the muscles of your buttocks, hips, abdomen and stomach. .. hold the
tension. .. now relax. Let all tension leave the center of your body. Relax all
of your muscles. . . deeply. . . comfortably.
Now, tense the muscles of your arms, hands and fingers. .. hold the
tension. .. relax.
Let
all
tension
and
strain flow out through your
fingers ... into
the air surrounding you.
Take in a deep breath ... and as you
exhale, feel all tension leaving you. Relax more and more deeply.
Slightly tense the muscles of your shoulders, neck and upper back. . . hold
the tension ... now relax. Let go of the tension and strain. Let it melt away.
Let go of all burdens.
Let your shoulders slump effortlessly. Sink into the
chair.
Feel
the gentle pressure of the chair.
£
Feel the light pressure of
your clothing.
Let all of your muscles relax completely.
Slightly tense the muscles of your jaw, face, and scalp. .. hold the
tension ... now release it. Replace it with relaxation. Thoroughly relax your
jaw. .. relax your mouth. .. your tongue. . . relax all of your facial muscles. . . relax
your eyes. .. smooth out and relax the muscles of your scalp. Relax all of the
muscles of your head. . . deeply. . . comfortably.
You're deeply and pleasantly relaxed. Your relaxation will continue and
will
deepen
throughout
the
experiment.
Your
mind
is also
relaxed. .. tranquil ... peaceful ... free
from all distractions. .. free of concerns.
In
this relaxed state, you can image and visualize more easily and more
effectively.
Continue to relax as you increase the connection between you and
the blood cells in the spectrophotometer in the other room.
During
the PROTECT periods, you will effortlessly and effectively
visualize
the
red
blood
cells ... image them,
visualize
them
being
protected ... see
them
maintaining their thin disk shape. .. visualize them
F-1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
protected
from
the
inflow
of
water ... their membranes firm, healthy,
intact ... see very
little water flowing into the cells. .. see them opaque. . . see
very little red
light going through the test tube. .. see the graph at a low
level ... visualize
low numbers.
Protect the cells from hemolysis during the
PROTECT periods.
During the CONTROL periods, keep your mind off of the blood cells. .. allow
hemolysis to proceed at its normal, rapid rate. Think about other things
during the control periods.
Let your mind flow effortless with the music. You are relaxed, yet alert
and attentive.
You have superb control of your mind. Beeping sounds will
signal each of the four periods. .. one beep for the first period, two beeps for
the second, and so on. When you hear beeps, consult your sheet for what to do
during that period. .. follow that instruction throughout that period until you
hear the next beeps. Then follow the next instruction, and so on. Each period
will last about fifteen minutes.
Your relaxed state. .. and the music ... and the color slide will help you to
visualize healthy blood cells.
REMEMBER:
Look at the slide and image the
cells only during the PROTECT periods.
Continue to relax ... and influence the blood cells in the test tube when
appropriate.
F-2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1

1
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 - CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1
for PARTICIPANT #
Here is the sequence for your four periods:
1st Period
=
check when completed
2nd Period
=
check when completed
3rd Period
=
check when completed
4th Period
=
check when completed
REMINDER:
Beeps will signal the beginning of each of the four
periods ... one beep for Period 1, two beeps for Period 2,
three beeps for Period 3, four beeps for Period 4.
*:
*
IF THE PERIOD IS A PROTECT
PERIOD, PROTECT
THE BLOOD CELLS THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD.
*
IF THE PERIOD IS A CONTROL
PERIOD, THINK
ABOUT OTHER THINGS THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD.
Please sign and date this sheet (below) and give it to the person who will
come to this room at the end of the experiment and tell you the session is
over.
NAME
DATE
for the EXPERIMENTER
Here is the tube schedule for SUBJECT #
1st Period =
tubes
2nd Period =
tubes
3rd Period =
tubes
4th Period =
tubes
G-1
Initials
Date
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300090001-1