try the f-scan2 and see just how many of those microganisms you have? roger
Mike Monett wrote: > > CS>What About the Hulda Clark Frequency Issue? > From: Wayne Fugitt > Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:11:01 > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m72440.html > > > Evening Mike, > > > Thanks for all the technical exposure and analysis of frequency > > measurement. > > > I can see no reason why the same problems do not exist with the > > frequency measurement that Hulda Clark suggests in some of her > > books. > > > While it would be nice to be able to tell good foods from bad > > ones, and determine the state of disease with one meter (simple or > > complex) ...... I was turned off by this theory in Hulda's book. > > > I simply did not believe it to be possible. > > > My technical knowledge does not compare with yours. I do have some > > practical experience to go along with the small amount of > > knowledge that I have. I simply had to refuse to believe the Hulda > > Frequency theory. > > > Could these people possibly be measuring something else and > > calling it frequency? > > > Maybe they are measuring the total noise level from a live food > > and a dead food. Likewise, a live body and a dead one, or a sick > > person compared to a healthy person? > > > I hate to think these people are intentionally lying to us. > > > Or > > > do they carry a card like the politicians that says, "I lie for > > Money" ? > > > Wayne > > Hi Wayne, > > I was not familiar with Hulda Clark's theories, but after a short > web review and reading some of her interviews, it is easy to see why > she is so controversial. Attributing everything to a parasite that > is activated by isopropyl alcohol is simply bizarre. I think a > competent medical doctor is better qualified to discuss her claims: > > > http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/clarkaff/primack.html > > Her syncrometer technique is about the most imaginative I've ever > seen. It is very subjective, and I don't see how you could find two > people that would give the same result. If two or more people give > different results, which one is correct? > > http://www.royalrife.com/syncrometer.pdf > > Her results on cancer treatment is simply abysmal, as documented in > her own book: > > "Case Histories" > > "Pages 119-372 of The Cure for All Cancers contain "case > histories" of 138 cancer patients, of whom 103 were "cured" and 35 > who "did not carry out instructions or could not be followed." The > standard way to determine whether a treatment is effective is to > carefully record the nature of the patient's disease before > treatment and to determine the patient's condition indefinitely. > Clark's reports contain little information about the patient's > history and no indication that Clark performed any physical > examinations. The only follow-up reports are for a few patients > who returned for further treatment - usually a few weeks later. > Cancer treatment results are normally expressed in terms of > cancer-free status or survival over periods of years. Five-year > survival rates are a common measure. Clark claims she can tell > that patients are cured as soon as their ortho-phospho-tyrosine > test is negative - within days or even a few hours after her > treatment is begun. This claim is preposterous." > > [...] > > "None of the reports provides any basis for concluding that > Clark's treatment has the slightest value. The majority of the > people described in the 103 case reports did not have cancer. Of > those that did, most had received standard medical treatment or > their tumors were in their early stages. In these cases, Clark > pronounced them cured but did not follow what happened after they > left her clinic - so she could not possibly know how they did > afterward. In some cases, she counted patients as cured even > though she noted that they died within a few weeks after she > treated them." > > http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/clark.html > > So I have to agree with you. I find her theories very difficult to > swallow. > > Best Wishes, > > Mike Monett > > -- -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: [email protected] Silver List archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected] OT Archive: http://escribe.com/health/silverofftopiclist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
