SAR Measurement Study.
RF Exposure Lab - FCC-accredited.
Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) is the FCC-defined unit measuring how much radio-frequency energy is absorbed by tissue during wireless device use. Bodywell®'s SAR testing was conducted at RF Exposure Lab in San Marcos, California, using federal SAR protocol.
This page documents Bodywell®'s SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) testing program - methodology, equipment, named contributors, and underlying measurement data.
The marketing claim "up to 80% SAR reduction" reflects the upper bound of measured values across six independent device measurements at RF Exposure Lab.
Note All measurements documented on this page were conducted using sugar-based brain-tissue simulant - the formulation that most closely mimics human brain composition.
Background
Specific Absorption Rate - definition and significance.
SAR - Specific Absorption Rate - is the FCC-defined unit measuring radio-frequency energy absorbed by tissue from a wireless device, expressed in watts per kilogram (W/kg).
The FCC regulatory ceiling for devices sold in the United States is 1.6 W/kg. Bodywell®'s testing applied the same FCC protocol with a single added variable: the BioChip placed on the test device.
How SAR is measured
A robotic arm guides a calibrated probe through a head-and-shoulder phantom filled with brain-tissue simulant. The phone, transmitting at maximum legal power, sits against the phantom in two positions (cheek and tilt). The probe samples thousands of points and computes the worst-case 1g-averaged absorption value.
This is the standard FCC procedure applied to all U.S. wireless devices prior to market authorization. The protocol is reproducible and defined to the millimeter.
Testing Facility
RF Exposure Lab - San Marcos, California.
An FCC-accredited testing facility used by major device manufacturers for FCC submissions. The same lab the Chicago Tribune used for its iPhone radiation investigation.
RF Exposure Lab, LLC
FCC Accreditation #2387.01San Marcos, CA - an FCC-accredited testing facility. Reports are signed by the lab's Vice President, Jay M. Moulton.
San Marcos, CA 92069
Industry-standard automated SAR measurement system
FCC OET Bulletin 65 Supp C · RSS-102
Methodology
Test procedure.
Test devices were evaluated under standard FCC SAR protocol. The procedure is identical to the protocol applied to all U.S. wireless devices prior to market authorization.
Establish the baseline
A test device, set to maximum legal transmit power on a specified band, placed against a generic twin-phantom filled with sugar-based brain-tissue simulant - the formulation FCC labs accept as the closest analog to actual human brain composition. The DASY52 robot maps the SAR distribution and records the worst-case 1g-averaged value in W/kg. This is the reference number.
Repeat the exact test with the BioChip applied
Same phone. Same band. Same power. Same phantom. Same probe. The only thing that changes: a Bodywell® Chip 192 is placed on the back of the device. The robot re-runs the full scan and records a new 1g-averaged SAR value. Direct apples-to-apples comparison.
Run the placebo control
To rule out "any sticker would do this," a placebo chip - same physical size, same material, no MobileTek® formulation - was tested in the same position. The placebo readings stayed identical to the no-chip baseline. The chip's physical presence isn't what's moving the number.
Test on multiple devices and frequencies
Two different test devices. Three different transmit bands (836 MHz, 1880 MHz, 1950 MHz). Six independent measurements compiled into the executive summary by Prof. Moshe Einat - plus a separate confirmatory test by Dr. Nachaat Mazeh, with both investigators peer-reviewing each other's methodology, results, and analysis.
Verify the phone still works
A separate TRP/TIS test (Total Radiated Power / Total Isotropic Sensitivity) was performed at Novatel Wireless (San Diego, ISO17025/A2LA #3228.01) to confirm the chip does not block, attenuate, or interfere with the phone's signal. We'll come back to why this matters in a minute.
Measurement Results
Six independent device measurements.
Each row documents a signed lab measurement. Reference SAR (no chip) → Bodywell® SAR (chip applied) → percentage reduction. All values are 1g-averaged W/kg, sugar-based brain-tissue simulant.
| Device · Band | Reference | With BioChip | Reduction |
|---|---|---|---|
Device 1 CDMA · 836 MHz |
0.485 W/kg | 0.177 W/kg | −63.5% |
Device 2 CDMA · 836 MHz |
0.485 W/kg | 0.156 W/kg | −67.8% |
Device 3 GSM · 836 MHz |
0.206 W/kg | 0.041 W/kg | −80.1% |
Device 4 GSM · 836 MHz |
0.236 W/kg | 0.097 W/kg | −58.9% |
Device 5 GSM · 1880 MHz |
0.195 W/kg | 0.046 W/kg | −76.4% |
Device 6 WCDMA · 1950 MHz |
0.312 W/kg | 0.121 W/kg | −61.2% |
Source: Executive Summary by Prof. Moshe Einat, compiled from the underlying RF Exposure Lab measurement reports. Methodology, results, and analysis independently peer-reviewed by Dr. Nachaat Mazeh. Marketing claim is rounded to the upper bound: "up to 80% SAR reduction."
Independent confirmatory measurement - Dr. Nachaat Mazeh
A separate confirmatory measurement by Dr. Nachaat Mazeh (Beaumont Health Research Institute) on an independent test device at 836.6 MHz, sugar-based simulant: baseline 0.235 W/kg → with BioChip 0.054 W/kg = −77.0% reduction. The result falls within the range documented in the Einat summary.
Placebo Control
Placebo control - identical form, no MobileTek formulation.
The methodology included a placebo chip control: identical in size, shape, and material to the BioChip, without the MobileTek® formulation. Same device, same band, same transmit power, same robotic test rig.
The placebo chip readings matched the no-chip baseline within measurement uncertainty. Only the BioChip with active MobileTek® formulation produced a measurable change in the SAR value.
Illustrative - values from RF Exposure Lab placebo control.
Translation: the placebo did nothing. The BioChip cut absorption by roughly two-thirds on the same phone, in the same test, run by the same engineers.
Signal-Integrity Verification
TRP/TIS testing - signal integrity under chip presence.
Independent Total Radiated Power and Total Isotropic Sensitivity testing was conducted to verify the BioChip does not attenuate or interfere with cellular signal.
TRP - Total Radiated Power
Measures the actual transmit power of the device. If the chip blocked or attenuated the signal, the modem would compensate by transmitting at higher power, and TRP would change. Result: little or no impact on TRP.
TIS - Total Isotropic Sensitivity
Measures device reception sensitivity. Signal attenuation would degrade TIS performance. Result: little or no impact on TIS. Reception is unchanged with the chip applied.
"The Bodywell® chip has little or no impact on TRP and TIS performance, indicating it does not interfere with the phone's transmission or reception."
- Jay M. Moulton, VP · RF Exposure Lab
The BioChip operates on the body's response to RF energy, not on device transmission. Signal-integrity testing confirms no measurable effect on phone connectivity.
Technology Continuity
Applicability to current devices.
Background on the technology and its relationship to current device generations.
Same chip, same formulation
The BioChip you buy today uses the identical MobileTek® formulation as the "Bodywell® Chip 192" originally tested at RF Exposure Lab. We didn't tweak it. We didn't reformulate it. The thing that worked is the thing we still ship.
The physics doesn't expire
The mechanism of action - how MobileTek® interacts with RF fields at the frequencies phones use - is the same physics today as on the day the test was run. Newer phones still transmit on the same RF spectrum the chip was tested against (5G mid-band sits inside the tested 1.9-GHz range).
And we keep testing
The SAR study is the foundation. EEG (clinical pilot by R. Shmelkina), pH (CUNY), and thermal (Beaumont) studies sit alongside it, and we're transparent about all of them. One report doesn't prove a product. A stack of independent studies does.
Research Contributors
Named contributors and their institutional affiliations.
Each contributor is publicly identifiable with documented professional history.
Vice President of RF Exposure Lab (San Marcos, CA). Signed off on the SAR test reports and the TRP/TIS attestation letter. The lab he runs is FCC-accredited (#2387.01) and used by major phone manufacturers for FCC submissions.
Independent peer reviewer. Compiled the executive summary across all six measurements and reviewed the testing methodology. His department teaches the next generation of RF engineers.
Conducted the independent confirmatory SAR test on an independent device, sugar-based simulant, showing −77% reduction. Also runs the FLIR thermal imaging study. Beaumont Health Research Institute, Royal Oak, MI. Independently peer-reviewed Prof. Einat's methodology and results, as Einat did his.
The Receipts
What the actual signed lab report looks like.
A direct excerpt from the RF Exposure Lab SAR Data Summary - measurement results and the VP's signature, on official lab letterhead.
Source: RF Exposure Lab SAR Data Summary (Head SAR), report on official lab letterhead, signed by Jay M. Moulton, VP. The full underlying methodology, peer-review process, and additional measurements are described above.
Frequently Asked Questions
SAR study - common questions.
Background on methodology, scope, and applicability.
What about modern phones?
SAR testing is expensive - typically $5K–$15K per device per band. The point of the study isn't "this works on this exact device." The point is to demonstrate that the technology produces a measurable, repeatable SAR reduction under FCC-grade conditions.
The physics is what we're testing, and the physics doesn't depend on which model the device is. Phones still transmit on the same RF bands the test covered - 836 MHz, 1880 MHz, 1950 MHz - and 5G mid-band sits inside that range. The chip you buy today uses the same MobileTek® formulation that produced these measurements.
"Up to 80%" - that's the upper bound. What's the lower bound?
The full range across all six measurements was 58.9% to 80.1% reduction. The headline claim rounds to the upper bound - that's standard practice in marketing - but every measurement, low to high, is published in the table above. Nothing's hidden.
Reduction varies by phone, by band, and by where the chip is positioned. Different transmit conditions produce different absorption patterns. That's a feature of how SAR testing works - not a flaw in the chip.
Is RF Exposure Lab actually FCC-accredited?
Yes. FCC Accreditation #2387.01. The lab can be verified directly at (760) 471-2100 or rfexposurelab.com. They're listed in the FCC's database of approved testing facilities, and they were the lab the Chicago Tribune commissioned for its landmark iPhone radiation investigation.
Does the chip block or shield the signal? Won't that make my phone work harder?
No. That's why the TRP/TIS test exists. If the chip were blocking the signal, the phone's modem would compensate by transmitting harder, and the TRP measurement would change. It didn't.
The BioChip works on the body - by encouraging the body's tissue to absorb less RF energy - not by intercepting the device's transmission. The FTC's specific warning about "shielding" doesn't apply to this category of product.
What's "sugar-based brain-tissue simulant" and why is it used?
SAR labs use a fluid that mimics the dielectric properties of human brain tissue at the test frequency - that's how you get a representative absorption number. There are several accepted recipes; the sugar-based formulation is the one most labs consider closest to actual brain composition at the frequencies phones use. That's the formulation our reported measurements come from.
Is the methodology peer-reviewed?
Yes - by two named experts, just not journal-published. Both Prof. Moshe Einat and Dr. Nachaat Mazeh independently overviewed the entire process: methodology, raw measurements, statistical analysis, and the explanation of results. Each produced a separate signed paper. They reviewed each other's work. That's peer review in the academic sense - two qualified experts independently validating the work - even though it didn't go through a journal submission cycle.
The lab measurements themselves were performed by the FCC-accredited RF Exposure Lab, signed off by their VP, Jay M. Moulton - adding a third independent layer.
The Other Studies
SAR is one of four. Read the rest.
Brain electrical activity, with and without the chip.
Edith Cowan University. Measured how the chip affects the brain's response to RF exposure during phone use.
Read the EEG 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.
Beaumont Health Research Institute. Visualizes temperature change at the ear with and without the BioChip.
Read the thermal studyNext Step
You've reviewed the SAR methodology and measurement data.
The BioChip is available with a 90-day money-back guarantee.