Posted by hasitatvam on
URL: https://www.es-forum.com/Dave-Stetzer-s-comments-re-filters-performance-tp1542880p1542929.html

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]
>