Zappers do work

>- Where are the microscopic analyzes of the water ?

It is basically irrelevant. The purpose is to demonstrate "Broadband" effectiveness, not specificity.

The fact is that pond water such as this usually contains hundreds of different species. Which specific ones are present is too costly to prove. It can cost up to !000,00 US or more per species isolated and identified, just for some of the more common species.

The whole point of the demonstration is to show that multi-frequency zappers such as ParaZapper CC2, ParaZapper UZI-3, and ParaZapper MY series can more effectively kill a broad spectrum of microbes in water than other outdated single frequency, dual frequency, and triple frequency zappers can.

You are absurd in your demands. If you want specifics, you go do the test and find out for yourself. Then you can file a report that OMG! ParaZapper may have missed xyz species!

I am not going to spend close to $100,000 , $10,000 , or even $1000 to show what specific microbes were killed or not killed. None of that would change the fact that ParaZapper kills more microbes, more effectively than other zappers. It is just that plain and simple.

If you needed to kill multicillin resistant Staph. aureus ( MRSA ) and Antibiotics are not available to stop it, what are you going to use?

If there is flesh eating bacteria present and Antibiotics are not available to stop it, what are you going to use? Necrotizing fasciatis is a major problem and it is mostly contacted from water.

You constantly deride zappers because you do not trust them to solve your problem but in the process you intentionally make them appear as if they are worthless. While I have seen zappers kill and eliminate helminths, Dr. Clark never claimed that this was the purpose of the zapper. She was very specific in that it was mostly intended for killing microbes.

The entire purpose of the zapper is to provide maximum coverage at the greatest ease and the lowest cost possible. This is not a $2500.00 Rife machine although from what I have seen, ParaZapper is better than some of them.

I have also been very specific in that these devices do not always work for certain helminths. In my writings, I have specifically stated that only about 75 percent of users who had parasites experienced 50 percent improvement or more ( when using our older outdated models ). About 41 percent experience very good results ( such as I did but I was not among those in the survey ) while only about 10 percent did not experience positive results. This information was from our 2006 survey, only applies to models sold at that time or before that time. This information does not apply to our newer improved models because since they are not sold for this purpose, we do not collect that type of information.

The point is that unless you try, you will never know.
Tweet