Cancer detection
You may not agree with what I write. In this case, I suggest you contact me using the
Contact Form so that we can discuss this topic.
As disturbing as it may seem, it is possible, through the frequency of an organ, to feel the primitive presence of a cancer. Some people will think that quackery still passes through there. I understand them, only, when the diagnosis becomes reproducible, adjective used by science, the facts become stubborn. On Earth as in the Universe everything is vibration, wave. This is well known. Many devices measure, quantify, visualize waves. For several years, I have been interested in the frequency of objects, organisms, humans. Frequency has its unit of measurement the Hertz. More precisely 347 Hz
Every organism has its own frequency. For invariable objects, with stable and constant contours, shapes and materials, as well as their similar positions in space. For organisms, it is not the same. The basis of every organism is the cell. This lives and vibrates. Cells are subject to all possible variations in their environment.
The human body is made up of billions of cells.
These form the organs.
Each organ has its own vibration. If an organ is altered for any reason, the cells undergo these disturbances and react. It is at this precise moment that the vibration always varies in the same negative direction. When any organ is sick, the vibration measured in Hertz decreases.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter if we constantly use the same pseudo unit of measurement. I have never noticed the vibration of an organ increase in the right direction when it is sick! That said, from these observations, it becomes possible to measure the frequency in Hertz or similar of everything around us and more particularly of our neighbor. I have noticed that certain disturbances follow their evolution. For all people without distinction of age, sex, race, the observed frequency is always identical. The people for whom I have had the honor of working and who will read this page, will not contradict me. Indeed, it is thanks to these people that I can write these lines. Conventional medicine, without knowing it, has proven my words right. These results were obtained weeks or months in advance, by a few minutes of serious examination, by measuring the Hertzian frequency of people.
I heard voices on my answering machine thanking me in tears for having advised them. I had directed them to conventional medicine. I had indeed noted on them the frequency corresponding to cancer. My goal is not to compete with conventional medicine. I only want to open the eyes and ears of researchers and finders. We should develop a device that can effectively measure the frequency of our organs. That this device can allow us to make a diagnosis without waiting for our organs to be attacked, therefore detectable by scanner, MRI and other devices that simply photograph what exists! We must not forget that our exposure during a scanner examination is equivalent to the dose that a human body can accept for a year, as a precautionary limit! Often late, too late for good prophylaxis to be truly effective. Not to mention that good prophylaxis must be accompanied by the geobiological cleaning of the place where the person frequently sleeps.
I am dismayed when we are told about cancer cures on certain television programs. Television never gives us news in vision, that is to say with the people present, two or three years after these people are supposedly cured.
I see them often and I know, by measuring these people even from a distance, that the cancer is always there, latent, waiting for an inevitable relapse if nothing has been changed in their home!
Some people think they are cured, but they are not! The photos appearing here and there allow informed dowsers to detect this.
After a geobiological cleaning, when it is done on time, I no longer find the frequency of cancer on the person concerned. Here too, some clients will recognize what I write!
Let's come to the detection for those who pendulum seriously, that is to say by practicing every day! You need a
Fundamental Ray , the photo of the person in the center, you will find RF 12 °. Then keeping on the RF the whole, you take a dial where it is indicated "cancer" from 1 to 10, the brass pointer on the angle 12 ° and the pendulum on the dial "cancer". The pendulum will then oscillate on the corresponding division.
The check will be done with the tuner, the person's photo to the south, the "cancer" card to the north. The pendulum will move towards the level of cancer installed on this person. It will return to the south if there is nothing. This method was used by a large number of doctors before the war. Among them, we can distinguish laureates of the academy of sciences and medicine to which the president Mr MEILLERE belonged.
To be free from cancer, two conditions must be met:
- Living in a properly harmonized house and the necessary care for the person if only it is necessary
- Practice “loving your neighbor as yourself”: never have disembodied souls on you.
You need a document showing the main parts of the body (one for each sex). For example, the right brain, the left brain, the cerebellum, etc. must be included. These organs must be grouped into a system. You also need a dial showing the different stages of cancer. The waves or vibrations of the person to be explored will be obtained either by a photo, a fingernail, their contact details (first name, last name, date of birth). For my part, it is this last method that I use with interesting results. I will not give here the frequencies corresponding to the various stages of this disease. For a very simple reason, to establish this approach and announce it, you must on the one hand be sure and sufficiently trained to find the right frequency. On the other hand, to announce it, the person concerned must agree to know their state of health. It is at the end of the training that these frequencies will be discussed and found together. It is with full knowledge of the facts that former trainees will be able to practice this technique.
Email dated 06.02.2010
Hello Bernard,
I went for a check-up mammogram yesterday. I went in very calmly since your pendulum didn't detect anything. (Mine didn't either, by the way).
Result: Nothing to report!
QED!
Have a nice weekend both of you.
Sincerely
The article below unfortunately reflects scientific truths that I had found through my occult means, repudiated by single-track thinking.
If I put this article on my site it is simply because I did not see any lies in it. It is also not tainted with intentional negativity. Again, those with whom I have discussed these problems will not contradict me.
Very important : If you wish to circulate this article, please indicate that it appeared in the Nexus newspaper number 71 of November-December 2010 and ask your correspondents to do the same.
A screening
Everyone should know that much of cancer research is fraudulent and that large cancer research organizations are neglecting their duty to those who support them.
"Screening" at all costs has become fashionable. All behavior of our body must be subjected to frequent and regular checks: monitoring of blood pressure, prostate, cholesterol level, diabetes and many other pathologies that threaten us insidiously. There are thus screening promotional campaigns that make the fortune of laboratories and the glory days of the media that feel no embarrassment in reminding us several times a day that it is urgent to have our body checked as we do for our car engines.
But the most useless and dangerous screening is breast cancer. Through the media, all health authorities encourage women to have a mammogram every year to avoid this cancer, but no one tells all those who are going to comply with these examinations that they involve many risks.
Dr. Henri PRADAL, a pharmacotoxicologist, summed up the situation very well thirty years ago. For him, the "dictators of the scalpel and radium" have managed to maintain for decades a lying propaganda on the effectiveness of their practice by relying on the unverifiable argument that an early diagnosis gives the cancer patient every chance of being cured. He stated: "It is easy to demonstrate that the X-ray of the breasts of an entire female population particularly exposed to cancer causes more cancerous processes than it detects." Other doctors share this point of view.
"The cancer field in the United States is defined by a medical monopoly that ensures a steady stream of profits for pharmaceutical companies, medical technology firms, research institutes, and government agencies such as the FDA, the National Cancer Institute, and the American Cancer Society." This statement comes from two leading cancer specialists, Dr. John DIAMOND, a fellow of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatry and past President of the International Academy of Preventive Medicine, and Dr. Lee COWDEN, of the University of St. Louis in Missouri. Both are well placed to know what they are talking about.
A study published October 20, 1993, in the
Journal of the National Cancer Institute shows a marked increase in breast cancer after radiation treatment of certain benign breast diseases in women over 40 years old at the time of the first treatments.
Already in 1995, Dr. Samuel EPSTEIN (1926-2018), then president of the Coalition for Cancer Prevention, Gold Medalist of the Albert Schweitzer Academy of Medicine, author of several hundred scientific articles on the subject, took advantage of a national mammography day organized on October 18 in the United States, to denounce the dangers of this practice which, for him, has never proven its usefulness. He insisted on the fact that when breast cancer is thus detected, it has existed for at
least eight years and has therefore already affected the lymph nodes or other organs, particularly in young women. In his important work
The Politics Of Cancer Revisited , published in 1998 but not translated into French, he broadly criticizes the cancer lobby and maintains that in pre-menopausal women,
one in four cancers detected is not a real cancer, but that on the other hand, one in four cancers is not detected.
The years since then have not changed his opinion, and twelve years later he confirmed his statements in an article entitled "The Hidden Dangers of Mammograms in Premenopausal Women."
"No matter what anyone tells you, refuse routine mammograms, especially if you are premenopausal. The radiation increases your chances of getting cancer." (See
Huffington Post, September 2, 2010).
In fact, performing two mammograms on each breast annually over a ten-year period results in exposure to 5 rads for each breast, which corresponds to the very high radiation experienced by women who were a kilometer and a half from where the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan.
For EPSTEIN, added to unnecessary anxiety, repeated mammograms increase the risk of cancer. "Recent studies based on the previous ten years indicate a very clear increase in cancers a few years after the start of these frequent examinations, which confirms the great sensitivity of pre-menopausal breasts and the carcinogenic effect of radiation."
The average dose of rads received in mammography for two images per breast is 1 to 4 units, but according to Professor EPSTEIN, the dose can sometimes be ten times higher. And Rosalie BERTELL, one of the most internationally respected authorities on the dangers of radiation, claims that each rad increases the risk of breast cancer by 1% and corresponds to one year of aging. These two cancer specialists reiterated their warning in a very detailed article published by the prestigious
International Journal of Services in 2001 (31(3): 605-615), entitled "The dangers and unreliability of mammograms", with the assistance of Barbara SEAMAN, founder and director of the Women's breast cancer movement. The article explains that most cancers have been detected by the patients themselves and that
nothing beats monthly palpation of their breasts by those at risk, "an effective and safe alternative practice".
Professor EPSTEIN is far from being the only one to criticize this habit and the NCI (National Cancer Institute) has published statistics which show that in
women under 35, mammograms can cause 75 cancers for every 15 correctly diagnosed cancers.
After reviewing all the available world literature on the subject, Drs. WRIGHT and MULLER of the University of British Columbia recommended that public funding for mammograms be cancelled because "the benefit obtained is minimal and the harm done is great." According to the
Lancet of July
1, 1995, the most comprehensive studies do not show an increased survival rate thanks to routine mammograms.
The NIH (National Institute of Health)
estimates that these tests conceal 10% of malignant tumors in women over 50. In turn, a Swedish study of 60,000 women showed that 70% of tumors detected by mammography were not tumors. However, in addition to the emotional stress caused by these erroneous diagnoses, these women also underwent biopsies that are always dangerous.
As for Dr. James Howenstine, an American physician with 34 years of private and hospital practice, he points out that "massive campaigns encourage women to have a mammogram every year. This annual ritual generates false positive and false negative results that lead to unnecessary operations and considerable anxiety among women who are incorrectly diagnosed."
Finally, on January 8, 2000,
The Lancet published a Danish study that dashed the hopes of cancer specialists who believed that by detecting breast cancer earlier by mammography, it would be possible to reduce its incidence and mortality. The journal concluded that in terms of mortality, a breast cancer screening policy "would not be justified."
A study published in 2005 by the
New England Journal of Medicine confirms that 30% of cancers in women aged 40 are not detected by mammograms.
And in March 2006, the monthly
La Recherche reported in its turn, in its issue 395, that "mortality from breast cancer has decreased very little over the past 20 years", while "diagnosed cases are exploding". The newspaper added that some experts denounced the perverse effects of screening which
"would lead to detecting and treating breast tumors that would not have put the patient's life in danger".
Dr. Ken WALKER, a Toronto gynecologist and Canada's most famous medical journalist under the pseudonym "Dr. GIFFORD-JONES," shares his opinion: "Women aged 40 to 49 who have regular mammograms are twice as likely to die of cancer three years later as those who keep their breasts under their blouses." This Harvard-trained physician also believes that early diagnosis is a lie because
"it takes eight years for a tumor to be large enough to be detected, which gives the cancer cells time to spread throughout the body. That's not really early diagnosis."
In his eyes, thousands of women have been used as guinea pigs for many years, while Medicine searches everywhere for the causes of cancer, from bacteria to genes, without thinking for a single second that one of the main culprits is the cancer industry itself.
These mammograms expose sensitive breast tissue to dangerous radiation, even though experts say there is no "acceptable dose" of radiation. Breast DNA is more vulnerable to low doses of radiation than thyroid tissue or bone marrow, says Professor Anthony Miller of the National Cancer Institute in Toronto.
According to Diana Hunt, a UCLA medical graduate and X-ray specialist, "the radiation received by the breast during a single mammogram is 11.9 times the annual dose absorbed by the entire body."
Performing two mammograms on each breast annually for a period of ten years results in an exposure of 5 rads to each breast. Therefore, if a woman begins having annual mammograms at age 55, by age 75 she will have received 20 rads. Of course, this percentage is proportional to the age at which mammograms are started, which is alarming in today's increasingly early age of mammograms. By comparison, women who survived the bombings of Hiroshima or Nagasaki absorbed 35 rads.
And the younger the breast cells, the more their DNA is damaged by radiation. In addition, this risk is multiplied by 4 in women who carry the A-T gene, or about 1.5 to 2% of subjects. The percentage may seem small, but it is estimated that in the United States about 10,000 cancers per year are due to mammograms in women who carry this gene. A single mammogram increases their risk of cancer by 4 to 6 times.
These recommendations were confirmed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Task Force, which recommends delaying mammograms until age 50, when the breasts are less sensitive to radiation. The National Breast Cancer Coalition has joined in this advice, which is based on the 20 percent increase in breast cancer since 1975 despite the multitude of mammograms and billions of dollars spent by insurance companies.
For young women, the numbers are even more alarming, as a 1992 study by the Canadian National Breast Cancer Society showed a 52% increase in breast cancer mortality among young women who undergo mammograms. In addition, pregnant women exposed to radiation put their fetus at risk with the risk of leukemia or malformations, and children exposed to radiation can in turn develop breast cancer as adults. Add to this terrifying observation that since the introduction of mammograms,
the incidence of a certain type of breast carcinoma has increased by 328%.
Dr. William John GOFMAN, professor emeritus of molecular and cellular biology at Berkeley and lecturer at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, a Nobel Prize-winning specialist in the biological effects of X-rays and nuclear hazards, estimated that 75% of new cancer cases were caused by medical radiation such as X-rays, CT scans, mammograms, tomography, and fluoroscopy. He also attributed many cases of coronary heart disease to them.
A few months before his death in 2007 at age 88, Dr. GOFMAN published a 699-page study under the auspices of the Committee For Nuclear Responsibility that concluded that the effects of these detection devices, combined with poor diet, smoking and the use of the pill, would cause 100 million premature deaths in the United States over the next decade.
He believed that detection techniques were sometimes necessary, but only in certain cases where it was impossible to do without them. "There is no healthy dose. A single radioactive atom can trigger a permanent mutation in genetic cells," and these accumulations can cause cancer between 5 and 50 years later.
Taking these risks could be understood if the benefit were certain, which is far from being the case.
Danish researchers Peter Gøtzsche and Margrethe Nielsen have discovered that if 2,000 women are screened regularly over a period of 10 years, only one of them will avoid dying of breast cancer. However, of these 2,000 women screened, 10 will be overdiagnosed and thus treated unnecessarily for cancer.
Also of these 2,000 women, 200 will undergo not only unnecessary biopsies, operations and treatments, but also serious psychological repercussions.
On the other hand, many cancer specialists insist that compressing the breast during the examination, especially in young women, can allow a small, undetectable cancer to spread. In turn, Professor Anthony Miller, who warns patients about the dangers of radiation, also points out that cancer cells risk being crushed and spread into the blood under the pressure of the detection equipment. He also denounces the dangers of biopsies.
Huge sums invested
In Germany, widespread screening — including mammograms — has been promoted as a national cause, and the German Health Ministry has opened a website where personalities from the world of entertainment and politics declare that early diagnosis can sometimes prevent the development of diseases, as if these people were qualified to have an accurate idea of the benefits of early diagnosis.
Fortunately, not everyone shares this euphoria and the magazine
Der Spiegel of April 20, 2009 was far from agreeing with this. "In 2005, health insurance funds spent 890 million euros on screening, in 2008, it cost them 1.2 billion euros. No other item in the total health expenditure, not even that of medication, is experiencing such a spectacular increase," specified
Der Spiegel , which published a remarkable analysis summarizing all aspects of the problem of this kind of "prevention."
According to journalist Markus Grill, early detection of breast, prostate and cervical cancer is no guarantee of preserving life, let alone its quality . However, the population still believes in its benefits, because according to a survey, half of those surveyed believe that 60 women out of 1,000 are saved by breast cancer screening and a third of those surveyed even put the figure higher, i.e. 100 to 200 women out of 1,000! The serious figures are quite different. "All those surveyed were unaware of the real figures: one to two people out of 2,000 would really benefit from screening." As for doctors, they know no more than the general population. And the magazine cites a survey conducted among 160 gynecologists who were asked the question: "What is the probability that a positive mammogram result indicates the actual presence of breast cancer?"
"They should have answered '10%', but half of the specialists questioned answered '90%'! One in five gynecologists knew the correct answer."
In his article "
Alarm und Fehlalarm " (Alarms and False Alarms), Markus Grill points out that "X-ray practices receive city dwellers, while "Mammobil" visits homes in rural areas. 54 mobile units are currently crisscrossing Germany, one of which belongs to a group of radiologists. Investment cost: 400,000 euros, of which 200,000 for the X-ray machine. If 80 women are examined every working day (250 days a year) at a rate of 57 euros reimbursed by the health insurance funds, the specialized equipment generates a turnover of more than one million euros per year. The economic interest for radiologists is obvious."
And he asks the disturbing question: "But is the interest in public health equivalent?"
Der
Spiegel concludes: "It is estimated that each doctor will have to examine an average of 225 healthy individuals per quarter and will earn 21 euros for the 20 minutes spent (75 minutes per day). For the classic follow-up of a patient, the doctor receives 13 euros per month, for a thorough examination 30 euros. Screenings are therefore motivated above all by financial interest."
This is also the conclusion of Peter Sawicki, Director of the IQWiG (German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care), who believes that "serious" studies meet the criteria of a medicine that takes into account scientific evidence and not simple "expert opinions".
"For the average person, the probability of avoiding cancer through screening is between 0.05% and 0.1%. In other words, if 1,000 to 2,000 people participate in screening programs over several years, only one of them will be saved." This behavior, which is currently rare among most doctors, cost him his forced resignation from the Institute. This is not surprising because the German pharmaceutical industry has repeatedly complained about the behavior of the Institute and particularly that of its director, who often prevented them from putting certain drugs on the market. In addition, Peter Sawicki insisted on demanding unpublished studies from the laboratories, which is not "medically correct."
In Germany, on average, five times more smear tests are performed than in the rest of Europe, while German women die from this cancer much more often than in other countries.
As for the Minister of Health, Ulla Schmidt, she is such a fervent supporter of screening that, despite numerous protests, she included paragraph 62 in the public health law, financially penalising all cancer patients who have not undergone the recommended screenings.
All this proves to us that medical reality has nothing to do with the propaganda organized by laboratories and so well relayed by the media.
In France, "individual practice improvement contracts" (Capi) are subscribed to voluntarily and individually by practitioners, for a period of three years.
The signatory doctors commit to achieving 16 public health objectives in three areas: prevention (for example, improving the rates of elderly patients vaccinated against influenza and breast cancer screening), better monitoring of chronic diseases such as diabetes or hypertension, and optimizing drug prescriptions . Ten thousand practitioners, or more than one in six, have thus signed a contract with the Health Insurance.
Under the pen of Olivier Auguste,
Le Figaro of September 25, 2009 warned us: "Volunteers will receive up to 7 euros per year and per patient if they reach certain objectives, such as the number of elderly patients vaccinated or patients having had a mammogram."
The medical unions are hostile to this direct relationship between doctors and Social Security, but our remarkable minister Roselyne Bachelot was delighted with the success of the Capi.
We already knew that the search for profitability is found everywhere, all professions combined. We knew this for the Police, the Gendarmerie, taxes and other administrations, but it is unlikely that a doctor receives, outside of his fees, a bonus for the performance of health expenditure. And this for examinations which, not only have not proven their usefulness, but have indeed proven their harmfulness.
Sylvie SIMON
Article published in the Nexus newspaper number 71 of November-December 2010
The cancer
Contrary to what is being peddled here and there, cancer does not come from pesticides and other non-radioactive chemicals.
CANCER develops only through RADIOACTIVITY received by the body eg TVS, WATER VEINS UNDER YOUR BED and all products containing RADIOACTIVITY YES there are many
4.09.2015
Hello Sir:
News from Papa JC P after scintigraphy: the metastases in the tibia have disappeared!
The others in the basin are decreasing...
Thanks thanks,
Sophie
26.08.2015
Hello sir, Dad is doing well, he is confident and grateful for life every day. Mom is more positive.
THANKS,
Sophie
21.08.2015
Start of my cancer treatment with metastasis
Hello Sir,
Just a quick note to give you some news about Dad who got up this morning in a bit of a bad mood.
Thank you, have a nice day Sophie
4.05.2015
Hello Mr. TENAND,
First of all, I would like to thank you very much for your work on my place of residence, on me and for the positive effects they have had on me.
In fact, I no longer feel any lower back pain or sciatica, the rectal bleeding has disappeared.
Here is my medical journey since that last email in November 2014:
ü Left ovarian cyst
I had an MRI on 20/11/2014 (P1 & P2: MRI report). It revealed a 3.9/4.7 cm cyst on the left ovary that was described as "borderline". After consulting my gynecologist, Professor R, on 16/12/2014 (P5 & P6) and 10/03/2015 (P7 & P8) and review of this MRI (P3 & P4) by a colleague, surgery was scheduled for April 22 to remove this cyst.
However, with the help of my GP, Dr C, I had a follow-up MRI on 01/04/2015 (P9). This latest imaging showed a cyst in regression, 1.8/2.7 cm, no longer classified as a "clear cell tumour", it became clear that surgery no longer seemed necessary in this situation. The operation was therefore cancelled and I was offered follow-up ultrasound in May.
Presence of papillomavirus type 18 and 66 revealed during samples, “smears”, taken on 04/02/2014 (P10 & P11), 29/07/2014 (P12) and 16/12/2014 (P13 & P14).
Professor R's opinion on this subject (cf P7) is "to wait for the spontaneous clearance of this HPV by taking a sample every 6 months".
According to the MRI scans of 11/2014 (P1 & P2 report and P3 & P4 MRI review) and 04/2015 (P9 report), endometriosis is present again. I have been taking Lutéran 10 mg (P19 Photo) per day, every day since December 2014. During the gynecological examination, Professor R noticed that my left side was not very mobile and was surprised by the absence of pain in everyday life and during intimate relations.
Since the beginning of 2014, approximately, 2 small white spots have appeared on the vulva. Initially smooth and light in appearance, they then took on a little relief to feel them to the touch as well as a clear depigmentation. I consulted a dermatologist, Doctor Bing, on 01/12/2015 (P15) and we performed a vulvar biopsy (P16 & P17). She diagnosed lichen sclerosus and prescribed Clarelux (P20 Photo) cream for local application. During our last consultation on 03/05/2015 (P18) the spots had disappeared and I am asked to remain vigilant by applying this cream once a week (for life according to Pf R) to prevent the lichen from reappearing.
To sum it all up:
- The left ovarian cyst is regressing and needs to be monitored.
- Papillomavirus: no smear-based treatment expected this year
- Endometriosis, under Lutéran 10 mg, no pain to monitor depending on the pain and desire for pregnancy
- Vulvar lichen has disappeared, monitor and apply Clarelux once a week
Overall I feel very good and no longer have any pain. These results, in terms of endometriosis, surprise me because I do not feel in line with them.
What also concerns me is the location and violence of these attacks centralized at the gynecological level since 2012.
I have actively researched my immediate family history and that of my ancestors. In view of the dramas and numerous secrets that have been reported to me, I wonder about any transgenerational link between my health concerns focused on fertility and this heavy family past.
What is your opinion on this? I can tell you more about it over the phone.
I am available to discuss my health with you once you have read “this library” about me!
I have the MRI CDs available for you and can send them to you by post if you wish.
Best regards and thanking you again for your interventions and their beneficial effects.
IM
22.04.15
Mr TENAND
I thank you for the help you gave me for my ovarian cancer. In fact, when I took the blood after the first chemotherapy, the blood test became normal. The doctors at the hospital do not understand.
B M
08.02.2015
Hello Bernard
A few words to tell you that my brother Philippe is doing better.
Indeed, after a diagnosis of prostate cancer at the beginning of December and a PSA level of 4.8; the latter after your treatment his PSA level rose to 3.6.
He decided not to have the operation.
I thank you very sincerely.
Jf
25.12.2014
Bernard,
To confirm that my brother Philippe saw his PSA level drop from 4.4 to 3.8, the authorized level being three!!!
To me it seems cured with a frequency of over 800,000htz on the prostate.
I corrected the cleaning of his house by installing biohmme when he returned from vacation.
JF
18.10.2012
Good evening Mr. TENAND,
I don't know what words to use to thank you very warmly for your help for our son F....... who, during the consultation with the cancer specialist, has nothing left. A follow-up every six months for two years of scan... is recommended for him??? not good for his health but I don't say anything to them anymore.
The result is just your work
A thousand THANKS Mr. Tenand
Very very affectionately S....
Pordic on 09.09.2012
A cancer case in the East where a woman was operated on in the abdomen and then they offered to remove a kidney and after my insistence to wait for the results which took more than two months to come: No cancer; I had cleaned her house a year before What to say???????????????
Pordic on 07.09.2012
In Paris, on the advice of a doctor in the presence of results, he declares to his patient what he believes to be pancreatic cancer, tells her you have 6 months, he had her admitted to the hospital, she undergoes many tests, I work a lot on her and she comes home 8 days later and now she is offered chemo?????????????????????I am waiting for the tests
Pordic on 01.09.2012
A client tells me that his wife has just had breast cancer surgery. I take this woman's file and I see that the day and the days before the surgery she was very negatively charged in the right breast I tell him: right breast he answers yes!!! exactly Now she is offered chemo without her having consulted her results. On my advice he decides to wait at least for the results of the tests....................
Pordic on 06.04.2011
I am quite often confronted with the pressure that is put on patients to undergo radiotherapy and chemotherapy without, very often, them having been informed of their test results.
Then I am called to make vomiting, nausea, etc. disappear.
Moreover, radio antennas and television channels bombard our eyes and ears with dazzling medical discoveries and future panaceas.
Books appear with great fanfare of television and radio advertising reports, giving false hope to those who quickly go to buy them. Now here is my question:
Can I be given the civil status (without his address) of a single doctor who has cured cancer using only classical and chemical medicine?
Morbihan 2010
A man is hospitalized, his heart beats at 180 beats/minute, a neighbor, a client, asks me to intervene a few hours after his hospitalization, which I do, the heart stabilizes at 80 beats/minute.
He had gone to the hospital with very little luck I was told to go home. A few days later he is back in his house.
He also has prostate cancer.
At the request of his wife who sends me the plans of their house and their civil status, I clean their house, and I intervene on them as usual. A series of rays is administered to him.
I told him I didn't agree but someone very close to him works at the hospital...
This gentleman, who is otherwise very positive, calls me from time to time during the series of rays to help him get over the burning and nausea inherent in this type of treatment which irradiates you... for a long time.
During a conversation, this person told me that she had already undergone chemotherapy three years ago for prostate cancer, without success.
Today this gentleman goes about his various activities and above all he is no longer tired on a recurring basis, he feels good.
Conclusion
The three successful conditions necessary for health when met rule out almost all cancers and many other diseases.
The person who acted as an intermediary in this case is a client who is now back working and to whom the health services of her department had promised the wheelchair a year ago!
Email dated 06.02.2010
Hello Bernard,
I went for a check-up mammogram yesterday. I went in a very, very calm manner since your pendulum had not detected anything. (mine didn't either, by the way).
Result: RAS !!!!!
QED!!!! ML
Have a nice weekend both of you.
Sincerely
What to do after geobiological cleaning
The geobiology and radiesthesia work that I carry out for people, in a living space, eliminates the harmful waves that cause cancer in people who sleep in these places.
That said, to maintain this state there are some conditions to apply.
If the person whose place of residence I have harmonized changes place of residence without harmonizing it, there is a break in protection.
Do not bring radioactive objects or devices into your living space without reporting it to the therapist.
Do not expose yourself to radioactive waves outside your living space.
Do not ingest radioactive substances.
Observe towards others the respect that one owes to everything that exists on earth in order not to be a carrier of disembodied souls.
Disembodied souls are radioactive.
Definition of respect by Larousse
"Feeling which leads to treating someone, something with great consideration, not to harm something."
To be free from cancer, two conditions must be met: