Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

[Guest guest]

Hi Nat,

Rife audio frequencies certainly work for many disorders and diseases. But it's

like the Rife Expert Dave Felt says, we are probably producing more immune

boosting and positive physiological responses than actually killing bugs via

MOR.

Wade, renowned physicist, suggested we are knocking the protein layers off

virus, and for some reason, Mycoplasma frequencies really seem to make people

heal fast. Strep and Staph seem to resond well to Rife audio therapy.

But are we actually killing pathogen as Dr Rife did ? Who knows.

On my web site, under the FreX menu, I have made a list of all the areas of

biology that I am aware of that frequency therapy addresses. Rife is just a

small part when compare with today's science findings. What we are doing is

making it very hard for some pathogen to hide from the body's immune, and making

it easier for the body to get on top of a pathogen loading.

Just my thoughts.

Sincerely,

Ken Uzzell

http://heal-me.com.au

Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> Dear all,

>

> It is maddening to think that the brain power in this, and associated

> groups, cannot collectively solve the dilemma.

>

> Some very sincere and bright members of these groups have repeatedly

> posted experiences involving various and vastly different

> methodologies, yet we repeatedly challenge ourselves: Are our results

> real and true? Are we actually successfully treating disorders or

> diseases? Are we just fooling ourselves?

>

> Training in science leads us to demand reproducibility. Desperation

> leads us to accept results, whether these can be successfully repeated

> or not.

>

> If you have had success with any of the myriad approaches of applying

> frequencies, you accept the results as being real. If you have failed

> to achieve any success, then Rife is just so much hogwash and snake oil.

>

> The worst case scenario, I think, occurs when you have had both, and

> can explain neither.

>

> Nate Berger

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

To state the obvious, the complexities of Rife's original work are

not well understood. There has been no broad based systematic

analysis. Not even a simple process of elimination.

One example is the role of contact pads (which Rife ridiculed) vs.

plasma tubes. A Helium-filled quartz tube has very specific

properties. One is the emission of mitogenic radiation in the UV

spectrum, the information channel for intra-cellular communication.

This is supported by recent discoveries in biophotonics.

The holy grail of exploding viruses within the body is highly

questionable. A living being is far too complex structurally. Any

induced resonance probably just makes the invaders more targetable by

the immune system. Evidence suggests the effect occurs through

internal demodulation of beat frequencies. Here is a graphical

representation of the principles involved.

http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/Demos/superposition/superposition.html

The classic phanotron tubes are modified parallel plate reactors.

This can be represented by a series circuit of two capacitors

(sheaths) and an inductor (plasma region). Resonance occurs at a

frequency where the plasma behaves inductively and resonates together

with the two sheaths. Modulation causes periodic damping of the

fundamental frequency. In short, there is more to the radiation than

the applied signal. To suggest this can be replicated with contact

pads is untenable.

With regard to audio " Rife " devices, you can feed nearly any

frequency into the body and it will affect the status quo. It's like

being struck by lightning. If the status quo is disease, something is

bound to change, odds are for the better. It has much to do with

self-organization.

I would be surprised if there were ever comprehensive discussion

about hardware on this list. Machine sellers are unwilling to expose

their products to scruntiny, or admit they don't know why they work

in some cases and not in others. Self-builders are a trusting lot. If

anyone really knows the truth, they are not-inclined to talk. It's a

cultural aberation. Rife did not set a great example in this regard.

That's why decades later we are still guessing.

Can you imagine how much farther along the world would be if

inventions were freely shared? As an electronics engineer, I would be

happy to help clarify these issues with anyone. But I am not holding

my breath. There is no collective information souce and each newcomer

will keep asking the same questions.

Nielsen

[Guest guest]

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> Rife audio frequencies certainly work for many disorders and diseases. But

> it's like the Rife Expert Dave Felt says, we are probably producing more

> immune boosting and positive physiological responses than actually killing

> bugs via MOR.

>

while that may be true I have seen and felt MOR with a bare rife device.

medusa

[Guest guest]

Hi medusa,

Many of my friends have experienced great hits in their bodies too, but I

don't know how you can say it is MOR's. My machince only goes upto 20kHz,

and these pathogen are reported to be up much higher than this.

Well, it can only be one of few things, diseased tissue resonance from

harmonic sine waves, or actual MOR of pathogen from sine wave harmonics

unless your machine is opperating right up on the MOR levels.

The harmonics from the B/R would be awesome. Jim Bare has displayed a few

spectrum charts of them.

How would we know these hits are MOR's and not a physiological reponse to

some resonance event in the body?

Sincerely,

Ken Uzzell

http://heal-me.com.au

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

>

>> Rife audio frequencies certainly work for many disorders and diseases.

>> But

>> it's like the Rife Expert Dave Felt says, we are probably producing more

>> immune boosting and positive physiological responses than actually

>> killing

>> bugs via MOR.

>>

> while that may be true I have seen and felt MOR with a bare rife device.

>

>

> medusa

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I know because I observed the kill under microscope first and then applied

it to myself. BTW the frequencies for the kill were pretty close to

list..not in the upper freqs as you suggest.

medusa

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> Hi medusa,

>

> Many of my friends have experienced great hits in their bodies too, but I

> don't know how you can say it is MOR's. My machince only goes upto 20kHz,

> and these pathogen are reported to be up much higher than this.

>

> Well, it can only be one of few things, diseased tissue resonance from

> harmonic sine waves, or actual MOR of pathogen from sine wave harmonics

> unless your machine is opperating right up on the MOR levels.

>

> The harmonics from the B/R would be awesome. Jim Bare has displayed a few

> spectrum charts of them.

>

> How would we know these hits are MOR's and not a physiological reponse to

> some resonance event in the body?

>

> Sincerely,

>

> Ken Uzzell

> http://heal-me.com.au

>

[Guest guest]

,

I can't agree more with what you say. I too am a EE and as such, have a problem

with people that ask way to many questions and contribute nothing but raising my

blood pressure. Then there are those that just suck you dry for infomation and

now they are the 'experts' selling something.

Yes I have a website and have completed a free software to drive a coil device

using a PC at www.osptechnologies.com

I would love to have a chat group using Skype or some other software

program. We could get together once and awhile and share info. I have come up

with some very interesting devices and theories over the last 10 years. We

could limit group to say five or so and then record and archive for others to

listen to. Maybe even get people I have found that are related directly to

Hoyland, Marsh and Dr. Couch to join in.

Jeffers

dave@...

'rifers' Moderator

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> To state the obvious, the complexities of Rife's original work are

> not well understood. There has been no broad based systematic

> analysis. Not even a simple process of elimination.

>

> One example is the role of contact pads (which Rife ridiculed) vs.

> plasma tubes. A Helium-filled quartz tube has very specific

> properties. One is the emission of mitogenic radiation in the UV

> spectrum, the information channel for intra-cellular

> communication.

> This is supported by recent discoveries in biophotonics.

>

> The holy grail of exploding viruses within the body is highly

> questionable. A living being is far too complex structurally. Any

> induced resonance probably just makes the invaders more targetable

> by

> the immune system. Evidence suggests the effect occurs through

> internal demodulation of beat frequencies. Here is a graphical

> representation of the principles involved.

>

> http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/Demos/superposition/superposition.html

>

> The classic phanotron tubes are modified parallel plate reactors.

> This can be represented by a series circuit of two capacitors

> (sheaths) and an inductor (plasma region). Resonance occurs at a

> frequency where the plasma behaves inductively and resonates

> together

> with the two sheaths. Modulation causes periodic damping of the

> fundamental frequency. In short, there is more to the radiation

> than

> the applied signal. To suggest this can be replicated with contact

> pads is untenable.

>

> With regard to audio " Rife " devices, you can feed nearly any

> frequency into the body and it will affect the status quo. It's

> like

> being struck by lightning. If the status quo is disease, something

> is

> bound to change, odds are for the better. It has much to do with

> self-organization.

>

> I would be surprised if there were ever comprehensive discussion

> about hardware on this list. Machine sellers are unwilling to

> expose

> their products to scruntiny, or admit they don't know why they

> work

> in some cases and not in others. Self-builders are a trusting lot.

> If

> anyone really knows the truth, they are not-inclined to talk. It's

> a

> cultural aberation. Rife did not set a great example in this

> regard.

> That's why decades later we are still guessing.

>

> Can you imagine how much farther along the world would be if

> inventions were freely shared? As an electronics engineer, I would

> be

> happy to help clarify these issues with anyone. But I am not

> holding

> my breath. There is no collective information souce and each

> newcomer

> will keep asking the same questions.

>

> Nielsen

>

>

[Guest guest]

I saw a UFO once, but was never able to convince anyone.

Can you elaborate a bit more on the phenomenon you observed? For

example, what pathogen was identified, the microscope's

magnification, signal applied, proximity of the tube (or?), duration

of exposure, and how you determined a " kill " . Other's may be

interested in learning from your experience or even replicating it.

Nielsen

>I know because I observed the kill under microscope first and then applied

>it to myself. BTW the frequencies for the kill were pretty close to

>list..not in the upper freqs as you suggest.

>

>medusa

[Guest guest]

Thank you for your invitation. In coming months, I will be doing

experiments with the aim of combining what I believe are the

operative principles of this technology into a more efficient device.

More importantly, something that can be adequately explained in terms

of effect.

I intend to start with audio and work upward, if necessary. The

project will initially use a PC signal generator, vacuum tube output

stage, and a range of emitters ... some being of my original design.

The latter are based upon existing commercial components. The signal

will be modulated, with a few extra tricks thrown in.

If there is anything you would like to share along these lines, I

would certainly enjoy hearing from you. I have no problem doing it here.

Nielsen

> I would love to have a chat group using Skype or some other

>software program. We could get together once and awhile and share

>info. I have come up with some very interesting devices and theories

>over the last 10 years. We could limit group to say five or so and

>then record and archive for others to listen to. Maybe even get

>people I have found that are related directly to Hoyland, Marsh and

>Dr. Couch to join in.

> Jeffers

><mailto:dave%40cicbs.com>dave@...

>'rifers' Moderator

[Guest guest]

Interesting, it suggests that our audio frequencies could be actual lower

harmonics of the origional MOR's.

Do you think this is correct?

Wouldn't it be exciting to get little movies made of distroying these

harmful pathogen in test tubes.

Then would start to get really excited.

Great work. Congratulations!

Sincerely,

Ken Uzzell

http://heal-me.com.au

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

>I know because I observed the kill under microscope first and then applied

> it to myself. BTW the frequencies for the kill were pretty close to

> list..not in the upper freqs as you suggest.

>

>

> medusa

[Guest guest]

I used standard slides not drop mounts. No staining..used phase contrast and

darkfield ...mostly darkfield. I used a radiant bare rife device....plasma

transmission. I grew my cultures in broth mixture. Simply drop a sample or

two drops on your slide..cover slip...did not seal cover slip in all cases

but it had no effect of sealed or not sealed.....specimen lasts longer

though when sealed.

Eventually found first a freq that separated the strep strains to produce

cocci and diploids then polished them off with freq that blew them up and

devitalized some.

After I saw this I treated myself and felt the agitation from the first freq

during treatment. The pathogen was ecoli. Applied 834 for about 10 minutes

( or until you see majority of separations of cocci then leaned on with 802

for kill. The cocci would merely pop...disappear.I began to wonder if I was

seeing things as the sample was still quite small ( 40X) but I knew I was

seeing what I was seeing. I recorded the experiments and have been trying to

figure out how to transfer to cd and clean up ( if possible) the

interference waves visible on the screen ( waves )...evidently I didn't have

a well protected scope area from the rfs.

medusa

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

>I saw a UFO once, but was never able to convince anyone.

>

> Can you elaborate a bit more on the phenomenon you observed? For

> example, what pathogen was identified, the microscope's

> magnification, signal applied, proximity of the tube (or?), duration

> of exposure, and how you determined a " kill " . Other's may be

> interested in learning from your experience or even replicating it.

>

> Nielsen

>

[Guest guest]

Evidently..or there can be more than one mor with perhaps others more

effective and others taking longer? I do have movies of these experiments

but can't get it on a cd. The clips are currently on VHS.

Lots of interference but I still am going to try and isolate the critical

points to post on group site someday. Let me also state for the record that

these frequencies were tested initially and tested by Jim Bare and then I

repeated the test and then treated myself. Since I am extremely sensitive

to rife I could not have done this without the generous help of Jim...god

bless those who don't chase the green!

medusa

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> Interesting, it suggests that our audio frequencies could be actual lower

> harmonics of the origional MOR's.

>

> Do you think this is correct?

>

> Wouldn't it be exciting to get little movies made of distroying these

> harmful pathogen in test tubes.

>

> Then would start to get really excited.

>

> Great work. Congratulations!

>

> Sincerely,

> Ken Uzzell

> http://heal-me.com.au

[Guest guest]

Yes, that was interesting. Even more so, if we knew the exact

spectrum of frequencies from the tube. Or, better yet, which were

pivotal to the effect. Since the MHz carrier is constant, we can rule

that out in terms of dialing up specific responses. With the

squarewave harmonics and plasma dynamics remaining, that leaves alot

of ground to cover.

But, there is a way to demonstrate if ANY frequency is acting as a

lower harmonic. Simply keep doubling it, up to the frequency limit of

your pulse generator, and see if the observed effect becomes

progessively more pronounced.

That should answer the " lower harmonics " question once and for all.

If it works, everyone will be running for higher octaves. If not,

start looking at a combined mechanism.

Nielsen

>Interesting, it suggests that our audio frequencies could be actual lower

>harmonics of the origional MOR's.

[Guest guest]

and group,

You make the statement " Since the MHz carrier is constant " that is true with

most machines made today. BUT it has been noted and documented using old

machines that the carrier is really all over the place because the plasma tube

makes up part of the tank circuit. the LC componets of the tube changes for a

number of reasons. Just moving your hand closer to the tube will change the

carrier frequency. This being said I discovered that when I was doing frequency

response tests on a circuit Aubry Scoon came up with that it knocked the H* & ^

out of me. Aubry confirmed this effect also. The tests were done with the

modulation held constant during the test. I have a design where the carrier is

a spread spectrrem oscillator and this is modulated with your MOR. Have not

tested it yet as time and money are short.

Jeffers

www.osptechnologies.com

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> Yes, that was interesting. Even more so, if we knew the exact

> spectrum of frequencies from the tube. Or, better yet, which were

> pivotal to the effect. Since the MHz carrier is constant, we can

> rule

> that out in terms of dialing up specific responses. With the

> squarewave harmonics and plasma dynamics remaining, that leaves

> alot

> of ground to cover.

>

> But, there is a way to demonstrate if ANY frequency is acting as a

> lower harmonic. Simply keep doubling it, up to the frequency limit

> of

> your pulse generator, and see if the observed effect becomes

> progessively more pronounced.

>

> That should answer the " lower harmonics " question once and for

> all.

> If it works, everyone will be running for higher octaves. If not,

> start looking at a combined mechanism.

>

> Nielsen

>

>

> >Interesting, it suggests that our audio frequencies could be

> actual lower

> >harmonics of the origional MOR's.

>

>

[Guest guest]

,

If I may suggest could you build the circuit I have on my website using a car

coil. And then use the software I have written. It modulates the coil in a new

and very different way adding a beat frequency to the output. Please also add

resistance in the output of the coil. As a EE please check out the negitive

resistance region of the plasma tube some really neet things happen there.

Jeffers

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> Thank you for your invitation. In coming months, I will be doing

> experiments with the aim of combining what I believe are the

> operative principles of this technology into a more efficient

> device.

> More importantly, something that can be adequately explained in

> terms

> of effect.

>

> I intend to start with audio and work upward, if necessary. The

> project will initially use a PC signal generator, vacuum tube

> output

> stage, and a range of emitters ... some being of my original

> design.

> The latter are based upon existing commercial components. The

> signal

> will be modulated, with a few extra tricks thrown in.

>

> If there is anything you would like to share along these lines, I

> would certainly enjoy hearing from you. I have no problem doing it

> here.

> Nielsen

[Guest guest]

Yes, the body becomes part of the circuit. It relates to the

impedance matching network driving the tube. If you operate above

about 30Mhz, this diminishes. It should also be noted impedance

varies during the ionization cycle. In effect, it represents a kind

of AM in terms of absorption characteristics. The body is " talking "

to the plasma and vice versa. It could be broadly stated that the

non-linear properties of plasma mirror those of a living system.

Such things illustrate the technical complexities of working back

from the original tube devices. The negative resistance you mention,

is a traditional cause of " instabity " . Hence the indication for an

external series resistance. In early Rife schematics, there was an

adjustable rheostat for this purpose, suggesting either he 1) did not

consider it a desirable feature, or 2) adjusted its level of

influence for some purpose.

What form of SS are you plannning to use? Perhaps you are interested

in a series of specific frequencies, each with desirable properties.

Otherwise, it would be simpler to FM the carrier. Assuming some

frequencies thereof are more conducive, once again, you have a form

of modulated absorption. Of course, there is an advantage in applying

harmonics simultaneously. And so ...

I downloaded your OSPgen frequency generation program. For general

information, here is a screenshot of the output.

http://users.tpg.com.au/hburns/ospgen.jpg

The upper window is a waveform at 610Hz. The spectrum plot below that

shows fairly strong harmonics extending to 20KHz, the limit of the

soundcard. It looks like a discrete frequency mix with an ELF beat.

What is the purpose of the ELF, , and how is it to be adjusted?

Nielsen

>You make the statement " Since the MHz carrier is constant " that is

>true with most machines made today. BUT it has been noted and

>documented using old machines that the carrier is really all over

>the place because the plasma tube makes up part of the tank circuit.

>the LC componets of the tube changes for a number of reasons. Just

>moving your hand closer to the tube will change the carrier

>frequency. This being said I discovered that when I was doing

>frequency response tests on a circuit Aubry Scoon came up with that

>it knocked the H* & ^ out of me. Aubry confirmed this effect also. The

>tests were done with the modulation held constant during the test. I

>have a design where the carrier is a spread spectrrem oscillator and

>this is modulated with your MOR. Have not tested it yet as time and

>money are short.

> Jeffers

>www.osptechnologies.com

[Guest guest]

--- " Dr. S. Berger "

wrote:

> Dear all,

>

> It is maddening to think that the brain power in

> this, and associated

> groups, cannot collectively solve the dilemma.

>

> Some very sincere and bright members of these groups

> have repeatedly

> posted experiences involving various and vastly

> different

> methodologies, yet we repeatedly challenge

> ourselves: Are our results

> real and true? Are we actually successfully treating

> disorders or

> diseases? Are we just fooling ourselves?

>

> Training in science leads us to demand

> reproducibility. Desperation

> leads us to accept results, whether these can be

> successfully repeated

> or not.

>

> If you have had success with any of the myriad

> approaches of applying

> frequencies, you accept the results as being real.

> If you have failed

> to achieve any success, then Rife is just so much

> hogwash and snake oil.

>

> The worst case scenario, I think, occurs when you

> have had both, and

> can explain neither.

>

> Nate Berger

Hi Nate:

I don't think it's a question of brain power, but the

first thing to do is clearly define just what dilemma

we're trying to solve. All results are real and true,

whether positive or negative. The issue, and solution

to the dilemma is in the subject line: the " Rife

approach " . In the current situation, people are doing

what I call physiologic frequency therapy. Few if any

are following the " Rife approach " . The Rife approach

requires resources that few of us have. In

physiologic frequency therapy, you're going to have

much more variable results, including more failures,

because it's dependent on the individual patient and

their unique physiology. In the Rife approach, we're

looking for MORs that are independent from any

interactions with an individual's physiology. What

has happened in the current paradigm, is that we've

hybridized the two approaches. We're trying to apply

frequencies in an MOR fashion to a system that

requires individualized frequencies. This, in my

opinion, is why we have the dilemma that you find

maddening. What needs to happen is to separate the

two approaches. If the Rife approach is reestablished

and properly applied, it will produce spectacular

results. If reliable ways can be found to

individualize frequencies for physiologic frequency

therapy, then that side will also improve greatly.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

Could you give us more details regarding your specific

setup? What type of plasma tube, amplifier, tuner,

frequency generator, CB, etc. Also, I got a little

confused. You mentioned that you cultured strep, but

then said you treated yourself for E. Coli, then went

back to describing your observations under the

microscope. What frequency caused the strep to

separate? What frequency caused the strep to explode

or otherwise devitalize? Did the devitalizing

frequency not work on its own? What frequency did you

use for E. Coli? If your results can be clarified and

reproduced by others, that would be a major

breakthrough.

Regards,

--- medusa wrote:

> I used standard slides not drop mounts. No

> staining..used phase contrast and

> darkfield ...mostly darkfield. I used a radiant

> bare rife device....plasma

> transmission. I grew my cultures in broth mixture.

> Simply drop a sample or

> two drops on your slide..cover slip...did not seal

> cover slip in all cases

> but it had no effect of sealed or not

> sealed.....specimen lasts longer

> though when sealed.

> Eventually found first a freq that separated the

> strep strains to produce

> cocci and diploids then polished them off with freq

> that blew them up and

> devitalized some.

> After I saw this I treated myself and felt the

> agitation from the first freq

> during treatment. The pathogen was ecoli. Applied

> 834 for about 10 minutes

> ( or until you see majority of separations of cocci

> then leaned on with 802

> for kill. The cocci would merely pop...disappear.I

> began to wonder if I was

> seeing things as the sample was still quite small (

> 40X) but I knew I was

> seeing what I was seeing. I recorded the experiments

> and have been trying to

> figure out how to transfer to cd and clean up ( if

> possible) the

> interference waves visible on the screen ( waves

> )...evidently I didn't have

> a well protected scope area from the rfs.

>

> medusa

>

>

>

>

> Re: Is there anything to the Rife

> approach?

>

>

> >I saw a UFO once, but was never able to convince

> anyone.

> >

> > Can you elaborate a bit more on the phenomenon you

> observed? For

> > example, what pathogen was identified, the

> microscope's

> > magnification, signal applied, proximity of the

> tube (or?), duration

> > of exposure, and how you determined a " kill " .

> Other's may be

> > interested in learning from your experience or

> even replicating it.

> >

> > Nielsen

> >

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Medusa,

I note with interest that your cultures were grown in broth media.

Have you also tried growing cultures on an agar or other semi-solid

media, and have you noticed any difference in results between the two

culture methods after applying frequencies? From past postings on

this and other Rife discussion lists it appears that there may be

some significant difference in results when applying frequencies to

cultures vs in vivo. I conjecture that this difference may relate to

the aqueous " media " found in vivo, or in broth, vs the semi-aerial

exposure of agar cultures. Perhaps complete enclosure of the target

organisms in an aqueous media is somehow necessary for the applied

frequencies to become effective MORs. Perhaps water itself is a

transducer which generates the final applied form of the MORs. (If

true then there may be a correlation with homeopathy.) Your thoughts?

Warren

I used standard slides not drop mounts. No staining..used phase

contrast and

darkfield ...mostly darkfield. I used a radiant bare rife

device....plasma

transmission. I grew my cultures in broth mixture. Simply drop a

sample or

two drops on your slide..cover slip...did not seal cover slip in all

cases

but it had no effect of sealed or not sealed.....specimen lasts longer

though when sealed.

Eventually found first a freq that separated the strep strains to

produce

cocci and diploids then polished them off with freq that blew them up

and

devitalized some.

After I saw this I treated myself and felt the agitation from the

first freq

during treatment. The pathogen was ecoli. Applied 834 for about 10

minutes

( or until you see majority of separations of cocci then leaned on

with 802

for kill. The cocci would merely pop...disappear.I began to wonder

if I was

seeing things as the sample was still quite small ( 40X) but I knew I

was

seeing what I was seeing. I recorded the experiments and have been

trying to

figure out how to transfer to cd and clean up ( if possible) the

interference waves visible on the screen ( waves )...evidently I

didn't have

a well protected scope area from the rfs.

medusa

[Guest guest]

Nate, you have certainly produced some results with your thought

provoked statement. I, like others, am getting good results using a

range of equipment as I believe there are horses for courses. While

Rife like devices (using the plasma tube) may be the answer for the

control of pathogens and the like I have problems with repeatability.

As points out the physiology may come in to it. It does not seem

to matter whether a carrier wave is used or not as well built EMEM

units are very effective. With respect to muscular, headaches and the

like I have found that the plasma in some cases can worsen the

situation possibly due to sensitivity. It is here that pad devices

work extremely well and are very effective as they can be locally pin

pointed.

With respect to wound healing including bacterially infected wounds

and pain management, there is no doubt that extremely low current at

very low frequencies is very effective. Becker did an enormous

amount of work in this area as have others. Though as you are aware

from my previous experiments one has to be very careful. I have yet to

show that duty cycle ie. above 50% is more effective though I take the

work of others and respect that this may be so. There is no doubt

however, that a change of polarity is essential as there is more than

a possible chance that a situation will worsen if this methodology is

not used.

While I respect the work of Rife we should not ignore the work of

Beck as again here is another example of a differing protocol

that appears to work. Use of silver colloid, blood electrification and

the magnet pulsar is simple in application but effective as the herx

effects will verify.

As a simple electronics technician my design capabilities are limited

to expanding on the knowledge that is mostly already known. I do

believe however, that before we can truly replicate Rife's work and

possibly beat cancer and the like (and other major killers such as

aids) someone will have to repeat the methodology used by Rife and

spend hours using a suitable microscope.

I apologize to the forum for my ramblings and to some degree getting

off the subject but I agree with Ken there are times when we need to

look at a broader approach and possibly think outside the box if a

solution to modern health problems is to be found.

Mike Fellows

>

> Dear all,

>

> It is maddening to think that the brain power in this, and associated

> groups, cannot collectively solve the dilemma.

>

> Some very sincere and bright members of these groups have repeatedly

> posted experiences involving various and vastly different

> methodologies, yet we repeatedly challenge ourselves: Are our results

> real and true? Are we actually successfully treating disorders or

> diseases? Are we just fooling ourselves?

>

> Training in science leads us to demand reproducibility. Desperation

> leads us to accept results, whether these can be successfully repeated

> or not.

>

> If you have had success with any of the myriad approaches of applying

> frequencies, you accept the results as being real. If you have failed

> to achieve any success, then Rife is just so much hogwash and snake oil.

>

> The worst case scenario, I think, occurs when you have had both, and

> can explain neither.

>

> Nate Berger

>

[Guest guest]

I used broth cultures in jars because it was easier and economical for me.

I do realize agar dishes are commonly available but that was outside of my

monetary reach and I don't believe in using plastic dishes for environments

sake. If someone wants to donate some glass petri dishes I'll test again and

let you know. Let me also add that I have also received concrete hits on a

fungus. I have yet to pinpoint which freq was the most effective but I'm

keeping my eye on that as well. Extra lab equipment donations are always

appreciated from those who have extra.

I just bought a DVD/R so I hope to be recording my findings in the future.

medusa

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> Hi Medusa,

> I note with interest that your cultures were grown in broth media.

> Have you also tried growing cultures on an agar or other semi-solid

> media, and have you noticed any difference in results between the two

> culture methods after applying frequencies? From past postings on

> this and other Rife discussion lists it appears that there may be

> some significant difference in results when applying frequencies to

> cultures vs in vivo. I conjecture that this difference may relate to

> the aqueous " media " found in vivo, or in broth, vs the semi-aerial

> exposure of agar cultures. Perhaps complete enclosure of the target

> organisms in an aqueous media is somehow necessary for the applied

> frequencies to become effective MORs. Perhaps water itself is a

> transducer which generates the final applied form of the MORs. (If

> true then there may be a correlation with homeopathy.) Your thoughts?

> Warren

>

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

Yours are among some of the most probing postings in this group. You

provide an intriguing explanation: That we have evolved along separate

pathways, on the one hand using MOR frequencies, and on the other

hand, utilizing physiologically individualized frequencies. It did not

occur to me, until you mentioned it, that we have further complicated

matters by allowing ourselves to combine or " hybridize " these into one

entity we now call " Rife Approach " .

If you will, I ask you, or anyone who has not done so, to please go to

the " Photos " section for this group and check out the first album. Its

photos present a case of basal cell carcinoma I treated and documented

several years ago.

This case was confirmed by biopsy. The photos shown have not been

re-retouched, and the only treatment rendered was use of frequencies,

individually determined, delivered to the patient via a R/B plasma

unit over a period of several months.

Did frequency therapy (Rife approach) accomplish anything in this

case? I think you would agree: YES.

However, the patient also had another basal cell cancer in another

part of his body. That lesion, receiving the same frequencies at the

same time, failed to respond at all.

Did frequency therapy (Rife approach) accomplish anything in this

case? NO.

Thus the dilemma.

Here is both success and failure, with no broadly accepted explanation

of either one- up to now. Was the first cancer treated with MOR

frequencies? Was the second cancer treated with physiologic

frequencies? The reverse? Combination? Neither? What?

Thanks to you, I now understand and can explain the polar-opposite

outcomes. Even better, I can accept these contradictory results.

Best of all, by delineating and verbalizing these parameters, you have

provided me (and all others using " rife approach " ) an understanding

which should produce a higher degree of " success " for those we treat.

My utmost goal is to find some kind of approach an ordinary person can

use for himself/herself which will permit self-administered treatment

leading to a restoration and preservation of health.

Further, this approach should be relatively easy to employ, produce

relatively consistent results, should not require heavy professional

intervention, should not require extensive use of drugs, and should be

relatively inexpensive to set up.

In the main, I think that Rife-type concepts (please interpret in the

broadest sense of the words), coupled with today's equipment (whatever

this may be, i.e., plasma, pad, etc.), offer such possibilities. But

our only consistent results seem to involve a degree of

unpredictability most of us cannot accept.

Perhaps your thoughts will permit us all to see that at journey's end,

there is no one machine that will produce consistent results. No one

set of frequencies (be they MOR or physiologic), no one overriding

principle such as the need to first strengthen the immune system or

eliminate toxins from our environment, that will lead to consistent,

reproducible, predictable results.

And if that is so, I, at least will now be O.K. with it.

After all, isn't that what our current medical system does? At least

" Rife " doesn't bankrupt us, and it does hold out some promise of hope

when our physician looks at us and with sadness in his/her voice,

tells us, Nothing more can be done. "

Thanks again for your efforts. Enjoy thinking with you.

Nate

>

>

>

> I don't think it's a question of brain power, but the

> first thing to do is clearly define just what dilemma

> we're trying to solve. All results are real and true,

> whether positive or negative. The issue, and solution

> to the dilemma is in the subject line: the " Rife

> approach " . In the current situation, people are doing

> what I call physiologic frequency therapy. Few if any

> are following the " Rife approach " . The Rife approach

> requires resources that few of us have. In

> physiologic frequency therapy, you're going to have

> much more variable results, including more failures,

> because it's dependent on the individual patient and

> their unique physiology. In the Rife approach, we're

> looking for MORs that are independent from any

> interactions with an individual's physiology. What

> has happened in the current paradigm, is that we've

> hybridized the two approaches. We're trying to apply

> frequencies in an MOR fashion to a system that

> requires individualized frequencies. This, in my

> opinion, is why we have the dilemma that you find

> maddening. What needs to happen is to separate the

> two approaches. If the Rife approach is reestablished

> and properly applied, it will produce spectacular

> results. If reliable ways can be found to

> individualize frequencies for physiologic frequency

> therapy, then that side will also improve greatly.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Beck also dabbled in actual Rife effects, as indicated by the circuit

I recently put online at:

http://biospectrum.50webs.com

It is the beginning of a semi-technical resource for experimenters,

which I hope to add to from time to time, or upon request. Comments welcome.

In response to another post about water, here is some information

which may be relevant:

http://www.digibio.com/cgi-bin/node.pl?nd=n5

Nieslen

>While I respect the work of Rife we should not ignore the work of

> Beck as again here is another example of a differing protocol

>that appears to work. Use of silver colloid, blood electrification and

>the magnet pulsar is simple in application but effective as the herx

>effects will verify.

[Guest guest]

,

I will try and answer the points that you bring up.

First I am talking about two different machines. The first one is the one I

wrote OSPgen for, that is the car coil. The reason I put a beat frequency in

the software is for many reasons.

1. I theroized years ago that the old machine may have worked better because of

the filter caps in the power supply were not as good as ones later develped.

This may explain why as machines were made " better " they didn't work as well.

This " beating " or motorboating effect is what I am trying to put back in.

2. By varying the " power " or time ON of the coil I am trying to modulate the

plasma in the negitive resistance region of the tube. This can be furthre

inhanced by adding resistance to the secondary of the coil.

3. By only driving the coil up to saturation and not past it allows for much

better cooling and performance. The transistor or mosfet will run much cooler

and most of the time I don't even use a heatsink on the bench.

To use OSPgen you can grab the bar and drag it close to the frequency that you

want. Then by clicking on the bar to the left or right of the handle you can

increase or decrease the frequency by one hertz. By clicking on the arrows you

can change by 0.1 Hertz. The same is true with the beat frequency by using the

smaller scroll bar. The range for the beat frequency is 1 to 20 Hz. Be careful

with the beat frequency as we all know what frequency our brains work on. May

have told me of very strange effects with this software.

The comments below apply to a NEW type of machine.

I am planning on using pseudorandom spread spectrum frequency modulation for the

carrier and then just gate it at 50% with the MOR frequency. With the circuit

that I allready have I will be using a full octive ie: 200kHz to 400kHz or

maybe move it up to say 300kHz to 600 kHz I think you can get the picture of

what I am going to do. If you think about it this would be a good way to avoid

interfering with radio transmissions by spreading it out.

Jeffers

www.osptechnologies.com

Re: Is there anything to the Rife approach?

> Yes, the body becomes part of the circuit. It relates to the

> impedance matching network driving the tube. If you operate above

> about 30Mhz, this diminishes. It should also be noted impedance

> varies during the ionization cycle. In effect, it represents a

> kind

> of AM in terms of absorption characteristics. The body is

> " talking "

> to the plasma and vice versa. It could be broadly stated that the

> non-linear properties of plasma mirror those of a living system.

>

> Such things illustrate the technical complexities of working back

> from the original tube devices. The negative resistance you

> mention,

> is a traditional cause of " instabity " . Hence the indication for an

> external series resistance. In early Rife schematics, there was an

> adjustable rheostat for this purpose, suggesting either he 1) did

> not

> consider it a desirable feature, or 2) adjusted its level of

> influence for some purpose.

>

> What form of SS are you plannning to use? Perhaps you are

> interested

> in a series of specific frequencies, each with desirable

> properties.

> Otherwise, it would be simpler to FM the carrier. Assuming some

> frequencies thereof are more conducive, once again, you have a

> form

> of modulated absorption. Of course, there is an advantage in

> applying

> harmonics simultaneously. And so ...

>

> I downloaded your OSPgen frequency generation program. For general

> information, here is a screenshot of the output.

>

> http://users.tpg.com.au/hburns/ospgen.jpg

>

> The upper window is a waveform at 610Hz. The spectrum plot below

> that

> shows fairly strong harmonics extending to 20KHz, the limit of the

> soundcard. It looks like a discrete frequency mix with an ELF

> beat.

> What is the purpose of the ELF, , and how is it to be adjusted?

>

> Nielsen

[Guest guest]

>Beck also dabbled in actual Rife effects, as indicated by the circuit

>I recently put online at:

>http://biospectrum.50webs.com

I assume this was some of Beck's earlier work prior to the evolving of

the blood electrification process? The thought of hooking up to the

mains supply is a little daunting particularly as there does not

appear be any isolation transformers in the circuit. Interesting

reading though.

Mike Fellows

[Guest guest]

Hi,

PLEASE share your fungus frequencies. Thank you.

>

> I used broth cultures in jars because it was easier and economical

for me.

> I do realize agar dishes are commonly available but that was outside

of my

> monetary reach and I don't believe in using plastic dishes for

environments

> sake. If someone wants to donate some glass petri dishes I'll test

again and

> let you know. Let me also add that I have also received concrete

hits on a

> fungus. I have yet to pinpoint which freq was the most effective

but I'm

> keeping my eye on that as well. Extra lab equipment donations are

always

> appreciated from those who have extra.

> I just bought a DVD/R so I hope to be recording my findings in the

future.

>

> medusa