Dave Stetzer's comments re. filters' performance

Dave Stetzer says "The filters do not cause harmonics in Europe any more
than they would
here.  The person is just misinformed.  We are using them in Europe,
Russia, Kazakhstan, Korea, Singapore, UK, and Australia, all of which
are the 220 volt models, and all having the same positive results."


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello Shivani,

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.

I have bought 2 Stetzer filters in the european design, and I am not
satisfied with them.
The contact pins, which are too thin for our european wall socket, do have
already black burn marks on them.
When one places these filters in a wall socket, they *hang*.
The housing is not safe; the connection of the two halves is too weak.
The connectors inside which connect through to the outside, are not safe.

Sure, the filters do filter a lot, according to the Stetzerizer meter, but I
cannot advice them to the public, because I find them not safe enough.
The american version may be all right, but the the european version (made in
China) is certainly not.
If a fire starts by them, all hell brakes loose.

So I am not misinformed.
I am for safety first.

I can also say a lot regarding your appraised Multidetektor II Profi, with
which people may *measure* things that do not exist and vice versa, but will
refrain so in order to avoid certain lawyers.

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton Antivirus




----- Original Message -----
From: <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 03:47
Subject: [eSens] Dave Stetzer's comments re. filters' performance



Dave Stetzer says "The filters do not cause harmonics in Europe any
more
than they would
here. The person is just misinformed. We are using them in Europe,
Russia, Kazakhstan, Korea, Singapore, UK, and Australia, all of which
are the 220 volt models, and all having the same positive results."


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links

charles

can you advise me on what to do i am running out of options, i live
inlondon and my skin burns on my face when near puters, fluorescent lights
and especially outside...
i have considerable skin damage from all this, i was wondering is there
any filters worth using for the uk..

best
peter






On Fri, 24 November, 2006 11:04 am, charles wrote: them

Hello Peter,

from overhere, I can not help you.
Inside near puters, fluorescent lights, means that you are sentive to VLF
signals.
Especially outside is another story, that is high frquency from all those
wireless stuff.
Mobiel phones and your english TETRA.

It seems logical that you contact asome english organisations:

http://www.electrosensitivity.org.uk/

http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/

http://www.mast-victims.org/

http://www.freewebs.com/eclectives/monitorpain.htm

http://www.satori-5.co.uk/links/hrs_links.html

http://www.electrosensitivity.org/

I am sorry, that I do not have a crystal ball to see what is going on with
you.
You are certainly electrosensible.
I suppose, that the pulsed high frequencies from the mobile phone masts take
charge.
Then the influence from cordless DECT phones and wireless internet modems
with your neighbours do kill you.
And as a result, you have become electrosensible, and now are also sensible
for low frequency sources.

The only advice I can give you is to consult a building biologist who
measures your house and makes an inventory what is really going on. When you
know that, you may take shielding measures accordingly, or just move away.

This is the first stage.

Filters may be be placed only in the next stage.
First stage 1 has to be performed.

Skin burns do have also other causes.
Changing food, and getting rid of heavy-metals (detox) is a first step.

Anyway, your immunse system is down the drain, and you must do everything to
improve that.

You asked my advice, and this is it.

BTW. don't give up hope.
I know people who got better (less electrosensibility) and where the *sun
allergy* got better.

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton Antivirus




----- Original Message -----
From: <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 16:44
Subject: Re: [eSens] Dave Stetzer's comments re. filters' performance

hi charles

thanks for getting back to me and taking the time to write...
i have over the last few years seen so many ppl, and no improvement for
skin..it sent me into a severe depression due to the isolation and trauma
that i ended up on meds including tranquilisers.

im aware of the tetra and masts around my area but by thinking that all
this stuff could be effecting me makes me feel worse as i try not to self
focus as i then become obessive and the whole thing. And as you may know
noone tends to believe you when you say you're skin is burning.

I didn't go out for a year during daylight hrs and it nearly emotionally
killed me so now i have to go out and face the burning or it will be the
end of me.


I sympathise with everyone who has this cause i know the isolation
involved in it and it is a tragic illness.

thanks for you're help charles
pete





On Fri, 24 November, 2006 4:57 pm, charles wrote:

Have you tried getting tested for lupus?

http://www.uklupus.co.uk/dxlupus.html


--- [hidden email] wrote:



____________________________________________________________________________________
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index

Hi all,

Anyone here have problems with FM transmitters (commonly
used with MP3 players) ? My cassette player in my car
just broke, so instead of installing a new cassette deck
just to use my cassette adapter, I'm going to try out an
FM transmitter.

Also, on a separate subject, for years I have had
sharp head pains from using a variety of headphones
(mostly the earbud type). However, I just bought a new
pair of Grado headphones (SR60 model), and these don't
seem to bother me at all.

Marc

Charles wrote:
"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.

Shivani responds:
Is this last sentence from Bajog? You imply so, but do not actually
say so, so it's not clear.
Is this statement supposed to apply to using the Stetzer filters? It
isn'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.
Please provide a copy of the Bajog report. If they, or anyone,
believe the filters are harmful, they should have contacted the CE people, who
certified the filters.
If anyone ever shows by genuine test any real problem with the Stetzer
products, Dave Stetzer should be notified immediately.
If people keep spreading false information about the filters, they may
soon be talking to a lawyer.
This is a serious offence.

Charles wrote:
I have bought 2 Stetzer filters in the european design, and I am not
satisfied with them.
The contact pins, which are too thin for our european wall socket, do have
already black burn marks on them.
When one places these filters in a wall socket, they *hang*.
The housing is not safe; the connection of the two halves is too weak.
The connectors inside which connect through to the outside, are not safe.

Shivani replies:
You need to use the filters made for the country you want to use them
in. There are several 220 models, made for different countries. (Different
ones, for instance, for Russia, Kazakhstan, the UK, Korea, etc.) The pins
are the right sizes for the country they are designed for, and should not be
used elsewhere. This is common sense.
The European models of the Stetzer filters are all CE approved.
(Similar to UL listing in the US.) They could not be so listed if the pins were
the wrong size, they were able to cause fires, etcetera.

Regards,
Shivani Arjuna
www.LifeEnergies.com




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The Filters I bought, were specifically asked for use in the Netherlands and
Belgium.
I had to wait for several months before they came.
There is NO CE mark whatsoever.
The two housing halves are just clipped together.
With your hands, one can easily open the housings, without any tools.
Just with your fingers.

If these filters were CE approved, they should be marked so, which is NOT
the case.
So, I regard them as NOT CE approved, and therefore not suitable for the
mainland of Europe.
Seen the manco's, I cannot imagine that they are CE approved.

Be aware, I am not talking about the american version, because I do not know
these.
I only speak about the ones I ordered and paid for, for use in the Benelux.

I can also state, that the back has those 2 round thin contact pins.
But the front has 8 (eight) openings, among them typical english holes.
One filter has only the two round openings connected; the other one has also
the two flat english pins connected.

So, with one filter, one goes from 2 round pins to 2 round opening.
With the other, one goes from 2 round pins to 2 round pins and also 2 flat
english pins.
No grounding pins.

I still think that they are not safe according to our standards.
Selling them here is an offence in itsself.

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton Antivirus


----- Original Message -----
From: <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 21:52
Subject: [eSens] Re: Dave Stetzer's comments re. filters' performance

from whom did you purchase these filters, Charles? What identifying
information do they have on them?
The Stetzer filters have either the CE or the UL approval on them,
depending on which country they are for.
Please respond to the points I made and the questions I asked about your
previous remarks. See reminder below.
Regards,
Shivani
filters.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

@ Shivani,

since Dave Stetzer did not respond to several of my mails regarding his
filters, I went to Lessemf.
They promply answered to me.
I then bought there the Stetzerizer meter and two filters.
The meter came prompt, but the filters came some months later.
They do not have a CE nor an UL marking on them.

On the front, there is a gliding cover (up and down) which only has three
logo's:
Stetzeriser ®
Graham Stetzer
Original

That is all.
And see my reminder also: The European versions are unsafe.

I find it typical, that especially you are threatening me. Dave Stetzer does
not take the trouble in answering himself.
It looks like that you have more at stake here, than Stetzer.
But I am not awaiting answers from you nor fom Stetzer anymore.

Be also aware, that being armed with an Aaronia *screwdriver* and an
Electrosmog Detector, is no guarantee for being or posing as a building
biologist, nor for having measuring knowledge.
As I told you before, the claims you place on your website regarding the
*screwdriver* cannot be upheld; the fact that you continue to advertise as
such, proves that you do not know your stuff.
It is a nice gadget, but not a serious measuring instrument.
When LED's flicker, that does not mean, that they are telling the truth.

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton Antivirus





----- Original Message -----
From: <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 22:54
Subject: [eSens] Re: Dave Stetzer's comments re. filters' performance

Marc Martin wrote:
> Anyone here have problems with FM transmitters (commonly
> used with MP3 players) ? My cassette player in my car
> just broke, so instead of installing a new cassette deck
> just to use my cassette adapter, I'm going to try out an
> FM transmitter.
>
>
Well, yes.
For those sensitive to wireless, what would be the difference?

Analog or digital. Seems like a bad idea.

Stewart

> For those sensitive to wireless, what would be the difference?
>
> Analog or digital. Seems like a bad idea.

FM stations have been broadcasting in my city for decades, and
there are dozens of them. So it's not like this is something
that can be avoided. And the small, personal FM
transmitters are not powerful enough to override an existing
station, so again, I don't think this is the same thing as
using a wireless phone or cellphone, which operates at
higher frequencies and have a much larger range.

But I've already ordered one, so I'll find out for myself
soon enough...

Marc

Hi Marc:

I agree, and there is another factor to be possibly considered as
well, since the FM band falls in the VHF range between 88 MHz and 108
MHz: many specialists and experts in the alternative health field
(particularly in the areas of Rife plasma ray beam devices and
similar plasma technologies, electrotherapy devices, "bioenergy"
treatment devices, and also in many niches within the broad realms
known as "radionics" and "psychotronics", actually seem to feel that
most RF frequencies in the range falling between about 400 kHz (i.e.,
just below 0.5 MHz) and about 150 MHz are rather harmless (unless one
is exposed to a great overdose, such as an amateur radio operator
operating with a 2 kW high power transmitter on the HF bands and with
lots of stray RF fields in her shack from equipment and from her
nearby E-field transmitting antenna) and indeed, a number of
electro-therapeutic "alternative healing" treatment devices in the
aforementioned realms deliberately employ frequencies in this range,
particularly at and around the following frequencies:
* 400 KHz to 1.5 MHz
* 14 MHz
* 18 MHz
* 28 MHz
* 120 to 136 MHz
* 150 MHz
Many of these devices bathe the patient undergoing treatment in RF
fields in this frequency range, which encompasses the mid-and-upper
LF range, the HF range and the low-to-mid VHF range.

with care,
--Vinny

At 02:15 PM 11/29/2006, you wrote:

Vinny Pinto
[hidden email]

phone 301-694-1249

To see my informational websites and e-mail list groups, please go to:
http://www.vinnypinto.us





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I feel no personal anomosity towards anyone in this group. However,
I will never remain quiet while people make false statements or accusations.  
If ES people are to be helped, we must have accurate information.

Charles wrote that he bought the filters he has from lessemf. He says that
he bought there
"the Stetzerizer meter and two filters.
The meter came prompt, but the filters came some months later.
They do not have a CE nor an UL marking on them.
On the front, there is a gliding cover (up and down) which only has three
logo's: Stetzeriser ®, Graham Stetzer, Original"

Shivani replies:
These are probably prototypes.  
If they did not properly fit your receptacle properly, then it was not
wise to use them. It would have been good to contact Emil at lessemf right
away to discuss this, and get the right model for your outlets.
Also, just two filters cannot handle much electrical pollution. One
buys one or two filters just for experimental purposes. Using two filters to
try to filter the average building is misusing them.
     
Charles also writes:
I find it typical, that especially you are threatening me. Dave Stetzer does
not take the trouble in answering himself.
It looks like that you have more at stake here, than Stetzer.

Shivani responds:
I have mentioned previously how overloaded Dave is. Today, for
instance, he is trying to reply to over 600 e-mails and finish a report, before
travelling out of the country. I have never met anyone who puts in longer hours
or more days. He works 7 days a week almost all the time, with very little
sleep. In fact, he has been hospitalized twice when he collapsed from
exhaustion.
This is not a person who is "not taking the trouble to answer himself."  
Dave's life is utterrly devoted to making a difference in the electrical
pollution situation, to save lives. He simply cannot do any more than he
already is. This is why I have volunteered to address questions, etcetera,
regarding the filters that arise here.
If you make false statements about someone's products you are engaging
in harmful and threatening activity, and should not be surprised if eventually
you are taken to task.

Charles also wrote:
Be also aware, that being armed with an Aaronia *screwdriver* and an
Electrosmog Detector, is no guarantee for being or posing as a building
biologist, nor for having measuring knowledge.

Shivani replies:
You imply that I am posing as a building biologist. I clearly am not,
so why do you say this?
Regarding measuring knowledge, you and I disagree about what is
important. You are interested in reading field strengths very precisely.I am
interested in identifying and protecting people from HARMFUL FREQUENCIES.
Unfortunately, many baubiologists assume that grounding everything as
much as possible will improve their clients' situations, when in fact this often
brings in more harmful frequencies. The public needs to be aware that
baubiologists in general misunderstand the cause of the harm.    

Charles also says:
As I told you before, the claims you place on your website regarding the
*screwdriver* cannot be upheld; the fact that you continue to advertise as
such, proves that you do not know your stuff.
It is a nice gadget, but not a serious measuring instrument.
When LED's flicker, that does not mean, that they are telling the truth.

Shivani responds:
The Aaronia Multidedektor II Profi meter is very useful for identifying
electric fields of the high frequencies that are health-damaging. That it
is not able to report the field strength with great accuracy is not so
relevant. It would be nice to have that feature, but it's not worth the much bigger
price., which most people cannot afford. The meter does enable users to
identify the health-damaging HIGH FREQUENCY ELECTRIC FIELDS in their personal
environment.    
This meter has just gone out of production, however. We hope to
encourage a manufacturer to create something similar, with the low/high freq.
breaking point at the more useful frequency of 1.7 or 2 kHz, which is the point at
which all the energy of the RF is absorbed internal to the body. (We have
good resistance to lower frequencies, such as 50 and 60 Hz, which do not create
ES symptoms.)

Charles also writes now:
But I am not awaiting answers from you nor fom Stetzer anymore.

Shivani replies:
You cannot just drop out of the conversation you started, without
backing up your claims - unless you want to lose all credibility in this group.

You wrote:
"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.

So I asked:
Is this last sentence from Bajog? You imply so, but do not actually say so,
so it's not clear.
Is this statement supposed to apply to using the Stetzer filters?  
It isn'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.
Please provide a copy of the Bajog report. If they, or anyone, believe
the filters are harmful, they should have contacted the CE people, who
certified the filters.
If anyone ever shows by genuine test any real problem with the Stetzer
products, Dave Stetzer should be notified immediately. If people keep spreading
false information about the filters, they may
soon be talking to a lawyer. This is a serious offence.

I ask once again for your response to the above questions. Whom are you
quoting? If Bajog did a study involving Stetzer filters, let's see it.

Regards,
Shivani


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> You cannot just drop out of the conversation you started, without
> backing up your claims - unless you want to lose all credibility in this group.

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...

Marc

Hi folks:

I second what Marc has written. Charles is in no danger of losing his
credibility with me if he refuses to get drawn into a pointless
argument, but I have, on the other hand, witnessed some less than
credible (written) behavior from a list member other than Charles.
Marc, thank you for writing what you did.

with care,
--Vinny

At 09:34 PM 11/29/2006, you wrote:

Vinny Pinto
[hidden email]

phone 301-694-1249

To see my informational websites and e-mail list groups, please go to:
http://www.vinnypinto.us

Vinny wrote:
I second what Marc has written. Charles is in no danger of losing his
credibility with me if he refuses to get drawn into a pointless
argument, but I have, on the other hand, witnessed some less than
credible (written) behavior from a list member other than Charles.
Marc, thank you for writing what you did.

Shivani responds:
A conversation to clarify whether or not a lab has actually tested the
stetzer filters and stated that they create harmful frequencies is hardly a
"pointless argument."

Again, if Vinny believes that anything that I have written is not
credible, then he is welcome to come out and state just what it is that he did not
find credible. He also said he doubted my veracity, which is a roundabout way
of saying that he thinks I lied. But he has not said what he thinks I lied
about.

To accuse me of presenting false information, and of lying, but not
being specific so that I can respond, is just stabbing in the back. Are we here
to have a useful conversation leading to all of us having the best
information possible about issues of common concern, or what?

Regards,
Shivani


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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]

I appreciate this discussion and am thankful to all the members who
are trying to make this forum positive and factual. As this
discussion revolves around the characteristics of a product that is
highly visible and readily available in the marketplace, I welcome any
factual experiences being shared about it.

I have heard many reports that these filters have helped in many
situations and would like to know the complete picture. As Charles
has had an experience that isn't something that we're likely to hear
in product marketing, I'm glad he has shared it. As the statements he
makes regarding the filters don't support the statements we can read
from the manufacturing company, I respectfully urge Charles to provide
what he can regarding the reports of the studies done by Bajog (links,
documents, etc.). And thanks to Shivani for standing up and insisting
we support what we say as best we can. Verification is a vital tool
in issues like these.

Cheers,
Yunijo

--- In [hidden email], SArjuna@... wrote:
>
> 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]
>