Practitioners of this method claim that it is possible to heal with it. This is to be done by stimulating changes in cell bioresonance, which is to reverse the disease-induced changes. The transmission of signals at different low-voltage current frequencies using electrodes is to have a therapeutic function. People who treat with this technique claim that they are able to diagnose and treat many diseases without bioresonance.

Where’s the evidence?

Recently, we came across the judgment of the National Supreme Court in Munich of May 14, 2009 (case number: 6 U 2187/06)

After a legal dispute, which lasted up to 5 years, the judgment of the National Supreme Court in Munich of May 14, 2009 (case number: 6 U 2187/06) obtained permission to provide clients, therapists and the public with the following information: using bioresonance carry out painless allergy tests and therapeutic therapies without side effects. Thus, the Social Competition Union (Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb e.V.) lost the lawsuit for the termination of harmful practices against Regumed GmbH. This association demanded that the bio-resonance therapy advertisement be banned, arguing with a ridiculous therapeutic concept that did not live up to expectations.

The Munich Supreme Court issued a positive judgment in favor of bioresonance therapy based mainly on Regumed’s detailed documentation on practical therapeutic examples – with scientific justification. What’s more, this judgment should be considered as positive not only for the area of bioresonance, but for all natural medicine. He showed that therapies and diagnostics, whose mechanisms sometimes are not fully explained in the face of natural sciences or conventional medicine, should be appreciated thanks to the results of improving health.

I remind you that Zapper’s action is based on the bioresonance principle, which clearly qualifies for the above judgment. I leave the applications to you

sources: https://openjur.de/u/476881.html