1. Patients launch $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
ME/CFS and Beating the Clock
For Jody Smith, the ticking of a clock was enough at one time to chase her back to her bed. But with the passage of time, she has been able to reclaim her living room ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Rife Machines: Discussion--cancer, Lyme, ME/CFS

Discussion in 'Alternative Therapies' started by brenda, Jul 3, 2014.

  1. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes:
    597
    UK
    @Valentijn

    You never know, you might be more than happy to give it a go once you get off your antibiotics and start to deteriorate which unfortunately is what happens to many.
  2. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,078
    Likes:
    8,473
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    Actually I'm pretty sure I won't be trying a Rife machine, ever. I prefer treatments with a scientific or at least rational basis.

    And I'm quite sure my doctor will have further avenues to try if I don't improve long-term from the current treatments.
    Kati, Sushi and SOC like this.
  3. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes:
    597
    UK
    Well good luck on that one. I think many have come down from your position to become very grateful to Royal Rife. There have been some complaints about KDM, further, regarding 'failures' read Athene's posts.
  4. Kina

    Kina Moderation Team Lead

    Messages:
    5,267
    Likes:
    3,628
    Ontario, Canada
    @brenda

    From the link you provided:

    Therapeutic Effects of Lightning Upon Cancer: from the 1880's -- Rife Machine had yet to be invented. Rife Machines do not put out the amount of energy equivalent to lightening bolts -- therefore means nothing.

    Ultrasound Cancer Treatment Kills Tumors in Mice: study done with mice. Definitely not using rife machine or anything similiar:

    Unlike Rife, the researchers here do not claim to be able to single out specific cell types -- the electric field sensitizes all cells (not just the cancer cells), the ultrasound is directed an cancerous cells but healthy cells around the tumour are not left intact. It would seem the application of an electrical field to the tumour does little until you add the ultrasound -- a much stronger blast than the type used to detect fetuses, abnormalities in the heart etc. This is not rife.

    They were supposed to be moving to human trials but I haven't been able to find any further information. This study in no way supports Rife as a therapy to cure cancer as ultrasound was involved but it certainly appears to be a viable procedure if it works in humans.

    Evaluating Cancer Therapies and Developing a Cancer Program

    This has no evidence that rife cures cancer. Rife was mentioned twice:

    Evaluation of DC Current Therapy in Mammary Cancer Tumor

    This study uses DC currents to decrease tumour size in dogs.
    As you can see, his has nothing to do with rife, the dogs were not cured of cancer. Tumour size was decreased only . Rife does not involve direct DC current using electrodes positioned in a tumour. Therefore you can draw no conclusions about rife from this study.

    Pulsed Field Assisted Chemotherapy

    This theoretical paper suggests that by combining pulsed EM fields with conventional chemotherapy, a better outcome will be achieved.

    But it is not discussing rife machines:

    No rife here, therefore cannot extrapolate that rife cures cancer.

    This is about as far as I can go here with this page of studies but I think it's enough that one can conclusively say that none of these studies are using any sort of 'rife' machine that is being sold to people on the internet. Rife machines do not cure cancer because they did, there would be proof out there of which none can be found

    It's not 'rubbishing' something to declare disbelief when somebody makes cure statements about cancer. It's called questioning.

    I am not opposing any of these studies. What I am opposing is that they somehow show that rife cures cancer.

    This is my evidence. None of these studies use a rife machine, none of these studies showed any form of cure whatsoever, these studies showed decreased size of tumours, or treatment using adjuncts such as ultrasound and chemotherapy. I am not opposing these studies many had some really interesting results, but none of them were using rife. So again, can you please support your statement that rife cures cancer with some actual empirical evidence. The only conclusion I can draw from any information presented in this thread is that rife does not cure cancer. There are some very interesting studies using EMF's, ultrasound etc that may be useful for tumour suppression etc but there is much work to be done.

    It's also disgraceful that sites that sell 'rife' machines are using these studies to back up their claims because it's deceptive and dishonest and frankly unethical.
    Kati, SOC, helen1 and 3 others like this.
  5. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes:
    597
    UK
    It is really difficult to discuss this with the uninformed. Here is a Rife researcher on the subject of 'non Rife machines':

    (Peter Walker)

    I have witnessed people curing or have cured their cancers using these units and I have had success myself , with various other conditions. The toe by the way is back to normal within 7 days. I have provided enough studies to show the work that is being done, and know that anything further I add with just be pulled to bits, and frankly, I only care to converse with people who are seeking the truth as I am not paid for my posts nor have any interest apart from it.
    golden and zzz like this.
  6. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,078
    Likes:
    8,473
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    The studies you cited did not involve rife, but rather zapping things with electricity. Which is neither similar to Rife nor practical in vivo.

    Rife is not at all proved to work, and thus far that makes it a rather non-scientific and random (and expensive) treatment to try for any medical condition.
  7. zzz

    zzz Senior Member

    Messages:
    159
    Likes:
    367
    Oregon
    It seems like we have a double standard here. Let me illustrate:

    Now, the expensive part is definitely not true over the course of a treatment, as it saves you all the money you'd otherwise be investing in drugs. So let me change just a few words in your quote:
    You have to admit that this is true; there are no FDA-approved treatments for ME, and methylation therapy has not been put through the full level of randomized, double-blind placebo controlled studies that are required for scientific proof.

    Similarly:
    In fact, aside from a few very specific treatments (such as using prescription thyroid medicine to address a thyroid problem), none of the methods that people use for treating ME have been proven to work, according to the standard of proof being applied to Rife. Even the use of existing prescription medicines for off-label purposes falls into this category, as by definition, these medicines have not been proven to work for off-label purposes.

    Almost all nutritional supplements - CoQ10, vitamin E, whatever, also fall into this category, because they have not been proven to help with ME.

    So why are people attacking Rife? The answer is simple: bias. Many people are biased against things with which they are not familiar. However, this has nothing to do with science. Nothing at all.
    JBB, golden and brenda like this.
  8. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes:
    597
    UK
    People here in general are not waiting or looking for clinical trials before they will try something which will help them. Most of what people are experimenting here has not been trialed as most are not in a position to wait around. I have tried many things but have not found anything to help apart from frequencies.

    I am not a troll but a long term member and am sharing my experience of some thing that has helped me and other people that I have known for a while and trust. Some people are working tirelessly and will not take any financial reward for the work they are doing in this area. I am using a unit which costs $114. That is not expensive. There is enough research out there to keep me happy. If it is not enough for you then go ahead and be a skeptic while I just get on with my healing.
    golden and zzz like this.
  9. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes:
    597
    UK
    This study is being overlooked:

    http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=45182#.U75Jq_ldWmN

    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 11, 2014
    zzz likes this.
  10. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,078
    Likes:
    8,473
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    First of all, there is science behind methylation. It is a biological process which is known to occur in the body. It is scientifically proven that problems with methylation, such as when a pregnant women has too little folate, cause serious problems. It is scientifically proven that B12 (also part of methylation) causes serious problems when it is deficient. Taking supplements to correct genetic or dietary deficiencies is well-established scientifically. And given the commonality of problems with B12 and folate, supplementing those is rational under certain circumstances, even when there is no direct evidence of an actual deficiency - as the case of recommended use of folic acid by pretty much every Western government for pregnant women or even those of child-bearing age.

    There is no scientific or rational basis for Rife anymore than there is for homeopathy. It stretches existing concepts by trying to say that vibrations will act upon body cells (protected by many centimeters of flesh and liquids) the same way that electricity does when directly applied to cells in a petri dish. It's ludicrous.
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2014
    SOC and Mij like this.
  11. Mij

    Mij Senior Member

    Messages:
    662
    Likes:
    688
    @zzz your wrote:

    "Almost all nutritional supplements - CoQ10, vitamin E, whatever, also fall into this category, because they have not been proven to help with ME"

    you are incorrect as far as supplementation. People with ME are deficient in many nutrients, so indirectly, taking them do improve symptoms in many patients. Actually, taking specific supplements is/was the most helpful for me. I was deificient in Omega 3 years ago and taking fish oils improved my cognitive abilities, so much so my family noticed a difference, taking mg shots improved my stamina symptoms etc If you understand some of the pathologies concerning ME such as oxidative stress, specific supplements help and also PREVENT worsening long term.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20010505

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20038921
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2014
    Valentijn likes this.
  12. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,078
    Likes:
    8,473
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    A rational basis for the treatment would help, given the complete lack of scientific research supporting the claims being made. But there is no rational basis for Rife treatment.
    SOC likes this.
  13. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,078
    Likes:
    8,473
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    It's a case study of 1 person who used a rife machine in addition to having chemotherapy, and his tumor had already shrunk following the chemotherapy. There's also no statement regarding whether or not he continued with the chemo while using the Rife.

    Is there any reason to believe that Rife cured him, versus a regression of the cancer due to the chemo or random chance? No, there isn't. That's why case studies don't mean squat, scientifically. At best it's an indication for further research - but there's been decades of wild claims and a few case studies without any controlled studies showing success.
    SOC and Kina like this.
  14. zzz

    zzz Senior Member

    Messages:
    159
    Likes:
    367
    Oregon
    For now, let's assume you're correct here
    Only in some cases. If the body's metabolism is not working properly, the supplements may not be processed properly. To be truly scientific about this, you have show, via randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that the particular supplement you're taking actually corrects the deficiency in the particular disease you're treating. You have to do this for each and every supplement. Otherwise, this is not science; it is simply belief.

    I am not just making things up here. People can swallow all the glutathione pills they want, and it's not going to relieve a glutathione deficiency. Some of these supplements are made and prescribed without understanding how the body processes them. For example, the B12 pills that you swallow are essentially worthless.

    To know for sure - to have proof - that a specific supplement will help a deficiency in a specific illness, you need randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. And they should be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal that has been accepted for listing in PubMed, so as to ensure the integrity of the studies. Otherwise, you have no scientific proof that a supplement works in a particular illness the way you claim it does.
    Rational, yes. But now you're talking about pregnant women, not ME. You have not scientifically proven that these are helpful in ME.
    You are revealing your complete ignorance of physics here. Radio waves can travel right through buildings, as you'll know if you ever listened to a radio inside a building. Do you think a few centimeters of flesh and liquids is going to stop them? If you do, I suggest you read up on radio waves, as their ability to penetrate most ordinary matter was demonstrated when they were first discovered.

    If you've got the basic laws of physics completely wrong, as you do here, then it's no wonder that you're coming up with wrong conclusions.
    Please understand, I am not saying that these supplements do not work. I certainly believe they work, and I take them myself. I am simply saying that the highest standards of scientific proof, which are being demanded of Rife in this thread, are not being demanded of anything else. As Brenda said,
    I think this is a very reasonable approach, both when applied to supplements and when applied to Rife. I'm just saying that to avoid bias, and to have any basis whatsoever in science, we need to use the same standards.

    Now as to your first reference on CoQ10, it does an excellent job of establishing scientifically (p < .00001) that CoQ10 is lower in people with ME than in healthy people. However, notice that in the Discussion section they say,
    "Suggest" is not "prove". I am sure these authors chose their words carefully, as the abstract is very well written. The authors know that scientific proof of the efficacy of CoQ10 supplementation would require a whole different study. "Suggest" is a very safe term.

    The second abstract is one of my favorites. I showed it to my doctor, trying to convince him that ME is a serious illness, but he was not impressed. But it is indeed a fine abstract; it simply does not show proof that any particular treatment will correct the deficiencies it points out. In fact, no treatments are even mentioned in this abstract.

    The third abstract is yet another good abstract, yet note that it concludes:

    There's that word "suggest" again. It's actually medical shorthand for, "Somebody needs to do another study."

    The fourth abstract is much like the third. It establishes proof of a disturbance, but concludes by saying:
    One can hypothesize anything one wants without any proof, evidence, or anything. It's another safe word, like "suggest", which is undoubtedly why the authors chose it.
    Please learn some basic physics before you continue making unscientific statements like these.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So to summarize, though people have responded to my previous post, no one has proven anything in their response.
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2014
    golden and brenda like this.
  15. Mij

    Mij Senior Member

    Messages:
    662
    Likes:
    688
    @zzz I agree with you that the word "suggest" is a safe term. But, these particular supplements have improved my symptoms/health from my own personal experience as an ME patient for 23yrs. It was not a shot in the dark, it proved it for me.
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2014
  16. zzz

    zzz Senior Member

    Messages:
    159
    Likes:
    367
    Oregon
    I agree with you 100%; that's why, as I mentioned, I take quite a few supplements as well. For me too, it was not a shot in the dark either; I took them only after I heard how they helped other people. And that's exactly how I got into Rife treatment too; I saw that these machines were helping thousands of people, and what I had was not sufficient to deal with my symptoms at the time. So I bought a Rife machine, and it has worked very well for me, just as my supplements have worked for me, and your supplements have worked for you.

    I have only been trying to make the point in my recent posts that this standard is not good enough for some people here when it comes to Rife, though it's plenty good when it comes to their favorite treatment. (I am not including you in this group, as you have made no statements about Rife.) I am simply asking that all types of treatments have the same standards of efficacy applied to them, so that it should be possible to discuss Rife here in the same way we discuss any other treatment.
    golden likes this.
  17. Kina

    Kina Moderation Team Lead

    Messages:
    5,267
    Likes:
    3,628
    Ontario, Canada
    @zzz

    This thread is not about how we discuss treatments on Phoenix Rising and you can't expect members to treat all things equally.

    'Rife cures cancer' Let's see if it does. Let's look at research. Let's discuss the mechanism by which it may work. That's what I am interested in and it's really difficult when those doing the questioning are called 'uninformed', and 'ignorant'.... It's also difficult to discuss something when the thread gets derailed with statements that have absolutely nothing to do with the thread topic. Perhaps you should start a new thread regarding how we discuss treatments on Phoenix Rising.

    We don't need to have the same standard for all discussions because this is a forum full of diverse members who fantastically enough bring their own unique points of view to the forums along with their experiences. I try supplements on the basis of what members say here because there is some scientific basis to what they are saying. I can't afford to just try random things so I do look for some scientific support. I don't believe anybody has really addressed how rife might benefit ME to any great extent at all. We are talking about rife curing cancer. When people come to Phoenix Rising claiming the lightening process has cured their ME, they get asked for the science to prove that LP cures ME. When people come along with some other cure claim, they too, get asked for evidence. Shall we lower our standards to just accepting these statements because they know 'thousands' of people who have been cured too, yet have no empirical evidence to support their claims. We don't shut down discussion on Phoenix Rising except when they turn personal.

    As far as I am concerned, if something doesn't seem plausible or I don't understand how something works, then I will ask questions. It does not seem plausible to me that rife cures cancer, in fact it seems impossible and at this point I am convinced that rife does not cure cancer. It seems that there is no empirical evidence to support the contention that rife cures cancers except one lone case study that included chemotherapy as treatment.

    It's supposed to cure lyme too but I see people with lyme using rife on our forum who are still very sick, so that seems questionable too. There is a huge chasm between 'cure' and 'helps with symptoms'.

    As for the broken toe, I am not even convinced of that because the healing of my broken toe followed the same healing path that brenda mentioned except all I did was splint and ice it. So really, who knows what happened there. Was it rife? Was it natural healing? These are questions that I continually ask myself about all treatment modalities, even my own. I don't see a problem with discussing how these things work or if they in fact work at all.

    Anyways, we are all allowed to be sceptical. We can jump in and comment on things we are sceptical about or want more evidence about. We don't have to apply the same standards to all conversations nor should we be expected to.
    Sushi, SOC and Valentijn like this.
  18. Hip

    Hip Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,753
    Likes:
    2,495
    I did have a look at this paper (the full paper is here):

    Is Victory over Pancreatic Cancer Possible, with the Help of Tuned Non-Invasive Physiotherapy? A Case Study Says Yes.
    Pierre Le Chapellier, Badri Matta. Journal of Cancer Therapy, April 2014.


    The above paper focuses on the idea that solitons are the waves emitted by the Rife-Bare plasma tube, and suggests that these solitons may be the means by which Rife machines might affect biological structures in the body.

    Solitons are special types of wave that can only exist in non-linear media or systems. Waves in a linear media tend to travel along as a series of waves, one after another (like the series of surface ripples you get when you throw a stone in a pond). However, the solitons that arise in non-linear media distinguish themselves by only appearing as one single wave. Examples of solitons include a tide bore, a tsunami wave, and a sonic boom. All these solitons comprise just a single solitary wave traveling on its own.

    The electromagnetic solitons in a Rife machine would be generated in the plasma tube: plasma is a non-linear medium in which solitons can exist.

    It seems that solitons are involved in biology: this article states that solitons are thought to play a role in: enzyme catalysis, cellular membranes catalysis, muscle function, DNA, and the action potential of a nerve cell. So I guess it's not implausible that externally applied solitons could affect biological structures and function.

    However, electromagnetic solitons cannot exist in normal air or free space, as far as I am aware, since these are linear media for electromagnetic waves. So then the question arises: how do the solitons in the Rife plasma tube reach the patient, if solitons cannot traverse ordinary air? It would appear that the solitons will not be able to reach the patient. (Although it may be that in the near field zone of the plasma tube electromagnetic emissions into the air, solitons may be able to exist and travel through the air; the near field electromagnetic waves behave differently to far field electromagnetic waves).

    It would require an expert in a field such as non-linear optics to look at this more closely, but this would appear to be a major flaw in the concepts presented in the above cited paper, because as stated , the solitons created in a Rife plasma tube cannot cross through the air to reach the patient.

    Though I have to say that I found the concept of solitons as the means by which biological structures are targeted and affected an interesting one. It's something that might be further investigated.



    What I found disconcerting about this paper is that fact that rather than developing a mathematical theory on how solitons might affect biological structures such as cell membranes (in order to explain how solitons might conceivably rupture or destroy cells), the paper instead contains some very odd and out of place philosophical tracts — see for example section 6.3: Epistemological Definition of the Functional Non-Being. If you want to have a laugh, here is an excerpt from this section:
    Seems totally out of place in what should have been a down-to-Earth physics paper presenting some mathematical explanations of how externally applied solitons might affect biological structures like cellular membranes.

    In summary: if (and it's a big if) Rife machines can affect biological structures, there is still a very long way to go in terms of proving this by properly conducted scientific experiments. And if solitons are the mechanism by which Rife machines affect biological structures, you would have to explain how these solitons can travel through un-ionized air, and also, you would have to develop a mathematical model explaining how these solitons interact and affect biological structures. No such mathematical models have been provided. So if there is anything to Rife machines, there is a very long way to go in terms of providing solid empirical evidence, and a very long way to go in terms of providing a theoretical, mathematical explanation of the mechanism.


    A few other papers and articles of interest:
    Disruption of cancer cell replication by alternating electric fields
    Alternating electric fields (TTFields) inhibit metastatic spread of solid tumors to the lungs
    Electric fields have potential as a cancer treatment

    This paper also talks about solitons (but appears not to have been peer-reivew published):
    Theorectical Low Frequency Acoustic Resonances of Various Rife-Bare Plasma Device Antennas, Upon the Destruction of Blepharisma and Paramecium Micro-Organisms
    Prof emeritus Gérard Dubost, Prof André Bellossi, Dr James Bare, Dr Anthony G. Holland.
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2014
    Valentijn and Sushi like this.
  19. SOC

    SOC Moderator and Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,283
    Likes:
    6,240
    USA
    The big difference here is that while many people here are experimenting with supplements and other not-fully-documented symptomatic treatments, they are not claiming that these treatments are fantastical cures for many and varied illnesses. It's one thing to experiment for yourself and describe what seems to be helping you. It's another to claim that such a treatment will work for everyone, is a cure for any condition, or is a universal panacea.

    No one is objecting to you saying, "I've done this and it's helping me". The objections are to your claims that this particular therapy is a scientifically sound cure for many conditions that will definitely work for the general population. You simply don't have the scientific evidence to support such a sweepingly broad claim.
    Valentijn, Kati, Mij and 1 other person like this.
  20. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    Likes:
    597
    UK
    @Kina you said that your toe did not hurt at all when you broke it, whereas I was in agony with mine at first, so much so that my cognitive function declined significantly, until I used some frequencies on it so we cannot really compare them.

    I am afraid that the technical stuff is way above my head.

    I do agree with the sentiments expressed and wish that there were trials using the modern machines.

    I don't know however, whether that is going to happen soon. I can't imagine many if any people with cancer, would be willing to take part in trials when only a frequency generator is used. It is generally accepted in the Rife communities, that modern day cancer is not the same beast that it was in Raymond Rife's time and they choose a multi-discipline approach to be on the safe side because of this. There is a book coming out soon from a woman who had breast cancer and is now cured and who used a generator. I don't know whether she used anything else. There are so many types of cancer and with various reasons for it, and viral infection seems to be a major factor.

    On the two rife forums I frequent, there are success stories, and with enough anecdotal evidence to show that using a generator seems to confirm the results of tests that have been performed so far. And because Raymond Ride cured the 16 people he was presented with 100%, and because the James Bare machine seems to be very like the original, and the machine I use is having success, and some researchers, are working for nothing so that everyone in the world can afford to buy one of the units, I am convinced enough as I do not wish to wait around for trials. I don't have the luxury of doing that at my age. If others want to wait then all well and good if that is what they want.

    But the fact remains that there were 16 documented cases of cancer cures using a rife machine in the 30's but the pharmaceutical industry did not like what was going on and people who have nothing to gain financially are giving testimonies that they are cured and used the modern machines and I feel duty bound to spread the word.

    There are plenty of people who like me, would be willing to take a look, on these grounds alone. Those who love to demolish everything that does not benefit the pharmaceutical industry have no right to deny these people this information just because they say that the evidence is not enough for them. Anyone might start to think that history is being reinacted.
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2014

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page