Re: Vindication of Dr. Clark and Rife

 I find this discussion all quite strange. On the one hand you have people giving their own ndividual opinions on both the Hulda and Rife methods for killing parasites and pathogens, and on the other side a person who insists that he is right in his sole interpretation of both.

What comes out of this discussion lacks an appreciation of one thing. The Hulda Clark Zapper Method was specifically devised to kill parasites. Rife's method was specifically devised to kill a huge number of different pathogens including those causing cancer. These were two completely different methods based on two different physics principles. Therefore THEY ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT methods for the following reasons:

* Rife at least used a modulated frequency carrier with a HIGH POWERED PULSED SPECIFIC AND UNIQUE FREQUENCY to kill a specific pathogen that did not involve direct body contact or connexions.  

* Hulda Clark used a LOW POWERED ELECTRICAL METHOD WITH BODY CONTACT to kill just parasites that relied on connecting it to the body with pads or metallic grips.

* Rife's method used specific and different RESONANT FREQUENCIES AT HIGHER TRANSMISSION POWER against a specific pathogen to destroy them by electromagnetic resonance. This is almost exactly the same as when the Fat Lady sings, hits one particular note or frequency (the resonant frequency of crystal glass), and  the glass shatters to pieces ten feet away. This is also a well-know principle in physics -- Resonance Theory.  And when Rife applied the correct  resonating frequency to a specific pathogen -- it would over-resonate and over-vibrate the pathogen's nucleus -- thus eventually blowing the pathogen's nucleus apart -- just like when the Fat Lady sings

* Hulda Clark and the Beck Zappers use only an ELECTRICAL CURRENT AT LOW POWER to electrically hyperpolarize the outer cell(s) of the parasite -- a completely different principle to Rife's method. This can also work against certain pathogens but not all. This hyperpolarization works to  change or reverse the outer electrical charge on the parasite's outer cell-wall, both wrecking its cell-wall absorbtion metabolism and allowing the immune system to attack it more easily. You can also achieve the same thing by using DMSO, Iodineor Hydrogen Peroxide internally and this method does not really on frequency but instead relies on a sudden transfer of charge to the pathogen from the chemical ion for the same destructive effect on the pathogen or parasite which does not rely on any specific freqency at all. These specific chemicals all have similar and positive electro-chemical effects which change the hyperpolarity of pathogens which all helps to destroy them electro-chemically.     

I've also read through many of Rife's notes and peer reviews over the years and he spent a huge amount of his time just discovering all the different and particular resonant frequencies which destroyed specific pathogens and for this he invented and used his own microscope and the Rife Ray Machine. I've also read Hulda Clark's book.

I really can't understand why people are arguing that Rife's methods and Clark's methods are one and the same. They certainly are not. They both rely on completely different and well-established physics principles and their individual action and outcomes on the body and on pathogens and parasites just couldn't be more different.

Furthermore the argument that one particular frequency has the ability to kill ALL harmful pathogens and parasites only shows a distinct lack of any allegiance to any understanding of physics or biochemchemical principles  What scientific principle does that statement rely on and where is the evidence? If, instead of a particular frequency, you had argued the case for the body achieving health through obtaining the correct pH, ORP(Redox Potential) or Conductivity I would have been much more pro. But this last sentence has nothing whatsoever to do with any one particular frequency at all.