Eleanor White's comments on this posting:
This book focusses on NON-ionizing radiation, and contains detailed texts about NON-THERMAL effects. In other words, "right up our alley".
The main use of this book is to show that it is easy for electromagnetic signals to cause radio frequency hearing and other effects at LOW power levels. This in turn can be used to explain why detection is so very difficult.
I don't understand the biological jargon, however, a few of the more plain- language paragraphs STUNNINGLY verify that with careful choice of signal frequency and modulation, not only can the body's cells detect the modulation envelope of an incoming radio signal (i.e. function as a "cellular crystal set") but even AMPLIFY these carefully formed signals. (Amplification of other effects, such as proneness to disease, is also covered in the book.)
"Detection", in terms of radio signal reception, means that some portion of the reciever "rectifies", that is, turns the AC of the incoming signal into varying DC. If this conversion is not done, voice to skull wouldn't work.
The book touches also on ways in which cells communicate, and shows that electromagnetic fields of relatively weak power levels can affect intercellular communication, which is, as I understand the subject, what the brain is "all about".
Bio-amplification is apparently why radio signals of very low average power ("MICROwatts" per NASA) can still produce audio effects, and no doubt plays a part in difficulties in detection.
When two more characteristics of voice to skull are factored in:
1. The carrier signal can be "hopped" continuously within the bioeffective bandwidth, known as "spread spectrum" transmission, and,
2. The voice modulation most effective for undetectable hypnosis is evidently a voice shifted just above normal hearing, but still audible to the brain,
...you have a recipe for incredibly difficult signals to detect.
This book is a mainstream publication, very well suited to use in our publicity and persuasion campaigns, and our dealings with authorities who claim radio signals don't affect living tissue except to heat it.
NASA abstract stating voice to skull works
Government contract to SEA, says same
Diagram explaining voice to skull technology
Article about use of ultrasound voice
Diagram illustrating ultrasound voice conversion
Finally, many thanks to Blanche Chavoustie for providing me photocopies of this book - a saintly work!
------------------------------------------------------------- Page 110: ... At that time  excitatory mechanisms in nerver fibers and nerve cells were grouped under a common rubric of ionic equilibrium mechanisms. There was little interest in the possibility that functional organization of mebranes of cell bodies might involve threshhold sensitivities to both oscillating EM fields and to molecular stimuli at energy levels substantially lower than predicted by Hodgkin- Huxley models, and substantially below typical threshholds in nerve fibers. Much recent research cited below has shown that imposed weak low frequency fields (and radiofrequency fields amplitude- modulated at ELF frequencies) that are many orders of magnitude weaker in the pericellular fluid [fluid between adjacent cells] than the membrane potential gradient [voltage across the membrane] can modulate actions of hormone, anti- body neurotransmitter and cancer-promoter molecules at their cell surface receptor sites. From their electrical characteristics, these sensitivities appear to involve nonequilibrium and highly cooperative processes that mediate a major amplification of initial weak triggers associated with binding of these molecules at their specific cell surface receptor sites. (Adey, 1983, 1986, 1987; Adey and Lawrence, 1984; Lawrence and Adey, 1982). Page 122: Cooperative Modification of Calcium Binding by RF Fields at Cell Surfaces with Amplification of Initial Signals Initial stimuli associated with weak perpindicular EM fields and with binding of stimulating molecules at their membrane receptor sites elicit a HIGHLY COOPERATIVE modification of Ca++ binding to glycoproteins along the membrane surface. As noted above, a longitudinal spread is consistent with the direction of extracellular current flow associated with physiological activity and imposed EM fields. This cooper- ative modification of surface Ca++ binding is an AMPLIFYING STAGE, with evidence from concurent initial molecular binding events by imposed RF fields that there is a far greater increase in Ca++ efflux than is accounted for in the events of receptor-ligand binding (Bawin and Adey, 1976; Bawin et al, 1975; Liu-Liu and Adey, 1982). Page 124: ... Enzymes are protein molecules that function as catalysts, initiating and enhancing chemical reactions that would not otherwise occur at tissue temperatures. This ability resides in the pattern of electrical charges on the molecular surface. In the fashion of more familiar chemical catalysts, such as the hydrocarbon oxidation systems which function only at very high temperatures in automotive exhaust systems, a catalyst emerges unchanged from these reactions and is thus able to participate indefinitely in a specific reaction. Activation of these enzymes and the reactions in which they participate involve energies millions of times greater than in the cell surface cell surface triggering events initiated by the EM fields, emphasizing the MEMBRANE AMPLIFICATION inherent in this trans-membrane signaling sequence. Page 131: ... Stimulus Amplification in Cooperative Systems ... It is therefore clear that OBSERVED EM field interactions with cells and tissues based on oscillating ELF tissue gradients between 10 E-7 and 10 E-1 volts per centimeter would involve cooperativity MANY ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE GREATER than envisaged in the examples just cited. In part this discrepancy appears to relate to far greater sensitivities to low-frequency EM fields [EW: ELF, that is, the "entrainment" frequencies] and to RF fields with low-frequency amplitude-modulation [EW: this includes radar hearing signals] than to imposed step functions or DC gradients [EW: common with contact electrodes, not of interest in mind control at a distance] used in many electrochemical experiments and models to test levels of cooperativity in biological systems. (Blank, 1972) [EW: In plain language, both entrainment (ELF) fields and pulsating radar-like (RF) fields are a hell of a lot more influential on cells than some experimental work using DC and electrode methods.] Page 95: [EW: This section is not part of the demonstration that EM signals can be biologically amplified, as above. It's main interest is that a magnetophosphene "gun" was under consider- ation by the U.S. National Institute of Justice in 1993, along with a "fever" gun and a "convulsion" gun, both using micro- wave technology. As of 1999, nothing has been heard from NIJ on this development, however, page 95 here suggests that such a microwave weapon is feasible.] Magnetophosphenes An effect of time-varying magnetic fields on humans was first described by d'Arsonval (1896) [EW: Anyone doubt there has been some progress since 1896?] is the induction of a flicker- ing illumination within the visual field field known as magnetophosphenes. This phenomenon occurs as an immediate response to stimulation by either pulsed or sinusoidal magnetic fields with frequencies less than 100 Hz, and the effect is completely reversible with no apparent influence on visual acuity. The maximum visual sensitivity to sinusoidal magnetic fields has been found at a frequency of 20 Hz in human subjects with normal vision. [EW: Radio signals are a combination of electric and magnetic fields. To radiate a 20 Hz signal would require such huge antennas that it is impractical to do so. I'd recommend that if someone has the facilities and skills, I'd try some VHF (or microwave) pulsing at 20 Hz on an RF carrier at, say, the 2-meter (144-148 MHz) ham band with a duty cycle, say, of 20% pulse-ON time.] -------------------------------------------------------------