>- I saw no tests conducted here to challenge the claim to frequency accuracy whatsoever. ie, no sample comparisons or contrasting data from which to make comparisons from. And so it's unlikely that we're going to obtain evidence for frequency accuracy from this particular video.
I agree, they do state however, that they started at 1 Hz and stepped through the frequencies without success until they got to 1197 Hz.
I will say, first that the Rife-Bare Plasma tube may need to be more accurate than the Rife-Crane pad type zappers. That is just my opinion based on my experience.
>- swamp water test could have been conducted with the same objective in mind. ie, zap the water with various frequencies so as to observe the influence and effects this would have on the purification of the water OR specific organisms present in the water type thing.
Yes, I did do this. I have spent a lot of time testing this and it is exactly why I have gone to multiple frequencies. I have not found one single frequency that even comes close to killing all microbes. But I have seen that each successive frequency will kill some of what survived that previous frequencies.
As a note: just running 1 pond water test takes 72 hours and doing that for many frequencies becomes very time consuming.
>- the matter of claim to accuracy is that there appears to be a divide between the practical nature of the claim and that of marketing ones devices.
I understand that point, but my point is as follows:
For every 100 zappers sold with a 10 percent accuracy and used for the same condition in 100 different cases, only a few produce really good results.
Consider this. Every zapper seller has testimonials, some of them report glowing cures. However, if you were to dig in and research, these glowing reports came from only 1 percent to 2 percent of the customers. WHY?
The reason why is the zappers are not all the same. They do not produce exactly the same frequency.
The solution to this problem is simple, make the zappers more accurate so that every customer gets the same frequency. Once that is achieved, provided that it is the right frequency, you will get a higher rate of good results.
So, lets take an example of 2500 Hz because this is a very popular frequency in zappers. The problem is that according to the Rife frequency list, this frequency does not have much effect. So, are the zapper users who report very good effects actually getting another frequency due to the inaccuracy of the zappers?
Of course, most likely only 1 out of 100 zappers will produce right at 2500 Hz. So, lets look at some other frequencies. A 10 percent accuracy means that the zapper will produce somewhere between 2250 Hz and 2750 Hz.
Lets look at the rife frequency list ( for the present argument, let us assume that the list is correct although it is not absolute ).
In the range being considered, we find 2 really good frequencies:
There are a number of other frequencies that cover a number of other things but none has a long list of effects.
So, I hope that at least from this you can see that it is in at least some ways better to use a series of exact frequencies. If they are not exact, they are just not going to get the hits.
When you buy a zapper, you want one that is going to produce results, plain and simple, and some random frequency is not going to cut the mustard.
So, take a look at the simple and cheap ParaZapper CC2 priced at $159 and $189 ( not trying to sell, just using it as an example ):
Mode 1 has only 4 frequencies:
Freq 1 2280 +/- 10 Hz Most units are +/- 4 Hz
Freq 2 2128 +/- 10 Hz Most units are +/- 4 Hz
Freq 3 2489 +/- 11 Hz Most units are +/- 4 Hz
Freq 4 2008 +/- 10 Hz Most units are +/- 4 Hz
So, please tell me that this zapper is not better than a plain old zapper?
Not perfect of course because the accuracy is not perfect. For example, we specify +/- 10 Hz but the worst one that we ever shipped was off by 6 Hz. and the average frequency at 2280 is 2280.67 Hz.
All that I can say is that instead of 1 very happy customer out of 100, we are probably running 10 very happy customers. The remainder are also reasonably happy because the absolute frequency is not absolutely required to get some "decent results".
So, what about the MY-3? It is outrageously expensive according to some. Is it worth it?
If you need 2280, it gives you 2280 +/- 0.1 Hz
the same with 2008 or 2489 Hz. You know that you are getting the advertised frequencies, not +/- 25 Hz and not +/- 250 Hz.
If you think that this does not matter, put 10 percent too much air in one of your car tires and 10 percent too little in another and see what happens.
A lot of theoretical discussion but it is well founded.