Research-led Health Science and Clinical Investigation

Lymphocytes are a type of white blood cell that form part of the adaptive immune system. Their primary role is immune surveillance, helping the body recognise and respond to infections, abnormal cells and other foreign substances. They are not the body’s detoxification system.

IGL Laboratories selected lymphocytes because they are living cells that continuously circulate throughout the bloodstream, lymphatic system and interstitial (tissue) fluid, giving them one of the widest surveillance ranges of any immune cell. Many lymphocytes are also among the body’s longest-lived immune cells, enabling them to continually monitor and interact with the body’s internal environment over time.

As they travel through these compartments, lymphocytes naturally “come up against” a wide variety of substances and chemical signals present within the body’s internal environment. They also sample tiny amounts of extracellular fluid through a normal cellular process known as pinocytosis (“cell drinking”), as well as through receptor-mediated uptake. In this context, the phrase “come up against” simply refers to their continual exposure to, and interaction with, their surrounding environment.

Using its proprietary methodology, IGL Laboratories measured the intracellular electrical properties of these isolated lymphocytes. The lymphocytes were therefore used as a biological sample from which intracellular electrical measurements could be made after they had circulated within the body’s internal environment. Their use in the iEC test was as an analytical cell type for laboratory measurement and should not be interpreted as indicating that lymphocytes themselves perform detoxification.

The iEC (Intracellular Electrochemical) test was a laboratory assay developed and performed by IGL Labor GmbH in Germany between 2009 and 2024. It was designed to analyse the intracellular electrical properties of isolated lymphocytes using the laboratory’s proprietary methodology.

Unlike conventional blood tests, which typically measure substances circulating in blood plasma or serum, the iEC test focused on living lymphocytes after they had circulated throughout the body’s internal environment.

The laboratory isolated lymphocytes from a blood sample and then analysed their intracellular electrical characteristics. Using its own validated analytical methodology, IGL reported numerical values for a range of substances and compounds. These results were presented in nanomoles per litre (nmol/L) together with laboratory reference ranges.

The precise analytical principles and instrumentation used by IGL formed part of the laboratory’s proprietary methodology and were not publicly disclosed. However, the test itself was performed routinely by IGL Labor for approximately fifteen years and was used by healthcare practitioners and researchers in a number of countries.

The iEC test was unique because it assessed intracellular measurements from living lymphocytes, rather than measuring substances directly in blood plasma, serum or urine. This provided a different type of laboratory assessment from more conventional clinical testing.

The iEC test was developed and performed exclusively by IGL Labor GmbH in Germany between 2009 and 2024.

Following the passing of the laboratory’s founder in 2024, IGL Labor discontinued the iEC test. As a result, the analysis is no longer commercially available, and no laboratory currently offers an equivalent test using the same methodology. The discontinuation of the iEC test was an operational decision by the laboratory.  

Although the iEC test is no longer available, the data generated while it was an active laboratory service remain part of the historical record for studies conducted during that period. As with any laboratory method, research findings are interpreted within the context of the analytical techniques available at the time the studies were performed.

The iEC test measured the intracellular electrical properties of isolated lymphocytes using IGL’s proprietary methodology.

Results were reported in nmol/L with laboratory reference ranges.

The test generated measurements for a range of substances and compounds according to the laboratory’s analytical method.

It was different from conventional blood, urine or hair analysis because it analysed living lymphocytes rather than extracellular fluid or excreted substances.

The analytical methodology was proprietary to IGL Labor.

The Non-Linear Junction Detector (NLJD) Study was designed to investigate whether a commercially available Non-Linear Junction Detector could detect repeatable signals from participants under controlled conditions and whether those recorded signals changed over the course of the study.

A Non-Linear Junction Detector is an electronic instrument originally developed for security and counter-surveillance applications to locate hidden electronic circuitry by transmitting a radiofrequency signal and analysing the harmonic signals that are returned.

The purpose of this study was not to investigate the operation of the NLJD itself, but to evaluate whether the instrument could consistently record measurable signals from participants using a standardised testing protocol and whether those measurements changed over time.

All participants were assessed using the same equipment, testing procedure and measurement protocol throughout the study. Measurements were recorded at baseline and again after the study period, allowing objective comparisons to be made using the same methodology.

The study found that the recorded NLJD measurements changed significantly over the course of the study. These findings relate to the measurements obtained using the NLJD under the study conditions and provide a basis for further scientific investigation.

A Non-Linear Junction Detector (NLJD) is an electronic instrument originally developed for security and counter-surveillance applications to locate hidden electronic circuitry, even when devices are switched off or not actively transmitting.

Unlike a conventional radiofrequency detector, which looks for signals being transmitted by an electronic device, an NLJD actively transmits its own low-power radiofrequency signal into the surrounding area.

When this transmitted signal encounters certain types of electronic components, particularly non-linear junctions such as semiconductor junctions found in transistors, diodes and integrated circuits, those components generate harmonic signals that are returned to the detector.

The NLJD analyses these returned harmonic signals to identify the presence of non-linear electronic structures. This enables the instrument to detect concealed electronic circuitry that may otherwise remain undetected.

Because the detector analyses the harmonic response rather than simply detecting radiofrequency transmissions, it can identify electronic components even when they are not powered or actively communicating.

The NLJD has been used internationally for many years by security professionals, law enforcement agencies and technical surveillance teams to locate hidden electronic devices.

The NLJD study recorded objective measurements generated by the Non-Linear Junction Detector (NLJD) using a standardised testing protocol.

Three primary measurements were recorded during the study:

Signal Intensity – the overall strength of the harmonic signal detected by the instrument.

Detected Signal Points (Spots) – the number of individual locations where the instrument recorded a measurable signal.

Average Signal Intensity per Spot – the average signal strength for each detected signal point.

Each participant was assessed using the same equipment, testing procedure and measurement protocol at every visit. 

Measurements were recorded at baseline and again at follow-up, allowing direct comparisons to be made over the course of the study.

These measurements were analysed to determine whether the recorded NLJD signals changed over time under the study conditions.

The study was designed to evaluate changes in the recorded measurements using the NLJD. Determining the precise biological or physical origin of those recorded signals was beyond the scope of the study.

The NLJD study recorded significant changes in the measurements obtained from participants over the course of the study.

Three primary measurements were compared between the beginning and the end of the study:

Overall Signal Intensity decreased by 78%.

Detected Signal Points (Spots) decreased by 67%.

Average Signal Intensity per Spot decreased by 32%.

These changes were observed using the same NLJD instrument, testing procedure and measurement protocol throughout the study, allowing direct comparisons to be made between baseline and follow-up measurements.

Overall, the findings demonstrated a substantial reduction in the recorded NLJD measurements across the study population during the study period.

The study was designed to document and analyse these recorded changes. Further research will continue to explore the significance of these findings and how they may contribute to a broader understanding of the recorded NLJD measurements.

Was Caroline Mansfield employed by Ria Hayes?

No.

I have never been employed by Ria Hayes.

In August 2023 I was invited to conduct a single outreach clinic day to provide specialist live blood analysis services, drawing on more than 25 years of experience in the field. The clinic was held in a room hired by Ria Hayes in Surrey, where clients were scheduled to attend live blood analysis appointments with me. This arrangement did not constitute employment.

I did not conduct any further consultations from the hired room. Instead, it was agreed that the remaining four or five clients would be seen at my own independent clinic in London.

As part of that arrangement, I signed an agreement confirming that I would not actively approach or encourage clients to transfer to my practice. The agreement also required that I would not copy or reproduce the layout or content of documentation and forms to which I had been given access during that arrangement.

At all times, I remained an independent practitioner responsible for my own clinical work, professional practice and business activities.

This statement is provided to clarify the nature of that professional arrangement and to ensure the factual record is accurate.

Why are there companies registered in both the names Caroline Amanda Mansfield and Caroline Amanda Russ?

Companies have been registered in both my maiden name, Caroline Amanda Russ, and my married name, Caroline Amanda Mansfield.

The existence of companies under both names simply reflects the fact that both are legal names associated with me at different stages of my life. There has never been any attempt to conceal my identity or create separate professional personas.

Both companies have always been dormant and have never operated as active trading businesses. They were established for personal and sovereignty-related reasons and are not connected with, nor have they been used to conduct, my scientific research or research studies.

This statement is provided to clarify the factual position and to avoid misunderstanding.

Is Caroline Mansfield a medical doctor?

No.

I have never claimed to be a medical doctor, nor have I used the title “Dr” in relation to my professional work.

I am a qualified and registered naturopath and have worked in the field of natural health and live blood analysis for more than 25 years. My qualifications, professional registrations and current roles are publicly available on the About Me page of this website.

Throughout my career, I have described myself using my actual qualifications and professional titles. Any suggestion that I have represented myself as a medical doctor is incorrect.

This statement is provided to clarify the factual position and to avoid misunderstanding.

Was Caroline Mansfield a participant in the pilot study?

Yes.

I participated in the initial three-person pilot study.

As Study Director, I considered it appropriate to participate in this very small exploratory study of a newly developed product. Taking part allowed me to gain first-hand experience of the study procedures and product while also assisting with the day-to-day oversight of participant compliance throughout the study.

The purpose of this pilot study was to explore the feasibility of the study design and collect preliminary data. As with many pilot studies, its findings informed the design and development of subsequent, larger studies.

My participation was not concealed within the study itself. However, it was not considered a material detail requiring separate public announcement at the time. The study methodology, participant numbers and findings were reported as part of the research.

This statement is provided to clarify the factual position and to avoid misunderstanding.

Did Caroline Mansfield receive additional treatments during the pilot study?

Questions have been raised regarding photographs and private messages that have been presented online in connection with my participation in the pilot study.

The photographs referred to show me undertaking a short demonstration (“taster”) EBOO session approximately one month before the pilot study commenced.

Separate text messages relating to an enquiry about IV therapy concerned a skin condition that had developed following an earlier outreach clinic. Those messages did not relate to treatment received during the pilot study.

The photographs and messages relate to different points in time and should not be interpreted as representing events that occurred during the study period.

This statement is provided to clarify the chronology of events and to avoid misunderstanding.