Pedagogue Chides Ken Adachi & Hulda Clark for Electronics 'Error' re. Bio-electrification
April 4, 2007
Subject: Error correction
Date: Wed, April 4, 2007
I appreciate your website and your desire to educate the public. I am glad to see Kaali's research report published at
I would like to refer others to the site, but I don't want to do so unless what I believe is an error on that page is corrected. I don't mean to sound too critical here, but I do have serious concerns about the following passage, which I copy and paste here:
However, Dr. Hulda Clark is adamantly opposed to using any application of negative voltage, whether as pure negative DC voltage or the negative half of an AC waveform (including the negative half cycle of a bi-phasic square wave). Hulda found that the slightest amount of negative voltage will encourage the growth of pathogenic organisms; something we're trying to avoid.
Now, I studied electrical engineering at university, so I can tell you with all certainty that there is no such thing as "negative voltage" in an absolute sense. Voltage by nature is ALWAYS RELATIVE, never absolute. If you want any current to flow between two electrodes applied to the body or anything else, one electode must ALWAYS have a negative voltage relative to the other. If you don't apply "negative voltage" to the body on one electrode, you simply won't get any current.
This makes Hulda Clark's alleged statement very puzzling indeed. What exactly does she think that "negative voltage" is? And by what mechanism could it possibly encourage growth of pathogens??? According to Kaali's research, which is listed on that very website, application of voltage across HIV viruses disabled them rather than encoouraging them to grow. Whether Kaali's voltage was positve or negative simply depends on which of his two electrodes you want to arbitrarily choose to label as your primary reference!! Kaali was using negative voltage. And positve voltage. It is simply relative. If you want to confirm what I am saying, just ask anyone with expertise in electronics.
So, after the statement that I quoted above, you proceed to recommend a diode rectifier to cut out the "negative" portion of Beck's bi-phasic waveform (which is nothing but the same current and voltage going in the opposite direction, with nothing inherently "negative" about it). I want to say as respectfully as I can that I think your well-intentioned advice is going to lead people into a less-effective or possibly ineffective version of blood electrification. The rectified waveform will deliver less than half the charge to the pathogens, and it gets far worse as you recommend a 20% duty cycle, etc. This watered down blood electrification might be too weak to get the job done.
I know your intentions were good, but with a better undertanding of electronics, you would not have given such advice. Beck (and others since his time) got great results with a bi-phasic waveform and never found it to encourage growth of pathogens. I am concerned that the misinformation on this site could throw some people off course and prevent them from receiving the full benefits of blood electrification. For the sake of such people I strongly encourage you to revise this section of the website. But I am exceedingly glad that you have put Kaali's report on the net, and I encourage you to keep it on line indefenitely.
I 'm afraid that I can't agree with your characterization of my suggestion or musings as an "error", but I will explain myself in greater detail.
I used the term "negative voltage" to refer to the excursion of the waveform below the zero line on the oscilloscope and into the area of negative voltage polarity in which the DIRECTION of the current flow REVERSES from the DIRECTION of the current flow in the positive voltage portion of the graph. Anyone who has a background in electronics would know that, which is why I find it surprising that you claim to have such expertise.
The principle of the Beck adaptation of the Kaali experiment hinges more on the limitations of the induced (AC) current flow through the artery to remain between 50-100 micro amperes rather than the size of the applied voltage. Mind you, Kaali used a DC current in his experiment.
The mechanism of pathogen neutralization explained by Hulda Clark is different from the mechanism that Kaali describes to adversely affect the outer protein coat on viruses and turn off the reverse transcriptase process. If you haven't studied Hulda Clark's books, you would not be aware of her important discoveries using the Synchrometer
My thoughts on limiting the current flow in one direction and creating more of a spike pulse is merely a SUGGESTION for those interested in experimentation. I make it very clear in that paragraph that I'm only offering suggestions for those who want to experiment and see what they might get. Anyone who builds a Beck electrifier (or buys one) gets the bi-phasic 3.92 Hz circuit. I'm not preventing anyone from doing that.
The info I suggested was based on information gleaned from other researchers who have found that DC positive offset pulse spikes bring far greater results than AC waveforms, which jibes with Hulda's findings that "negative voltage" applications will induce pathogen growth (info derived from Synchrometer testing).
Using the diode (observing correct polarity of course) prevents current flow when the voltage goes below the zero line on an oscilloscope, therefore you would see only positive voltage excursions on the scope and zero line during the negative part of the applied waveform cycle. You get current flow in only one direction which is positive polarity pulsing DC, but DC all the same. Recall that Kaali used straight line DC in his original experiment
It's possible that total current saturation is the critical element, but it's also possible that a positive spike voltage will achieve similar current density (in a given moment of time), but only in one direction of flow. There are other possibilities as well. There is nothing set in stone when it comes to bio-electric medicine.
Kind Regards, Ken
© Copyright 2007 Educate-Yourself.org All Rights Reserved.
|All information posted on this web site is the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only. It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer of your choice for medical care and advice.|