Knowledgebase: Product Questions
What's the difference between the Green 8 and the Biopro?
Posted by Jorah Lafleur on 19 November 2008 03:27 PM
The Green 8 is a German technology which essentially attracts aetheric (or atmospheric) energy into the field of your cell phone to make the phone 'more like' a bio-field.

This gets into the difference between the electro-magnetic field from any electronic device and the electro-magnetic field from a living organism. These are two very distinct types of fields.

The Green 8 is designed to make the man-made and un-natural electro-magnetic field from an electronic device more like a bio-field from a living organism. This makes a device less disruptive to your bio-field and that's why users have reported relief from electro-sensitive symptoms for years when using the Green 8 technology.

The Biopro on the other hand was developed after research showed that the low frequency 'voice pattern' or 'information signal' had an effect on the both intra-cellular communication and intra-cellular transport. This is the mechanism that the cells use to carry toxins out and nutrients into the cells thus it's very important.

Cell phone signals cause a protective or 'shock' response which blocks these important processes.

Noise field technology was researched by a few scientists as a means preventing this protective or 'shock' response. The first of these technologies proposed was incorporated into the battery of the cell phone because it required a small amount of power. The problem with this is that the industry doesn't want to admit there's a problem therefore they don't collaborate well with this sort of innovation. Replacing your battery with a special 'protective battery' after purchasing a phone is a bit of a hard sell and thus has been largely unsuccessful to bring to market.

The Biopro was an attempt to solve this problem but did it do this effectively? It's efficacy is coming under question in recent months due to Dr. George Carlo's statements regarding their MRET technology which he had originally seemed to deem worthy of investigation. Some say he 'endorsed' this technology but it's clear from Joshua Parker's interview with him (on that he only thought that it was a technology worthy of investigation and he did not actually endorse the Biopro product as some have stated on the web. He always made it clear that he only investigated technologies for the safety of cell phone users and refused to endorse products. It seems that some distributors of the Biopro may have taken it upon themselves to overstate Dr. Carlo's support of this product.

Since his statements from April 2008 we no longer feel it appropriate to recommend the Biopro products for protection even if they may have some value in protection.
(120 vote(s))
This article was helpful
This article was not helpful

Comments (0)
Post a new comment
Full Name:
CAPTCHA Verification 
Please enter the text you see in the image into the textbox below. This is required to prevent automated registrations and form submissions.

Help Desk Software by Kayako fusion