The F-scan is a device which claims to be able to measure the "resonances of the body" that cause disease. People who are selling the F-scan are being more specific, they claim it detects the "resonance" of specific pathogens and that by applying this same "resonance frequency" to the body, the F-scan will kill those pathogens. I have repeatedly asked on public forums for any real evidence at all that this is the case - to date no such evidence has been forthcoming.
I have explained at length, also on public forums why I believe the claim to detect pathogen resonances is nonsense. The reasons are so numerous I will not state them all here, except to say that the body is a complex mixture of tissues, fluids and chemicals all of which have electrical "resonances" of various sorts. The idea that by feeding a very simple electrical signal into the skin, that somehow this machine will uniquely identify a pathogen (i.e. a bacterium) and be able to distinguish its unique electrical response from all the other electrical activity in the body is so improbable as to approach impossibility.
Following various analyses I made of data submitted by F-scan users on the readings obtained by the machine I discovered that there were simple, statistically significant patterns that recurred in all readings regardless of the person involved or the nature of the alleged disease. Further investigation showed exactly the same patterns occurring in inanimate objects as well! The immediate implication of the above was that whatever the machine was measuring (if anything) was some generalised electrical property related to itself and not to the subject under test, be it animal, vegetable or mineral.
I proved the above conclusion to my own satisfaction when I was able to obtain one of the above devices. I made hundreds of measurements with it on all kinds of objects and compared the results. The overall statistical pattern was identical regardless of the nature of the object under test and any of its electrical properties.
In order to find out why I then took the machine apart and analysed both its circuitry and its programming. I was rather shocked by what I found, which was very poor design, poor build quality and quite inadequate processing power, bandwidth and resources to properly perform any meaningful analysis along the lines it claimed.
In particular I discovered that the machine (due to extremely poor design) was outputting high levels of mainly harmonic electrical noise (when it claimed to be putting out a pure signal). It was then apparently detecting its own noise which was intermodulated with false signals generated by its own switching processes and presenting that as being a property of a sample under test - i.e. a person's body. The same noise pattern was observed in every one of dozens of tests (regardless of what was being tested) and corresponded directly to the results reported by the machine - which in turn corresponded with results of actual body tests publicly submitted by other users of the device.
At the same time, the poor quality of the machine meant that it did not produce anything like the level of waveform purity and accuracy as claimed on its specifications and sales brochures.
My overall conclusion was that most if not all the claims made for the machine were seriously misleading and false. In the light of the fact that the machine is being sold for close to $4,000 and that it is being promoted for medical treatments and critical diagnosis of disease, I felt in good conscience I could not overlook this and that I was obliged to report my findings to people who might be misled into buying this machine on the basis of false claims.
I have written an extensive technical report which contains my findings and analysis of the machine. Proofs of various false claims are given in this document together with photographs and detailed measurements. Although the report is highly technical I believe that certain parts of the report should be obvious even to laypeople.
The report is linked below (in Adobe PDF format)
F-scan Technical Report
(c) Copyright Aubrey Scoon 2002 - Mirror of information from www.scoon.co.uk
The opinions stated on this page are those of Aubrey Scoon (1960-2009). They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of anyone else assocaited with www.rife.de.