翻訳が完成するまで、このページの一部は英語で表示されます。
What existing studies can constrain in BERM now — and what still requires a calibrated L2 kernel.
The literature closes several literature-search gaps. It supports state-dependent response families involving phase, coherence duration, pulse shape, developmental timing, receptor or agonist state, redox state and co-exposure. Organ transfer and BERM's geometry-to-tissue calibration remain open.
BERM therefore writes the endpoint response as a retarded, state-conditional kernel rather than a universal weighted sum:
Sᵣ includes background magnitude and direction, polarization, envelope spectrum, coherence time, circadian and metabolic phase, developmental window, receptor/agonist state, redox state, genotype, organ transfer and exposure history. FieldState may measure physical members of Sᵣ; BERM owns the biological kernel and endpoint mapping.
Experimental setup illustration
Compare two example setups. Choose one difference and see what needs to be recorded around the sample.
Coil pair and sample stage
Coil pair and sample stage
The same device setting can meet differently oriented samples. Here the sample's reference axis rotates while the coils and background direction stay fixed.
Record for the comparisonThe sample reference axis, source field vector and local B₀ vector in the same coordinate system.
A directional sample is used as an example. Sample posture, probe orientation and the biologically relevant receiving direction are different quantities. Rotation alone does not specify the sign or size of a response.
In both setups. Record the sample, life stage and handling, the source's actual waveform and field components, the local B₀ vector, probe calibration, measurement time and temperature. Blinding, sham conditions and the biological endpoint belong in the actual experiment's protocol.
This is an example setup illustration. It does not reproduce a named study or display a biological result. Comparing a conditional BERM response also requires a specified receiver and endpoint; missing information is not evidence of a hidden effect.
For matched single- and combined-channel experiments, BERM stores both the additive contrast I₊ = Y₁₂ − Y₁ − Y₂ + Y₀ and the log-multiplicative contrast I× = log(Y₁₂/Y₀) − log(Y₁/Y₀) − log(Y₂/Y₀). Positive, null and negative values are all admissible. The model no longer assumes that combined channels must always be supra-additive.
Each row constrains a response condition. None supplies an environmental population dose or a TFR coefficient.
| Source | Condition | Bounded result |
|---|---|---|
| Litovitz et al. (1991)i | Coherence time | About 10 s of coherence produced the tested ornithine-decarboxylase response; shorter intervals weakened or removed it. |
| Rosenspire et al. (2005)i | Metabolic phase | The sign of the cellular response depended on phase relative to a metabolic oscillation. |
| Ubeda et al. (1983)i | Pulse shape and developmental window | Chick-embryo effects depended on pulse rise time and exposure during the first 48 hours. |
| Blackman et al. (orientation) (1990)i | AC × DC relative orientation | The tested calcium-release response depended on alignment between the oscillating and local static magnetic fields. |
| Blackman et al. (temperature) (1991)i | Temperature level and trajectory | The same field protocol produced enhanced, reduced or null calcium release under different temperature conditions. |
| Berman et al. (1990)i | Laboratory interaction | A six-laboratory replication found a pooled effect together with significant between-laboratory interaction. |
| Burch et al. (2000)i | Polarization or linked source state | Personal magnetic-field exposure was associated with lower urinary melatonin metabolite only in specified three-phase/substation conditions. |
| Lymangrover et al. (1983)i | Agonist-gated endocrine response | The tested electric-field effect on steroidogenesis appeared under ACTH stimulation and within a field-intensity window. |
| Kavaliers & Ossenkopp (1986)i | Calcium-state intervention | Chelation blocked and ionophore treatment potentiated the tested field–morphine interaction. |
| Liu et al. (2002)i | Chemical co-exposure | ELF magnetic field and lead produced joint oxidative effects in mouse brain and liver beyond the single exposures. |
| Ghione et al. (2005)i | Human neural endpoint specificity | A double-blind study reported EEG-alpha and pain-threshold changes while blood pressure and heart rate were null. |
| Møllerløkken et al. (2012)i | Human protocol-specific null region | One randomized crossover MRI protocol produced no immediate or 11-day change in the measured male reproductive hormones. |
| Iversen et al. (2024)i | Light × magnetic-field timing | Combined light and magnetic conditions produced a supra-additive myoblast response whose interpretation depended on intervention timing. |
| Jimenez et al. (2019)i | Carrier × envelope × channel × organ | A specified 27.12 MHz amplitude-modulated protocol engaged Cav3.2 in hepatocellular-carcinoma models. |
| FDA HDE H220001 (2023)i | Protocol-specific clinical boundary | TheraBionic received HDE approval on 26 September 2023; 14/41 patients had stable disease beyond six months. HDE establishes probable benefit, not randomized effectiveness. |
| Burd et al. (2026)i | Engineered radical-pair feasibility | An engineered flavin radical-pair construct enabled magnetic control in C. elegans; this does not identify a natural human receptor. |