It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cancer cure found back in the 1930's?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 09:12 PM
link   
This is the Rife website...

www.royalrife.com...




posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Seekerof sorry bout that, still kinda tender from some friends and family geting ill and dyin on me... I shouldve adding in that if you actually believed that to my first comment. I just saw the comment and reacted as happens alot on these boards. Sry again



No problemo Sardion2000. We all 'over-react' at times, myself included.

Your response was valid and not taken wrong. I sincerely apologize if my response was in error. Even I need to be kept in place, and some here within ATS make sure that I do stay in place.





seekerof



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by kdx175
Good Discussion,

.

Back to Rife.... with Rife, the machine is pretty easy to make, and once you have a machine you don't need constant perscriptions and constant money flowing to the Pharma giants.

[edit on 1-12-2004 by kdx175]

[edit on 1-12-2004 by kdx175]


You dont need to make one. You can download one as all it conststs of is basically a frequency generator. The origional machine in the 30' had all kinds of valves and stuff but you can use your pc.

However the problem is knowing how to use it, what frequencies at what amplitude for how long and how often. Plus how do you know if it is working.

I can post a link if smoeone wants to download a version of the rife machine.



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Well... Post the link!! I would like to see the program...



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 10:49 PM
link   
My experience.. last post

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 18 2004 @ 02:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
Well... Post the link!! I would like to see the program...


this is the link for the PC based rife machine.. cat007.com...

it is written by the guy who owns the site. See what you think. Obviousley he has disclaimers all over his site so nobody better start thinking they can use this program to heal themselves or others



posted on Feb, 3 2005 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Friend tried it with her husband...this book: makes it easy, and pretty cheap, to build.
He had a lump in his inner thigh, near the groin....and it went away before the doctor even bothered to do a biopsy.

I don't think this is a cure-all, but I do know that every story in the book is supposed to be true (never read it myself, but the woman who did read it and recommended me to it, is rather cynical....and has a decent head on her shoulders...and on top of that, her hubby is a Nurse, as is She, lol...)

Excerpted from The Cancer Cure That Worked: 50 Years of Suppression by Barry Lynes. Copyright © 1987. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
In the summer of 1934 in California, under the auspices of the University of Southern California, a group of leading American bacteriologists and doctors conducted the first successful cancer clinic. The results showed that cancer was caused by a micro-organism, that the micro-organism could be painlessly destroyed in terminally ill cancer patients, and that the effects of the disease could be reversed.

It does not suprise me for it to be caused by a micro organsism....otherwise, what is the gene that causes cancer?



posted on Feb, 3 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Not only would it decrease profits for pharmaceutical companies, but what you need to understand is that it's more simple than that, it's POPULATION CONTROL!! Cancer is the great equalizer. They will never find a cure for it because it keeps the population somewhat in check. Just think if they'd found a cure 50 years ago, how many more people would be on this planet. The biggest lie is that all who give to cancer charities are being led to believe that their money is going to help find a cure for cancer, but it's really going towards making cancer patients comfortable at the end of their lives (at least they can feel good about that) and into the pockets of the people that run these global charities. Man I'm talking billions and billions of dollars. Do the math people. If you have enough money and you have cancer, you'd better get your arse over to another country which doesn't have it's hands tied by the FDA. It's sad, it's really sad!!

Peace



posted on Feb, 3 2005 @ 01:43 PM
link   


It does not suprise me for it to be caused by a micro organsism....otherwise, what is the gene that causes cancer?

Some cancers are confirmed to be caused by viruses. There is not a cancer gene. But this DOES NOT mean that cancer isn't a genetic disease. Cancer tends to arise from defects in more than 1 gene that restrict or otherwise control cellular growth. This is why it's so difficult to combat. There can be multiple genes involved. Even in cancers of the same variety, the genetic changes and damage can be extremely diverse. This is why there may never be a general 'cancer' cure. Each case may have to be evaluated on the genetic level and treatments designed around said evaluation.



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 12:41 PM
link   
There is proven cancer therapy that most people are still not aware of and that is proton therapy. Unfortunately, there are only 22 facilities in the world and only two currently operating in the US at Loma Linda Proton Treatment Center and the Mass General at Harvard. MD Anderson also has built one and will become operational in 2006. check out the link regarding proton therapy:

www.proton-therapy.org



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattison0922


It does not suprise me for it to be caused by a micro organsism....otherwise, what is the gene that causes cancer?

Some cancers are confirmed to be caused by viruses. There is not a cancer gene. But this DOES NOT mean that cancer isn't a genetic disease. Cancer tends to arise from defects in more than 1 gene that restrict or otherwise control cellular growth. This is why it's so difficult to combat. There can be multiple genes involved. Even in cancers of the same variety, the genetic changes and damage can be extremely diverse. This is why there may never be a general 'cancer' cure. Each case may have to be evaluated on the genetic level and treatments designed around said evaluation.


*snort* .....a bit of a generalization on my part.
Also, if they found a gene that would lead to any particular cancer, how long would it take to figure out if it was a gene for a weaknes towards that cancer (meaning that you'd be more likely to cath the virus/have the secondary symptoms of whatever else causes it), or if the gene IS the deficiency that causes the cancer. The latter, I don't see really happening.

To make matters more fun: Not all cancers act exactly the same. Not even cancers that affect the same body part. (The diffrence between having cancer once and having it break out everywhere once the main mass has been eliminated (referring to the ones that were caught early enough to where there shouldn't be a reason for it to spread to anywhere but where it started), often because it was already elsewhere.) I know there is some correlation between Tea Tree oil (high-concentrate ucalyptus) and reduction in skin cancer (or at least skin tumors) (in family experience of 2 generations).

One good thing: For breast cancer, I remember seeing an advertisement on MSN/hotmail about Breast cancer survival being around 98% now. I don't know where they got that statisitc from; I dont know what they consider a breast cancer death; and I certainly haven't found the thing again..... But if it is accurate, then this particular cancer is not the monster it once was...and may well become the first cancer eradicated from the general population.



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by jlc163
One good thing: For breast cancer, I remember seeing an advertisement on MSN/hotmail about Breast cancer survival being around 98% now. I don't know where they got that statisitc from; I dont know what they consider a breast cancer death; and I certainly haven't found the thing again..... But if it is accurate, then this particular cancer is not the monster it once was...and may well become the first cancer eradicated from the general population.


I don't believe that we will eradicate any form of cancer in the near future. What we do have though, is better more effective treatments. What really is interesting though, is the treatments that hunt and kill specific cancers and do not seriously damage the surrounding tissues.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join