Showing posts with label radionics rates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label radionics rates. Show all posts

Sunday, June 23, 2024

Numerical Values or Radionics Rates.

 What are Radionics Rates. How to use these rates. 

Radionics rates are numerical values used in radionics instruments to assist in diagnosis and treatment through applying electromagnetic radiation to the body. These rates are created with radionics instruments and play a crucial role in the process of detecting imbalances and sending correcting frequencies to treat diseases remotely. The principles of radionics revolve around the concept that all life forms share a common electromagnetic field and vibrate at unique frequencies. It originated with figures like Dr. Albert Abrams, who utilized electromagnetic therapy for diagnosing and treating diseases. However, radionics has been met with skepticism due to contradicting established principles of biology and physics, leading to its classification as pseudoscientific.

In radionics practice, different numerical rate systems are used, such as Base 10, Base 44, and Base 336. Base 10 rates were originally developed by Dr. Albert Abrams for measuring resistance in the human body as an indication of disease. This system evolved over time with practitioners like Ruth Drown and Bruce Copen adopting and refining the Base 10 rates. Additionally, George De la Warr and Malcolm Rae introduced alternative rate systems like Base 44 and Base 336, which offer different approaches to radionics treatment.

Each rate system in radionics is believed to resonate with specific vibratory fields within the body:

  • Base 10 rates resonate with the physical/etheric body.
  • Base 44 rates resonate with the emotional/astral body.
  • Base 336 rates resonate with the mental body.

These distinctions highlight the corresponding vibratory fields each rate system targets, possibly influencing the effectiveness of treatment based on the subtle energies or occult anatomy. However, the efficacy and legitimacy of radionics and its associated devices remain a subject of skepticism within the scientific and medical communities, with many considering it pseudoscientific and lacking empirical evidence to support its claims