MedCapsules Forum
Ozone vs. Rife therapy - Printable Version

+- MedCapsules Forum (http://medcapsules.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Main Lobby (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Holistic Medical Topics (/forumdisplay.php?fid=18)
+---- Forum: Cancer (/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+----- Forum: Alternative Therapies for Cancer (/forumdisplay.php?fid=83)
+------ Forum: Electrotherapies (/forumdisplay.php?fid=86)
+------ Thread: Ozone vs. Rife therapy (/showthread.php?tid=2764)



Ozone vs. Rife therapy - James - 07-03-2012 08:16 AM

I notice when you give recommendations to people with cancer, that only sometimes do you mention the Rife machines. Mostly you just mention Ozone.

There are several reasons for that:

1. I find ozone is more effective and has more benefits.

2. Cancer cells are not able to build a tolerance to ozone the way they can with RF, especially if the person had previous radiation therapy.

3. I don't wish to get in to long debates with people trying to explain to them that multiple frequencies ARE NOT needed. We have found that the 666hz works on everything we have tried it on including various cancers, neuropathies, MS, MD, etc.

There is a basis behind this one frequency and behind why Rife's other two frequencies worked but were slow. But many people believe that Rife had numerous frequencies, which is not true, and that the frequency list is accurate, which is also not true.

The first time I saw that frequency list was about 20 years ago, which came with the Crane units he was selling for $7500. But they were not based on the Rife frequencies and some of the frequencies listed are cancer causing such as 42hz. But again there are people who look at the frequency list like their Bible, and I am not going to waste my time arguing with them over the fact the list is bogus.

One thing I do like about the Rife units though is that they are less invasive compared to most forms of ozone administration. So it is a good alternative to ozone provided the proper frequency is used.


My question is, a lot of the modern ozone machines are hot corona as you've said, so if a person isn't sure about what sort of Ozone machine is available, would it better to use a rife machine using the 666hz?

That is hard to say. Hot corona can still be used for some applications if air is used or internally if pure oxygen is used. It is not as good, but will still work. And Rife units will lose effectiveness if the person has had prior radiation therapy or if the wrong frequencies are used. So each has its pros and cons.

I know you're also somewhat skeptical of the multiple frequency units but I've come across quite a few anecdotal cases of people being cured of cancers using that frequency on modern machines ( a non-hodgkins one recently as well, in case person below is reading), so maybe would that be a less risky option, less margin for error?

Again in some cases it may be a better choice.

Lasty, what do you make of John Crane and that frequency list?

I am not impressed with his list. Again there was a basis for the Rife frequencies that Rife himself was not aware of. I am not very good at explaining it. It was actually my father that figured it out. The Crane frequencies other than the few Rife frequencies he uses. And the other two rife frequencies are slightly off, which is why they work but are much slower. And the Crane list also has 42hz listed on some of the cancers. But 42hz is the frequency of formaldehyde, which is one of the strongest carcinogens known.

I've looked through it and noticed that 666 is listed for four cancers ; Melanoma, Non-Hodgkins, prostrate, Leukemia, as well being in 'general' set. Why did he include it in only a few cancers, did he have a bit of guilt trip when was fabricating the whole list and think "well, i'll leave the frequency in there for a few of them", just to settle his conscience or something? I find the whole thing very weird.

I don't know why he did that or why he bothered to come up with so many bogus and potentially dangerous frequencies. We think it was to throw people off of the real research or to justify the $7500 price tag he had on his machines. People are not going to pay that for a fixed frequency machine that cost them less than $10 to build.