Hi BG,

As you probably know Dr. Robert Beck used 36 volts applied to two
small electrodes over the two arteries on the inside of the same
wrist. He had his blood examined and had hospitals supply him with
reports on their own findings and had excellent if not surprising
results. He was very insistant that you need to supply as much as two
to three milliamps to the skin to get 50 or more microamps into the
blood which is needed to affect the pathogens in the blood properly
enough. He indicated that devices like Hulda Clark's was not strong
enough to be very effective. Most everyone knows that little power is
needed if you target with a sine wave the pathogen at the proper
frequency. Using DC or fixed frequency pulses apparently requires
more power. Do you know of any studies that low voltage DC or pulses
work good enough. We can all site our own positive experiences but is
there any real scientific evidence to back it up? The studies at
Einstein Medical College indicate that at least 50 microamperes in
the blood is required to affect pathogens. Can 6 volts DC applied to
the skin induce that kind of current in the blood?

John

--- In microelectricitygermkiller2@yahoogroups.com, "baby_grand"
<bobluhrs@...> wrote:
>
> no, it takes a very high voltage for 5 milliseconds to open the
pores
> of a host cell so as to allow viral RNA/DNA to enter the cell. It
is
> a lab technique, only. You don't do this anytime at home, never!
It
> could stop your heart. You use 4-6 volts steady and reverse it
every
> few minutes, like every 5-10. That voltage should not be enuf to
open
> up any cellular pores because it is not strong enough to do so.
>
> This theory is used to explain why the cells probably will not
absorb
> medications easily at these voltages. In some people, there have
been
> such reactions, but it is rarely reported.
>
> Still, the safe thing to do is the electricity first, then take the
> meds after you are done. That way the least exposure to it is
> obtained.
>
> bG
>