Re: zapper effect on good bacteria

Agreed, this is a very good question. There is at least one good reason why this question is difficult to answer and that is another question - how does zapping really work (in detail, not glossed-over terms and concepts) ?.  However, at the very end of this post, there is an answer from Hulda Clark that may in fact be the kind of answer that will satsify you. If it does, great!, and glad I could help.  See the * near the end of this post. 

In hopes of being able to provide you some reasonable clues to the answer, I  consulted the first 21 pages of Hulda Clark's book - Cure for All Diseases, hoping to find clues there.  Clues were found but also found was the remembering of how the previous read through these pages left me thinking that Hulda tends to be kinda of short/brief on giving sufficient and exact details of her zapper research, and how in the course of giving a simple and  lay-person's view of the underlying electrical/electronic bio-electric principals she tends to deviate and alternate back and forth between MOR theory and Electrocution theory and how these related to her explanation of how/why the Zapper she invented kills anything - good, bad, or indifferent. I see the two (resonance versus electrocution) as significantly and distinctly different.... but perhaps I'm wrong and all wet on this understanding. It's difficult for me to tell if this weaving back and  forth between two theories coupled with lacking/dubious explanation were things she did unconsciously and or accidentally, or intentionally, or perhaps a bit of both (there is always the effects of her hassles with the establishment/law/food&medical enforcers to keep in mind on anything she appeared to reveal/disclose for us the public). Despite the clues found in these 21 pages, the overriding impression I got is that, in terms of providing a reasonablly sufficient and detailed technical explanation, she leaves the fundamental question unanswered - how does zapping work? The first few pages starts down the death-by-frequency (resonant) path (IE> MOR), but then swerves onto the death-by-electrocution path as though it is part of the same path as the resonance path (is it?, I don't think so, but is it?). Granted, dead is dead, however, death by resonant-frequency is significantly different from death by electrocution especially when it comes to the questions of friendlies versus unfriendlies. Just one example that in this context may not be the best - grab ahold of a wire that is carrying, oh, just for kicks, 100 amps pure DC with bunches and bunches of DC volts behind it and I am pretty sure you will die and fry by electrocution and only electrocution, not resonance; in this example, resonance as it pertains to the electricity involved is not even part of the equation. Another example - go to a heavy metal concert where musical talent may be in short supply but cover-effects, like Hendrix-style feeback IE> oscillation IE> resonance, at painfully high volume, is in excessive supply, and your ear drums are may rupture, not due to direct contact with the electricity (like electrocution) used to generate this sound, but by indirect effects - the waves of various resonating frequencies in the air that eventually cause your ear drum to burst.

Some clues: 1)pages five through nine talks about electric, electronic and RF frequency pretty much exclusively and comes to a head by page 9 wherein is provided somewhat confusing details of Hulda recollecting the testing of a particular hypothesis - effects upon a specific parasite using specific frequency as output by a Frequency Generator (one "much better" than a previous one Hulda used that was  limited to 2Mhz output). She describes coming to test  the effects of 434,000 hertz (output via frequency generator) applied to an Adult Fluke; the confusion lies in the fact that she then details not testing upon said Fluke, but instead  upon "....Salmonella bacteria, and Giardia and Herpes...." (side-note: are Flukes and Salmonella and Giardia related?). The results imply the testing went well " after a 3 minute treatment, I retested (using methods like a "syncrometer") and I could no longer find them (Salmonella and Herpes) in my organs......symptoms were quickly gone too.... my Herpes lesion no longer tingled". It's important to note - frequency generator set for 434,000 hertz.... or in other words, as best I can tell, this test was a success using AC only, not DC in any form ( no plain DC DC, no pulsed DC that involves AC components, no positive offset yada yada yada). These same pages refer to an indepth chart (at page 561) that lists organism and their known (Rife?) resonating frequency. The below excerpts of this chart were taken out of the same/similar electronic/PDF chart copied from a Hulda web site 2 years ago. This is a long and seemingly thorough list of resonant frequencies for  Molds/mold-toxins, Bacteria/Viruses, Roundworms/Flatworms/Other one-celled animals. Be this as it may, this clue #1  definitely favors the concept of ridding/killing pathogens/parasites/bateria by AC frequency **

Clue #2: page nine concludes with a section title Selective Electrocution that seems to be where Hulda first sets the stage for weaving and interlacing frequency theory and electrocution-theory. The section title implies the latter, but the actual section begins with more discussion of the theorizing she did back then (in the 80s) as to why/how resonant frequency worked? (why did it seem to give her positive testing results to date?) To her credit, maybe her speculation that she voiced in this section was her way of suggesting that the beneficial killing of parasites occured as the result of combined two-fold reason - frequency (resonance) and electrocution, at the same time?..... just thought I'd throw this in to give consideration. Anyway, by page 12, a section titled Zapping Bugs begins with the statement "by zapping I mean selectively electrocuting pathogens. For years I used a commercial frequency generator to 'zap' one pathogen after another". This statement leaves no doubt in my mind that in Hulda's mind, pathogen death by frequency is synonomous with death by electrocution. Perhaps by her combined understanding of biology, electricity, electronics and conventional terms, there is a way this can be so. It is in opposition to my understanding - death by frequency is not exactly the same as death by resonance. There was a recent poster who posed a good and related question about what some may recognize as a nuance and what others may not even recognize as something worth questioning -  is it  frequency or electrocution that kills the pathogens?. Who knows the answer and can tell us? This section continues to focuse mainly on frequency effects but within the next two pages introduces the infamous "positive offset frequency" without much fanfare nor technical clarification,  but the section is still dealing with frequency as generated by a frequency generator; use of freqeuncy-based DC has not yet been clearly introduce or mentioned outright but it has been intimated in the section just prior to the intro of the positive-offset concept; another seemingly out of place statement describing how bacteria with known resonant frequencies, outside that one which was used during a specific tests, were also found to have been killed and due to "battery operation!" .... the reference seems to be with respect to a battery-operated frequency generator but it's not clear.

Clue #3: Page 19 is the section wherein Hulda leads up to the several-page description of how people at home can build their own Zapper. The beginning of this section re-iterates her previous mention/findings on what we now know as the prescribed and basic routine of  3 sessions of 7 minute zapping with the first and second sessions separated by a 20 minute period of no zapping. The main clue here is in paragraph 2 where Hulda seems to be asking the reader and herself  "how does it work?", which she then explains as follows: 

*    "I suppose that a positive voltage applied anywhere on the body attracts negatively charged things  such as bacteria. Perhaps the battery voltage tugs at them, pulling them out of their locations........." 

This section and the above quoted statement in particular suggests to me that at the time it was published Hulda herself still did not know/reveal in clear and full details (or perhaps knew but did not tell.... perhaps  did not tell due to ongoign legal harassment and  pressure?),  how/why zapping really works; like any of us may be prone to doing when seeking a difficult answer, she seems to have grapsed for and found one.    

** This post started off asking about the effects on friendly bacteria. (* above, from Hulda) may be the kind of answer being sought here ..... . or in other words..... maybe friendly bacteria do not have negative charges like unfriendly bacteria, and possibly for this reason they are not attracted to the killing properties of positive voltage.  To really try to get to a deeper and less speculative answer, it would be helpful for someone to name at least a few of the most commonly known friendly bacteria that could then perhaps be experimented with. This may be an erroneous assumption, but the aforementioned chart (in part excerpted below) seems to imply that these are all "unfriendly bacteria"... but again, this may be wrong, and I'm admittedly not all that well schooled on bacteria......possibly some of the bacteria listed are friendly?..... I honestly do not know..... anyone? Here is a short list of bacteria from this chart that I assume are known to be unfriendlies:

Bacteria and Viruses
Including locations where I (Hulda) commonly found them

                                        Low Freq (kHz)         High Freq (kHz)       Use freq gen for 3 min @
Adenovirus                                 393                       393                                           393

Alpha streptococcus                     369.75                  385.4                                         380, 375

Bacillus anthracis spores              386.95                  391.45                                        388

Bacteroides fragilis -- found with
common roundworm in Ascaris      324.3                    325                                            325

Bordetella pertussis -- "whooping
cough" (tooth)                            329.85                  332.25                                        331

Borrelia burgdorferi -- Lyme disease 378.95               382                                             380

Candida albicans (pure powder) --
common yeast                            384.2                    388.4                                          386

Clostridium botulinum (tooth) --
causes food poisoning                 361                       364.55                                        362


Epstein Barre Virus (EBV)              372.5                    382.85                                        380, 375

Escherichia coli (E. coli) --
intestinal bacterium                     356                       356                                            356, 393

Haemophilus influenzae --
bacterial meningitis, infects joints  336.41                  336.41                                          336

Measles antigen                          369.5                    373                                               371

Neisseria gonorrhea -- causes
gonorrhea                                  333.85                   336.5                                            334

Nocardia asteroides -- found in
Parkinson's Disease                    354.95                   355.35                                          355.1, 368

Salmonella enteritidis --
intestinal infection                       329                        329                                               329

Shigella dysenteriae --
intestinal problems                      390.089                  390.089                                         390.089

Streptococcus pneumoniae--
causes pneumonia and inner ear disease 366.85         370.2                                              368 

 Friendlies                                             ?                                    ?                                                                      ?

*** PS - since some good answers are outstanding on some good qustions on this topic,  it is probably worth considering the possibility that friendly bacteria are to one extent or another negatively affected, degraded or killed by zapping.