How Are Rife Manufacturers Compared?

[Peter Walker]

One of the most important features of this forum, is the independant assessment of a wide range of Rife devices and manufacturers.

As I have only personally seen and used a few Rife devices, I was left with the problem of how to make a reasonable and fair comparison, that is of use to the entire Rife community. The concept I have decided to implement is as fair as I believe is possible.

There are a number of aspects that can be compared and I wish to make the method used transparent to all - both manufacturers and members of this forum.

I will be using the concept that the BBC uses when gathering news: To be unbiased, you have to tell both sides of the story!

Please send me a description of your company and Rife products for me to use as a basis for describing your Rife product(s). This should be in the form of a description the readers can recognise as being fair, without having the feeling they are reading some form of advertising. Unjustifiable claims ("We make the world's best...", "Nobody else can do this...", etc.) and criticism of competitors products, etc. is not acceptable and will not be used. Please also supply images of your equipment preferably showing it from all sides. If your equipment has been medically certified, and/or you have run clinical trials, etc. in any way, please provide full details of this, too.

In order for me to have basic information about each organisation, I also ask you to answer the following questions:

• Name of Device, Photo(s) of device, Introduction
• Model No., Description, Type
• Release date, Made by,
• Contact, Tel. (Time to call), Fax, E-Mail, Web site URL, User online forum url (if any)
• Sold in Europe by..., and Price in Euro!
• Sold in America by..., and Price in Dollar!
• Sold in (country) by..., and Price in Euro/Dollar/Whatever
• Special features, Units sold,
• Certification (medical CE, TGA, FDA, etc.)
• Clinical Trials (some organisatiosn have already done these)
• Other trials
• Testomonials (independently verified?)
• Claims made, Verification of claims
• Waveform used, Frequency range, Frequency steps, Voltage range
  Voltage steps, Waveform accuracy, Oscilloscope images of waveform
• PC Programmable?, User Programmable?,
• Diagnostic capability (method used)
• Operating manual available in which languages
• Any further Comments

The other side of the story is the response from the users. To determine this, I have looked through the messages posted, in the last 3 years, to the 3 existing Rife lists on the Internet (until recently, all on Yahoogroups). After reading the messages, I then do my best to summarise what I have found on each unit. Additionally, I also take account of messages sent to me privately.

I have chosen a method that allows the members of this forum to be able to openly and democratically state their true opinion, while remaining annoymous! To achieve this, I am making use of the POLLING feature, of this forum, to ask the users the same questions about each unit on the market! A Poll is basically a message containing a question with up to 10 different answers. Each member of the forum can answer each question once as thay feel fit. Once a vote has been made, it cannot be changed and every member only has one vote for each question. I can assure all members that I will never release details of who voted for what (I will not even investigate this, myself).

I ask all the members of this forum to vote conscientiously for those devices you have been able to form an honest opinion about. In order to prevent misuse of this feature, you will need to join the respective usergroup for the device before you can vote in these polls.

I think the above factors will allow for as fair an assesment as is possible and thereby assist people interested in buying Rife equipment to be as well advised as is possible.

[Doug Detelj]

I am new to the group, and my mind is reeling from an internet search for the most effective/economical Rife machine.

In this forum's FAQ section is a topic named "How are Rife manufacturers compared?" The author outlined a very impressive idea for compiling a list to compare, yet I can not find it yet on this site? Am I missing it, or is it elsewhere? Can anybody help???

Thank you so much for your time.

[Peter Walker]

I am new to the group, and my mind is reeling from an internet search for the most effective/economical Rife machine.

In this forum's FAQ section is a topic named "How are Rife manufacturers compared?" The author outlined a very impressive idea for compiling a list to compare, yet I can not find it yet on this site? Am I missing it, or is it elsewhere? Can anybody help???

Thank you so much for your time.

Hi Doug,
the project to compare a wide range of devices has been on hold for some time due to other projects. However, I do hope to restart that project here on this forum during this year.

Regards

Peter

[Bernard Ong]

Hi,

I have been on the YAHOO! Rife Group for a few years now. I am very convinced of the beneficial effects of Rife technology, and have always wanted to buy some of those devices frequently mentioned in the Group. However, I am much confused by the numerous machines available on the market, each claiming to be the best. As such, Peter Walker's initiative to establish a comparison system on this platform is long overdue and much welcome.

I like to express my personal gratitude to Mr. Walker for the invaluable contribution and immense sacrifice he has made for the benefit of mankind in general, and the Rife community in particular.

Keep it up, Peter.

[Annie Andrey]

HEAR! HEAR! Thank you Peter!

I also second the following:

"As such, Peter Walker's initiative to establish a comparison system on this platform is long overdue and much welcome."

Thanks Bernard!
@nnie

[Rick Sacks]

A friend has been diagnosed with advanced prostste cancer and is in need of some help. After diong some reading and looking around I find some Rife machines to have handles that you hold and some to use light. What should I be looking for? I see so many alternatives and I don't have that much time to read volumes of study material. If I might glean from the research others have done and save the time I would be appreciative.

[Michael Tigchelaar]

A friend has been diagnosed with advanced prostste cancer and is in need of some help. After diong some reading and looking around I find some Rife machines to have handles that you hold and some to use light. What should I be looking for? I see so many alternatives and I don't have that much time to read volumes of study material. If I might glean from the research others have done and save the time I would be appreciative.

SEE: http://truerife.com/TrueRifeQuestions.html

Mike www.truerife.com

[Rick Sacks]

Are there places that rent the equipment so the burden of the thousands of dollars might be avoided?

[Randall Haislip]

Hello Rick
As you have found out by now, its very easy to invest several thousands of dollars in this equipment if you've got it to spend.
I think if I was in the position of your friend I would spend that money on a airline ticket to Austraila to visit the clinic of Dr. John Holt who has the only proven protocol for defeating most cancers.
More information on Dr. John Holt can be located on this website.
Best Wishes
randall

[Stephen Freeman]

Hi Randall andothers,
I am so very new to all of this. I am a Physical Therapist, specializing in Electromyography, (nerve and muscle testing) for 31 years. I actually have a friend dying of 2 forms of cancer his namd is also Randall..anyway I have read a great deal on the NET and certainly buy all of how this science has been squashed by the big boys...I have recently purchased some of the CD with Freq's and the bood about Cancer . Need to learn a great deal. Just facinated by the whole deal. I am also curious about what machine to buy if I were to get one....though not personally in the market, I would very much like to feel comfortable in what to suggest to someone..
ALSO does any one have any experience with using the CD programs and computer speakers, or headphones.. ?
I have also wanted to know if the treatment Frequencies are in the 20 to 20 range that is "in theory" audible to the human ear, or are these Freq's and the harmonics in differnet areas not audible.
Great to hear from anyone.
Thanks to all
Stephen Freeman
252-726-1192 USA

[Toby Montry]

Digital frequency using headphones do not work. And actually digital frequency from cds can cause a cancer. WHAT works is analog. But not all head phones are good. The best way is to use a subwofer the type with a front speaker at least 12 inch 15 is better. Play the ANALOG frequency (I am talking about low frequency I am not sure about high frequency. I think you can keep dividing it down by 2 to get the lower frequency. Play that. It wont harm other people in the room if your body dont need it, no effect. but best to be out of the room if you dont need the frequency.
I have been studying it for a year (low frequency not Rife high frequency). I have had sucuess on back pain and I had a runny nose a few times and I listened to 22.02 (frequency for vitimin C) and with in seconds my nose stoped running.　　I know that it is not a major disease but it WORKED!!!

>ALSO does any one have any experience with using the CD programs and computer speakers, or headphones.. ?

[Jeff Garff]

SEE: http://truerife.com/TrueRifeQuestions.html

Mike www.truerife.com

Hello Michael Tigchelaar

The answer that you have given on you web site under “Contact Vs Plasma” in regards to pad devices would be good if it was correct. Many scientific tests called “Bio-Electrical Impedance Analysis” have been done on the human body which show that your description and answer is not correct. These tests prove that low frequencies (5,000 hertz) will penetrate the body but only go through the connective tissue. They will not go into the cell. “The Skin Effect” would only apply if the human body was made of copper. The real question is “What is the Cell Effect.” These many impedance tests show that at about 1MHz (1 million cycles per second or hertz) there is no more resistance in the biological tissue of the body. Low frequencies below about 10,000 hertz only travel through the connective tissue of the body. At about 10,000 hertz frequencies begin to penetrate the outside layers of the cell. This scale gradually goes up so that at about 100,000 hertz penetration into the cell is very noticeable. From 100,000 hertz to 1,000,000 hertz (1MHz) penetration into the cell is significant until full penetration is achieved at 1MHz.

Your description of pad devices as being like a kitchen “stove” which “transfer their energy through surfaces and therefore are excellent in treating the blood, but may have some limitations as regards full body penetration” is giving people incorrect information.
These scientific tests also show the body to be about 450 to 500 ohms not “1 million ohms.” This 450 to 500 ohms is an overall figure because the legs are different that the arms and the arms are different than the torso.

These tests prove that the frequencies from a pad instruments are not like putting a “turkey on top of the stoves burner vs a pot of water which conducts energy much easier”. These scientific “Bio-Electrical Impedance Analysis” test prove that low audio frequencies from a pad device penetrate into the body and go throughout all the connective tissue. If higher frequencies are used, such as a carrier frequency of at least 1MHz then full penetration of these audio frequencies is made into the cells and the bone.

It would be better to give people correct information so that they can make a more informed decision. Here is a link to one of these scientific tests that was on the web.

http://www.rifevideos.com/pdf/skin_effect_and_bio-impedance_analysis.pdf


Best wishes
Jeff Garff
www.rifevideos.com

[Jason Ringas]

Hello Michael Tigchelaar

The answer that you have given on you web site under “Contact Vs Plasma” in regards to pad devices would be good if it was correct.
<snip>
It would be better to give people correct information so that they can make a more informed decision. <snip>

A far more seriously incorrect statement that Michael is making is in calling his web site and machines "True Rife". They are not "true Rife", and calling them such is a misrepresentation of and disservice to Rife's name and legacy. Any clinical therapeutic efficacy his machines may produce is irrelevant to the point being made.

The biggest obstacle to the advancement of "true" Rife research is the Rife community's misrepresentation of what a "true Rife" machine is, and the methodolgy used to establish it as "true Rife". This ultimately filters down into people being confused as to how to proceed, what machine to buy, etc.

Regards,


Jason

[Jeff Garff]

A far more seriously incorrect statement that Michael is making is in calling his web site and machines "True Rife". They are not "true Rife", and calling them such is a misrepresentation of and disservice to Rife's name and legacy. Any clinical therapeutic efficacy his machines may produce is irrelevant to the point being made.

The biggest obstacle to the advancement of "true" Rife research is the Rife community's misrepresentation of what a "true Rife" machine is, and the methodolgy used to establish it as "true Rife". This ultimately filters down into people being confused as to how to proceed, what machine to buy, etc.

Regards,


Jason

Hello Jason,

Your point is well taken. Dr. Rife made this statement on the Rife CDs.

“Well it’s been called a half a dozen different things, a frequency device now, but it was called a Rife ray at one time. I made them stop that because I didn’t want my name on it. Some quack might get a hold of it.”

Because of this statement Rife made we closed all of our web sites that had his name on them and took his name off of our instrument. How could we honor him and then put his name on our machine.

Jeff
www.rifevideos.com

[Mico Snook]

I know this is an old thread but what about the spooky2 with plasma? They state the original rife machine did not use a carrier hence way more power. New to this rife idea. Just trying to get my head art it all.

[Stanislaw Chmielarz]

"Rife" mean not one type of a machine described. As I know he used 3 types where 2 of them he made and the third was Hoyland's construction. So the word "Rife" mean a frequency machine with a plasma transmitter. Rife didn't use carrier modulation but the mixing of 2 frequencies in his second machine. Hoyland used carrier modulation with a modulation coefficient M>100%. Spooky and many other producers have a good marketing staff so You ought to filter an information.

[Mico Snook]

Ok thanks for the reply. So, is there a machine out there that comes the closest to his original design?
Regards

[Alan Blood]

Rife didn't use carrier modulation but the mixing of 2 frequencies in his second machine. .

I also beleive this is true. I dont think anybody today really knows how that system worked, and today nobody makes or sells anything like that. I am trying to convince people to re-invent these.

Different people insist on different interpretations of the history. Some people insist that the monofrequency approach would be Rife's choice, but there are comments in the archives that clearly contradict that interpretation .

I wrote in other posts comparing some electronic schemes for gas tubes that may have been tried at different times ...

A) superimposing a low frequency with an RF frequency (lo-hi superimposition) .... pre-Hoyland and based on triodes, five output valves in parallel based on Navy MOPA circuit, but possibly with modulation stage not used, battery bank power supplies.

B) superimposing two RF frequencies F1 and F2 to generate a low frequency component F3 (dual RF heterodyning) .... 1934, pentode valves and on-board power supplies

C1) AM to obtain multiple RF sidebands ... effectively this modulates with a harmonic set of low frequencies (AZ-58 c. 1950's)

C2) multiple sideband device as above, but with floating earth etc as described by Dan Jensen (Beam Rays 1939). This design had significant frequency drift in the carrier, but personally I do not beleive that is a flaw because the low frequency component was stable despite that drift.

D) Rife-Bare AM ... modulates with a single square wave (unlikely to have been used by Rife).
...........................................

Comments:

A) This is only my opinion / guess and other people may strongly disagree .... I suspect this worked well on microscope slide samples to demonstrate dielectrophoretic force (DEP) adhesion effects (clumping or agglutination) better than monofrequency (or at least at lower power thresholds) but Hoyland proved it had poor penetration into deep tissue. I outline a simple two-frequency concept, but in a real gas plasma tube device, the output may also include mixing of harmonics. What happens might also depend on whether the signal superimposition occurs in a pre-amp stage or directly in the plasma tube. I beleive the evidence for 5 parallel final valves suggests a single amp that amplifies one (superimposed) signal. Another alternative design that might pre-date this Rife MOPA might use relatively primitive triodes (hooked up as inverters) in series to progressively amplify. This could incorporate AM, but I am voting that Rife was deliberately interested in superimposition.

B) Hoyland's first solution to improve the penetration problem (most other people think this is a dumb complicated idea and that Rife never tried this. But I think it is awesome and I would love to work with a design like that. Nobody has ever messaged me to say they like it, or that they agree it was ever tried by Rife)

C2 An elegant low-cost design that might indirectly deliver a harmonic set of low frequency components via the interference of multiple RF sidebands . BUT does it do a better job that the more expensive design B ???

C1 AZ-58 copied the Hoyland 1939 design but abandoned the floating earth principle in favor of a more conventional circuit . (This also improved the carrier drift). Some people sell modern versions of this style of multiple RF sideband device, but they insist that the bioactive "MOR" is actually one of the RF sidebands. They also insist that Rife's MORs were all within the RF band, meaning that lower frequencies are useless or irrelevant, and the mod frequency is irrelevant, and that MOR is highly dependent on the actual carrier value. They argued that when the AZ-58 altered the original carrier frequency, the designers had no understanding of how the correct amended mod frequency should be calculated, because they were ignorant of the principle of multiple sidebands . With all due respect, my counter-argument is that not enough consideration was given to sideband interaction by these researchers.

Most of these modern multiple sideband devices feature an option for modulation sweep to allow all the frequencies within that part of the RF spectrum to be emitted. I made an unpopular interpretation that the historical charts they refer to list RF sidebands that were convenient to detect and record (more accurate than reading the mod frequency). But on the other hand, given the serious carrier drift, it would be important for calibrating sideband to mod frequency to maintain the equipment with no change of the placement of reactive objects near the tube during the work, and maybe even similar humidity conditions). I beleive the low frequency modulation values are bioactive and the actual RF sideband values are irrelevant, similar to the Rife-Bare paradigm. My personal opinion is that to attempt to delivery DEP force as a therapy, the dwell-times within the effective window should be at least a few seconds. If the modulation is in a sweep mode, I would run the sweep change slowly over a limited window in any given session, not rapidly over a wide window as proposed by Bedini.

D) Rife once used the term "amplitude modulation" and Crane taught that AM was Rife's technology. However this quote may have been referring to the 1939 design. Moreover, signal superimposition schemes even now are described by some people as AM, because you can see a regular envelope in the trace signal. There are theoretical reasons to assume the Rife-Bare devices can deliver a low-frequency MOR (as the mod frequency) because in the simplest analysis there are two RF sidebands that interfere within the target. Some people beleive Rife used a scheme similar to Bare, but using overmodulation instead of square, but bottom line is they may have been misled by Crane.

.................................................. .......

It may be that assuming Rife saw clumping effects (possibly this required custom dilutions in glycerol or sugar solutions to get into a useable DEP window, and most modern Rife researchers may have not been aware of that when attempting to treat bacteria), he looked for a technology that gave the most robust effect, e.g. a device that gave the effect even at modest power settings) ... at some point Rife abandoned monofrequency designs and moved on to two-frequencies simultaneously. Since he had a collaboration with Lee deForest, you would think they would have had a crack at AM, perhaps also by using a large version of deForest's gas triode either as output or as a pre-amp. But from the perspective of delivering an optimal DEP signal, you might consider superimposition instead of AM. Assuming the earlier monofrequency research indicated DEP windows below the RF band, it would seem logical that superimposing RF onto the earlier known LF frequencies would be worth a look. (Hi-lo superimposition) ..... I made a guess that the hi-lo scheme would fail in deep tissue and another guess that Hoyland would also predict that, and a further guess that he might offer a novel dual RF heterodyning scheme as a solution. We do NOT see that well described in the archives, but on the other hand there are obvious gaps in the archives. The one clue that supports my interpretation is a schematic by Crane that modifies an AZ-58 sketch by pencilling in a second RF oscillator stage, shown as connected to the second gas tube electrode.

People might assume the 1939 innovation makes a dual RF design redundant, so why should I prefer dual RF to multiple sidebands ?. One reason is that I know obtaining a fundamental F3 is very different to obtaining a harmonic set. I would say that if I wanted to use extend the research of Kirson et al on cancer cells to improve the existing 200 kHz capacitative plate applicator designs to allow deep non-invasive treatments using RF, I would have various choices to evaluate. My opinion is excluding dual RF would be silly. Moreover there may be some advantages to opposed-wave configurations. Based on Rife's comments criticising harmonic content in the 1939 design, it may be that dual RF might have been Rife's preferred alternative, and the modern obsession with AM is misinterpreted.

[Stanislaw Chmielarz]

Whose design? Rife or Hoyland? Some people here try to build a replicas but I think that is worthless.
You will find an other machies which have a good results in healing from a parasites but I don't look for a "rife" or "true rife" but on the individual testimonials. Some machines help some but not the other. Sometimes a proper diet and lifestyle change can do more ...

[Mico Snook]

Hi Stanislaw,
There is so many companies stating there's is the best. So confusing