The simple fact is that doctors like Jeff Sutherland who are authorities on electro healing and also ex N.I.H work with this device and get results when using the frequencies in Plasma and R.F Rife machines. So if the device isn't as good as you claim how do you account for the amazing differences in peoples ailments once they've completed the scan and rife treatments??????????????
Why have people gone to friends with their Fscan2 and told them what problems they have without knowing prior and shocked them?
A good example is http://www.holisticdentistryonline.com/article_tricorder3.html
Fighting the Medical Mafia Matrix & the aids SCAM
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸, 2TUFF ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤
Research the following excellent sources
Jon Rappoport, Harvey Bialy, Christine Maggiore
Dr Kary Mullis, Dr. Heinz Ludwig Sänger
Dr Peter Duesberg, Dr Robert Root-Bernstein
Dr Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, Dr Valendar Turner
Dr Gordon Stewart, Dr Alfred Hässig, Dr Charles Thomas Jr
Dr Richard Strohman, Dr David Rasnick, Dr Charles Geshekter
Dr Etienne de Harven, Dr Joseph Sonnabend, Dr Casper Schmidt
Dr Heinrich Kremer, Dr Stefan Lanka
- Did I have a bad Herxheimer reaction... Stephan2
19 y
20,674
Stephan2
Dear 2tuff,
I am not disputing the effectiveness of the therapy mode, which is like a regular Rife frequency generator.
I want to tell you and the forum what happened with me in the last few weeks while experimenting with my own scanner version (which also didn't work) and with the F-Scan2.
I started with the soundboard output from my laptop amplified that a little and tried to see if I could detect small changes in the impedance as a function of frequency. I bought two short pieces of copper tubing from a local hardware store and cleaned them with ketchup to remove the tarnish of the pipes.
I passed a sweeping frequency through these handelectrodes and did this a few times, since I was trying various approaches to detect those minute changes in impedance. Well there is a large change in impedance due to the fact that the interface hand-to-copper pipe resembles a combination of a resistor (about 20k Ohms) and a capacitance that is of the order or 1-2 pF per square cm. The impedance therefore changes naturally with frequency. So that was the first difficulty. I wanted to build a circuit that differentially detects the change in currents at slightly different frequncies but my crude set-up wasn't able to detect that. What I could see was noise from the soundboard!
I started experimenting with that two weeks ago over the weekend. That next morning on Monday I started having diarea. I thought that I must have eliminated something in my intestine simply by scanning! I did experiment a little more during the week. Then the following Friday something strange happened:
Our dog was digging in the yard and her paws were all muddy. I was upset, since I had to go to work and bring my son to the YMCA. So I carried her into the bathroom and washed her paws. Thereby I was very close with my face to her coat. When I arrived at my office I started itching on my throat and cheeks. I wondered if I got an allergic reaction from her ferr especially since my face was irritated from having shaved. Then I started sneezing. It started something that looked like symptoms of an allery - which I had never before in my whole life (just turned 50). I went to my homoeopathic doctor and she found also an infection. And I noticed that besides a lot of slime coming from my nose and what I coughed up there was some mucus.
Last Friday evening I got the F-Scan2 and immediately started to experiment with it that night and on Saturday. Saturday night I didn't sleep well, I coughed a lot. Then I continued experimenting and scanning yesterday on Saturday, I scanned a lot! Towards the evening my allergic reaction increased - I was almost constantly coughing. I thought I might have a Herxheimer reaction that has been reported a lot on this and other forums.
Last night I slept even less. I got up early in the morning around 5:30 am and took a hot bath with apple cider - my doctor recommended that. That gave some relieve and I went back to bed.
Two hours later I woke up - it was 8 am. I started getting out of my bed, then suddenly: I COULD NOT BREATH!! My airpath collapsed - I paniked. I tried breathing through my nose and that worked, fortunately. It wasn't an astma attack, I could breath fine through the nose, something in my throat collapsed when I tried breathing through my mouth. That was scary, I really thought for a moment that I could die! I will go to the hospital - although I don't like allopathic medicine but in these emergencies they have things that do work. Also I want to know what caused the blockage in my upper airpath.
So, what I wanted to get accross here is that the F-Scan2 DOES work somewhere, I now assume that just scanning (and I scanned all the way from 500 Hz to 1 MHz) does something. I might have had a bad Herxheimer reaction this morning that collapsed my air path. I will be more careful from now on and stop scanning for a while until I am through this.
This might have not anything to do with the scanning and was just coincidental, who knows? Time will tell.
I do believe that people got well using the F-Scan2, there is too much evidence of this posted here on the forum. I only doubt that it is because of its DRIP function that detected these frequencies. As I offered, I can give you and others my Excel spreadsheets where you can see for yourself graphs of scans with my body and with a resitor network (just two resistors as a voltage divider, the center tap goes to the sensing contact of the finger electrode). They look identical within their statistical variations. I think I can convert the Excel spreadsheets into Adobe Acrobat readable form, in case someone doesn't have Excel on their computer.
- Sorry but I believe in the DIRP -2tuff-
19 y
20,338
-2tuff-
My friend people have gotten better using Fscans because of the DIRP! Alot of people who use Fscan2 machine don't use them for anything other than DIRP then they program the frequencies into a dedicated Rife unit. Again if someone has a problem and the Fscan2 tell them specifically what they thought the problem was doesn't this give credibility to the DIRP?
I'm sorry about your herx reaction and it sounds kinder weird! I should agree that the Fscan doesn't work and offer you 50$ for it haha ;-)
One example from
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/fscan/
"My son had 2 warts, one on each middle finger. The dirps showed all
of the Clark frequencies for warts. 2 1/2 minutes for each peak
didn't do it. About a month ago we did 7 minutes per peak. About 2
weeks after, the smaller wart got a little bloody as the root was
dying. Last week, I finally pulled the root out after he showered.
It took a few days for the skin to heal completely. The larger wart
turned brown and just yesterday fell off like a scab. There was new
pink skin under it. The F-scan works quite well on warts with the
right treatment duration. -tbrownerski-"
Fighting the Medical Mafia Matrix & the aids SCAM
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸, 2TUFF ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤
Research the following excellent sources
Jon Rappoport, Harvey Bialy, Christine Maggiore
Dr Kary Mullis, Dr. Heinz Ludwig Sänger
Dr Peter Duesberg, Dr Robert Root-Bernstein
Dr Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, Dr Valendar Turner
Dr Gordon Stewart, Dr Alfred Hässig, Dr Charles Thomas Jr
Dr Richard Strohman, Dr David Rasnick, Dr Charles Geshekter
Dr Etienne de Harven, Dr Joseph Sonnabend, Dr Casper Schmidt
Dr Heinrich Kremer, Dr Stefan Lanka
- Re: Sorry but I believe in the DIRP Stephan2
19 y
20,445
Stephan2
I would love to take a look at the DIRP scan files from people that also have an F-Scan2 together with their interpretation. Yes, I have read, e.g. posts from 'vtool' that sounded incredible, that is why I made the decision to buy it and test it. I am interested in a device that can detect these resonances. I wish I could post images of the graphs here. Then, again, I said that maybe my F-Scan isn't picking anything up because I am 'so healthy'? It should pick up something, e.g., I had herpes zoster (face) about 19 years ago. The bugs should be still around, but the F-Scan2 isn't pick it up, why? I didn't want to do another scan, but I did a scan between 700 and 1000 Hz, since the F-Scan2 manual listed Rife frequency at 880, 802, 787 and 727 Hz. I was curious if the DIRP picked something up. The scan showed four broad features centered arouind 725, 825, 900 and 990 Hz. Not exactly the right frequencies, except for 725 and maybe 880? Then I did a scan using resistors: the scan showed almost exactly the same features, only the amplitudes were higher but that I could have easily corrected with a slightly different divider network. So, where is the 'previous medical history'? The F-Scan2 only showed noise that it generated by itself! So I scanned the Clark frequency for herpes zoster at 418kHz. Here some peaks did not show up in the resistor network scan that showed up in the scan using my hands. I repeated one resistor network scan and the same inconsistancy was seen, some peaks showed up in one scan but not in the other and viz-versa, also the amplitudes changed considerably. I stay with my conclusion that the F-Scan does not detect the history of illnesses but produces random features until I find proof or someone could show me reproducible scans with features that won't show with a resistive network!
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... drloyd
19 y
20,794
drloyd
Aubrey Scoon also did a good write-up on the F-SCAN and he described some shortcomings he found on the early version that he tested. The square wave is not very square. The sine waves do have a hitch in the slope.
And, in the audio range, most people's test results do look similar. Not identical, but similar. There are peaks near 1360, 2720, 4080 and so on whether you are testing a person, a banana, or a vial of salt water. I noticed that when I tested electrolytes with stainless probes, the results were very different in the various salts. Dilute hydrochloric acid was a series of simple peaks. Potassium chloride had the same peaks but they were more complex. Magnesium chloride was even more complex with many peaks in between the usual ones. It has appeared to me that these regular peaks may be related to electrolytes.
In the audio range, body fluids such as blood, urine and saliva all had peaks in the usual areas, but each had many peaks that did not fit the pattern. And all were different. Urine had fairly simple peaks, blood much more complex peaks. Saliva was very complex, perhaps due to the large number of creatures that live there! Clearly the unit is not generating the peaks itself.
When I did a series of tests from low audio up to the 300,000 Hz range, I noticed that the regular peaks got smaller and smaller as the frequency increased. By 100,000 Hz, they were very small but still barely detectable. But now there were much taller peaks that did not fit any pattern and were different in each person.
In the Clark range and above, every person's test is different. No two tests look alike. So it clearly does not generate its own peaks. And, as the actual MORs ("Mortal Oscillatory Rates" or actual resonant killing frequencies) are mostly in the area of 50,000 and above, the low frequency regular series is hardly noticed if it is noticed at all.
We have an excellent tool, and many physicians and others have found it to be the best way to deal with infections and conditions such as colds, flu, Rheumatoid Arthritis , MS, ALS, and so on.
Richard Loyd
- Thankyou oh mighty Dr.Loyd one ;-) *... -2tuff-
19 y
20,021
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... Stephan2
19 y
20,397
Stephan2
Dear Richard,
When I use a resistive network (two resistors in parallel or you can use a 10k potentiometer to make a voltage divider) and I scan several times, then in some cases I also get different results each time. I did a scan around the herpes zoster peak at 418kHz between 400 kHz and 450 kHz with a small step size of 100 Hz and the overall pattern looks very similar in the three scans (one with finger, two with resistors). I had herpes zoster 19 years ago when I was working on my Ph.D. in physics, maybe I got stressed out and the virus broke out.
For people on the forum who do not know what herpes zoster is, it is a virus that also causes chicken pox. I had chicken pox as a child. It can brake out once more if the immune system is depressed. It is assumed that after that second outbrake you have immunity against that virus for life.
According to some posts here on the forum, one should be able to see the virus in a DIRP scan with the F-Scan2 device. I couldn't see it in the data.
If you like, I send you my Excel files and you can judge for yourself.
Experimental evidence like this can't easily be disputed.
Regards,
Stephan
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... dtooker
19 y
20,313
dtooker
Stephan,
A couple of things. I have an Fscan2, and I've been using it for a year, typically with very good results.
That said, you do have a couple of valid gripes about the unit. The ADC arrangement they're using is kind of Rube Goldberg-ey, and I have reservations about the DIRP methodology. My experience, however, has been that DIRPs above 100kHz are repeatable and consistent. Have a look at http://www.tookworks.com/fscan for some of the results I've gotten, as well as some software I wrote for the unit.
So, the question I have is "why doesn't the Fscan work for you?" I have come across 2 people who seem to be entirely impervious to my unit. I can DIRP and zap them all day and get no result. None. Zilch. On the other hand, I respond pretty well to it, as do most people I work with. (Note- I'm not a professional practitioner, I don't charge for doing anyting with the Fscan as I don't need the legal entanglements, nor do I have the time.) Additionally, have you tried it on anyone else? If your DIRP results are that consistent, I'd have to wonder if the unit isn't buggered. And, I have to ask the obvious- when DIRPing, you're NOT connecting the blue lead, right? (Not trying to be insulting, just thorough.)
Further DIRP discussion: Personally, I think that the differential mesurement concept is flawed, especially when taking measurements with a small delta. For example, if a microbe had a frequency signature that covered 1000Hz, and you were scanning in 100Hz steps, you would miss the overall picture of the peak because many measurements would have similar values, even though the entire response was elevated. So, for narrow deltas, I'd like to see a baseline integrated resonance protocol (which has a suitably snarky acronym) where the test frequency is compared to a baseline frequency. This can be accomplished in software when controlling the unit from a PC. I just haven't gotten around to writing it yet.
Regards,
Dennis Tooker
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... Stephan2
19 y
20,120
Stephan2
Dear Dennis, Thank you for your post! You raised a question that I wondered about myself: Why do some people get results and I don't? And why were you not able to use it with certain individuals while it seems to work fine and repeatable with others? This goes into a completely different subject - that of dowsing and muscle testing, etc., which I am also familiar with. It could be that the F-Scan2 is sensitive to the believe system of the individual. As silly as that might sound, I have come across these things in my life. But I assumed that the F-Scan2 is not of this tpye of device but measures 'physical' effects. Like taking a voltmeter and measure the voltage of a battery. The EAV devices work partially like a 'voltmeter' but the actual response is from a 'non-physical' source, it might have to do more with quantum physics. The noise in the F-Scan2 can then be used by the non-physical or 'quantum' aspect of the measurement to influence the outcome. For such noise-driven methods see, e.g., http://noosphere.princeton.edu http://gerp.free.fr/rpeoch-chicks.htm http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Fight/Fight-SheldrakeOnPresentiment&Psych... So if I looked at the F-Scan2 too critical and doubted its performance or better said: 'I didn't subscribe to it', then I might not get any results. The other comment of yours with regard to the bandwidth is well taken! You are absolutely right, if there is a spectral feature which is broad, then scanning over it with a very small wavelength increment would completely miss it! That is, and that I also completely agree with you, due to the differential nature that device operates upon. The F-Scan2 differentiates between consecutive measurements. It works best if the spectral feature has the SAME bandwidth as the stepwidth of the DIRP scan. But what are the natural spectral widths of various pathogens or conditions? That would require a vast amount of experience and testing to find the best scan steps. But if the measurement is based on the 'manipulation' of the noise, then the bandwidth should not matter. It should always give a good answer. I think the best approach - if you would build one for yourself - would be to use a good EAV device and connect a signal generator to it and 'ask' the EAV machine if that frequency is present in the body (meaning the corresponding pathogen with that resonant frequency). I would be interested to see some of your scan data, is that possible? Thank you for these very good comments! With best regards, Stephan
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... dtooker
19 y
20,521
dtooker
Stefan,
I have posted 3 DIRP data sets in an xls file at
http://www.tookworks.com/fscan/dirpdata.xls
These scans are just what I happened to have on this PC- random samples, if you will. You'll notice that the three test subjects have very individual profiles. IT has a very flat CV line, and only a few readings that might be called spikes. Could be just noise. IS has a CV line that follows the groups of peaks. CB has a fairly smooth CV curve, with pretty obvious peaks. If I remember correctly, when the DIRPS were done, CB and IS had active cold or flu bugs. IT was feeling run down, but otherwise OK.
Personally, I think that the CV line is enlightening in IS's case. I think that it shows a broad spectrum disturbance, that the FSCAN picked up as a series of intermittent spikes, which goes back to my previous post. Thing is, the delta was 1000, so that's a *very* broad bump.
Another peeve of mine with the unit is the initial spike. The first DIRP you do when the unit is first turned on will almost always show a huge spike for the first frequency. I believe that this is due to a software issue- the first reading has no prior reading to compare itself with, and so represents a big jump from zero. That could be fixed in firmare, by having the machine test the first frequency twice, or introduce a 'prep frequency' before the initial DIRP frequency. All of which is to say that the machine is not without its problems, but I stand by my results.
Going back to why it doesn't work for you- I've been thinking about it, and I'm having a hard time believing the results you're seeing are possible without something being wrong with the unit. Either in the ADC, or possibly the eeprom. Do you have the latest firmware update? Before jumping to 'quantum suggestivity', I'd want to rule out anything else. Unfortunately, the typical "test, replace, retest" A to B methodology would require two units. I had thought that perhaps your own personal body chemistry was producing an inductance, or a damping field effect, but that would likely still give a different profile than scanning a resistor network. So I'm stumped. Regarding the person I was unsuccessful with, I should add that I think the problem there was that the CVs were too low to allow a good reading. Typically 1 or 2, and nothing we tried got it higher. I did get a DIRP result that looked like a noise floor, but nothing useful- could have been reading the lights in the room for all I know.
Regards,
Dennis
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... Stephan2
19 y
20,160
Stephan2
Dear Dennis,
Thank you for the link with your data!
While I was able to 'replicate' the spectrum of case 'IT', although each time I made a scan the hits were at a different location.
Now the case 'IS' really is interesting. As you pointed out there are two broad features in the conductivity (CV). THIS looks to me very real!!!
I tried to replicate this with the resistor network and although I got hits scattered all over the place there was no similarity to your data. I will do some more testing later today but I think this is an indication of real responses. That is what I would have expected to see - pathogens in resonance should change the body's impedance at that frequency. And I also think that these resonances should be fairly broad.
I am really excited about that, Dennis! Maybe one should just do CV scans and forget about the differential MV data altogether? This could lead to a development of a simpler, more affordable device!
The only other way such a change in the conductivity (CV) could have occured is if the test subject changed his/her grip on the hand electrode or if the finger electrodes shifted. Therefore it is best to repeate the scans at least once. These two scans should show the same features, otherwise it could be just a change in the quality of contact with the electrodes of the hand and finger!
By the way I was using a potentiometer and had to adjust the amplitude in order to get hits in the 'IS' scan versus the first 'IT' scan. This is due to the fact that a simple resistor network or divider does not replicate the body's impedance. To get a better network that resembles the body, one has to add at least on capacitor or one capacitor with a resistor in series and add that to the network. I might experiment with that and hopefully get a pretty good circuit that matches the body's impedance for the whole range of frequencies that the F-Scan2 operates upon. Then such a network would be very valuable of us 'researcher' to see what is random noise and what is real signal.
I thank you so very much to share your experience within this forum!
I will try to find a way to post my scans on the web, I don't have a personal web site yet to do that.
With best regards,
Stephan
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... dtooker
19 y
20,044
dtooker
Stephan,
You're welcome. It's good to see we're making progress!
A note on DIRPing- I always use contact pads, placed either on the inside of the wrist, over the veins, or near whatever point on the body I'm interested in. I don't use the cylinders. I think it's far too easy to introduce error into the test when using them.
As far as just using the CV, I don't know. My first impression is that would give you a frequency response curve, but wouldn't tell you about peaks, at least not the way the Fscan is currently configured. When connected to a PC, the unit returns a series of values that are interpreted by software into CV and MV. The CV is decided by the range of the value, and the MV by the differentials. I'm going to leave that vague, as Thomas has indicated he considers the inner workings to be proprietary info, and I will respect his right to protect his work. That said, I think that there's a lot of room for improvement. You don't really have access to the CVs when using the unit standalone, for example. Nor can you get at them with the PC software either, really. This is part of what drove me to write w_zap: so I could have the option of using the CV curve to determine the clip levels, and to be able to compare similar DIRP runs.
I should mention that I am in no way affiliated with TB Electronics.
I'd be all for cheaper easier technology. Any ideas? Something that was processor based, but used a DVM for input instead of an ADC? I'm concerned about signal smear, and what happens at or near the Nyquist limit of the ADC when DIRPing.
Rgds,
Dennis
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... iamabigdolt
19 y
20,083
iamabigdolt
Hello Stephan,
I purchased an FScan2 the end of last year and experimented with it and ended up returning it. I posted some excel spreadsheets and graphs on the fscan message board at yahoo groups. If you go to the "files" section you will find the spreadsheets listed as some_fscan_results.xls below is the url for the files section and then for the spreadsheet;
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/fscan/files
http://f4.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/cJ1zQlDVBq37IAHBiB8NnfRDWHdXo6U1Q2A2i41DXsiiyBVi...
Note the sheet titled bananapeople.
You can post your spreadsheets there as well.
People seem to have a hard time understanding that in treatment mode the fscan is applying frequencies and just because something happens doesn't mean that the DIRP function had anything to do with it. As you found out just the random application of frequencies can have an effect.
You mentioned the PEAR project. I have wondered myself about the random noise effect in the FScan. You might find this site interesting;
http://www.bioenergeticmedicine.org/
Kiran (from bioenergeticmedicine.org) is coming out with a plasma tube attachment for the CoRe that will be driven by the CoRe using frequencies determined by the software. I’m receiving a demo here any day to give it a spin. Will be interesting.
One of the problems with the FScan2 is that the screen is so small it is hard to tell what is going on. That is why importing the results to Excel is so nice.
Dave
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... Stephan2
19 y
20,585
Stephan2
Dear Dave, Thank you for your post! I became a member on the F-Scan forum at Yahoo, so I already saw your Excel spreadsheet. Funny, 'banana people'! Yes, you are absolutely right - people that own and/or used the F-Scan2 and got well confuse their health improvement with the (possibly) useless DIRP function! I am reading through all 2,100 postings on the F-Scan forum, I am halfway through. I am thankful for Dr. Loyd to post some interesting information on that forum regarding chelation therapy. The compound called 'NDF', which is derived from spirulina ($79 per 1 oz.), seems to give good results although not cheap. http://www.healingedge.net/store/bioray.html I ordered it and want to try it out. I did electronics since I was in high school and I possibly have elevated levels of lead and tin in my body. By the way, your second link was dead! Now I am still interested in a device that CAN scan the body and find resonances. The problem with the approach that the manufacturer of the F-Scan2 device used is that the DIRP only gives a positive reading. I would like to see a device that is similar to an EAV (electro acupunktur according to Voll) device that would give you both a positive and a negative feedback. So you know which frequencies would be good for you and which won't. And the scan should be so subtle that it would not be as strong as in therapy mode. So you don't screw up your system by scanning, which I think happened to me. I guess I have to try to develop my own scanner after all! The other problem that I see in the F-Scan2 DIRP function is that it uses a DC-offset of 6 Volts during the scan. I think the body's feedback system immediately gets too polarized (or tired if you will) that it is not able to give a response at all. I would like to know how the EAV machines work and how that could be implemented to do a scan. I will have to experiment with this a little. I also would like to separate the bio-feedback from the exposure to the frequencies. In the F-Scan they go together - the frequencies are scanned by an AC signal with a DC offset. The AC provides the frequency to be tested and the DC is there to test the body's response. Unfortunately a small portion of the AC leaks into the pick-up electrode and causes aliasing-type of behavior during digitization. That's why you see these periodical peaks in the scan. Those become smaller at higher frequencies due to a 0.1 uF capacitor that is attached at the pick-up line against ground. I added a low-pass filter to just allow the DC component through with the right time-constant so it would still allow a slow change in the DC level to pass through to the ADC. But then the DIRPs were just flat-lined, no peaks at all! For information on aliasing, here is a nice java-applet that you can play with. Start with a low frequency, like 200 Hz and then enter high and higher frequencies. This applet simulates an ADC that samples 8000 times per second. If you enter frequencies higher than the Niquest-frequency (=4000 Hz, half the sampling frequency) then you get funny results. That is how the DIRP ends up having these periodic peaks that everyone that uses the F-Scan, even the 'banana-people' (scanning a banana) see: http://www.dsptutor.freeuk.com/aliasing/AD102.html Dr. Loyd had some scans posted on the F-Scan forum. One of the scans looked interesting. That test subject showed a strong variation in the CV (conductivity value) during the scan. The body must have acted by increased perspiration when a resonant frequency was approached. But there is still the question on whether that is repeatable, since he did this scan only once. So that is not very scientific but that type of body response is what I would have expected! My homoeopathic doctor uses the RM 10S and the MORA device from MedTronik. She studied homoeopathy in Germany and she always helped my son and myself when we get sick. I think a device like the RM 10S could measure a biofeedback on frequencies. It will tell you whether that frequency is beneficial/therapeutic or not! http://www.med-tronik.de/html/produkte-e.html Then the other bad side effect of the F-Scan2 is that since it uses a 6-Volt DC offset, metal ions are driven into your body. The F-Scan2 that I bought came with stainless steel electrodes - most all stainless steel contains the carcinogen nickel! Beware of nickel; my son got a bad reaction from a spacer that he had to wear in his mouth. I asked the dentist when he wanted to put the spacer in my son's mouth whether there was nickel in the wire - he answered 'no'. But then my son developed problems swallowing and it turned out that there was nickel in the wire. I asked for a sample of the wire and they gave me the packaging that had a warning label on it that said, in all languages, 'do not use in patients with nickel allergies'. I suppose dentists don't read labels, that's why the AMA still thinks mercury is fine in your mouth! My homoeopathic doctor tested my son and me on this wire with the RM 10S and sure enough it showed a toxic reaction!! After taking the nickel wire out and after treating my son against the nickel wire it was amazing to see how fast he recovered! Homoeopathy does work. While reading through the posts on the F-Scan forum, it becomes clear that this DC offset is a problem. A lot of people report darkened skin where the hand electrodes were held in their hands. Sometimes it was pinkish, due to gold forming salts when the electrode was gold coated. However, in the therapy mode the DC might be of benefit. I think it was Robert Becker that promoted electrifying the blood using electrodes close to the blood vessels to 'electrify' the blood. But the metal electrodes may not be so good, or does one would get colloidal gold this way? Stephan
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... iamabigdolt
19 y
19,956
iamabigdolt
Hey Stephen,
You are as obsessive as I am. When I was considering purchasing the FScan I also read every single post on the Fscan board!
A Far Infrared Sauna worked wonders for me for detoxing metals. Also used DMSA, Alpha-Lipoic acid and homeopathic detox remedies.
By the way, my second link works, but not in Internet Explorer! FireFox opens it just fine. Go figure… must be a security thingy.
EAV is real simple, it reads conductance – the official definition is that the meter should read 50 with a resistance of 95 kΩ – they typically apply between one and two volts to the electrodes. It is generally considered that the smaller the voltage the better. The ET Screenpen http://www.oirf.com/recinstr/ET%20Screenpen.html uses no voltage at all. It reads in the nanoampere range!
As time goes by I am thinking that maybe the idea of measuring resonances in the body like the FScan is trying to do may simply not be even reasonable. All the difference tissues and cells have there own resonance frequencies – so how is a device going to isolate out the resonance frequency of say a virus in the system? I also think that a lot of the perceived effect of applying electromagnetic oscillations to the body are due to things like the stimulation of the transmembrane potential and all the receptors that lie imbedded in the cell walls and maybe oscillating a bug to death if you are lucky enough to find the right frequency.
Just some late night rambling…. Dave
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... Shapokolay
10 y
16,391
Shapokolay
I have a question this really is bugging me I am looking for F-scan2 and most companies who still sell their old stock are selling them for $4000 each whereas the brand new F-Scan3 that just came out and is for sale for $4500.00 a piece. So for $500 one can get an up to date new one!
I am looking for a used F-scan2 reasonably price around $2000.00 I won't go any higher in my offer.
Any one interested let me know.
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... Shapokolay
9 y
6,366
Shapokolay
Sir,
Do you still have the Fscan2 and also do you think the Fscan 3 is not much better?
I know the price for the Fscan3 is $4500.00
If its still available maybe we can strike a deal of sorts.
Thanks
- Re: The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluat... #229129
6 y
2,192
#229129
Hey Stephan2 - I hope you are still receiving these messages :) couple of questions - have you tried DIRP in either of the FSCAN 3 or 4 to see if it is any better ??? Also did you make your own??? if so I am interested in how it turned out
|
|
Donate to CureZone
Translate This Page:
| |
The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluation
The F-Scan2 - a critical evaluation 
Stephan2
19 y
20,839
The bad news: 
