coiling

[Guest guest]

>

> Coiling seems to make scientific sense........

people keep saying so, but I still have to see the first real scientific proof

(i.e. in a peer-reviewed article).

I'm not saying that is doesn't work, I'm just very sceptical how such a

technology can kill specific bugs inside the body from outside, while not

harming human cells or good bacteria. It all sounds very very unlikely to me,

and I have never seen a solid scientific explanation for it (have seen some very

general theories that say nothing really ...).

[Guest guest]

Dr. Phi;;ips just got a $40,000 Grant to study........He is a believer...but

can't broadcast........

[ ] coiling

>

> Coiling seems to make scientific sense........

people keep saying so, but I still have to see the first real scientific proof

(i.e. in a peer-reviewed article).

I'm not saying that is doesn't work, I'm just very sceptical how such a

technology can kill specific bugs inside the body from outside, while not

harming human cells or good bacteria. It all sounds very very unlikely to me,

and I have never seen a solid scientific explanation for it (have seen some very

general theories that say nothing really ...).

[Guest guest]

Read about Doug MacLean............He is pioneer & had made amazing recovery

with hundres of others...Plenty of science as he took no meds....

[ ] coiling

>

> Coiling seems to make scientific sense........

people keep saying so, but I still have to see the first real scientific proof

(i.e. in a peer-reviewed article).

I'm not saying that is doesn't work, I'm just very sceptical how such a

technology can kill specific bugs inside the body from outside, while not

harming human cells or good bacteria. It all sounds very very unlikely to me,

and I have never seen a solid scientific explanation for it (have seen some very

general theories that say nothing really ...).

[Guest guest]

>

> Read about Doug MacLean............He is pioneer & had made amazing recovery

with hundres of others...Plenty of science as he took no meds....

This is not science at all; I think that is one of the problems with all the

discussions about IDSA, ILADS etc on internet. Most people have no idea what

science is and the craziest ideas are thrown around as 'hard science', e.g.

because it was published in the Townsend Newsletter.

Many people claim on the forums that they were 'cured' with some strange therapy

while there was no proof at all that they had Lyme (Borrelia infection) in the

first place.

Science means fully documented, independently verified, peer-reviewed research

that others can duplicate. It means using a control group etc. Not some personal

experience that something 'works'. I'm sure many people will recover from 'Lyme'

on a daily dose of orange juice; it doesn't prove anything.

[Guest guest]

>

> Knotweed...You are a VERY cynical guy....not a good technique for healing!!

EVERYBODY in community knows about Doug MacLean & what he accomplished as THE

pioneer & he has been symptom free for 20 years!! That my dear sir is science!

I don't doubt he was 'cured'. But such individual experience is not science at

all.

As I said, for every crazy therapy there are people who have recovered (and most

of them problably didn't have Lyme to start with ...). Some of this therapies

probably will have value for others, but it is impossible to say which ones,

based on just some personal experience. And one can't try all therapies that are

suggested on lymenut ...

[Guest guest]

>

> As I understand it, the FDA pretty much has to approve medical studies before

they can be done in the US. Fat chance that will happen any time soon with

coiling or any of the other alternative therapies. If someone did stick out

their neck to do it scientifically, it would cost hundreds of thousands of

dollars to do. And you would have to find a population of people to test who

all had the same thing.  From whe I've read, there are no two people with lyme

who have exactly the same infections/coinfections/etc.  That all seems to make

it pretty impossible to get scientifically validated data.  Manufacturers of

machines can make no claims about how well they are working or even what they

are for without crossing a very fine line with the FDA, so it is a necessity

that all results are anecdotal.  I wish it could be some other way and we could

get valid scientific data, but don't see it happening any time soon.

good points, but this applies to almost every 'alternative' or new therapy for

Lyme and most similar (auto-immune like) diseases. Outside the US, research

restrictions are often less severe.

Some alternative therapies do have solid scientific backing, e.g. for most

Buhner herbs there is many years of literature about using these herbs for

similar diseases (e.g. ayurvedic medicine), and a possible biochemical mechanism

of action is available. Even though these herbs cannot be patented, you can find

over a thousand articles on PubMed about health effects or biochemical actions

of the basic Buhner herbs. All of that is missing with coiling IMHO.

This doesn't mean the Buhner protocol is 'proven', as other issues that you

mentioned remain (mostly statistical problems in evaluating different patients).

What surprises me about coiling is that it seems quite specific to the US. In

Europe we have 'bioresonance' which is performed by an alternative practitioner

and seems a bit related. And sometimes someone mentioned the Hulda zapper,

but that's about it.

[Guest guest]

>

> Understood.........

> Maybe something will happen as a result of grants with top LLMD's.

yes, I would like to see some investigations as well. I don't believe coiling

can selectively kill Borrelia, but maybe it does something that helps the body

to get stronger, improve immune reaction, help detox or something like that.

Another thing that could help is the recent surge in 'open source' scientific

publishing. Such articles are peer-reviewed, but no longer published in

controlled publications that are often dominated by Big Pharma (like the NEJM

where all papers are censored by Klempner and his friends). This gives more room

for new, fresh research.

I don't think it is really about money. There is sometimes very good research

from scientists in foreign countries who work with very little budgets, and who

pay more attention to patients than to multimillion dollar diagnostics.

[Guest guest]

>

> Not only that, but I wonder where we would be if all the knowledge and

discovery of the last century or so were held to the same standard? I agree with

Knotweed that it would be great if all theories and protocols could be run

through the same gauntlet. But then I think about all the " old wives tales " and

all the other anecdotes that have withstood the test of time. How about all that

knowledge?

Don't take me wrong, I value such knowledge if it has proven itself over many

years. In fact, some of the most effective allopathic drugs are based on old

folk / herbal medicine, not on modern (bio)chemistry.

I was told in college (in the eighties) that probably over 90% of current

prescription drugs would never pass a doubleblind placebo test. For recent

medicine it is probably even worse, because there is so much incentive to cheat

(because of the $$) in medical research.

But I'm also worried about all the alternative 'snake oil salesmen' who sell all

kinds of expensive Lyme treatments that are totally ineffective (at least

against Borrelia, maybe some do have other positive effects). I'm even more

suspicious if they sell some very expensive 'cure-all' with a lot of

pseudo-scientific stories to back it up.

I'm not saying this applies to coiling, because that seems more of a DIY type

treatment. But I'm still worried about the lack of solid science behind it. I

have read about Royal Rife (and Tesla), but have never seen a convincing

scientific explanation as to how this technology works, or an independent

investigation that proves that it works. It also is strange that there are many

flavors of these technologies, where often one group will claim that only their

version works, and the others are bogus or ineffective. Usually that suggests

none of them works ...

[Guest guest]

You said:

> It all sounds very very unlikely to me, and I have never seen a solid

> scientific explanation for it (have seen some very general theories

> that say nothing really ...).

But, I guess when a doctor mis-diagnoses someone with Rheumatoid

Arthritis when they actually have lyme (confirmed) and then gives them

immunosuppressants and then that person's symptoms lessen (because their

immune system isn't responding with inflammation, etc), THAT is

science. Thank God for all those peer reviewed scientific articles

proving that drugs treat or cure this or that, when they actually damage

our bodies (those studies don't seem to come out until much later). You

are worried that coils might harm human cells or good bacteria-- we know

that scientifically approved meds do both of these things.

There is simply not the same kind of support for alternative treatments

being studied and published in scientific journals. It is mostly driven

by money, and people don't make money selling coils or other

alternatives when they can make so much more pushing pills.

Just because something isn't published in a scientific study, or just

because it isn't tested an exact way does not mean it isn't effective.

You said:

> As I said, for every crazy therapy there are people who have recovered

> (and most of them problably didn't have Lyme to start with ...)

so, do you think the crazy therapy helped them recover from another illness?

If I had waited for lots of good scientific studies before I did some of

the treatments that have helped me, I would be dead.

~Mimi

[Guest guest]

>

> Just because something isn't published in a scientific study, or just

> because it isn't tested an exact way does not mean it isn't effective.

I fully agree with that, and if you read the scientific papers you will see that

'science' is not convinced at all about a lot of these new drugs (e.g. for

'auto-immune' or cancer treatment). Some of the medical research is flawed

exactly because there is no real independent peer review.

But there is still a major difference with rifing and some other alternative

therapies: usually (e.g. for antibiotics, or certain herbs) there is a proposed

mechanism of action that can be tested. This takes time, and sometimes products

are rushed to market under financial pressure. But ultimately science tends to

clean up its act, and sometimes whole groups of drugs get out of favor because

there is too little benefit, or too much side effects. That even applies to

drugs that make the pharma companies billions of dollars.

> You said:

> > As I said, for every crazy therapy there are people who have recovered

> > (and most of them problably didn't have Lyme to start with ...)

>

> so, do you think the crazy therapy helped them recover from another illness?

sometimes maybe, e.g. with treatments like MMS or Salt/C I don't believe they

can kill Borrelia in the tissues. But it can probably lower the amount of

parasites in the gut (and sometimes, maybe in the blood), thus lowering the load

on the immune system so people FEEL better. So yes, maybe it helps but, I don't

think it 'cures'.

People recover on crazy treatments because most people tend to recover from most

illnesses (even severe ones), whatever the treatment, if you wait long enough.

This is a fact that is often disregarded on the Lyme forums (and sometimes by

the medical community as well). This is why we have double-blind placebo tests

in medicine.

Some people would call this 'cure by faith' (suggesting that any therapy is

right as long as you fully believe it will work) but that is a complicated

discussion.

>

> If I had waited for lots of good scientific studies before I did some of

> the treatments that have helped me, I would be dead.

Yes that is a problem - but as I said: you cannot try every treatment out there.

I'm not saying science is the best way to choose the best treatments; that's

just my personal opinion, based on historical success rate of scientific

procedures.

If anyone can give a solid explanation of how Rife cures Lyme disease (assuming

Lyme = Borrelia infection, if you don't agree with that discussion is

meaningless ...), I'm interested as a scientist and as a patient. But I have

seen nothing that is even remotely convincing up to now.

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

I would like to add some things about this discussion. I'm an academic, and I

can tell you that publishing in peer reviews implies not necessarily the

validation of a fact. One should not be so confident is the science. Keep in

mind that a publication sums up the work of several persons: Under certain

circumstances, under certain assumptions they find that, or that. Few months

latter with new materials and methods, they will find other results, and so on.

Such is science, it's not frozen. And above all medicine is so complicated,

that, for the moment it is not an exact science as math. So a physician saying

`this is the truth' about a thing, is just possibly a liar, and conversely a

physician saying `I don't know', is maybe the best one. Second, peer reviews

belong to people that often don't tolerate alternate views. So, even if you come

and say 1+1=2, but they do think that 1+1=3, you won't be published. Scientists

are sometimes strange and narrow-minded people. Look at the gap between the time

a new idea comes, and when it is really accepted. This can takes decades and

decades, but during this time, life goes on. Sometime, ancient ideas are

re-discovered. To build new drugs, they now look at ancient drugs and so on.

So, I think that medicine, whatever they say, is purely empirical, and progress

with experiments, not theoretical models. Unless I'm wrong, that's why such

forums exist, they are of great value. Because people search for themselves, and

they share an information for the community. Until it remains safe, trying is

not a crime.

For Lyme now, nobody's got the answer. They even don't know for sure why we are

so sick. They don't know for sure the pathogen mechanism, some speaks about

auto-immune disease, an other speak about neuro-toxins, some say that the

Borrelia is not so aggressive. So, the conclusion is that science will produce

answers in decades, not now, and I don't want to wait for a study to be

published. So, if some persons report benefits while coiling, I will also coil,

since what they report is an experiment. Ok, it's true that you don't know if

people have really Lyme, but some report very similar things, which is a proof

for me. But I agree, that one must interpret some forums with care. Now, for

coiling, it's just important that it is working, now I will let the science

tells me why in few years, but I won't wait for the science to find an

explanation.

To conclude, I feel that medicine is just a matter of experiment, and Lyme is

far beyond the possibility of the science, now. Look, the only solution we have

is kill, kill and try to re-kill something we can not even reach. In my point of

view, the good direction was not to find ways to destroy the borrelias, but

identifying the relation between the borrelias and our symptoms, and then use

palliative drugs.

You know, once, a man asked to Pascal, a French philosopher :'Tell me a reason

why I have to believe in God', he answered. We have to possibilities either you

believe, or you don't. If you believe, and if God exists, when you die, you

enter the paradise, if Gods doesn't exist so….nothing, you just no more exist.

Now, if you don't believe, but if God exists, then you go to hell. Of course, if

God doesn't exist then…nothing. So the best thing is to believe….That's

something that can be applied to our disease.

If you have red this message up to this point, please read these short quotes,

it's from a French doctor, Claude Bernard. I will do my best to translate .

1-C'est ce que nous pensons déjà connaître qui nous empêche souvent d'apprendre

What we think we already know, prevent us from learning

2-Quand le fait qu'on rencontre ne s'accorde pas avec une théorie régnante il

faut accepter le fait et abandonner la théorie.

When a fact doesn't match the generally admitted theory, you must accept the

fact and give up this theory.

This latter is my best.

Philippe

ps. Please find below some references. Some are very close to coiling, really.

Amazing.

1-Strasak, Lud & #283;k, Šmarda, Jan et V. Vetterla (2002) : Low-frequency

electromagnetic fields affect bacteria escherichia coli and Leclecia

adecarboxylata. In Endogenous Physical Fields in Biology. Praha : AV & #268;R,

2002. p. 84-84. 2002, 1.-3.7.2002, Praha.

2-R. Mittenzweya, R. Süßmuth, et W. Meib (2004) : Effects of extremely

low-frequency electromagnetic fields on bacteria-the question of a co-stressing

factor, Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, Elsevier.

3-L. Fojta, L. Straáka, V. Vetterla, et Jan mardac (2004) : Comparison of the

low-frequency magnetic field effects on bacteria Escherichia coli, Leclercia

adecarboxylata and Staphylococcus aureus, Bioelectrochemistry 63, pp. 337-341.4

4-E. Di Campli, S. Di Bartolomeo, R. Grande, M. Di Giulio1 et L. Cellini (2010)

: Effects of Extremely Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields on Helicobacter

pylori Biofilm, Current Microbiology 60, pp. 412-418.

5-Benson, D. E., Grissom C. B., Burns G. L. et S. Fazal Mohammad (1994) :

Magnetic field enhancement of antibiotic activity in biofilm forming Pseudomonas

aeruginosa, ASAIO 40, pp. 371-376.

6-S. A. W. Pickering, R. Bayston et B. E. Scammell (2003) : Electromagnetic

augmentation of antibiotic efficacy in infection of orthopaedic implants, J Bone

Joint Surg 85, pp. 588-593.

7-Cellini L., Grande R., Di Campli E., Di Bartolomeo S., Di Giulio M., Robuffo

I., Trubiani O. et Ma Mariggiò (2008) : Bacterial response to the exposure of 50

Hz electromagnetic fields, Bioelectromagnetics 29, pp. 302-311.

8-Pica F, Serafino A, Divizia M, Donia D, Fraschetti M, Sinibaldi-Salimei P,

Giganti MG et Volpi A (2006), Effect of extremely low frequency electromagnetic

fields (ELF-EMF) on Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpes virus in BCBL-1 cells,

Bioelectromagnetics 27, pp. 226-232.

9-Simkó M et Mattsson MO. (2004) : Extremely low frequency electromagnetic

fields as effectors of cellular responses in vitro: possible immune cell

activation, J Cell Biochem 93, pp. 83-92.

10-L. Fojta, P. Klapetekb, L. Strašáka et V. Vetterla (2009) ,50 Hz magnetic

field effect on the morphology of bacteria, Micron 40, Issue 8, pp. 918-922

11-M. Li, J.-H. Qu, Y.-Z. Peng (2005): Sterilization of Escherichia coli cells

by the application of pulsed magnetic field, Journal Journal of Environmental

Sciences 16, pp.348-352

12-, R.L. (1979) : Biological effects of magnetic fields Studies with

microorganisms. Can. J. Microbiol., 25:1145-1151

13-Pothkamury, U.R., Barbosa-Canovas, G.V., et B.G. Swanson (1993) :

Magnetic-field inactivation of microorganisms and generation of biological

changes. Food Technol. 47(12):8593

[Guest guest]

>

> For Lyme now, nobody's got the answer. They even don't know for sure why we

are so sick. They don't know for sure the pathogen mechanism, some speaks about

auto-immune disease, an other speak about neuro-toxins, some say that the

Borrelia is not so aggressive.

agree

> So, the conclusion is that science will produce answers in decades,

final answers will take a long time yes, but there are already some partial

answers. Getting the answers starts with asking the right questions, that is

where we are now. I don't think any of the 'alternative' therapies hold the

answers either.

> Now, for coiling, it's just important that it is working, now I will let the

science tells me why in few years, but I won't wait for the science to find an

explanation.

I understand people want the solution now; I'm with you there. But is it a fact

that rife cures Lyme??

There were some detailed Lyme patient polls in my country last year that asked

whether or not patients had confirmed LD (with blood test or EM), how long they

were ill, what treatments they tried, if they felt the treatment offered any

advantage for their condition etc. I have read about similar studies from other

countries although I haven't seen the details from those.

In my country, the people who use 'rifing' or bio-resonance are usually those

who haven't had positive Bb blood tests (without a positive test, they will not

receive ABX treatments so are probably more likely to visit alternative

practitioners). So we often don't know if these people have Lyme. Most of the

longterm Lymies here DO have positive Bb blood tests, usually of course after

starting with several negative 's.

On the forums some people are raving about bio-resonance etc., but in the poll

there was hardly anyone who was positive about the outcome, many people reported

trying it without any improvement. Just for the record, about 50% of those who

used antibiotics reported no or very little improvement; that agrees with what I

hear in personal contacts.

In the few years that I checked the Dutch forums daily, I was always surprised

with the few bio-resonance supporters who kept claiming they were fully cured,

while regularly coming back to the forums and reporting all kinds of general

problems (sometimes matching clinical Lyme diagnosis). I know bio-resonance is

not rife (rife itself is very unusual here, so difficult to say anything about

patient experiences), and of course Europe is not the US. I would like to see

such patient reports from other countries.

If rifing cures Lyme, why haven't the ILADS docs switched to rifing instead of

ABX with all its side effects? Are they too much hooked on the antibiotics

trade? At least most of them are pretty good at listening to the patient ...

> ps. Please find below some references. Some are very close to coiling, really.

Amazing.

I know about influence of electro magnetic fields on certain life processes, and

I'm sure there are things science does not know about yet (e.g. the recent finds

regarding entanglement in biological systems).

But I don't see any direct relevance of this to rifing as a medical treatment.

Especially not in the sense that I can't see how it could penetrate in the

tissues and selectively kill bugs there. The fact that most of the manufacturers

/ users keep suggesting other frequencies, waveforms, procedures makes it also

questionable, from a scientific point of view.

Again, that doesn't mean that it can't work but I just don't see any compelling

evidence that it does.

[Guest guest]

Knotweed, have YOU tried rifing? I assume you are from the U.S. but I don't

know where you get your facts that people who rife have not tested positive and

thus cannot get abx. I tested positive but chose not to do abx because over my

lifetime I haven't tolerated even 10 day courses of them (for things like strep

throat, etc.) and because it took 2 years to get my diagnosis so I was already

in chronic stage.

I also know many people who tested positive and are using rife as a tool in

their protocol. ly I have seen vast improvement in symptoms. I personally

believe that my Lyme symptoms are much better but I also believe that the

reduction in borrelia has allowed a co-infection, possibly bartonella, to take

over and cause different symptoms. Some even believe that borrelia is the

co-infection and bart or some other bug is the primary. This makes sense to me

from my own experience.

Regarding why doctors do not suggest rife, it is because the FDA has not

approved these machines. Doctors could lose their licenses (as they are already

doing due to the controversy over long term abx use) by recommending them or

charging for sessions in their practices.

There is a relatively new FDA approved machine by a company called Medsonix that

is selling sessions to treat people with Lyme and ailments with similar

symptoms. I believe it actually uses low frequency sound waves. There's one in

Florida and one in Vegas and a number of people are checking it out. I

personally haven't since these are nowhere near me. The betterhealthguy (web

site) has done a review of it - he didn't use it long enough to be able to

notice much difference; however other people have been claiming some relief of

symptoms.

I use two different types of machines - one has a lower frequency range and the

other has a higher frequency range. One does not select specific frequencies

with either of these - they sweep through the ranges, randomly generating the

frequencies so you adjust your session time longer as you adjust to the herxes.

You can read about these on the dougplus group.

deb

> >

> > For Lyme now, nobody's got the answer. They even don't know for sure why we

are so sick. They don't know for sure the pathogen mechanism, some speaks about

auto-immune disease, an other speak about neuro-toxins, some say that the

Borrelia is not so aggressive.

>

> agree

>

> > So, the conclusion is that science will produce answers in decades,

>

> final answers will take a long time yes, but there are already some partial

answers. Getting the answers starts with asking the right questions, that is

where we are now. I don't think any of the 'alternative' therapies hold the

answers either.

>

>

> > Now, for coiling, it's just important that it is working, now I will let the

science tells me why in few years, but I won't wait for the science to find an

explanation.

>

> I understand people want the solution now; I'm with you there. But is it a

fact that rife cures Lyme??

>

> There were some detailed Lyme patient polls in my country last year that asked

whether or not patients had confirmed LD (with blood test or EM), how long they

were ill, what treatments they tried, if they felt the treatment offered any

advantage for their condition etc. I have read about similar studies from other

countries although I haven't seen the details from those.

>

> In my country, the people who use 'rifing' or bio-resonance are usually those

who haven't had positive Bb blood tests (without a positive test, they will not

receive ABX treatments so are probably more likely to visit alternative

practitioners). So we often don't know if these people have Lyme. Most of the

longterm Lymies here DO have positive Bb blood tests, usually of course after

starting with several negative 's.

>

> On the forums some people are raving about bio-resonance etc., but in the poll

there was hardly anyone who was positive about the outcome, many people reported

trying it without any improvement. Just for the record, about 50% of those who

used antibiotics reported no or very little improvement; that agrees with what I

hear in personal contacts.

>

> In the few years that I checked the Dutch forums daily, I was always surprised

with the few bio-resonance supporters who kept claiming they were fully cured,

while regularly coming back to the forums and reporting all kinds of general

problems (sometimes matching clinical Lyme diagnosis). I know bio-resonance is

not rife (rife itself is very unusual here, so difficult to say anything about

patient experiences), and of course Europe is not the US. I would like to see

such patient reports from other countries.

>

> If rifing cures Lyme, why haven't the ILADS docs switched to rifing instead of

ABX with all its side effects? Are they too much hooked on the antibiotics

trade? At least most of them are pretty good at listening to the patient ...

>

>

> > ps. Please find below some references. Some are very close to coiling,

really. Amazing.

>

> I know about influence of electro magnetic fields on certain life processes,

and I'm sure there are things science does not know about yet (e.g. the recent

finds regarding entanglement in biological systems).

>

> But I don't see any direct relevance of this to rifing as a medical treatment.

Especially not in the sense that I can't see how it could penetrate in the

tissues and selectively kill bugs there. The fact that most of the manufacturers

/ users keep suggesting other frequencies, waveforms, procedures makes it also

questionable, from a scientific point of view.

>

> Again, that doesn't mean that it can't work but I just don't see any

compelling evidence that it does.

>

[Guest guest]

>

> Knotweed, have YOU tried rifing? I assume you are from the U.S.

no I haven't and I'm from Europe. Rifing is nearly non-existent here.

> but I don't know where you get your facts that people who rife have not tested

positive and thus cannot get abx. I tested positive but chose not to do abx

because over my lifetime I haven't tolerated even 10 day courses of them (for

things like strep throat, etc.) and because it took 2 years to get my diagnosis

so I was already in chronic stage.

I think there is some misunderstanding here (maybe my fault, I'm not a native

english speaker). I think most people will try ABX first, if they can get them.

In my country, as in the US, that requires an unequivocally positive serologic

test (or sometimes a tick byte with EM for early cases, depends a bit on the

MD).

Those who haven't tested positive will not get ABX and will have more incentive

to try alternatives, including rifing. In my country (at least in the poll) the

big majority of the rife/bioresonance users have no positive Lyme tests. I know

many others (that includes myself) have tried alternatives because they cannot

tolerate ABX or had insufficient results.

> Some even believe that borrelia is the co-infection and bart or some other

bug is the primary. This makes sense to me from my own experience.

I agree that maybe Bb is not the real cause of the problem, we are not sure. But

from all I can see in research, it is mostly linked to Bb (not Bart). Could be a

bacterial virus (Bb carries two of them, including one similar to retroviruses)

or an unknown bug that often travels together with Bb.

And yes, coinfections have their part in the puzzle because they are often also

immune-supressing, and make the disease more complex.

> Regarding why doctors do not suggest rife, it is because the FDA has not

approved these machines. Doctors could lose their licenses (as they are already

doing due to the controversy over long term abx use) by recommending them or

charging for sessions in their practices.

but doesn't the same thing apply to almost every other alternative therapy?

And why then is rifing not far more popular in Europe, where all these devices

are allowed (more or less, I think they discourage their use by allopathic docs

though) ?

> I use two different types of machines - one has a lower frequency range and

the other has a higher frequency range. One does not select specific

frequencies with either of these - they sweep through the ranges, randomly

generating the frequencies so you adjust your session time longer as you adjust

to the herxes. You can read about these on the dougplus group.

one thing that bugs me is: where do these frequences come from. How do they know

that frequcy xxx will kill borrelia, or bart, or whatever? Why is there so much

disagreement about frequencies, waveforms, etc.?

It sounds to me a bit like the Audio-CD's that are sold in Germany (and maybe

also in the US?) with sounds that kill borrelia; you just have to listen to it

and you will get well. They claim that the sound (or maybe it is the reverse of

the sound, as with bio-resonance) was recorded from live Borrelia bacteria by

some German scientists, working in a bunker deep underground in the Black

Forest, where the most horrible Bb's are sometimes supposed to orginate (the

ones that ended up at Plum Island after WWII i guess). Sigh ...

[Guest guest]

I have a DP100 and a DP300 from Meissner Research. The Meissner web site does

not provide any specific info or make any claims about their machines. You can

read about them or ask questions of the group

DougPlus.

deb

> > >

> > > For Lyme now, nobody's got the answer. They even don't know for sure why

we are so sick. They don't know for sure the pathogen mechanism, some speaks

about auto-immune disease, an other speak about neuro-toxins, some say that the

Borrelia is not so aggressive.

> >

> > agree

> >

> > > So, the conclusion is that science will produce answers in decades,

> >

> > final answers will take a long time yes, but there are already some partial

answers. Getting the answers starts with asking the right questions, that is

where we are now. I don't think any of the 'alternative' therapies hold the

answers either.

> >

> >

> > > Now, for coiling, it's just important that it is working, now I will let

the science tells me why in few years, but I won't wait for the science to find

an explanation.

> >

> > I understand people want the solution now; I'm with you there. But is it a

fact that rife cures Lyme??

> >

> > There were some detailed Lyme patient polls in my country last year that

asked whether or not patients had confirmed LD (with blood test or EM), how long

they were ill, what treatments they tried, if they felt the treatment offered

any advantage for their condition etc. I have read about similar studies from

other countries although I haven't seen the details from those.

> >

> > In my country, the people who use 'rifing' or bio-resonance are usually

those who haven't had positive Bb blood tests (without a positive test, they

will not receive ABX treatments so are probably more likely to visit alternative

practitioners). So we often don't know if these people have Lyme. Most of the

longterm Lymies here DO have positive Bb blood tests, usually of course after

starting with several negative 's.

> >

> > On the forums some people are raving about bio-resonance etc., but in the

poll there was hardly anyone who was positive about the outcome, many people

reported trying it without any improvement. Just for the record, about 50% of

those who used antibiotics reported no or very little improvement; that agrees

with what I hear in personal contacts.

> >

> > In the few years that I checked the Dutch forums daily, I was always

surprised with the few bio-resonance supporters who kept claiming they were

fully cured, while regularly coming back to the forums and reporting all kinds

of general problems (sometimes matching clinical Lyme diagnosis). I know

bio-resonance is not rife (rife itself is very unusual here, so difficult to say

anything about patient experiences), and of course Europe is not the US. I would

like to see such patient reports from other countries.

> >

> > If rifing cures Lyme, why haven't the ILADS docs switched to rifing instead

of ABX with all its side effects? Are they too much hooked on the antibiotics

trade? At least most of them are pretty good at listening to the patient ...

> >

> >

> > > ps. Please find below some references. Some are very close to coiling,

really. Amazing.

> >

> > I know about influence of electro magnetic fields on certain life processes,

and I'm sure there are things science does not know about yet (e.g. the recent

finds regarding entanglement in biological systems).

> >

> > But I don't see any direct relevance of this to rifing as a medical

treatment. Especially not in the sense that I can't see how it could penetrate

in the tissues and selectively kill bugs there. The fact that most of the

manufacturers / users keep suggesting other frequencies, waveforms, procedures

makes it also questionable, from a scientific point of view.

> >

> > Again, that doesn't mean that it can't work but I just don't see any

compelling evidence that it does.

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>