How We Observe

Posted to Subscribers on 30 March 2008


Dear Subscribers,

First, a couple of catch up notes and then some Sunday reflections.  The bee presentation can be used freely. However, please do not remove the credits on the photos or at the end. If you want to use the presentation in schools or public information programs about organic farming or beekeeping, you are welcome to use it.  The higher resolution version can be burned to a CD-ROM and if there is someone with some spare time who would like to do this as a public service, great.  There is also a Romanian version, finished and about to go on YouTube.  The German translation is done and the YouTube files should be ready tomorrow.  The French might be ready later tomorrow, after the German.  I know we have subscribers who are fluent in many languages so feel free to contact me if you want to translate the presentation.  It is very short as there are not many words but we found that Chemtrails has not been translated into some languages (yet) and Colony Collapse Disorder has a fantastic name in German.

Rife and Microscopes

This is just a story . . . sort of, but it leads somewhere. 

Years ago, a pathologist phoned me to ask if I had any suggestions for him.  He said he had kidney cancer and that he had had one kidney removed.  I asked if he had looked at the kidney himself.  He said, "Yes, certainly, it was malignant."  I said, "Well, I imagine so, but did you look at the surrounding tissue to see what was supporting the growth?"  He said, "No, if it's malignant, you remove the kidney and that's what we did."  Trying to be tactful, I said, "Oh, I understand completely, but since it was your own kidney, I thought you would be curious and want to know as much as possible."  I never heard from him again. 

So much for diplomacy, but I learned a lot.  I learned that you can teach people to look for very specific abnormalities.  Basically, when this is the case, it is possible to miss the context and much more.  One of the subscribers to this list wrote me that there is no word in Greek for blue.  Well, there is a fascinating pilgrimage place for me in Paris, Musée de l'Homme.  It is a kind of anthropological, sociological museum and I spent many days there studying the division of the octave in different cultures and studying the color spectrum.  It's absolutely totally intriguing, but it also shows how affected we are by language and conditioning.

Continuing . . .

I took a seminar on mold a few years ago.  In the laboratory analysis, they divide the slide into quadrants, count what they find in one quadrant and multiply by four.  I suppose this is reasonable except that in live blood analysis, if there is mold, the blood runs so after a few moments, all the blood is one area and the mold in another so the method used by some labs would give faulty results, providing the sample was capable of movement, which may or may not be the case with air and dust samples from a home.

Now, with the microscopes, one is obviously very influenced by what one sees so if one cannot see a virus, it may be hard to convince some people it exists.  In fact, this reminds me of a series on alternative medicine that was broadcast some years ago.  A pompous surgeon wished to assure viewers that there is no such thing as "chi".  He had performed 7000 operations and never seen it.  Okay, I am sure I have made my point.

After the debate between Pasteur and Béchamp in which the French pundits foolishly declared Pasteur the winner, medicine went on a rampage against germs.  Pasteur was a chemist and consultant to the brewery industries and he had concerns about bacteria that should have been quite different from the questions medical doctors ask.  However, thanks to Pasteur, it's quite possible we are not asking the right questions, even today, more than a century later . . . which also suggests that progressive as science is purported to be, it is actually vehemently opposed to most new ideas and very slow to accept even the most persuasive of those cutting edge observations and thoughts.

In my estimation, Rife was probably the most important medical researcher of the 20th century but he was also influenced by the germ theory.  So, what do we have here?  We have a situation in which research into viruses and bacteria could have gone the route of seeking "energetic" methods for destroying the germs or it could have gone the direction of what actually happened, i.e., the pharmacological route.  In any event, no one (in the 20th century) seemed to question the importance of killing the germs and thanks to this, we have everything from antibacterial soap and disinfectants to chlorine and fluoride and antibiotics  . . . and antibiotic resistant new strains of super bugs.

Gee whiz?

Yes, of course, it had to lead to this because Nature loves balance and there is, in fact, a context for proliferation of anything from Candida albicans to Streptococcus aureus or the BX virus, which, we noted was only capable of causing cancer if irradiated.  In short, it did not cause cancer unless irradiated so what should we learn from this?

With the frequency generators, there is a specific rate that is fatal for each form vibrating at its unique rate.  If exposed to that rate, the form dies.  Finding the rate for each pathogenic organism and substance is the basis of a lot of list exchanges in the busy world of spin off technologies based on Rife's work.  What is less clear is what happens when an organism dies.  I have not had much occasion to observe this in the microscope, but if I were to speculate on the basis of the very small number of observations I have made, the organism is reduced to particulates so that the factors that hold the components in place are rendered nonfunctional.  Let me try to say this in simpler English.  If there is a blood parasite and it is killed by frequencies, the soft tissue is destroyed but the parasite seems to retain its shape but there are many tiny dots, too small to interpret, that remain.  Assuming these are actually inert or lifeless, it would appear that the frequencies can, in fact, destroy parasites.  Moreover, it appears that there is no bacterial infection following death in this manner.  It is important to state this because when a parasite dies as a result of pharmaceutical or herbal remedies, the parasite has to decompose.  The dead parasite is then eaten by bacteria and after a few days, if the immune system is working properly, white blood cells will eat the bacteria.  This is the normal cycle and it could happen routinely without anyone noticing if living in a tropical country where reinfection is practically constant but the diet includes some antiparasitic foods that knock out the infections.

With the frequency treatments, it is not clear what happens to the debris in the blood.  In the very few chances I have had to observe, the white blood cells were ignoring the debris and I suspect it is because of one of two possibilities.  First, the white blood cells could have themselves been traumatized by the frequencies.  Second, the dead parasites may be so inert that they are not identified as risk factors.  Given their appearance, it would seem easy to eliminate them, but I honestly do not know if or how this happens . . . which is one reason that these microscopes need to be used, not forced underground.

Oh, and just for the record, I am paranoid enough about our government that I left my scope in Europe.  Obviously, I miss it, but . . .



Now, if someone takes a basic course in live blood analysis, he or she will first be taught how to observe which is a euphemism for what to observe.  You can always tell a newbie because newbies talk about rouleaux, one of the more wonderful words in the specialized vocabulary of the cognoscenti.  This is a condition caused by red blood cells sticking together so they look like a stack of coins.  For the record, the word is not unique to live blood analysis, but it is lesson number one in live blood cell analysis so newbies are very happy when they are able to identify these formations correctly.

However, here is where the very first lesson in context should begin.  Where on the slide was the rouleaux observed, how was the sample taken, is the patient dehydrated, does the rouleaux break up if you tap the slide gently, etc., etc.?  In short, in many cases, there is no treatment needed for this condition, but it could be serious for a few people. 

Fortunately for me, a great deal of my life experience has been as an Observer.  I capitalize it because I think of it as a title.  I have a heap of planets in Virgo (and some of you have definitely noticed) and I grew up in a family in which children were to be seen and not heard.  I saw a lot and said nothing until I was 33.  I think I was doubly fortunate because at the tender age of 16, I met Suzuki-sensei.  I was actually seated next to him at a banquet at a Chinese restaurant.  The next day, I saw him on campus and, well, he taught me to see my own mind.  If you know what your mind is "doing" and where it is, you will surrender the belief that your mind spends much of its time and energy thinking.  Most of the time, the mind is regurgitating . . .

. . . and this brings me back to observing.  To be ultrascientific, we teach people to limit their inquiries to one variable.  There are reasons for this, but they are really absurd in real life situations.  The ostensible reason is to attribute all responses to a single factor that is unique and therefore causal.  For instance, in medicine, we need to have names for typhoid and hepatitis and Epstein-Barr and so on and so forth.  If a condition doesn't have a name, there is no treatment for it because the treatments are patented approaches to identified pathogens rather than systemic approaches to immune enhancement or healing.

This is where I take issue with 20th century medicine, and, I am sorry to say, even with people such as Rife who had the opportunity to observe context but fell into the trap set by the germ theorists.

Since this is long, I will continue later.

Many blessings,



Darkfield Microscopy






Seventh Ray Press
Copyright by Ingrid Naiman 2010

Home || Contact Us

No content on any of the pages of this web site may be reproduced without written permission of
Ingrid Naiman and Seventh Ray Press, publisher of this site.


Design by Damien Francoeur