Question and challenge 
parazapper
11 y
6,926
† Cross †
I posted a while back about the project / study where I zapper a jar full of water loaded with microbes and practically destroyed all microbes in the water in two 1 hour zappings.
My Question is this:
Has anyone had any success repeating this experiment using any other zapper, including Beck, or with any rife machine, using two 1 hour zappings? It would seem that proponents of various technologies and methods would jump on this to show that they are also effective and that ParaZapper is not the only one. The next step is a before and after biological diversity analysis.
http://huldaclarkparazapper.com
More
- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,688
This is a reply to # 2,110,311I actually love this idea
I would love to try this with my rife machine. The problem is that I pretty much use exclusively DNA frequencies with my machine, where's the zapper is more of a broadband approach.
In other words I would have to know the specific bacteria or fungus or whatever that's in the jar and then apply the appropriate DNA frequency to it. It can't just be "assorted microbes" or whatever. You know what I'm saying?
It would have to be a very specific organism. How do you think that could happen?- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,333
This is a reply to # 2,110,478I understand what you are saying and in saying that, you are actually making part of my point.
If it is that broad in coverage and that effective, why resort to any other time consuming method? Say, for example, I have an abscessed tooth. With Rife, I have to guess just which bacteria may be in the infection, and treat each one individually and possibly with several frequencies. Lots of guess work and seeking out multiple frequencies can be time consuming and a lot of work.
The very purpose of the zapper is to avoid this tedium as well as the guesswork. The problem is that one frequency is not enough, nor is two.
On the other hand, part of the challenge is not necessarily that your have to know what microbes are present and what frequencies to use. For example, using the pond water sample that I used ( or similar ), how many different microbes can we take out with the Rife Trio ( 727, 787, 880 ) which is stated to affect many different microbes. This is a powerful way of demonstrating that these machines do what is claimed, kill microbes, because it can be strikingly visible when successful.
One thing that I think that I left out about the experiment is that after taking the photo of the cleared water, I took several slides of samples and scanned them under the microscope looking for any active microbes. I did not find any.
I believe that this can completely change the landscape of the zapper industry. I know for a fact that certain zappers, some of which claim to be the best, Do Not Work very well. No names mentioned at this time.
Part of this change that will come to the zapper industry is that the 555 based zappers will go away. They are not accurate enough, not reproducible, and can not reliably provide the specific frequencies that are needed. Future zappers will of necessity be microprocessor based and will cycle through a specific set of frequencies or multiple sets as the case with current ParaZapper products excluding the 2 cheapest models.
There are a number of other improvements that will be found in the future zappers but that will be another discussion.
As for testing on specific microbes, there are supply houses that can provide a source of microbes but you will need some certification to get some of the hard core stuff.
You can also collect, isolate, and purify your own microbes with a little study and effort.
More
- Re: Question and challenge jaguar57
11 y
6,609
MoreThis is a reply to # 2,110,501all this baloney about mortal frequencies
I can kill any bacteria or fungus with direct current- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,328
This is a reply to # 2,110,939Show us,
Do the jar test.
Can DC do it as completely? Can it do it in less time?
What we really need is to do a standardized biological diversity test.
- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,441
This is a reply to # 2,110,939how many people do you know with long-term chronic Lyme disease that were cured with the zapper?
Serious question
because I know Plenty that were cured with Rife machines- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,353
This is a reply to # 2,111,020>- how many people do you know with long-term chronic Lyme disease that were cured with the zapper?
Zero, it is a brand new zapper. I do know of some who claimed cures with older models that are not as good as this, however, I can not say what zappers for legal reasons. The FDA is still looking for any excuse to shut us down.
We do not claim any cures. only killing microbes.
>- because I know Plenty that were cured with Rife machines
After two 1 hour sessions? 4? 6? 20? 3 months? 6 months? and they are no longer using Rife? Because being cured means that you no longer need the thing that does the cure.
- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,658
This is a reply to # 2,111,027different people with Lyme disease had used rife machines using different frequencies and different protocols for different lengths of time. But most Treat for at least a few months
some of them are symptom-free for a while then had a relapse and need to do the more treatments. Others Do rife treatments for a few months and then are completely fine from that point on. And of course there are others for whom the rife machines do not work for Lyme disease
- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,658
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,353
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
7,237
This is a reply to # 2,110,939
OK, I did the test and sorry, Jaguar, your claim is not correct. Although I completely tilted the scale in favor of zapping with a battery ( straight 9v DC ), and it did kill some algae, it did not in any way approach the effectiveness shown by the ParaZapper CC2.
The test jar was japped for 1 hour and 30 minutes on the first day, then it was zapped for 1 hour 10 minutes on the second day. The photo was taken on the third day. My apologies, I realized that my camera date and time was off by 12 hours, after uploading the image.
When the water was zapped with a ParaZapper CC2, the jar showed it to be visibly clear 24 hours after the second zapping.
When a 9 volt battery was used, it had slightly reduced coloration but was still visibly cloudy. This obviates that using a 9 volt battery is not as effective as the CC2 used in Mode 1 or 5.
The battery used was a fresh, new Duracell.
- Re: Question and challenge johny apple bomb
11 y
6,443
This is a reply to # 2,111,535DC is likely to short out across the electrodes in a water jar, explaining why fewer organisms died. A Zapper runs at 30000 Hz. So you will have impedance resistance.
When the Beck device is used in the bloodstream, it has been proven to sterilize the blood. And that's what is important.
- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,535
This is a reply to # 2,111,799I have no doubt it sterilizes the blood And I'm sure that could be very good thing and very helpful for a lot of people
However, there are organisms such as Borrelia burgdorferi that burrow deep deep down into the tissues into the joints into the brain etc., Places in the body that I believe that the current is unable to get to. If the current was able to get to Those areas and kill pathogens we Would see a lot of testimonies from people with Lyme disease who had been cured with zappers. We do not see those testimonies.- Re: Question and challenge Johny Apple Bomb
11 y
6,511
This is a reply to # 2,111,803Beck designed the Magneic Pulser to solve the problem you mention. And if your blood is sterile your immune system will then have more resources for the other areas of the body.
You can also use a carrier wave with a Rife device like an Atelier Robin to penetrate even solid bone.- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,527
This is a reply to # 2,111,811I'm close to 100% positive the magnetic Pulser does not kill Borrelia burgdorferi spirochetes
and yes, the correct type of rife device will certainly penetrate all tissues
- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,527
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,248
This is a reply to # 2,111,803>- We do not see those testimonies
Sorry, FDA regulations and action forced us to remove any testimonials that claim healing or curing of anything.
- Re: Question and challenge Johny Apple Bomb
11 y
6,511
- Re: Question and challenge blackchisel97
11 y
6,276
This is a reply to # 2,111,799The current flow in water depends on the conductivity. Distilled water has very poor conductivity but adding salts (ions) will accelerate the process and that's what determines the current flow. For such particular reason there should be a current limiter added while making silver colloid. What Beck device does is raising blood cells potential. This causes increased absorption and distribution of oxygen throughout our body also due to the blood thinning. The result is a better circulation and oxygen intake - very important, since many pathogens don't thrive in oxygen rich environment.
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,395
This is a reply to # 2,111,799>- DC is likely to short out across the electrodes in a water jar, explaining why fewer organisms died.
Not the way that we set it up. The electricity must travel through the water and is directly proportional to the DC resistance of the water.
>- A Zapper runs at 30000 Hz. So you will have impedance resistance.
Not true. Only some zappers run at 30000 Hz.
The test that we have done is in the 2500 Hz range.
What this test shows is definitively that DC does not produce as good of results as PEF ( Pulsed Electric Field ) does.
>- When the Beck device is used in the bloodstream, it has been proven to sterilize the blood. And that's what is important.
That is not all that is important because the BBBE does not reach the Lymph, interstitial fluids, or internal organs which is where the best zappers can produce results.
- Re: Question and challenge johny apple bomb
11 y
6,435
This is a reply to # 2,111,824JAB
>- DC is likely to short out across the electrodes in a water jar, explaining why fewer organisms died.
"Not the way that we set it up. The electricity must travel through the water and is directly proportional to the DC resistance of the water."
JAB
their is no resistance in normal water. How many Amps are you running?
JAB
>- A Zapper runs at 30000 Hz. So you will have impedance resistance.
"Not true. Only some zappers run at 30000 Hz.
The test that we have done is in the 2500 Hz range.
What this test shows is definitively that DC does not produce as good of results as PEF ( Pulsed Electric Field ) does."
JAB
Not true. 2500 Hz is 625 times faster frequency than a standard Beck Device. And it is infinity faster than DC.
JAB
>- When the Beck device is used in the bloodstream, it has been proven to sterilize the blood. And that's what is important.
"That is not all that is important because the BBBE does not reach the Lymph, interstitial fluids, or internal organs which is where the best zappers can produce results."
JAB
Your Hulda Clark device doesn't sterilize the blood. And because your Hulda Clark positive offset device is below 1 MHZ it doesn't penetrate everywhere in the body either.
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,282
This is a reply to # 2,112,485>- their is no resistance in normal water. How many Amps are you running?
That is not correct, properly distilled water has a fairly high resistance, very salty water has a very low resistance, Tap water has a medium resistance because of the chlorine content. Rainwater has low salt and has a higher resistance, closer to distilled water. The pond water cane from rain water. The presence of microbes and contaminants will lower the resistance some, but the current is on the order of milliamperes and is proportional to the surface are of the electrodes and the ( average ) voltage and inversely proportional to the distance between the electrodes.
From: Yuk, wikipedia:
"Pure water containing no exogenous ions is an excellent insulator" and "the theoretical maximum electrical resistivity for water is approximately 182 kΩ·m" I think that it should be kΩ·m/sq.cm
>- Your Hulda Clark device doesn't sterilize the blood. And because your Hulda Clark positive offset device is below 1 MHZ it doesn't penetrate everywhere in the body either.
I suggest that you are mistaken. Have you even tried to sterilize blood with ParaZapper CC2, ParaZapper UZI-3, or ParaZapper MY? I am not claiming that it does, but you can not fairly claim that they don't unless you have actually found some evidence that I do not believe that exists. It is my experience that the zapper can and does go far beyond what the older stuff that you are experienced with does.
Again, I point to the jar test. No zapper before now has so completely succeeded at that., not the even CCa, Not the CC1, not the others, Not my Beck unit.
And, so far, I have not seen anyone post a successful test and microscopic examination that shows otherwise.
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,282
- Re: Question and challenge johny apple bomb
11 y
6,435
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,141
This is a reply to # 2,111,799>- When the Beck device is used in the bloodstream, it has been proven to sterilize the blood. And that's what is important.
I have seen results, but the issue that I have with the BBBE is that there has been a number of cases of Sepsis and septicemia where Beck did not work. What is the explanation for that?
There are complaints all over these forums of cases where various electro-therapies did not work when they should have.
I am only trying to find the answers to this problem. There are a range of variables that can influence the outcome and we need to describe all of those and determine how to optimize each variable in order to achieve maximum results.
What I believe that this jar test showed, as well as the other ones is:
#1, that frequency matters - The DC battery test produced roughly the same results that is achieved using any single frequency. Any one frequency will kill some microbes but not all.
#2, that multiple frequencies do produce better results - Each additional frequency will affect a different set of microbes so that the more frequencies that are applied the greater the range of microbes that are killed.
#3, that each frequency should run for a certain minimum time - Running any frequency for 1 or 2 minutes kills nothing if anything. Such a short application might stun some microbes but they quickly recover.
I believe that the same is true with the BBBE - It is a single frequency and for that reason will only affect certain microbes.
- Re: Question and challenge johny apple bomb
11 y
6,544
This is a reply to # 2,113,471>- When the Beck device is used in the bloodstream, it has been proven to sterilize the blood. And that's what is important.
I have seen results, but the issue that I have with the BBBE is that there has been a number of cases of Sepsis and septicemia where Beck did not work. What is the explanation for that?
JAB
Sepsis is a serious medical condition caused by an overwhelming immune response to infection. Chemicals released into the blood to fight infection trigger widespread inflammation.
Since the Beck Protocol will cause more die off. Symptoms will probably get worse. Especially if ozone water is not used.- Expand 20 messages, 21 to 40 of 67 kscmac
11 y
6,578
- Re: Question and challenge johny apple bomb
11 y
6,544
- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,535
- Re: Question and challenge johny apple bomb
11 y
6,443
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,328
- Re: Question and challenge jaguar57
11 y
6,609
- Re: Question and challenge parazapper
11 y
6,333
- Re: Question and challenge Tizona
11 y
6,688
Expand 27 messages, 41 to 67 of 67 Esstee
11 y
6,354
Share:
Translate This Page: