Research with Rife Technology
From the 1950s to 2010 A number of research scientists, working independently, have slowly been verifying the scientific principles upon which Rife''s clinical cures of the 1930s were based. A body of recognized scientific evidence now overwhelmingly supports the original cancer theories articulated and demonstrated by Rife 80 years ago. This includes modern AIDS researchers.
In the 1950s, John Crane-engineer, machinist, laboratory analyst, health researcher and inventor-became Rife''s partner. Crane, born in 1915, worked at Rife''s side from 1950 until Rife''s death in 1971. During this time, he learned all the secrets of Rife''s cancer treatment . . . and all the details of its suppression.
Together, the two men designed and constructed new and better equipment, and managed to interest a new generation of doctors in the possibilities of a genuine, lasting and painless cancer treatment. And again the authorities struck. Crane was jailed, equipment was smashed, records were destroyed. Again the motives driving on the forces of suppression were the same. By sharing the long hidden facts, as well as thousands of documents preserved from the 1930s, Crane has enabled the full story to be told.
Dr. Arthur Kendall was Director of the Hygienic Laboratory of the Panama Canal Commission in 1904. The Hygienic Laboratory was the forerunner of the National Institute of Health. In 1906, Kendall became a bacteriologist at the Rockefeller Institute. This was followed by 3 years as an instructor at Harvard University Medical School (1909- 1912).
In 1912, Kendall became head of the first wholly independent Department of Bacteriology in America, at Northwestern University. In 1916, he was appointed Dean of the Medical School. In 1924, Kendall became Professor of Bacteriology and public health at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. Then in 1928, he returned to Northwestern and shortly afterwards began working with the California group which conducted the first successful cancer clinic in 1934. In 1942 he retired from Northwestern. More than 100 of his papers were published.
On December 1 1, 1931, Science magazine reported in its Science News section that Dr. Kendall had filtered bacteria to a smaller form and that these micro-organisms had remained alive on a medium of his creation. His "K Medium'' had broken down the typhoid bacillus into a filterable form. Moreover, using a special microscope, he was able to see: (1) the full sized bacillus still unchanged, (2) other bacilli in an intermediate stage between the filterable and the non-filterable phases, and (3) still other, very small turquoise-blue bodies which were the final bacillus form. This final form was the size of a virus, and yet it was still a bacteria! The basis for Dr. Rivers'' authority had been challenged. When the official publication of the California Medical Association, California and Western Medicine, published the incredible news in December 1931, and Dr. Kendall was invited to address the Association of American Physicians, Rivers reacted. First he tried to have Kendall's talk cancelled. When that was refused by the sponsors, he insisted that he and Dr. Hans Zinsser of Harvard be allowed to speak also.
After Kendall made his presentation before the Association in May 1932, Zinsser and Rivers publicly ripped Kendall apart, stating that since they could not replicate Kendall's results, Kendall was lying. The opposition mounted by Rivers and Zinsser was such that few scientists and doctors of the time dared to support Kendall. Kendall could not convince the orthodox "no filtration" school that experiments done according to his techniques would validate his discovery. The opposition group did not want to learn. In 1974, Lida H. Mattman of the Department of Biology, Wayne State University, published Cell-Wall Deficient Forms. By then, pleomorphism was a proven phenomenon although the orthodox school continued to ignore it. Mattman wrote, "Current bacteriology holds the belief that each species of bacteria has only a certain very simple form. . . ."
Kendall had not only challenged the experience of Rivers and other established authorities, but had unknowingly threatened medical and financial interests
By 1982, when Gerald J. Donigue of Tulane University School of Medicine published Cell-Wall Deficient Bacteria, the suppression of Kendall's work for 50 years had obvious results. Domingue writes: ''"There is a considerable body of experimental and clinical evidence-much of which has never been published-supporting the concept that cell wall deficient bacteria may be agents of disease. . . . There are no current books whose primary focus is on the clinical significance of these unusual bodies. . . . The most neglected research area has been on the role of these organisms in disease."
Thus, 50 years after Kendall's discovery, even with substantial evidence, the erroneous orthodox view continued to dominate medical theory, cancer research, and cancer treatment. One of Kendall''s renowned supporters was Dr. Edward Rosenow of the Mayo Clinic. Rosenow was viciously attacked by Thomas Rivers of the rival Rockefeller Institute. As reported in the 1976 article in New Age Journal, Rosenow's son, Dr. Edward C. Rosenow, Jr., Chief Administrative Officer of the American College of Physicians, "asserts that his father was all but accused by Rockefeller Institute research moguls of experimental dishonesty." Rosenow told his son, "They simply won't listen." (Rosenow's son later told how, while a student of Zinsser's at Harvard, Zinsser had admitted to Rosenow Jr. that he, Zinsser, had not even used Rosenow Sr.'s medium in failing to duplicate and then condemning Rosenow's test results.)
The medical moguls apparently wouldn't listen even to one of their own. In 1911, Peyton Rous of the Rockefeller Institute provided the first evidence that a virus could cause a cancer. Yet for decades the orthodox view was that cancer resulted from "somatic mutation"-a gene develops a flaw and disorganizes cellular function.
David Locke, author of a book on viruses published in 1974, recalled meeting Peyton Rous in the corridors of the Rockefeller Institute during the mid-century and being shocked to learn that a micro-organism could be the cause of cancer. Locke wrote, "The 1940s and 1950s were the heyday of the somatic mutation theory. At the time, it was scientific dogma that cancer was a peculiar transformation of cells caused not by an infectious agent, but by a mutation of the cells." Peyton Rous was finally honored for his discovery in 1966 when he received the Nobel Prize. He was 86 years old and his discovery 55 years past. Because the Rous virus has been around for so long, it has been carefully categorized. However, as described in Lida Mattman's 1974 book, the Rous "virus" has been found to be a classical bacterium. Citing Dr. Eleanor Alexander-Jackson's work, Mattman explained that the Rous virus produces DNA as well as RNA. Viruses supposedly contain only DNA or RNA, not both. The orthodox virus school undoubtedly has difficulty with the fact that one of the "classical" viruses-if not the most famous-is in truth a "filterable bacterium."
In a paper presented to the New York Academy of Sciences in 1969, Dr. Virginia Livingston and Dr. Eleanor Alexander- Jackson declared that a single cancer micro-organism exists. They said that the reason the army of cancer researchers couldn't find it was because it changed form. Livingston and Alexander-Jackson asserted: "The organism has remained an unclassified mystery, due in part to its remarkable pleomorphism and its stimulation of other micro-organisms. Its various phases may resemble viruses, micrococci, diptheroids, bacilli, and fungi." Florence Seibert, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry, University of Pennsylvania and Dr. Irene Diller from the Institute for Cancer Research in Philadelphia made essentially the same argument to the New York Academy of Sciences in 1967. Seibert's book 'Pebbles on the Hill of a Scientist' (1968) includes the following: "We found that we were able to isolate bacteria from every piece of tumor and every acute leukemic blood specimen that we had. This was published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences." Seibert also clearly recognized pleomorphism as the underlying scientific reality which must be appreciated if cancer is to be cured: "One of the most interesting properties of these bacterium their great pleomorphism.
For example, they readily change their shape from round cocci, to elongated rods, and even to long thread-like filaments depending upon what medium they grow on and how long they grow. And even more interesting than this is the fact that these bacteria have a filterable form in their life cycle; that is, that they can become so small that they pass through bacterial filters which hold back bacteria. This is what viruses do, and is one of the main criteria of a virus, separating them from bacteria. But the viruses also will not live on artificial media like these bacteria do. . . . Our filterable form, however, can be recovered again on ordinary artificial bacterial media and will grow on these." The Mayo Clinic''s Dr. Edward Rosenow, who worked with Kendall in the preparatory stage of the successful cancer clinic, had written as early as 1914 in the Journal of Infectious Diseases that, "It would seem that focal infections are no longer to be looked upon merely as a place of entrance of bacteria, but as a place where conditions are favorable for them to acquire the properties which give them a wide range of affinities for various structures."
This was also Bechamp''s conclusion back in the 19th century- that the body''s environment produced a place for microorganisms to become diseased bacteria and that improving the body''s internal environment could alter bacteria into harmless, even useful "microzymia." E. Douglas Hume has written, "Bechamp . . . had demonstrated the connection between a disturbed state of body and the disturbed state of its indwelling particles, which, upon an unfortunate alteration in their surroundings, are hampered in their normal multiplication as healthy microzymas and are consequently prone to develop into organisms of varied shape, known as bacteria.
Upon an improvement in their environment, the bacteria, according to Bechamp''s view, by a form of devolution may return to their microzymian state, but much smaller and more numerous than they were originally ." At the end of 197 1, Congress passed the National Cancer Act. As Robin and David Nicholas later wrote (Virology, an Information Profile) in 1983, "In the 1970s research into the role of viruses in cancer was virtually given a blank check, particularly in the USA, the powerhouse of virus research." Bacteria and its various forms were ignored. Even in 1986, when researchers mention bacteria as a possible cause of cancer, they are dismissed by the "experts."
One high university official stopped reading a report on the 1934 cancer treatment when he came across the word bacteria, so brainwashed was he to the certainty that viruses were the cause of cancer while bacteria were of no importance in cancer. And yet, by 1986, despite the massive funding of virus research, more people than ever continued to die of cancer. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, the world''s largest non-profit cancer research center, and still the leading institutional opponent of pleomorphism research and related cancer treatment in America, stated in a 1986 fund-raising appeal that over 460,000 Americans died of cancer in 1985. (Sloan-Kettering''s own 1975 tests had indicated pleomorphic bacteriavirus in all cancer blood tests, but they had buried the laboratory results.) In 1974, Rockefeller University's Dr. Norman Zinder admitted, "We don't know how to attack cancer, much less conquer it, because we don't understand enough about how it works." Yet the answer existed then and now in scientific journals, Academy of Sciences' reports, books, old newspapers, and other forms. If money wasn't being invested into careful research and cross-referencing of all the relevant literature, then why wasn't it?
The cancer authorities-in the 1980s as in earlier decades had censored ideas and researchers who argued the unorthodox pleomorphism cause and cure for cancer. The money and clinical trials went to orthodox virus monomorphism supporters and chemical treatments aimed at killing cancerous cells, not micro-organisms in the bloodstream attacking the entire body. The funding procedure was essentially stacked against those who, even though top scientists, didn't parrot the conventional (and wrong) beliefs. Ralph W. Moss, former Assistant Director of Public Affairs at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center explained the roadblock in his 1980 book The Cancer Syndrome: "A new grant request must therefore be approved by a wide variety of scientists, bureaucrats and businessmen. It must be the result of a consensus of opinion among these many individuals. Almost by definition, however, such an application must be well within the bounds of conventional science.
These ''cumbersome constraints'' make it difficult, if not impossible for radically new ideas to be approved by the NCI." (NCI = the National Cancer Institute) The "radically new ideas" might include the one that cured cancer in the California clinic in 1934. The 460,000 Americans scheduled to needlessly die in the next year might like some of their tax money to fund a new clinic using those long covered-up ideas and technologies. As Frank J. Rauscher, Jr., Director of the National Cancer Institute, rhetorically asked in 1975, "What are we doing with the taxpayer''s money?" It is a question which no one in authority wants to answer honestly-the horrible results of the cancer treatment cover-up are too well-known. The death toll from 1970 to the present (1986) is more than 6 million, matching the Nazi holocaust. When the death count includes those who died from 1934 to 1970, the number of victims is staggering. The cancer treatment cover-up is America''s holocaust. A political firestorm could erupt if a large sector of the American public learned the truth.
Dr Royal Rife's Journal
➥ The Life of Dr Royal Rife
➥ The Original Rife Microscope
➥ The Original Rife Machine
➥ The Rife Story: Introduction
➥ Research with Rife Technology
➥ Suppression of Dr Rife's Cancer Treatment
➥ Dr Royal Rife Method for Cancer Treatment
➥ The Rife-Kendall Partnership
➥ Rife Searches for the Cancer Virus
➥ Opposition to Findings
➥ Dr Rife's Treatment for 16 People with Cancer
➥ Raising Funds
➥ Positive Clinical Results
➥ Beam Ray 1938
➥ Rife Shut down by AMA
➥ Rife Machine & Microscope
➥ Rife Gains Acceptance
Re: Rife Digital Professional. To: Dr Pete Williams Hi there, I just wanted to give a testimonial on the rife digital machine. I had come back from holidays a few days ago. Upon returning, I noticed a sore throat, with very noticeably swollen tonsils. Using just one session of this (in fact, using a different set of frequency not the one in the book Gram Positive Bacteria), I was able to cure this immediately, no painful swallowing, tonsils shrunken back to normal size within a few hours. I am very impressed with the machine itself! Am glad I bought this!
Learning about the Rife technology, I know that it is not really the result of a miracle – it is simply the application of a scientifically sound technology which was discovered, developed, and proven by Dr. Rife. What is shocking is that this technology has been so effectively suppressed by the conventional medical establishment, and even when the appearance of a new disease like Morgellons appears which can be effectively treated by the technology, they not only continue to reject the technology, but they also refuse to acknowledge the existence of Morgellons itself as a physical reality. I hope that Dr. Rife is able to witness the miracle of his discovery in the healing of my daughter from his place of honor in the world above. I am extremely grateful for your assistance, and that Rife Digital has made the effort to sustain the Rife technology in order to make these machines available.
I'm the one who worked with Dr. Loftin in Salt Lake nearly 20 years ago and operated his Rife machines on his patients in exchange for treatment on my daughter who was born with almost no immune system...after were were told take her home and enjoy her for what ever time she has left...so, we ordered the Rife Digital Professional and I have used it to treat severe T-2,3,4,5 and 6 spondylitis....additional damage from polio at age of nine....so much swelling and pain and even felt the pressure up into my head..I was most days unable to function. I started the Rife Digital Professional treatments and in less than 3 months I'm walking up and down 100 ft high hill to feed the animals on our mountain 31 acre farm, chopping and spitting fire wood..teaching 4 hrs per day home school to Grandchild and able to sit at computer for hours and feel no pain... none... not being a medical person I don't know if the bone it's self is being repaired or just the swelling and inflammation are under control...I'm 66... and feel a bunch like 50....
Recently my Doctor told me I had a Thyroid problem and scheduled me to see a specialist. Before my visit I used the Rife Professional Machine, and when I went in to the specialist their test showed it was normal. The test results showed it is a 4.82 and the Doctor said if it is 5 or lower it is normal. The Specialist showed me that when the other Doctor checked me it was over 8 and she could not explain why it is suddenly normal. My question is how often should I repeat the Rife Thyroid treatment for it to stay at the normal level? Monthly, quarterly, annually? Thanks Nick Promenart
This is just a thank you letter. What a difference it makes to have a real person at Rife Digital - answering questions personally, efficiently, thoroughly and promptly. The machine is working well and we are thrilled with it and will recommend it to others. It is helping me with a tooth that will only be attended to in a month's time as I am in Australia at present. Initially we thought it was going to be complicated and time-consuming because of changing the program for different members of the family. But my 9 year old Grandson got the hang of it very quickly and programmed his own treatment for Dermatitis - Exfoliate. Warm regards Pippa
Hi Dr Williams, I never thought this was possible (as I thought that rife was only for bacteria and viruses), but I used the back pain frequency for one whole night (7 hrs) and after only my left lower back had pain. After another night (not running any script), most of the pain was gone! All I can say is wow! Please let others know because back pain is such a serious pain and can be long term. Kind regards Gabe
I have been using your machine for about 3 months now. Over the last couple of weeks, my ear cancer has been reducing in size, noticeable on a daily basis. My desire is to destroy it completely, At the moment I am not willing to undergo a CT scan and perhaps surgery to remove my lymph gland and the SCC on my ear, unless there is no other option. I will purchase the Rife Healing Belt now off you and put the belt over my ear, I think it would be more viable to have the frequencies at the point of the ear. Many Thanks, Rob Baillie
I received the Rife Digital Professional V2 machine thank you, the larger menu screen is so much easier to use now. I found COPD on the menu immediately. I mean I just basically plugged it in, found my frequency in under 30 seconds and started Pulse Sweep overnight. I have already noticed my lungs have cleared and the infection is gone after 3 weeks of using the overnight 8 hour treatment time while sleeping. I ordered one for my wife for the treatment of the tumor under her armpit. I just couldn't lend her my machine, my treatments are full time. Thanks
I became a believer in Dr Rife's discovery not so much after reading "The Cancer Cure that Worked", but after I was in a Rife Digital Professional healing session by a retired nurse. This Nurse had refused going for congenital treatment because Chemo and radiation was her specialty and she saw mostly pain and misery and little improvement with conventional medicine. After so many Rife Digital treatments and mixing it up with Re-connective Healing sessions, I saw her about 3 months later at a club meeting. I asked how she was doing and she said fine. I said, how are you "really" doing? She knew what I was asking and said (with a bright smile), she went for a check up and the docs are confused because they can''t find any cancer (even after subsequent tests). I said did you tell them what you have been doing? She said, "no, they wouldn't understand". Thanks again for the great customer support, Be Well, Steve E.
I've been using the Rife Digital Professional V2, I bought through you for 7 1/2 weeks now. I am using it on my dog Carlos who has a Malignant Tumor the size of a golf ball growing on the outside of his nose. The first few weeks we saw no effect, then after about a month we noticed the tumor reduced about 50% in size. The ball shaped tumor was curving in to become concave. This was a great sign of progress. Carlos is often exhausted from the Cancer or the Rife healing treatment. His lymph node under his neck are hard and swollen. About a few weeks ago we gave him a few days off the machine to let his body recover. His body did recharge and the lymph nodes did get smaller. I will buy the Mat now for the Bed Lining, and hook this up for the overnight treatments.
Hi Dr Peter, This is George from Greece. I have had the machine for about 3 weeks now. A lot of changes - for the good. My mother has taken herself off morphine, given up the wheel chair and most of the coughing. Not out of the woods yet but in a lot better place than she was 6 weeks ago. I have mentioned the machine to several people and I have been pleasantly surprised by a positive response. Especially from a few people who have seen mother through this process and know others with major challenges. I would like to start trying to sell the units at some point soon so will be needing your input on that. Have more questions but get to them later. Look forward to hearing from you.
I Have had my husband on the Rife Digital Professional everyday for three months, alternating from Malaria (for the first 3 weeks) then HIV then HepC and then alternating from HIV to HepC. He also completed the three week - MMS HIV treatment (taking MMS every hour for eight hours a day). On completion of the three months he had his 3 monthly HIV blood test. We also asked for a liver function test as well. His liver function is back to normal and his CD4 count has gone from 207 to 417 this is a great improvement. We will continue with the Rife Digital but would like to know if we just stay now with the HIV or do we continue alternating between HIV and HEPC. We have him taking the Astragalus and Ganoderma (high doses everyday) he also takes several other immune boosters as well. Your advice is always appreciated. Kind regards, Teresa Cumbers
Dr. Williams, my family and I deeply thank God for you and your apparent genuine concern for those of us who were diagnosed with cancer. My mother was recently treated for gastric cancer and the chemotherapy seems to be causing her more pain and suffering than the cancer itself. When I researched alternative treatments, I found a Rife Treatment Clinic and we went to New York for treatments. We wanted to purchase the Rife Professional machine so that treatment for her and our loving pet (dog) who has cancer, could be done in the comfort of our home, but everywhere we looked to purchase the machine, the cost was too much out of our financial ability (thousands of dollars). It wasn't until I saw your site and the sale that I JUMPED for joy and told my family I had found a Rife machine and other very valuable cancer treatment information we could afford and could use. Dr. Peter Williams, you and your company are our angels. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts for not being greedy and for being truly concerned about helping people heal. Even if your price goes up after the sale, at least the sale allowed those of us with little to no money purchase this very valuable piece of healing equipment. I wish you and your company, your family, and friends well; and, again please know you are our Angel! Bernard
Regarding The Rife Professional V2 Treatment: My present thought is that I must have been doing something right to stabilize the PSA. As I have reduced the Rife Machine treatment frequency after 3 months treatment [specialist definitively doesn't want to know about it ]I would like to have your valued advice as to when I should continue with the rife machine and what programs would best suit my condition?. I would be looking to have a further PSA reading in about 3 months time. I hope the above will meet with your request for a progress report Dr Peter and I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
I received my rife digital professional and am very, very happy with it. Thank you so so much. Having Lyme for six years I feared it progressing to the point of being helpless. I'm now feeling like my 'old' self and stronger than ever. It's been less than a month using the rife. Really a Miracle, Thank you. Sincerely, Susie
Many thanks for the Rife Digital Machine, bought as the second Machine with Yury Erman''s, who you have advised further regarding treating his Adult Onset Diabetes. The post-sales Support is really appreciated. I have just had a bad re-occurrence of Asthma not experienced since childhood. I was diagnosed 35 years ago as being allergic to dust and feathers. I had been sanding the wings of a sailplane for refurbishment, and have inhaled polyester gel coat particles. After just two full cycle treatments for asthma, I am breathing normally again! I am continuing further with the sessions to make sure the Asthma cause (probably a virus to which I am sensitive) has been killed.
I have the new series Rife Digital Professional V2. Very useful. I have had great success with the Bacterial Infections and Mycoses setting for infections. And the Parasite, General and Comprehensive frequencies. I have seen excellent results over the 3 week period of using the machine with overnight treatments. The built in programs are great. My father borrowed my machine, So I need to buy another one now. Thank You Vikki Young