Need your comments and views

[Guest guest]

I was talking to another Rife anthusiast about the phenomenon of Rife

resonance and he told me that not unless the frequency produced by

the machine " Locks in " with the specific virus, would it be possible

to produce efficient rifing. He used the word " Locks in " which when I

asked for further clarification, he mentioned that for a system to

fall into resonance, it not only requires the correct frequency to be

produced, but also that correct frequency should somehow lock into

resonance with the pathogen.

Now from what I was told, if that be the case then I wonder if the

programs with converge or even sweep will even be able to produce

that " lock in " effect, because the frequency keeps fluctuating and

maynot be able to " lock into resonance " .

Also when discussing Rife, we sometimes use the example of how a

radio tunes in to the appropriate station when tuned to the proper

single frequency. This explanation maybe ok with an inanimate object

such as a radio, but a pathogen, on the contrary,is a dynamic

organism and due to the dynamic biological nature of pathogens, their

resonant frequency cannot remain static at only one frequency and can

differ due to various constant intracellular metabolic changes such

as different stages of development, mitotic changes, cellular

ingestion and various other metabloic processes occuring within the

pathogens ... I feel that these pathogens would not necessarily

respond to only one frequency ONLY per se, but it operates within a

frequency range and this range is its normal resonant frequency. Say

a pathogen may have a resonant frequency range of between 30K to 40K

Hz and ANY frequency within this range can be used to Rife it,

PROVIDED that the frequency used " Locks in " to the system of

resonance with the pathogen producing strong harmonics within its

resonant frequency range of 30K to 40K.

Hence it maynot be that what is important in Rifing is to nkow the

correct frequency, but rather the correct frequency range and more

important HOW this frequency is used to produce strong harmonics

within the pathogens " resonant frequency range " . Hence shape of

waves, duty cycle, gating frequency and other wave specifics ,I feel,

carry more importance than if say 2178 Hz is used or 2128 Hz. As long

as 2178 Hz and 2128 Hz both fall within the pathogens normal resonant

frequency range and the frequency is able to produce the proper

resonant harmonics within the system...

I maybe ENTIRELY wrong in my views and would humbly request any one

who has a greater understanding to share in their views and correct

me.

Thanks

Reza

[Guest guest]

Hi Reza,

Obviously, a scanner instrument is going to be very useful in finding the

" unknown " .

Here is an interesting experience I had with a dog a few weeks ago that may

shed some light on your question.

Neighbours dog had a cancer tumour the size of a large bean on top of its

eye-ball, under and behind the eyelid. There were suspected more tumours as

the eyeball was almost bulging out of its socket. The dog also had advance

cataracts. Surgery would have removed the eye and a great deal of tissue

around the eye, the vet thought the best thing for the dog would be to put

it to sleep.

In a one last desperate hope the neighbour brought his dog to me. Not

knowing the exact type of eye cancer the dog had, we placed it on a rug in

our lounge room and set up my B/R style instrument about 8 feet away. We ran

the CAFL Cancer BX and Cancer BY frequency sets for 15 minutes per

frequency, a 4.5 hour program.

Interesting to note the dog (a miniature poodle - so a bean size tumour is

rather large in the eye socket) kept creeping closer to the plasma light.

After the first few minutes, the dog had worked out the optimum distance

from my B/R, as it kept creeping forward and stopped when it got to about

3.5 feet from the tube, and there it stayed, as quiet as a log for the

remainder of the 4.5 hour Rife session.

At the conclusion of the session, the dogs eye was washed in saline

solution. Last weekend my friend took the dog back to the vet. The tumour

had completely disappeared, as well as the cataracts. This dog is one happy

animal and bouncing around the yard being its old self. The cataracts were

not advanced, but grey clouding was easily visible, now his eye's are dark

as dark and it is quite obvious the cataracts have gone as well as the

tumour.

This was the best Christmas present my neighbour has ever received. He was a

frequency therapy skeptic, and is now a full converted enthusiast as belief

has nothing to do with his personal and direct experience in the healing

arts of frequency therapy. Very difficult to get placebo to work on animals,

although love does wonders too :-)

Regards

Ken Uzzell

----- Original Message -----

>

>

> I was talking to another Rife anthusiast about the phenomenon of Rife

> resonance and he told me that not unless the frequency produced by

> the machine " Locks in " with the specific virus, would it be possible

> to produce efficient rifing. He used the word " Locks in " which when I

> asked for further clarification, he mentioned that for a system to

> fall into resonance, it not only requires the correct frequency to be

> produced, but also that correct frequency should somehow lock into

> resonance with the pathogen.

>

> Now from what I was told, if that be the case then I wonder if the

> programs with converge or even sweep will even be able to produce

> that " lock in " effect, because the frequency keeps fluctuating and

> maynot be able to " lock into resonance " .

>

> Also when discussing Rife, we sometimes use the example of how a

> radio tunes in to the appropriate station when tuned to the proper

> single frequency. This explanation maybe ok with an inanimate object

> such as a radio, but a pathogen, on the contrary,is a dynamic

> organism and due to the dynamic biological nature of pathogens, their

> resonant frequency cannot remain static at only one frequency and can

> differ due to various constant intracellular metabolic changes such

> as different stages of development, mitotic changes, cellular

> ingestion and various other metabloic processes occuring within the

> pathogens ... I feel that these pathogens would not necessarily

> respond to only one frequency ONLY per se, but it operates within a

> frequency range and this range is its normal resonant frequency. Say

> a pathogen may have a resonant frequency range of between 30K to 40K

> Hz and ANY frequency within this range can be used to Rife it,

> PROVIDED that the frequency used " Locks in " to the system of

> resonance with the pathogen producing strong harmonics within its

> resonant frequency range of 30K to 40K.

>

> Hence it maynot be that what is important in Rifing is to nkow the

> correct frequency, but rather the correct frequency range and more

> important HOW this frequency is used to produce strong harmonics

> within the pathogens " resonant frequency range " . Hence shape of

> waves, duty cycle, gating frequency and other wave specifics ,I feel,

> carry more importance than if say 2178 Hz is used or 2128 Hz. As long

> as 2178 Hz and 2128 Hz both fall within the pathogens normal resonant

> frequency range and the frequency is able to produce the proper

> resonant harmonics within the system...

>

> I maybe ENTIRELY wrong in my views and would humbly request any one

> who has a greater understanding to share in their views and correct

> me.

> Thanks

> Reza

[Guest guest]

Hi Ken ,

Do you remember the frequencies you applied to the dog. I would like to

try it out on my 12 year old dog who has a large tumour on his chest.

Thxs

Graham Dilks Sacramento Calif .

Ken Uzzell wrote:

> Hi Reza,

>

> Obviously, a scanner instrument is going to be very useful in finding the

> " unknown " .

>

> Here is an interesting experience I had with a dog a few weeks ago

> that may

> shed some light on your question.

>

> Neighbours dog had a cancer tumour the size of a large bean on top of its

> eye-ball, under and behind the eyelid. There were suspected more

> tumours as

> the eyeball was almost bulging out of its socket. The dog also had advance

> cataracts. Surgery would have removed the eye and a great deal of tissue

> around the eye, the vet thought the best thing for the dog would be to put

> it to sleep.

>

> In a one last desperate hope the neighbour brought his dog to me. Not

> knowing the exact type of eye cancer the dog had, we placed it on a rug in

> our lounge room and set up my B/R style instrument about 8 feet away.

> We ran

> the CAFL Cancer BX and Cancer BY frequency sets for 15 minutes per

> frequency, a 4.5 hour program.

>

> Interesting to note the dog (a miniature poodle - so a bean size tumour is

> rather large in the eye socket) kept creeping closer to the plasma light.

> After the first few minutes, the dog had worked out the optimum distance

> from my B/R, as it kept creeping forward and stopped when it got to about

> 3.5 feet from the tube, and there it stayed, as quiet as a log for the

> remainder of the 4.5 hour Rife session.

>

> At the conclusion of the session, the dogs eye was washed in saline

> solution. Last weekend my friend took the dog back to the vet. The tumour

> had completely disappeared, as well as the cataracts. This dog is one

> happy

> animal and bouncing around the yard being its old self. The cataracts were

> not advanced, but grey clouding was easily visible, now his eye's are dark

> as dark and it is quite obvious the cataracts have gone as well as the

> tumour.

>

> This was the best Christmas present my neighbour has ever received. He

> was a

> frequency therapy skeptic, and is now a full converted enthusiast as

> belief

> has nothing to do with his personal and direct experience in the healing

> arts of frequency therapy. Very difficult to get placebo to work on

> animals,

> although love does wonders too :-)

>

> Regards

> Ken Uzzell

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

>

> >

> >

> > I was talking to another Rife anthusiast about the phenomenon of Rife

> > resonance and he told me that not unless the frequency produced by

> > the machine " Locks in " with the specific virus, would it be possible

> > to produce efficient rifing. He used the word " Locks in " which when I

> > asked for further clarification, he mentioned that for a system to

> > fall into resonance, it not only requires the correct frequency to be

> > produced, but also that correct frequency should somehow lock into

> > resonance with the pathogen.

> >

> > Now from what I was told, if that be the case then I wonder if the

> > programs with converge or even sweep will even be able to produce

> > that " lock in " effect, because the frequency keeps fluctuating and

> > maynot be able to " lock into resonance " .

> >

> > Also when discussing Rife, we sometimes use the example of how a

> > radio tunes in to the appropriate station when tuned to the proper

> > single frequency. This explanation maybe ok with an inanimate object

> > such as a radio, but a pathogen, on the contrary,is a dynamic

> > organism and due to the dynamic biological nature of pathogens, their

> > resonant frequency cannot remain static at only one frequency and can

> > differ due to various constant intracellular metabolic changes such

> > as different stages of development, mitotic changes, cellular

> > ingestion and various other metabloic processes occuring within the

> > pathogens ... I feel that these pathogens would not necessarily

> > respond to only one frequency ONLY per se, but it operates within a

> > frequency range and this range is its normal resonant frequency. Say

> > a pathogen may have a resonant frequency range of between 30K to 40K

> > Hz and ANY frequency within this range can be used to Rife it,

> > PROVIDED that the frequency used " Locks in " to the system of

> > resonance with the pathogen producing strong harmonics within its

> > resonant frequency range of 30K to 40K.

> >

> > Hence it maynot be that what is important in Rifing is to nkow the

> > correct frequency, but rather the correct frequency range and more

> > important HOW this frequency is used to produce strong harmonics

> > within the pathogens " resonant frequency range " . Hence shape of

> > waves, duty cycle, gating frequency and other wave specifics ,I feel,

> > carry more importance than if say 2178 Hz is used or 2128 Hz. As long

> > as 2178 Hz and 2128 Hz both fall within the pathogens normal resonant

> > frequency range and the frequency is able to produce the proper

> > resonant harmonics within the system...

> >

> > I maybe ENTIRELY wrong in my views and would humbly request any one

> > who has a greater understanding to share in their views and correct

> > me.

> > Thanks

> > Reza

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Graham,

The below two sets I used. These are capped to 10.1kHz. 15 minutes on each

frequency.

Cancer, BX virus

Carcinoma virus. Sweep up and down 1000Hz on MHz freqs and use 0.01Hz sweep

on 2876 and 2790. Start with 11,780,000Hz then 17,033,662Hz then follow list

below.

Frequencies: 5431.25, 8517, 5751.95, 5751.95, 5751.95, 3713, 2876,

2790, 2128, 2008, 1604

Cancer, BY virus

Sarcoma virus.

Start with 11,430,000Hz then follow freqs below.

Frequencies: 10040, 8517, 5890, 5715, 3524, 2128, 2008

Regards

Ken

Re: Need your comments and views

>

> Hi Ken ,

>

> Do you remember the frequencies you applied to the dog. I would like to

> try it out on my 12 year old dog who has a large tumour on his chest.

>

> Thxs

>

> Graham Dilks Sacramento Calif .

>

> Ken Uzzell wrote:

>

> > Hi Reza,

> >

> > Obviously, a scanner instrument is going to be very useful in finding

the

> > " unknown " .

> >

> > Here is an interesting experience I had with a dog a few weeks ago

> > that may

> > shed some light on your question.

> >

> > Neighbours dog had a cancer tumour the size of a large bean on top of

its

> > eye-ball, under and behind the eyelid. There were suspected more

> > tumours as

> > the eyeball was almost bulging out of its socket. The dog also had

advance

> > cataracts. Surgery would have removed the eye and a great deal of tissue

> > around the eye, the vet thought the best thing for the dog would be to

put

> > it to sleep.

> >

> > In a one last desperate hope the neighbour brought his dog to me. Not

> > knowing the exact type of eye cancer the dog had, we placed it on a rug

in

> > our lounge room and set up my B/R style instrument about 8 feet away.

> > We ran

> > the CAFL Cancer BX and Cancer BY frequency sets for 15 minutes per

> > frequency, a 4.5 hour program.

> >

> > Interesting to note the dog (a miniature poodle - so a bean size tumour

is

> > rather large in the eye socket) kept creeping closer to the plasma

light.

> > After the first few minutes, the dog had worked out the optimum distance

> > from my B/R, as it kept creeping forward and stopped when it got to

about

> > 3.5 feet from the tube, and there it stayed, as quiet as a log for the

> > remainder of the 4.5 hour Rife session.

> >

> > At the conclusion of the session, the dogs eye was washed in saline

> > solution. Last weekend my friend took the dog back to the vet. The

tumour

> > had completely disappeared, as well as the cataracts. This dog is one

> > happy

> > animal and bouncing around the yard being its old self. The cataracts

were

> > not advanced, but grey clouding was easily visible, now his eye's are

dark

> > as dark and it is quite obvious the cataracts have gone as well as the

> > tumour.

> >

> > This was the best Christmas present my neighbour has ever received. He

> > was a

> > frequency therapy skeptic, and is now a full converted enthusiast as

> > belief

> > has nothing to do with his personal and direct experience in the healing

> > arts of frequency therapy. Very difficult to get placebo to work on

> > animals,

> > although love does wonders too :-)

> >

> > Regards

> > Ken Uzzell

> >

> >

> > ----- Original Message -----

> >

> > >

> > >

> > > I was talking to another Rife anthusiast about the phenomenon of Rife

> > > resonance and he told me that not unless the frequency produced by

> > > the machine " Locks in " with the specific virus, would it be possible

> > > to produce efficient rifing. He used the word " Locks in " which when I

> > > asked for further clarification, he mentioned that for a system to

> > > fall into resonance, it not only requires the correct frequency to be

> > > produced, but also that correct frequency should somehow lock into

> > > resonance with the pathogen.

> > >

> > > Now from what I was told, if that be the case then I wonder if the

> > > programs with converge or even sweep will even be able to produce

> > > that " lock in " effect, because the frequency keeps fluctuating and

> > > maynot be able to " lock into resonance " .

> > >

> > > Also when discussing Rife, we sometimes use the example of how a

> > > radio tunes in to the appropriate station when tuned to the proper

> > > single frequency. This explanation maybe ok with an inanimate object

> > > such as a radio, but a pathogen, on the contrary,is a dynamic

> > > organism and due to the dynamic biological nature of pathogens, their

> > > resonant frequency cannot remain static at only one frequency and can

> > > differ due to various constant intracellular metabolic changes such

> > > as different stages of development, mitotic changes, cellular

> > > ingestion and various other metabloic processes occuring within the

> > > pathogens ... I feel that these pathogens would not necessarily

> > > respond to only one frequency ONLY per se, but it operates within a

> > > frequency range and this range is its normal resonant frequency. Say

> > > a pathogen may have a resonant frequency range of between 30K to 40K

> > > Hz and ANY frequency within this range can be used to Rife it,

> > > PROVIDED that the frequency used " Locks in " to the system of

> > > resonance with the pathogen producing strong harmonics within its

> > > resonant frequency range of 30K to 40K.

> > >

> > > Hence it maynot be that what is important in Rifing is to nkow the

> > > correct frequency, but rather the correct frequency range and more

> > > important HOW this frequency is used to produce strong harmonics

> > > within the pathogens " resonant frequency range " . Hence shape of

> > > waves, duty cycle, gating frequency and other wave specifics ,I feel,

> > > carry more importance than if say 2178 Hz is used or 2128 Hz. As long

> > > as 2178 Hz and 2128 Hz both fall within the pathogens normal resonant

> > > frequency range and the frequency is able to produce the proper

> > > resonant harmonics within the system...

> > >

> > > I maybe ENTIRELY wrong in my views and would humbly request any one

> > > who has a greater understanding to share in their views and correct

> > > me.

> > > Thanks

> > > Reza