Royal Raymond Rife is often referred to as a pioneering genius in frequency medicine, having found a method to kill microorganisms with specific frequencies, which in turn treats diseases such as cancer. Although Rife’s work inspired many followers and still has its advocates, evidence shows that some of his conclusions, as well as the practices of his collaborators, were erroneous. Let’s take a look at the most common myths and facts associated with his discovery.
1. Incorrect use of harmonic frequencies
Originally, Rife used radio frequency (RF) devices to devitalise microorganisms. In the 1950s and 1960s, Rife’s colleagues, particularly, John Crane and John Marsh, shifted from using high-frequency (RF) devices to lower audio frequencies in their experiments to target microorganisms. They believed that lower frequencies could be as effective as higher RF frequencies. This miscalculation led to the development of devices such as the AZ-58, which depended solely on audio frequencies and were far less effective. Consequently, the effectiveness of these devices was compromised compared to the original technology of Rife.
2. Misunderstanding of harmonic frequencies
Rife’s engineer, Philip Hoyland, developed “Beam Ray” devices that integrated carrier frequency and audio frequencies to produce harmonic frequencies for targeting microorganisms. Unfortunately, Rife and his team failed to grasp the complexities of this method and believed that audio frequencies alone would be effective. Due to this misunderstanding, later devices were built without adhering to the original specifications, neglecting the need for proper frequency alignment, and thus impairing their effectiveness.
3. Lack of proper testing
Another issue was the failure to conduct comprehensive testing of the newer devices. In the 1970s, John Marsh tested his replicas of Rife’s devices. However, since these tests weren’t conducted in controlled environments, the outcomes weren’t comparable to Rife’s original findings. This lack of proper testing led to misunderstandings regarding the true effectiveness of these newer devices.
4. Misinterpretation of frequency functions
Rife and his team were under the impression that multiple frequencies were necessary to devitalise microorganisms. Rife’s laboratory notes, which indicated two frequencies for each bacterium, were the source of this misconception. Later, it was discovered that a single precise frequency was sufficient to destroy a microorganism. This flawed assumption impacted the development of the devices and led to misconceptions about the true mechanics of frequency therapy.
5. Mix-up between harmonic and fundamental frequencies
Rife frequently mixed up harmonic frequencies (higher multiples of a fundamental frequency) with the fundamental frequencies of microorganisms. Rather than using the original fundamental frequencies, he focused on the harmonic frequencies generated during system oscillation. As a result, some frequencies were recorded inaccurately, leading to further mistakes in later experiments.
What are the consequences of these mistakes?
Rife’s emphasis on harmonic frequencies meant that his devices sometimes failed to deliver results where precision was key. These mistakes persisted in later versions of the devices, which were based on Rife’s original concept but fell short of his deeper grasp of frequency therapy. This has led to misinterpretation of the results, especially by Rife’s followers who have attempted to recreate his work.
Rife’s achievements should be evaluated through the lens of critical and evidence-based science. Rifetech, a Czech start-up, pays tribute to Rife’s vision while recognising the need to advance his pioneering work to a modern, scientifically validated level. Rifetech builds on his legacy by combining contemporary medical knowledge with the latest technological advancements. This approach unlocks the potential for frequency therapy to deliver the results Rife had initially envisioned.
The true Rife?
Today, efforts to recreate the true Rife device typically involve semi-professional technologies that have no proven track record of effectiveness. Without proper certifications or adherence to safety requirements, these devices are restricted to the unregulated grey zone of alternative medicine. Without scientific backing and proper testing, these devices pose more risks than benefits and have no place in modern medicine, which emphasises evidence-based practices and rigorous quality control.