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

[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

[Jason Ringas]

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

Good point. I wouldn't have so much of a problem with a machine being called "Rife", if it actually was a "true Rife" machine. As I've said so many times before, at present, there's no such thing as a "true Rife" machine. I really wish people would stop abusing Rife's name for their own interests. It is a very sad reality that in many respects, it is we the Rife community that have become the quacks that Rife feared would sully his name and reputation. That may be a harsh statement, but I believe it's a totally true one, and all would do well to reflect upon it.

Regards,


Jason

[Michael Tigchelaar]

As regards our published research on body impact energy, we are in full agreement with your research as regards frequency penetration to the cells. We were discussing impact energy not frequency penetration. Even A.M. and F.M. broadcast penetrate our cells. But what is the impact energy? Is it really sufficient enough cause damage?

Having said this, we do not argue with results. If a Pad device is demonstrated to reduce the viral load of HIV through a comparitive study great! We do not have a problem with pad / contact devices. We actually produce a contact device ourselves and have reports of excellent results.

Rife Plasma and Pad devices however operate on entirely different principles of ENERGY transference.

We are in favor of both pad and plasma. Both methods of energy transference have their own advantages and disadvantages. We recommend both.

Mike www.truerife.com

[Stephen Freeman]

Hi MIke and other
I am a Physical therapist doing Electromyography for 31 years. that is a fancy muscle and nerve test. I use a gel "Sonigel" when placing my electrodes on the ski. I tape them on.."OLd School" the newer ones are self adhesive and pre gelled...anyway I use Sonigel, as even with a slight air space the current I use will not effeciently pass from electrode to and into the skin and eventuyally into the nerve tissue which I am testing. I have read many of the Forum posts and have not seen any mention of a gel. I know that with Ulatrsound..which I have also used...that we need to Sonigel for the same reasons...and then you have the OB-GYN doctors using the gel for ultrasound of pregnang women. ....Hmm in just a though just now....could or would a clinical ultrasound unit used by therapist, and chiropracters, also work as a Rife..."if you could find the freqs.?

Anyway I was just want to ask or inquire about the Gel ussage.
All Be Blessed
Stephen Freeman North Carolina
Sfreeman@ec.rr.com

[Jason Ringas]

<snip>
Anyway I was just want to ask or inquire about the Gel ussage.

I've used a pad machine with both self-adhesive and gel type electrodes. They both work fine. They're more for a focused type of application rather than a generalized whole body type of set-up that is commonly used.

Regards,


Jason

[Jeff Garff]

Hello Michael Tigchelaar

I appreciate you giving an explanation but I have a few questions before I am willing to accept your explanation.

First I would like to say, this research on “Bio-Impedance Analysis” is not our research. These are independent scientific tests that have been done on “Bio-Impedance Analysis” with regards to frequency penetration into the human body. As you know there are two different types of pad instruments. Some of them use a carrier frequency and some do not. Frequencies output from a non-carrier instrument, in square wave form, produce harmonics up to about 500,000 hertz. We have tested this on a spectrum analyzer. This can account for a significant amount of cell penetration in the body according to these Bio-Impedance tests. The energy that comes from an RF carrier instrument will create a very strong electromagnetic field which can be read with a tri-field meter just the same as a ray tube and these “Bio-Impedance Analysis” tests prove that energy can fully penetrate the cells of the body. I mention this because the many reports on “Bio-Impedance Analysis” discuss RF frequencies up to 1 MHz and the fact that the human body has no resistance to frequencies of this range or higher.

<As regards our published research on body impact energy, we are in full agreement with your research as regards frequency penetration to the cells. We were discussing impact energy not frequency penetration. Even A.M. and F.M. broadcast penetrate our cells. But what is the impact energy? Is it really sufficient enough cause damage?>

Here are a few of my questions. Do you have any scientific papers on this “Body Impact Energy”? I have never heard of it before. How do you measure it coming out of the ray tube? How do you measure it in the body? Also how do you determine that it is penetrating the cells? Is your published research, your research, or is it independent scientific tests that have been done in laboratories on EM plasma devices proving they have superior “Body Impact Energy”?

The reason I ask these questions is, I do not see any scientific information on your site backing up your claim. I am not trying to be negative about EM devices because I have seen too many good results with the people who use them. But if you do have independent scientific tests that substantiate your claim then I would really like to get that information because I believe it would be very helpful. Without this kind of proof, what you say on your web site is nothing but your personal opinion and your claim is still misleading and incorrect. When I first started to talk about “Bio-Impedance Analysis” many people wanted me to send them the scientific proof, which I did.

<Rife Plasma and Pad devices however operate on entirely different principles of ENERGY transference>

I do not have a problem with the fact that RF Pad and Plasma work on different methods of transferring energy. But the real question is does it really make any difference? The reason I bring this up is, if it really does make a big difference then the EMEM type of instruments, like pad instruments, have a couple of problems. The first problem is, Rife used RF frequencies output through a ray tube and this is how he found the M.O.R.s that resonated with the organisms. Rife’s method of energy transfer was RF. His frequencies ranged from 139,200 hertz for Anthrax to 1,604,000 for the BX and BY organisms. The second problem is, EMEM ray tube instruments cannot reach this frequency range because they are specifically built to work on EM energy in the low audio frequency range. The energy from an RF ray tube is different than the energy from an EMEM type of ray tube. An RF pad instrument does not use a ray tube so this could be the main problem with them but they can output the RF frequencies that Rife used. Dr. Robert P. Stafford reported that his tests with the audio frequencies on Staph and Strep cultures had no effect on the organism. Many others have done the same tests with the same results. After all of Dr. Stafford’s testing he came to the conclusion that all the audio frequencies did was to boost the immune system. So which is more important the correct frequency or the ray tube? We all may be on shaky ground.

If the method of energy transfer really matters as I mentioned earlier then how can an EM instrument be called a “Rife plasma device” when it is not built on any of Rife’s original principles. We call our instrument a “Function Generator” not a “Rife Machine”. No pad instrument should ever be called a Rife machine.

Since Rife did not want his name put on any instrument then the only thing you can call your instrument is an “EM Plasma Device” not a “Rife Plasma Device.” Even if in the future Rife’s method of devitalizing organisms is fully figured out it should never have his name put on it because of his request. As I motioned earlier we removed Rife’s name off of our instrument when we listened to the audio tapes and heard Rife say he didn’t want his name put on any instrument.

<If a Pad device is demonstrated to reduce the viral load of HIV through a comparitive study great!>

Has your HIV study been confirmed by independent medical trials. None of the good results that we have seen with people who have used pad instruments on HIV have been verified by studies. So I do not think personal claims are of much value in arguing this point.

Jeff Garff

As regards our published research on body impact energy, we are in full agreement with your research as regards frequency penetration to the cells. We were discussing impact energy not frequency penetration. Even A.M. and F.M. broadcast penetrate our cells. But what is the impact energy? Is it really sufficient enough cause damage?

Having said this, we do not argue with results. If a Pad device is demonstrated to reduce the viral load of HIV through a comparitive study great! We do not have a problem with pad / contact devices. We actually produce a contact device ourselves and have reports of excellent results.

Rife Plasma and Pad devices however operate on entirely different principles of ENERGY transference.

We are in favor of both pad and plasma. Both methods of energy transference have their own advantages and disadvantages. We recommend both.

Mike www.truerife.com

[Jason Ringas]

In reference to the debate on plasma tube versus pad type applications, I've never seen any definite information on the subject. We just don't know at this juncture if the plasma tube adds something "extra", making it a necessity. If anyone makes a claim or implication that their machine is "better", because it uses a plasma tube, they should back it up with some solid evidence. By the same token, if someone claims that the plasma tube is not necessary, then that should be backed up too.

This comes back to the fundamental issues of what is Rife research, Rife technology, and Rife therapy? Despite all that we've learned over the years, there are still many people who blatantly misrepresent the matter. As I've said so many times before, "Rife" is not about any particular hardware, it's about a methodology. It doesn't matter if you use pads, plasma tubes, vacuum tubes, transistors, analog, digital, or whatever else. If you can produce the "Rife effect", and can demonstrate it with the same methodology that Rife used, that's all that matters. In "Rife therapy", you shouldn't really be talking about what disease you're treating, but rather what microorganism you're trying to devitalize. In Rife's hand-written lab notes, they didn't "ray" the experimental animals for cancer, they "rayed" them for the BX organism. The fact that Rife believed the BX organism was the cause of the cancer is beside the point. "Rife therapy" is founded upon rigorous laboratory research and testing, not clinical trials or results. Clinical results may be the ultimate goal, but if your "therapy" is not founded upon, or is somehow divorced from in vitro laboratory research, it's not "Rife therapy" and it's not "Rife research". Anyone claiming otherwise is misrepresenting the matter, and is "muddying the water". They are not only doing a disservice to Rife's name and legacy, but are doing a disservice to the broader field of electrotherapy. This misrepresentation and in some cases outright fraud needs to stop.

Regards,


Jason

P.S. Who disagrees with what I've said here, and why? What I've said here is the crux of what Rife is all about, so I would like to hear what any objections may be and why.

[Mike Kirkpatrick]

I just found this discussion, and now have a few questions for Mr. Garff:

I notice that the GB-4000 is now being offered with an Emem-type plasma device.

1. Can you run the carrier from the GB-4000 through the Emem?
2. What is the highest frequency from the GB-4000 that can be run through the Emem?
3. Is the Emem-SRX 10Khz (as stated on one page of your website) or 10,000,000 Hz as stated on another page?
4. Can the amp be used with the Emem?

Thank you,

Mike