Re: 714-X Cancer Treatment

September 6, 2006

:

Rife did not explode cancer cells. He exploded the cancer virus that he

observed it under his universal microscope at 30,000 diameters. He also

injected the same virus in 400 rats and gave them all cancer. Then he

proceeded to cure them by blowing up the virus. I know that this does

not jib with current cancer dogma, but is well described in the

documentary and apparently, he did a reasonable enough job in his

verification One thing for certain, mainstream medicine is off the

mark in their search for a cancer cure. It is not happening with drugs

or radiation therapy when lifetime cures are the measure. Five years is

not a cure..

Regards, Jim

Brown wrote:

> Hi:

>

> Personally the physics involved with supposedly selectively

> " exploding " cancer cells, but not normal cells through resonance

> seems like black magic to me. I'm a major doubter until and unless I

> see it and fully understand it. None of the explanations sounds

> plausible to me.

>

> At 10:24 AM 9/5/2006, you wrote:

>

> >I don't know about 714x, but the Rife machine is snake oil IMNSHO. Many

> >patients of mine have used Rife machines and I have never ever been

> able to

> >discern any benefit. This includes a man who died of cancer who used the

> >machine for over two years on a very serious and regular manner.

> >

> >Hans

> >

> >On 9/4/06, Brown

> ><<mailto:scotflyr%40pacbell.net>scotflyr@...

> <mailto:scotflyr%40pacbell.net>> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi:

> > >

> > > In reviewing the

> > <<http://www.cerbe.com/

> <http://www.cerbe.com/>>http://www.cerbe.com/

> <http://www.cerbe.com/>>Gaston site, I found the sale

> > > of the cancer therapeutic agent, 714-X, to be injected into lymph

> > > nodes or inhaled, to be quite

> > > interesting.

> > > <

> > >

> >

> <http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

>

<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>>htt\

p://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

>

<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>>Thi\

s

> > >

> > > review by the National cancer institute is straightforwardly stated

> > > and fairly unbiased. Does anyone know anything about 714X? I found

> > > some glowing testimonials about it but also some reports that Gaston

> > > is insane. How would I know who's right? You can purchase the

> > > injectable from the web site for

> > >

> > <<https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html

>

<https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>>https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta\

..html

> <https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>>$300.

> > This is a far cry

> > > from the pulsed RF resonant device that supposedly kills all the bad

> > > microbes.... 714X is supposed to enable your immune system to work

> > > better to recognize and kill cancer cells. Conceptually, that is

> > > great and it is how many other alternative therapies say that they

> > > work, like the Gearson therapy.

> > >

> > > Personally, I'm not ready to try either the RF device or 714X without

> > > a lot more verification. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially dangerous, it is how

> > > microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance kill bad stuff and

> > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of keeping for a

> > > while longer? I don't have the foggiest idea how 714X or Rife's 500

> > > Watt RF transmitter aimed at my body work.

> > >

> > > If you don't have first-hand experience or understanding of the

> > > technology or tried this, why do you believe in it?

> > >

September 6, 2006

Dave:

My nose is :far too dainty to focus on... maybe I'll try another

target. Thanks for the help, though :0)

Jim

> Well, there it is... You gotta get out more!

>

> I find that focusing on my nose and then on the horizon about 20 times

> gives the peepers a good workout.

>

> Jim wrote:

> >

> > Dave:

> >

> > I have taken Bilberry, eaten a fist full of blueberries every day for

> > the last ten years, and take Dr. 's eye formula regularly (which

> > looks great on paper). Plus I took the " Vision for Life " course and

> > exercise regularly. Part of the problem is that is sit in front of a

> > computer for 12 hours a day.

> >

> > By UV blockers... do you mean eyeglasses with UV filters? There are

> > pros and cons on that as you must be aware.

> >

> > Regards, Jim

> >

> > Narby wrote:

> >

> > > 728hz Works for me.

> > >

> > > AFA your eyesight is concerned, you might try bilberry and other dark

> > > berry extracts and jams. If focusing is the problem, eye exercises

> > > work. I also wear UV blockers whenever I go outside.

> > >

> > > Jim wrote:

> > > >

> > > > & Dave:

> > > >

> > > > is correct.. I had to go back to Tom Valone's book... you guys

> > > > were messing with my mind. My Gingko Biloba was not kicking in. The

> > > > actual number that Tom Valone posted in his book is 728 Hz..

> > > >

> > > > I could still hear 20 to 20,000 Hz when I checked my hearing at

> age 60

> > > > and I don't think that it has fallen since. The Dr. that checked it

> > > > was amazed... he recalibrated his instrument just to make sure.

> I only

> > > > wish my vision were still as good.

> > > >

> > > > Regards, Jim

> > > >

> > > > Brown wrote:

> > > >

> > > > > No, middle C in the center of the piano keyboard is 440 Hz and a

> > > > > healthy young person can hear from about 20Hz to about 20 KHz and

> > > > > dogs can hear to 45 KHz

> > > > >

> > > > > 700 MHz is more like it, almost near the 800 MHz cell phone

> > band, but

> > > > > it is doubtful that it is a fixed or simple sine wave from a brief

> > > > > scan of the literature it is a series of modulated RF pulses.

> Maybe

> > > > > the 700 Hz has something to do with the way it is modulated.

> > > > >

> > > > > At 05:58 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >It wouldn't... Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't 700hz be

> > > > sub-sonic?

> > > > > >

> > > > > >It might be a decimal point error. 700mhz seems like it would be

> > > closer

> > > > > >to the right frequency.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Hi:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 700 Hz?? Wow, that wavelength is about 428 kilometers in the

> > > > > > > electromagnetic spectrum and about 40 cm (a little over a

> > foot) in

> > > > > > > the sonic wave in water (human body) domain. How would a

> 428 Km

> > > > > > > wavelength resonate in the human body? All the machines that

> > I saw

> > > > > > > were running on 27 MHz (citizen's band) frequencies - ~11

> > meters).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Do you have the U-Tube link? I'd love to watch it.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > At 02:59 PM 9/4/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >De. Tom Valone discusses this in his book,

> " Bioelectromagnetic

> > > > > > > >Healing. " I am not finished reading it, but so far, its a

> very

> > > > > > > >interesting read. Maybe I'll have an answer once it

> finish it.

> > > > Also,

> > > > > > > >have you watched the Rife documentary in U Tube? He claimed

> > > > that each

> > > > > > > >cell type and each microorganism has a frequency that

> blows it

> > > > apart

> > > > > > > >and the video even shows it happening in one segment.

> Finally,

> > > > Valone

> > > > > > > >mentions a universal healing frequency at 700+ Hz for humans

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >Regards, Jim

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially dangerous, it

> > > is how

> > > > > > > > > microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance kill bad

> > > > stuff and

> > > > > > > > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of

> > keeping

> > > > > for a

> > > > > > > > > while longer?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

September 6, 2006

Dave:

My nose is :far too dainty to focus on... maybe I'll try another

target. Thanks for the help, though :0)

Jim

> Well, there it is... You gotta get out more!

>

> I find that focusing on my nose and then on the horizon about 20 times

> gives the peepers a good workout.

>

> Jim wrote:

> >

> > Dave:

> >

> > I have taken Bilberry, eaten a fist full of blueberries every day for

> > the last ten years, and take Dr. 's eye formula regularly (which

> > looks great on paper). Plus I took the " Vision for Life " course and

> > exercise regularly. Part of the problem is that is sit in front of a

> > computer for 12 hours a day.

> >

> > By UV blockers... do you mean eyeglasses with UV filters? There are

> > pros and cons on that as you must be aware.

> >

> > Regards, Jim

> >

> > Narby wrote:

> >

> > > 728hz Works for me.

> > >

> > > AFA your eyesight is concerned, you might try bilberry and other dark

> > > berry extracts and jams. If focusing is the problem, eye exercises

> > > work. I also wear UV blockers whenever I go outside.

> > >

> > > Jim wrote:

> > > >

> > > > & Dave:

> > > >

> > > > is correct.. I had to go back to Tom Valone's book... you guys

> > > > were messing with my mind. My Gingko Biloba was not kicking in. The

> > > > actual number that Tom Valone posted in his book is 728 Hz..

> > > >

> > > > I could still hear 20 to 20,000 Hz when I checked my hearing at

> age 60

> > > > and I don't think that it has fallen since. The Dr. that checked it

> > > > was amazed... he recalibrated his instrument just to make sure.

> I only

> > > > wish my vision were still as good.

> > > >

> > > > Regards, Jim

> > > >

> > > > Brown wrote:

> > > >

> > > > > No, middle C in the center of the piano keyboard is 440 Hz and a

> > > > > healthy young person can hear from about 20Hz to about 20 KHz and

> > > > > dogs can hear to 45 KHz

> > > > >

> > > > > 700 MHz is more like it, almost near the 800 MHz cell phone

> > band, but

> > > > > it is doubtful that it is a fixed or simple sine wave from a brief

> > > > > scan of the literature it is a series of modulated RF pulses.

> Maybe

> > > > > the 700 Hz has something to do with the way it is modulated.

> > > > >

> > > > > At 05:58 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > >It wouldn't... Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't 700hz be

> > > > sub-sonic?

> > > > > >

> > > > > >It might be a decimal point error. 700mhz seems like it would be

> > > closer

> > > > > >to the right frequency.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Hi:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 700 Hz?? Wow, that wavelength is about 428 kilometers in the

> > > > > > > electromagnetic spectrum and about 40 cm (a little over a

> > foot) in

> > > > > > > the sonic wave in water (human body) domain. How would a

> 428 Km

> > > > > > > wavelength resonate in the human body? All the machines that

> > I saw

> > > > > > > were running on 27 MHz (citizen's band) frequencies - ~11

> > meters).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Do you have the U-Tube link? I'd love to watch it.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > At 02:59 PM 9/4/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >De. Tom Valone discusses this in his book,

> " Bioelectromagnetic

> > > > > > > >Healing. " I am not finished reading it, but so far, its a

> very

> > > > > > > >interesting read. Maybe I'll have an answer once it

> finish it.

> > > > Also,

> > > > > > > >have you watched the Rife documentary in U Tube? He claimed

> > > > that each

> > > > > > > >cell type and each microorganism has a frequency that

> blows it

> > > > apart

> > > > > > > >and the video even shows it happening in one segment.

> Finally,

> > > > Valone

> > > > > > > >mentions a universal healing frequency at 700+ Hz for humans

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >Regards, Jim

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially dangerous, it

> > > is how

> > > > > > > > > microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance kill bad

> > > > stuff and

> > > > > > > > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of

> > keeping

> > > > > for a

> > > > > > > > > while longer?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

September 6, 2006

Hi Jim:

In medical science, proof of a valid treatment or cure cure only

comes from repeatability. A documentary movie can be easily created

and fabricated. Multiple doctors, researchers or labs, not one or

two, but many, need to be able to easily repeat what was done with

the same or similar results to show that a treatment has efficacy.

I agree with you that mainstream medicine has failed miserably in its

ability to cure cancer. That I want there to be a definitive cure

does not give me sufficient reason to believe in a cure that " seems "

like it might work.

You seem to believe in this treatment, but have you actually seen

first-hand proof? I can't believe in this until I see several

credible scientists repeat the work and report similar results. Can

you or anyone else provide that?

At 05:21 PM 9/6/2006, you wrote:

>:

>

>Rife did not explode cancer cells. He exploded the cancer virus that he

>observed it under his universal microscope at 30,000 diameters. He also

>injected the same virus in 400 rats and gave them all cancer. Then he

>proceeded to cure them by blowing up the virus. I know that this does

>not jib with current cancer dogma, but is well described in the

>documentary and apparently, he did a reasonable enough job in his

>verification One thing for certain, mainstream medicine is off the

>mark in their search for a cancer cure. It is not happening with drugs

>or radiation therapy when lifetime cures are the measure. Five years is

>not a cure..

>

>Regards, Jim

>

>Brown wrote:

>

> > Hi:

> >

> > Personally the physics involved with supposedly selectively

> > " exploding " cancer cells, but not normal cells through resonance

> > seems like black magic to me. I'm a major doubter until and unless I

> > see it and fully understand it. None of the explanations sounds

> > plausible to me.

> >

> > At 10:24 AM 9/5/2006, you wrote:

> >

> > >I don't know about 714x, but the Rife machine is snake oil IMNSHO. Many

> > >patients of mine have used Rife machines and I have never ever been

> > able to

> > >discern any benefit. This includes a man who died of cancer who used the

> > >machine for over two years on a very serious and regular manner.

> > >

> > >Hans

> > >

> > >On 9/4/06, Brown

> > ><<mailto:scotflyr%40pacbell.net>scotflyr@...

> > <mailto:scotflyr%40pacbell.net>> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi:

> > > >

> > > > In reviewing the

> > > <<<http://www.cerbe.com/>http://www.cerbe.com/

> > <http://www.cerbe.com/>><http://www.cerbe.com/>http://www.cerbe.com/

> > <http://www.cerbe.com/>>Gaston site, I found the sale

> > > > of the cancer therapeutic agent, 714-X, to be injected into lymph

> > > > nodes or inhaled, to be quite

> > > > interesting.

> > > > <

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

<<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>htt\

p://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

>

> >

>

<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>><ht\

tp://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>http://\

www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

>

> >

>

<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>>Thi\

s

> > > >

> > > > review by the National cancer institute is straightforwardly stated

> > > > and fairly unbiased. Does anyone know anything about 714X? I found

> > > > some glowing testimonials about it but also some reports that Gaston

> > > > is insane. How would I know who's right? You can purchase the

> > > > injectable from the web site for

> > > >

> > >

>

<<<https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_int\

a.html

>

> >

>

<https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>><https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_int\

a.html>https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html

>

> > <https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>>$300.

> > > This is a far cry

> > > > from the pulsed RF resonant device that supposedly kills all the bad

> > > > microbes.... 714X is supposed to enable your immune system to work

> > > > better to recognize and kill cancer cells. Conceptually, that is

> > > > great and it is how many other alternative therapies say that they

> > > > work, like the Gearson therapy.

> > > >

> > > > Personally, I'm not ready to try either the RF device or 714X without

> > > > a lot more verification. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially dangerous, it is how

> > > > microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance kill bad stuff and

> > > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of keeping for a

> > > > while longer? I don't have the foggiest idea how 714X or Rife's 500

> > > > Watt RF transmitter aimed at my body work.

> > > >

> > > > If you don't have first-hand experience or understanding of the

> > > > technology or tried this, why do you believe in it?

> > > >

September 6, 2006

:

You did get the URL for the video, right? This documentary was an

honest historical report. Everyone that I have talked to who has seen it

has been very positive about it. There is no question that Rife was a

mainstream scientist in his time. His work was highly respected,

repeated, and confirmed by a number of west coast doctors who searched

him out to use it. It was only after the AMA went after him and the

practitioners who followed him that his work was no longer considered.

At least one of those practitioners went to jail (for three years) for

practicing with his technology.

I do not see why his treatment should be swept under the table based on

politics as it was and is even today. If people are serious about

curing cancer, his instruments should be carefully recrafted and

proven or disproven objectively.. JoAnn Guest, who contributes often

in the alternative medicine group, wrote a glowing 20 page report

and recommendation on his work amid a lot of other startling facts

about alternative cancer cures about a month ago. As with about

everything that JoAnn reports on, I was impressed. She is very

thorough. I have never been diagnosed with cancer, but I agree that we

all have it and its our immune system that makes the difference between

sickness and wellness. Hopefully, some day our medical community will

drop the losing dogma that follows the dollar and center their work on

healing and wellness. Cancer would be a great place to start, but

heart disease is almost as bad with its emphasis on surgical

intervention and lowering cholesterol. If it were not for modern

medicine's success with trauma and corrective surgery, it would be

total loss in my opinion.

Regards, Jim

Brown wrote:

> Hi Jim:

>

> In medical science, proof of a valid treatment or cure cure only

> comes from repeatability. A documentary movie can be easily created

> and fabricated. Multiple doctors, researchers or labs, not one or

> two, but many, need to be able to easily repeat what was done with

> the same or similar results to show that a treatment has efficacy.

>

> I agree with you that mainstream medicine has failed miserably in its

> ability to cure cancer. That I want there to be a definitive cure

> does not give me sufficient reason to believe in a cure that " seems "

> like it might work.

>

> You seem to believe in this treatment, but have you actually seen

> first-hand proof? I can't believe in this until I see several

> credible scientists repeat the work and report similar results. Can

> you or anyone else provide that?

>

> At 05:21 PM 9/6/2006, you wrote:

>

> >:

> >

> >Rife did not explode cancer cells. He exploded the cancer virus that he

> >observed it under his universal microscope at 30,000 diameters. He also

> >injected the same virus in 400 rats and gave them all cancer. Then he

> >proceeded to cure them by blowing up the virus. I know that this does

> >not jib with current cancer dogma, but is well described in the

> >documentary and apparently, he did a reasonable enough job in his

> >verification One thing for certain, mainstream medicine is off the

> >mark in their search for a cancer cure. It is not happening with drugs

> >or radiation therapy when lifetime cures are the measure. Five years is

> >not a cure..

> >

> >Regards, Jim

> >

> >Brown wrote:

> >

> > > Hi:

> > >

> > > Personally the physics involved with supposedly selectively

> > > " exploding " cancer cells, but not normal cells through resonance

> > > seems like black magic to me. I'm a major doubter until and unless I

> > > see it and fully understand it. None of the explanations sounds

> > > plausible to me.

> > >

> > > At 10:24 AM 9/5/2006, you wrote:

> > >

> > > >I don't know about 714x, but the Rife machine is snake oil

> IMNSHO. Many

> > > >patients of mine have used Rife machines and I have never ever been

> > > able to

> > > >discern any benefit. This includes a man who died of cancer who

> used the

> > > >machine for over two years on a very serious and regular manner.

> > > >

> > > >Hans

> > > >

> > > >On 9/4/06, Brown

> > > ><<mailto:scotflyr%40pacbell.net>scotflyr@...

> <mailto:scotflyr%40pacbell.net>

> > > <mailto:scotflyr%40pacbell.net>> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi:

> > > > >

> > > > > In reviewing the

> > > > <<<http://www.cerbe.com/

> <http://www.cerbe.com/>>http://www.cerbe.com/ <http://www.cerbe.com/>

> > > <http://www.cerbe.com/

> <http://www.cerbe.com/>>><http://www.cerbe.com/

> <http://www.cerbe.com/>>http://www.cerbe.com/ <http://www.cerbe.com/>

> > > <http://www.cerbe.com/ <http://www.cerbe.com/>>>Gaston site, I

> found the sale

> > > > > of the cancer therapeutic agent, 714-X, to be injected into lymph

> > > > > nodes or inhaled, to be quite

> > > > > interesting.

> > > > > <

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> <<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

>

<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>>htt\

p://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

> <http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>

>

> >

> > >

> >

> <http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

>

<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>>><h\

ttp://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

>

<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>>htt\

p://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

> <http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>

>

> >

> > >

> >

> <http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3

>

<http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/714-X/HealthProfessional/page3>>>Th\

is

> > > > >

> > > > > review by the National cancer institute is straightforwardly

> stated

> > > > > and fairly unbiased. Does anyone know anything about 714X? I found

> > > > > some glowing testimonials about it but also some reports that

> Gaston

> > > > > is insane. How would I know who's right? You can purchase the

> > > > > injectable from the web site for

> > > > >

> > > >

> > <<<https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html

>

<https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>>https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta\

..html

> <https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>

> >

> > >

> > <https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html

>

<https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>>><https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_in\

ta.html

>

<https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>>https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta\

..html

> <https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>

> >

> > > <https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html

> <https://secure.cerbe.com/orders_inta.html>>>$300.

> > > > This is a far cry

> > > > > from the pulsed RF resonant device that supposedly kills all

> the bad

> > > > > microbes.... 714X is supposed to enable your immune system to work

> > > > > better to recognize and kill cancer cells. Conceptually, that is

> > > > > great and it is how many other alternative therapies say that they

> > > > > work, like the Gearson therapy.

> > > > >

> > > > > Personally, I'm not ready to try either the RF device or 714X

> without

> > > > > a lot more verification. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially dangerous, it is how

> > > > > microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance kill bad stuff and

> > > > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of keeping

> for a

> > > > > while longer? I don't have the foggiest idea how 714X or

> Rife's 500

> > > > > Watt RF transmitter aimed at my body work.

> > > > >

> > > > > If you don't have first-hand experience or understanding of the

> > > > > technology or tried this, why do you believe in it?

> > > > >

September 6, 2006

You got me there Jim. Sounds like your aunt made some good stuff.

--

Steve - dudescholar2@...

" When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never

tried before. "

--Mae West

On Wednesday 06 September 2006 5:37 pm, Jim wrote:

> Steve:

>

> I had an aunt who used to make frozen jams using fresh berries and

> gelatin with no sugar added. They tasted great and certainly were equal

> to fresh berries in most respects Bet you concur given that, huh? No

> question that refined sugar is not a good food additive and I almost

> never touch the stuff..

>

> Regards, Jim

>

> wrote:

> > I concur on the dark berries but not on the jams. I know almost zilch

> > about

> > eye exercises. On the other hand, I'm not convinced that UV is a negative

> > but that lack of UV may be a negative. I'm not aware that hunter gather

> > peoples who spend a lot of time in the sun ever had problems with

> > either skin

> > cancer or eye sight.

> >

> > My 3 cents.

> >

> > --

> >

> > Steve - dudescholar2@... <mailto:dudescholar2%40basicmail.net>

> >

> > " It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. "

> > --Voltaire

> >

> > On Monday 04 September 2006 11:46 am, Dave Narby wrote:

> > > 728hz Works for me.

> > >

> > > AFA your eyesight is concerned, you might try bilberry and other dark

> > > berry extracts and jams. If focusing is the problem, eye exercises

> > > work. I also wear UV blockers whenever I go outside.

> > >

> > > Jim wrote:

> > > > & Dave:

> > > >

> > > > is correct.. I had to go back to Tom Valone's book... you guys

> > > > were messing with my mind. My Gingko Biloba was not kicking in. The

> > > > actual number that Tom Valone posted in his book is 728 Hz..

> > > >

> > > > I could still hear 20 to 20,000 Hz when I checked my hearing at age

> > > > 60 and I don't think that it has fallen since. The Dr. that checked

> > > > it was amazed... he recalibrated his instrument just to make sure. I

> > > > only wish my vision were still as good.

> > > >

> > > > Regards, Jim

> > > >

> > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > No, middle C in the center of the piano keyboard is 440 Hz and a

> > > > > healthy young person can hear from about 20Hz to about 20 KHz and

> > > > > dogs can hear to 45 KHz

> > > > >

> > > > > 700 MHz is more like it, almost near the 800 MHz cell phone

> >

> > band, but

> >

> > > > > it is doubtful that it is a fixed or simple sine wave from a brief

> > > > > scan of the literature it is a series of modulated RF pulses. Maybe

> > > > > the 700 Hz has something to do with the way it is modulated.

> > > > >

> > > > > At 05:58 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > >It wouldn't... Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't 700hz be

> > > >

> > > > sub-sonic?

> > > >

> > > > > >It might be a decimal point error. 700mhz seems like it would be

> > > > > > closer to the right frequency.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > > > Hi:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 700 Hz?? Wow, that wavelength is about 428 kilometers in the

> > > > > > > electromagnetic spectrum and about 40 cm (a little over a

> >

> > foot) in

> >

> > > > > > > the sonic wave in water (human body) domain. How would a 428 Km

> > > > > > > wavelength resonate in the human body? All the machines that

> >

> > I saw

> >

> > > > > > > were running on 27 MHz (citizen's band) frequencies - ~11

> >

> > meters).

> >

> > > > > > > Do you have the U-Tube link? I'd love to watch it.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > At 02:59 PM 9/4/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >De. Tom Valone discusses this in his book, " Bioelectromagnetic

> > > > > > > >Healing. " I am not finished reading it, but so far, its a very

> > > > > > > >interesting read. Maybe I'll have an answer once it finish it.

> > > >

> > > > Also,

> > > >

> > > > > > > >have you watched the Rife documentary in U Tube? He claimed

> > > >

> > > > that each

> > > >

> > > > > > > >cell type and each microorganism has a frequency that blows it

> > > >

> > > > apart

> > > >

> > > > > > > >and the video even shows it happening in one segment. Finally,

> > > >

> > > > Valone

> > > >

> > > > > > > >mentions a universal healing frequency at 700+ Hz for humans

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >Regards, Jim

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially dangerous, it

> > > > > > > > > is how microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance kill

> > > > > > > > > bad

> > > >

> > > > stuff and

> > > >

> > > > > > > > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of

> >

> > keeping

> >

> > > > > for a

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > > while longer?

September 6, 2006

Jim wrote:

>

> Dave:

>

> Your conclusion regarding UV seems to fit current conclusions of those

> who are paying attention.

>

Well... It seems like common sense to me (you know, high energy photons

and all degrading proteins, helping to cause cataracts and destroying

nerve cells (the color sensing cells are the first to go)), but WTF do

*I* know...

>

> Contemporary aboriginal people are probably not correctly categorized

> as hunter gatherers, but I'd imagine that life as a bear hunter using

> spears as weapons would be

> fairly compacted. There was documentary on a group of people who lived

> in the British Isles 8,000 years ago. They studied their bones which

> were well preserved in crypts. The conclusion was that 25 years old was

> average and the oldest found was 50 years old.

>

Sounds plausible. Heck, the sheer boredom of that life would do me in

(I'd probably have built a reed raft and went for a sail).

> The added conclusion

> was that we have been doing better in last few hundred years in terms of

> longevity. However, I am not convinced that a long life span is a real

> answer, there is much more to it.

>

True... I'm always reminded of the parable of Methuselah - Who was

mentioned for his extraordinarily long lifespan... But NOTHING else...

>

> My nickel, Jim

>

> Dave Narby wrote:

>

> > Hunter gatherers don't tend to live that long, unfortunately.

> >

>

http://www.disability.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Aboriginal_health_i\

ssues?open

>

<http://www.disability.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Aboriginal_health_\

issues?open>

>

> >

>

<http://www.disability.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Aboriginal_health_\

issues?open

>

<http://www.disability.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Aboriginal_health_\

issues?open>>

> >

> > steve wrote:

> > >

> > > I concur on the dark berries but not on the jams. I know almost zilch

> > > about

> > > eye exercises. On the other hand, I'm not convinced that UV is a

> > negative

> > > but that lack of UV may be a negative. I'm not aware that hunter

> gather

> > > peoples who spend a lot of time in the sun ever had problems with

> > > either skin

> > > cancer or eye sight.

> > >

> > > My 3 cents.

> > >

> > > --

> > >

> > > Steve - dudescholar2@...

> <mailto:dudescholar2%40basicmail.net>

> > <mailto:dudescholar2%40basicmail.net>

> > >

> > > " It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. "

> > > --Voltaire

> > >

> > > On Monday 04 September 2006 11:46 am, Dave Narby wrote:

> > > > 728hz Works for me.

> > > >

> > > > AFA your eyesight is concerned, you might try bilberry and other

> dark

> > > > berry extracts and jams. If focusing is the problem, eye exercises

> > > > work. I also wear UV blockers whenever I go outside.

> > > >

> > > > Jim wrote:

> > > > > & Dave:

> > > > >

> > > > > is correct.. I had to go back to Tom Valone's book...

> you guys

> > > > > were messing with my mind. My Gingko Biloba was not kicking

> in. The

> > > > > actual number that Tom Valone posted in his book is 728 Hz..

> > > > >

> > > > > I could still hear 20 to 20,000 Hz when I checked my hearing at

> > age 60

> > > > > and I don't think that it has fallen since. The Dr. that

> checked it

> > > > > was amazed... he recalibrated his instrument just to make sure.

> > I only

> > > > > wish my vision were still as good.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards, Jim

> > > > >

> > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > > No, middle C in the center of the piano keyboard is 440 Hz and a

> > > > > > healthy young person can hear from about 20Hz to about 20

> KHz and

> > > > > > dogs can hear to 45 KHz

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 700 MHz is more like it, almost near the 800 MHz cell phone

> > > band, but

> > > > > > it is doubtful that it is a fixed or simple sine wave from a

> brief

> > > > > > scan of the literature it is a series of modulated RF pulses.

> > Maybe

> > > > > > the 700 Hz has something to do with the way it is modulated.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > At 05:58 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > > >It wouldn't... Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't 700hz be

> > > > >

> > > > > sub-sonic?

> > > > >

> > > > > > >It might be a decimal point error. 700mhz seems like it

> would be

> > > > > > > closer to the right frequency.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > > > > Hi:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > 700 Hz?? Wow, that wavelength is about 428 kilometers in the

> > > > > > > > electromagnetic spectrum and about 40 cm (a little over a

> > > foot) in

> > > > > > > > the sonic wave in water (human body) domain. How would a

> > 428 Km

> > > > > > > > wavelength resonate in the human body? All the machines that

> > > I saw

> > > > > > > > were running on 27 MHz (citizen's band) frequencies - ~11

> > > meters).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Do you have the U-Tube link? I'd love to watch it.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > At 02:59 PM 9/4/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >De. Tom Valone discusses this in his book,

> > " Bioelectromagnetic

> > > > > > > > >Healing. " I am not finished reading it, but so far, its a

> > very

> > > > > > > > >interesting read. Maybe I'll have an answer once it

> > finish it.

> > > > >

> > > > > Also,

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > >have you watched the Rife documentary in U Tube? He claimed

> > > > >

> > > > > that each

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > >cell type and each microorganism has a frequency that

> > blows it

> > > > >

> > > > > apart

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > >and the video even shows it happening in one segment.

> > Finally,

> > > > >

> > > > > Valone

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > >mentions a universal healing frequency at 700+ Hz for

> humans

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >Regards, Jim

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially dangerous,

> > it is

> > > > > > > > > > how microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance

> > kill bad

> > > > >

> > > > > stuff and

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of

> > > keeping

> > > > > >

> > > > > > for a

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > while longer?

> > > > > > > > >

> > >

> >

> > --

> > This is your brain on politics:

> >

> > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060131092225.htm

> <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060131092225.htm>

> > <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060131092225.htm

> <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060131092225.htm>>

> >

> > Yep! You've been an annoying zombie all these years.

> >

September 6, 2006

Looking into the sun doesn't dilate your pupils, it contracts them. And

clearly he doesn't do it for more than a split second. I do the same

occasionally just to zap my brain into knowing it's daytime (figure it

helps keep my internal clock set), but I avoid chronic long term exposure.

AFA sunlight curing skin cancer... Got any studies? Until then, I'm

keeping my skin's DNA as intact as possible.

Jim wrote:

>

> :

>

> Plexiglas?

>

> I have an 80 year old friend who has the eyes of a 30 yr old. He looks

> directly into the sun to dilate his eyes every day that the sun is

> shinning... works for him.

>

> Many others now claim that sunlight cures skin cancer and sun screen

> causes it... Dr. Mercola is one. One observation is that melanomas

> most often occur in the middle of the back and bottoms of feet where the

> sun never generally goes. There is also the argument that Vit D is a

> deterrent to many cancers and the observation that dark skinned people

> get less of it from sunlight and thus show negative effects in terms of

> certain cancers and other diseases.

>

> Jim

>

> Brown wrote:

>

> > Hi

> >

> > I read a book a number of years ago

> >

> " <http://www.amazon.com/Health-Light-Effects-Natural-Artificial/dp/0898040981

> <http://www.amazon.com/Health-Light-Effects-Natural-Artificial/dp/0898040981>

>

> >

> <http://www.amazon.com/Health-Light-Effects-Natural-Artificial/dp/0898040981

>

<http://www.amazon.com/Health-Light-Effects-Natural-Artificial/dp/0898040981>>>H\

ealth

>

> >

> > and Light " by Ott, the person who did Disney's time-lapse

> > pictures of fruit ripening and flowers blooming. They tried putting

> > fruit into Plexiglass boxes so that they wouldn't move as they

> > ripened and they just got bigger but never changed color to ripen

> > because they were shielded from the UV. They had to get a special

> > glass that passed UV for the fruit and flowers to blossom or

> > ripen. He later got eye problems and remembering his experience with

> > time-lapse and plants, used it to heal his eyes with natural

> > sunlight. Too much can cause problems too, in my opinion. Dr

> > , an herbalist with whom I studied, claims to have cured

> > skin cancer with sunlight.

> >

> > I have a bad experience. I had a pterygium - a red, vascular growth

> > on the surface of my eye caused by excessive exposure to the sun. Of

> > course, maybe it was because I stopped going out in the sun, but I

> > doubt it. I lived on the beach and went out to the beach

> > everyday. My skin has sun damage too, partly corrected by good

> > moisturizers. I had the pterygium surgically removed so that I could

> > wear contact lenses.

> >

> > Moderation anyone?

> >

> > At 02:18 PM 9/5/2006, you wrote:

> >

> > >I concur on the dark berries but not on the jams. I know almost zilch

> > about

> > >eye exercises. On the other hand, I'm not convinced that UV is a

> negative

> > >but that lack of UV may be a negative. I'm not aware that hunter gather

> > >peoples who spend a lot of time in the sun ever had problems with

> > either skin

> > >cancer or eye sight.

> > >

> > >My 3 cents.

> > >

> > >--

> > >

> > >Steve -

> > <mailto:dudescholar2%40basicmail.net>dudescholar2@...

> <mailto:dudescholar2%40basicmail.net>

> > <mailto:dudescholar2%40basicmail.net>

> > >

> > > " It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. "

> > >--Voltaire

> > >

> > >On Monday 04 September 2006 11:46 am, Dave Narby wrote:

> > > > 728hz Works for me.

> > > >

> > > > AFA your eyesight is concerned, you might try bilberry and other

> dark

> > > > berry extracts and jams. If focusing is the problem, eye exercises

> > > > work. I also wear UV blockers whenever I go outside.

> > > >

> > > > Jim wrote:

> > > > > & Dave:

> > > > >

> > > > > is correct.. I had to go back to Tom Valone's book...

> you guys

> > > > > were messing with my mind. My Gingko Biloba was not kicking

> in. The

> > > > > actual number that Tom Valone posted in his book is 728 Hz..

> > > > >

> > > > > I could still hear 20 to 20,000 Hz when I checked my hearing at

> > age 60

> > > > > and I don't think that it has fallen since. The Dr. that

> checked it

> > > > > was amazed... he recalibrated his instrument just to make sure.

> > I only

> > > > > wish my vision were still as good.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards, Jim

> > > > >

> > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > > No, middle C in the center of the piano keyboard is 440 Hz and a

> > > > > > healthy young person can hear from about 20Hz to about 20

> KHz and

> > > > > > dogs can hear to 45 KHz

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 700 MHz is more like it, almost near the 800 MHz cell phone

> > band, but

> > > > > > it is doubtful that it is a fixed or simple sine wave from a

> brief

> > > > > > scan of the literature it is a series of modulated RF pulses.

> > Maybe

> > > > > > the 700 Hz has something to do with the way it is modulated.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > At 05:58 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > > >It wouldn't... Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't 700hz be

> > > > >

> > > > > sub-sonic?

> > > > >

> > > > > > >It might be a decimal point error. 700mhz seems like it

> would be

> > > > > > > closer to the right frequency.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > > > > Hi:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > 700 Hz?? Wow, that wavelength is about 428 kilometers in the

> > > > > > > > electromagnetic spectrum and about 40 cm (a little over a

> > foot) in

> > > > > > > > the sonic wave in water (human body) domain. How would a

> > 428 Km

> > > > > > > > wavelength resonate in the human body? All the machines

> > that I saw

> > > > > > > > were running on 27 MHz (citizen's band) frequencies - ~11

> > meters).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Do you have the U-Tube link? I'd love to watch it.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > At 02:59 PM 9/4/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >De. Tom Valone discusses this in his book,

> > " Bioelectromagnetic

> > > > > > > > >Healing. " I am not finished reading it, but so far, its a

> > very

> > > > > > > > >interesting read. Maybe I'll have an answer once it

> > finish it.

> > > > >

> > > > > Also,

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > >have you watched the Rife documentary in U Tube? He claimed

> > > > >

> > > > > that each

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > >cell type and each microorganism has a frequency that

> > blows it

> > > > >

> > > > > apart

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > >and the video even shows it happening in one segment.

> > Finally,

> > > > >

> > > > > Valone

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > >mentions a universal healing frequency at 700+ Hz for

> humans

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >Regards, Jim

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially dangerous,

> > it is

> > > > > > > > > > how microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance

> > kill bad

> > > > >

> > > > > stuff and

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of

> > keeping

> > > > > >

> > > > > > for a

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > while longer?

> > > > > > > > >

> > >

> >

September 6, 2006

Try and do it when your nose isn't looking. : D

Jim wrote:

>

> Dave:

>

> My nose is :far too dainty to focus on... maybe I'll try another

> target. Thanks for the help, though :0)

>

> Jim

>

> > Well, there it is... You gotta get out more!

> >

> > I find that focusing on my nose and then on the horizon about 20 times

> > gives the peepers a good workout.

> >

> > Jim wrote:

> > >

> > > Dave:

> > >

> > > I have taken Bilberry, eaten a fist full of blueberries every day for

> > > the last ten years, and take Dr. 's eye formula regularly

> (which

> > > looks great on paper). Plus I took the " Vision for Life " course and

> > > exercise regularly. Part of the problem is that is sit in front of a

> > > computer for 12 hours a day.

> > >

> > > By UV blockers... do you mean eyeglasses with UV filters? There are

> > > pros and cons on that as you must be aware.

> > >

> > > Regards, Jim

> > >

> > > Narby wrote:

> > >

> > > > 728hz Works for me.

> > > >

> > > > AFA your eyesight is concerned, you might try bilberry and other

> dark

> > > > berry extracts and jams. If focusing is the problem, eye exercises

> > > > work. I also wear UV blockers whenever I go outside.

> > > >

> > > > Jim wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > & Dave:

> > > > >

> > > > > is correct.. I had to go back to Tom Valone's book...

> you guys

> > > > > were messing with my mind. My Gingko Biloba was not kicking

> in. The

> > > > > actual number that Tom Valone posted in his book is 728 Hz..

> > > > >

> > > > > I could still hear 20 to 20,000 Hz when I checked my hearing at

> > age 60

> > > > > and I don't think that it has fallen since. The Dr. that

> checked it

> > > > > was amazed... he recalibrated his instrument just to make sure.

> > I only

> > > > > wish my vision were still as good.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards, Jim

> > > > >

> > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > > No, middle C in the center of the piano keyboard is 440 Hz and a

> > > > > > healthy young person can hear from about 20Hz to about 20

> KHz and

> > > > > > dogs can hear to 45 KHz

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 700 MHz is more like it, almost near the 800 MHz cell phone

> > > band, but

> > > > > > it is doubtful that it is a fixed or simple sine wave from a

> brief

> > > > > > scan of the literature it is a series of modulated RF pulses.

> > Maybe

> > > > > > the 700 Hz has something to do with the way it is modulated.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > At 05:58 PM 9/3/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >It wouldn't... Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't 700hz be

> > > > > sub-sonic?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >It might be a decimal point error. 700mhz seems like it

> would be

> > > > closer

> > > > > > >to the right frequency.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Brown wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Hi:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > 700 Hz?? Wow, that wavelength is about 428 kilometers in the

> > > > > > > > electromagnetic spectrum and about 40 cm (a little over a

> > > foot) in

> > > > > > > > the sonic wave in water (human body) domain. How would a

> > 428 Km

> > > > > > > > wavelength resonate in the human body? All the machines that

> > > I saw

> > > > > > > > were running on 27 MHz (citizen's band) frequencies - ~11

> > > meters).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Do you have the U-Tube link? I'd love to watch it.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > At 02:59 PM 9/4/2006, you wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >De. Tom Valone discusses this in his book,

> > " Bioelectromagnetic

> > > > > > > > >Healing. " I am not finished reading it, but so far, its a

> > very

> > > > > > > > >interesting read. Maybe I'll have an answer once it

> > finish it.

> > > > > Also,

> > > > > > > > >have you watched the Rife documentary in U Tube? He claimed

> > > > > that each

> > > > > > > > >cell type and each microorganism has a frequency that

> > blows it

> > > > > apart

> > > > > > > > >and the video even shows it happening in one segment.

> > Finally,

> > > > > Valone

> > > > > > > > >mentions a universal healing frequency at 700+ Hz for

> humans

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >Regards, Jim

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >. For example, why is this RF good and all

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > other EMI/RFI bad? Resonance is potentially

> dangerous, it

> > > > is how

> > > > > > > > > > microwaves heat food. Why would this resonance kill bad

> > > > > stuff and

> > > > > > > > > > not good stuff, like the brain cells that I'm fond of

> > > keeping

> > > > > > for a

> > > > > > > > > > while longer?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

September 6, 2006

Interestingly, my friend just got his Rife machine back. He has to fix

the linear power amp. Further updates as developments warrant.