3. I SHRED HIS "not so ultimate" ZAPPER PAGE -- here
4. DAVID ETHEREDGE NAQ -- NEVER ASKED QUESTIONS -- here
5. PARAZAPPER -- DECEPTIVE MARKETING EXPOSE -- here
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor
ParaZapper's David Etheredge:
"Never mind the truth. Let's talk about something important."
ParaZapper's David Etheredge has an awesome record of dishonesty. After he endorsed The Ultimate Zapper on Curezone he saw it becoming too popular for his liking. So he announced I made up all the testimonials in The Archive. Then he created an anti Ultimate Zapper page calling The Ultimate Zapper a "cheaply made hobby zapper". Then he "borrowed" three of my zapper's features for his new UZI [Ultimate Zapper] model and renamed it "ultimate". Hmmm.
The Ultimate Zapper has thousands of satisfied customers and a return rate of less than 1%. No wonder David Etheredge is trying to copy it. He calls me a "shade tree mechanic". Must be a lovely shade tree I'm under. By the way, David Etheredge's new zapper is actually not a zapper at all. It is a frequency generator -- a very expensive and complicated device to use as you will see by reading #4 on my FAQ Page. It does not produce harmonics which are an important factor contributing to zapper effectiveness.
David Etheredge doesn't mention the positive news about The Ultimate Zapper on Curezone and 600 unsolicited testimonials in The Archive. He has a better idea. Defamation. He recently found a fraudulent "shocking report" about The Ultimate Zapper on a phoney "complaint site" owned by criminals. He put links to this "report" on his site.
When the "report" appeared on his site his creative use of mathematics transformed it into several "reports". At the very end of his discussion about the now-plural "reports" he casually noted some had magically disappeared. But he "forgot" to mention that "complaint sites" which never remove "reports" did so very quickly in this case after I proved fraud which could have led to legal problems for them.
Perhaps there is work for David Etheredge at the National Enquirer. I wonder if he will fool customers like wellness_woman who posted on Curezone (below). He is fighting a losing battle with the truth. I didn't recover from 2 incurable diseases by accident. And for every disgruntled competitor there are 1000s of satisfied customers of The Ultimate Zapper.
I'm on day three of using the Ultimate Zapper after a week on the Dr. Hulda Clarkparasite cleanse (separate black hull tincture, Wormwood , cloves). I've been cleansing for years, including colonics, and while I cannot compare zappers, I can say that the results for me with this particular zapper are very dramatic even after such a short time ... I wish I had done this years ago.
Oct. 9, 2010
David Etheredge says whatever it takes to help him reach his stated goal -- to be #1 in zapper sales. That includes misrepresenting his credentials on Curezone and his site where he has been calling himself an electrical engineer for 10 years. He is not an electrical engineer. His resume states "self taught in electronics". To project an air of authority he refers to himself as "we". Since I revealed all this he has been trying to defend himself on his site.
I shred his anti Ultimate Zapper page ane expose his unethical business practices here.
ParaZapper's David Etheredge came out of the barracks a number of years ago. He launched an unprovoked attack against The Ultimate Zapper, lying about about my site, my zapper and my work on his site and Curezone. He has recently ramped up his campaign by dedicating a web page that tries to discredit The Ultimate Zapper. He casts truth to the wind -- and turns his page into a marketing ploy.
The Ultimate Zapper is actually a "hobby zapper" according to David Etheredge. And I am "a shade tree mechanic". Well, it must be the best darned hobby zapper in the world. He has "borrowed" 3 of its features for him new model. David Etheredge says he is an "electrical engineer". Well, not really. That is what he has been saying for 10 years on Curezone and his website but his resume actually says "self taught". Hmmm. He calls his ParaZapper a pet zapper but then he says it should not be used on pets -- or people. Hmmm. Maybe it will work on house plants. If it does, David Etherdge's zapper can joint the ranks of hobby zappers.
This page talks about the real David Etheredge -- the David Etheredge who has totally discredited himself. The more he goes after The Ultimate Zapper the worse things get for him. What goes around comes around. He has not discovered the universal truth that untruth comes back to those who foster it. Read my shredding of his anti Ultimate Zapper page (below).
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor
Is David Etheredge
anti Ultimate Zapper or
pro Ultimate Zapper?
Actually, it looks like David Etheredge can't decide if he is for or against The Ultimate Zapper. If you believe what he says he is actually for and against it at the same time. This is a show of amazing ambivalence. He endorsed The Ultimate Zapper a few years ago on Curezone but then it dawned on him that this was not good for business. He has been trying to retract his endorsement ever since. The main focus of his negative campaign has shifted from Curezone to his anti Ultimate Zapper page. It was originally called the "not so ultimate zapper" page -- in lower case. He recently changed the name of his page to "their Ultimate Zapper". I wonder who "their" is? Oh, he must be referring to me.
My name is Ken Presner
and my zapper is called The Ultimate Zapper
I hereby give David Etheredge official permission to use my legal name -- Ken Presner. Actually, my name is registered as Kenneth Presner so if he prefers to call me Kenneth that's fine. He can also refer to me as "he" or "him" if he wishes. I think it's obvious that mentioning me by name is a big problem for David Etheredge -- as if doing so would cast a spell over everything he is doing to try to discredit me and my zapper.
Calling The Ultimate Zapper by its actual name -- using three capital letters -- is also a big problem for him. He has always been "spelling challenged". If he is worried that calling my zapper by its name could put him into anaphalactic shock perhaps he should seek medical attention before considering taking such a drastic action. Perhaps an antihistamine would provide temporary relief from this terrible allergy.
Recently,e David Etheredge has started to call me by my name and to call my zapper by its name but he is a bit confused about its name. May I point out that my zapper is called The Ultimate Zapper -- not Ultimate Zapper without The at the beginning -- and not "ultimate zapper" in lower case and not "the Ultimate Zapper" with a small t instead of The. I realize he is a spelling-challenged person so I do not take personal offense.
Actually, David Etheredge's use of misnaming is a cunning ploy to try to turn my zapper's name into a generic term that anyone can take as their own -- including him -- which he is has actually done. He calls his zakker the UZ [Ultimate Zapper] and "ultimate". Such a jealous fellow. He may eventually decide to abandon the name ParaZapper altogether in favor of my zapper's name. Arthur Doerksen of Auto-Zap tried this a few years ago. It was a disaster for him and he quickly dropped the ploy. Anyone can call their zapper "an ultimate zapper". The only problem is that there is only one zapper called The Ultimate Zapper.
The Ultimate Zapper is not so ultimate
-- but I've got one too, so buy mine
Please don't misunderstand. David Etheredge is not actually stealing the name of my zapper. He is just "borrowing" it by creating his "beyond the Ultimate Zapper" model. He says his zapper is the real Ultimate Zapper. It remains to be seen how long he intends to borrow my name for. I am flattered that he is trying to imitate the highly successful Ultimate Zapper that I have been selling since 1996. The Ultimate Zapper was one of the very first zappers to be marketed on a website. David Etheredge tagged along a few years later.
Despite all his efforts, his stable of zappers has not been able to cut much mustard. So he needs a stable of zappers. I also note that he has quite a few mirror sites. He has not been able to create one winner so he takes the shot-gun approach. I don't believe in shot guns. It's hard to hit the bullseye with all that shot flying around. I believe in a high-velocity weapon. I have one. It's called The Ultimate Zapper.
David Etheredge has an exquisite talent for turning logic completely on its head when it suits his purposes. A perfect case in point is that he has gone to the trouble to try to incorporate 3 of The Ultimate Zapper's features into a new ParaZapper -- but then denies he is doing this because it makes his zapper any better. In fact, he says it does not make his zapper any better at all but that his customers are asking for these not-so-ultimate features. So, he has gone to the trouble to add them to his zapper.
He says he is only offering these features because he wants to give his customers extra choices even though he says his customers are wrong and they add nothing to his zapper. His hope is that, by going to all this trouble, he will be able to take sales away from The Ultimate Zapper. He hopes that those foolish enough to believe the 628 testimonials in the Testimonial Archive on my site -- including the amazing testimonial of actress Karen Allen and testimonials from medical doctors and other practitioners -- will turn to him in the end -- thanks to his brilliant marketing.
It is clear that David Etheredge wants to capture as many of my prospective customers as he can before they order my zapper -- by trying to copy 3 of its features. What a pathetic ploy with the typically convoluted Etheredge talk surrounding it. Well, people are not so easily fooled. People who visit zapper sites see right through David Etheredge. They send me emails.
But David Etheredge is not only transparent. He reminds me of Richard Nixon. "If you don't like my policies I have other policies." Here is a list that follows the evolution of the spectrum of nonsense that has for years been emanating from David Etheredge in his vain effort to talk down the phenomenal success of The Ultimate Zapper.
1. How can The Ultimate Zapper give meaningful results? Its a cheaply made hobby zapper.
2. The Ultimate Zapper does not do as much as it claims.
3. The Ultimate Zapper is all hype.
4. OK, so maybe The Ultimate Zapper feels like it does some good but it's all in your head. It's just the placebo effect.
5. OK, so The Ultimate Zapper does some good. But it's too expensive no matter how much good it does.
6. The Ultimate Zapper's advanced square wave is no good. It does not conform to Hulda Clark 's specifications.
7. The Ultimate Zapper's square wave has a short spike below the zero line. That's no good. Hulda Clark said so.
8. The Ultimate Zapper's AC adapter is no good. Hulda Clark was for only batteries.
9. The Ultimate Zapper's stainless steel handholds and footpads are no good. Hulda Clark said you have to use copper.
10. Hulda Clark said ... and then she said ... and then she said ...
David Etheredge is like a chameleon.
First he says it's all about printed circuits boards. You don't buy that? OK then he says it's all about my site being nothing more than hype. You don't buy that? OK then he says it's all about the placebo effect. You don't buy that? OK then he says it's all about the price. You don't buy that? OK then he says it's all about the specifications. You don't buy that? OK then he says it's all about the square wave. You don't buy that? OK then he says it's all about the AC adapter. You don't buy that? OK then he says it's all about copper. You don't buy that? OK then he says it's all about Dr. Hulda Clark. You don't buy that? Hmmm. Makes ya wanna think this over for a while, doesn't it?
You can quote Hulda Clark till you are blue in the face. The only problem is that she wrote The Cure for All Cancers but she died of cancer. Hmmm. Makes ya wanna think over all that quoting of Dr. Hulda Clark, doesn't it?
Here is an email that I recently received that is typical of the emails I receive every day 365 days a year. Unfortunately for David Etheredge, these kinds of comments do not reflect his agenda. How can David Etheredge possibly explain this glaring contradiction? It's obvious. He doesn't even try because there is no reconciling what he is reporting with the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. So, who are we to believe -- customers who get great results and say The Ultimate Zapper is amazing or a competitor who has a list to try to convince people they've got it all wrong? Makes ya wanna think about David Etheredge a bit, doesn't it?
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:50:32 -0700 From: xxxxxxxx
Subject: Hi Ken
Hi Ken, It's John your old zapper client friend from Toronto. I want to say that the zapper is the best money spent, me and my mom get lots of help from it ...
The more David Etheredge attacks my work
and tries to copy my zapper
the more orders I get
All of David Etheredge's efforts to duplicate the amazing effectiveness of The Ultimate Zapper have failed. He must be frustrated. Why else would he continue his unrelenting smear campaign against my work for so many years? Unfortunately, disinformation and defamation are not the road to success. In an obvious act of desperation he has resorted to taking 3 of my zapper's features to try to duplicate it -- and he is even trying to take the name of my zapper. Arthur Doerksen of Auto-Zap tried the same thing years ago. He quickly abandoned his plans once he saw the impending disaster he was creating. I give him credit for backing away from the edge of the cliff. Imitation is actually the sincerest form of flattery. It brings a lot of visitors to my site, and a lot more orders. I actually owe David Etheredge a debt of gratitude. By trying to take a piggy-back ride on the name of my zapper he is actually drumming up business for me. These are good days.
But David Etheredge has created problems for himself not only by these shenanigans and other serious ethical issues but also by misrepresenting health issues and his own credentials which I have already exposed -- to his chagrin. After all these years it is a shame he has not risen to a higher level with a sense of grace -- and a greater perspective on how to go about things the right way. Alas, I must respond to his lies lest people be deceived into taking take his word as the truth.
The Bottom Line
A virtual mountain of hard evidence in support of the phenomenal success of The Ultimate Zapper has emerged over the past 18 years as you can see by reading this site. The logical explanation for David Etheredge's "anti Ultimate Zapper" campaign is that The Ultimate Zapper has produced an ultimate thorn in David Etheredge's side. But I believe it goes deeper than that -- to a level of consciousness and spiritual awareness.
You would think David Etheredge would spend his time focusing on his own business. His problem is he has not been able to create a winner. All his models are weak -- including his latest -- as The Charts clearly show. David Etheredge seems to be hopelessly confused. This is from his site: "We have several models of Zappers sold not for use on pets or farm animals. These devices are not sold for use on humans." Huh? A site called Pet Zapper with zappers not sold for pets -- or for humans? Are his zappers meant to be used on plants or pet rocks?
David Etheredge has become The Ultimate Jealous Competitor. But there is only one Ultimate Zapper and it is definitely not on David Etheredge's ParaZapper site. His smear campaign is not only aimed at my zapper it is aimed at discrediting me personally. The Ultimate Zapper has earned a well-deserved reputation, a reputation that David Etheredge is obviously envious of and is trying his best to tarnish -- to no avail. On the contrary, he has failed miserably. Nothing David Etheredge says or will ever say can erase the fact that The Ultimate Zapper is by far the best zapper in the world. And nothing David Etheredge says or will ever say can erase the fact that I overcame Multiple Sclerosis and near-death from Crohn's disease and have been helping people recover their health for 18 years -- with the help of The Ultimate Zapper. That's the bottom line. Read more.
3. David Etheredge's
"anti Ultimate Zapper" page
shredded -- line by line
David Etheredge must think that visitors to zapper sites are stupid. I can tell him one thing with total assurance -- they are not. 18 years of experience in the zapper business has shown me that people shopping for a zapper are intelligent and very discerning. I am often asked, "why do you even bother answering David Etheredge of ParaZapper". The answer is simply that I don't like competitors lying about me and my work. I will never let their lies be the last word. My mother lived to nearly 98 and kept her own apartment. She was a fighter. God bless her. I take after my mother. God willing, David Etheredge will have his work cut out for him for a long time to come.
I am glad to say that most zapper makers are honest and non-confrontational. But there are a few makers who push the envelope. I have been responding to them for years and I am prepared to continue to do so as long as they continue to make dishonest and inane remarks about The Ultimate Zapper and my work.
I work 10 hours a day 365 days a year. I have not taken a day off since year 2000. I'm in excellent health. I work out everyday. David Etheredge and other misguided competitors are going to need a heck of a lot of stamina to keep up with me. I overcame MS and Crohn's disease after nearly 7 years of blood, sweat and tears. David Etheredge is merely a jealous competitor. He is not an incurable disease. He has no idea who he is dealing with.
Please read my shredding of David Etheredge's "anti Ultimate Zapper" page below these introductory remarks. His defamatory page shows such breathtaking dishonesty. The intent of his statements is obviously to try to make gullible readers into ParaZapper customers. He has brashly and openly stated his goal on Curezone -- to be #1 in zapper sales. After everything I went through to overcome 2 "incurable" diseases -- Multiple Sclerosis and Crohn's disease -- my goal has always been to help people.
David Etheredge never had a disease. He never recovered from paralysis. He was never near death. They never sliced him open from stem to stern to take out part of his insides and staple him back together with 29 metal staples with a "good luck" and the promise of an encore within 5 years -- if he made it that far. Does he think he is more qualified than me to give opinions on MS and Crohn's disease? What about other serious illnesses? David Etheredge used to talk about MS and Crohn's on his site but he took all that nonsense down when I showed he had no idea what he was talking about.
Trying to get ahead by floating a pack of lies about my zapper and my work is a failed marketing plan. David Etheredge says whatever it takes to get ahead -- the truth be damned. The facts show he is an unscrupulous and cunning liar. Cunning is not a substitute for the truth. David Etheredge is totally transparent. The amazing thing is that he thinks he can disguise his this obvious fact.
One of David Etheredge's favorite lies is his authoritative statement that it is impossible for The Ultimate Zapper to create the Electroporation Effect. He refuses to take me my up on my Electroporation Challenge. If he did, he would be talking very differently very quickly. But since the truth might emerge, he can't take that chance. The lies have to be perpetuated. Letting the truth get a foot in the door is no way to do that.
Below, I have cut and pasted the text from David Etheredge's "anti Ultimate Zapper" page from top to bottom -- line by line. No statement from his page has been omitted. My responses in red follow each section of his text that you will find in quotation marks.
You will note that I have not changed David Etheredge's spelling mistakes and other text errors that his site is by now "famous" for -- including using lower case for the name of The Ultimate Zapper. As I mentioned earlier, David Etheredge has always been "spelling-challenged". Although I must admit his spelling has improved in recent years he still needs help. He used to explain away this sloppiness -- for want of a better word -- by saying he was in a hurry or his keyboard was sticky or he was using an unfamilar computer.
Anyway, I suggested to David Etheredge years ago that he might want to consider getting a proofreader. He has not taken me up on my suggestion. Never mind. I mention this not because it is important in and of itself, I mention it because his sloppiness is a reflection of how he does business. It gets a lot worse. When you read what follows I think you'll get my drift.
Ken Presner: David Etheredge refers to The Ultimate Zapper as "their ultimate zapper". "Their"? Who are "They"? There is no "they" on my site. There is only me. I call David Etheredge by his name. I refer to him as "he" and "him". And I refer to his site as the "ParaZapper" site. Please note I use the upper case. Please note that he refers to The Ultimate Zapper as "their ultimate zapper". Please note that he uses the lower case. This manipulative gesture is typical of his unethical tactics. More below. Please note that he uses his commercial name, ParaZapper, when referring to himself as well as his site. He avoids using his name, as though he has something to hide. He does have something to hide. More below.
David Etheredge goes by the commercial name "ParaZapper" even when he posts to forums. You have to search hard to find the name David Etheredge anywhere. What does he have to hide? When you Google his name you will find his c.v. It shows that he has been misrepresenting his credentials for over 10 years on his website and on Internet forums. No wonder why he doesn't want people to know his real name, wishing to be identified only as ParaZapper, his commercial name.
To further his agenda, David Etheredge chooses to use his commercial name exclusively on forums. He uses the ubiquitous name ParaZapper on CureZone Forums . Curezone is a forum that says it forbids the use of its site for commercial purposes and claims it requires a non-commercial logon identity for all posters. In fact, this is a lie. It is a false front than enables people like David Etheredge to ambulance chase on their forums. I stopped posting to Curezone years ago because of this duplicity.
David Etheredge's ParaZapper site is basically just an order page. My site comprises the largest zapper website in the world with about 20 megabytes and over 30 web pages devoted to research and health information. Some pages are over 200 book pages, such as the Testimonial Archive with 628 unsolicited testimonials. My site not only presents The Ultimate Zapper. It also presents information about MS and Croh's disease (and other diseases), the 2 "incurable" diseases I overcame. David Etheredge used to publish information about MS and Crohn's disease on his site. He took the information down when I showed it was inane. He never had a disease.
David Etheredge is the archetypal jealous competitor. He lies at every turn about my zapper and my work in an effort to distract people from the amazing results satisfied users have obtained with The Ultimate Zapper --for the past 18 years. He does his best to manipulate those who have scant understanding of technical matters, with lies about about components and wiring and by quoting fraudulent "complaint reports". He also does his utmost to cast doubt on my recovery. But his house of cards collapses when you tap lightly on the table. More below.
"Their Ultimate Zapper does not meet Dr. Clark's specifications ..."
Let's start off with Dr. Hulda Clark herself. Who was the "Dr. Hulda Clark" so many zapper makers, including David Etheredge, quote so religiously. Who was the "doctor" in front of the name Dr. Hulda Clark that zapper makers hope will add a patina of legitmacy to their sites? It sounds good to call your zapper a Dr. Clark Zapper because it sounds impressive to have the appellation "Doctor" in front of the product you are selling. Hulda Clark was a Ph.D. She claimed her doctorate was in physiology but the record shows it was in zoology, Her degree in naturopathy was from an unaccredited distance-learning online natural health "institution" called Clayton College that is no longer in business.
And who exactly is David Etheredge? He has been passing himself off as an accredited electrical engineer for 10 years on his website and on Internet forums. But he is not an electrical engineer. He is self taught. David Etheredge has been deliberately misrepresenting his credentials all these years. Since I disclosed this fact there have been no denials from him -- just attempts by him to find ways to put out the fire. More below.
I have never misrepresented my credentials. I overcame 2 incurable diseases, I invented The Ultimate Zapper and I have an ordinary B.A. Those are my credentials. Oh, I also trained as a computer programmer, have worked on a lot of computer programming projects and have worked on a variety of electronics projects. And I have a few things I could pull out of my hat that would make David Etheredge go away and hide under a shade tree for a while. The most important thing is that The Ultimate Zapper, along with my my publications and my experience with serious illnesses and diseases have been helping people for the past 18 years. That's my interest and that's my bottom line. The rest is irrelevant to me.
"Dr. Clark's specifications".
It may surprise some people to know that quoting Dr. Clark's specifications is often used by zapper makers to mislead people looking for a zapper. Many competitors tag along after the coattails of Hulda Clark by repeatedly quoting "Dr. Clark's specifications" because it serves their commercial interests. Many competitors pretend to be "unquestioning devotees" of Hulda Clark, to promote a fictitious link between themselves and Hulda Clark for commercial purposes. But the fact is that Hulda Clark stated on her site that she did not endorse any zapper or any zapper maker. Here is what she wrote:
"Please keep in mind, however, that no other website speaks for me ... I do not endorse any manufacturer, and I receive no compensation for any product sales by any company. I have no direct influence on any other company, either."
David Etheredge and other zapper makers talk about their "Hulda Clark zappers" and "Dr. Clark's specifications" then turn around and ignore her specifications by changing them to try to create a better zapper. David Etheredge is an obvious example of this kind of hypocrisy and duplicity with his stable of so-called "Hulda Clark zappers". His zappers so not conform to Hulda Clark's specifications. They are not Hulda Clark zappers. He uses the name Hulda Clark freely -- as well as the false claim of making zappers with "Dr. Clark's specifications" -- like many other zapper makers -- for commercial gain.
I am not a "devotee" of Hulda Clark's. She did some amazing research and she invented the original zapper. But to treat her work as immutable does a great disservice to people looking for a more complete answer to their health problems -- and to Hulda Clark who was always open to change. It should be noted that she wrote The Cure for All Cancers but in fact she died of cancer in 2009. The cause of her death was misrepresented as a spinal cord injury but her death certificate shows the true cause of death.
It is clear that Hulda Clark did not have all the answers, as some zapper makers would like people to believe. Their interest is in exploiting her name. Casting aspersions on more advanced zappers by saying they do not follow "Dr. Clark's specifications" is clearly hypocritical and self-serving. David Etherdge makes this accusation against The Ultimate Zapper -- then he turns around and abandons Hulda Clark's specifications in his own zappers. This is typical of his dishonesty in the pursuit of commercial gain -- done with a tone of authority to put people off the track. Hypocrisy is David Etheredge's calling card.
Hulda Clark invented the original zapper in 1993. She was actually an astute biomedical researcher in Canada for years before obtaining her Clayton College degree. A few years ago I sent her a message through her publishing company expressing my personal gratitude to her. But Hulda Clark did not invent electro-medicine and she did not invent the square wave which is the basis of zapper technology. Nikola Tesla was the grandfather of electro-medicine and Dr. Royal Raymond Rife was the great modern genius of electro-medicine.
Hulda Clark laid out clearly the specifications of her original zapper. But she never stated that zapper makers were forbidden from changing or improving on the specifications of her zapper design, as is implied by the declarations of David Etheredge and other zapper makers in their self-serving "devotion" to her . The doctrine according to Dr. Hulda Clark. Actually, Hulda Clark was not doctrinaire -- nor was she a cultist. She was a researcher and was very open to change. She realized that her zapper was just a starting point. And she recognized that some changes to her original zapper design were already bringing improvements in therapeutic results although she felt constrained to use her original A6 zapper in her daily work for the sake of the continuity of her research. In fact, she knoew some of the lower frequencies were mor effective for zapping than her high frequency zapper.
Let's examine the logic of technological developments in the context of David Etheredge's feigned devotion to "Dr. Clark's specifications". Did the invention of the record disc by Emile Berliner in 1889 define the state of the art of recording media? Did Emile Berliner say "This is the best it gets. No need to go any further. You have to stick with this format"? Did the first computer, the room-filling ENIAC, define the state of the art of computing? Was there no need to go any further? Was the first crystal radio proclaimed as the state of the art in wireless sound transmission? Was there no need to go any further? Were the specifications of these and countless other inventions and technological innovations ever proclaimed as the end point -- specifications that must be followed unwaveringly and never altered? I think it is clear that it is ridiculous when zapper makers talk as though "Dr. Clark's specifications" were written in granite, immutably handed down from the mount.
The implication of David Etheredge's comment about not following "Dr. Clark's specifications" is self-serving as well as inane. In effect, he is saying "improving on Dr. Clark's specifications is against the rules. Now, take a look at my "improved" zappers. How dishonest and hypocritical can you get? It is clear that David Etheredge, like many zapper makers, has become a self-styled Hulda Clark "interpreter" when it suits his commercial agenda.
Actually, despite David Etheredge's declaration about tolerances, Hulda Clark never talked about a specific frequency for zappers. She talked about a frequency range from 25,000 to 30,000 Hertz. She knew that zappers are not frequency generators and they not have to be tuned to precise frequencies, as long as the range is respected. Hulda Clark always said that any single frequency will do the work. She later discovered that some of the lower frequencies were more effective than higher frequencies. David Etheredge misrepresents the importance of frequency and tolerances.
Ironically, the truth is that David Etheredge has never followed Hulda Clark's specifications, the cornerstone of which was a single high frequency. ParaZapper has always been a dual or multiple frequency zapper. The Ultimate Zapper has always been a single frequency that uses a lower frequency than Hulda Clark's zapper. Ironically, Hulda Clark knew lower frequencies were more effective than higher frequencies but did not want to get involved in any zapper "controversy". She had a mission and she focused on her work.
David Etheredge has been trying for years to improve on Hulda Clark's design. The result of all his efforts is a confusing collection of models. He has never managed to produce a single winner. He is now trying to copy The Ultimate Zapper by adding 3 of its features to yet one more new model in his stable while declaring that The Ultimate Zapper "does not meet Dr. Clark's specifications". Then he disclaims the effectiveness of those very features he is "borrowing" from The Ultimate Zapper. See my comments on the stabilized wave here. I have never heard such a convoluted and inane explanation by a zapper maker in the past 18 years. David Etheredge twists and turns in his vain attempts to defame The Ultimate Zapper while imitating it. He should have been a pretzel maker.
"... and is cheaply made ..."
I should only be so lucky. It costs more to produce The Ultimate Zapper than is costs to produce any zapper with printed circuit boards because the wiring requires point-to-point soldering.
If The Ultimate Zapper is "not so ultimate" -- which was the name of David Etheredge's original anti Ultimate Zapper page, and if The Ultimate Zapper is made with "the cheapest hobby level parts" then how the heck is it doing all the amazing things that customers report in the Testimonial Archive on my site? He has never answered this obvious question except to keep repeating the same lies he has always repeated about The Ultimate Zapper. There are 628 testimonials that David Etheredge said I made up -- then proceeded to copy features from a zapper he says is "not so ultimate"? Why is he also "borrowing" my zapper's name? This is an odd thing to do with a zapper you say is no good and go to so much trouble to try to defame. Why go to all that trouble if it is no good in the first place?"
David Etheredge's modus operandi is to ignore the facts in favor of self-serving fiction. The truth is that he is a jealous competitor who has lost thousands of sales to The Ultimate Zapper. He has pretended to be an electrical engineer since the inception of his website and is now trying to cover up this lie in response to my revelation of this fact by publishing a list of projects he has worked on. Projects? A project is not a degree. I worked on projects. Projects are not degrees. Projects are projects. Does he really think he will be able to fool people with all this?
To David Etheredge's dismay, people have been voting with their feet for years in the direction of The Ultimate Zapper. His response has been a level of duplicity -- and vindictiveness -- that is breathtaking. The Ultimate Zapper is called The Ultimate Zapper for a very good reason. It is clearly the best zapper in the world as the 5 Zapper Comparisons Charts show. They compare 29 popular zappers using the 12 features that make zappers effective -- some of which David Etheredge is copying -- while at the same time criticizing them. He talks out of both sides of his mouth at the same time. I use the words deception, disinformation, duplicity, lies, hypocricy, misrepresentation, unscrupulousness and dishonesty when I describe how David Etheredge does business. He has declared on Curezone that his goal is to be #1 in zapper sales. He continues to live up to his well-deserved reputation to say whatever it takes to get there.
The "shocking" photo on David Etheredge's anti Ultimate Zapper page shows a zapper without a printed circuit board. How awful! But here we have one more deception. I have made no secret of the fact The Ultimate Zapper is made without a printed circuit board. The problem is that David Etheredge totally misrepresents the facts about printed circuit boards on his anti Ultimate Zapper page. Point-to-point wiring is actually a feature of The Ultimate Zapper as you can read here. He has a way of "informing&" people is by disinforming and misinforming. Each Ultimate Zapper is hand-made with point-to-point wiring by electronic experts. Point-to-point wiring produces a zapper with a superior signal and extremely high reliability. There has not been a single circuit failure inn 18 years. A attention to detail is the essence of The Ultimate Zapper.
Machine-made printed circuit boards -- like those used in ParaZappers -- are much cheaper to make than zappers like The Ultimate Zapper that are made with point-to-point wiring. PCBs are prone to failure. In fact, there is mounting evidence that high temperatures that machined printed circuit boards are subjected to degrade product quality. David Etheredge points to the neat-looking inside of his zapper as though a neat printed circuit board guarantees a better zapper. It most certainly does not. Let's examine what printed circuit boards and point-to-point wiring are really all about.
Hand-made zappers have much higher production costs than zappers made with printed circuit boards. The fact is that the cost of producing each Ultimate Zapper by hand is much higher than the cost of producing each ParaZapper by machine, and other machine made zappers, as well. Years ago I rejected using the cheap printed circuit boards like those found in ParaZapper in favor of having my production team hand wire each Ultimate Zapper individually.
Like my production team that makes each Ultimate Zapper individually, high-end "boutique" audio manufacturers are taking the time to produce some of the highest quality and most reliable audio products in the world -- by hand -- with point-to-point hard wiring. Like most zapper makers, David Etheredge chooses the easy way out -- printed circuit boards. His accusation that The Ultimate Zapper is made of cheap "hobby-level" parts is preposterous. If it were true I would have a high return rate. My return rate is actually less than 1%. As far as I am aware, The Ultimate Zapper has the lowest rate of return of any zapper in the world. So much for his assertion about my "hobby zapper&". And I back my zapper with a 3-month trial offer and a lifetime warranty. My package makes his conditions look punitive -- which is what they actually are.
New Model SE and New Model XE are not only individually made, they are made with high quality all lead-free components which makes them the most environmentally friendly zappers on the market. They are RoHS compliant for shipment to California and the European Union. New Model SE and New Model XE use special silver alloy solder that gives them 40% higher conductivity than the original Ultimate Zapper. Their lead-free silver alloy solder is the most expensive on the market. The Ultimate Zapper's solder produces superior adhesive quality compared to leaded solder.
New Model SE and New Model XE are shipped with the most expensive solid copper clips and gold-plated connectors on the market, not the cheap nickel-plated steel clips that David Etheredge uses in his ParaZappers and that most other zapper makers use. The latter corrode, rust and break off easily. The Ultimate Zapper has the highest quality, most expensive and most reliable switch of its kind of any zapper on the market -- totally contrary to the false statement made by David Etheredge regarding its switch. The box that contains its components is made of the highest quality industrial grade ABS plastic that money can buy. Cheap "hobby-level" parts? Trying to pull the wool over people's eyes by appealing to common ignorance of electronics is something David Etheredge excels in -- and spares no opportunity to exploit.
How does this amplfier look to you with
its neat-looking PCB board?
Here's how it looks on the outside.
Looks good. But is it better than an amplifier with point-to-point wiring?
How does this amplifier look to you with
the nest of wires?
I know. Looks pretty bad. But looks can be deceiving. Does this look like the inside of a very expensive amplifier? Doesn it look like it's cheaply made. The fact is this is a very sophisticated high-end amplifier costing thousands of dollars. There are many high-end "boutique" audio manufacturers that eschew printed circuit boards in favor of point-to-point wiring -- because point-to-point wiring delivers superior results. I won't put you to sleep with the details. Suffice it to say that anyone -- inclouding David Etheredge -- who represents point-to-point wiring as being inferior is clearly not telling the truth. Period.
Here's how it looks on the outside.
Take a look at the inside of some vintage Marantz amplifiers and receivers. Not a lovely sight. No neat green printed circuit boards. But the sound they produce is sublime -- even after many decades of use. These are vintage components made by one of the most highly respected high end audio companies in the U.S.A.
Here's how it looks on the outside.
Take a look at the inside one of the best high end amplifiers in the world -- made by Ralph Karsten of Atma-Sphere. The cost? Thousands. See any neat-looking green printed circuit boards here?
Here's how it looks on the outside.
Electronics: Truth and deception
I am an audiophile. I have a nice sound system at home -- one of the great pleasures in my life. I listen to music while I work. I use the example of high end audio here to prove the point that David Etheredge intentionally misrepresents the facts regarding printed circuit boards vs. hard wiring. I believe this makes the subject of printed circuit boards and point-to-point wiring a lot easier to understand for those who are not familiar with electronics.
David Etheredge's agenda is to make The Ultimate Zapper look bad -- whatever it takes -- even if that means playing on the ignorance of many zapper buyers regarding electronics. He tries to sell those who don't know about electronics on this false idea: "The Ultimate Zapper looks bad inside. And if it looks bad inside it must be bad so I can't recommend it." Has anyone asked David Etheredge why he really can't "recommend" The Ultimate Zapper -- beyond his obviously self-serving statements -- as though he were in the zapper recommendation business rather than the zapper manufacturing business? I think the answer is obvious.
But wait. David Etheredge already endorsed The Ultimate Zapper -- unsolicited -- on Curezone. He said it "may be the best single-frequency zapper" -- but then decided to try to rewrite history. Who asked him to recommend The Ultimate Zapper in the first place? I never asked him? What competitor actively worries about whether or not he can recommend a competitor's product and takes pains to defame competitors? David Etheredge twists and turns in a self-styled pretzel logic that is the without doubt most convoluted, contradictory and irrational reasoning you'll find in Zapperland. Take a look at other zapper sites -- then please email me if you find a better example of this anywhere in Zapperland.
"There are a number of zappers out there and some are good, some are not. This page is to expose the one that may be the greatest rip-off in zappers,"
Say again? " ... may be the greatest rip-off ... ". Wait a moment. What does that mean? May be, may be not? Well, if ever there was a jealous competitor who knew how to sit on the fence while unable to make up his mind his name is David Etheredge. Let's look at it in another way -- not from the point of view of a jealous competitor. Has one of the thousands of satisfied customers of The Ultimate Zapper ever made such a statement? Actually, those who have benefitted from The Ultimate Zapper have often commented how cheap it is relative to the amazing benefits it has rendered. They have been very grateful for it. You can read 628 testimonials from satisfied customers and make up your own mind. David Etheredge's statement that that The Ultimate Zapper may be a rip-off comes from a competitor who has the nerve to turn around and take 3 of The Ultimate Zapper's features for his own zapper while taking its name for his zapper! He leaves one breathless at his hypocricy and dishonesty -- not to speak of his inanity.
"based on an exhorbitant price"
Say again? "... based on an exhorbitant price?" David Etheredge, a predatory and jealous competitor, has now decided, when all else fails, that price has become the determining factor against his being able to "recommend" The Ultimate Zapper. Unbelievable. If you don't believe the nonsense he spouts about point-to-point wiring and the defamatory "reports" that he quotes that appear on "report" sites run by criminals -- and all the other rabbits he pulls out of his hat -- then he has a trump card. He doesn't like the price. HIs main problem here is that, feature-for-feature, The Ultimate Zapper represents by far the best value of the 29 most popular zappers as the Zapper Comparison Charts on my site clearly prove. He just won the Nobel Prize for inanity.
The charts use the 12 features that make zappers effective -- unlike the smoke-and-mirrors charts on his and other zapper sites. David Etheredge has also complained that the price of My Recovery Protocol is exhorbitant. "Yikes!!" he declared. Of course, he forgot to mention that I also give free follow-up for the exnhorbitant price of $24.95 -- for as long as people need it. He also forgot to mention all the help my book has given people over the years. According to David Etheredge, $24.95 is way too high a price for getting your life back. Did he just land here from planet Mars?
Talking about books, you may find it interesting to know that David Etheredge does not complain about the price of $99.95 for a book written by a convicted felon -- Kevin Trudeau -- a larcenist turned selfless humanitarian, according to him. This $99.95 book just happened to have a photo of his ParaZapper. You may be surprised to learn that Kevin Trudeau is now one of David Etheredge's favorite people.
After all, this great humanitarian has written things you cannot find anywhere else, according to David Etheredge. And my name is Eleanor Roosevelt. We can forgive Kevin for his little transgressions. Never mind that he is still stealing money from so many people that they have mounted a site against him to document his criminality. He has already spent time behind bars and it looks like there is a good chance he may be headed back to the slammer if he keeps it up. Never mind. David Etheredge thinks he's a true folk hero.
David Etheredge declares with authority that the information in my book must be overvalued -- if not worthless. Of course, he hasn't actually read my book. This doesn't stop him from having a very strongly negative opinion about it. He doesn't worry about unimportant things. My book sells for 25% of the price of the book in which his zapper is mentioned. For the price of $24.95 my work contains information people with MS and Crohn's disease and other serious related illnesses can find no where else and that has helped many people get their lives back. David Etheredge accuses me of ripping off book buyers. If you can find a bigger hypocrite in the zapper business than David Etheredge please email me his name.
"and a lot of hype for so little content."
Ken Presner: Say again? Hype? Does this come from those who have been helped by my book? And I suppose the 628 unsolicited testimonials in the Testimonial Archive are "hype" as well. Actually David Etheredge says it's a lot worse than that. He says I made them up. This is one of the most abominable lies he has made up. Is actress Karen Allen lying -- with her incredible testimonial and radio interview? How many people is David Etheredge willing to call liars and accuse of hype -- with a straight face and a tone of authority? As I have accurately pointed out, David Etheredge says whatever it takes -- the truth be damned. Senator Al Franken wrote a book called "Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them".
"One of our customers told us that they were unhappy with their Ultimate Zapper and that they thought that it was junk. We had them send it and this is what we received. This illustration of the $179.95 Ulitimate [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "Ultimate"] Zapper shows that it is one of the poorest quality zappers that I have ever seen and has a very high price. The maker uses the cheapest hobby level parts for his components and circuits, and even uses cheap lamp cords for his cables."
Well, David Etheredge just hit the motherlode -- only too happy to hear this good news and to spread the good word. He says one of his customers has called The Ultimate Zapper "junk". If it is true what his customer said then, in David Etheredge's willing mind this obviously overrides the opinions of thousands of satisfied customers. He shows a zapper with no label on it. Is this is the same Ultimate Zapper that David Etheredge is now trying to copy? Hmmm.
I imagine this ParaZapper customer will soon be complaining to David Etheredge that he is unhappy with his ParaZapper since David Etheredge is now taking 3 of The Ultimate Zapper's features and Cloning them into it. Ah, maybe the neat looking printed circuit board is the key to everything. As long as a zapper has a printed circuit board then all is well even if the zappers are weak -- like ParaZappers.
Have you noticed how David Etheredge focuses on the cost of parts and how he likes to talk about resistors and capacitors and wiring -- which he gets wrong -- but he avoids talking about results and testimonials except to declare with authority that I made up the Testimonial Archive on my site? After all, how could a "hobby level" zapper possibly produce such amazing results? He does not explain this. The Ultimate Zapper must be a heck of a hobby zapper. Were the Hulda Clark prototypes hobby zappers? I guess they were. They didn't have printed circuit boards. They had the same wiring as my zapper. Has David Etheredge complained about them?
When we talk about parts and the cost of production, we're talking about carrying a square wave signal through electrodes attached to a pulse-generating device. In case you were wondering, this is not rocket science. The cord used for The Ultimate Zapper is high-conduction multi-strand solid copper cord like most other zappers. Multi-strand solid copper carries signal much more efficiently than single-strand copper cord. In fact, no zapper maker enters the world of "exotic" high-priced cords because it would raise the zapper price without any therapeutic benefit whatsoever. As a signal carrier, The Ultimate Zapper's cord and other components are as efficient as any other zapper on the market -- including David Etheredge's ParaZapper -- despite his protestations to the contrary. He plays to the uninformed who are unfamiliar with electronics.
In fact The Ultimate Zapper's signal is far superior to that of other zappers because of the synergy created by its 12-feature formula. The fact is that no zapper maker's product is enhanced one iota by its power cord or its lead wires. Is David Etheredge implying he uses cryogenically-treated cord or quantum tunneled actively shielded cord or cord that incorporates the latest quantum nano technology or that his zapper uses special technology to prevent Eddy currents? I -- don't -- think -- so. In fact, David Etheredge wants to give the impression of using superior cord. That's simply one more lie to add to his list. No zapper maker does. But he makes his cord sound special by trying to impugn other people's cord. David Etheredge knows how to disinform, mislead and misrepresent and he takes advantage of every opportunity to do so.
The Ultimate Zapper uses the highest quality ABS plastic box available. It is actually much more compact and much easier to use than thie ParaZapper box. David Etheredge does not mention this fact. He fearlessly declares that The Ultimate Zapper's switch is "cheap". The fact is that The Ultimate Zapper uses the highest quality, most expensive toggle switch of its kind available. Add one more lie to his long list of lies. The Ultimate Zapper incorporates high quality capacitors and resistors but does not focus on low-tolerance for one simple reason -- because tolerance in a zapper that outputs 2500 Hz. is irrelevant. It is the range that is important, not a specific frequency. David Etheredge forgot to mention this, too.
But wait. If you are really marketing a frequency generator, not a zapper -- which is one of the secrets about ParaZapper that David Etheredge conveniently forgets to talk about -- then you do require low-tolerance resistors because of the complexity of using frequency generators. I discuss the expense and the complexity of using a frequency generator at #4 and #5 on my FAQ Page. David Etheredge avoids discussing the complicated truth about frequency generators because discussing this would be a game-changer. Then the truth would have to come out. He does not go there -- nowhere near there.
You'd think that a ""shoddy hobby zapper" would be falling apart pretty quickly according to David Etheredge. But I offer an unlimited life-time warrany on parts and labor for The Ultimate Zapper. David Etheredge only offers a 3-year limited warranty -- and he "offers" a punitive returns policy with a 60% return penalty. The Ultimate Zapper has a 3-month trial period with a 7% return fee. It has a rate of return of less than 1%. Not bad for a "piece of junk" zapper.
You'd think that if David Etheredge had as much confidence in the quality of his zapper as he says he has that he would be offering his customers a lot more in terms of backing up his product than he actually offers -- and that he would show just a little generosity to his customers. He says he watches post marks on returns very carefully and that the axe falls if he sees a return that is post marked on day 11.
The Ultimate Zapper is a very high quality product. But its fame does not rest on its resistors and capacitors. The Ultimate Zapper's success rests on something much bigger -- its results -- which is what people are really interested in. The key to the The Ultimate Zapper's success is its unique 12-feature formula that produces amazing results. Frankly, when people purchase a zapper I don't think they are terribly worried about resistor tolerance. They want to know two things. They want to know if the zapper they are buying will give the results they are looking for and if the maker stands behind his product.
People are looking for results and reliability. Which is why you will never see David Etheredge talking about the results people get with The Utltimate Zapper and its extremely low return rate. He never talks about its success. Does this surprise you? His mission is to search for reasons why he cannot "recommend" The Ultimate Zapper. Recommend it? A competitor is acting as a "recommendation agency" for other zappers? This is totally inane. David Etheredge talks about The Ultimate Zapper's "following". Why in the world would people be "following" The Ultimate Zapper in over 60 countries if it were not effective?
It looks like David Etheredge has found a new way to defame The Ultimate Zapper. He is now quoting "reports" from "complaint sites". Read the truth about his "shocking revelations" (below). The "reports" are fraudulent.
"The claim" about the photo of the inside of The Ultimate Zapper that he shows on his site looks like one of my 1996 prototypes".
"The claim"? What claim? This is a fact. It looks like an old model. David Etheredge says it was sent to him in 2007 by a customer. Who knows what the truth is about this zapper without a label when you are dealing with David Etheredge? Unfortunately for him, even my older models produced such superior results that they created the wonderful reputation The Ultimate Zapper now enjoys worldwide. This is what David Etheredge calls its "folllowing".
"Actually, the customer that sent it to us bought it from him in 2007, so he was still shipping these over 10 years after he claims that this one was made. Other customers have since made the same complaint. The manufacturer's response is to call names and accuse us of lying."
"Call names"? I do no such thing. I simply call him a liar because that's the fact. What David Etheredge seems to be saying is that I was shipping 1996 models in 2007. He has a photo on his anti Ultimate Zapper page showing what looks to be the inside of an old Ultimate Zapper but with no label!. He says a customer sent it to him in 2007. Well, in case he has not noticed, we are now in the year 2014. Who knows what zapper he is showing on his site? It is certainly not New Model SE. Of course, David Etheredge also wants people to believe The Ultimate Zapper is shipped without a label. Please see the photos on my Home Page.
This reminds me of his fear-mongering about The Ultimate Zapper's AC adapter -- and his lying about The Ultimate Zapper's features, those same features he is copying for his own zapper. David Etheredge is the most consistent and liar in the zapper business.
"As for pricing, this zapper should not sell for more than $45 or $50 US. If it was made using the higher quality components and boards that we use, this zapper should sell for less than $80.00 with the AC adapter included. His zapper does include a AC wall adapter that does not meet the IEC 60601 specifications for contact with humans. This could possibly be lethal in some cases."
David Etheredge is now authoritatively stating how much The Ultimate Zapper costs to make and how much I should sell it for. But he has no idea what the cost of parts and production are. He doesn't even know what parts are used in the The Ultimate Zapper let alone the details of the cost of production. David Etheredge would like me to sell The Ultimate Zapper below cost. So, I would go out of business and he would pick up all sales he has been missing these past years.
"possibly be lethal in some cases."
This is one of David Etheredge's favorite lies. The famous adapter scare. He hopes this one will work when all others fail. Arthur Doerksen of Auto-Zap and David Etheredge have been fear-mongering about The Ultimate Zapper's AC adapter for years. The Ultimate Zapper was the first zapper in the world with an AC adapter (in 1996). Many other zapper makers followed my lead. He knows very well that our AC adapter is UL and CSA approved. We have also put our high quality double-insulated AC adapter through exhaustive independent testing. There has never been a single problem with our adapter in 18 years and there never will. Please read more at #16 on the FAQ page on my site. The safety of the AC adapter has also been independently corroborated on Curezone.
"Also, this zapper does NOT meet Dr. Clark's specification for positive offset ( see the images below ). If you buy one from them, take it to an electronics shop and have them open it up for you. Have them check it under human load with an oscilloscope. It dips very negative. We will be happy to hear if he makes a significant improvement but a product with so few components should still sell well less than $45 or $50."
Surprise -- more inanity from David Etheredge. Please note that the oscilloscope photo on this site that shows a dip is actually a photo of his own zapper! He has "massaged" the oscilloscope view by quoting Dr. Hulda Clark -- once again. Also, Hulda Clark was wrong when she stated a spike in the square wave has the effect of "sustaining pathogen life". I have yet to read any scientific description or proof of this anywhere. Certainly, David Etheredge provides no evidence to support this statement. It is a totally unproved assertion -- with only Hulda Clark's name attached to it as proof. She died of cancer in 2009 after writing The Cure For All Cancers. The cause of her death was unsuccessfully covered up by David Etheredge.
The fact is that a short spike below the zero line is normal. In fact, there is a short spike at the top and bottom of every zapper wave produced by every zapper from every zapper maker -- including David Etheredge's own ParaZappers -- that you can see below, taken from his own site. Here is an email from my production team:
Here is a picture off the ParaZapper website. Notice that his zapper also has an upward spike at the beginnnig and a downward spike at the end of each cycle. I have also noticed this on other square waves that I have measured. It must be a common occurance. I notice too that under load, his zappers' voltage drops quite a bit, unlike ours ...". The drop in voltage with ParaZapper translates into diminished therapeutic effectiveness -- as per the information from Hulda Clark that David Etheredge chooses to ignore about the importance of zapping with at least 9 volts.
Here is David Etheredge's own oscilloscope photo of the ParaZapper wave taken from his own website:
FROM THE PARAZAPPER SITE
THE PARAZAPPER WAVE
CLEARLY SHOWS THE SPIKE AT THE
TOP AND THE BOTTOM OF THE WAVE
The short spikes at the top and the bottom of The Ultimate Zapper's wave do not diminish its powerful therapeutic effects. We have never received a single email about this from customers. Its wave is very powerful as thousands of users know, to the chagrin of David Etheredge. The difference between the ParaZapper wave and The Ultimate Zapper wave is clearly explained on my Home Page. The Ultimate Zapper New Model XE and New Model SE are the most powerful and effective zappers available. They are 40% more powerful than the original Ultimate Zapper.
"The maker of this unit claiming quality is like a shade tree mechanic claiming that his car is a Rolls Royce. I have seen some hand made units that I would consider to be good quality. This is not one. "
Ken Presner: The Ultimate Zapper is made with high quality parts and assembled by experts (as discussed above). The results people have obtained over the past 18 years are unequivocal with 628 unsolicited testimonials in The Archive. This is the thorn in the side of David Etheredge that he will never be able to remove. His "authoritative" comments regarding "shade tree mechanic" are laughable.
"As you can see from this picture of our most affordable $64 model, ParaZapper provides far superior quality and technology. The claim that hand built is good quality can be easily refuted from the photo of the interior of their unit. It can be but it really depends on how it is hand built and the components that go into it. We use the highest quality green boards and higher quality components that meet ROHS requirements. This model has an almost zero failure rate, less than 1 failure in 5000 units sold. Our machining processes do not create excess heat or damage to the components."
If David Etheredge's ParaZappers are superior then why is he forever chasing The Ultimate Zapper -- recenly taking 3 of its features from for his own zapper? Whose zapper did he say is inferior with his pretzel logic? Taking features from The Ultimate Zapper will -- according to him -- make his zappers inferior! Does he make any sense at all? Have you ever heard such nonsense?
Now David Etheredge pulls a new rabbit out of his hat. He admits that hand-built zappers can be good -- depending on how they are made -- but since The Ultimate Zapper is not well made it is a bad zapper, he declares. Well, The Ultimate Zapper has never seen a circuit failure in 18 years. This is the zapper he says is not well-made.
"As you can see from this picture, ParaZapper is securely attached inside of the durable plastic case with 4 screws.
Same for The Ultmate Zapper.
"The switches and connectors are also securely soldered to the circuit board."
Same for The Ultmate Zapper. But the circuit board is not a printed board.
"Sorry, but cheap switches,"
Ken Presner: He has no idea what he is talking about. The Ultimate zapper uses the most expensive switch of its kind available -- with not a single switch failure.
"hand wiring that can easily break,"
Easily break? This has never happened even once sin the past 18 years -- in over 10,000 zappers shipped.
"hobby level resistors,"
Hobbies are discussed about. The Ultimate Zapper is the best "hobby zapper" in the world.
"and unmounted circuit boards"
The Ultimate Zapper's board is very well mounted. Never a single problem in over 10,000 zappers shipped.
"do not represent quality in any context,"
David Etheredge means in the fairy-tale world he is trying to create for people who do not know about electronics.
"especially when compared to our high quality boards and components."
This has been fully discussed above. A high quality board or component does not translate into a high quality zapper. All ParaZappers are weak compared to The Utlimate Zapper as seen in the 5 Zapper Comparison Charts.
The Ultimate Zapper's switch is the most expensive toggle switch of its kind available. Unmounted circuit boards? Hand wiring that can easily break? David Etheredge pulls one rabbit after the next out of his magic hat. The only problem is they are all lies. By trying to focus attention on parts -- and lying about them -- he may be able to deceive those who are unaware. His agenda is to try to get people's attention away from the amazing results The Ultimate Zapper produces. And he is willing to say whatever it takes to do that. That's the bottom line.
"The ParaZapper UZI has over 50 components on the circuit board, some of them costing almost as much as the entire set of parts that go into the so called [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "so-called"with a hyphen].
Say again? 50 components and still unable to produce one winner? David Etheredge needs to go back to the drawing board. More lies repeated by him about the cost of parts. He also stated that I made up the Testimonial Archive on my site and that he is an electrical engineer ...
"This Ultimate Zapper did not even have a label. According to the customer that traded it in to us, it was purchased in April of 2007. The claim "Machine made printed circuit boards are much cheaper to use but they produce an inferior end product." is not true as we use a lower soldering temperature. The very purpose of the printed circuit board is to improve quality and reliability. In reality, the cheap piece of generic board used in the model shown is much cheaper than our circuit boards cost and we have very few problems with component reliability"
More lies from David Etheredge? He is so desperate that he even wants people to believe The Ultimate Zapper has no label. Really? Have you had a look at my Home Page? I think a visit to the eye doctor may be a good idea at this point for David Etheredge. He may have "very few problems with component reliability" but we have none. So much for his lies about the inferior quality of point-to-point wiring.
"The ultimate [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "The Ultimate Zapper" -- with a capital TUZ] has only 9 hobby quality components on the circuit board and the volume cost for those parts is only about 95 cents, plus a switch costing a buck or so, a jack for a power connector ( also a buck or so in volume ), a battery strap costing about 50 cents, and a plastic case costing about $2.80. And you are paying how much for that custom build? Sorry, but we would consider it extremely dishonest to sell so little for so much."
"... so little for so much"? Was David Etheredge referring to the results? He has an odd concept of the truth. He does not consider it dishonest to say I made the Testimonial Archive. He does not consider it dishonest to misrepresent his credentials, He does not consider it dishonest to lie about the cost of parts and production. He does not consider is dishonest to say The Ultimate Zapper has no label. He does not consider it dishonest to fear-monger about The Ultimate Zapper's AC adapter. He does not consider it dishonest to take 3 features of The Ultimate Zapper for his own zapper while calling The Ultimate Zapper inferior and his own zapper superior. He does not consider it dishonest to misrepresent the wave form produced by his own zapper. He does not consider it dishonest to complain about the price of My Recovery Protocol that has saved many lives (for him $24.95 is too expensive when you're saving lives). He does not consider it dishonest to deny the fact that The Ultimate Zapper produces a very powerful Electroporation Effect. He does not consider it dishonest to make excuses for a convicted felon turned "humanitarian" who steals money from people on his website as long as he mentions the name ParaZapper is his book that sells for $99.95. You have to be very gullible to believe soemone with David Etheredge's track record of dishonesty.
"When the unloaded signal from the Ultimate zapper is observed on the oscilloscope, it looks fairly decent. Unfortunaltely, this is not the signal that needs to be examined."
Now David Etheredge is lecturing on the signal that "needs to be examined". We don't need to examine the results people are getting. Let's not talk about unimportant things like results. Let's talk really important things liket resistors and capacitors for a moment. David Etheredge is the arbiter of what we should and should not be "examining". Yah, sure.
"When the loaded signal from the Ultimate zapper [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "The Ultimate Zapper" with capital letters], using a human body as a load, is observed on the oscilloscope, the story is told."
The story is told? What story? He does not say. Is it the story about the results people have been getting for 18 years with The Ultimate Zapper? Or is it the story about all of David Etheredge's lies?
"The waveform dips extremely negative completely violating Dr. Clark's statement "No even a single spike on negative side, because you sustain pathogen life". According to the image, the claim of 100 percent positive output is obviously completely false."
"Sustain pathogen life"
"Sustain pathogen life"? In which case it is impossible for The Ultimate Zapper to produce the amazing results it has been producing for 18 years. David Etheredge needs to visit an eye doctor. My explanation of how the square wave works has been on my FAQ Page (#11) for years. David Etheredge's reply: he ignores it. Here is a quote from #11 on my FAQ Page:
"I note David Etheredge has done oscilloscope hocus pocus on his new "not so ultimate zapper" page. The only problem with quoting Dr. Hulda Clark about the square wave dipping below the zero line is that she was wrong. The fact is Dr. Clark was not right about everything she said -- in her books or in her research. She was definitely wrong about her statement regarding "sustaining pathogen life" that David Etheredge is quoting regarding the square wave dipping below the zero line. Beyond the statement and the reiteration of this claim I have not read any description supporting this statement. David Etheredge provides no evidence to support this claim -- nor did Dr. Clark herself."
The claim is totally false. A short spike below the zero line is normal under load. In fact there is a short, sharp spike at the top and the bottom of every zapper wave produced by every zapper from every zapper maker. This can be seen in close-ups of oscilloscope views -- and the photo on Dsvid Etheredge's site of the ParaZapper wave!. The ultimate irony is that this short spike does not diminish the powerful therapeutic effects of The Ultimate Zapper in any way -- as thousands of users know -- to the chagrin of David Etheredge I am sure. The Ultimate Zapper is the most powerful and effective zapper in the world. I think this is probably The Ultimate Thorn in the side of David Etheredge who has not been able to figure out how to make a better zapper. He resorts to negative marketing where all fails.
"The Ultimate Zapper's frequency is advertised as 2500 Hz but as you can see below, the output is not exact. Actually, due to the hobby level components used in making the Ultimate Zapper [sic spelling mistake -- should be "The Ultimate Zapper" with a capital T], the actual frequency could be +/- about 18 percent. This is one of the poorest quality zappers that I have seen. As a comparison, the ParaZapper PLUS-2 has a tolerance of only +/- 10 Hz in the 2500 Hz range, which is less than 1/2 percent error and the CC1 is even more accurate."
" ... the output is not exact"? Who says that frequency has to be exact? It must be the great zapper authority David Etheredge. The fact is that, for frequency generators, it is vital that the output frequency be exact -- with no variation at all. But this is not for zappers. Zappers are not frequency generators, as I point out in #4 on my FAQ Page. David Etheredge, once again, takes advantage of the fact that most people are not aware now these technical matters. Resistors with a more liberal tolerance have a variable frequency around the nominal output. But that changes nothing when it comes to the results people get with zappers -- which is all people really care about -- and all that really matters. Jealous competitors may want to focus on resistor tolerance when they are trying to make other zapper makers look bad. But, too bad for David Etheredge, users of The Ultimate Zapper get amazing results with those resistors.
"Based on this information, you can see that the Ultimate Zapper [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "The Ultimate Zapper" with a capital T] does not meet the manufacturer's claims. Seeing this, how could anyone trust his other claims such as Electroporation ( which is not possible at such low voltages according to most authorities ) and blood electrification which requires a much higher voltage according to its author, Bob Beck."
My zapper is actually called The Ultimate Zapper. I guess it's just another David Etheredge typo on his sticky keboard. Does not meet the manufacturer's claim"? Ya gotta be joking.
Talking about Electroporation and Blood Electrification, David Etheredge likes to quote "authorities" when he thinks he can get some mileage out of it -- even when the "authorities" are dead wrong. I mean, who needs facts when you have "authorities"? That way you can park your brain under a shade tree so you don't have to think for yourself. Read the truth about The Ultimate Zapper's Electroporation Effect here. Quoting Bob Beck will also do David Etheredge no good. The Ultimate Zapper produces a very powerful Blood Electrification effect at its lower voltage. Countless testimonials from customers prove this fact -- beyond a shadow of a doubt.
"We have had several phone calls from former customers of the manufacturer who complain about their "poor customer service" and "arrogant attitude".
Isn't this interesting? David Etheredge says my customers are calling him to complain about me. It is very well-known in the zapper business that I offer the best customer service of any zapper maker. Hands down. Bar none. I answer all emails within 24 hours and I am glad to talk over the phone. David Etheredge will never be able to convince anyone otherwise. Who is he trying to fool?
David Etheredge has no qualms about claiming people have complained to him about that "arrogant" Ken Presner. All he has to do is refer to a third party. He should work for The National Enquirer. What do we know about David Etheredge's ethics? We know a lot. His deceptive business practices and his lack of ethics are revealed in black and white in this expose.
For someone with David Etheredge's track record for lying and poor service -- he says he examines post marks and counts the days so he can let the ax fall at day 11 with a 60% return penalty -- and his public display of arrogance both on his site and on CureZone Forums -- David Etheredge has an opinion of himself that is not shared by the many customers and forum posters who email me and who post on Curezone.
David Etheredge is keen to report alleged complaints about my site. The only problem is that these "reports" that have been proved fraudulent and are posted on sites owned by criminals like Ed Magedson of Ripoff Report. David Etheredge leaves it to the end of his shocking expose to mention that two of the sites where these fraudulent "reports" were posted have no actual "reports" to report when you click on the links he provides -- because they were taken down when I proved fraud! As though this were irrelevant. There is a second "report" referred to on the same criminal-owned "report" site (Ed Magedson, once again) that is clearly a set-up. It mentions David Etheredge by name -- and quotes him word for word.
A group of their "reports" are no longer there when you click. Why? The owner of Complaints Board and their sister site (run out of Latvia -- so they are beyond the long arm of the law) NEVER takes down any complaints from his sites. But he took these "reports" down because I proved that they were fraudulent. I esteemed that chasing after other criminal sites that copied the same "report" onto their own sites would be an exercise in masochism. So, I chose not to waste time pursuing them.I had already proved my point.
David Etheredge "forgot" to mention that these "reports" that appear as several "reports" on his site are not plural at all. They are actually a single report that appears on several so-called "report" sites. He published these "reports" on his site with his usual tone of authority, as though there were a bevy of legitimate complaints against The Ultimate Zapper. Where the truth is that this was a single fraudulent report. There is no better example of his ethics in motion than this whole affair.
To read more about these fraudulent reports click here.
"This complaint appears to have been removed."
Duuuh. "... appears to have been removed ..." This is not a questions of "appears". It was in fact removed. But he neglects to say why and he has never removed the links from his site. David Etheredge is indeed a cunning liar.
Years ago on Curezone a forum visitor started posting complaints about me and my service. Ooooh. David Etheredge was so happy to hear about this. He just loves repeating stories and "reports about The Ultimate Zapper -- without checking the facts. Facts? I mean, who needs facts when you can repeat a "report" on Ken Presner? As someone who ambulance chases on Curezone, David Etheredge was quick to pick up on this new poster's grievance against me. It was ipso obvious to David Etheredge that it must be legitimate. Obvious?
The "complainant" said he ordered an Ultimate Zapper but never received his order and was demanding a refund which I allegedly refused to give him. This looked like a juicy scandal that can make a competitor start to salivate -- a competitor named David Etheredge. The only problem is that it was all lies. The "complainant" had received his zapper and signed for it (on the form the signature was "Pe****on") -- AND he received a refund as well. Through a cunning ploy he was able to get his Ultimate Zapper for free -- and publicize a totally false story on Curezone to elicit the sympathy and support of Curezone readers. David Etheredge was not about to let this opportunity slip through his fingers. He pounced on it. He was only too happy to repeat the "complainant's" lies. To this day he has never admitted the truth and has never removed this "report" from his site. Well, guess what? David Etheredge is at it again. This is no surprise from someone with David Etheredge's ethics.
"While the zapper does work to some extent"
Say again? "... the zapper"? Oh, I get it. He means The Ultimate Zapper. I notice how the name sticks in his craw. "... works to some extent"? That's not what he said when he declared The Ultimate Zapper "may be the best single frequency zapper". And that's not what thousands of satified users have been saying for the past 18 years -- reflected in 628 unsolicited testimonials in the Testimonial Archive. To what "extent"? His recent comments are those of a jealous competitor. Who are you going to believe? Actress Karen Allen who got rid of her Lyme disease after using The Ultimate Zapper for only 4 hours after suffering from Lyme for years -- or David Etheredge? How about the other 627 testimonials?
"and has a following,"
"Has a following"? Why on earth would it "have a following" if it were the terrible product that David Etheredge portrays it as being? According to sales figures anounced by Don Croft of Terminator that used to be the world's #1 selling zapper, The Ultimate Zapper has overtaken it and has become the world's #1 selling zapper. David Etheredge got it right -- The Ultimate Zapper has "a following". For a good reason. Results -- that he does everything to avoid talking about.
"we do not feel that it matches up to the hype."
Ken Presner: Say again?
"We"? Oh, he is referring to himself. "Matches up"? What the heck does that mean? Did he do field testing with The Ultimate Zapper to arrive at this authoritative statement? "The hype."? What hype? Is he referring to the 628 unsolicited testimonials in The Archive? If so, my comments about The Ultimate Zapper are positively muted compared to what so many people have to say in their testimonials. Does he really think anyone would even take his comments seriously -- a jealous competitor of his ilk?
"We are only trying to show the inferior aspects of this zapper"
Say again? "We"? Oh, David Etheredge is referring to himslef in the plural again. The word "I" is only a small one. We sounds better.
"We're only trying to show the inferior aspects of this zapper [David Etheredge means The Ultimate Zapper]." That's very kind of him to provide this public service. Of course, his statement implies that there are "aspects" to The Ultimate Zapper that are not "inferior". After all, why try to show the superior "aspects" of "this zapper". That could get people thinking The Ultimate Zapper is not so bad after all. After all, he did say The Ultimate Zapper "may be the best single frequency zapper". We wouldn't want anything positive to creep into the conversation, now would we? I wonder what "aspects" David Etherdge is referring to? Is he referring to the three "aspects" he "borrowed" from The Ultimate Zapper to take for his own zapper?
I wonder how these "inferior aspects" David Etheredge refers to are able to produce the amazing results that people are reporting? They are obviously contributing to The Ultimate Zapper's success and popularity. I can only imagine how its superior "aspects" are adding to its amazing synergy and the results people are raving about if its inferior aspects are doing such a good job. I wonder if he even thinks twice about anything he says before he says it. I mean, just look at all the inanity. One idiocy after the next.
"and the high price that is reaped through hype."
I get it. David Etheredge is "worried" about "the high price that is reaped". This is the essence of his agenda. It does not matter how many people my zapper has helped -- and the many people who have literally got their lives back. He is worried about the high price they had to pay. Is there any more that needs to be said about David Etheredge?
"the truth is that if that zapper"
"That Zapper". David Etheredge has a problem saying my zapper's name -- and spelling it correctly when he does mention it by name. I cannot think of a single instance in the past 10 years when he got its spelling correct. He claims he has a sticky keyboard.
"was the best, we would be producing it"
David Etheredge takes 3 of The Ultimate Zapper's 12 features then talks about "if that zapper was the best ... we would be producing it" That's exactly what he is trying to do -- while disclaiming this obvious fact.
"and promoting it as would everyone else in the business."
Well, if there is a better example of pretzel logic from any zapper maker I have not yet found it. According to David Etheredge, all zapper makers are scanning other zapper sites so they can find the best zapper so they can copy it -- just like he is trying to do by taking 3 of The Ultimate Zapper's features. According to David Etheredge, all zapper makers are as uncreative and unscrupuous as he is. He is even trying to take the name of my zapper -- while putting my zapper's name in lower case to make it look generic. David Etheredge is as transparent as a pane of Windexed glass.
"Also, note that there are a lot of other zappers out there and you do not see us posting web pages about them."
Gee, I wonder why?
Say again? "Their"? Oh, he must be referring to me. "Claim"? This is not a claim. David Etheredge stated in black and white on Curezone that The Ultimate Zapper may be the "best single frequency zapper".
"that we supported their product was from before we found out what was inside of it."
Supported "their product"? Wow, he takes my breath away. Oh, I get it. He has to backtrack now. He need to re-write history since he realized he was sending me customers.
"This is certainly not a product that we could endorse."
Is a product endoresment company or a zapper maker posing as Mr. Consumer Reports?
"There are even some competing zappers and manufacturers that we endorse when asked about them."
Aw shucks. I take it all back He's really a nice guy after all.
"Impressive diagram? NO! The competitor is only showing the diagram of a single component (a 555 timer) that is used in almost every single cheap zapper ever made. Nothing special, it just looks impressive to the unknowing user. "
Who said it was an "impressive diagram"? I said it was at the heart of The Ultimate Zapper. And so it is. This is simply a fact. The 555 CMOS timer chip is now also being deprecated by David Etheredge. He says it is used in "almost every single cheap zapper ever made"? And what about expensive zappers? Why do makers of expensive zapper use the CMOS as well, if it is no good? And why did Hulda Clark, the inventor of the original zapper, use it in her zapper? Read the truth about the amazing 555 CMOS timer chip here. The Ultimate Zapper uses the superior TTL version, by the way. Sorry to point out another positive thing about The Ultimate Zapper. I hate to embarrass David Etheredge any more than necessary. Wikipedia says about the 555 CMOS timer chip that "As of 2003, it is estimated that 1 billion units are manufactured every year." Well, sorry, but it can't be as bad as David Etheredge tries to make out.
"If we were to post the diagram of the main chip that is used in our ParaZapperCC1, and ParaZapperUZI it would be well over 100 times more complex than this diagram."
Too bad it does not produce the superior results that The Ultimate Zapper does -- which does not depend on the chip only, of course, but on the synergy of its 12 features. David Etheredge needs to get busy. Back to the drawing board.
Ooooh. Now we get to the punch line. It's time to place an order for a a real zapper -- ParaZapper -- that takes 3 features from that no-darn-good Ultimate Zapper. The petzapper site is David Etheredge's website.
"Even though we do not think much of the ultimate zapper [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "The Ultimate Zapper" with capital letters],"
Say again? He means "I" but cannot bring himself to abandon the illusion that he is a plural, not a singular.
He does not think much of the ultimate zapper -- in lower case no capitals you may note. Of course not. That's the competition. Did anyone REALLY expect him to say anything in favor of The Ultimate Zapper whose features he is in the habit of taking and whose name he conveniently "borrows"? David Etheredge says whatever it takes to talk my zapper down. But the one thing he has not factored into the equation is the law of the universe. Karma. What goes around comes around.
"if you feel that you must have that function,"
Say again? The Ultimate Zapper is no longer a zapper? It is a "function"? Did you get that? Wait. Further down his page David Etheredge calls it a "mode". He already talked about its "aspects" and often refers to it as a device with "functionality" and as "that zapper" and as a generic "ultimate zapper". Stop there. Just what is The Ultimate Zapper, actually? Is it a zapper? Or is it that zapper? Or is it a device with functionality. Or is it an ultimate zapper?
Or is it a function? Or is it a mode? Or is it an aspect? David Etheredge cannot even agree with himself on what the heck to call The Ultimate Zapper. Calling it The Ultimate Zapper would stick in his craw and he might get a case of indigestion. I mean, you have to laugh when you read David Etheredge. He is like a zapper sit-com. He calls me "they" and "them" and "their" and "the competitor". He calls himself "him" and "we". How can you trust someone who cannot even call simple things by their real name -- including himself?
David Etheredge has probably not noticed that The Ultimate Zapper is actually a real live zapper called The Ultimate Zapper with a unique 12-feature formula -- and lots of good Karma -- and thousands of satisfied customers with a worldwide network of distributors.
"we even provide a model that beats their Ultimate Zapper hands down!"
Here's that "we" again. Oh, I see. The Ultimate Zapper is trash but "we" have a better model -- that just happens to take 3 of The Ultimate Zapper's features. Huh? The Ultimate Zapper is not worthy of correct spellling with the same 3 features that he takes for his own zapper to help make it superior? Did I get that right? His new model beats a zapper he calls worthless -- that he is trying to copy. Did I get that right?
"See ParaZapper UZI the real ultimate zapper, it has 6 different zappers built into one."
Say again? You mean all those other models he has been selling are not good enough? But I thought they were great zappers? What happened all of a sudden? Into the garbage can now? You now need a 6-in-one? Why would you need 6 in one if he had one that was good enough? The Ultimate Zapper is only one in one. And it has been doing great for many years -- with thousands of very satisfied customers -- but it is obviously worthless according to David Etheredge.
"It includes the exact 90 percent duty cycle at 2020 Hz ( which is a lower frequency than even the ultimate zapper [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "The Ultimate Zapper" with capital letters] provides ), with an accuracy of 0.5 percent ( way more accurate than the ultimate zapper ), and top quality, high reliability construction. We do not offer the ultimate mode because it is any better, but only to give you a choice."
Say again? You mean David Etheredge is throwing "Dr. Clark's specifications" in the garbage can -- after all his protestations and after accusing me of doing that very thing? And copying The Ultimate Zapper to do so? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Aw shucks. I just don't know what to say. How about a simple thank-you.
"As a mattrer [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "matter"] of point, the ultimate mode is the least preferred mode among the users who have told us which modes that they like."
Say again? You mean all those other models David Etheredge has been selling are not good enough? But I thought they were great zappers? What happened all of a sudden? Into the garbage can now? You now need a 6-in-one? Why would you ever need 6 if one zapper was good enough? The Ultimate Zapper is only one. It has been doing great for many years -- with lots of very satisfied customers that back it to the hilt.
"The ParaZapper UZI offers functionallity [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "functionality" with only one l] that exceeds any zapper in its price range, on the market."
Say again? Have a look at the 5 Zapper Comparison Charts. They show very clearly that not only is the UZI more expensive in most of its versions than The Ultimate Zapper it does not shine a light to The Ultimate Zapper that is clearly on the top of the zapper heap -- which is why it has been so successful.
In fact, as I discuss on this page, the UZI is not really a zpaper at all. It is a frequency generator -- a very complicated, expensive and time-consuming device to use that I discuss in #4 on my FAQ Page. In fact, Hulda Clark herself wrote that most people looking for a zapper should eschew complicated and expensive frequency generators in favor of a good zapper. So much for all of David Etheredge's empty talk about following "Dr. Clark's specifications".
"David Etheredge has had extensive experience in product development since the 1970's. For a list of his electronics design products, click here."
Did you notice David Etheredge he cannot even say "I" when referring to himself? He refers to himself here in the third person singular -- and in the first person plural ("we") in many other instances. Hmmm. He does not mention that these statements about his credentials are a direct response to my revelation that he has been misrepresenting himself as an accredited electrical engineer for over 10 years on his site and on discussion forums. He took courses in electronics and has experience in electronics design -- no rocket Science here -- but he IS NOT an electrical engineer.
"For a list of his electronics software and programming experience, click here."
Programming? What in the world does this have to do with zappers? Should I list my computer programming training and all the computer programming projects I have worked on? This is totally irrelevant -- except to try to create some kind of credibility for himself after lying about his credentials for years.
"All ParaZapper products are made with 100 percent ROHS compliant components and are free of lead and other hazardous materials. We have built to this standard for a long time, it is not new to us. "
The Ultimate Zapper has been built to this standard for many years. I have never said or even implied that this was new to David Etheredge. This is a paper tiger.
"The competitor also offers a convient [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be "convenient"] comparison chart where he only shows the 2 least expensive models that we offer and he only compares the characteristics that he claims are the best. Conveniently, he completely ignores our 3 best models that surpass his in practically every way. ParaZapper UZI offers several frequencies ( including several Rife Frequencies ) that are lower than the Ultimate Zapper's [sic -- spelling mistake -- this should be The Ultimate Zapper's with a capital T] frequency, and that actually produces a genuine positive offset."
" ... a genuine positive offset." Just like The Ultimate Zapper's square wave. "The competitor"? David Etheredge must be referring to me. As you can clearly see in the 5 Zapper Comparison Charts, David Etheredge's UZI is right there beside his basic and plus models -- one more weak zapper added to his stable of weak zappers. But wait. With all those frequencies the UZI doesn't look like a zapper at all. It isn't. It is actually a frequency generator. Uh, oh. This is a whole new ball game. David Etheredge has just stepped into quicksand. Please see #4 on my FAQ Page for an explanation about the difference between zappers and frequency generators.
The latter are a very complicated and expensive route to take. Look at David Etheredge's zapping schedule. People will actually have the time to zap at all those frequencies? That's what frequency generators are all about. Complications. Hulda Clark knew this and said most people will end up choosing the zapper option -- not the frequency generator option. David Etheredge forgot to mention this. The frequency generator option is very time-consuming and also much more expensive than zapping with The Ultimate Zapper that requires zapping for only 15 seconds to begin with.
"Characteristics" I "claim" are the best? View the 5 Zapper Comparison Charts and judge for yourself. Does my list of features look like a "claim" to you? Do they look like "characteristics"? Scan all of the features and scan all of the zappers. Never mind what David Etheredge would like you to think about my Zapper Comparison Charts. He thinks that by calling features "characteristics" that they are no longer features. This is the same kind of deception that we find throughout David Etheredge's anti Ultimate Zapper page. He wants people to think that the features in my charts do not represent the features that make zappers effective -- while taking 3 of those features for his own zapper. Hypocrisy and duplicity also characterize David Etheredge's modus operandi. Have a look at The Charts and judge for yourself.
And finally. The smoking gun. The Ultimate Zapper is not so ultimate. David Etheredge is adding 3 of its features to create his best zapper -- but just to satisfy misguided customers who want to purchase what he and they already know is an inferior zapper. Huh?
Now David Etheredge's "3 best models ... surpass his [Ken Presner's Ultimate Zapper] in practically every way." Say again? "... surpass ... in practically every way [The Ultimate Zapper]"? But I thought The Ultimate Zapper was an inferior zapper not worth copying except to provide an inferior zapper to customers who demand it? Trying to surpass an inferior zapper? Ah, how exqusite. David Etheredge has put his 2 feet in his mouth at the same time -- once again.
For an expose of David Etheredge's
4. David Etheredge
NAQ (never asked questions)
1. Why did David Etheredge endorse The Ultimate Zapper and then try to retract his endorsement?
2. Why is David Etheredge now trying to copy The Ultimate Zapper?
3. Why is David Etheredge adding the name of The Ultimate Zapper to his own zapper?
4. Why do electronics experts endorse The Ultimate Zapper?
5. Why does Don Croft who created the Terminator zapper endorse The Ultimate Zapper?
6. Why has David Etheredge devoted so much effort to waging an unprovoked war against The Ultimate Zapper over a period of many years -- while studiously ignoring the mountain of positive reports from satisfied customers about The Ultimate Zapper's effectiveness -- and its worldwide acceptance?
7. Why does David Etheredge ignore that The Ultimate Zapper has been reported by practitioners all over the world to be effective for treating many serious conditions? Doctors are using it in hospitals and clinics to treat malaria that is eliminated in only 6 days with my zapper -- as well as using it to treat HIV and cancer and many, many other conditions.
8. Why does David Etheredge ignore the mountain of clinical evidence supporting The Ultimate Zapper -- preferring to talk about the cost of resistors and capacitors while publishing totally false information about the cost of production for The Ultimate Zapper?
9. Why does David Etheredge restrict his zapper discussion to the one thing that matters least to zapper users -- electronic circuitry -- while ignoring the one thing that matters most to people -- The Ultimate Zapper's amazing results?
10. Why did actress Karen Allen's doctor recommend The Ultimate Zapper for treating her Lyme disease?
11. Why did Karen Allen get such amazing results with The Ultimate Zapper for Lyme disease -- after only 4 hours zapping?
12. Why did Karen Allen do an unsolicited interview publicizing me and The Ultimate Zapper?
13. Why did Karen Allen's friends get the same amazing results with her Ultimate Zapper for Lyme disease as Karen did?
14. Why does David Etheredge say I made up the 628 unsolicited testimonials (and counting) in the Testimonial Archive that bear witness to The Ultimate Zapper's phenomenal success.
15. Why do thousands of customers in over 60 countries say The Ultimate Zapper is the best zapper they ever used?
16. Why does The Ultimate Zapper have a worldwide network of distributors with a expanding clientele of satisfied users?
17. Why does The Ultimate Zapper have a return rate of less than 1%.
18. Why is David Etheredge trying to improve his internet ranking by using the cunning ploy of taking the name of my zapper to piggy-back onto the popularity of The Ultimate Zapper -- instead of improving his ranking through good old honest hard work?
19. Why does The Ultimate Zapper site have more sites linking into it than any other zapper site in the world -- while the ParaZapper site has only 8 other sites linking into it?
20. Why has David Etheredge been falsifying his own credentials for years?
21. Why does David Etheredge quote fraudulent reports from sites owned by convicted criminals to try to discredit The Ultimate Zapper?
22. Over the past 18 years I have received universal thanks from customers and practitioners. There has been a single voice railing relentlessly against The Ultimate Zapper. It has not been from a customer or a practitioner. It has been from David Etheredge -- an obviously jealous competitor. Who is he fooling Anyone? Read more.
23. Why do so many people email me saying that my site rings true?
24. Why have many spiritually aware people reported to me that they have been guided to my site above all other zapper sites?
25. Why would David Etheredge bother producing a stable full of complicated zappers if he had one model that was really effective?
26. Why does David Etheredge claim his zapper must be more effective than The Ultimate Zapper because of its complexity? The Charts show it most definitely is not. The simplicity of The Ultimate Zapper is precisely what creates its power and its amazing effectiveness. This simple concept is translated into the amazing synergy of its 12 features.
27. Why does David Etheredge pander to a well-known convicted felon -- Kevin Trudeau -- a larcenist turned author who has a photo of the ParaZapper in his book? And why does he make excuses for this felon's criminal activity?
28. Why does David Etheredge ambulance chase on Curezone and use its forums for commercial purposes in contravention of Forum Rules ?
29. I recovered from Multiple Sclerosis and Crohn's disease. David Etheredge has been publishing dangerously false information for years on Multiple Sclerosis and Crohn's disease as well as other diseases and serious conditions -- as well as a lot of harmless outright nonsense. Why does he try to project an aura of authority on health matters he knows nothing about and has no credentials for?
30. Why has David Etheredge removed countless comments on health issues from his site after I publicized they were false?
31. In response to my revelation that David Etheredge has been falsifying his credentials he is now publishing portions of his c.v. to cover up the truth that he is not an electrical engineer as he previously alleged. Why does he consistently lie about himself?
32. Who does David Etheredge think he is fooling?
5.PARAZAPPER -- DECEPTIVE MARKETING EXPOSE here