This message was, originally, sent off-line
to Solar. I have, since, received a number of off-line inquiries of a
similar nature. Therefore, as an economy in time and effort...on my
part I am forwarding my answers to the general list. Although this does
not cover the entire spectrum of questions, it will help----at least
until I get the time to anwer the individual inquiries in a more
detailed form.
Thank you all for your understanding.
Sincerely, Brooks Bradley.
--- Begin Message ---
Dear Solar,,
In answer to your inquiry I offer the following:
Since the researchers at the University of Chicage
established, over a decade ago, that the majority of human tissue average
wavelength indices were between 600 and 720 nm, we settled on 660 nm
(after some preliminary tests) as the most effective frequency available
(for a majority of considerations). The frequency did not appear to be
critical.....but 660 nm was the most effective wave
length---generally---from among a number evaluated across the 600 -- to
720 + spectrum. Additionally, ONLY pulsed applications yielded the rapid,
stimulating, healing/corrective responses I suggested earlier. The
application of a constant LED light-source----AT ALL FREQUENCIES---seemed
to induce muscle relaxation, reduce pain and inflamation (this phenomenon
was recognized by the Russians and Czechs as early as the 1960's). [ We
have not conducted ANY basic research on these phenomena----but have
restricted ourselves to applications research/evaluations]. We applied a
variety of different control pulses......all were effective, but two
regimes seemed to yield superior results ( 4 to 10 cps [hertz ]
settings...........and super-imposed frequencies of 800 to 2000 hertz,
over a Rife/Bare type (approx 27 MHZ carrier) output---applied in
discrete....SINGLE FREQUENCY steps (e.g. 800, 801. 921, 1500, etc).
Sidebar: Anyone possessing a Rife/Bare type system can, easily, utilize
it as a driver for this type of protocol.
Your question on effectivity on obese persons is one I
cannot address with a high degree of certainty; however, I can relate
that the small unit ( 5 element 3500 mcd per bulb) furnished 1.5"
penetration. Higher powered units would have no difficulty in penetrating
beyond 7". Except in morbidly=obese cases, presenting fatty-tissue
overlays greater than 1.5", the small portable unit should work very
satisfactorily. I have it on good authority that one may , safely, use
even the high-power LED units on the head----and they easily penetrate the
skull.
While the results did appear to be similar---to
some degree---to those achieved in our "years-earlier" researches
employing Dr. Beck's blood-machine devices, we do not feel that the
effecting mechanisms are the same.
Additionally, we never achieved the speed-of-response with the Beck
devices......that we did from this, particular , protocol.
However, the Beck-type device yielded superior results on HIV-type
pathogens-----although we have discussed this at great length, we do not
know why....exactly.
A strobe light system certainly appears to
offer some promise----AT LOW FREQUENCIES. However, as you raise the the
firing frequency I believe you will encounter several problems including
charging times of the large capacity condensers starting to interfere with
your realized power curves. We have not utilized this approach. If you
perform such evaluations we would be quite interested in your results.
I must go now. Good luck in your personal
researches.
Sincerely, Brooks
Bradley.
Solar wrote:
> Hello Brooks,
>
> Regarding your protocol, I have a few questions. Is the wavlength of
> the light source hyper-critical? Would 650 nm light work as well as
> 660 nm? The reason I ask is because common, laser-pointer devices are
> normally 650 nm, and are a source of intense light. Also, you state
> that this is very efffective because the aorta lies directly behind
> the navel. Would the protocol be equally effective on obese people, or
> would the excessive body fat attenuate the light before reaching the
> aorta? One last question. Would you say that the effects delivered by
> this protocol are similar to the effects of the "Beck protocol"? Since
> the effects are seen much faster, is it possible that it is superior?
> Oh, one question that just popped into my head. If the wavelength of
> light is critical, could it be that a broad spectrum, high intensity
> light would accomplish the same resluts? I am thinking in terms of a
> flashtube, like those used in photography strobes. While they are not
> a constant source of light, the intensity achieved is tremendous.
>
> Thanks for your time!
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Solar mailto:[email protected]
--- End Message ---
