Re: Re: What would we need to Scientifically Confirm Rife's Frequencies?

[Guest guest]

A couple comments about the pathogens.

wrote:

> Basically recreating the frequency research for (re)determining the

> MORs for cancer and other pathogens as originally performed by Rife,

If the project attempted to test the same pathogens that are named in Rife's

lab notes, it might be necessary to consider what strain to use in the

testing. For example, Rife's Bacillus coli is the same as Escherichia coli,

but there are numerous strains of E.coli out there - pathogenic and

nonpathogenic. So the question becomes, is there a best guess what strain

he may have used back then?

And wrote [about the purported cancer virus]:

" The virus needs to be filtered out of the fresh tumors, imaged, and also

have its constituent proteins determined with standard

methods, as well as its DNA, RNA, or whatever else. "

It's possible that if the cancer virus was a retrovirus, it may not easily

show up in tumor material because its genome may have retreated (reinserted)

into the host DNA. Some of its proteins (i.e., relevant transduced

oncogenes) might show up in tumor material and give clues about what the

original virus is. A cooperative virologist would be helpful.

I have a suspicion that when Rife first successfuly cultured out the " BX "

virus *after* setting the test tube of his cell culture inside the argon

loop, he may have chased a cancer retrovirus out of the host cellular DNA

into which the viral genome had inserted. I'm not saying that's what

happened for sure, but feel it is a possibility that deserves consideration.

[ also wrote]:

" It needs to be subjected to whatever they do in

standard virology and molecular biology, but the

samples have to be directly filtered from fresh

tumors. "

Likewise, if the virus happens to be a retrovirus, the testing may need to

involve checking to see if it is inserted into the tumor cell (host's)

genome, using PCR types of techniques. Even then that would only be a first

step, not proving anything definitively, but might be a strong pointer

towards what the next testing step would need to be.

PCR techniques have advanced a long way from the original method, and using

an appropriate test could save a lot of time and work, and could support the

microscope efforts. For instance, using multiplex PCR, many viral sequences

can be placed on one chip, and the sample material spread over the chip. If

any of those viruses are present in the sample, they will show positive.

There may be technicalities to consider, but that's the basic procedure.

Again, a qualified/cooperative virologist and/or molecular biologist would

be able to help.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

I'm a bit of a contrarian. Why is it imperative to demonstrate the

effectiveness of a frequency device using Rife's method? There are

many ways to demonstrate the effects of frequencies on micro

organisms without resorting to Rife's method. In fact such is done

all the time. Over a thousand papers are published every year on the

effects of frequencies on the biological processes of cells and

living organisms. Not a single one uses Rife's method.

Duplication of Rife's method and effect is highly important.

Something unique was occurring, something important! But why must we

wait and wait and wait ( over 70 years now! ) to do so, when there

are many other ways that are in fact superior ( for they relate to

the effects of modern day frequency instruments ) to demonstrate

efficacy ? Looking for societal approval because a physiologic

change is evident in a microscope? Happens all the time - right now.

Not Rife's effects, but modern effects.

If someone wants to evaluate modern day frequency devices - the tools

and methods are widely available. They are a lot more complex than

Rife's simple methods, but they work, and they can show effectiveness

in a scientifically repeatable manner.

Want acceptance - put 10,000 field type devices into impoverished

third world countries. If used every day - could easily treat 50

people each a day. That is 500,000 people a day or..... 162 million +

a year. If you want to change the world, place 100,000 machines into

the same areas and you could treat 1/4th of the worlds population every year.

Jim Bare

[Guest guest]

I'm a bit of a contrarian. Why is it imperative to demonstrate the

effectiveness of a frequency device using Rife's method? There are

many ways to demonstrate the effects of frequencies on micro

organisms without resorting to Rife's method. In fact such is done

all the time. Over a thousand papers are published every year on the

effects of frequencies on the biological processes of cells and

living organisms. Not a single one uses Rife's method.

Duplication of Rife's method and effect is highly important.

Something unique was occurring, something important! But why must we

wait and wait and wait ( over 70 years now! ) to do so, when there

are many other ways that are in fact superior ( for they relate to

the effects of modern day frequency instruments ) to demonstrate

efficacy ? Looking for societal approval because a physiologic

change is evident in a microscope? Happens all the time - right now.

Not Rife's effects, but modern effects.

If someone wants to evaluate modern day frequency devices - the tools

and methods are widely available. They are a lot more complex than

Rife's simple methods, but they work, and they can show effectiveness

in a scientifically repeatable manner.

Want acceptance - put 10,000 field type devices into impoverished

third world countries. If used every day - could easily treat 50

people each a day. That is 500,000 people a day or..... 162 million +

a year. If you want to change the world, place 100,000 machines into

the same areas and you could treat 1/4th of the worlds population every year.

Jim Bare

[Guest guest]

One of our members has done great work on the Risley

Prism... thats likely to help quite a bit too

--- wrote:

> Hi ,

> actually both!

>

> Basically recreating the frequency research for

> (re)determining the

> MORs for cancer and other pathogens as originally

> performed by Rife,

> yet using the Ergonom microscopes and respective

> chambers instead of

> the original Rife microscope (which we do not have

> at our disposal).

>

> They is a possibility of obtaining funds for such a

> project, and we

> want to make sure everything is planned correctly so

> that the work is

> scientifically valid.

>

> Using the Ergonom microscope, we want to see exactly

> what does happen

> to those pathogens when using the Rife method as

> originally used (as

> far as it is possible to recreate that work).

>

> Regards

>

>

>

>

>

> >

> > > Hi,

> > > here is a question that was recently put to me

> and

> > > which I want to find

> > > a consensus on.

> > >

> > > Providing money was not an issue, what would we

> need

> > > to scientifically

> > > confirm the frequencies and methods used by

> Rife,

> > > today?

> > <snip>

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

One of our members has done great work on the Risley

Prism... thats likely to help quite a bit too

--- wrote:

> Hi ,

> actually both!

>

> Basically recreating the frequency research for

> (re)determining the

> MORs for cancer and other pathogens as originally

> performed by Rife,

> yet using the Ergonom microscopes and respective

> chambers instead of

> the original Rife microscope (which we do not have

> at our disposal).

>

> They is a possibility of obtaining funds for such a

> project, and we

> want to make sure everything is planned correctly so

> that the work is

> scientifically valid.

>

> Using the Ergonom microscope, we want to see exactly

> what does happen

> to those pathogens when using the Rife method as

> originally used (as

> far as it is possible to recreate that work).

>

> Regards

>

>

>

>

>

> >

> > > Hi,

> > > here is a question that was recently put to me

> and

> > > which I want to find

> > > a consensus on.

> > >

> > > Providing money was not an issue, what would we

> need

> > > to scientifically

> > > confirm the frequencies and methods used by

> Rife,

> > > today?

> > <snip>

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>Over a thousand papers are published every year on the

>effects of frequencies on the biological processes of cells and

>living organisms.

Very relevant of you to mention this Jim. But nearly any applied

energy will affect " biological processes " , if we know where to look.

So, let's narrow it down a bit ... to the Rife-like effect we are

claiming to produce. Here is my question to you. From the thousands

of research papers you allude to, please cite those that best provide:

1. Visual confirmation of a single frequency, and no other,

selectively disabling any pathogenic organism within a living body.

2. Disclosure of the primary or subordinate mechanism by which this occurs.

Failing the above, what ten or so papers do you think come the

closest to fulfilling these criteria? In the interest of clarity, I

suggest we exclude 50 and 60Hz, and perhaps unmodulated RF.

IMO part of the problem is patents like this:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6845270.html

If all applicants were obliged to provide proof of efficacy, we would

have alot better information at our disposal. As implied in W's

recent posts, those with the most incentive are those with commercial

interest, and rightly so.

Nielsen

[Guest guest]

Uncle here: I designed a little frequency device that would plug

into a usb port to recharge and reprogram. It would exchange GSR

readings taken on prior scans. Detached from the computer it then would

scan and treat a patient. Perhaps twenty of these devices could be used

a day hooked to a single computer. That computer could be hooked up to

the net to exchange the scans and the effectiveness of the treatment.

What is really sick is that it would cost less than $50 to manufacture

these usb rife (or fscan) devices in medium quantities. The cost to

cure most of the world's sufferings would be pennies per day per human

being.

I know I would be killed or thrown into jail if I released my design and

it gained acceptance. I know who is running the show on this planet and

why they want needless human suffering and a big biotech industry.

, you are complete right in your summery. God bless you for seeing

this.

Bare wrote:

>I'm a bit of a contrarian. Why is it imperative to demonstrate the

>effectiveness of a frequency device using Rife's method? There are

>many ways to demonstrate the effects of frequencies on micro

>organisms without resorting to Rife's method. In fact such is done

>all the time. Over a thousand papers are published every year on the

>effects of frequencies on the biological processes of cells and

>living organisms. Not a single one uses Rife's method.

>

>Duplication of Rife's method and effect is highly important.

>Something unique was occurring, something important! But why must we

>wait and wait and wait ( over 70 years now! ) to do so, when there

>are many other ways that are in fact superior ( for they relate to

>the effects of modern day frequency instruments ) to demonstrate

>efficacy ? Looking for societal approval because a physiologic

>change is evident in a microscope? Happens all the time - right now.

>Not Rife's effects, but modern effects.

>

>If someone wants to evaluate modern day frequency devices - the tools

>and methods are widely available. They are a lot more complex than

>Rife's simple methods, but they work, and they can show effectiveness

>in a scientifically repeatable manner.

>

>Want acceptance - put 10,000 field type devices into impoverished

>third world countries. If used every day - could easily treat 50

>people each a day. That is 500,000 people a day or..... 162 million +

>a year. If you want to change the world, place 100,000 machines into

>the same areas and you could treat 1/4th of the worlds population every year.

>

>Jim Bare

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Uncle here: I designed a little frequency device that would plug

into a usb port to recharge and reprogram. It would exchange GSR

readings taken on prior scans. Detached from the computer it then would

scan and treat a patient. Perhaps twenty of these devices could be used

a day hooked to a single computer. That computer could be hooked up to

the net to exchange the scans and the effectiveness of the treatment.

What is really sick is that it would cost less than $50 to manufacture

these usb rife (or fscan) devices in medium quantities. The cost to

cure most of the world's sufferings would be pennies per day per human

being.

I know I would be killed or thrown into jail if I released my design and

it gained acceptance. I know who is running the show on this planet and

why they want needless human suffering and a big biotech industry.

, you are complete right in your summery. God bless you for seeing

this.

Bare wrote:

>I'm a bit of a contrarian. Why is it imperative to demonstrate the

>effectiveness of a frequency device using Rife's method? There are

>many ways to demonstrate the effects of frequencies on micro

>organisms without resorting to Rife's method. In fact such is done

>all the time. Over a thousand papers are published every year on the

>effects of frequencies on the biological processes of cells and

>living organisms. Not a single one uses Rife's method.

>

>Duplication of Rife's method and effect is highly important.

>Something unique was occurring, something important! But why must we

>wait and wait and wait ( over 70 years now! ) to do so, when there

>are many other ways that are in fact superior ( for they relate to

>the effects of modern day frequency instruments ) to demonstrate

>efficacy ? Looking for societal approval because a physiologic

>change is evident in a microscope? Happens all the time - right now.

>Not Rife's effects, but modern effects.

>

>If someone wants to evaluate modern day frequency devices - the tools

>and methods are widely available. They are a lot more complex than

>Rife's simple methods, but they work, and they can show effectiveness

>in a scientifically repeatable manner.

>

>Want acceptance - put 10,000 field type devices into impoverished

>third world countries. If used every day - could easily treat 50

>people each a day. That is 500,000 people a day or..... 162 million +

>a year. If you want to change the world, place 100,000 machines into

>the same areas and you could treat 1/4th of the worlds population every year.

>

>Jim Bare

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

We receive reports sometimes weekly as regards viral loads and tumor shrinkage.

These are based on modern testing methods accepted by mainstream medicine

(bloodwork, MRI, Ultrasound, etc)

Here are 2 examples:

This is from last week. A report from the Dominican Republic using a TrueRife

F-117 with GRS:

I currently have a full time techinician running programs on 7 patients with

cancer diagnoses. One is a 31 young man with liver cancer. He was told by a

doctor after ultrasound that the tumor was the size of his liver and I palpated

his abdomen and can say for sure that his liver was very enlarged. He was

having increasing pain in his liver once we began his treatments (down there I

can use that word!). After 10 sessions on his personalized program, his pain was

so bad that he went back to the doctor who ultrasounded him and his liver is

normal size and the tumor is the size of a golfball!

We aslo published the HIV study here several months ago:

We have been conducting a 3 week study as regards our F-117 and its potential

impact on HIV viral counts and CD4's with a client in the Detroit Michigan USA

area. Client also was supplementing Colloidal silver (less than1 ounce pre day)

along with 2 other supplements)

Today 8/13/07 the results have come in.

It should be noted that the client discontinued use of all HIV drugs several

weeks prior to our study.

The Herb he was taking during this discontinuation of the HIV drugs did not

inhibit his viral load from rising.

His Viral load after discontinuing the HIV drugs for several weeks was:

268,000

Viral Load after running the F-117 for 3 weeks every day:

146,000

This represents a drop of 122,000 or a 33% decrease in HIV viral load in 3

weeks.

CD4 count:

The CD4 count tells the doctor how strong your immune system is, how far HIV

disease has advanced (the stage of the disease), and helps predict the risk of

complications and debilitating infections. The CD4 count is most useful when it

is compared with the count obtained from an earlier test.

The CD4 count is used in combination with the viral load test, which measures

the level of HIV in the blood, to determine the staging and outlook of the

disease.

His CD4 was: 154

CD4 count after running the F-117 for 3 weeks: 165

We have discontinued the study at this point and the F-117 has been returned

to our lab ( the client was discourage that his viral load was not Zero after 3

weeks so discontinued). It is not known how much more progress would be made

with continued use of the system, but early results from just 3 weeks look

promising.

These two examples were not proceeded by the use of microscopic evidence prior

to the application of Rife frequencies, but demomstrated clear effectiveness.

Mike

www.truerife.com

Bare wrote:

I'm a bit of a contrarian. Why is it imperative to demonstrate the

effectiveness of a frequency device using Rife's method? There are

many ways to demonstrate the effects of frequencies on micro

organisms without resorting to Rife's method. In fact such is done

all the time. Over a thousand papers are published every year on the

effects of frequencies on the biological processes of cells and

living organisms. Not a single one uses Rife's method.

Duplication of Rife's method and effect is highly important.

Something unique was occurring, something important! But why must we

wait and wait and wait ( over 70 years now! ) to do so, when there

are many other ways that are in fact superior ( for they relate to

the effects of modern day frequency instruments ) to demonstrate

efficacy ? Looking for societal approval because a physiologic

change is evident in a microscope? Happens all the time - right now.

Not Rife's effects, but modern effects.

If someone wants to evaluate modern day frequency devices - the tools

and methods are widely available. They are a lot more complex than

Rife's simple methods, but they work, and they can show effectiveness

in a scientifically repeatable manner.

Want acceptance - put 10,000 field type devices into impoverished

third world countries. If used every day - could easily treat 50

people each a day. That is 500,000 people a day or..... 162 million +

a year. If you want to change the world, place 100,000 machines into

the same areas and you could treat 1/4th of the worlds population every year.

Jim Bare

---------------------------------

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

[Guest guest]

We receive reports sometimes weekly as regards viral loads and tumor shrinkage.

These are based on modern testing methods accepted by mainstream medicine

(bloodwork, MRI, Ultrasound, etc)

Here are 2 examples:

This is from last week. A report from the Dominican Republic using a TrueRife

F-117 with GRS:

I currently have a full time techinician running programs on 7 patients with

cancer diagnoses. One is a 31 young man with liver cancer. He was told by a

doctor after ultrasound that the tumor was the size of his liver and I palpated

his abdomen and can say for sure that his liver was very enlarged. He was

having increasing pain in his liver once we began his treatments (down there I

can use that word!). After 10 sessions on his personalized program, his pain was

so bad that he went back to the doctor who ultrasounded him and his liver is

normal size and the tumor is the size of a golfball!

We aslo published the HIV study here several months ago:

We have been conducting a 3 week study as regards our F-117 and its potential

impact on HIV viral counts and CD4's with a client in the Detroit Michigan USA

area. Client also was supplementing Colloidal silver (less than1 ounce pre day)

along with 2 other supplements)

Today 8/13/07 the results have come in.

It should be noted that the client discontinued use of all HIV drugs several

weeks prior to our study.

The Herb he was taking during this discontinuation of the HIV drugs did not

inhibit his viral load from rising.

His Viral load after discontinuing the HIV drugs for several weeks was:

268,000

Viral Load after running the F-117 for 3 weeks every day:

146,000

This represents a drop of 122,000 or a 33% decrease in HIV viral load in 3

weeks.

CD4 count:

The CD4 count tells the doctor how strong your immune system is, how far HIV

disease has advanced (the stage of the disease), and helps predict the risk of

complications and debilitating infections. The CD4 count is most useful when it

is compared with the count obtained from an earlier test.

The CD4 count is used in combination with the viral load test, which measures

the level of HIV in the blood, to determine the staging and outlook of the

disease.

His CD4 was: 154

CD4 count after running the F-117 for 3 weeks: 165

We have discontinued the study at this point and the F-117 has been returned

to our lab ( the client was discourage that his viral load was not Zero after 3

weeks so discontinued). It is not known how much more progress would be made

with continued use of the system, but early results from just 3 weeks look

promising.

These two examples were not proceeded by the use of microscopic evidence prior

to the application of Rife frequencies, but demomstrated clear effectiveness.

Mike

www.truerife.com

Bare wrote:

I'm a bit of a contrarian. Why is it imperative to demonstrate the

effectiveness of a frequency device using Rife's method? There are

many ways to demonstrate the effects of frequencies on micro

organisms without resorting to Rife's method. In fact such is done

all the time. Over a thousand papers are published every year on the

effects of frequencies on the biological processes of cells and

living organisms. Not a single one uses Rife's method.

Duplication of Rife's method and effect is highly important.

Something unique was occurring, something important! But why must we

wait and wait and wait ( over 70 years now! ) to do so, when there

are many other ways that are in fact superior ( for they relate to

the effects of modern day frequency instruments ) to demonstrate

efficacy ? Looking for societal approval because a physiologic

change is evident in a microscope? Happens all the time - right now.

Not Rife's effects, but modern effects.

If someone wants to evaluate modern day frequency devices - the tools

and methods are widely available. They are a lot more complex than

Rife's simple methods, but they work, and they can show effectiveness

in a scientifically repeatable manner.

Want acceptance - put 10,000 field type devices into impoverished

third world countries. If used every day - could easily treat 50

people each a day. That is 500,000 people a day or..... 162 million +

a year. If you want to change the world, place 100,000 machines into

the same areas and you could treat 1/4th of the worlds population every year.

Jim Bare

---------------------------------

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

[Guest guest]

,

I don't have references handy for bacteria - but

do for cancer. Here are just a few:

120 Hz – Reduced Growth and vacularization of

implanted breast cancers in mice –

et.al. “Therapeutic Electromagnetic Field

Effects On Angiogenesis and Tumor

Growth” Anticancer Research Nov-Dec; 21 (6A): 3887-91 2001

25 to 100 Hz - Reduced growth rates in cultured

cells. Above 50 Hz, affected cell viability and

proliferation. Evaluated were Prostate Cancer,

Lung Cancer, Rat Glioma. Cuccullo et. al. “Very

Low Intensity Alternating Current Decreases Cell

Proliferation” GLIA 51: 65-72 2005

100,000 Hz to 300,000 Hz - “Profound

inhibitory effect on the growth rate of a variety

of human and rodent tumor cell lines.” Evaluated

were; C,U-118, U87, H-1299, MDA231, PC3,

B16F1, F-98,C-6, RG2, and CT-26.Kirson et.

al. “Disruption of Cancer Cell Replication by

Alternating Electric Fields” Cancer Research 64 3288- 3295 May 1, 2004

100,000 to 200,000 Hz – “ Low intensity

intermediate frequency electric fields inhibit by

anti micro-tubule mechanism of action, cancerous

cell growth in vitro.” Evaluated were human

breast carcinoma, MDA-MB-231 human non small cell

lung carcinoma( H1299). Animal tumor models using

intradermal B16F1 and intracranial F-98 glioma

.. The findings lead to a human clinical pilot

study using ten patients with GBM. Median time to

progression was 26,1 weeks, and median survival

was 62.2 weeks. This is more than double the

reported medians of historical control patients.

Mouse Melanoma – 100,000 Hz

Human Breast Cancer – 150,000 Hz

Human Glioblastoma – 200,000 Hz

Kirson et al “ Alternating Electric Fields

Arrest Cell Proliferation in Animal Tumor Models

and Human Brain Tumors” Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2007

Jun 12;104(24);10152-7

50 Hz - 40% tumor growth inhibition in mice

bearing a subcutaneous WiDr human colon

adenocarcinoma. Caused by mitotic index decrease,

apoptosis increase and p53 protein expression

decrease. Tofani, S. et.al. “ Increased Mouse

Survival, Tumor Growth Inhibition, And Decreased

Immunoreactive p53 After Exposure To Magnetic

Fields” Bioelectromagnetics 2002 Apr;23(3)230-8

10,000Hz to 120,000 Hz - Two 45 minute

exposures of leiomyosarcoma cells (LSC), isolated

from tumors of fifteen Wistar rats induced via a

3,4-benzopyrene injection, resulted in LSC

proliferation dramatically decreased by more than

98% (P<0.001). At that time, the survived LSC

were only 2% of the total cell

population. Avdikos, A. et al “ Anticancer

Effects On Leiomyosarcoma-Bearing Wistar Rats

After Electromagnetic Radiation Of Resonant

Radiofrequencies.” Hell. J. Nucl Med 2007 May- Aug;10(2) 95-101

0.16 to 1.34 Hz – “Inhibit murine malignant tumor

growth, induce apoptosis of cancer cells, and

arrest neoangiogenesis” Zhang,X. et al Extremely

LowFrequency( ELF) Pulsed-Gradient Magnetic

Fields Inhibit Malignant Tumour Growth At

Different Biological Levels” Cell Biol Int. 2002;26(7):599-603

50 Hz – Inhibition of cell growth in two human

cancer cell lines – HL-60 and SK-Hep-1. Huang,L.

et al Effects of Sinusoidal Magnetic Field

Observed On Cell Proliferation, Ion

concentration, and Osmolarity In Two Human Cancer

Cell Lines” Electromagn Biol Med 2006;25(2):113-26

5 Hz – Delivered as an interferential “beat

frequency” . Erlich tumors undergo partial

regression and shrinkage. Magdy, M. et al “

Inhibition Of Erlich Tumor Growth In Mice By

Electric Interference Therapy ( In Vivo Studies)”

Electromagn Biol Med 2002;21(3):255-268

Jim

>1. Visual confirmation of a single frequency, and no other,

>selectively disabling any pathogenic organism within a living body.

>2. Disclosure of the primary or subordinate mechanism by which this occurs.

[Guest guest]

Ringas wrote:

>>>I know I would be killed or thrown into jail if I

>>>

>>>

>>released my design and

>>

>>

>>>it gained acceptance.

>>>

>>>

>

>

>Jim Bare released his design and it gained acceptance

>by many. He's still alive and well and hasn't been

>thrown in jail.

>

>Regards,

>

>

>

>

>

Uncle here: My design is fundamentally different and better than

Jim Bare's.

Don't get me wrong, my hat is off to Jim Bare.

In my design all the Rife machines are networked with GSR feedback.

Frequencies can be determined or tried over a very big sample. This is

a new way of determining MOR's using statistics instead of using a

microscope.

Jim Bare's devices have not dented the biotech and medical industries.

My design would in a major way.

But hey, if anyone wants to take my ideas and run with it, more power to

you. I will even assist in the background.

The real enabling technology is the power and low cost of

microcontrollers designed to be hook up to usb ports. If millions of

these usb rife machines were made then cost would be less than $20.

After rethinking about my design, you could probably download and

reprogram hundreds per day using one networked computers of these usb

rife machines (fscan really) if use multiple unconnected but powered usb

hub to recharge them. Actually the computers could be networked by

using usb memory cards as a local region network.

I can envision one central hub controlling millions of these usb rife

machines throughout the whole world.

Sorry, but I'm not sticking my neck out that far.

[Guest guest]

Ringas wrote:

>--- wrote:

>

>

>

>>Uncle here: My design is fundamentally

>>different and better than

>>Jim Bare's.

>>

>>

><snip>

>

>

>>Sorry, but I'm not sticking my neck out that far.

>>

>>

>

>

>Why not just do like Jim and put your information out

>so people can build their own? That's how Jim stayed

>out of trouble. It really doesn't do anyone good to

>announce that you have a " better " design, but then say

>that you're not going to make it or the information

>available. In a situation like this, it would be

>better for all if you didn't say anything about it,

>since nobody will ever have access to it.

>

>

Uncle here: You're right , sorry I mentioned it.

[Guest guest]

,

At the present, the only way we, the general public, will have anything outside

of what the " powers to be " want, is to do it ourself, keeping under the radar.

This is true from healing through energy.

I have a construction article for a hybrid car, published in 1979 in Mother

Earth News, made from recycled parts. It got 72 miles per gallon. One of the

new hybrids being sold gets about 23 MPG, heck, an old Cadillac could do that.

As long as the people insist on having a hybrid that performs like a muscle car,

forget about energy savings, performance costs energy, no matter what you power

it with. The worse of it with that particular hybrid is the battery will go bad,

and cost $6000 to replace. Even worse, it is made of really hazardess

materials, and there is no way to recycle them. (How dumb can it get?)

Jim Mars has a Corvette that runs on Hydrogen, but he had to do it himself. I

looked on eBay once for electrolytic hydrogen converters, they listed around a

hundred. In '73, Utah power built a model home, in Salt Lake City, that

included an electrolytic hydrogen generator in the garage to fill the fuel tank

of a car converted to hydrogen, at night while it was parked in the garage. Over

30 years ago the technology was available to convert ANY internal combustion

powered engine to better, alternative fuels without massive changes to the car,

or using oil. Years ago a fellow in GB had a dozen chickens in his yard. He

fed them grain, got eggs and chicken droppings, he converted that into methane

and ran his Minor on the methane. The feed lots across the US can

replace up to 20% of the natural gas on the east coast with the methane from the

cow crap piled up at those feed lots. Germany ran buses on methane after WW-ll,

Japan ran cars and buses on wood chips also after WW-l

l. (I have a photo of a wood chip powered car I took in Tokyo, 1950) I knew a

guy in the '50's who used caster oil in his engine. After a 1000 miles or so,

he drained it into a gallon jug, put in the replacement oil, and put the dirty

oil on the shelf. When It was time to change the oil again, he used the one on

the shelf, all the sediments had settled to the bottom of the jug. Just drain

off the clean oil and dump the sediments, add another quart to replace it.

During WW-ll Germany ran it's war machines on petrol made from coal. We have all

that technology and enough coal to last 400 years, but our gvt says it can't be

done. We took all their technology, hid it way, and claim it never happened.

I made my bio-Electrifier, (apparently based on Rife and Hulda ), that is

used to kill bacteria in the blood. The PC board from a mail order house, the

rest of the parts from Radio Shack. I also made the electro magnetic " zapper "

that is meant to kill off any bacteria that survive long enough to collect in

the lymph, using an old electronic flash unit and a coil of wire.

The ancient Celtic healed for thousands of years until Western medicine (and the

church) stopped it, through genicide. Chinese medicine also healed for

thousands of years, but now the government there is suppressing that in favor of

more profitable " Western Medicine " ! When I was diagnosed with heart disease, a

friend, a registered nurse, gave me the book, " How to Heal Heart Disease Without

Surgery " by Dr. Dean Ornish. He admitted his system will never be approved

because it does NOT MAKE ENOUGH MONEY. My aunt, a registered nurse, told me that

bypass surgery is todays cash cow, replacing all those unnecessary

hysterectomies that replaced the unnecesary tonsilectomys, etc.

(I wonder how many mastectomies are also unnecessary?)

In the 60's, a fellow was healing cancer, using the same system as recommended

by Dr. Ornish. BUT, in the 60's the guy was jailed and his healing camp shut

down. (Because he was not a licensed doctor) No matter how we feel, no matter

what we know is true, if some special gang can't make money on it, it ain't

gonna happen!! I don't see the medical community as being much different than

the mafia.

Staying below the radar is getting harder all the time, here in the US, now that

there appears to be some effort to use " thought police " in monitoring the

internet.

Just my spin on it!!! Vance

[Guest guest]

>I don't have references handy for bacteria - but

>do for cancer. Here are just a few:

How should we take that Jim? If _I_ had read any, they would be at

the top of the pile. What you supplied are mostly effects of EMR on

cell division. This is pretty well known. While it could be broadly

construed as " frequency therapy " , there is no compelling link with

Rife or what I believe most of his followers are presently seeking to

replicate.

The point of my OP was essentially this. W requested a

concensus on which direction to take in formally validating Rife's

work. I contend that FIRST we need to agree on where we are NOW, in

terms of accepted science. IOW to what degree it supports our

suppositions. This means collectively examining the literature and

arriving at a set of conclusions regarding the principles involved.

That then becomes our frame of reference, or starting point for

research. So far, this has not been done. It's work, but the

alternative is repetitive speculation, thus ultimately expending even

more time and resources.

While on the subject of cell division, here is a result worth

considering. Have a look at the last sentence. Does that give anyone any ideas?

**********

Species Specificity of Bacterial Response to a 50 Hz Magnetic Field

V. I. Lobyshev , D. I. Nikitin , L. E. Nikitin , and I. Yu. Petrushanko

Moscow State University, Moscow, 119992 Russia

Institute of Microbiology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 117811 Russia

Received March 24, 2003

Abstract: The growth of cultures of bacteria with different cell

membrane lipid compositions was studied after their exposure to a

magnetic field of a frequency of 50 Hz and induction of 18 mT for 40

min. The experiments revealed three new fundamental facts. The

species specificity of the responses of the bacteria to the

application of the magnetic field was observed, which included both

inhibition and activation. The character of the changes in the

kinetics of the bacterial culture growth correlates with the type of

the membrane lipid complex. Pre-exposed distilled water stores the

information about exposure to the magnetic field, and evokes a

pronounced response in the cultures, which is much stronger than the

responses of the same cultures exposed directly in the cultural medium.

**********

Nielsen

[Guest guest]

This does not sound like a very competitive way to remain in business. Why not

just give the machines away?

Since there are no standards for these such devices, I guess this could be

some sort of way. What we really need is for Consumer Reports to do a test on

all Rife Machines and thier plans. This would be an unbiased, objective third

party that could determine which machines were good for what.

Angie

Ringas wrote:

--- wrote:

> Uncle here: My design is fundamentally

> different and better than

> Jim Bare's.

<snip>

> Sorry, but I'm not sticking my neck out that far.

Why not just do like Jim and put your information out

so people can build their own? That's how Jim stayed

out of trouble. It really doesn't do anyone good to

announce that you have a " better " design, but then say

that you're not going to make it or the information

available. In a situation like this, it would be

better for all if you didn't say anything about it,

since nobody will ever have access to it.

Regards,

---------------------------------

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

[Guest guest]

, why do you feel you'd be done away with or thrown in jail?

The establishment prefers to just call those of us who experiment in

these alternatives " Quacks " , why should they bother with anything more

drastic? No need.

If one builds a better mousetrap, the world will NOT come banging on the

door.. It today's world, it would have to be seriously marketed, and

that's where they'd get you! How many patent infringement suits can you

afford to defend?

Dave

wrote:

I know I would be killed or thrown into jail if I ...

[Guest guest]

It has to be U.S. based to have legitimacy in the eyes of the U.S. authorities.

Sorry.

Angie

Metanoic wrote:

;

I would be interested in, and can put together, the lab, staff and

location in India, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. India could do all

the work, for about 20 cents on the dollar for any clinical trials or

just empirical studies. Whatever. Excellent facilities and

professionals as needed.

FYI

Noel

>

> Hi,

> here is a question that was recently put to me and which I want to find

> a consensus on.

>

> Providing money was not an issue, what would we need to scientifically

> confirm the frequencies and methods used by Rife, today?

>

> I will start this off with my ideas.

>

> First of all for in-vitro scientific research:

>

> 1. An Ergonom 4000-3 microscope as a modern day equivalent of the Rife

> microscope with video recording capabilities to document the process.

> http://www.grayfieldoptical.com/ergonom_4000-3.html

>

> 2. Suitable heated chambers where the pathogens can be cultured and

> viewed at high magnifications without staining or other destructive

> methods required. Such chambers would require the ability to apply

> frequencies either electrically, or via plasma tube.

> http://www.grayfieldoptical.com/chambers.html

>

> 2. A medical lab to conduct the experiments in a country when such work

> would be allowed (NOT the USA for example)

>

> 3. Professionally trained microscopists and doctors

>

> 4. Access to live pathogens that could be cultured and viewed under the

> microscope.

>

> 5. Suitable frequency equipment which can generate the frequencies

> (which device would be the most suitable)?

>

> 6. Time to perform this research. How long is it felt would be

> necessary to obtain scientifically significant results?

>

> Once the in-vitro research was completed, in-vivo research could be

> performed with animals and human subjects. Please list what you guys

> feel would be necessary to do this research.

>

> let me know what you guys think is necessary and I would like to see a

> consensus. I have my reasons for asking this now ....

>

> Regards

>

>

> Moderator

>

---------------------------------

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

[Guest guest]

Has there been any evidence that RIfe devices can cure epilepsy?

Angie

Mark Pebbles wrote:

There are some of us who have the objective evidence

that we have cured cancer. In my case, it was two

times, 1997 and 2005 for the treatment of

non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. Both times I used 11.78MHz

with a high-voltage plasma tube system. For the

objective evidence I have all my lab tests and MRI's,

before and after Rife.

Admittedly it does not work for everyone, but at the

same time the traditional methods (surgery,

chemotherapy and radiation) do not work for everyone.

Some people for some unknown reasons don't respond to

any kind of treatment. For me Rife was my only

option; I tried Rituxan, but was nearly killed by an

infusion reaction.

http://shareyourstory.livestrong.org/c.ijIVI2PFKoG/b.738859/siteapps/personalpag\

e/ShowPage.aspx?sid=mlL0JfNQLfJXLcO2F

--- Ringas wrote:

> The recreation of Rife's work should proceed in two

> major phases. The first phase should be done with

> bacteria and regular microscopes, not viruses and

> the

> Ergonom microscope. The reason for this is so that

> it

> could be widely reproduced by virtually anyone. We

> should also follow Rife's lead and use motile

> bacteria

> such as E. Coli. The reason for this is because

> motile bacteria will be visibly affected, whereas

> non

> motile bacteria might not be visibly affected,

> needing

> more complex work to determine their devitalization.

>

> We should even go one step further and use non

> pathogenic E. Coli, so that any high school student

> could reproduce the effect.

>

> If we could achieve this first phase, and reproduce

> it

> widely, we could use that to not only silence the

> debunkers, but also interest the professionals to

> take

> it and continue on with other bacteria that cause

> disease.

>

> The next phase is cancer, the proverbial holy grail

> of

> Rife research. This is where the Ergonom microscope

> comes in. I have yet to see images of properly

> filtered virus through the Ergonom, but we'll grant

> that this isn't a problem for it. Then we would

> need

> cooperation from a clinic or hospital to provide

> fresh

> tumors that have been carved out of patients. One

> flaw in Rife's research is that he could not see the

> so-called cancer virus in its fresh, uncultured

> state.

> Hopefully the Ergonom can do this. The virus needs

> to

> be filtered out of the fresh tumors, imaged, and

> also

> have its constituent proteins determined with

> standard

> methods, as well as its DNA, RNA, or whatever else.

> It needs to be subjected to whatever they do in

> standard virology and molecular biology, but the

> samples have to be directly filtered from fresh

> tumors. After that baseline is established, then we

> move on to culturing. It would be best to reproduce

> Kendall's medium and Rife's special culturing

> technique, but we could add other more conventional

> methods for comparison. When it is cultured, then

> standard Koch's postulates should be followed, as

> well

> as Rife's standard method of determining its MOR.

> With a supply of highly purified virus, we could

> also

> develop a blood test (like Dr. did) for the

> virus, which would not only be used for diagnosing

> cancer, but could also be used to determine that the

> experimental animals were virus free before their

> use

> in experiments. The animals used could be standard

> pure strains like Rife used, but I would also like

> to

> see an experiment with non inbred animals. This is

> another flaw in Rife's and conventional research. I

> should also point out that we don't need endless

> experiments with myriads of animals; just a few

> basic

> experiments to fulfill Koch's postulates. After

> that,

> human experimentation. We can be confident about

> safety from the experience with Diathermy and other

> physical therapies, as well as the relatively low

> power of a Rife machine. What we want is small

> studies, and are looking for large effects. The

> reason for small studies is so that they can be

> widely

> reproduced, and the reason for large effects is so

> that there will be no mistaking the matter. Curing

> 10

> out of 10 patients is more impressive and

> significant

> than curing 100 out of 1000. I should also point

> out

> that we want subjects with biopsy confirmed cancer.

>

> If we can achieve all of this, then we will have

> thoroughly confirmed Rife's research.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

>

> --- wrote:

>

> > Hi ,

> > actually both!

> >

> > Basically recreating the frequency research for

> > (re)determining the

> > MORs for cancer and other pathogens as originally

> > performed by Rife,

> > yet using the Ergonom microscopes and respective

> > chambers instead of

> > the original Rife microscope (which we do not have

> > at our disposal).

> >

> > They is a possibility of obtaining funds for such

> a

> > project, and we

> > want to make sure everything is planned correctly

> so

> > that the work is

> > scientifically valid.

> >

> > Using the Ergonom microscope, we want to see

> exactly

> > what does happen

> > to those pathogens when using the Rife method as

> > originally used (as

> > far as it is possible to recreate that work).

> >

> > Regards

> >

> >

>

>

__________________________________________________________

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.

http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

---------------------------------

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

[Guest guest]

Epilepsy (also try Shigella) - 10000, 880, 802, 787, 727, 700, 650, 600, 210,

633, 125, 20

Shigella (can cause acute dysentery and diarrhea as well as infect nerves,

brain, and spinal cord chronically) - 621, 762, 769, 770, 1550, 802, 832

Shigella_dysenteriae_HC – 19421.39, 966.93

Shigella_flexneri_HC (causes depression) – 19616.10, 976.63

Shigella_sonnei_HC (invades tumors) – 15832.29, 788.24

A friend of mine used water therapy, colon cleanse, Brain Formula, and felt

better as a result.

-

[Guest guest]

I'm sorry ,

I thought there was some discussion about testing and proving the validity of

the Rife Machines. My argument is that in the US nothing new will be accepted

by those people in control and stuck in their own dogma.

I posed a question about a subject, to a fellow, an aviatian engineer,and his

responce was what I consider typical. He went on and on about " there being no

" evidence " while, in fact, there is a lot of evidence. He then argued if it had

not been proposed by the famous " scientists " , DeVinci, et al, of the 13th/14th

centuries, it could not be valid.

Science schools, it would seem, pass on the old dogma, which hangs on to the

end. I believe if it weren't for dogma, we would be hundreds of years ahead of

where we are now.

There have been too many Americans imprisoned (or eliminated) for their seeking

improvements in the " Status Quo " .

Vance

[Guest guest]

Getting clearance for Clinical Trials in Australia is relatively easy. It must

be registered with the Govt. TGA (Therapeutic Goods Administration) at a cost of

Au$13,500 to Au$14,500.

Trials can then go ahead legitimately.

Kind Regards,

Kerry G Tume

M.Ac.F. M.I.L.A. A.C.O.N.T.

www.tumelaser.com

Clini-Lase, Laser 3000 Therapeutic Lasers

PH: (61) 08 8327 0845

Mobile: 0431674910

Re: Re: What would we need to Scientifically Confirm Rife's

Frequencies?

>Setting up a special Rife website for test results, as you suggest,

>would be difficult from the start.

I specifically did not advocate an equipment " test site " for the

obvious reasons you mention. Only an interpretation of advertised

technical features within the marketplace, and their relative value

in practice. And cost effectiveness. This is not available at

present, and I doubt there are many on your forum who would consider

themselves able to provide this kind of overview, or read between the

hype, if requested.

And yes, I consult forums too. The issue I pointed out is finding

them. The newcomer invariably first encounters websites, and most

have a set agenda.

>I asked here many times that others contribute articles to the Wiki,

>even anonymously. To date, not one article has been added by anyone

>but myself.

Maybe you should have said you a doing a new website :-) Some authors

are not keen on others " editing " their work. But I did suggest my

recently posted list of manufacturers' websites could be added.

>I have a suggestion to you. Why don't you assist us all by putting

>your own information together on the various devices and posting it

>in the relevant sections on the Rife Forum.

Well, as you might notice, upon self-reflection, everyone

instinctively likes to feather their own nest. The general idea is

worthy, however, and I am sure someone will get to it eventually.

Nielsen

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.1/1302 - Release Date: 27/02/2008

4:34 PM

[Guest guest]

Getting clearance for Clinical Trials in Australia is relatively easy. It must

be registered with the Govt. TGA (Therapeutic Goods Administration) at a cost of

Au$13,500 to Au$14,500.

Trials can then go ahead legitimately.

Kind Regards,

Kerry G Tume

M.Ac.F. M.I.L.A. A.C.O.N.T.

www.tumelaser.com

Clini-Lase, Laser 3000 Therapeutic Lasers

PH: (61) 08 8327 0845

Mobile: 0431674910

Re: Re: What would we need to Scientifically Confirm Rife's

Frequencies?

>Setting up a special Rife website for test results, as you suggest,

>would be difficult from the start.

I specifically did not advocate an equipment " test site " for the

obvious reasons you mention. Only an interpretation of advertised

technical features within the marketplace, and their relative value

in practice. And cost effectiveness. This is not available at

present, and I doubt there are many on your forum who would consider

themselves able to provide this kind of overview, or read between the

hype, if requested.

And yes, I consult forums too. The issue I pointed out is finding

them. The newcomer invariably first encounters websites, and most

have a set agenda.

>I asked here many times that others contribute articles to the Wiki,

>even anonymously. To date, not one article has been added by anyone

>but myself.

Maybe you should have said you a doing a new website :-) Some authors

are not keen on others " editing " their work. But I did suggest my

recently posted list of manufacturers' websites could be added.

>I have a suggestion to you. Why don't you assist us all by putting

>your own information together on the various devices and posting it

>in the relevant sections on the Rife Forum.

Well, as you might notice, upon self-reflection, everyone

instinctively likes to feather their own nest. The general idea is

worthy, however, and I am sure someone will get to it eventually.

Nielsen

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.1/1302 - Release Date: 27/02/2008

4:34 PM

[Guest guest]

Here is a twist - Rife claimed in the 1950's that the cause of cancer

wasn't the virus, it was the metabolic byproducts of the virus (

chemicals ) the virus produced. The main culprit -

Di-benzanthracene. Today a variant of this chemical - Di Methyl

Benzanthracene or DMBA is used to produce cancer.

So what was Rife treating? A virus? A chemical ? or was he just

treating Cancer?

A lot of infectious organisms have now been recognized as

contributing to the initiation of cancer. Once cancer has begun,

simply treating the infection doesn't cure the cancer.

My 2 cents on this is that Rife was treating cancer - and thought he

was treating an infection.

Jim Bare

> > " The virus needs to be filtered out of the fresh tumors, imaged, and also

> > have its constituent proteins determined with standard

> > methods, as well as its DNA, RNA, or whatever else. "

[Guest guest]

Here is a twist - Rife claimed in the 1950's that the cause of cancer

wasn't the virus, it was the metabolic byproducts of the virus (

chemicals ) the virus produced. The main culprit -

Di-benzanthracene. Today a variant of this chemical - Di Methyl

Benzanthracene or DMBA is used to produce cancer.

So what was Rife treating? A virus? A chemical ? or was he just

treating Cancer?

A lot of infectious organisms have now been recognized as

contributing to the initiation of cancer. Once cancer has begun,

simply treating the infection doesn't cure the cancer.

My 2 cents on this is that Rife was treating cancer - and thought he

was treating an infection.

Jim Bare

> > " The virus needs to be filtered out of the fresh tumors, imaged, and also

> > have its constituent proteins determined with standard

> > methods, as well as its DNA, RNA, or whatever else. "