BIORESONANCE FACT OR FICTION

[Guest guest]

Based on actual research the word Bioresonance is not a well defined medical

term.

For instance here in the preeminent medical research tool

l ?

Start new search    Search these results

    Advanced English -

Spanish -French

Results for: bioresonance

No results were found for your search.

????????

A thorough search of many strings in Tabers the other medical dictionary used

by

Doctors and Medical Students brought forth these results

  • 

biorhythm

  • 

bios

  • 

biosafety levels

  • 

bioscience

  • 

biosensor

  • 

biospectrometry

  • 

biospectroscopy

  • 

biosphere

  • 

biostatistics

  • 

biosynthesis

  • 

biosynthetic pathway

  • 

Biot's breathing

  • 

Biot's breathing

  • 

Biot's respiration

  • 

biota

  • 

biotaxis

  • 

biotechnology

  • 

biotelemetry

  • 

bioterrorism

  • 

biotherapy

  • 

biotics

note the lack of bioresonance!

A search of the FDA site also brings forth no results except for an Australian

import of a

recently made Hyperbaric oxygen chamber and that is only because the company

has put

that in the name of the unit.

the word Resonance does bring up entries as does the word Bio I assume Mr

Gilbert is

not suggesting that any word with Bio or resonance in it is now owned by both

the medical

profession and the FDA.

In addition a call to my representative at the FDA yielded no further support

for this claim.

Though indeed the FDA would like to lay claim to every word and expression

because

regulation is what they live for the more rules and regulations the more tax

payer money

that goes in to the pockets and everyone gets to keep their job of pushing

papers from

one desk to another. (Who would want to end that legacy? - Try reading

" Overdosed

America : The Broken Promise of American Medicine "

by Dr. Abramson

on the FDAs financial ties with the drug companies before we start swallowing

truths from

this Government agency)

The MRI or Magnetic resonance imaging is of course not bioresonance. Which is

why it

uses the word magnetic and not bio.

So again separating fact from fiction let us find out why all this to do over

Bioresonance

It has to do with getting approvals of medical devices.

There is already a precedent set for Biofeedback devices (you see the

Biofeedback world

did their home work to introduce new type of device back in the 60s.) But to

get approval

on a completely new type of device through the FDA would be costly and time

consuming

and there is no guarantee they would every approve it. ( I work with the FDA on

organic

product approval and trust me, though there are some really dedicated people

there,

Speedy is not how I would describe them!!) So it really does not leave many

choices for

someone like Bill who comes out with something really incredible and

then has to

stub his toe in the wheels of the FDA. But it is easier to describe the device

in terms that

the FDA can already understand. So riding in on the Biofeedback horse was a

good idea

for him at the time. But is it for us as practitioners? I don't think so.

When the first

Biofeedback device was invented it did take longer for approvals and even

longer for any

profession to recognize it. Times have changed now. I am not really looking

for the

oldest most reliable nag in the stable, I am looking for an Arabian with the

promise and

stamina of Seabiscuit. Yes I want to forge a new field. I am willing to do

what it takes to

do it, and though the CBBT certification does cover biofeedback it also has

the word

bioresonance because that is what we truly do. The genius of Bill and

all of the

people who gave their input to this equipment deserve that level of dedication.

To be able

to bring health back into the hands of not only licensed and certified

practitioners but to

each and every home, to every mother for her children, to every child for their

parents. To

do this responsibly and to bring to the consciousness of the world what the

potential of

bioresonance is. That will help every single one of us even the device

manufacturers.

They are a little frightened now because they do not want to lose their hard

earned

positions in the biofeedback field and it has been so long since anyone tried

to break any

new ground- I guess people feel it is safer to copy than to start something

new, and it is.

But without taking new risks we do not progress. I am not challenging the

field of

biofeedback. Our machines do biofeedback and so much more. I am simply making

a

place for, and trying to bring recognition to that " so much more " I have done

so by

creating the Association for Bioresonance and Biofeedback Practitioners http://

www.abbp.org

Where we will try to open the field for those inventors who have the vision to

create a

VEGA, SCIO or an ORION. So that they can introduce their machines with the

weight of

Practitioners and public support behind them. Support that is not sycophantic or

paid for

by some unrelated special interest group.

Those of you who know me or have been in my classes know that ethics and

integrity are

of paramount importance to me. So understand I am taking this path to widen the

possibilities for practitioners in order to make sure they have insurance that

will actually

cover their QXCI or SCIO and will state so explicitly in writing. But I am also

hoping it will

eventually make it easier for the inventors because they will have a little more

room to

describe what their equipment does in a more dynamic language.

Language is important here because there are constant impingement's due to

political

correctitude on what we can and can not say to describe something. Because you

say a

table is a chair does no make it so.

In order to be completely ethical I have resigned from Quantum-life. I wish

them very well

during their transition.

I am also very sorry that some of the principals involved might not have found a

more

private forum for airing their grievances. There are usually truths on every

side.

Marla S

[Guest guest]

Thank you. That was quite clear. I am new to this and want to do things correctly from the start. Truly appreciate your input.

Gilbert <john2002@...> wrote:

Gentlepeople,With all due respect to Ms. who has searched thedictionaries and FDA website and found no reference tobioresonance in any way, that's not the issue. Bioresonanceis a fact. It is not a fiction. It's just illegal for a biofeedbackdevice to be used for bioresonance. This is the real issue.The real issue is whether the EPFX, or any other quantum device, is registered with the FDA and/or Health Canada as a bioresonance device. They are not. The EPFX and SCIO are registered with both the FDAand Health Canada as a biofeedback device. In bothjurisdictions it is absolutely legal to use the EPFX or SCIOfor biofeedback. At the same time, it is absolutely illegalto use either for any other therapy other than biofeedback.This includes bioresonance.

That's the issue. But it's also true that inside the FDA,Health Canada and the AMA, the term bioresonance iswell defined and they consider it outside the definitionof biofeedback. Bioresonance is not biofeedback andbiofeedback is not bioresonance. They are distinctlydifferent. Further according to the FDA, the only medical devicescurrently registered for use in bioresonance are themagnetic and electrical resonance imaging devices.These include things like MRI and Cat Scans.