A real CURE for AIDS, Hepititis, Cancer, Herpes etc, for less than the price of a night out!

reply to post by arpanet


I'm calling it snake oil because the sellers/pushers are claiming it can cure all disease without any data. If they were, instead, suggesting it COULD cure something, but we need to study it further, that would be a different story. Growing up in a country where opportunists and charlatans were/are common, I have a very low tolerance for people like that.

Originally posted by gatewaywithin
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Bedlam,I appreciate your professional opinion on the the subject but hardly believe that medical science has even scratched the surface of these particular types of treatment.Furthermore to call Rife and others quacks and snake oil salesmen only indicates your degree of arrogance and ignorance.I really think you have it backwards.The snake oil salesman never left, they simply took over the industry.

Sorry, I stand by it for Rife and Clark. Not so much for Beck.

Rife claims that MF-HF frequency range RF "resonates" with cells - it doesn't.

He also had that microscope which he claimed could violate Abbe, but while that's technically possible in some very circumscribed circumstances, his device wasn't any of those. Worse, it seems they only worked if he built and operated them.

Sort of like Keely. In oh so many ways.

reply to post by RogerT

I am on p11 but I posted earlier on the computer availability of some of these techniques.
Research showed on Rife pages that RRR used HIGHER frequencies to kill cancer cells, and that his two followers that we inherited the so-called rife machines from used Hertz frequencies in the lower (auditory) range.

They acknowledged in court records that these lower frequencies do not kill or eliminate cancer cells. The Rife frequencies used for cancer in the thirties that are on record to be efficient range in the millions of Hertz (cycle per second).
They are ALREADY RADIO WAVES.

Now Beck's novelty was that he could kill Aids virus with 4 Hz or 3.9 with an added twist - but all that can be done on a PC with a sound system. 4 is subauditory - actually it is a Delta wave that puts some people to sleep.

The human ear can hear on the average from 60 Hertz to a little above 20,000. That is all you can do with an average sound card on a PC - but if you want to fight the flu, Lyme etc. they may be good enough. It may work for aids but you have to have a slightly more sophisticated tone generator program.

My main point is that Beck's device can be modeled on a PC, and so can most post-Rife frequencies in the auditory range, but none of these are supposed to be very efficient against cancer cells, they do not even penetrate all cells according to some researcher on standard Rife history pages. The frequency that starts penetrating all is ultrasound, that is, higher than 20,000.

If you buy a machine that can do Hertz ranges in the millions though, you may try to have a serious advantage against tumors.

Another person who discovered the same radio frequencies independently and PUBLISHED STANDARD MEDICAL RESEARCH on his findings is the Turkish MD Dr. Seckiner Gorgun. He called this GEMM therapy, and it is done in several countries today, including ITaly, which accepted his medical research.

In other words, he cured quite a lot of cancer types with radio waves, and his disciples today do the same. No one called him a quack and his discovery is slowly spreading after his death (which happened at a mature age from non-cancerous problems).

The cell studies are beyond my competence but you can start your studies here:

www.gemm-therapy.com...

I am not sure Beck devices or standard zappers are efficient against tumors. If anyone knows such cases, please post testimonies. I have heard and read credible testimonies in the case of HIV and simply colds as well as H1N1.

Due to technical limitations, I experiment with audio range Rife devices at this point and anyway they are effective against the troubles I am trying to fight.

To sum it up: Beck does not claim his device is sureproof against cancer. If that is what you want to fight, either go to a Gorgun clinic (the nearest one to Russia is in Kosovo), or purchase a machine that can reproduce the million Hertz ranges that Rife used. HIV is quite another thing.

Contrary to what some skeptical poster said earlier, there IS CREDIBLE MEDICAL RESEARCH on radio waves killing cancer cells with citology and all. Please check the papers of Dr. Gorgun in English at the GEMM site.

www.gemm-therapy.com...

Originally posted by Angeldust1199
Your holy peer review system have killed thousands upon thousands of people, just think VIOXX. Oops, well now tell me - where is the prosecutions, outrage and character assassinations?

Personally, I prefer leeches and bloodletting. It gets the evil humours out of the blood that come in the window from demon infested air.

If a good leeching doesn't do the trick, then I've got a couple of books of hexerei that are guaranteed by the authors to cure nearly any disease - why, there's dozens of anecdotes right there in the book that prove that it works! Tabitha D of Smith County was "curyd of herr shingels in a fortenite by the powyr of the majik sqwar"

reply to post by Bedlam


No one knows how the Rife microscope worked. Vital parts of the design and use instructions are missing. Everyone would grant you that.
However, his high-frequency early efforts agaisnt cancer cells have been reproduced. That technology has been checked with or without ray tubes. It is far simpler to use RF range.

The stuff most people today claim to be Rife technology is not his early research which was efficient against tumors - those efforts were done in the Megahertz range and higher. It is the technology developed by two of his followers (mainly John Crane), in the audio range, with simple electric pads, and later with square waves, which proved effective against a lot of bacteria but not cancer cells.

This should give you a very thorough history of various frequencies:
www.rifevideos.com...

and we all have to grant you that no one knows today how the microscope worked. On top of that, Rife was noted to be inaccurate in reading frequencies - his co-workers jotted them down correctly sometimes. You are correct as far as that.

However, if anyone can kill certain pathogens with higher frequencies, and Gorgun used radio, why debate the issue in general?

Be discerning. Quacks and false claims do exist - but I assume you are mre discerning than to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

reply to post by Kokatsi


Thanks for the link in English.

This is wonderful to know. Thanks again to the OP.

Originally posted by Kokatsi
reply to post by RogerT

 

I am on p11 but I posted earlier on the computer availability of some of these techniques.
Research showed on Rife pages that RRR used HIGHER frequencies to kill cancer cells, and that his two followers that we inherited the so-called rife machines from used Hertz frequencies in the lower (auditory) range.

They acknowledged in court records that these lower frequencies do not kill or eliminate cancer cells. The Rife frequencies used for cancer in the thirties that are on record to be efficient range in the millions of Hertz (cycle per second).
They are ALREADY RADIO WAVES.

Radio waves with 15 meter to 1000 meter long wavelengths, and so not particularly able to "resonate" some putative frequency (of what, one wonders) that all cells supposedly have.

Now Beck's novelty was that he could kill Aids virus with 4 Hz or 3.9 with an added twist - but all that can be done on a PC with a sound system. 4 is subauditory - actually it is a Delta wave that puts some people to sleep.

If it's a brain wave in that frequency range it's a delta wave. If it's a sound, it's a sound.

The human ear can hear on the average from 60 Hertz to a little above 20,000. That is all you can do with an average sound card on a PC - but if you want to fight the flu, Lyme etc. they may be good enough. It may work for aids but you have to have a slightly more sophisticated tone generator program.

And why do you think that sound waves with wavelengths from inches to feet in length (in air, at any rate) have diddly to do with ANY particular organism?

Because Rife said so?

Another person who discovered the same radio frequencies independently and PUBLISHED STANDARD MEDICAL RESEARCH on his findings is the Turkish MD Dr. Seckiner Gorgun.

This guy says it pretty well..."The Journal of Frontier Perspectives" isn't what you'd call reputable.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by Bedlam]

Originally posted by Kokatsi
reply to post by Bedlam

 

No one knows how the Rife microscope worked. Vital parts of the design and use instructions are missing. Everyone would grant you that.
However, his high-frequency early efforts agaisnt cancer cells have been reproduced. That technology has been checked with or without ray tubes. It is far simpler to use RF range.

If the proof comes from the Rife Society or the Cayce Institute or the like, I'm not likely to call that "proof". If you're talking about destroying tumors with diathermy, a Bovie, an RF ablator that's heating cells to destruction or the like, that's a lot different than what Rife was claiming, which really doesn't have much in the way of a believable mechanism, at least what they put forward sounds more like something you'd hear at a Roscicrucian meeting.

A hallmark of Keely-dom is that no-one but you can use or create your special invention. It should be a flashing red light that warns you of quackery ahead.

The stuff most people today claim to be Rife technology is not his early research which was efficient against tumors - those efforts were done in the Megahertz range and higher....

Yeah, but what I'm saying is that the entire Rife "specific frequency" thing is total bollocks, documented by true believers with no proper background in how to conduct experiments, and no expertise. Remember, Rife said there were really only 10 types of bacteria. I could show you more than that with a q-tip, my backyard and a couple of different types of media.

However, if anyone can kill certain pathogens with higher frequencies, and Gorgun used radio, why debate the issue in general?

Gorgun is also a quack. I can kill nearly anything with higher frequencies, by heating the sample, or coagulating the organism's proteins with dielectric heating or whatnot. About the only thing I could find in terms of double blind studies for GEMM were in the Frontier Perspectives, which is a joke. Also Gorgun's mechanism for function is incorrect, and for corroboration he cites a paper which has nothing to do with what he's doing.

Be discerning. Quacks and false claims do exist - but I assume you are mre discerning than to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

People whose substantiation is from their own web-site and a study published in Frontier Perspectives, which also publishes serious articles on homeopathy and dowsing sort of fill me with a lack of trust.

Another very interesting question to consider when exploring this matter is this... Based on the supposition that the device is actually useless "snake oil", what would motivate such a reputable scientist/doctor to make such claims (as in the video in the thread's initial posting)? It is made clear that money is not a motive as the doctor is not benefiting financially in any way. One would have to think that he was either demented or lying. Does anyone have evidence of either?

No, and I understand your desperation. People here make outrageous claims and they do not know or disregard things discovered by science such as the germ theory. I personally have never been against Western medicine, in fact I am taking an antibiotic now against bacteria in the superdental region that I could not kill off with Rife experiments at home.

However, PLEASE READ THIS (research summary)

www.gemm-therapy.com...

Gorgun is dead on.

I think Beck's claims are overstated and his stuff can be reproduced by a simple PC.

I know the difference between sound waves and brainwaves. I studied EEG research on the physiology of meditation.

Binaural sine wave sounds can entrain most people's brains to alpha and theta and lower - the technology is based on putting out a sine wave let's say at 100 Hz in the one ear, and 104 Hz in the other. The brain starts an immediate and uncontrollable auditory hallucination heard as a vibration between the two speakers - which can lead to entrainment (except in the case of trauma, drugs or certain schizophrenics).

The same tone generators that can do binaurals can be used to reproduce some of John Crane's results from the fifties and sixties, except you naturally attach the speaker wires to your skin (preferably with phys moistened cotton pads). Then you have low-voltage audio range square wave DC currents going through your body - and trust me, it works only if you can feel it. It has effectively cured several bad sinus infections (mostly viral) for me this year, and it is TOTALLY FREE.

Naturally, no one will be put to sleep by hearing a simple 4 Hz sine wave, it has to have entrainment of the two hemispheres and this has been documented well since the fifties (Bob Monroe was the inventor.)

Gorgun, back to healing, was an engineer too, he produced some computer innovations in his time too.

He does not put forward any weird theory either, he only suggests modestly that the balance in understanding cell communication may be more towards weak electric signals than solely chemical messengers. And he has decades of research to prove it - and the backing of the official Italian organization of MD's.

I am less sympathetic with Beck, he may have had good results with in vitro AIDS virus but he is obviously a salesman at heart. I do not have a good opinion on people who charge high dollars for what can be done free with a pair of wires and an existing PC.

Rife is controversial, I grant you happily, but some of his suppressed research may have great value - notably that radio waves, electricity and even microwaves may have a role in fighting pathogens in the science of the future as opposed to only chemical means.

We know that ionizing radiation is used to kill cancer cells in certain cases.

I do not know enough details on recent advances of chemo (although I studied in the same class of people that make the h1n1 vaccine in my country) but all I know is that msot people I saw that tried it died and it was very unpleasant. The most frequent cause of death was the thinning of certain veins.

If there is a safer alternative in any type of current, why not experiment and try?

Can you say with certainty that electricity, radio waves or microwaves are totally useless against pathogens? Some of this (like the method I described above - speaker wires) are perfectly safe to experiment with.

I do not believe that only ONE frequency would be efficient against all known diseases. Already Adachi has gathered empirical data to disprove that.

Personally, the best results I ever obtained were against viruses. I will one day get my biologist classmate (the one who developed last year's vaccine which was awarded by the WHO) to try some experiments in vitro, since it is so simple and cheap to try.

Originally posted by TheFlash
It is made clear that money is not a motive as the doctor is not benefiting financially in any way. One would have to think that he was either demented or lying. Does anyone have evidence of either?

Why did Keely do it? Cayce? Reich?

There could be a number of reasons.

Maybe he really thinks it's true, but what he's seeing as results aren't what he thinks they are. That happens a lot. Someone gets a result and becomes their own true believer, and everything they do from that point is seen through the glasses of their misperception. That's one reason we have legitimate peer review, and results have to be replicable and falsifiable, and you do a lot of painful data gathering to disprove the null hypothesis. People are wired to do this, it's tough not to do it. We don't let people here validate their own designs for the same reason. No one on the design team can sit on the validation team. No one on design or validation can sit on production or compliance testing. Period. It cut the error rate in our delivered product to near zero.

Before that, we had people (including me) who would be curiously blind to errors they were getting. After the fact, it was obvious you'd had them, but for some reason you don't tend to look for faults in your own work.

Or the guy could just be delusional.

Originally posted by Kokatsi

... and trust me, it works only if you can feel it. It has effectively cured several bad sinus infections (mostly viral) for me this year, and it is TOTALLY FREE.

But in that case, it seems like a perfect case for being nothing but a placebo reaction. If it was just below the threshold of sensation, it's hard to know that it's doing anything...

Gorgun, back to healing, was an engineer too, he produced some computer innovations in his time too.

He does not put forward any weird theory either, he only suggests modestly that the balance in understanding cell communication may be more towards weak electric signals than solely chemical messengers. And he has decades of research to prove it - and the backing of the official Italian organization of MD's.

But it's decades of his own research, and as far as I can tell, not much in the way of validation, at least the only things I've seen published on it are in pure woo journals or his own website.

His explanation seems to be at first glance that he's saying that his radio waves are coupling to proteins with some sort of qm resonance, and as 'proof' he cites papers describing what actually ARE qm resonances using IR, UV and high frequency microwaves. But you don't get those effects with radio waves in the region he's using - it's a lot like Rife, you can't really pull a 15 meter long radio wave out of your pocket and tell me it's coupling resonantly to a structure a few microns long. Because it's rubbish.

We know that ionizing radiation is used to kill cancer cells in certain cases.

That's back to mechanical damage, like using high power focused ultrasonics to liquify a tumor. I can also whack them with a hammer and kill them, if I do it hard enough, but you can't say "and thus I can soak this hammer in a bottle of fairy-distilled mountain spring water and give you a cup of it - and you'll be CURED!" because the cure isn't in the hammerness of it, it's in the whacking.

Can you say with certainty that electricity, radio waves or microwaves are totally useless against pathogens? Some of this (like the method I described above - speaker wires) are perfectly safe to experiment with.

That would be proof of a negative - tough to do. Can you say with certainty that Rife will stand up to double blind testing in good labs? Because I can't find that it did, although I'd bet that Frontiers has some data.

I do not believe that only ONE frequency would be efficient against all known diseases. Already Adachi has gathered empirical data to disprove that.

Adachi has serious articles about building holy handgrenades to repel the evil orgone from cell phone death towers, as well. I used to read it like people read The Onion, only it got old eventually.

Well then, let me drop this here and see what the reaction from the various members here will be.

The 2008 Nobel in Medicine for his work on HIV, Luc Montagnier, published these 2 recent studies.

Electromagnetic signals are produced by aqueous nanostructures derived from bacterial DNA sequences

Abstract

A novel property of DNA is described: the capacity of some bacterial DNA sequences to induce electromagnetic waves at high aqueous dilutions. It appears to be a resonance phenomenon triggered by the ambient electromagnetic background of very low frequency waves. The genomic DNA of most pathogenic bacteria contains sequences which are able to generate such signals. This opens the way to the development of highly sensitive detection system for chronic bacterial infections in human and animal diseases.

and

Electromagnetic detection of HIV DNA in the blood of AIDS patients treated by antiretroviral therapy

Abstract

Electromagnetic signals of low frequency have been shown to be durably produced in aqueous dilutions of the Human Imunodeficiency Virus DNA. In vivo, HIV DNA signals are detected only in patients previously treated by antiretroviral therapy and having no detectable viral RNA copies in their blood. We suggest that the treatment of AIDS patients pushes the virus towards a new mode of replication implying only DNA, thus forming a reservoir insensitive to retroviral inhibitors. Implications for new approaches aimed at eradicating HIV infection are discussed.

The skeptics already nominated Luc Montagnier, a Nobel winner, for the IgNobel.

Can you believe that?

Why I am Nominating Luc Montagnier for an IgNobel Prize

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by Kokatsi

... and trust me, it works only if you can feel it. It has effectively cured several bad sinus infections (mostly viral) for me this year, and it is TOTALLY FREE.

But in that case, it seems like a perfect case for being nothing but a placebo reaction. If it was just below the threshold of sensation, it's hard to know that it's doing anything...

Please re-read my sentence, Bedlam. In your haste, you understood the opposite of what I said.
I said sinus pathogens were cleared when I could FEEL the current going through my head, not the other way around!

Can you say with certainty that electricity, radio waves or microwaves are totally useless against pathogens? Some of this (like the method I described above - speaker wires) are perfectly safe to experiment with.

That would be proof of a negative - tough to do. Can you say with certainty that Rife will stand up to double blind testing in good labs? Because I can't find that it did, although I'd bet that Frontiers has some data.

This is not a logical problem. I have a background in linguistics and logic. Western science has advanced as an EMPIRICAL path. That is, you first have a phenomenon, like bacteria showing up together with certain symptoms, THEN you try to explain it with a hypothesis, which, after much experimentation and theorizing can be accepted by mainstream science. This is how all advances were done by scientists like Koch and doctors like Semmelweis.
If you exclude experimentation protocol because your current theory disallows it, you are a closed minded opponent of scientific progress.
Again, with physics it may be different, but medical and healing sciences are EMPIRICAL professions.
To this day we do not know how certain treatments work accepted by mainstream medical science. We have HYPOTHESES about them.
If you exclude hypotheses merely based on the limitations of your theory, you are not advancing science.

I do not believe that only ONE frequency would be efficient against all known diseases. Already Adachi has gathered empirical data to disprove that.

Adachi has serious articles about building holy handgrenades to repel the evil orgone from cell phone death towers, as well. I used to read it like people read The Onion, only it got old eventually.

I know that. I also know he is a devout Christian, which is just as unscientific. However, he and a lot of his correspondents experimented with post-Rife technologes and there are empirical results.

Empirical evidence suggests that RF waves as well as certain electric currents do kill pathogens without harming the host human. Rife had a hypothesis that certain frequencies kill certain pathogens because he has seen that happen in his lab.

Cell cultures or Petri dishes in a lab are immune to suggestion and the placebo effect - unless you are a hard-core esotericist.
So how do you explain the results so far?
If you think Gorgun's documented results are due to mere hypnotism, you should devise double-bind experiments that prove them so.

If large wavelengths happen to kill certain pathogens, and we cannot explain it - so be it, let us proceed with trying to understand what is happening in detail. Mere armchair theories cannot help. Healing is a practical issue.

An open-minded scientist would suggest let us do experiments.
A dogmatic person would say the hell with it, my THEORY disallows it.

The minimum you can do if you are on that side, is to provide a detailed explanation on why in THEORY you think it cannot happen. If you say placebo, then you should explain in vitro experiments.

I am having the feeling that you have a few FOREGONE CONCLUSIONS here, just like the pro-Beck and Rife people have theirs. That does not help science or objectivity.

You would not even look at evidence because it has been produced by the researcher himself. But that begs the question - you prove that Gorgun's work is not accepted by mainstream medical professionals simply by saying that he has (so far) produced all the evidence himself. That is, others have not reproduced his experiments and have not yet contemplated his (ever so slight) changes in cell communications theory honestly.

Translated, he is not accepted by certain scientists because he has not yet been accepted - so in your mind this proves that he cannot be...

How on earth would Pasteur react to such an illogical attitude?

It is OK to personally dislike anything that is has not yet been proven completely and accepted by the mainstream medical community. But then you have probably nothing worthwhile to say on any experimental therapies.

Originally posted by jjjtir
The skeptics already nominated Luc Montagnier, a Nobel winner, for the IgNobel.

Can you believe that?

Why I am Nominating Luc Montagnier for an IgNobel Prize

I'd say they have a point.

You get biologists pranking around in physics, you can get some weird crap.

What do you think about him having to start his own journal to publish in?

"We’ve learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature’s phenomena will agree or they’ll disagree with your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you haven’t tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it’s this type of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself–and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you’ve not fooled yourself, it’s easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that."

Richard Feynmann

Sorry, I did not write all the required quote unquote signals as required. Please read my entire post - it has my comments in the grey field as well.

Originally posted by Kokatsi

Please re-read my sentence, Bedlam. In your haste, you understood the opposite of what I said.
I said sinus pathogens were cleared when I could FEEL the current going through my head, not the other way around!

No, I understood you. A dramatic placebo with a bad taste, a weird sensation, or some tangible side effect (like, for example, giving you some Niacin) typically has a stronger result than one that doesn't "do" anything.

This is not a logical problem. I have a background in linguistics and logic. Western science has advanced as an EMPIRICAL path. That is, you first have a phenomenon, like bacteria showing up together with certain symptoms, THEN you try to explain it with a hypothesis, which, after much experimentation and theorizing can be accepted by mainstream science. This is how all advances were done by scientists like Koch and doctors like Semmelweis.
If you exclude experimentation protocol because your current theory disallows it, you are a closed minded opponent of scientific progress.
Again, with physics it may be different, but medical and healing sciences are EMPIRICAL professions.

However, when your putative healer states "these long wave radio signals are totally selective in narrow ranges of frequencies for exact strains of bacteria because all bacteria have golden magic resonances" or the like, and there IS no way that that happens, then you have to wonder about the research. That's why you do double blinded testing outside of a partisan group, otherwise you get Tobacco Institute or CSPI studies. It also helps if the testing is done by a group that does that sort of research, with skilled researchers that can do a proper design of experiment, to keep the variables down to one as far as possible and eliminate bad test design by reducing confounders and bad assumptions such as confusing correlation with causation.

It's generally why you don't have BS level guys doing experiment design. It's not that easy.

It's also a good idea in the case where you've got a Keely-ish guy with the magic microscope, just sayin'.

To this day we do not know how certain treatments work accepted by mainstream medical science. We have HYPOTHESES about them.
If you exclude hypotheses merely based on the limitations of your theory, you are not advancing science.

Ah, but we know a lot of them, and newer treatments are being sought by first understanding the effect you want and then designing something to do that instead of, say, culturing wild fungi and seeing which ones kill bacteria. Not that that's a bad way to do it, but even in that case we know what's going on, in many cases.

I know that. I also know he is a devout Christian, which is just as unscientific. However, he and a lot of his correspondents experimented with post-Rife technologes and there are empirical results.

Empirical evidence suggests that RF waves as well as certain electric currents do kill pathogens without harming the host human. Rife had a hypothesis that certain frequencies kill certain pathogens because he has seen that happen in his lab.

Cell cultures or Petri dishes in a lab are immune to suggestion and the placebo effect - unless you are a hard-core esotericist.

The intent of double blinding is also to eliminate experimenter bias, either in application of the 'treatment' or in evaluation of the results. Something I'm rather sure exists in Adachi's 'researchers'. The other thing I'd expect is that their experiments have a lot of bad controls, small sample sets and confounders they're not dealing with.

How many reputably published double-blind studies ever successfully demonstrated the success of either Rife or Clark's (or Drown's homo-vibro machine, or whatever)?

If large wavelengths happen to kill certain pathogens, and we cannot explain it - so be it, let us proceed with trying to understand what is happening in detail. Mere armchair theories cannot help. Healing is a practical issue.

I'm sure that's been said by every guy that's selling Dr Nature's Patented Wigwam Oil. Look, if you state that doing Morris dance with bells on kills E. Coli, but with hankies doesn't, great, but then the research should go away from you into someplace that can replicate it properly. And when it fails to do so, it ought to end there instead of the proponent squealing about men in black stealing his magic Morris bells that only he can make.

How on earth would Pasteur react to such an illogical attitude?

It is OK to personally dislike anything that is has not yet been proven completely and accepted by the mainstream medical community. But then you have probably nothing worthwhile to say on any experimental therapies.

Pasteur kept records and his results were replicable. He didn't have magic Pasteurization that only worked when he ran the machine in his lab and kept the samples in his storage.

He published the details of what needed to be done to effect his methods. And then put them into action, not with himself at the magic controls that no-one else could run, but in a production environment that was run by workers trained to do them.

Pasteur would spit on Rife, IMHO.

I think experimental therapies are interesting. If it involves something that has radionics attached to it, or dowsing, or Reiki, or telepathy, fairies, orgone, or the magical piano playin' finger bones of St Cecilia, I'll be honest with you, it'll have to be astoundingly well replicated many many times by someone I'd have faith in.

edit: and by 'faith' I mean trust that they know how to carry out a proper experiment and aren't affiliated in some way with the original proponent

[edit on 22-6-2010 by Bedlam]

Originally posted by Kokatsi
Sorry, I did not write all the required quote unquote signals as required. Please read my entire post - it has my comments in the grey field as well.

Don't you hate that? I've sometimes found that the preview will show it right and it'll be wrong in the forum. Quite a number of times when you try to edit them they won't change, either.

blah, blah, blah, blah. All the words here are really pretty worthless when you get right down to it. It someone truly has faith in this device, that is, that it can cure AIDS as claimed, and rid the body of all HIV virus then actions would speak MUCH louder than words. All one has to do to gain my belief (and be a hero to many people) is find someone who is suffering from AIDS, ask him for a sample of blood, inject it into his own vein, become infected, be tested in a reputable laboratory and post the results here for us to see the virus load in his blood, then use the device to cure himself and repost the virus-free lab test once the several-week treatment is complete.

For my next trick I will predict the future - I predict that no one has such faith in this device.

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa


Again, I don't care about why you drew the conclusion, it doesn't change a thing other than you having the last word. You still drew the conclusion without data; I mean I knew doctors were stubborn in their ways, but wow...

A few other notes: the crack about stalin was just a joke on my part, you know i.e. humor, haha, funny...

Also I didn't ignore your thoughts on the HPV vaccine as I found it lacking in scope, and didn't mean the pharmaceutical company Merck was "shooting themselves in the foot". When you look past the sugar coating that "hey we have a cancer vaccine" provides, and notice that it is:
1) a vaccine NOT a cure
2) the lancet stated that the vaccine was good up to 4-5 years (www.thelancet.com...) and seeing as to how the original vaccine marketed by Merck was only introduced in 2006, we still await any substantial evidence that this vaccine works.
3) The vaccine hasn't shown any decline in incidence above the average decline of cervical cancer from 1975*2007 of 4.5% APC. (seer.cancer.gov...)
4) my favorite is that the average age for cervical cancer is 48, and the clinical followed 1,113 woman with average ages of 23. Hell it only killed 4,020 in 2009, the real cash cow for pharma is lung cancer!

The vaccine is certainly not hurting Merck's profits, more like a volcano insurance salesman to me.

As for the chemotherapy, I am sorry I just did a quick search. Maybe you can dazzle me with some positive chemotherapy numbers?

[edit on 22-6-2010 by arpanet]