Biorresonance

Hi all,

I would like to comment some experiences about this diagnostic and treatment method. This method said positive to me, which is for sure right.

After treatment says no longer have borrelia, but I doubt if has a limit which can not detect, any thoughts?

Thanks a lot.
Bee.

Thanks so much auzzie,

Just to clarify, you have used the "Biorresonance Quantum" or the "Mora machine"..... I realized they are quite different.

i know there will be true believers -

but for balance i have to say i believe bioresource is bunkum with no real science behind it - only pseudoscience used to lighten peoples wallets.

i don't say this to upset anyone - just to caution people to use their analytical skills to evaluate where they spend their money carefully - for most of us its in short supply - with little certainty around where more will be coming from - but there are plenty of people who will still take it from us.

NONE - of the most respected LLMDs use bio resonance for diagnosis or treatment - that should tell you something in and of itself

all the best

Thanks Saraeli, I found the mora machine, much consistent than the biorresonance itself, trying to find other experiences as well.

I've also had success with bio resonance, I had to stop due to the price but if I could have then I would have continued. I know a lot of people who swear by it helping them!

Hahahah Garzie, I would not rely on that method for sure.

Indeed I am a pharmacyst and at first I would not believe at any “unconventional” method, but those machines gave me proofs several times that are all in the correct tracks!!

Believe that when the machine said I have a herniated disc exactly where I know I have it by MRI scans…. I started believing!

Emma, do you the type of machine? There are many

yeah, my main concern is to try to help ensure that vulnerable people are not taken advantage of by the unscrupulous or even well intentioned but delusional practitioners out there for selfish profit motives.

if people consciously wish to follow treatment directions based purely on belief or anecdote rather than evidence - then that is entirely up to them.

I do think there is a lot of confusion out there around what constitutes evidence - and what treatments have good evidence behind them - because all of these fringe treatments are deliberately designed and marketed to appear as if they have credible evidence behind them when in reality most do not - but people would need to have quite a high level of technical knowledge to figure that out.

there is also a great deal of good hard scientific evidence for the self healing effect - even in the published scientific journals.
for example - there are very well documented cases of real miracle cure level results - but in the placebo groups of organised treatment trials.
examples like people who were in wheelchairs getting up and being able to play basket ball after sham (simulated not real) surgeries
the inference is that the patients bodies are somehow able to heal themselves through some combination of the patients belief or expectation and perhaps the other aspects of interaction with the provider.
i am not denying or knocking this self healing at all - if more people could access a drug free treatment that could delivery these results that would be excellent!
but its easy to see how a little of this could be exploited by practitioners to successfully market their "treatments"

so its the bogus or unsupported claims that i feel are dishonest and exploiting people that i take most objection to - there are some clear cases of unscientific mumbo jumbo that are designed to sound credible - but to anyone with sufficient education in a technical discipline, clearly are anything but credible and its easy to see how they are constructed merely to appear so.

so if people understand there is no hard evidence around a treatment - but have heard anecdotally from people who said they thought it helped them - and are happy to spend the not inconsiderable amounts of money on these treatments on the back of that - then i consider this fully informed consent - and i wish them well.

in fact, some people make all their treatment decisions based on how many people they see online saying something helped them - without looking at independent input or any scientific evidence at all.

i personally think that in a world where there are so many people willing to profit from the sick and where its also easy to manipulate reviews, testimonials social media etc - that this puts people at increased risk of being taken for a ride repeatedly, and stay sick much longer - so i would advise against it.

i would instead advise asking for feedback from a wider audience - like the people here on the forum, who would give a range of different perspectives.
also read around the topic on independent websites ( not only the ones that support the treatment - but also those that do not).
if the providers quote scientific research that supports their theories - read that - to see if it really does support the treatment in the way its being done or not ( often it does not - or the research quoted is done in conditions that are so abstracted that it does not say anything about the way the treatment is being used in humans at all) if you don't feel able to digest the science fully - maybe ask someone you know who is more technically oriented
But basically, try to avoid kneejerk "i just need something to have hope in right now" type decisions - do your homework and try to get a more rounded perspective and figure out who's arguments make more sense - and in that way be able to make a more informed decision.

i hope its at least some food for thought

all the best

It’s worth noting that not all forms of muscle testing are the same and can have different foundations (I.e applied kinesiology vs contact reflex analysis).

Lymestop for example is based off contact reflex analysis. So their approach uses the same points (+ new ones they claim to have found) as both diagnostic and treatment. (Which also ties into meridian lines/acupuncture based teachings).

I saw an applied kinesiology based practitioner in my hometown and I did not resonate with that.

I ended up at Lymestop after considering SOT (we had a recent thread on this!) for awhile. SOT is debatably more “science” based vs Lymestop. But my lengthy observation of both communities showed far different outcomes/favorability % of the experience - that allowed me to pick something more “fringe” over something more “science” backed.

That was the conclusion I came to essentially was that complex chronic illness is more often several things.

Maybe it’s just Lyme. Maybe removing Lyme helps the body better address other things.

But buhner also describes symptoms as synergistic not additive. Sometimes pealing back one layer so definitively.. can paradoxically make the picture look worse. And I believe that’s why sot has a weird phenomenon of people getting worse. I’ve spoken to someone in the Lymestop group who’s one of the more knowledgeable people and who used a local CBT (Cranio biotic technique) practitioner before Lymestop to individually address infections in hopes of getting ahead on progress. And she said that was a horrible decision and doesn’t recommend it.

Add on - I think SOT will eventually have a “tick disease blend”. Sorta like how phagen corp is doing that with phage therapy with “inducen ln/rf” (not backing this treatment exactly). If the sot is harmless start getting comprehensive.

Post Edited (loski01) : 3/5/2024 10:40:39 AM (GMT-8)

Reading all your thoughts and experiences I find a lot of sense in everybodies. Nevertheless if anyone has wealth enough to try biorresonance it has shown positive results to me in terms of diagnose.

Another thing to pinpoint and to add to discussion is, not everthing that works has a double study placebo published on Pubmed….. and maybe it works. Just because pharmaceutical world is not very decent as you all may know.