Ok now let me respond to the half truths and outright lies…
At no point did I ever say it was wrong to run a business and make a profit, what I was criticizing was your overall sleazy method of attempting to lead sick people to your product in a forum where they should be able to get many opinions and not one that is clearly biased and suspect in the opinion of many on these forums. I don’t object to any company whether its parazapper or Don croft making money but I don’t see croft here and yes obviously he does make a lot more then parazapper…clearly his product is able to stand on its own reputation and has gained wide appeal due to its effectiveness. If Croft were on this forum using your methods I would be saying the same thing to him because it has nothing to do with the amount of money made, it has to do with methods and false claims (which we will get to momentarily). So since it has nothing to do with money the hypocrisy you claimed to see is non existent. See in your own statements as follows…
In one breath you say "we feel that testimonials are not a reliable source of information as they are one-sided. I have never seen a site that published a negative testimonial, but I can guarantee that they exist, even for the best products such as penicillin and aspirin."
in the next you say “We tell them what other customers tell us about what does work and what does not work when it comest to zapping.”
Followed later by “The CCa is only available from ParaZapper and it produces a distintively noticable difference in results according to our users”
Not according to any independent studies but “according to our users” even though you just stated that testimonials are unreliable.
Now, either you don’t except testimonials as reliable or you base your statements on them, which is it? I think the hypocrisy is yours alone.
Its really ridiculous to claim that I haven’t read all your material just because you don’t like the conclusions that I reached from reading it (so every time you are about to write that I missed something, please refer to this sentence…I haven’t missed a page on your site, my conclusions are just not the ones you would like me to draw). I know the site inside and out because I always read your statements and wanted to learn about the parazapper and it seems I have learned quite enough to know that it is nothing special.
Now lets discuss this “innovative technology” lol…
From the parazapper site “The CCa has an internal device that senses the current flowing out to the body and if it is not sufficient, the circuit adapts to increase the current until the correct level is reached ( if possible ).”
Followed directly by “Also, because it can deliver a stronger signal, it has a control for you to adjust if it gets too strong.”
Why would one need to adjust the current if the device is able to adjust to apply “correct level” automatically? It should not be needed because it couldn’t get too strong if it is sensing the amount of current and applying it exactly. If a zapper outputs the correct current in the first place then this is a pretty meaningless feature and in the contradicting statements just noted it makes one wonder if it even works as advertised. This is not a advanced technological advance it is a smoke and mirrors technique to attempt to make the zapper standout in the croud, kind of like Crofts use of pennies for electrodes.
Lets get get to the next technological advancement…
Footpads may be more effective but that is still not a reason to buy the parazapper, as footpads can be connected to ANY GOOD ZAPPER, can they not? Since they can be connected to any good zapper and bought for a few bucks at any hardware store, they are not a reason to claim that the parazapper is better zappers because you offer them as an accessory. That’s like saying one ipod is better then the other mp3 players because it has headphones, when one can easily connect them to any mp3 player. So the headphones are not a reason to buy an ipod. They are an accessory not a part of an advanced device. Let me inform you that copper pads made in the shape of feet are not a “technological advancement” LOL…it is another smoke attempt to make it seem as though it is vastly different when the truth is it is not. Footpads are just another means of applying the output to the body. What if I came out with a zapper that had an entire copper suit that one could wear, would that be a technological advancement because it is a ble to apply the signal to more areas of the body? If you are just attempting to apply the signal to as much of the body as we can then my copper suit would be far better then footpads lol. But in no way would my patented copper zapping suit be a technological advancement or make the zapper more then the average zapper any more then footpads. Nothing mentioned on the parazapper site or in your response qualifies (in the mind or any sane person) as a “major innovation.” A major innovation would be to truly discover the mechanism at work in effecting the bodies when zapping is concerned and finding another method (other then electrical current) to apply a treatment with a near 100% success rate. That would be a major innovation. But there is still a debate about what the mechanism for healing is and there is no conclusive proof as to which side of the debate is correct.
If your only selling point is the better instruction manual then that is a sad statement to make…there are many free, thorough, and comprehensive zapping articles on the net which require no purchase from a ill person who needs there money for other
You said “I am seeking to protect the person who needs a good zapper from ignorance.”
The only ignorance you are protecting people from is the ignorance of where provide there credit card numbers to purchase the parazapper. Because that is the only product you provided such valuable info on. You say that you have tried a “dozen other zappers” as well… wow that’s an amazing coincidence that you just happen to work for the company of the best zapper you’ve ever tried. That is the definition of bias, is it not? Those who have only used one zapper may be limited in their scope but at least their experiences are not blatantly motivated by anything other then caring for others.
As for the $10 zapper, the chip may be inferior but if people who have used it are satisfied with the results they have received, then who are you to downplay their testimonials in favor of your own biased counter testimonial?
I said “Any other zapper that is mentioned on this forum is immediately attacked by parazapper as being inferior when”
you said “Please provide the specific pages where this claim is made.”
A few sentence before this you said “As for Ken Pressner's ultimate zapper ( which I tried with a 9v battery ) I have not complained about it. I do not like it plugged into the wall though.”
In the same sentence as saying you have not complained about it you come out and complain about it. A properly engineered product that is plugged into the wall has not been shown to be more dangerous or ineffective then using a 9 volt battery but you have to take every opportunity to take shots at any other products in order to make the parazapper appear superior.
You said “There is not any other zapper out there with CCa technology built in, so they may produce a similar but not identical output.”
No two zappers, even built by the same company, are going to produce the exact same output just because of the variations in individual parts so “similar” is about as close as one can get.
You said “Even our shoebox zapper produces better results than the standard Clark zapper.”
According to whom? I have not seen any competent independent lab studies showing this to be the case
You said “If our customers were dissatisfied, you would be hearing from a lot of them here. You do not!”
I have also never seen any customers praising your products either, so that is blatantly false/ flawed argument.
You said “Based on the same circuit but with definite improvements. First, the chip that we use is far better.
You in no way provide any info on how this chip is better in terms of its effect on a patient. You can not be so certain of its superiority as there is still the debate about what the mechanism is that is causing the positive effects on user’s health.
You said “First, Dr. Clark does not have the time or you would see her here providing information.”
Yes this is true, she would be giving info on her protocols not attempting to steer people toward a zapper manufactured for her profit. In fact as far as I know she does not have a line of zappers that she profits from.
You said “From what I have seen, you definitly have presented a biased hypocritical viewpoint.”
LoL, how to you ever call anyone biased…you have some nerve don’t you. I have no interests in the use or lack in of any product (so that rules out bias) and my statements have in no way been hypocritical (as I never objected to having business, just to disgusting methods of bias profiteers like yourself) but yours on the other hand have been clearly shown to be so.
You said “I do not know what your problem is but I work 12 to 16 hours a day 6 to 7 days a week looking for improvements and trying to help people get better. I do know one thing though. You have not tried the ParaZapper CCa because if you had, you would not have written this.”
Well if you are spending that much time trying to find improvements then it truly has not been a very fruitful search because their have not been any major improvements as I’ve said. Are you saying that no one who has used a parazapper product has sent it back or been dissatisfied with the results? You said earlier that there were negative testimonials. So I think those people, having used it would agree with what I wrote. So to say that no one who ever used the product would ever write anything critical is an absolute fallacy. I was opened to using the parazapper when I first came on this site but after seeing your sleazy methods and your blatantly unsupported statements, I wouldn’t spend one cent the parazapper products and think they should be ashamed of the way there product is being marketed.
The parazapper may be a good zapper (though I see nothing that makes it superior to the crowd) but the form of ambulance chasing that you engage in on this site reflects very poorly on the company and its product. If I were your employer you would be out on your ass and no longer be a “salaried employee.” I had to write this because it sickens me to see people who are sick and frightened, looking for help having to deal with people with vested interests.