Quote Originally Posted by Dan Jenson View Post
So the second generation oncotherm uses e-fields in order to generate microcurrents that do the job in a background of targeted hyperthermia for the purpose of tissue temperature stabilization for treatment standardization.

I'm just trying to sort this out, if I am getting it correctly. Seems the Anthony Holland lab method with added tissue temperature heating for better effect. ( Someone previously suggested that Anthony H. needs be add some temp. stabilization to his process anyway)

Still, my contention continues that these processes are targeting cells with limited success, (20%) while, historically Royal Rife targeted micro-organisms. (method 1.)

However, seen side effects of the historical Rife therapy (that aimed to destroy micro-organisms) did destroy cancer cells. We have seen that pulsed energies electrocute the coherence of cell division thus limiting tumor growth at the moment of application. (method 2.)Then afterwards the randomness of proliferating cell division resumes.

Now with oncotherm we get a 3rd method of action, namely bringing the tissue temperature up to some standard and then applying pulsed micro-currents for the purpose of creating apoptosis in the cancer cells.

dj
I am going to be cynical and say that first inventors build the circuit of their dreams. And afterwards they make up waffle about how they guess it might have bioeffects.... Some historical background is the old theory that if you exceed 43 C you can kill cancer cells and unfortunately if you hit 45 C you start killing normal cells. This was difficult to safely acheive and the most recent hyperthermia therapies tend to aim lower than 42 C.

The oncortherm uses an upper cone applicator of limited size and a lower waterbed functioning as a virtual second electrode. The RF irradiated area is thus limited to a defocused shape under the applicator.

There are other ways to acheive capacitive coupling e.g. using two plate electrodes.