It seems as if we have a few skeptics here. Shame that those skeptics obviously haven't done any research, don't have the first clue about the therapeutic properties of H2O2, and have obviously never tried it. I have tried it, for a (non-ulcerative) ringworm condition (rash of 6 inches diameter) that the poisonous anti-fungus pharmaceuticals weren't moving and were just exacerbating... and it completely blew away the fungus in about 3 days / 6 applications of 15% food grade. At this concentration it will get rid of all non-broken fungal dermatologic conditions with little side effect. (If the skin was open you would have to go about it more cautiously.)
Put this stuff on healthy skin and you get nothing, or maybe just a tiny bit very short lasting bleaching effect, or fizzing as it attacks dead cells. But on a fungal rash? It goes nuts neutralising (killing) the fungus and you heal rapidly thereafter. You experience some stinging but it is doing it's job. Obviously, reduced dosage over a longer period will take longer and sizzle less.
H2O2 is a potent oxidiser so it needs to be used with caution, and that especially means getting it nowhere near the eyes, and at the right dosage for the application. You wouldn't use anywhere near 3% in an enema for example. But the ignorance in the above post is clearly evident because H202 is endogenous - ie native to the human body - and every cell produces it. It is used by the immune system at the most fundamental level when white cells attack foreign cells. Ask any biochemist what would happen if there was no peroxidation reactions in the body. It's like asking what would happen if you didn't breathe.
If anyone is considering this treatment modality, educate yourself and don't listen to %§#&!ß-artists who pontificate from their podiums and know nothing. They are protecting vested interests in medicine and pharmacos. Try reading Ed McCabe's "Flood your body with Oxygen" and make up your mind for yourself.