Re: Vindication of Dr. Clark and Rife

 >- Viruses are not even considered alive let alone a parasite

Your ignorance shows.

Here we go with the personal attacks once again because I proved you wrong again.

A virus is the ultimate obligatory parasite according to the definition.

No, it is not.  You clearly have a lot to learn about BASIC science!!!

A Parasite is any organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, for at least some part of its life, from the body of which it obtains nutriment or some form of its sustenance.

Right there you already discredited yourself once again.  Viruses are not live.

http://www.beyondbooks.com/lif72/2c.asp

"This is why viruses do not belong to a kingdom of living things. Just because a virus seems alive doesn't mean it is alive. After all, it's not even a single-celled organism."

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Are_viruses_living

"Life is defined in science with certain criteria. Some lists are slightly different, but a universal point of definition is that something living requires metabolism (the ability to create it's own energy). 

Viruses lack metabolism, therefore they are not living."

http://library.thinkquest.org/CR0212089/virus.htm

"Viruses are non-living microscopic particles that attack healthy cells within living things. They do not have the characteristics of living things and are not able to metabolize food. To metabolize means to change food energy into chemical energy that the body can use. Viruses are not alive, so they do not have a need for food like living oganisms. Viruses do not have an organized cell structure. They are so light that they can float in the air or water, be passed on to other organisims if touched, and fit anywhere. The virus injects its own DNA structure into healthy cells where new virus cells grow."

While a virus can not live on its own, it does qualify as a parasite.

Again, viruses are not alive to begin with.

>- she did not give complete schematics and she DID NOT specify a frequency

I am aware of the controversy. You however, have NEVER made any mistakes or omissions.

I never said I did not.  But I correct my mistakes and omissions instead of ignoring them.  Some people though prefer to keep making the same false claims even when the error was pointed out to them such as making reference to viruses living.

>- Have you heard of first copy, which is what I had

Yes, that is usually why second editions are published. So, why don't or didn't you sue her for such horrendous omissions. From your attitude and remarks, she obviously caused you serious pain and suffering.

Another incorrect assumption.  I just have a major problem with people pushing false health information.  Especially with alternative medicine since I have spent so many years working on trying to get alternative medicine legitimized.  When people make up claims like Clark did so many times it does so much damage to the alternative medicine movement.

>- Since when?

Always when real, true, legitimate evidence is presented. However, I m not going to be buffaloed by some of the junk that you present as evidence.

So medical studies are "junk" to you.  Oh, that's right, you are also a "liver flush" supporter.  They also believe that golf ball size gallstones can pass through the ducts that don't expand that large.  They also believe that the gallbladder is larger than the entire chest and abdominal cavity combined.  All this while claiming fecal soaps do not exist even though I have posted a number of medical studies discussing their existence and how they form.  They also don't believe that gallstones can lead to pancreatitis even though the medical journals say otherwise.   Bottom line is that they don't even believe in evidence, they prefer to believe in fairy tales.

>- You have ignored all the evidence I have presented on the "Liver Flush Debate " forum,

You have not posted anything but anecdotal claims. If you consider that to be evidence, I am glad that you are not a member of the judicial system.

See my last statement.  I am sorry that medical studies are above your head.  But I do not rely on Dick and Jane books to get my evidence.

For example, where I have evidence from a medical journal and other credible sources about fecal soaps that the "liver flush" supporters kept denying exist and still continue to deny the existence of despite the evidence presented.  You and the other "liver flush" supporters keep playing this game of asking for evidence then denying its existence once presented.  Again they don't care about the truth or facts.  All they care about is whatever fantasies they can come up with that fit their needs.

>- The one I am really interested in is how you think they obtain magnesium sulfate from calcium carbonate derived from seawater as you claimed.

Once again, the master of smoke and mirrors, you entirely misrepresent what I said. The magnesium is obtained from magnesium salts.

Once again the master of lies is making things up again.  Here is HIS post:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1863990#i

">- magnesium sulphate ( Epsom Salts ) are made by pharmaceutical chemical manufacturers-Hveragerthi

Only some of the cheap stuff on the store shelves is synthetic and much of it is a byproduct of the production of salt from sea water. The synthetic method treats calcium carbonate or hydroxide with sulphuric acid. "-Parazapper

So again mister master chemist and master manipulator, how do you make magnesium sulfate by the action of sulfuric acid on CALCIUM carbonate or hydroxide?

Alchemy does not work in any economical sense. Elements can not be changed unless bombarded with highly energized nuclear particles or by fission.

Yes, which is what I told you in my response:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1864505#i

"Must be really super expensive since it would be pretty hard to transmute that calcium atom in to a magnesium atom so you could even create magnesium sulfate!"

Magnesium is also a component of seawater, since you are obviously unaware.

LOL!!!!  Again, I was the one that had to explain that to you in the same response linked above (http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1864505#i):

"Either way, the pharmaceutical companies usually buy it rather than make it. Take it from an old lime chemist who knows.-Parazapper

Knows what?!!!  First of all magnesium sulfate is not produced from calcium carbonate or hydroxide.  Secondly,  if you really are a chemist then you would have known that most of the magnesium that is present in seawater is in the form of magnesium chloride, not magnesium sulfate.

So how is magnesium separated from seawater?  Well here, let me show you: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnesium

"The Mg²⁺ cation is the second most abundant cation in seawater (occurring at about 12% of the mass of sodium there), which makes seawater and sea-salt an attractive commercial source of Mg. To extract the magnesium, calcium hydroxide is added to seawater to form magnesium hydroxide precipitate.

MgCl₂ + Ca(OH)₂ → Mg(OH)₂ + CaCl_2"

So now they are left with Magnesium chloride, not magnesium sulfate, which is otherwise known as "Epsom salts".  So how do you suppose they convert that magnesium hydroxide in to magnesium sulfate?  Hmmm......  Supposedly being a chemist you should know that they can react sulfuric acid on the magnesium oxide to form magnesium sulfate.

Mg(OH)₂ + H₂SO₄ ---> MgSO₄ + 2H₂O 

 So how is that less expensive.

Of course they can also use electrolysis to separate the pure magnesium metal first, then treat this chemically to produce magnesium sulfate.  But electrolysis is energy intensive and not very efficient.  So the cost would be prohibitive even before the chemical treatment.

So is magnesium sulfate really extracted directly from seawater as you supposedly claim?  Well let's see:

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/optics/olympusmicd/galleries/polarized/magnesiums...

"Magnesium oxide, as mined or extracted from seawater, acts as the starting point for commercial production of magnesium sulfate."

As a supposed "chemist" you should be aware of the fact that the mixing of magnesium oxide in water forms magnesium hydroxide.  And as I showed above magnesium hydroxide is converted in to magnesium sulfate by the action of sulfuric acid on the hydroxide!!!"-Hveragerthi

So keep making up lies Parazapper and I will keep exposing them!!!

>- if they are off or not as you claim when they are wrong in the first place

Another twisting of the facts. Some of the frequencies may well be off by a few Hz and some may not.

 

Not a twisting of facts at all.  But at least you admitted this time that the frequencies were not necessarily off.  You are just guessing at that because it does not fit your needs.

However, the feedback that I have received is that zappers, Rife, and other electro-therapy devices do work very well in most cases. I publised statistics and the FDA called our customers looking for errors in our claims.

So let's see this publication and the FDA's results.  FDA records are public, so show us a link to the findings if you are telling the truth.

They did find that our customers do have good results and as a result, classify our products as CLASS III devices when used on humans, along with pacemakers and dialysis machines.

So let's see proof of this class III approval.  And let's see what that really means anyway:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_device#Class_III:_General_controls_and_p...

"

Class III: General controls and premarket approval

A Class III device is one for which insufficient information exists to assure safety and effectiveness solely through the general or special controls sufficient for Class I or Class II devices.^[7][9] Such a device needs premarket approval, a scientific review to ensure the device's safety and effectiveness, in addition to the general controls of Class I.^[7][9] Class III devices are usually those that support or sustain human life, are of substantial importance in preventing impairment of human health, or which present a potential, unreasonable risk of illness or injury.^[9]Examples of Class III devices which currently require a premarket notification include implantable pacemaker, pulse generators, HIV diagnostic tests, automated external defibrillators, and endosseous implants.^[9]"

 

So why you are at it why don't you also post a link to the required scientific review that is required since this should also be a public record.  And if you are not making all your claims up then you should have no problem providing links to prove the classification and the studies that would have been required.  Somehow I seriously doubt you will be able to come up with these.

 

I will state specifically that frequency therapy does work and due to the natural resonances involved,

"Natural resonances"?!!!!  LOL!!!  They are not natural, they are being created by the machine.  Again, changing definitions to fit your needs is not helping your case at all.

each organism has its own frequency and organelles within an organism will have their own frequencies as well.

That is resonate frequencies, not electrical frequencies.  Surprised you don't know the difference being that you are supposedly an expert.  But then again you thought that you can make magnesium sulfate from the calcium carbonate or hydroxide derived from seawater.

>- knew anything about electrotherapy, cancer and its origins then you would know why it works

I do know plenty about electro-therapy, cancer, and its origins.

I seriously doubt that based on your statements above.  You have shown a serious lack of knowledge about chemistry and radiofrequency therapy.

>- some frequencies will also be able to kill human cells

Yes, this one reason why she gave a range in her second edition and all later books.

LOL!!!  You still don't get it.  A "range" can include healthy and dangerous frequencies!!!!  The more you post the more you show how much you need to be avoided when looking for health advice.

However, while some human cells do have resonances within the range but there is an aspect of the human cell that makes it somewhat impervious to these frequencies.

Proof to this claim?  Obviously you do not understand how frequencies can affect cells.

That is the difference between the cells of higher lifeforms have a flexible cell membrane where many lower organisms have rigid cell walls or semi-rigid membranes. Flexible cell walls just shimmy like a balloon.

You are showing even more of your ignorance.  It does not matter if a life form is a higher or lower life form as to whether it has a cell membrane or wall.  Yes, humans have cell membranes, just like bacteria.  Plants contain cell walls.  So according to your own statement above you are clearly stating that radiofrequency therapy will not kill bacteria since they have cell membranes as well.  And since viruses have neither they also would not be affected according to your claim.  You really should learn about what you are posting about before posting it because you are a walking, breathing billboard for medical quackery!!!

>- If that were the case then Rife would not have narrowed his list of frequencies down to a few related frequencies

This just goes to show that Rife did not find all of the answers and most likely did not investigate square waves but mostly centered his work around sinusoidal waves.

Again you are speculating since you have no evidence to the contrary.  I find it very interesting myself that out of all the frequencies Rife tested he narrowed them all down to three frequencies.  And all three of those frequencies were related to each other and the body's primary, healthy frequency.  It was a lot more than coincidence.  But of course you would not realize that being that you have no clue what you are talking about as your responses have shown.

>- would not touch a Zapper

Your loss.

Not at all.  I believe in things that actually work, not made up science based on bogus claims about parasites causing all diseases.

Many people suffer great loss by not trying things. What you do not know can hurt. That aside, I agree that Rife is in general better if you can afford it.

1.  Rife units do not have to be expensive.

2.  Are something that really has no real basis, such as "Zappers"  really a bargain when there is no evidence that they work?  Especially when one's life is depending on it?

>- the herbs she chose are known for fighting cancer, but not because of anything to do with parasites

A seriously misguided idea. Wromwood and Green tincture of walnut have been known to have anti-parasitic properties from centuries ago. Use of wormwood dates back to before 1500 B.C., and evidence of wormwood's anti-parasitic use by Egyptian herbalists was found on papyrus from around this time.

LOL!!!  That simple concept really went over your head.  Of course why am I not surprised?  I never said they did not have antiparasitical properties.  Problem with your basis is that parasitical cancers are EXTREMELY rare.  Therefore, according to your own statement these herbs would RARELY work for cancer.  Luckily these herbs have other properties that help them in the fight of cancers since cancers are rarely caused by parasites.

>- If Rife could have continued his work then maybe he would have one day stumbled upon the key as to why different frequencies were not needed for different diseases.

Yes, but even better, he might have come to the realization that more could be accomplished with multiple frequencies and might have even delved deeper into square waves and harmonics.

Again, multiple frequencies are not needed.  Like Rife, you need to learn how these frequencies actually work to understand why.

>- where I have been royally kicking

Your opinion only and what you present as facts is not just questionable, it is mostly anecdotal garbage. You have not posted even one single peer reviewed study that showed negative results for flushing. Sadly for you, you rate yourself much higher than others do.

There you go again twisting things.  I have addressed your bogus claims and proved them wrong.  What do your false claims about making magnesium sulfate from calcium carbonate or hydroxide from seawater have to do with the safety of "liver flushing".  Don't try to skirt the facts by twisting things.

And as far a evidence, what evidence have the "liver flush" supporters provided to prove the safety and effectiveness of "liver flushing"?  Oh, that's right, ABSOLUTELY NONE!!!  On the other hand I have presented overwhelming evidence against most of the claims made by the "liver flush" supporters even though I was not the original claimant and thus did not have the burden of proof.  So why have you and the other "liver flush" supporters failed to come up with even one piece of REAL evidence that "liver flushing" is valid?  Could it be you have no evidence to present just like you have no real evidence to back your claims about the FDA approval and the claims you have made about radiofrequency therapy?

Additionally, either you are retired with lots of spare time and nothing better to do, or you are paid to be here posting your bunk. This is easy to tell from the hours of time you spend putting all of your bunk out there. I noticed that only 2 of 15 agreed with your post

I see your full time hobby is assuming.  As far as who has agreed or disagreed with me we all know that is politics.  The "liver flush" supporters all hit "agree" on any posts made by other "liver flush" supporters even when they are proven wrong.  For example, look at all the "liver flush" supporters that clicked "agree" when you falsely claimed that magnesium sulfate was from calcium carbonate or hydroxide extracted from seawater?  Again, it did not matter that your claim was completely bogus, they still clicked "agree" just because you were a "liver flush" supporter and you were attacking me.  So you can try to twist the facts all you want, but most people here on Curezone are intelligent enough to see right through your games.

"Would you like a Liver Flush with that colon cleanse? ", my ratings are much higher. As a matter of point, most of your posts have very little positive votes and a large number of negative votes, so what you consider kicking but is fluff.

See above.  You ought to check yourself for colon polyps while you still have your head so far up in your.......

>- when it is based on bogus research it is already by definition over priced and fluff

Once again, the even FDA could not find any evidence that our products do not work. What they found was lots of very satisfied customers. At least one of their agents accused us of hypnotizing our customers.

Sure, and as you also claimed calcium is used to make magnesium sulfate.  Sorry, but you have busted in too many lies to have any credibility in my eyes.  But if you are by some miracle telling the truth then you would have no problem providing the FDA reports, which are public records.  If you cannot provide them then we will all know why.

The fact is that while not perfect, the zapper does have at least a reasonable level of effectiveness for certain applications. We certainly have solid proof that it can kill microbes living in water.

Apparently not bacteria as they have cell membranes and viruses since they have no membrane.  And as you said above human cells are not affected since they have flexible membranes, which by the way bacteria also have.

If you are going to recant on your claims though now lets see the studies backing your claim.

We also have plenty of data to show that some microbes are killed quicker at one frequency while others are more susceptible to other frequencies.

See above.

On top of that it was not an effort to make a personal attack, but to point out that to the great majority of people here, you not only appear to be narrow minded, but portray the image of close mindedness. I will say that I have seen a few changes in what you say on a few topics since you first appeared on these forums. That is welcome, but your pretending that you have all of the answers because you have read a few pages of Rife, Bare, Lahovsky, or others, does not cut it.

Again you assume too much.  I have done a lot more research that simply reading a few pages.  And I did not obtain my information from sales sites like you clearly have.

I have been living, breathing, and eating Electro therapy for the past 11 years to the tune of 12 to 16 hours a day.

Seeing how much time you spend here on Curezone attacking people I seriously doubt that claim as well.

I do not just read, I have a lab and test it. Since Rife, Clark, and whoever else is not here, others like myself are pursuing the badly needed answers. No, I am not the only one and qiute possibly not the best. But at least, I am doing and making progress.

I have been researching radiofrequency therapy for 20 years.  And again, not from sales sites like you clearly have.

As for the rest of your claim I seriously doubt the res of your claims as well.  Again, you have been caught in too many lies to be taken seriously.  But we will see whether or not you can come up with documentation for your claims you made about the FDA.  Details of whether or not you really have a facility would be revealed in the documents if you are telling the truth.  And again, if you cannot come up with evidence of your claims then we will all know that you are lying again as FDA documents are public record.

>- did you realize that they never claimed anyone was cured by this method

Yes, I do not claim cures either. All that I claim is that my products kill germs in water.

But you also claimed that flexible cell membranes make cells resistant.  Bacteria have flexible cell membranes.  So you are really contradicting yourself again.

>- Chemotherapy can achieve those results

Look again, what they were receiving was palliative. They were on their death bed and had exhausted their chemo / radiation options. If they had been given this treatment early on as their primary therapy, they would have fared much better.

ROTFLMAO!!!!  What a load of garbage!!!  The person I saw use a Rife unit at 666hz had terminal liver cancer and was given less than a week to live.  He ended up dying 2 years later from an aneurysm.  But a scan a month earlier showed the cancer still had not returned.  He was using no other therapy other than the Rife unit.  And I have seen other such turnarounds.  So it really has nothing to do with how advanced or aggressive a cancer is.  If the proper FREQUENCY is used the person can be turned around as long as they are still breathing.  So you are just looking for excuses as to why the varied frequencies failed.

Please do not take what I say as a personal attack because that is not what is intended. You have a habit of taking certain things that you read as gospel and in your fervor spread a lot of poorly based misinformation. Learn to open you mind and give the things that you are hard set against at least a bit of study. While I think that you are definitely smart, educated, and somewhat knowledgeable, there are many things that you are overlooking. Your efforts would be more effective and much better appreciated if you would delve into things further before slamming the door in denial.

Is the speech you gave yourself?

I do want to express that while I know that some of Dr. Clark's early work had definite shortcomings, she did try to make corrections in her later writings and for this I give her Kudos.

She expanded her quackery to include other diseases in to her personal bogus list of diseases supposedly caused by parasites.  She was a quack, pure and simple!!!

She opened the door for many of us into a number of aspects of our health and made us think about things. I have a lot of research still left to do and could do it sooner if I did not have to spend so much time on these forums undoing the damage that has been caused by others who have posted either poorly based information or intentionally try to provide bad information.

Then stop posting misinformation and I will stop correcting your mistakes.

Tweet