Wouldn't exact frequencies with decimals be more effective than broad rounded frequencies and if so why spooky has many broad ones?

Each pathogen has what we call a MOR tolerance -- the range of frequencies that seem to work. This is considered to be 0.025%.

The higher the frequency, the larger the range will be that can devitalize a pathogen. Most pathogens have been reported to live between 76kHz to 880kHz by Hulda Clark, and using 76kHz, the MOR tolerance results in a +-19 Hz range. So in theory, no decimal is needed.

Obviously, when dealing with very low frequencies, decimal resolution becomes more important.

It is my understanding that most frequencies have been recorded at the center point of the range of effectiveness. However, some frequencies were recorded using methods that may have incorporated a carrier wave, which may have worked due to additional frequencies that were generated. In general, it takes time to become familiar with each frequency sets history and whether there were factors that need to be taken into account when evaluating its efficacy.

To shed some light, I have found that the eczema set did not work at all no matter what I did until I added amplitude modulation. It is my conclusion that these frequencies were originally developed and recorded in a manner that had a carrier wave added that resulted in specific frequencies being generated that actually did the work. I have not been able to dig up enough historical data on the set to confirm, but am happy that I now have a very effective setup for dealing with my eczema.

For more details, please check the link:

Have more questions? Submit a request


Please sign in to leave a comment.