Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 Bruce is on target as regards those who argue that more power must translate into more effectiveness. Perhaps one of the most common reason for NO RESULTS with Rife sessions is bad targeting. Regardless of the output power that some researchers may boast, attempting to kill a fly with a sledge hammer is of little use if you miss the target! From time to time we send out programs that have convergences of CONVERGENCE 1 .03125 Divisional Convergence Harmonics is at the core of our research and cannot be duplicated by innefective systems simply because the oscillator rather it be an audio sound card or an inexpensive 555 timer may be too primitive to accurately target many pathogens. These inexpensive oscillators are like using a sling shot to hit a bird, verses using a gun with a scope. Thus we may often hear of the clamor for more power from some researchers which is revealing that they probably are not getting a high percentage of kills, so they assume that the problem is not enough POWER when in reality it is more than likely BAD TARGETING. This is like putting a bigger rubber band on a sling shot, when what really is necessary to up the percentages is to upgrade the targeting device to something that is far more advanced such as a precision oscillator. Such oscillators although very expensive, have the ability to precision target and have at least two output channels or more, allowing for pulses and sweeps to be generated at the same time (pulses get better kills, while sweeps or convergences will pick up mutations). Understanding convergence's and harmonics / Principles for accurate targeting. Many Rife programs converge at 1 1 or 1 Hz up and down from the primary number or even wider. (I have seen convergences as wide as 10 1) Example: Target frequency is 100. The first frequency with the above convergence command would be 99 then 101, then finishing with the target of 100. The purpose of this is to pick up possible mutations and variants outside of the target number. It should be noted that in many cases we are relying on harmonics of the primary number for targeting. The actual primary number for example could be 331251 (Epstein-Barr Virus). This number is too high for many Plasma systems to drive. So if we divide by 32 we can come up with a useful harmonic frequency within the audio range that we can drive. (Or you can divide by 2 repeatedly) If we were to run a 1 Hz convergence around this primary frequency 331251, we would run 331250 then 331252 and finish with are target frequency of 331251. Note what happens however as we divide these 3 numbers by 32 to get a useful harmonic within the audio range our system can drive: 331250 = 10351.5625 331251 = 10351.59375 (target frequency) 331252 = 10351.625 It can be seen that all 3 frequencies fall within the same frequency range of 10351 Hz. The difference between these 3 numbers must be measured by the smaller numbers after the decimal point to get a true harmonic convergence of 1 Hz up and down in the audio range. The difference is .03125. Or each change of 1 Hz in the upper range frequencies are a .03125 difference when divided by 32 to give us harmonics in the audio range. Therefore a convergence of 1 Hz up and down of the primary frequency within the audio range of our harmonic numbers should have a command of .03125 to gain a true 1 Hz convergence of the true higher range frequencies that we divided by 32. This new command line should get us the greatest true convergence as well as spread of the primary number: This is the new command line: converge 1 .03125 This actually will give you a convergence of 32 Hz off the primary number to pick up any possible mutations, even though in the audio range it appears to be only spreading out 1 Hz, the second number .03125 in the command line is what gives you the spread of 32 Hz up and down from the primary frequency, picking up all the true harmonics. 1 Hz divide by 32 = .03215 From this research it can also be seen that if we reverse the math that a convergence in the audio range of 1 Hz off from the primary number in the audio range of 10351 will produce harmonics of not 1 Hz but 32 Hz off the true target number of 331251! Or it would translate like this: 10350=331200 10351=331232 Target Frequency: 331251??? 10352=331264 It should be noted that NONE of these frequencies produce a true harmonic of our target number of 331251! The only way to generate a true harmonic of 331251 from the audio range is to have an oscillator accurate enough to generate frequencies with differences of less than 1 Hz. In this case the frequency in the audio range must be 10351.59375 to produce the true harmonic target frequency of 331251! Thus we can demonstrate the need for a precision oscillator to produce these frequencies with smaller differences then simple 1 Hz steps. Mike Truerife " Bruce K. Stenulson " wrote: Luigi, It's good to hear that you are doing so well; obviously the way you are using the 6C EM+ is VERY effective. There appear to be some common misconceptions around the concepts of 'power' versus 'effectiveness' that another researcher brought to my attention, so it may be time to try to shed some light upon this common myth: that " more power equals more effectiveness " . In many cases, the opposite is actually being found to be true. The 6C EM+ actually may have quite a bit more 'power' than what needs to be employed to produce optimum body response in many situations; for example, using a modest percentage of it's output power capability at the " 300 " power level setting is repeatedly being reported to produce the maximum positive response, while also producing the minimum of adverse collateral reactions. On the 6C EM+, you can take a TriField meter in hand and back away from a single Resonant Plasma tube about 8 feet before the E-field reading drops from being pegged off-scale, down to the 100,000 volts per meter E-field density reading when the " Power Output Level " setting is set at the " 300 " level. With the output power set up to the maximum " 1220 " setting, you need to back away about ten feet (or more) from the Resonant Plasma tube before the Trifield meter's reading drops to that same 100,000 volts per meter E-field density reading. That's a lot of power in the E-field. Being within 8 feet of the tube, even at this modest Output Power Level setting, continuously produces results for users of the EM+ systems. But the E-field reading is only a simple 'energy field density' reading, and it does not offer any 'qualitative' information about the characteristics of the resonance being set up within, and radiated from, the plasma tube (/tubes). When run at the higher 1220 setting, there is more of a secondary 'ringing' / damped wave resonance present in the radiated waveforms from the plasma. While this may be acceptable and usable in many situations for many research subjects, there may also be many research subjects who will in fact respond more positively to the 'cleaner' plasma resonance that results when the power level is controlled and the plasma resonance characteristics are optimized at intermediate power levels. Research subjects using the EM+ systems at the 300 Power Output Level setting report dramatic results with a minimum of collateral reaction that are otherwise experienced when a higher power output level is selected. (Many times the 'collateral adverse reactions' experienced from exposure to a plasma system with too much input power, resulting in variations and uncontrolled plasma resonance characteristics, are being misinterpreted as 'healing reactions', and people are even being told that they are a 'good sign'.... even though while they feel like crap for days after an exposure, their condition remains relatively unchanged for prolonged periods.... (What's wrong with this picture?) So maybe this often-repeated misconception that " more power is better " needs to be very closely examined once more. The body may in fact respond optimally within certain 'power windows', or more properly 'windows of receptivity'. While the body is known to be responsive to extremely subtle resonance influences (as evidenced by the results repeatedly produced by the ABPA devices in use by Dr. Jeff Sutherland and many others), it is also known to go into a 'resistive' or self-protective made when exposed to adverse fields or energy levels; EAV testing and various forms of body response testing illustrates this beyond question. So yes, in many cases, 'more is less'... more power is paridoxicly less effective... an interesting delima for those who are marketing from the standpoint that " More MUST be better!??). And the often repeated clamor of " MORE POWER - MORE POWER - MORE POWER! " may have misled many well-meaning researchers, or individuals fighting their health challenges, looking for help and hope... Extensive reports on this subject, arising out of research done over the last year, are being prepared, which should offer further insight. Until these reports are completed, I'd suggest those who are interested to utilize whatever body response testing systems they may have available to them to investigate this subject further. I wish each of you the best of progress and insights in your research! Be Well!! Bruce http://www.stenulson.net/althealth ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Luigi Farina wrote: > The only one I know that might have that info about my EM+ is Bruce > Stenulson so perhaps I should ask him, but I am doing well enough that I > figure it's not really worth wasting his time. > Luigi > > > luigi-- Frex machine and how it works...? >> >> >> >>>>how far will the freq. travel from the bulb, to be >>>>effective on your body, on your plasma system? >>>>roger >>>> >>>> >>>>Luigi Farina wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am not sure how familiar you are with Frex15 >>>>>software (you might want to >>>>>download it and kick its tires-it's shareware), but >>>>>it allows me to set up a >>>>>group of conditions I'll be dealing with, day or >>>>>night, with each involving >>>>>even dozens of frequencies. >>>>> >>>>>This software makes a computer equipped with a >>>>>decent sound subsystem into a >>>>>workable frequency producing device. >>>>> >>>>>And because the frequency lists come from CAFL, Jim >>>>>Bare, Bruce Stenulson >>>>>and Hulda I am quite sure they are good. >>>>> >>>>>During a session that will include, say, " cancer, >>>>>BX " , " parasites, >>>>>schistosoma " , " bone regeneration " , " dna repair " and >>>>>a few other goodies my >>>>>laptop will cycle by itself through what frequencies >>>>>are associated with the >>>>>conditions I am dealing with for up to several hours >>>>>without any >>>>>intervention from me. >>>>> >>>>>For example " cancer, BX " includes 21725, 17034, >>>>>46015.6, 23007.8, 11503.9, >>>>>3713, 2876, 2790, 2128, 2008 and 1604, with each of >>>>>these frequencies fired >>>>>for 180 seconds, although the software can be >>>>>customized for different time >>>>>lengths or additional frequencies for each >>>>>condition. >>>>> >>>>>Because my cancer is a carcinoma I use " cancer, BX " >>>>>or " cancer, carcinoma " >>>>>and find some additional good frequencies with >>>>> " parasites, schistosoma " (the >>>>>parasite associated with bladder cancer). >>>>> >>>>>I also use the arthritis, bone regeneration, " acute >>>>>pain " and " pain of >>>>>cancer " sets (good for bone and joint pain-they help >>>>>when the bones start to >>>>>complain they have to produce marrow); strep, staph >>>>>and c-diff frequencies >>>>>(cheap insurance-I go to the hospital and to clinics >>>>>A LOT, and that's where >>>>>you catch these bugs!); plus colon and hypothalamus >>>>>normalization (both >>>>>these glands had almost shut down on me), kidney >>>>>insufficiency and >>>>>maintenance (my lone kidney needed help BIG TIME), >>>>>and " Dr. 's Zapper " >>>>>(good stuff all around I am told). >>>>> >>>>>There have been other sets I have used as a matter >>>>>of emergency, like white >>>>>and red blood production and energy and wellness, >>>>>and for those there was no >>>>>herx effect whatsoever. >>>>> >>>>>The others might make one feel a bit down the day >>>>>after. >>>>> >>>>>One set that is A MUST at the end of each session is >>>>> " dental foci " : one's >>>>>teeth house LOADS of nasties that need killing or >>>>>the problem might not go >>>>>away. >>>>> >>>>>The EM+ I have can be used as a contact device or as >>>>>a plasma unit, so the >>>>>only additional trick I count on is to reuse a set >>>>>of frequencies only every >>>>>48 hours. >>>>> >>>>>And once every couple of days I'll rest the neon >>>>>tube on my lap, as close to >>>>>the bladder as possible, for the duration of the >>>>>session. >>>>> >>>>>Luigi >>>>> > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Perhaps if you were someone able to merge 's Wade machine with Bruce's, you'd have a pretty lethal rife machine (I'm not too familiar with the physics, however, to determine whether or not the piezoelectric properties can be fully reblicated with a plasma tube) It'd be dangerous to use around sick people of course. Some frequencies are not easily obtainable by simply inputting frequencies (fourier transforms)... I have used both machines (EM+ and Wade's 10b) and each has its limitations. Wade's only treats a certain small area, while Bruce you have to find the needle in the haystack in order to kill something. > > Bruce is on target as regards those who argue that more power must translate into more effectiveness. > > Perhaps one of the most common reason for NO RESULTS with Rife sessions is bad targeting. Regardless of the output power that some researchers may boast, attempting to kill a fly with a sledge hammer is of little use if you miss the target! > > From time to time we send out programs that have convergences of > CONVERGENCE 1 .03125 > > Divisional Convergence Harmonics is at the core of our research and cannot be duplicated by innefective systems simply because the oscillator rather it be an audio sound card or an inexpensive 555 timer may be too primitive to accurately target many pathogens. > > These inexpensive oscillators are like using a sling shot to hit a bird, verses using a gun with a scope. > > Thus we may often hear of the clamor for more power from some researchers which is revealing that they probably are not getting a high percentage of kills, so they assume that the problem is not enough POWER when in reality it is more than likely BAD TARGETING. This is like putting a bigger rubber band on a sling shot, when what really is necessary to up the percentages is to upgrade the targeting device to something that is far more advanced such as a precision oscillator. > > Such oscillators although very expensive, have the ability to precision target and have at least two output channels or more, allowing for pulses and sweeps to be generated at the same time (pulses get better kills, while sweeps or convergences will pick up mutations). > > Understanding convergence's and harmonics / Principles for accurate targeting. > > Many Rife programs converge at 1 1 or 1 Hz up and down from the primary number or even wider. (I have seen convergences as wide as 10 1) > > Example: Target frequency is 100. The first frequency with the above convergence command would be 99 then 101, then finishing with the target of 100. The purpose of this is to pick up possible mutations and variants outside of the target number. > > It should be noted that in many cases we are relying on harmonics of the primary number for targeting. The actual primary number for example could be 331251 (Epstein-Barr Virus). This number is too high for many Plasma systems to drive. So if we divide by 32 we can come up with a useful harmonic frequency within the audio range that we can drive. (Or you can divide by 2 repeatedly) > > If we were to run a 1 Hz convergence around this primary frequency 331251, we would run 331250 then 331252 and finish with are target frequency of 331251. > > Note what happens however as we divide these 3 numbers by 32 to get a useful harmonic within the audio range our system can drive: > > 331250 = 10351.5625 > 331251 = 10351.59375 (target frequency) > 331252 = 10351.625 > > It can be seen that all 3 frequencies fall within the same frequency range of 10351 Hz. The difference between these 3 numbers must be measured by the smaller numbers after the decimal point to get a true harmonic convergence of 1 Hz up and down in the audio range. The difference is .03125. Or each change of 1 Hz in the upper range frequencies are a .03125 difference when divided by 32 to give us harmonics in the audio range. > > Therefore a convergence of 1 Hz up and down of the primary frequency within the audio range of our harmonic numbers should have a command of .03125 to gain a true 1 Hz convergence of the true higher range frequencies that we divided by 32. > > This new command line should get us the greatest true convergence as well as spread of the primary number: > > This is the new command line: converge 1 .03125 This actually will give you a convergence of 32 Hz off the primary number to pick up any possible mutations, even though in the audio range it appears to be only spreading out 1 Hz, the second number .03125 in the command line is what gives you the spread of 32 Hz up and down from the primary frequency, picking up all the true harmonics. > > 1 Hz divide by 32 = .03215 > > From this research it can also be seen that if we reverse the math that a convergence in the audio range of 1 Hz off from the primary number in the audio range of 10351 will produce harmonics of not 1 Hz but 32 Hz off the true target number of 331251! > > Or it would translate like this: > > 10350=331200 > > 10351=331232 Target Frequency: 331251??? > > 10352=331264 > > It should be noted that NONE of these frequencies produce a true harmonic of our target number of 331251! The only way to generate a true harmonic of 331251 from the audio range is to have an oscillator accurate enough to generate frequencies with differences of less than 1 Hz. In this case the frequency in the audio range must be 10351.59375 to produce the true harmonic target frequency of 331251! Thus we can demonstrate the need for a precision oscillator to produce these frequencies with smaller differences then simple 1 Hz steps. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Hi zenalpha, You don't have to " find the needle in a haystack " to kill something. You can run one of the many freq sets (such as in the Rife program Frex). There are sets for almost any condition you can think of. You can run stepped sweeps to do the job (in at least some cases). You can run sweeps with 2 second, 2 Hz steps and see if you get a hit. Usually covering a particular range of freqs that is likely to cover the freq needed (sweeping from a few Hz to over 10kHz may take much too long, depending on the freq step chosen). Bil PC 1000 M-Pulse 5000 magnetic pulse generator http://magpulser.com Mammoth Lakes, CA mailto:magpulser@... z> Perhaps if you were someone able to merge 's Wade machine with z> Bruce's, you'd have a pretty lethal rife machine (I'm not too familiar z> with the physics, however, to determine whether or not the z> piezoelectric properties can be fully reblicated with a plasma tube) z> It'd be dangerous to use around sick people of course. Some z> frequencies are not easily obtainable by simply inputting frequencies z> (fourier transforms)... z> I have used both machines (EM+ and Wade's 10b) and each has its z> limitations. Wade's only treats a certain small area, while z> Bruce you have to find the needle in the haystack in order to kill z> something. z> >> >> Bruce is on target as regards those who argue that more power must z> translate into more effectiveness. >> >> Perhaps one of the most common reason for NO RESULTS with Rife z> sessions is bad targeting. Regardless of the output power that some z> researchers may boast, attempting to kill a fly with a sledge hammer z> is of little use if you miss the target! >> >> From time to time we send out programs that have convergences of >> CONVERGENCE 1 .03125 >> >> Divisional Convergence Harmonics is at the core of our research z> and cannot be duplicated by innefective systems simply because the z> oscillator rather it be an audio sound card or an inexpensive 555 z> timer may be too primitive to accurately target many pathogens. >> >> These inexpensive oscillators are like using a sling shot to hit a z> bird, verses using a gun with a scope. >> >> Thus we may often hear of the clamor for more power from some z> researchers which is revealing that they probably are not getting a z> high percentage of kills, so they assume that the problem is not z> enough POWER when in reality it is more than likely BAD TARGETING. z> This is like putting a bigger rubber band on a sling shot, when what z> really is necessary to up the percentages is to upgrade the targeting z> device to something that is far more advanced such as a precision z> oscillator. >> >> Such oscillators although very expensive, have the ability to z> precision target and have at least two output channels or more, z> allowing for pulses and sweeps to be generated at the same time z> (pulses get better kills, while sweeps or convergences will pick up z> mutations). >> >> Understanding convergence's and harmonics / Principles for accurate z> targeting. >> >> Many Rife programs converge at 1 1 or 1 Hz up and down from the z> primary number or even wider. (I have seen convergences as wide as 10 1) >> >> Example: Target frequency is 100. The first frequency with the z> above convergence command would be 99 then 101, then finishing with z> the target of 100. The purpose of this is to pick up possible z> mutations and variants outside of the target number. >> >> It should be noted that in many cases we are relying on harmonics z> of the primary number for targeting. The actual primary number for z> example could be 331251 (Epstein-Barr Virus). This number is too high z> for many Plasma systems to drive. So if we divide by 32 we can come up z> with a useful harmonic frequency within the audio range that we can z> drive. (Or you can divide by 2 repeatedly) >> >> If we were to run a 1 Hz convergence around this primary frequency z> 331251, we would run 331250 then 331252 and finish with are target z> frequency of 331251. >> >> Note what happens however as we divide these 3 numbers by 32 to z> get a useful harmonic within the audio range our system can drive: >> >> 331250 == 10351.5625 >> 331251 == 10351.59375 (target frequency) >> 331252 == 10351.625 >> >> It can be seen that all 3 frequencies fall within the same z> frequency range of 10351 Hz. The difference between these 3 numbers z> must be measured by the smaller numbers after the decimal point to get z> a true harmonic convergence of 1 Hz up and down in the audio range. z> The difference is .03125. Or each change of 1 Hz in the upper range z> frequencies are a .03125 difference when divided by 32 to give us z> harmonics in the audio range. >> >> Therefore a convergence of 1 Hz up and down of the primary z> frequency within the audio range of our harmonic numbers should have a z> command of .03125 to gain a true 1 Hz convergence of the true higher z> range frequencies that we divided by 32. >> >> This new command line should get us the greatest true convergence z> as well as spread of the primary number: >> >> This is the new command line: converge 1 .03125 This actually will z> give you a convergence of 32 Hz off the primary number to pick up any z> possible mutations, even though in the audio range it appears to be z> only spreading out 1 Hz, the second number .03125 in the command line z> is what gives you the spread of 32 Hz up and down from the primary z> frequency, picking up all the true harmonics. >> >> 1 Hz divide by 32 == .03215 >> >> From this research it can also be seen that if we reverse the math z> that a convergence in the audio range of 1 Hz off from the primary z> number in the audio range of 10351 will produce harmonics of not 1 Hz z> but 32 Hz off the true target number of 331251! >> >> Or it would translate like this: >> >> 10350=31200 >> >> 10351=31232 Target Frequency: 331251??? >> >> 10352=31264 >> >> It should be noted that NONE of these frequencies produce a true z> harmonic of our target number of 331251! The only way to generate a z> true harmonic of 331251 from the audio range is to have an oscillator z> accurate enough to generate frequencies with differences of less than z> 1 Hz. In this case the frequency in the audio range must be z> 10351.59375 to produce the true harmonic target frequency of 331251! z> Thus we can demonstrate the need for a precision oscillator to produce z> these frequencies with smaller differences then simple 1 Hz steps. >> z> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 True, you could use a sweep program - that would be the way to go. I think it would have to be more refined than using increments however. You need some sort of oscillator like what is used in 's machine. I ran over a small range of frequencies several times before getting a " hit " (the same one I thought). I guess getting the right frequency can be finnicky - especially as the temperature of the machine messes with your input device.. > > Hi zenalpha, > > You don't have to " find the needle in a haystack " to kill > something. You can run one of the many freq sets (such as in the > Rife program Frex). There are sets for almost any condition you > can think of. > > You can run stepped sweeps to do the job (in at least some > cases). You can run sweeps with 2 second, 2 Hz steps and see if > you get a hit. Usually covering a particular range of freqs that > is likely to cover the freq needed (sweeping from a few Hz to > over 10kHz may take much too long, depending on the freq step > chosen). > > Bil > > PC 1000 > M-Pulse 5000 magnetic pulse generator > http://magpulser.com > Mammoth Lakes, CA > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 I'm not so sure that I can agree completely with the " bad targeting " idea. Of course, not being remotely close to the frequency/frequencies needed for a specific purpose will prove ineffective, but that is not my point. It had been demonstrated over and over again by individual researchers that in most cases, you can be off the " perfect " frequency slightly and still have the effectiveness. Divisional convergence harmonics is not the answer by my records in working with numerous conditions. Subtle sweeps around the target frequency have proven far more effective in my records - so much that I do not even use converges of any type, period. I think a large part of effectiveness & results is something that almost NO manufacturer will speak of, but is a topic that speaks volumes...Effective plasma resonance. I'm in complete agreement that more power does not give better results. But by that statement and agreement, why is the " TrueRife " device touting the high energy output so strongly? That just seems like a contradiction. Plasma Dynamics is a far more important issue - one that Mr. Stenulson hit upon in December of '97 when he departed profoundly from all of the " in the box " thinking. Nobody still has been able to duplicate what that wonderful knob does. In either case, if imitation is the highest form of flattery, Bruce Stenulson has received more flattery than any other creator of devices. Not only do I respect the man for his incredible knowledge in electronics and engineering in regard to these devices, but also to his integrity to abide by the wishes of the late R.R.R. and not use the Rife name to gain a foothold in marketing. But he doesn't need to, anyway. His record speaks volumes for itself and hundreds of researchers and users have only added to the credibility. But back to my point, I haven't spoken with anyone who has the knowledge to intelligently speak of the importance of plasma dynamics and how it interacts with the body other than Mr. Stenulson. It is so much more than getting a tube to light up. I really wish that the creators of the various plasma devices would all get in on a discussion about this, but I feel that is something that will just not come about. > > Bruce is on target as regards those who argue that more power must translate into more effectiveness. > > Perhaps one of the most common reason for NO RESULTS with Rife sessions is bad targeting. Regardless of the output power that some researchers may boast, attempting to kill a fly with a sledge hammer is of little use if you miss the target! > > From time to time we send out programs that have convergences of > CONVERGENCE 1 .03125 > > Divisional Convergence Harmonics is at the core of our research and cannot be duplicated by innefective systems simply because the oscillator rather it be an audio sound card or an inexpensive 555 timer may be too primitive to accurately target many pathogens. > > These inexpensive oscillators are like using a sling shot to hit a bird, verses using a gun with a scope. > > Thus we may often hear of the clamor for more power from some researchers which is revealing that they probably are not getting a high percentage of kills, so they assume that the problem is not enough POWER when in reality it is more than likely BAD TARGETING. This is like putting a bigger rubber band on a sling shot, when what really is necessary to up the percentages is to upgrade the targeting device to something that is far more advanced such as a precision oscillator. > > Such oscillators although very expensive, have the ability to precision target and have at least two output channels or more, allowing for pulses and sweeps to be generated at the same time (pulses get better kills, while sweeps or convergences will pick up mutations). > > Understanding convergence's and harmonics / Principles for accurate targeting. > > Many Rife programs converge at 1 1 or 1 Hz up and down from the primary number or even wider. (I have seen convergences as wide as 10 1) > > Example: Target frequency is 100. The first frequency with the above convergence command would be 99 then 101, then finishing with the target of 100. The purpose of this is to pick up possible mutations and variants outside of the target number. > > It should be noted that in many cases we are relying on harmonics of the primary number for targeting. The actual primary number for example could be 331251 (Epstein-Barr Virus). This number is too high for many Plasma systems to drive. So if we divide by 32 we can come up with a useful harmonic frequency within the audio range that we can drive. (Or you can divide by 2 repeatedly) > > If we were to run a 1 Hz convergence around this primary frequency 331251, we would run 331250 then 331252 and finish with are target frequency of 331251. > > Note what happens however as we divide these 3 numbers by 32 to get a useful harmonic within the audio range our system can drive: > > 331250 = 10351.5625 > 331251 = 10351.59375 (target frequency) > 331252 = 10351.625 > > It can be seen that all 3 frequencies fall within the same frequency range of 10351 Hz. The difference between these 3 numbers must be measured by the smaller numbers after the decimal point to get a true harmonic convergence of 1 Hz up and down in the audio range. The difference is .03125. Or each change of 1 Hz in the upper range frequencies are a .03125 difference when divided by 32 to give us harmonics in the audio range. > > Therefore a convergence of 1 Hz up and down of the primary frequency within the audio range of our harmonic numbers should have a command of .03125 to gain a true 1 Hz convergence of the true higher range frequencies that we divided by 32. > > This new command line should get us the greatest true convergence as well as spread of the primary number: > > This is the new command line: converge 1 .03125 This actually will give you a convergence of 32 Hz off the primary number to pick up any possible mutations, even though in the audio range it appears to be only spreading out 1 Hz, the second number .03125 in the command line is what gives you the spread of 32 Hz up and down from the primary frequency, picking up all the true harmonics. > > 1 Hz divide by 32 = .03215 > > From this research it can also be seen that if we reverse the math that a convergence in the audio range of 1 Hz off from the primary number in the audio range of 10351 will produce harmonics of not 1 Hz but 32 Hz off the true target number of 331251! > > Or it would translate like this: > > 10350=331200 > > 10351=331232 Target Frequency: 331251??? > > 10352=331264 > > It should be noted that NONE of these frequencies produce a true harmonic of our target number of 331251! The only way to generate a true harmonic of 331251 from the audio range is to have an oscillator accurate enough to generate frequencies with differences of less than 1 Hz. In this case the frequency in the audio range must be 10351.59375 to produce the true harmonic target frequency of 331251! Thus we can demonstrate the need for a precision oscillator to produce these frequencies with smaller differences then simple 1 Hz steps. > > > Mike Truerife Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Hi zenalpha, Whatever freq generator you use is The oscillator. I think freq and time steps are plenty (more than most people use). The trick is knowing what range to cover (so you don't spend all day). Bil PC 1000 M-Pulse 5000 magnetic pulse generator http://magpulser.com Mammoth Lakes, CA mailto:magpulser@... z> True, you could use a sweep program - that would be the way to go. I z> think it would have to be more refined than using increments however. z> You need some sort of oscillator like what is used in 's machine. z> I ran over a small range of frequencies several times before getting z> a " hit " (the same one I thought). I guess getting the right frequency z> can be finnicky - especially as the temperature of the machine messes z> with your input device.. z> >> >> Hi zenalpha, >> >> You don't have to " find the needle in a haystack " to kill >> something. You can run one of the many freq sets (such as in the >> Rife program Frex). There are sets for almost any condition you >> can think of. >> >> You can run stepped sweeps to do the job (in at least some >> cases). You can run sweeps with 2 second, 2 Hz steps and see if >> you get a hit. Usually covering a particular range of freqs that >> is likely to cover the freq needed (sweeping from a few Hz to >> over 10kHz may take much too long, depending on the freq step >> chosen). >> >> Bil >> >> PC 1000 >> M-Pulse 5000 magnetic pulse generator >> http://magpulser.com >> Mammoth Lakes, CA >> >> z> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2006 Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 Read this: http://educate-yourself.org/gw/gwultrafreq25sep99.shtml Not all frequency generators are created equal, and not all rife devices operate necessarily the same way. It would be difficult to create the hidden fourier components, I suspect, using a traditional plasma machine (possible, but I'm not technical enough to answer that). Which is why I suspect that used the piezoelectric plate instead of plasma (it also might be that treating the whole body is just plain dangerous using that type of sweep). I've used both 's and Bruce's rife machines (and a few other people's rife machines as well). I have been most satisfied with 's machine, not because it is necessarily inherently superior, but because it is convenient and because I've gotten better results from it than any other rife machine that I've used. This is probably due to the nature of the device (the production of powerful pressure square waves in the body and the hidden fourier frequencies). I'd be difficult, but I suspect not impossible to replicate what 's machine using a frequency generator. > >> > >> Hi zenalpha, > >> > >> You don't have to " find the needle in a haystack " to kill > >> something. You can run one of the many freq sets (such as in the > >> Rife program Frex). There are sets for almost any condition you > >> can think of. > >> > >> You can run stepped sweeps to do the job (in at least some > >> cases). You can run sweeps with 2 second, 2 Hz steps and see if > >> you get a hit. Usually covering a particular range of freqs that > >> is likely to cover the freq needed (sweeping from a few Hz to > >> over 10kHz may take much too long, depending on the freq step > >> chosen). > >> > >> Bil > >> > >> PC 1000 > >> M-Pulse 5000 magnetic pulse generator > >> http://magpulser.com > >> Mammoth Lakes, CA > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > z> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2006 Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 Hi Neuromancer, I can say Bruce's frequencies for stimulating and normalizing body functions has received a lot of use and the frequencies well appear to do what is claimed. I believe Bruce uses one coil in his system, which is a great indication that we don't have to blast away to achieve results. My favourite RIFE photo is on Bruce's web site, looking at that couch (look's so comfortable) and six plasma lights around it. I've mimiked it with two plasma lamps either side of my table. However, Mike does a great system too from feedback I received. I seen what coils can do to very accurate frequencies, so I do not believe a 0.001 is required in the oscillator, as the plasma and assocated firmware will mess this up a little. Probably accurate oscillators would be more beneficial to the B/R which Dr Bare has displayed how well the signal is transmitted and preserved from the plasma tube on the B/R system and contact pads where accurate frequencies can be delivered. At the end of the day, we make the frequencies noisy, to cover morphing and broad range physiological effects. Also audio frequencies without a RF carrier aren't going to produce harmonics of value much more than 300kHz, so it becomes pointless in attempting to target a higher RF region with audio alone. I heard the GB4000 has produced excellent results for a contact system, since the RF carrier was added, although the GB4000 has a huge frequency range and outputs all RF frequencies directly. Nice :-) Regards, Ken Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key I'm not so sure that I can agree completely with the " bad targeting " idea. Of course, not being remotely close to the frequency/frequencies needed for a specific purpose will prove ineffective, but that is not my point. It had been demonstrated over and over again by individual researchers that in most cases, you can be off the " perfect " frequency slightly and still have the effectiveness. Divisional convergence harmonics is not the answer by my records in working with numerous conditions. Subtle sweeps around the target frequency have proven far more effective in my records - so much that I do not even use converges of any type, period. I think a large part of effectiveness & results is something that almost NO manufacturer will speak of, but is a topic that speaks volumes...Effective plasma resonance. I'm in complete agreement that more power does not give better results. But by that statement and agreement, why is the " TrueRife " device touting the high energy output so strongly? That just seems like a contradiction. Plasma Dynamics is a far more important issue - one that Mr. Stenulson hit upon in December of '97 when he departed profoundly from all of the " in the box " thinking. Nobody still has been able to duplicate what that wonderful knob does. In either case, if imitation is the highest form of flattery, Bruce Stenulson has received more flattery than any other creator of devices. Not only do I respect the man for his incredible knowledge in electronics and engineering in regard to these devices, but also to his integrity to abide by the wishes of the late R.R.R. and not use the Rife name to gain a foothold in marketing. But he doesn't need to, anyway. His record speaks volumes for itself and hundreds of researchers and users have only added to the credibility. But back to my point, I haven't spoken with anyone who has the knowledge to intelligently speak of the importance of plasma dynamics and how it interacts with the body other than Mr. Stenulson. It is so much more than getting a tube to light up. I really wish that the creators of the various plasma devices would all get in on a discussion about this, but I feel that is something that will just not come about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2006 Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 Yes, Bruce's stimulating and normalizing frequencies are wonderful. I have a few written testimonies on their effectiveness. The sad part about those wonderful numbers is that they have been taken from Bruce's site and re-distributed by TrueRife without permission, nor had any credit been given. The same holds true for work by Jeff Sutherland. I think one pic that is better than the six plasma tubes (driven by three EM+ machines) is the pic showing NINE tubes all lit by one single EM+ device! I haven't seen another instrument out there with SO much power...because none exist. :-) Since this is a forum to discuss, debate, and exchange ideas - I hope this is taken as a spirited debate and not otherwise. That being said, I have not seen pages of reports about the TrueRife system. I have not been able to speak with numerous people who have used it and had conditions resolve. All I can really say about the hardware itself is that it is nothing more than a Pat Robin freq. generator and a trumped-up version of Holman's " poor man's Rife " . Sloppy science masked by a lot of smoke and mirrors. And then the Effectrolysis system...stainless steel plates in the water? Sorry, but you can't pay me enough to do that - not for fear of electrocution but the Nickel that is going to be absorbed into your system. As for the GB-4000...fine and dandy if you turn off the RF carrier. Totally unnecessary. I'm sure Luigi can attest to that! :-) > > Hi Neuromancer, > > I can say Bruce's frequencies for stimulating and normalizing body functions has received a lot of use and the frequencies well appear to do what is claimed. > > I believe Bruce uses one coil in his system, which is a great indication that we don't have to blast away to achieve results. My favourite RIFE photo is on Bruce's web site, looking at that couch (look's so comfortable) and six plasma lights around it. > > I've mimiked it with two plasma lamps either side of my table. > > However, Mike does a great system too from feedback I received. I seen what coils can do to very accurate frequencies, so I do not believe a 0.001 is required in the oscillator, as the plasma and assocated firmware will mess this up a little. > > Probably accurate oscillators would be more beneficial to the B/R which Dr Bare has displayed how well the signal is transmitted and preserved from the plasma tube on the B/R system and contact pads where accurate frequencies can be delivered. > > At the end of the day, we make the frequencies noisy, to cover morphing and broad range physiological effects. Also audio frequencies without a RF carrier aren't going to produce harmonics of value much more than 300kHz, so it becomes pointless in attempting to target a higher RF region with audio alone. > > I heard the GB4000 has produced excellent results for a contact system, since the RF carrier was added, although the GB4000 has a huge frequency range and outputs all RF frequencies directly. Nice :- ) > > Regards, > Ken > Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key > > > I'm not so sure that I can agree completely with the " bad targeting " > idea. Of course, not being remotely close to the > frequency/frequencies needed for a specific purpose will prove > ineffective, but that is not my point. It had been demonstrated over > and over again by individual researchers that in most cases, you can > be off the " perfect " frequency slightly and still have the > effectiveness. > Divisional convergence harmonics is not the answer by my records in > working with numerous conditions. Subtle sweeps around the target > frequency have proven far more effective in my records - so much > that I do not even use converges of any type, period. > I think a large part of effectiveness & results is something that > almost NO manufacturer will speak of, but is a topic that speaks > volumes...Effective plasma resonance. > I'm in complete agreement that more power does not give better > results. But by that statement and agreement, why is the " TrueRife " > device touting the high energy output so strongly? That just seems > like a contradiction. Plasma Dynamics is a far more important issue - > one that Mr. Stenulson hit upon in December of '97 when he departed > profoundly from all of the " in the box " thinking. Nobody still has > been able to duplicate what that wonderful knob does. > In either case, if imitation is the highest form of flattery, Bruce > Stenulson has received more flattery than any other creator of > devices. Not only do I respect the man for his incredible knowledge > in electronics and engineering in regard to these devices, but also > to his integrity to abide by the wishes of the late R.R.R. and not > use the Rife name to gain a foothold in marketing. But he doesn't > need to, anyway. His record speaks volumes for itself and hundreds > of researchers and users have only added to the credibility. > But back to my point, I haven't spoken with anyone who has the > knowledge to intelligently speak of the importance of plasma > dynamics and how it interacts with the body other than Mr. > Stenulson. It is so much more than getting a tube to light up. > I really wish that the creators of the various plasma devices would > all get in on a discussion about this, but I feel that is something > that will just not come about. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2006 Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 I have a TrueRife machine and have no complaints, did it cure my wife's cancer no but it did normalize her blood and control her pain, I have no regrets about buying this system, my wife made steady improvements with this machine, even her Home Health nurse was amazed after being skeptical, since we had no access to doctors my wife was bed ridden and they don't make house calls, all I have to go on were monthly blood tests, her last visit to the hospital the ER doctor remarked that her blood work was great but looked like some type of cancer treatment was being administered, I just smiled, I think her cancer mutated after all the chemo and radiation, I have no proof of that, after this happened I could do nothing but make her comfortable, I wish there was more cooperation out here and less fighting, some of the arguments remind of Ford Chevy discussions, it seems like personal preference. I am just a layman so a lot of discussions out here are over my head or just make issues more confusing when it comes to buying or using different equipment, if someone is selling fraudulent equipment I want to know about it, but the rest seems like quibbling or infighting, this is not meant as an insult or opinion about anyone person or equipment, just as constructive input. Terry Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key Yes, Bruce's stimulating and normalizing frequencies are wonderful. I have a few written testimonies on their effectiveness. The sad part about those wonderful numbers is that they have been taken from Bruce's site and re-distributed by TrueRife without permission, nor had any credit been given. The same holds true for work by Jeff Sutherland. I think one pic that is better than the six plasma tubes (driven by three EM+ machines) is the pic showing NINE tubes all lit by one single EM+ device! I haven't seen another instrument out there with SO much power...because none exist. :-) Since this is a forum to discuss, debate, and exchange ideas - I hope this is taken as a spirited debate and not otherwise. That being said, I have not seen pages of reports about the TrueRife system. I have not been able to speak with numerous people who have used it and had conditions resolve. All I can really say about the hardware itself is that it is nothing more than a Pat Robin freq. generator and a trumped-up version of Holman's " poor man's Rife " . Sloppy science masked by a lot of smoke and mirrors. And then the Effectrolysis system...stainless steel plates in the water? Sorry, but you can't pay me enough to do that - not for fear of electrocution but the Nickel that is going to be absorbed into your system. As for the GB-4000...fine and dandy if you turn off the RF carrier. Totally unnecessary. I'm sure Luigi can attest to that! :-) > > Hi Neuromancer, > > I can say Bruce's frequencies for stimulating and normalizing body functions has received a lot of use and the frequencies well appear to do what is claimed. > > I believe Bruce uses one coil in his system, which is a great indication that we don't have to blast away to achieve results. My favourite RIFE photo is on Bruce's web site, looking at that couch (look's so comfortable) and six plasma lights around it. > > I've mimiked it with two plasma lamps either side of my table. > > However, Mike does a great system too from feedback I received. I seen what coils can do to very accurate frequencies, so I do not believe a 0.001 is required in the oscillator, as the plasma and assocated firmware will mess this up a little. > > Probably accurate oscillators would be more beneficial to the B/R which Dr Bare has displayed how well the signal is transmitted and preserved from the plasma tube on the B/R system and contact pads where accurate frequencies can be delivered. > > At the end of the day, we make the frequencies noisy, to cover morphing and broad range physiological effects. Also audio frequencies without a RF carrier aren't going to produce harmonics of value much more than 300kHz, so it becomes pointless in attempting to target a higher RF region with audio alone. > > I heard the GB4000 has produced excellent results for a contact system, since the RF carrier was added, although the GB4000 has a huge frequency range and outputs all RF frequencies directly. Nice :- ) > > Regards, > Ken > Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key > > > I'm not so sure that I can agree completely with the " bad targeting " > idea. Of course, not being remotely close to the > frequency/frequencies needed for a specific purpose will prove > ineffective, but that is not my point. It had been demonstrated over > and over again by individual researchers that in most cases, you can > be off the " perfect " frequency slightly and still have the > effectiveness. > Divisional convergence harmonics is not the answer by my records in > working with numerous conditions. Subtle sweeps around the target > frequency have proven far more effective in my records - so much > that I do not even use converges of any type, period. > I think a large part of effectiveness & results is something that > almost NO manufacturer will speak of, but is a topic that speaks > volumes...Effective plasma resonance. > I'm in complete agreement that more power does not give better > results. But by that statement and agreement, why is the " TrueRife " > device touting the high energy output so strongly? That just seems > like a contradiction. Plasma Dynamics is a far more important issue - > one that Mr. Stenulson hit upon in December of '97 when he departed > profoundly from all of the " in the box " thinking. Nobody still has > been able to duplicate what that wonderful knob does. > In either case, if imitation is the highest form of flattery, Bruce > Stenulson has received more flattery than any other creator of > devices. Not only do I respect the man for his incredible knowledge > in electronics and engineering in regard to these devices, but also > to his integrity to abide by the wishes of the late R.R.R. and not > use the Rife name to gain a foothold in marketing. But he doesn't > need to, anyway. His record speaks volumes for itself and hundreds > of researchers and users have only added to the credibility. > But back to my point, I haven't spoken with anyone who has the > knowledge to intelligently speak of the importance of plasma > dynamics and how it interacts with the body other than Mr. > Stenulson. It is so much more than getting a tube to light up. > I really wish that the creators of the various plasma devices would > all get in on a discussion about this, but I feel that is something > that will just not come about. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2006 Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 Hi Terry, Sorry to hear about your wife. The most important messages, that are totally balanced come from Dr Bare, Dr Loyd, Bruce Stenulson, Dave Felt, Bil Green and Alvin Rose, there are a lot of others too, but these are the regular posters, and police this therapy a little. These heroes aren't terrible concerned about who's got what machine, they just get down to the business of helping people make it work as best as it can so people get value from their frequency therapy device. Most of the other stuff is just vendors touting their wares and trying to get an edge over other vendors. Gosh, the $26 zapper produces results, so any advancement on this simple device is very good, as with most of the Frequency Therapy devices on offer. The only common ground I have seen is that everyone tends to agree it is important that the machine be able to accept new frequencies, and that it can do sweeps. I think there is a wellness machine circulating that all vendors warn people about, as it can't do sweeps and it can't accept new frequencies, other than those frequencies programmed into it. Regards, Ken Uzzell http://heal-me.com.au Frex - CHIamp RE: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key I have a TrueRife machine and have no complaints, did it cure my wife's cancer no but it did normalize her blood and control her pain, I have no regrets about buying this system, my wife made steady improvements with this machine, even her Home Health nurse was amazed after being skeptical, since we had no access to doctors my wife was bed ridden and they don't make house calls, all I have to go on were monthly blood tests, her last visit to the hospital the ER doctor remarked that her blood work was great but looked like some type of cancer treatment was being administered, I just smiled, I think her cancer mutated after all the chemo and radiation, I have no proof of that, after this happened I could do nothing but make her comfortable, I wish there was more cooperation out here and less fighting, some of the arguments remind of Ford Chevy discussions, it seems like personal preference. I am just a layman so a lot of discussions out here are over my head or just make issues more confusing when it comes to buying or using different equipment, if someone is selling fraudulent equipment I want to know about it, but the rest seems like quibbling or infighting, this is not meant as an insult or opinion about anyone person or equipment, just as constructive input. Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 The most important messages, that are totally balanced come from Dr Bare, Dr Loyd, Bruce Stenulson, Dave Felt, Bil Green and Alvin Rose, there are a lot of others too, but these are the regular posters, and police this therapy a little. I agree Ken, however, to those new to the forum not realising the great work all of the above have done makes it hard to differentiate between a lot of the devices that are discussed. Healthy discussion and debate benefits us all but we have to be careful not to judge unless there is sound knowledge of fraudulent activities for as you point out from the simplest machines to the expensive most appear to offer some benefit. Mike F Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 Thanks for your kind response, I always look forward to your e-mails, what I would like to see as a lay person is a consensus on what to look for when shopping for a " Rife " machine, what electronic capabilities should it contain, how much should each different tier of equipment cost and what should each tier contain equipment wise. What to watch out for in the don't buy this category, in my case you blunder into this at a bad time in your life and do not have ample time to research this as you might when buying an expensive car, you want to buy and start using right away, as in my case you have little or no time left. Also you are not financially able to make additional purchases so the machine must be " The " machine no trade ups or additional machine purchases are affordable. It would be great to see this forum build a web site to train consumers interested in these machines, it shouldn't or doesn't need to mention brands by name, it could list price ranges and what is available (equipment types) in these price ranges. It doesn't need to make claims, but would also like to see a section on personal use stories of people you can talk to not " I cured myself using XYZ " signed Becky C in Seattle WA. People you can e-mail who are willing to answer you back about your concerns, I personally purchased my machine after calling some users and talking to them on the phone. Information sections could be set up for different intelligence levels some of us want to know everything about how a TV works, others just how to use the remote. Sorry to Ramble Terry Re: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key Hi Terry, Sorry to hear about your wife. The most important messages, that are totally balanced come from Dr Bare, Dr Loyd, Bruce Stenulson, Dave Felt, Bil Green and Alvin Rose, there are a lot of others too, but these are the regular posters, and police this therapy a little. These heroes aren't terrible concerned about who's got what machine, they just get down to the business of helping people make it work as best as it can so people get value from their frequency therapy device. Most of the other stuff is just vendors touting their wares and trying to get an edge over other vendors. Gosh, the $26 zapper produces results, so any advancement on this simple device is very good, as with most of the Frequency Therapy devices on offer. The only common ground I have seen is that everyone tends to agree it is important that the machine be able to accept new frequencies, and that it can do sweeps. I think there is a wellness machine circulating that all vendors warn people about, as it can't do sweeps and it can't accept new frequencies, other than those frequencies programmed into it. Regards, Ken Uzzell http://heal-me.com.au Frex - CHIamp RE: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key I have a TrueRife machine and have no complaints, did it cure my wife's cancer no but it did normalize her blood and control her pain, I have no regrets about buying this system, my wife made steady improvements with this machine, even her Home Health nurse was amazed after being skeptical, since we had no access to doctors my wife was bed ridden and they don't make house calls, all I have to go on were monthly blood tests, her last visit to the hospital the ER doctor remarked that her blood work was great but looked like some type of cancer treatment was being administered, I just smiled, I think her cancer mutated after all the chemo and radiation, I have no proof of that, after this happened I could do nothing but make her comfortable, I wish there was more cooperation out here and less fighting, some of the arguments remind of Ford Chevy discussions, it seems like personal preference. I am just a layman so a lot of discussions out here are over my head or just make issues more confusing when it comes to buying or using different equipment, if someone is selling fraudulent equipment I want to know about it, but the rest seems like quibbling or infighting, this is not meant as an insult or opinion about anyone person or equipment, just as constructive input. Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 > > Hi Neuromancer, > > I can say Bruce's frequencies for stimulating and normalizing body functions has received a lot of use and the frequencies well appear to do what is claimed. > > I believe Bruce uses one coil in his system, which is a great indication that we don't have to blast away to achieve results. My favourite RIFE photo is on Bruce's web site, looking at that couch (look's so comfortable) and six plasma lights around it. > > I've mimiked it with two plasma lamps either side of my table. > > However, Mike does a great system too from feedback I received. I seen what coils can do to very accurate frequencies, so I do not believe a 0.001 is required in the oscillator, as the plasma and assocated firmware will mess this up a little. > > Probably accurate oscillators would be more beneficial to the B/R which Dr Bare has displayed how well the signal is transmitted and preserved from the plasma tube on the B/R system and contact pads where accurate frequencies can be delivered. > > At the end of the day, we make the frequencies noisy, to cover morphing and broad range physiological effects. Also audio frequencies without a RF carrier aren't going to produce harmonics of value much more than 300kHz, so it becomes pointless in attempting to target a higher RF region with audio alone. > > I heard the GB4000 has produced excellent results for a contact system, since the RF carrier was added, although the GB4000 has a huge frequency range and outputs all RF frequencies directly. Nice :- ) > > Regards, > Ken > Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key > > > I'm not so sure that I can agree completely with the " bad targeting " > idea. Of course, not being remotely close to the > frequency/frequencies needed for a specific purpose will prove > ineffective, but that is not my point. It had been demonstrated over > and over again by individual researchers that in most cases, you can > be off the " perfect " frequency slightly and still have the > effectiveness. > Divisional convergence harmonics is not the answer by my records in > working with numerous conditions. Subtle sweeps around the target > frequency have proven far more effective in my records - so much > that I do not even use converges of any type, period. > I think a large part of effectiveness & results is something that > almost NO manufacturer will speak of, but is a topic that speaks > volumes...Effective plasma resonance. > I'm in complete agreement that more power does not give better > results. But by that statement and agreement, why is the " TrueRife " > device touting the high energy output so strongly? That just seems > like a contradiction. Plasma Dynamics is a far more important issue - > one that Mr. Stenulson hit upon in December of '97 when he departed > profoundly from all of the " in the box " thinking. Nobody still has > been able to duplicate what that wonderful knob does. > In either case, if imitation is the highest form of flattery, Bruce > Stenulson has received more flattery than any other creator of > devices. Not only do I respect the man for his incredible knowledge > in electronics and engineering in regard to these devices, but also > to his integrity to abide by the wishes of the late R.R.R. and not > use the Rife name to gain a foothold in marketing. But he doesn't > need to, anyway. His record speaks volumes for itself and hundreds > of researchers and users have only added to the credibility. > But back to my point, I haven't spoken with anyone who has the > knowledge to intelligently speak of the importance of plasma > dynamics and how it interacts with the body other than Mr. > Stenulson. It is so much more than getting a tube to light up. > I really wish that the creators of the various plasma devices would > all get in on a discussion about this, but I feel that is something > that will just not come about. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 Hi Terry, like others on the forum I am sorry at your loss and the difficulties you have gone through. You raise a very good point just how it can be handled may pose a few problems. I believe is trying to establish a list of machines available together with features but it is still in its early days. There are some reviews that has done listed on the Rife Forum which may be of benefit to some but there is much more work needed in this area so lets hope some of the manufacturers can get together and produce a web page we can all have a look at. Mike F > > Thanks for your kind response, I always look forward to your e- mails, what I > would like to see as a lay person is a consensus on what to look for when > shopping for a " Rife " machine, what electronic capabilities should it > contain, how much should each different tier of equipment cost and what > should each tier contain equipment wise. What to watch out for in the don't > buy this category, in my case you blunder into this at a bad time in your > life and do not have ample time to research this as you might when buying an > expensive car, you want to buy and start using right away, as in my case you > have little or no time left. Also you are not financially able to make > additional purchases so the machine must be " The " machine no trade ups or > additional machine purchases are affordable. It would be great to see this > forum build a web site to train consumers interested in these machines, it > shouldn't or doesn't need to mention brands by name, it could list price > ranges and what is available (equipment types) in these price ranges. It > doesn't need to make claims, but would also like to see a section on > personal use stories of people you can talk to not " I cured myself using > XYZ " signed Becky C in Seattle WA. People you can e-mail who are willing to > answer you back about your concerns, I personally purchased my machine after > calling some users and talking to them on the phone. Information sections > could be set up for different intelligence levels some of us want to know > everything about how a TV works, others just how to use the remote. > Sorry to Ramble > Terry > > Re: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity > may be the key > > Hi Terry, > > Sorry to hear about your wife. > > The most important messages, that are totally balanced come from Dr > Bare, Dr Loyd, Bruce Stenulson, Dave Felt, Bil Green and Alvin Rose, > there are a lot of others too, but these are the regular posters, and police > this therapy a little. > > These heroes aren't terrible concerned about who's got what machine, they > just get down to the business of helping people make it work as best as it > can so people get value from their frequency therapy device. > > Most of the other stuff is just vendors touting their wares and trying to > get an edge over other vendors. > > Gosh, the $26 zapper produces results, so any advancement on this simple > device is very good, as with most of the Frequency Therapy devices on offer. > > The only common ground I have seen is that everyone tends to agree it is > important that the machine be able to accept new frequencies, and that it > can do sweeps. > > I think there is a wellness machine circulating that all vendors warn people > about, as it can't do sweeps and it can't accept new frequencies, other than > those frequencies programmed into it. > > Regards, > Ken Uzzell > http://heal-me.com.au > Frex - CHIamp > RE: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not > Quantity may be the key > > > I have a TrueRife machine and have no complaints, did it cure my wife's > cancer no but it did normalize her blood and control her pain, I have no > regrets about buying this system, my wife made steady improvements with > this > machine, even her Home Health nurse was amazed after being skeptical, > since > we had no access to doctors my wife was bed ridden and they don't make > house > calls, all I have to go on were monthly blood tests, her last visit to the > hospital the ER doctor remarked that her blood work was great but looked > like some type of cancer treatment was being administered, I just smiled, > I > think her cancer mutated after all the chemo and radiation, I have no > proof > of that, after this happened I could do nothing but make her comfortable, > I > wish there was more cooperation out here and less fighting, some of the > arguments remind of Ford Chevy discussions, it seems like personal > preference. I am just a layman so a lot of discussions out here are over > my > head or just make issues more confusing when it comes to buying or using > different equipment, if someone is selling fraudulent equipment I want to > know about it, but the rest seems like quibbling or infighting, this is > not > meant as an insult or opinion about anyone person or equipment, just as > constructive input. > Terry > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 Hi Terry, Providing balanced assessments of Rife devices, as you describe, is one of the aims of the Rife Forum I run at http://www.rifeforum.com Although I am still in the process of creating such assessments of the various devices, there are a few there already and more are coming soon. One of the principle problems in writing such assessments is the lack of response from the device manufacturers. This is somewhat hard to understand as the Rife Forum is probably the ideal platform for their devices to be discussed without them having to be worried about what they say on their own website. A lot of manufacturers, particularly those based in the USA, are being very careful about what they say about their devices capabilities, on there own websites, in order to avoid problems with the authorities (the Forrest case shows how important this is). If that information was placed on the Rife Forum for example, the information would still reach the target audience, yet avoid a lot of the problems. A number of articles on the Rife Forum have been specifically written for those trying to learn about the technology. I would like to encourage those, more knowledgeable on the subject, to write more articles explaining the fundamentals of Rife technology to make the learning curve more easy to handle. Those who would prefer not to have such articles published under their own name, can send them to me and I will release them (if I agree with what is written of course :-) What I would like to see is for researchers and manufacturers to use the Rife Forum to post their research for the common good. Due to the structured sections, information posted there can be much more easily found and referenced. It is also much easier to include data in the form of attachments to the individual posts (up to 5MB each). Up until now, most researchers have been posting on a few selected Yahoogroups which have very poor unstructured archives. Searching for info on a Yahoogroup is a slow process interrupted by advertising every few messages. One of the most common reasons people have given to post on a Yahoogroup is that they can simply read all the new messages in their inbox and reply via Email. Those who wish to receive all new Rife Forum messages via Email just need to join the Rifeforum Yahoogroup. To reply, you just click on the link in the Email to be taken straight to the message you want to reply to on the Rife Forum. Posting on the Rife Forum is similar to writing a text in Word and it is easy to add formating, images, attachments, etc. in a way not possible on a Yahoogroup. I therefore would like to encourage those who normally post here (and in other similar Yahoogroups) to consider moving future topics to the Rife Forum now it is fully operative. The archives of this Rife group will be transferred to the Rife Forum once time and resources allow. Due to the structured nature of the forum, the range of topics posted can be much wider including off topic subjects not normally disussed here. http://www.rifeforum.com ---------- Finally, I would like to comment on a recent message from " Neuromancer " where he pretty much attacked the people at True Rife, Jeff Sutherland and even the GB-4000 device, which otherwise has a good reputation. http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Rife/message/16953 Nothing against constructive criticism, but to pretty much call someone publicly a thief and a liar as well as making poor equipment is going too far unless you have some very hard evidence. This group and the forum are here to constructively inform and exchange knowledge for the greater good, not to defame anyone. I know a number of researchers who have stopped posting their research here after similar such attacks - surely such behaviour is only damaging to what we are all doing. If Bruce has any problems with the people at Truerife using his research (if that is the case), it is up to Bruce to talk to them directly about it. I have no problems acting as a go-between to solve such issues. Regards Moderator Re: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key Hi Terry, Sorry to hear about your wife. The most important messages, that are totally balanced come from Dr Bare, Dr Loyd, Bruce Stenulson, Dave Felt, Bil Green and Alvin Rose, there are a lot of others too, but these are the regular posters, and police this therapy a little. These heroes aren't terrible concerned about who's got what machine, they just get down to the business of helping people make it work as best as it can so people get value from their frequency therapy device. Most of the other stuff is just vendors touting their wares and trying to get an edge over other vendors. Gosh, the $26 zapper produces results, so any advancement on this simple device is very good, as with most of the Frequency Therapy devices on offer. The only common ground I have seen is that everyone tends to agree it is important that the machine be able to accept new frequencies, and that it can do sweeps. I think there is a wellness machine circulating that all vendors warn people about, as it can't do sweeps and it can't accept new frequencies, other than those frequencies programmed into it. Regards, Ken Uzzell http://heal-me.com.au Frex - CHIamp RE: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key I have a TrueRife machine and have no complaints, did it cure my wife's cancer no but it did normalize her blood and control her pain, I have no regrets about buying this system, my wife made steady improvements with this machine, even her Home Health nurse was amazed after being skeptical, since we had no access to doctors my wife was bed ridden and they don't make house calls, all I have to go on were monthly blood tests, her last visit to the hospital the ER doctor remarked that her blood work was great but looked like some type of cancer treatment was being administered, I just smiled, I think her cancer mutated after all the chemo and radiation, I have no proof of that, after this happened I could do nothing but make her comfortable, I wish there was more cooperation out here and less fighting, some of the arguments remind of Ford Chevy discussions, it seems like personal preference. I am just a layman so a lot of discussions out here are over my head or just make issues more confusing when it comes to buying or using different equipment, if someone is selling fraudulent equipment I want to know about it, but the rest seems like quibbling or infighting, this is not meant as an insult or opinion about anyone person or equipment, just as constructive input. Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 Hello Terry,I think is working towards what you mention below ,with his new forum. Regards Guy Terry McClelland wrote: >Thanks for your kind response, I always look forward to your e-mails, what I >would like to see as a lay person is a consensus on what to look for when >shopping for a " Rife " machine, what electronic capabilities should it >contain, how much should each different tier of equipment cost and what >should each tier contain equipment wise. What to watch out for in the don't >buy this category, in my case you blunder into this at a bad time in your >life and do not have ample time to research this as you might when buying an >expensive car, you want to buy and start using right away, as in my case you >have little or no time left. Also you are not financially able to make >additional purchases so the machine must be " The " machine no trade ups or >additional machine purchases are affordable. It would be great to see this >forum build a web site to train consumers interested in these machines, it >shouldn't or doesn't need to mention brands by name, it could list price >ranges and what is available (equipment types) in these price ranges. It >doesn't need to make claims, but would also like to see a section on >personal use stories of people you can talk to not " I cured myself using >XYZ " signed Becky C in Seattle WA. People you can e-mail who are willing to >answer you back about your concerns, I personally purchased my machine after >calling some users and talking to them on the phone. Information sections >could be set up for different intelligence levels some of us want to know >everything about how a TV works, others just how to use the remote. >Sorry to Ramble >Terry > > Re: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity >may be the key > >Hi Terry, > >Sorry to hear about your wife. > >The most important messages, that are totally balanced come from Dr >Bare, Dr Loyd, Bruce Stenulson, Dave Felt, Bil Green and Alvin Rose, >there are a lot of others too, but these are the regular posters, and police >this therapy a little. > >These heroes aren't terrible concerned about who's got what machine, they >just get down to the business of helping people make it work as best as it >can so people get value from their frequency therapy device. > >Most of the other stuff is just vendors touting their wares and trying to >get an edge over other vendors. > >Gosh, the $26 zapper produces results, so any advancement on this simple >device is very good, as with most of the Frequency Therapy devices on offer. > >The only common ground I have seen is that everyone tends to agree it is >important that the machine be able to accept new frequencies, and that it >can do sweeps. > >I think there is a wellness machine circulating that all vendors warn people >about, as it can't do sweeps and it can't accept new frequencies, other than >those frequencies programmed into it. > >Regards, >Ken Uzzell >http://heal-me.com.au >Frex - CHIamp > RE: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not >Quantity may be the key > > > I have a TrueRife machine and have no complaints, did it cure my wife's > cancer no but it did normalize her blood and control her pain, I have no > regrets about buying this system, my wife made steady improvements with >this > machine, even her Home Health nurse was amazed after being skeptical, >since > we had no access to doctors my wife was bed ridden and they don't make >house > calls, all I have to go on were monthly blood tests, her last visit to the > hospital the ER doctor remarked that her blood work was great but looked > like some type of cancer treatment was being administered, I just smiled, >I > think her cancer mutated after all the chemo and radiation, I have no >proof > of that, after this happened I could do nothing but make her comfortable, >I > wish there was more cooperation out here and less fighting, some of the > arguments remind of Ford Chevy discussions, it seems like personal > preference. I am just a layman so a lot of discussions out here are over >my > head or just make issues more confusing when it comes to buying or using > different equipment, if someone is selling fraudulent equipment I want to > know about it, but the rest seems like quibbling or infighting, this is >not > meant as an insult or opinion about anyone person or equipment, just as > constructive input. > Terry > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 Another problem I have and nothing against Neuromancer, is I don't know these people making opinions, they could be PhDs from Harvard or high school drop outs who like to rattle peoples cages, this makes it very uncomfortable for the rest of us wondering if we are making the right decisions with treatments or equipment purchases. Terry Re: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key Hi Terry, Sorry to hear about your wife. The most important messages, that are totally balanced come from Dr Bare, Dr Loyd, Bruce Stenulson, Dave Felt, Bil Green and Alvin Rose, there are a lot of others too, but these are the regular posters, and police this therapy a little. These heroes aren't terrible concerned about who's got what machine, they just get down to the business of helping people make it work as best as it can so people get value from their frequency therapy device. Most of the other stuff is just vendors touting their wares and trying to get an edge over other vendors. Gosh, the $26 zapper produces results, so any advancement on this simple device is very good, as with most of the Frequency Therapy devices on offer. The only common ground I have seen is that everyone tends to agree it is important that the machine be able to accept new frequencies, and that it can do sweeps. I think there is a wellness machine circulating that all vendors warn people about, as it can't do sweeps and it can't accept new frequencies, other than those frequencies programmed into it. Regards, Ken Uzzell http://heal-me.com.au Frex - CHIamp RE: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key I have a TrueRife machine and have no complaints, did it cure my wife's cancer no but it did normalize her blood and control her pain, I have no regrets about buying this system, my wife made steady improvements with this machine, even her Home Health nurse was amazed after being skeptical, since we had no access to doctors my wife was bed ridden and they don't make house calls, all I have to go on were monthly blood tests, her last visit to the hospital the ER doctor remarked that her blood work was great but looked like some type of cancer treatment was being administered, I just smiled, I think her cancer mutated after all the chemo and radiation, I have no proof of that, after this happened I could do nothing but make her comfortable, I wish there was more cooperation out here and less fighting, some of the arguments remind of Ford Chevy discussions, it seems like personal preference. I am just a layman so a lot of discussions out here are over my head or just make issues more confusing when it comes to buying or using different equipment, if someone is selling fraudulent equipment I want to know about it, but the rest seems like quibbling or infighting, this is not meant as an insult or opinion about anyone person or equipment, just as constructive input. Terry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Dear , Any response to you must first include an expression of thanks for your tireless efforts to bring knowledge to the Rife community. We are fortunate to have the various forums you have established and moderate as vehicles for sharing what we need and what we know. It always strikes me as ironic that Rife seemed to have developed an approach and instrumentation so simple in concept and so achievable in practice, yet we, with (or perhaps in spite of) our advanced concepts and equipment, are unable to reproduce his accomplishments with any great degree of certainty. The task you have set before yourself is daunting. There are hardware issues, software issues, environmental issues, legal issues, people issues. It will take a superhuman effort to sort through the various concepts being used by information seekers to be able to come to any specific conclusions about whether it is better, for example, to use a plasma tube unit than it is to use a pad device. Both work, but how does a person determine if one approach is superior to the other? Is a straight tube superior to a triple bulb? Is it better to use a tube filled with Krypton than one filled with Argon? How much power is needed to drive a unit? How concerned should I be that I don’t have an oscillator to calibrate my sound card? Similarly, it is hard to argue with the accumulated reports of those who get great results using simple low frequencies (787, 5000) via the sound card on their computer, as opposed to those obtaining results by use of sophisticated instruments such as the Fscan into which have been programmed complex frequencies of much higher range. Will it really be possible, do you think, to say one is substantially better than the other? Then, there is the matter of using simple harmonic frequencies versus scalar wave frequencies; frequencies taken verbatim from the CAFL tables versus frequencies specifically determined for the individual by means of pendulum. Your task is most difficult because, despite the obvious contradictions, all manner of diverse approaches achieve results. RESULTS This is one absolutely fundamental requirement we need to address, as without results, the rest is purely academic. Would you agree most people seeking resolution of their health condition have expectations often out of all proportion to reality? When someone has a stage three ovarian cancer, for example, expectations of rapid reversal of this disease are unrealistic. What of the mother who writes to the group of her child who has MS and asks, “Anyone suggest frequencies?” A well-intentioned reader replies, listing a series of numbers. What are the chances for success? Yet, there are successes here, too. That's why Rife continues to be used to this day- you CAN obtain results! Dealing with chronic or complicated conditions, satisfactory results often require a change of frequencies. To change frequencies when appropriate or necessary is not something the average person is always able to assess or accomplish. All these factors will, of course, reflect on the results obtained. What’s to be done? I would think it not possible to come to a broad consensus for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that there is no common ground for evaluation of any of the issues above. There is much material already available, however, and to start the thought process rolling, perhaps I might suggest something like the following: How about beginning with an updated FAQ that addresses, at a minimum, the benefits to be obtained with each various approach? It would be helpful, as an example, for people to know whether a particular approach is more beneficial in chronic situations (say, cancer) or in simpler, acute situations (say, sore throat). I would like to see an impartial discussion of the value of pad and tube devices, addressing the strengths and weaknesses of each, not for comparison, but for consideration of their individual use. Perhaps the FAQ should include descriptions and application of some of the more commonly used “systems” such as Frex and FreqGen programs. Again, I applaud your continuing efforts on behalf of the Rife community. Hope the suggestions here will help you extend the ability of others to learn of, and benefit from this important concept. Best regards, Nate Berger *********************************** Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:43:41 +0100 Subject: RE: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key Hi Terry, Providing balanced assessments of Rife devices, as you describe, is one of the aims of the Rife Forum I run at http://www.rifeforum.com Although I am still in the process of creating such assessments of the various devices, there are a few there already and more are coming soon. One of the principle problems in writing such assessments is the lack of response from the device manufacturers. This is somewhat hard to understand as the Rife Forum is probably the ideal platform for their devices to be discussed without them having to be worried about what they say on their own website. A lot of manufacturers, particularly those based in the USA, are being very careful about what they say about their devices capabilities, on there own websites, in order to avoid problems with the authorities (the Forrest case shows how important this is). If that information was placed on the Rife Forum for example, the information would still reach the target audience, yet avoid a lot of the problems. A number of articles on the Rife Forum have been specifically written for those trying to learn about the technology. I would like to encourage those, more knowledgeable on the subject, to write more articles explaining the fundamentals of Rife technology to make the learning curve more easy to handle. Those who would prefer not to have such articles published under their own name, can send them to me and I will release them (if I agree with what is written of course :-) What I would like to see is for researchers and manufacturers to use the Rife Forum to post their research for the common good. Due to the structured sections, information posted there can be much more easily found and referenced. It is also much easier to include data in the form of attachments to the individual posts (up to 5MB each). Up until now, most researchers have been posting on a few selected Yahoogroups which have very poor unstructured archives. Searching for info on a Yahoogroup is a slow process interrupted by advertising every few messages. One of the most common reasons people have given to post on a Yahoogroup is that they can simply read all the new messages in their inbox and reply via Email. Those who wish to receive all new Rife Forum messages via Email just need to join the Rifeforum Yahoogroup. To reply, you just click on the link in the Email to be taken straight to the message you want to reply to on the Rife Forum. Posting on the Rife Forum is similar to writing a text in Word and it is easy to add formating, images, attachments, etc. in a way not possible on a Yahoogroup. I therefore would like to encourage those who normally post here (and in other similar Yahoogroups) to consider moving future topics to the Rife Forum now it is fully operative. The archives of this Rife group will be transferred to the Rife Forum once time and resources allow. Due to the structured nature of the forum, the range of topics posted can be much wider including off topic subjects not normally disussed here. http://www.rifeforum.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 All I can say is that the advice from people on this and Dr. 's forums has brought me to where I am today. I have had people call me at home to discuss their experiences, which has helped me eradicate terminal cancer. PhDs or high school drop outs, these people have caused me to be alive when the " experts " at two separate, leading cancer centers told me I'd be dead. The one thing I must point out is that in my experience, after chasing the monster for better than two years, cancer is as individual as its victims, so I sincerely doubt that a database of systems can effectively be assembled that will describe how to eradicate, say, carcinoma where this is 100% functional for everyone. Rife works and I no longer have any doubts about that, but I needed to add to my cache of weapons vitamins and supplements that would help in the fight. And being told what parts of me needed to be dealt with to strengthen my body meant that I'd know what ELSE to use Rife on. Where in my case my hypothalamus was shorted out, someone else may have thyroid issues with everything else being the same.. My large intestine was no longer processing food, while someone else might make do very nicely with only digestive pills. I have heard from many who praise their GB4000 and from others who swear by plasma devices. I'd suggest instead for us to create a list of practitioners who have the reputation of actually helping us plan out an effective war against our diseases: having someone show us what parts of us require work besides the cancer itself and the order in which this work has to be performed is invaluable. As far as I'm concerned being able to share the names of good doctors (and bad quacks!) can be the difference between going back to work and getting buried. Luigi RE: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not > Quantity may be the key > > > I have a TrueRife machine and have no complaints, did it cure my wife's > cancer no but it did normalize her blood and control her pain, I have no > regrets about buying this system, my wife made steady improvements with > this > machine, even her Home Health nurse was amazed after being skeptical, > since > we had no access to doctors my wife was bed ridden and they don't make > house > calls, all I have to go on were monthly blood tests, her last visit to > the > hospital the ER doctor remarked that her blood work was great but looked > like some type of cancer treatment was being administered, I just smiled, > I > think her cancer mutated after all the chemo and radiation, I have no > proof > of that, after this happened I could do nothing but make her comfortable, > I > wish there was more cooperation out here and less fighting, some of the > arguments remind of Ford Chevy discussions, it seems like personal > preference. I am just a layman so a lot of discussions out here are over > my > head or just make issues more confusing when it comes to buying or using > different equipment, if someone is selling fraudulent equipment I want to > know about it, but the rest seems like quibbling or infighting, this is > not > meant as an insult or opinion about anyone person or equipment, just as > constructive input. > Terry > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 I agree with you 100% about cancer experts, the first thing they told my wife is you can't beat this, what a stupid thing to say, doctors have been sued so much that they instantly place a disclaimer in their treatment info to tell you the outcome may or may not be what the outcome is, such as a vasectomy surgery, telling people this surgery may or not result in sterilization, why am I having this surgery if it doesn't result in sterilization? I have run into people on other forums who are excellent and will helps at all costs, others who just like to stir up trouble and cause flame wars, my problem is slowly figuring out who is who, the practioner's list would be great but I know from experience that my Naturopath who helped us was scared all the time about his giving advice or help as you never know when one will be arrested in order to harass them. A list should be out there for all doctors about how good or bad they are, my wife took to her oncologist because she was personable and a toucher hugger, what a mistake that was, I think she was a company man from way back, what people need to look out for is these new stock market run cancer centers, they will only offer you the treatment options offered by their company this is what happened to us, and by the time you figure this out you are in a deep hole with little light shining in, please if you are in this cancer situation be skeptical and research everything, our doctor lied to us or was incompetent through my wife's treatment by the time we figured this out my wife was doomed, I have a good case to sue on but what would it accomplish, other than hopefully bring this type of thing to light, people are already figuring this out as a recent survey I saw stated that 27% of those surveyed believe their doctor has a cure for cancer but is after the mighty dollar, whether this is true or not I don't know but feel there is more money all around letting people die than by curing them. Sorry to ramble. Terry Re: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not Quantity may be the key All I can say is that the advice from people on this and Dr. 's forums has brought me to where I am today. I have had people call me at home to discuss their experiences, which has helped me eradicate terminal cancer. PhDs or high school drop outs, these people have caused me to be alive when the " experts " at two separate, leading cancer centers told me I'd be dead. The one thing I must point out is that in my experience, after chasing the monster for better than two years, cancer is as individual as its victims, so I sincerely doubt that a database of systems can effectively be assembled that will describe how to eradicate, say, carcinoma where this is 100% functional for everyone. Rife works and I no longer have any doubts about that, but I needed to add to my cache of weapons vitamins and supplements that would help in the fight. And being told what parts of me needed to be dealt with to strengthen my body meant that I'd know what ELSE to use Rife on. Where in my case my hypothalamus was shorted out, someone else may have thyroid issues with everything else being the same.. My large intestine was no longer processing food, while someone else might make do very nicely with only digestive pills. I have heard from many who praise their GB4000 and from others who swear by plasma devices. I'd suggest instead for us to create a list of practitioners who have the reputation of actually helping us plan out an effective war against our diseases: having someone show us what parts of us require work besides the cancer itself and the order in which this work has to be performed is invaluable. As far as I'm concerned being able to share the names of good doctors (and bad quacks!) can be the difference between going back to work and getting buried. Luigi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 How the heck does one know if a ³hit², which I assume makes you feel a herx [read Œunpleasant¹] is truly killing a parasite or should be avoided because it is bad for you? I seriously feel ill instantly when I hear heavy metal music for even seconds. Does this mean I should listen to it for my health? I am not being a smartass, I would really like to hear responses. Where did this prominent idea of following ³hits² arise? lee > True, you could use a sweep program - that would be the way to go. I > think it would have to be more refined than using increments however. > You need some sort of oscillator like what is used in 's machine. > I ran over a small range of frequencies several times before getting > a " hit " (the same one I thought). I guess getting the right frequency > can be finnicky - especially as the temperature of the machine messes > with your input device.. > > * > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 Why are you so sure sure about turning off the RF on a GB4000? Please be specific; while I appreciate you spirit of debate and constructive conflict, in a real debate you would get clobbered for making such sweeping statements. I have a GB4000 and if you have some compelling evidence as to why I should turn the RF off, I would like to hear it and hear others comment on it. Did not rife himself use an RF carrier? Doesn¹t RF penetrate tissues better? lee > Yes, Bruce's stimulating and normalizing frequencies are wonderful. > I have a few written testimonies on their effectiveness. The sad > part about those wonderful numbers is that they have been taken from > Bruce's site and re-distributed by TrueRife without permission, nor > had any credit been given. The same holds true for work by Jeff > Sutherland. > I think one pic that is better than the six plasma tubes (driven by > three EM+ machines) is the pic showing NINE tubes all lit by one > single EM+ device! I haven't seen another instrument out there with > SO much power...because none exist. :-) > Since this is a forum to discuss, debate, and exchange ideas - I > hope this is taken as a spirited debate and not otherwise. That > being said, I have not seen pages of reports about the TrueRife > system. I have not been able to speak with numerous people who have > used it and had conditions resolve. All I can really say about the > hardware itself is that it is nothing more than a Pat Robin freq. > generator and a trumped-up version of Holman's " poor man's Rife " . > Sloppy science masked by a lot of smoke and mirrors. And then the > Effectrolysis system...stainless steel plates in the water? Sorry, > but you can't pay me enough to do that - not for fear of > electrocution but the Nickel that is going to be absorbed into your > system. > As for the GB-4000...fine and dandy if you turn off the RF carrier. > Totally unnecessary. I'm sure Luigi can attest to that! :-) > > * > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 There was an article about one year ago on Yahoo news, where the NY Times asked several hundred cancer patients what they were doing about their condition. 40% admitted to using vitamins and supplements in addition to allopathic care. How many of them did not admit to using technology like Rife? How many of the others did not admit anything for fear of trouble? To this day my two sisters in law look at me as if I had two heads because I am alive when doctors had said I'd be dead. One of them gets the whole family vaccinated for the flu every year, then most of them get the flu every year anyway. I'd think that by now she'd have gotten the message... Luigi Re: Re: machine and how it works...? : Quality, not > Quantity > may be the key > > All I can say is that the advice from people on this and Dr. 's > forums > has brought me to where I am today. > I have had people call me at home to discuss their experiences, which has > helped me eradicate terminal cancer. > PhDs or high school drop outs, these people have caused me to be alive > when > the " experts " at two separate, leading cancer centers told me I'd be dead. > The one thing I must point out is that in my experience, after chasing the > monster for better than two years, cancer is as individual as its victims, > so I sincerely doubt that a database of systems can effectively be > assembled > that will describe how to eradicate, say, carcinoma where this is 100% > functional for everyone. > Rife works and I no longer have any doubts about that, but I needed to add > to my cache of weapons vitamins and supplements that would help in the > fight. > And being told what parts of me needed to be dealt with to strengthen my > body meant that I'd know what ELSE to use Rife on. > Where in my case my hypothalamus was shorted out, someone else may have > thyroid issues with everything else being the same.. > My large intestine was no longer processing food, while someone else might > make do very nicely with only digestive pills. > I have heard from many who praise their GB4000 and from others who swear > by > plasma devices. > I'd suggest instead for us to create a list of practitioners who have the > reputation of actually helping us plan out an effective war against our > diseases: having someone show us what parts of us require work besides the > cancer itself and the order in which this work has to be performed is > invaluable. > As far as I'm concerned being able to share the names of good doctors (and > bad quacks!) can be the difference between going back to work and getting > buried. > Luigi > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 Usually the feeling of a " hit " has most commonly been associated with one of the following: goose bumps, watering eyes, slight muscle spasm/twitches, sinus clearing - runny nose, prickles in scalp, churning stomach, feet and hands get twitchy - like a nervousness, breathing rate change. (either way), quickening of the pulse, biofeedback temperature drops, a group of muscles going soft or strong, nerve pathways (deep in tissue usually) tingle, noise in ears alters (can go loud or soft), low level pain in joints increase then falls away quickly, a random tingle in the body (may be the site of pathogen or tumor), a feeling of warmth in the tissue or sweating. You usually won't feel a Herx off of getting a hit unless perhaps you ran that freq for a long time. With the people I work with, I run scans to search for hits, staying only 20-30 seconds on each frequency. Plus, in a given day I'll only run a range of 100Hz as well, scanning at a simple .5Hz increment. What normally happens is that you'll end up with a list of hits and if you look them up on a cross-reference CAFL they will usually be centered around something which you can then go after. I've never seen anyone feel seriously ill on a hit personally, but have read of it. Not sure exactly where or when the idea came about, either. Hope this is of some help. > > > True, you could use a sweep program - that would be the way to go. I > > think it would have to be more refined than using increments however. > > You need some sort of oscillator like what is used in 's machine. > > I ran over a small range of frequencies several times before getting > > a " hit " (the same one I thought). I guess getting the right frequency > > can be finnicky - especially as the temperature of the machine messes > > with your input device.. > > > > * > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.