Re: Rectal insufflation of ozone vs H2O2 orally?

Not sure if there is a simple answer to your question.
In general, ozone is considered by many oxygen therapy
experts as safer than H2O2. In principle, they have a
similar effect in that they both have an extra oxygen
atom (O3 vs. O2 for normal oxygen, and H2O2 (Hydrogen-Peroxid) vs. H2O
for normal water). But apparently the hydrogen aspect
of H2O2 (Hydrogen-Peroxid) has a burning effect not present in ozone.

So, based upon testimonies here and other material you
read, you'll have to make up your own mind as to which
route to take. H2O2 (Hydrogen-Peroxid) is obviously the less expensive
route. I've personally taken the ozone route (except I
do enjoy an occational H2O2 bath).

If you choose the ozone path, there are various things to
consider. There are various treatments such as drinking
ozonated water, ear, rectal (vaginal for women) insufflation,
ozone sauna, and even direct injection (which most people
would understandably never do in their home). Beyond
drinking ozone water, you would need a medical grade ozonator
which can be considerably more expensive then an inexpensive
water ozonator.

At face value, you could say that taking H2O2 orally is
roughly equivalent to drinking ozonated water (although
H2O2 may possibly be more potent because of the
concentration??? - not sure about this). Doing an ozone
rectal insufflation, in theroy, would roughly be equivalent
to perhaps an H2O2 enema of some sort.

Basically, I'm saying that you're probably comparing apples
to oranges when comparing H2O2 orally to ozone rectal
insufflation. I know that probably doesn't answer your
question, but hopefully sheds some light.