EEG Pilot Study.
Alpha-rhythm measurement under cellphone exposure.
A clinical EEG pilot recorded brain electrical activity under four conditions: at rest, with the BioCard alone, with a phone call alone, and with the phone plus the BioCard. Conducted under International 10-20 electrode placement and ASET-aligned protocols.
This page documents a clinical EEG pilot conducted to record brain alpha-rhythm parameters under defined cellphone-exposure conditions, with and without the BioCard.
The study was conducted as a 6-subject pilot under ASET-aligned protocols. Limitations of pilot scope are stated alongside the results below.
Note Every chart, every measurement, and every interpretation on this page comes from the original EEG report by Regina Shmelkina. Methodology and results documented in full below.
Background
Alpha-rhythm - definition and clinical significance.
Your brain runs on rhythmic electrical activity. Alpha-rhythm is the wave (8–13 Hz) the brain produces when you're awake, calm, and at rest with your eyes closed - relaxed-but-alert. Clinical neurology has used it as a baseline marker of normal brain function for nearly a century.
Two numbers describe it: alpha-index (the percentage of recording time the rhythm is present) and alpha-power (its average amplitude). Both are standard EEG outputs. Both were measured here.
What "synchronization" means
When alpha-rhythm is steady and present, neurologists call the brain's electrical activity synchronized - the rhythm is coherent. When alpha breaks up, gets noisy, or disappears, the activity is desynchronized - a measurable change in the brain's baseline state.
Cell phone radiation has been shown in multiple EEG studies to produce desynchronization in some subjects. This study asked a more specific question: with the BioCard applied, does that pattern change?
Study Reference
Study of Human Electroencephalogram under Influence of Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation and MobilTek Protection Card
Conducted and authored by Regina Shmelkina, clinical EEG specialist with peer-reviewed publications dating to the 1970s.
Clinical EEG Pilot Study
Conducted to ASET RegulationsRecordings were performed in accordance with the regulations of the American Society of Electroneurodiagnostic Technologists (ASET) and follow the methodology used in routine clinical neurology.
It's a pilot - six subjects, exploratory by design - but every step is documented, every measurement is published, and the conclusion is conservative: "the BioCard showed significant effect on EEG."
Author of EEG research published 1976–2002 (Moscow journals; J. Appl. Psychophysiology & Biofeedback, 2002)
5 male, 1 female · screened for head injury & neurological history · informed consent
Used in talk mode, 7 minutes against the ear
Visual clinical analysis + automated power-spectrum extraction
4 brain regions: frontal, temporal, parietal, occipital - both sides
Methodology
Four EEG recordings per subject across defined conditions.
Each subject served as their own control across four sequential conditions, recorded under identical electrode placement and recording protocol.
Background EEG (no influences)
Subject seated, awake, restful, eyes closed. After a 3-minute relaxation period, a 1-minute baseline EEG was recorded with no phone and no BioCard present. Standard activation procedures (eye opening 15 sec, eye closure) applied. This is the reference state.
EEG with the BioCard alone (no phone)
The BioCard was applied to the heart area for 10 minutes. EEG was then recorded again. Result: no significant difference vs. background. The BioCard by itself, with no phone present, doesn't visibly alter resting EEG.
EEG after a phone call (no card)
After a 10-minute break, the cellphone was held to the ear in talk mode for 7 minutes, then turned off and set aside. EEG was recorded for 1 minute immediately after - capturing the brain's post-exposure state. The phone was never used during the EEG so its RF couldn't introduce electrical noise into the recording itself.
EEG after phone call + BioCard together
After another 10-minute break, the BioCard was re-applied to the heart area. The phone was used again for 7 minutes in the same talk-mode position. Phone off. EEG recorded immediately. Same subject. Same electrodes. Same protocol. Only one variable changed: the BioCard was now in place during the phone call.
Two analysis methods, cross-checked
Each recording was analyzed two ways: (a) visual clinical interpretation by a trained EEG specialist using the standard ruler method to measure alpha-index, and (b) automated frequency spectrum analysis from the EEG machine to extract average alpha-power. Recordings with physiological artifacts were excluded.
Measurement Data
Alpha-index and alpha-power across four conditions.
Recorded values for each subject under each condition. Source: Table 1, Shmelkina report.
| Subject | Background | Phone alone | Phone + BioCard | Δ Index vs. phone |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.9% · 77 | 10.2% · 89 | 21% · 117 | +10.8 pp |
| 2 | 91.5% · 98 | 52% · 115 | 55% · 214 | +3.0 pp |
| 3 | 82% · 67 | 73% · 53 | 75% · 80 | +2.0 pp |
| 4 | 22% · 62 | 69% · 67 | 80% · 67 | +11.0 pp |
| 5 | 96% · 101 | 89% · 83 | 95% · 117 | +6.0 pp |
| 6 | 28% · 86 | 92% · 98 | 93.5% · 93 | +1.5 pp |
Each cell shows alpha-index (%) · alpha-power. "pp" = percentage points. Background = no phone, no BioCard. Phone alone = 7 min talk mode, no BioCard. Phone + BioCard = same protocol with BioCard applied to heart area. Source: Table 1, Shmelkina, reproduced verbatim.
Every subject's alpha-index increased with the BioCard applied
That's the central finding. Alpha-power increased in 4 of 6 subjects (66%); 1 was unchanged; 1 showed a small reduction. Statistical analysis put the alpha-power ratio of phone+card to phone-alone at 1.34 ± 0.33 (P=68%) - a statistically significant change. The phone alone, by contrast, pushed alpha in opposite directions in different subjects (3 up, 3 down) - a sign of desynchronization, not a uniform response.
Interpretation
Observed patterns across the four conditions.
Two distinct patterns are documented in the recordings.
Phone alone - variable direction
After cellphone exposure alone, alpha-index increased in 3 subjects and decreased in 3 subjects. Direction correlated with baseline alpha level - clinically associated with desynchronization patterns.
Phone + BioCard - consistent direction
Alpha-index increased in all 6 subjects when the BioCard was added. Alpha-power increased in 4 of 6 subjects. The pattern was uniform across the cohort, in the direction clinical EEG associates with synchronization.
BioCard alone - no observable effect
With the BioCard applied but no phone present, EEG recordings did not differ from baseline. The change in alpha-rhythm was documented only in the context of cellphone exposure.
Statistically significant
The alpha-power ratio of phone+card to phone-alone was estimated at 1.34 ± 0.33 with P = 68%. The investigator's conclusion was conservative: "the BioCard showed significant effect on EEG." The signal isn't subtle, and it's not in the direction you'd expect from random noise.
"The BioCard application influenced both alpha-index of EEG and alpha-power significantly, causing in the majority of cases an increase of alpha characteristics - in other words, we suggest that the BioCard improves the synchronization of the electrical potentials."
- Regina Shmelkina · Clinical EEG Pilot Report
Stated Limitations
Documented limitations of the pilot scope.
Pilot studies are exploratory by design. The following limitations apply.
Scope and limitations
This study is a 6-subject pilot conducted under ASET-aligned clinical EEG protocols. It was designed as exploratory work to document whether a measurable change in alpha-rhythm parameters could be observed under the defined exposure conditions.
Subjects were aged 55–79. The investigator was a single clinical EEG specialist. The study is one of four documented Bodywell® research outputs, each examining a different dimension of RF interaction.
Investigator
Clinical EEG specialist with documented publication history.
Decades of clinical EEG practice and EEG research, with peer-reviewed publications spanning 1976 to 2002 - including work on alpha-rhythm in brain tumor diagnostics, EEG dynamics during light-stimulus switching, and EEG criteria of athletic training in young people. Co-published with M. Krinker in Journal of Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback (2002). Conducted this pilot study using standard clinical EEG protocols and ASET-aligned regulations.
The Receipts
What the actual EEG recordings look like.
Side-by-side: the brain's electrical activity before and after the BioCard was applied - the same readings the investigator used to document the alpha-rhythm change.
Source: EEG recordings from the Shmelkina pilot study, six channels (FP1-F7, FP2-F8, F7-C3, F8-C4, C3-O1, C4-O2). The figure label uses the brand-wide "Biochip" descriptor; on this page the same component is referred to as the BioCard, since the test was conducted with the BioCard placed on the heart area.
Frequently Asked Questions
EEG study - common questions.
Background on methodology, scope, and applicability.
Six subjects is a small sample. Why publish it?
Because every one of them moved in the same direction. In a 6-subject pilot, you'd expect noise - some up, some down. What we got was 6 of 6 alpha-index increases when the BioCard was added. That uniformity, even with a small N, is what made the result worth publishing.
It's not the kind of statistical confidence a 500-subject trial gives you. We're not claiming it is. It is the kind of clean direction-of-effect signal that justifies the additional studies (SAR, pH, thermal) we ran in parallel - a stack of converging evidence rather than one giant study.
The phone wasn't on during the EEG - how do you know it's the phone causing the change?
Deliberately so. If the phone were transmitting during the EEG, its RF would inject electrical noise directly into the recording - making clean measurement impossible. Standard practice in EEG-vs-cellphone research is to expose first, then record - capturing the brain's post-exposure state.
What's compared isn't "during phone vs. during phone+BioCard" - it's "after 7 minutes of phone exposure with no BioCard" vs. "after 7 minutes of phone exposure with BioCard." Same exposure, same recording protocol, same person, one variable.
Is increased alpha-rhythm "good"? It's not the same as "feeling better."
Correct - and we're not going to claim it is. EEG measurements are not feelings. Alpha-rhythm synchronization is what clinical neurology uses as a marker of normal, intact baseline brain function. When it disappears or fragments in awake adults, it's typically considered abnormal.
What this study shows is a measurable change in an objective clinical parameter, in a direction that's clinically associated with synchronized brain activity. What it doesn't show is that the BioCard cures, treats, or prevents anything. No EEG study can show that, and ours doesn't try.
The subjects were 55–79. Does it generalize to younger people?
Honest answer: not from this study alone. The investigator notes age can affect EEG response patterns, and the literature suggests cell-phone EEG effects can be more prominent in children and younger adults - not less. Generalizing to a wider population is exactly what a follow-on study would address.
For our purposes, the pilot serves a specific role: confirming a measurable, repeatable change in alpha synchronization can be observed when the BioCard is applied during phone exposure. Generalization is a separate question.
Is this peer-reviewed?
The pilot report itself is investigator-authored, not journal-published. It was, however, independently reviewed by Prof. Moshe Einat (Ariel) and Prof. Motti Haridim (HIT) - the same expert reviewers who validated the SAR and thermal work. So it has had peer review in the academic sense (independent qualified experts validating the methodology and conclusions), even though it didn't go through a journal submission cycle.
The investigator's broader EEG research has appeared in peer-reviewed clinical journals (J. Applied Psychophysiology & Biofeedback, Journal of Human Physiology, Journal of Theory and Practice of Physical Culture) over a 35-year career.
It's exactly the kind of study you'd run before deciding whether a larger, journal-grade trial was worth the cost. The pH study (CUNY) and SAR study (FCC-accredited lab) sit at different points on that evidence ladder. We publish the full chain instead of cherry-picking.
Why was the BioCard placed on the heart, not the head?
The BioCard is designed to be applied to the body - typically the chest or wallet - not to the device. The mechanism the company has described is body-side, not phone-side (which is also why a separate TRP/TIS test was needed to confirm it doesn't shield the phone - it doesn't). Heart-area placement matches how the product is actually used.
The Other Studies
EEG is one of four. Read the rest.
Up to 80% reduction at an FCC-accredited lab.
RF Exposure Lab, San Marcos. Six measurements across multiple test devices, plus a confirmatory test by Dr. Mazeh.
Read the SAR studyCellular pH stabilization in human blood.
City University of New York. Foundational MobileTek® mechanism study, co-led by Prof. Aron Goykadosh, P.E.
Read the pH studyFLIR thermal imaging during phone calls.
Visualizes temperature change at the ear with and without the BioCard during sustained phone use.
Read the thermal studyIf the science checks out for you
You've seen the protocol, the data, and the limits of what it shows.
Try the BioCard for 90 days. If it's not for you, send it back for a full refund - no questions, no restock fee.