Does a Rife machine harm normal body cells?

[CharBoehm]

Tyrone, sir. I also feel compelled to respond.

You (and possibly others on this forum) have no idea the amount and level of work that many of us working to further this emerging technology put in on a daily basis, or the years we have spent getting to where we are now.

You apparently have no idea where our hearts are and intentions are.

You have no idea of the number of people that have been helped for a mere fraction of the cost of usual medical treatment, some of which never worked for them. Many of these people don't belong to any forums, so you will never hear about them. Knowing that their lives have been improved or extended in a good way is our biggest reward. I don't pretend to know all of what God thinks about that, but I have some clues.

You have no idea of the hours we spend on email and phone assistance, to help people use this technology in an optimal way.

You have no idea of the direct financial costs we incur doing this work, of the taxes we pay on the money that does get sent to us for services, of the little that is left over to help support us.

You have no idea of the innumerable hours we have spent away from interacting with our families, doing this work.

And yet you tell us we are selfish and ungodly.

No system is ever perfect, but for now this is the best we can do. And yes, our families do have to eat and we need a roof over our heads. Or do you expect food to be free also? That tends to create a system called slavery.

I respect that fact you have a gift and are able to assist with entities and do other shamanic work, and that you are in a position to do that for free. Many other shamans accept gifts. That keeps them fed and in shelter. I would assume you have other work that you do, to keep you fed and in shelter. The other work you do is your choice. Or perhaps you are independently wealthy - if so, that is wonderful.

The work we all do is our choice, and I have chosen to do my work with frequencies in the most reasonable way I could come up with. It tool me a long time to figure out the structure of how to offer this service.

However, it is not fair that you insult me in this way for doing what I do, on the basis of how you do things, or on the basis of what you think is Godly or selfish or not; or because certain frequency information has been free in the past. Everybody is free to use, or not use, the DNA-related frequencies. And somehow, this technology will go into the future - but like most other services, it won't be free. Nobody can afford to absorb the costs of such an endeavour. Even Rife was supported by Mrs. Bridges. Somewhere along the line, somebody pays in one way or another.

And as I have said before, and as might be obvious from other posts I make on this forum, it's never just the frequencies. Good and effective frequencies go hand in hand with high-quality devices.

Tyrone, please stop making assumptions about our intentions. This is hard work.

Best wishes,
Char
www.dnafrequencies.com

[Leroy Dissinger]

Dear Charlene Boehm,

I did not know about your site or method of calculation. I have read the paper and it does not seem to be too complicated (however, one may need to know some information that may or may not be obtainable via internet searches). Based on your method for calculating frequencies based on DNA, then you must have frequencies that could potentially be harmful to human cells?

Have you calculated these frequencies? If so, how many of these frequencies correspond to published frequencies (or are very close to published frequencies) that could potentially harm people using frequency devices?

It is an intriguing method, scientifically based and seems sound.

However, based on the paper (and my calculation which could be incorrect), "The entire genome of Borrelia burgdorferi sains 910,724 base pairs", 112.58 is the frequency specified. This is 33 octaves removed from the actual frequency obtained. Would not a square wave (with its odd harmonics) have very little power this far removed from the actual or debilitating frequency.

The reason for these questions is based on the title of this thread. It is also based on people getting herx reactions...is it the bug that was killed, or is it cells withing the body. I do not understand why a "hit" as defined by some manufacturers would create a physical sensation to the user of the device...it seems like it should only create a sensation to the little beasty...causing it to explode.

Also, based on my 33 octaves lower calculation, it seems that buying a device that can produce much higher frequencies is the right way to go...to get closer to those actual frequencies, i.e. less octaves removed from the actual or debilitating frequency.

As a newbie asking questions, I hope you will not take this as trying to steal information or being questions that are just TOO stupid.

Regards,

Leroy

[Leroy Dissinger]

Dear Charlene Boehm,

I am no expert on you method. I've looked up human DNA, and I'm not sure that they know exactly how many base pairs are present, but they say around 3 billion.

Using the method in your paper I calculated the following frequency using 3 billion pairs.

So, the frequency of human DNA (based on that loose number) is :

646.6575381
The lower octaves of that are :
323.328769 161.6643845
With debilitating frequencies respectively of:
457.2559303 228.6279651
Would these calculations be in line with yours, based on 3 billion base pairs?

Leroy

[Randall Haislip]

In response to Jason Ringas' question as to whether frequencies can harm tissue cells and or blood cells this page might be a starting point for those interested in that discussion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ul...ge_diagram.png
This thread is the proper place for such discussion.

[Randall Haislip]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randall Haislip
<snip>
If however you have information that suggest that frequencies are harmful to tissue cells or blood cells as your doubting remark indicates, I would be delighted to read that document.
<snip>
You never said "harmful" in your original comment. I understood you to be saying that frequencies have no effect on blood or tissues, not no harmful effect. On this point, however, I do recall an early study where they destroyed frog blood cells with sound waves. I don't have the study handy, but I think I may have posted it to one of the discussion groups over the years. I also recall someone making a post observing the same thing with a frequency machine. This was many years ago. I agree that the frequency machines that we use generally do not have harmful effects, but that doesn't mean that they can't have harmful effects. They're certainly not toys, so caution should always be kept in mind.
Regards,
Jason


Jason,
You and I have both been involved in this technology a long time. We both know that frequencies DO affect tissue cells and blood cells. I would never intentionally suggest otherwise.
And yes I certainly agree with you:
[Jason Ringas]" I agree that the frequency machines that we use generally do not have harmful effects, but that doesn't mean that they can't have harmful effects. They're certainly not toys, so caution should always be kept in mind."
Yes, I'll say it with you, These machines are not Toys.
Those with lyme disease don't need to hear that nearly as much as the newcomers who have never experienced a herx.
Randall

[CharBoehm]

Leroy, please know I am not ignoring your posts about the DNA frequency and human DNA, but have not had time to properly address the questions. I will need to pull some references to give a decent reply, and will try to do that asap.

Char

[Leroy Dissinger]

Leroy, please know I am not ignoring your posts about the DNA frequency and human DNA, but have not had time to properly address the questions. I will need to pull some references to give a decent reply, and will try to do that asap.

Char

No worries. I was and am in the process of moving. Wish I'd known you were in NC before I moved from SC...oh well. Looking forward to your response. I'd think that using the DNA frequencies directly (or boosting those) would help a person, but using the square root of 2 * those frequencies could be bad. Anyway, I'm looking to purchase or build a system shortly (after some more unpacking) and doing some testing.

Thanks,

Leroy