Re: Zapper proof of efficacy

Your misguided critique is noted.

>- My critic to you is that, as a zapper producer, you have the responsibility to be honest about what your device can or cannot do and you should not keep trying to convert more desperate infected people to buy your device by spreading distortions, exaggerations, omissions, inaccuracies.

I am absolutely honest about our products and even posted statistics to show just how effective customers claim that they are. If you or anyone else does not accept these statistics, that is your sad loss.

I do not claim that it always works and I do not exaggerate distort, omit, or pass on inaccurate information. I do claim that from what I have seen that our multi-frequency zappers produce better results than the other ones that I have seen or tried. This claim is based entirely on the variety and extent of microbes killed in water. If a competing zapper can not do this in water, then how the heck do you expect it to work in a more complicated environment such as in a human body.

What you do not get is that you are part of the 10, 20, or whatever percent that fail to get reasonable results and that you are misleading others by your misleading claims.

What you call lies are not lies. Just because you do not believe them does not make those claims false. Every statement that I have posted has a basic or can be demonstrated.

>- Slew rates are good on many zappers.

There is good and there is better, and then there is the best.

>- Maximum bandwidth i have no idea what this means.

Some 555 chips have a roll off frequency at about 800 kHz, some at 1.0 MHz, some at 1.2 MHz, and others at 2.0 MHz, and yes, it does make a difference. One promoter of Rife once made the uninformed claim that ParaZapper does not go above 1 MHz.

>- Output impedance has to be taken into consideration only if your electrodes/skin is not wet enough.

Again, this is misinformed on your part and is quite likely partially responsible for your failure to achieve success. There is a difference between surface resistance and transdermal resistance. The two combined are known as skin resistance.

I recall that in the past, you posted your measured values and that they were very high compared to some of the readings that I have measured in the past.

This means that a large part of the signal that you receive, likely runs over the surface of the skin rather than penetrating. This significantly affects your results and skews your opinion.

>- After all these years, what have you shown us

What I posted prior to 2006 was sufficient to have a federal search warrant issued, a raid consisting of over 20 officers, the confiscation of all of our computers and customer files, shut us down for months, and the US government spending close to a million $$$ trying to put us in jail. The end result was that the FDA sent us a letter telling us that our product was a Class 3 device, etc., when sold for use on humans. This is in the same class as pacemakers and kidney dialysis machines. Perhaps you do not understand how significant this is? The closest that any zapper has been presented is as Class 2. Anyhow, I will not post anything that causes that to happen again.

If you want studies, you do it or find someone to do them for you. Regardless of what I find, I will not post it because that would only provide more ammunition for the powers that be to shut us down.

In the mean time, I will continue to try to inform people on the differences in zappers and try to help them find the best one. I will be glad to provide a comparison of our zapper to any other that can be found but the opposite is not true. Not one other zapper seller has posted a comparison to either the CC2, the UZI-3, or the MY on their site. As a matter of fact, these three best zappers are rarely mentioned, if at all, by any competitor.

http://best-zapper.com/

Also, If I were to find a zapper that had an improvement that made it work better than ours, you would find that technology built into our products in very short time.

>- I have invested a lot of money in different devices and custom devices and i have stopped my experiments because the results were not good enough.

Sorry that you chose the wrong zappers.

>- I think that the only thing that must be taken into account is visible dead adult worms and dead larvaes evacuated in the feces/phlegm/urine.

My Ah-ha moment was a dead, approx. 5 foot tape worm in the commode. Sorry, no picture, flushed before I thought about it. I would say that I will take a photo if it happens again, but that is not likely.

Some interesting photos at http://zapperdave.blogspot.com/2013/08/spider-bites.html

>- where are the photos ?

A few here: http://paradevices.com/zapper_works.html

>- Where are the videos ?

One here: http://paradevices.com/ParaZapper_works.avi

In the final analysis, I suggest that you think about making you false and uninformed claims. The reason is that you may actually be misleading people into making a bad decision. It is plain wrong to defame something that you have not tried.

I do not claim that our products are perfect, only that they are better than anything else out there that I know of and that there are a lot of happy customers. You do not see our customers coming back here and bashing our products. Statistically, a dissatisfied customer is 10 times as likely to say something as one who is very satisfied.

Also, there have been a number of positive posts on these forums by our customers in the past. Do I hear a lot of I'm Cured!!!!, no, not on these forums anyhow. Most of those people do not come back on these forums. Why would they? I do get telephone calls of thanks and praise though. These are always appreciated.
Tweet