Dave Stetzer's comments re. filters' performance

> Marc wrote:
> "I think Charles has already established credibility... You might
> get
> the answers you're looking for if you'd stop threatening people
> with lawsuits, which I think makes *you* lose credibility. "
>
> Shivani responds:
> Charles has been posting here for a long time, yes. And he usually
> has good information, yes.
> However, if he posts something that defames a product, he needs to offer
> substantiation. To spread false information about a product that causes
> uninformed people to have a negative view of that product is not only
> unethical, it
> certainly IS a legal matter.
>
> Dave's first reaction to what Charles said was very laid back. He
> thought Charles was just some misinformed person. However, as the
> conversation
> has developed, it appears that Charles has an agenda, as he has not
> reacted in
> a logical and reasonable way. If this were your product being falsely
> maligned, Marc, I am rather sure you would see this in a very different
> light. A
> court would.
>
> By the way, I am not about to sue anybody. It's not my product being
> maligned. I am the messenger here. Being shot at plenty.
>
> What Charles said was:
> "I have reports from the German company Bajog, who have calculated and
> tested, that raising the number of capacitors (filters) can cause
> unwanted resonances, by which other electrical equipment can get damaged.
> By raising the capacity of 200 uF and a net impedance of 0,5-1,2 Ohm
> (praxis value), the critical resonance frequency can be 180 Hz, which is
> the
> 3rd
> harmonic."
> He implies that this is somehow relevant to the Stetzer filters, but
> so
> far has not answered any of my questions about it. If Bajog in fact did a
> study on the Stetzer filters, let's see it. WHAT did Bajog test?
> Stetzer
> filters, or something else?
> As I pointed out before, there is no number of Stetzer filters the lab
> or anyone else could use that would = 200uF and cause resonance.
>
> As more people have found out about how damaging electrical pollution
> is, and how much the Stetzer filters can help, the electric utilities and
> their
> bosom buddies in governmental agencies are taking action to purposefully
> misinform the public regarding the filters. The recent publication by
> Health
> Canada is one of these projects. (By the way, since we have posted Dr.
> Havas'
> comments of rebuttal, the Health Canada publication is now unavailable at
> their
> Web site. They claim it is a technological problem.) Dave Stetzer and
> Dr.
> Martin Graham are presently looking into suing them for publishing this
> false
> information about the filters. Dave and Marty would rather spend their
> time
> working on new ways to help people, but are forced into this in order to
> protect their name and their product.
>
> It is the same here. If this is a simple misunderstanding, why
> didn't
> Charles just answer the questions that I asked? Instead, he just goes
> on
> and on badmouthing the Stetzer filters.
>
> Another group that continues to make inaccurate remarks about the
> Stetzer filters is baubiologists. Dave Stetzer and Dr. Graham have
> tried and
> tried to educate baubiologists regarding the importance of FREQUENCY over
> magnetic
> field strength, and to explain to them why their "body voltage"
> methodology
> is unsound. But the baubiologists, as a group, for some reason believe
> they
> understand electricity better than they actually do, and they continue to
> make
> harmful statements about the filters.
>
> (A Canadian baubiologist previously claimed that a reputable lab in
> Texas had done a test of the Stetzer filters that showed that are a fire
> hazard.
> When Dave asked for a copy, the fellow said "Oh, I was drunk when I said
> that. There wasn't actually any study.")
>
> Whether Charles' motivation is related to his being part of this group
> (baubiology), we do not know. I hope not.
>
> Personally, I am surprised., as I have had good personal
> e-conversations
> with Charles in the past, and had the feeling that his motivations were
> good.
> I repeat again that I have no personal animosity towards anyone on this
> list, but I will not remain silent in the face of misinformation being
> spread
> about the Stetzer products.
>
> At any rate, I once again request that Charles clarify his remarks
> about
> whatever it is that Bajog has studied and published.
>
> Regards,
> Shivani
> www.LifeEnergies.com
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

>As information for the group, I wanted to provide my experience with
>the Stetzer filtes and clarify a point that has been discussed a few
>times now.
>
>Like Vinny, I too have a EE background, am an extra class Amateur
>licensee, and a physics background.
>I have also had some recent psi/emotional openings and am still
>trying to make sense of them.
>Vinny seems much farther along on that path than I do. Someday I
>hope to figure out more about that aspect.
>
>I have been having ES problems for over a year now and most measures
>haven't helped much.
>I was convinced that ES was an issue after removing a cordless phone
>from my bedroom and feeling much better.
>My symptoms have included Tinnitus, foggyness, and just plain
>"feeling gross", even some days I didn't think I'd make it through to
>see the morning.
>
>I bought the Stetzer filters and meter as kind of a "last resort"
>given that other things (besides reducing exposure) had made limited
>difference. Upon testing my house, I was surprised to see readings
>ranging from 120 all the way up to 680 or so.
> From what I can tell, this is quite high. Installing the filters has
>definitely made a big difference, although it hasn't eliminated all
>my symptoms.
>
>I have noticed the number fluctuate greatly based on time of day and
>can shift from one minute to the next.
>With filters installed, however, I am mostly below 50 throughout the
>house, below 30 at most outlets.
>I still have some outlets in my home with readings as high as 200 at
>times.
>I haven't yet tracked down where this high frequency energy is all
>coming from, but that's a goal for the future.
>
>So, I have had fairly good luck with them. They definitely made a
>positive difference for me.
>I didn't notice any negatives at all, and none of the "pain in the
>head" that Marc mentions.
>Also, the units for the US that I was shipped seem well constructed,
>sealed, and DO bear the UL listing.
>
>Even though I've had good luck with them, I do want to add my
>comments on the discussion between Charles and Shivani that has been
>going back and forth for some time. Although I publicly disagreed
>with Charles once on the list (regarding the electrical origin of the
>earth's magnetic field), generally I do agree with and respect what
>he says. And, since no-one has clarified this issue, I feel
>compelled to...
>
>On Nov 27, 2006, Shivani stated (in reference to Charles's comments
>about creating a resonance condition)
>
> > Is this statement supposed to apply to using the Stetzer
> > filters? Itisn't even possible to get 200 uF (microfareds) with
> > the Stetzer filters. The European model of the filters is 15 uF.
> > No number of them will = 200 uF.
>
>This is not correct. Capacitors sum when paralleled, so in fact, 13
>or 14 of them would just about equal 200uF. That is in fact about
>the number a small home might use. At 180hz, the reactance of the
>wiring in the home is mostly irrelevant, so for all practical
>purposes every filter in the home would be wired in parallel.
>
>If in response you say that it is not possible to EXACTLY reach 200uF
>(13 would be 195uf, for instance), please note that electronic
>components (including capacitors) are rated with fairly loose
>tolerances, usually +- 5 to 10%, so hitting 200 exactly with 13 15uf
>filters is just about as likely as with a single 200uF capacitor.
>
>Whether or not this is a "problem" or causes a resonance condition
>that would lead to problems I really don't know, although it seems
>unlikely to me.
>
>Having said that, I want to reiterate that my experience with Dave
>Stetzer's products, in the US, has been very good, and construction,
>shipping, and sales were all excellent. And they do have the UL seal
>in the states.
>
>Garth
>
>

>
> I mentioned this a long time ago, but I purchased one Stetzer meter
> and filter just to try them out. Almost immediately after plugging
> in the filter, I got a sharp pain in my head (similar to what some
> might experience from using a cellphone). According to the meter,
> the noise levels were not excessive (reading was about 50), so
> I don't think it was overloading. I've had this sort of reaction
> to power strips which contain capacitor EMI/EMR filtering (e.g.
> Power Sentry), so I think I'm reacting to the technology, not
> necessarily something unique to the Stetzer filter.
>
> When I moved into my new house, I found that the power outlet
> that I sat next to in the living room was bothering me. I
> tested it with the Stetzer meter, and found that the readings
> were quite high. My solution? I replaced the outlet with
> a newer one, and readings dropped back to normal, and my symptoms
> went away. The outlet that came with the house looked incredibly
> cheap, and I installed it with a better quality one from the
> hardware store. On my "to-do" list is to replace all of the
> outlets in the house with higher quality ones.
>
> Marc
>

>
> @Shivani
>
> This discussion is only fed by Shivani.
> Stetzer did not utter one word.
> As usual.
>
> As I stated many times ago, Stetzer never answered my questions in the
> beginning, also related to EC marks etc.
>
> Now, first of all, I have never uttered one word about the american

> talking about.
> *Safety first* is very important to me.
> The well-being of people is the most important thing to look after.
>
> Greetings,
> Charles Claessens
> member Verband Baubiologie
> www.milieuziektes.nl
> www.milieuziektes.be
> www.hetbitje.nl
> checked by Norton Antivirus
>