IV) In the replication program the technology was tested on the following biological system and substances: Human Lymphoma cells: Catholic University, Washington Impact of exposure to EMF field: Significant increase in activity of ODC. (Marker for growth and cancer –potential increased cancer risk). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No increase in ODC activity. Human Leukemia cells: Columbia University, New York Impact of exposure to EMF field: Over-expression of cancer related gene, c-myc protooncogenes.(potential increased cancer risk)Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No EMF response from c-myc protooncogenes.Human breast cancer cells:Columbia University, New York Impact of exposure to EMF field: Onset of HSP90 stress protein production. (potential increased cancer risk) Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No increase in HSP90 production. Human Epithelial amnion cells:Aalborg and Aarhus Universities Impact of exposure to EMF field: Increased cell proliferation rate. (potential increased cancer risk). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No increase in cell proliferation rate.PC-12 cells: Columbia University, New York Impact of exposure to EMF field: Decrease in the level of Neurotransmitter Dopamine.(potential increased risk for Parkinson’s Disease). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No decrease in Dopamine level. Mouse cells (murine L929 fibroblasts): Catholic University, Washington Impact of exposure to EMF field: Enhancement of ODC enzyme activity, involving DNA replication (marker for growth and cancer - potential increased cancer risk). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No increase in ODC activity. Zhejian University, Shanghai, China: Impact of exposure to EMF field: Significant inhibition of gap-junction intercellular communication. (Potential cancer promoter). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No inhibition of intercellular communication.

Chicken embryos: Catholic University, Washington, D.C. Impact of exposure to EMF field: Two-fold increase in ODC enzyme activity and truncal abnormality ratio. (Spinal cord and brain deformation). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No Increase in ODC activity or incidence of truncal abnormality Catholic University, Washington, D.C. Impact of exposure to EMF field: Significant decline in HSP70, heat shock protein, and Csytoprotection. (Potential cancer promoter). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No increase in HSP70. University of Western Ontario, Ontario, Canada Impact of exposure to EMF field: Suppression of activity of Nucleotidase-enzyme related to DNA production. (involved in the development of the central nervous system). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No suppression of enzyme activity. Rat’s Brain cells: University of Washington, Washington State Impact of exposure to EMF field: Significant deficit in learning. Short term memory loss. Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No learning deficit or memory loss. University of Washington, Washington State. Impact of exposure to EMF field: Significant increase in the level of DNA single and double strand breaks. (Potential cancer promoter). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No increase in DNA breakage. Hamster Lung CHL cells: Zhejian University, Shanghai, China: Impact of exposure to EMF field: Significant increase in level of Stress-activated protein kinase SAPK Phosphorylation. (Potential increased cancer risk). Impact of superimposing the EMX Noise field: No increase in SAPK phosphorylation. All seventeen studies showed biological effects from exposure to EMF fields and all documented the ability of EMX noise field to neutralize the effects on the tested biological systems and cell substances. IIX) Further documentation for EMF fields causing biological effects: Besides the above listed biological effect tested with the EMX noise field, numerous studies, independent of the EMX research program, demonstrate significant biological effects caused by EMF fields such as: Chromosomal damage in human blood cells. Maes et al., 1993, Nordenson et al., 1994 and Chromosomal damage (micronuclei) in human cells. Dr. George Carlo, 2000, Maes et al., 1993, Garaj-Vhrovac et al., 1992. Increased DNA strand breaks in animal and human cells. Dr. Lai et al., 1995, 1996, and 1997. Philips et al. 1998. Changes in Gene expression in human cells. Professor Reba Goodman et al. 1995, 1997 and 1998. Tsurita et al., 1999. Harvey et al., 1999. Change in Cell differentiation in human blood cells. Trosko et al., 2000. Change in Melatonin metabolism in electric utility workers. Burch et al., 1998. Change in cellular repair mechanism. DiCarlo et al., Lin et al., 1997. Professor Goodmann et al., 1998. Tsurita et al., 1999. These studies, along with those mentioned above, provide compelling evidence that biological effects can occur due to exposure to EMF fields. V) The physical basis for the EMX technology: The physical ability of an EMF field to establish biological effects (“bioeffects”) in living cells and tissues is based on three different elements, the Energy, the Intensity and the Structure. If one of these components actually can cause changes in the cellular system, the field is considered bioeffective. The fourth dimension, the length of the exposure or the accumulated exposure over time is decisive for whether the biological effects are beneficial, neutral or adverse to the biological system. It is a matter of doses. Studies have shown, that short term or few times exposure (up to half an hour in a couple of days) to EMF actually can stimulate the defense system of the cells and thereby constitute a beneficial effect, a principle known from hospital magnetotherapy. On the other hand if the exposure is long term or repetitive (which is mostly the case in the use of electric equipment and cellphones) this effect might change from beneficial via neutral to adverse to the cellular system. Thus as the three components: energy, intensity and structure are the key to whether biological effects occur or not, the time of the exposure is the decisive factor for whether the effects are adverse or not. a) Energy: The element of the EMF field, which can promote the biological effect via direct cell damage. The power of EMF fields carrying high energy (number of photons higher than visible light) can cause biological effects directly by breaking chemical bonds and damaging the cells.

It is a well-known fact that the EMF issue is still surrounded by controversy. Anyway a substantial number of epidemiological studies and scientific publications show a possible link between EMF exposure and biological and health effects. More than fifty epidemiological studies: Although the link between the recognized biological effects and the health effects is not scientifically proven yet, more than fifty important epidemiological studies suggest that EMF exposure is associated with an increased risk of diseases, most commonly Cancer, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. A considerable number of laboratory studies: Also a considerable number of significant laboratory studies from universities and laboratories around the world show health effects due to EMF exposure. The most prominent is the Royal Adelaide Hospital study in Australia, funded by Telstra, showing a doubling of tumors in EMF exposed mice and the paper published in 1966 by D. Jacobson from George Washington University showing chromosomal damage among 34 exposed employees at the US Embassy in Moscow. Even research done by the Cell Phone Industry Association in US, found a link between EMF exposure and cancer. Dr. George Carlo: “Cell Phones – invisible hazards in the wireless Age”.

Controversy: However other studies show no effects at all, so the discussion is still ongoing and it is not possible based upon the existing epidemiological and laboratory studies alone to make a clear, unconditional statement about the health issue at this point in time.But since the majority of epidemiological and laboratory studies suggest a link between EMF exposure and Health effects, the only prudent response to the issue is to be careful and take whatever precaution is available to protect against the potential risk. Otherwise the explanation of the phenomenon and the final proof might be too late.