Auto-Zap
&
Silver Terminator
INDEX OF ARTICLES
1. THE AUTO-ZAP: 14 ISSUES here2. THE AUTO-ZAP: HIS "ULTIMATE ZAPPER" FIASCO here
3. THE AUTO-ZAP: OPEN LETTER TO ARTHUR DOERKSEN here
4. SILVER TERMINATOR:
EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH
KEN ADACHI of "EDUCATE-YOURSELF" here
1. THE AUTO-ZAP: 13 ISSUES
It is hard to know what to do when a competitor makes inaccurate statements about your product on his website. Do you just ignore it or can you find a way to respond in a respectful and professional manner? I do not want my zapper to be misrepresented by other zapper makers so I will respond to the competition in order to clarify matters.
The maker of the Auto-Zap zapper, Arthur Doerksen, has made a number of inaccurate and misleading statements about The Ultimate Zapper on his website which I feel obliged to comment on. He corrected some of these misstatements after I emailed him about them. But there are still a number of misstatements on his site that need clarification and correction.
In addition, there are some statements he makes about his Auto-Zap zapper which I find confusing and contradictory and I will discuss those statements here as well. This discussion is meant to clarify these matters for the many people who have emailed me about them.
I respect Arthur Doerksen's professional credentials. I have emailed him to let him know that I do. I met him at his home in Vancouver, B.C. in 1996 and we spent hours talking, together with his wife. He has stated to me that he is very careful about the statements he makes on his website. I hope that the misstatements he makes about The Ultimate Zapper on his site are innocent mistakes on his part.
But one thing that is not an innocent mistake, in my opinion, is his copying the name of my website. Please read part 2, below, for the story of Arthur Doerksen's Ultimate Zapper website which his son recently created with Arthur's knowledge, and on his behalf.
First, here is a discussion of 13 issues regarding the Auto-Zap site.
Issue number one.
One thing that Arthur Doerksen does which I have not done and which I will never do is to seek the approval of Dr. Hulda Clark to sell zappers or to make it appear, as he does on his site, that Dr. Clark's son, Geoff, "approved" his zapper and that it therefore has more credibility, or is better or more effective than other zappers. Nothing could be further from the truth. This "approval" was essentially a verification of output specifications, and nothing more. It simply verified that zappers sent in for his "approval" conformed to the output specifications as outlined in his mother's books. This included a positive offset square wave with between 25,000 and 30,000 Hertz output. The Geoff Clark "approval" is still used as a marketing tool by many zapper makers who seek to give their zapper the benefit of the Hulda Clark cachet, her "seal of approval". Geoff Clark stopped providing this service years ago.
On his site Arthur states "We became friends with Geoff Clark and some of the Self-Health Resource Center folks. During this time we developed our own zapper, the Auto-Zap, which was tested and approved by Geoff Clark." This statement is misleading because it does not explain what the Geoff Clark "approval" consisted of. It implies that the approval was an endorsement. It was not. This is what I characterize as a lie by omission.
You can see a copy of Geoff Clark's "approval" letter on the Hulda Clark page. If Joe Blow's zapper had conformed to Dr. Clark's specifications Geoff Clark would have also given his "approval" to the Joe Blow zapper. In addition to this misleading marketing tool, Arthur has photo ops of himself and his wife with Dr. Clark on his site to help boost his zapper sales. The great irony of all this is that the Auto-Zap is still based on the outdated square-wave that Dr. Clark originated 16 years ago which only has a 50% Duty Cycle. The Ultimate Zapper's square wave not only has a near 100% Duty Cycle, it is stabilized and distortion-free.
I have not sought Dr. Clark's recognition or approval, or that of her son Geoff, for my zapper, as so many other zapper makers have. I have made no attempt to contact her or her son in order to curry favor with them. I do not use her name to sell my zapper, as so many other zappers makers have done without her approval. While recognizing the importance of her work, I have retained the intellectual freedom that I feel one must have in order to think freely and act independently.
Many zapper makers use Dr. Clark's name on their site in such a way as to lead people to believe that Dr. Clark is associated with their site. She is not associated with any site but her own at
http://www.drclark.net
They use her name freely as a promotional tool. Although she might have, Dr. Clark has never taken any action against anyone using her name to sell their zappers because she feels that if people are being helped then she should not do anything to detract from that fact. Dr. Clark has a good heart.
David Amrein of the Dr. Clark Research Association has gone even further by taking Dr. Clark's name, using it blatantly to sell his zappers without Dr. Clark's approval. For more information about this please click here.
I have not sought Dr. Clark's recognition or approval, or that of her son Geoff, for my zapper, as so many other zapper makers have. While I let people know that my zapper is based on her original concept I do not use her name to sell my zapper, as so many other zappers makers have done, without her approval. While recognizing the importance of her research, I have retained the intellectual freedom that I feel one must have in order to think freely and act independently.
In the past, many zapper makers sought Dr. Clark's approval for their devices, including Arthur Doerksen for his Auto-Zap zapper. This approval consisted merely of a verification of the output of the zapper by her son, Geoff, and nothing more. You can see a copy of this letter of verification on the Dr. Hulda Clark page on my site here. Who is Geoff Clark? He is Dr. Hulda Clark's son, a businessman, not an electrical engineer or an electronics expert. Arthur Doerksen prides himself on being an electrical engineer but he relies on an amateur to "approve" his zapper, which I find ironic. Even moreso since he, and his son Fraser, have denigraded my work, implying that being an electrical or electronics professional is of paramount importance in the zapper field and automatically places one on a higher plane. Being a mere inventor is of a far lesser order, with the implication that one is a mere tinkerer who could not possibly create an effective device, let alone one that is superior to a device created by a "professional". Arthur and Fraser Doerken neglect to point out that both Dr. Hulda Clark and her son, Geoff, are essentially tinkerers. They are both amateurs in the the fields of electrical engineering and electronics. Being an amateur and a mere inventor did not prevent Dr. Clark from creating the original zapper in 1993. And it did not prevent me from inventing The Ultimate Zapper in 1996. You can't have it both ways, Arthur and Fraser.
Update on Dec. 7, 2007. Arthur Doerksen has removed Dr. Clark's "approval" from his site.
Issue number two.
Arthur states that my, "Exclusive 'All positive pulsations' claim is untrue, as the Auto-Zap and all 555 timer battery operated zappers have only positive pulsations." This is technically correct, and I have emailed him acknowledging this. But being technically correct does not address the central issue. Having no "negative pulses coming out" of his zapper, as he states on his website, does not mean that his square wave is all positive and all therapeutic in the way that I define positive and therapeutic. It is not. I illustrate the difference by showing live oscilloscope pictures on the front page of my site, and by comparing them with the oscilloscope design of the square wave on Arthur's site.
I define a positive square wave with all-positive pulsations as a square wave that has only a top side. Hulda Clark has stated that the top side is the therapeutic side of the wave and that the bottom side of the wave is not therapeutic. The bottom side of the Auto-Zap zapper wave is positive, technically speaking, but since it is just above the zero line, skirting negative territory, it constitutes the bottom side of the wave and is therapeutically ineffective, what I term the negative side of the wave. You can even see this clearly on Mr. Doerksen's own site in his oscilloscope pictures. Only the top side of the Auto-Zap wave is therapeutically effective, which is also true for all other Hulda Clark zappers available. The bottom side of his wave is 50% of the wave. So, 50% of the wave produced by his zapper is not therapeutic.
The Ultimate Zapper's square wave has a near 100% Duty Cycle which translates into near 100% therapeutic power. You can see this by comparing the oscilloscope photos on my website with the oscilloscope design on Mr. Doerksen's website. This is the main feature that distinguishes the square wave of The Ultimate Zapper from all other Hulda Clark zappers, including Mr. Doerksen's Auto-zap zapper. This is what helps make The Ultimate Zapper unique, and uniquely effective. Mr. Doerksen has yet to comment on these observations. His only comment is that I talk double speak. I beg to differ. I think I talk single speak. I think that what I am saying is perfectly clear. And what I am saying is backed up by results. The results that people are getting with my zapper speak for themselves. You can read the testimonials on my website. Mr. Doerksen has no testimonials on his website. People have been getting superior results with my zapper for 13 years.
Another way of thinking about the top side of the square wave is to use the analogy of a bow and arrow. If the arrow (wave) is longer, it penetrates deeper. The top side of The Ultimate Zapper's wave is twice as long as the top side of all Hulda Clark zappers, including the Auto-Zap zapper. So, it penetrates at least twice as deep into the tissues and organs as the other Hulda Clark zappers. With the skin effect it penetrates 7 times as deep as most Hulda Clark zappers. It is the most therapeutic Hulda Clark zapper available.
Another way of thinking about all this is that the arrows (top side of the wave) produced by traditional Hulda Clark zappers are twice as short as the arrows (top side of the wave) produced by The Ultimate Zapper. Even if you zap for twice as long you will not get the same results as The Ultimate Zapper provides because the longer arrow, the top side of the wave, of The Ultimate Zapper penetrates much deeper than the shorter arrow of other Hulda Clark zappers. As a result The Ultimate Zapper has a greater therapeutic effect than all other Hulda Clark zappers, including the Auto-Zap.
Issue number three.
Arthur says that The Ultimate Zapper has a cheap AC adapter. This negative comment is meant to sow doubt in the minds of people looking for a zapper and is meant to discourage them from considering The Ultimate Zapper as a serious choice. The fact is that The Ultimate Zapper's AC adapter is the single most expensive component of the zapper. It is a high quality double insulated unit that is UL and CSA approved. Arthur has not disclosed the price of the components in his zapper. I imagine that he has been able to purchase some of them at a reasonable price without compromising quality. If he paid a higher price for the same components enabling him to say that the components in his zapper are expensive, would that change the quality of the components and the quality of his zapper? I think not. The issue here is quality, not price. The Ultimate Zapper is made of the highest quality components available. This is why I feel totally confident in offering an unconditional lifetime warranty for my zapper. I am the only zapper maker in the world who offers such a warranty. The Auto-zap zapper only offers a 5-year warranty. The double insulation of the Ultimate Zapper's AC adapter makes it fail-safe. So, the GFCI that was previously shipped with each zapper is redundant.
Issue number four.
On his website Arthur states, "Dr. Clark is adamant about battery power for safety,
and I agree." Once again Arthur raises the safety issue. The fact is that the AC
powered Ultimate Zapper is as safe as any battery-powered zapper. It is 100% safe
thanks to its double insulation. It is UL and CSA approved. The safety of The Ultimate
Zapper is a non-issue. And no matter how many times Arthur raises this issue on
his website it will remain a non-issue. I have been selling The Ultimate Zapper
for 13 years and there has not been one single instance of malfunction. I discuss
this is detail at #16 on the FAQ Page at
http://zap.intergate.ca/wordforword.htm
Issue number five.
Arthur Doerksen boasts long battery life for the Auto-Zap. Here is what fellow electrical engineer David Etheredge of ParaZapper has to say about the Auto-Zap: "Long battery life: Sorry, some companies sacrifice effectiveness in order to conserve battery power. A standard 9-volt battery provides about 150 mAh. If your zapper last 150 hours of usage, then you can only get 1 mA of current. That is not enough! For ideal effectiveness, 4 mA is a good value." The Ultimate Zapper is rated at 500 mA thanks to its AC adapter. This is one of the secrets of its effectiveness.
Issue number six.
Arthur makes a serious misstatement about The Ultimate Zapper's design. He uses one definition of fail-safe and I use another definition, a more common definition, I might add. His definition is confusing, in my opinion. The Ultimate Zapper is indeed 100% guaranteed fail-safe thanks to its double insulated AC adapter. His statement that The Ultimate Zapper does not have a fail-safe design is completely false and totally misleading and is a back-handed comment that amounts to scare-mongering. Arthur's definition of fail-safe is less common. By fail-safe he means that his zapper has a quality control mechanism to make sure that the output of his zapper is correct. The Ultimate Zapper does not need such a quality control mechanism because when the red light is on it is automatically functioning according to the advertised specifications. Each Ultimate Zapper is tested on an oscilloscope before shipping to guarantee that the output produced conforms strictly to the advertised specifications on my site.
Issue number seven.
Arthur states that "The higher output voltage is not an advantage either, according to Dr. Clark's research: she specifies 5 to 10 volts." This is a very interesting comment because Hulda Clark now states that an output level of at least 9.4 volts is required on order for the zapper to be therapeutically effective. For 14 years Dr. Clark has espoused a battery zapper that produced a 9-volt charge that declined quickly with continued use. Arthur, the maker of the Auto-Zap, has agreed with her for 13 years. Now Dr. Clark has declared that at least 9.4 volts is required for the zapper to be effective, and Arthur has made no comment about this reversal. He knows that The Ultimate Zapper features a higher voltage, and has done so for 13 years. But he lets Dr. Clark's earlier statement about the adequacy of zapping with a 9-volt zapper that discharges quickly down to zero remain on his website knowing full well that she has since reversed herself. If he acknowledged this reversal he would have to comment on this change, decide whether he agrees with her earlier position or her new position, and he would have to retract his implied criticism of The Ultimate Zapper, which is based on Hulda Clark's earlier preference for a lower voltage zapper. And he would have to address the fact, and the problem, that his own Auto-Zapr works off a discharging 9-volt battery which quickly falls into the non-therapeutic sub-9 volt zone.
I knew 13 years ago that higher voltage makes a big difference in therapeutic effectiveness. My hands were not tied by any invisible loyalty to Dr. Clark. I have never used her name or approval to promote my zapper, and I have never sought or asked for her approval, unlike Arthur, among other zapper makers. My only desire was to make the best zapper possible, even if that meant questioning some of her assumptions and changing her formula. The Ultimate Zapper has been featuring a higher voltage for a decade. This is one of the features that make it the most effective zapper in the world.
Issue number eight.
Arthur claims to make the world's best zapper? He states that "The Auto-zap zapper is the best unit to keep you zapping!" It is the "Rolls-Royce" of zappers, according to him. It "goes farther" than other zappers. He does not explain these statements anywhere on his site. They appear to be nothing more than marketing slogans. He has a list of "features" that he says makes his zapper "the best zapper" in the world. I have copied this list, below, for your perusal. There is only one true feature on the list, the low frequency.
All the other features on his list are "bells and whistles", add-ons that are not related in any way to the effectiveness of the zapper, "features" such as a pocket clip, a beep sound alert, and an LED light. The Ultimate Zapper has 11 features in its unique formula that make it the best zapper available. I list them below. They are detailed on the Front Page page of this site. As you can see there are no "bells and whistles" on The Ultimate Zapper list.
Here is Arthur Doerksen's list of features
for his Auto-Zap zapper
-
WORLD'S ONLY FAIL-SAFE ZAPPER: every Professional Auto-Zap has 3 features that guarantee
correct operation at all times
-
Excellent SUPPORT - expert TOLL FREE support at
1-888-533-7007
(California time zone) because we care about you! - Foolproof - SENSOR LEDs give positive indication of correct output (show you that connections, current and battery are good):
- Faster results - lower frequency (2.5 kHz) for better signal penetration
- Simple to use - FULLY AUTOMATIC, has a 63 minute cycle per Hulda Clark's books
- Cheap to run - runs about 500 hours on one 9 volt alkaline battery, ten times longer than most zappers
- Reliable - FIVE YEAR full parts and labor warranty
- Sound investment - fully protected against damage from static electricity and reversed battery (which can destroy other zappers)
- Convenient SOUND ALERT - long beep at start and short beep at end of each pulse output period to remind you to put down hand holds for rest periods
- Automatic battery test each time the start button is pressed: the Auto-Zap will start only if full output is assured for the entire cycle
- Top quality - solid case, Lexan label, heavy duty wires and plugs, rustproof solid copper clips and hand holds to last a lifetime. Our switches have solid silver contacts, and are rated for a million operations!
- Canadian made
Here is the list of features
for The Ultimate Zapper
1. near 100% DUTY CYCLE
produces results superior to all other zappers -- 2. SUPER STABILIZED WAVE
stays square "under load" -- 3. CONSTANT HIGH VOLTAGE
produced by the AC adapter -- 4. PURE SQUARE WAVE
produced by the AC adapter -- 5. CONSTANT HIGH CONDUCTIVITY
produced by the stainless steel accessories
6. STAINLESS STEEL FOOTPADS (optional)
improve results by 63% to 77% -- 7. LOW FREQUENCY
produces superior results -- 8. SUPERIOR HARMONICS
multiply the therapeutic effect of the primary wave 9. BLOOD ELECTRIFICATION
(US government-approved) 10. ELECTROPORATION
(US government-approved) 11. AURA EXPANSION
by a factor of 3 times -- shields the body plus 2 EXTRA FEATURES
Tooth Zappicator
Food Zappicator
|
Dr. Clark's "approval"
and "Bells & Whistles"
Earlier this year, on this page, I observed that many zapper makers use Dr. Hulda Clark's "approval" to promote zapper sales. As a result, Arthur Doerksen has removed the "Dr. Clark approval feature" from his list of zapper features. But there is still only one single feature on his list that applies to zapper effectiveness: the 2,500 Hertz frequency. All the other features are in the "bells and whistles" category. Unlike The Ultimate Zapper which has 11 unique operational features that make it, by far, the very best zapper in the world there are no "bells and whistles" on my list of features. In addition, The Ultimate Zapper features an unconditional lifetime warranty on parts and labor, the only zapper in the world that offers such a warranty. Arthur Doerksen's Auto-Zap zapper has a 5-year warranty. In addition, The Ultimate Zapper can be used with a 9-volt battery if you are away from a wall plug. It also has a sensor LED that gives a positive indication that the actual output at the handholds conforms to the strict specifications that are advertised on my site.
Issue number nine.
I note that Arthur has just started publishing the first testimonials for his zapper on his site, possibly inspired by the testimonial page that has been on my site for many years. I note that he does not update the testimonials on his site, as I do every month. My site features a testimonial archive that features dozens of remarkable unsolicited testimonials that I have received from people who have used The Ultimate Zapper over the past 13 years. I ass new testimonials to the archive every month. My testimonial archive is just the tip of the testimonial iceberg. Most people who email me that they are happy with the results choose not to submit detailed testimonials.
Issue number ten.
Arthur stated for years that his zapper was the only zapper that offered a 3-month trial period while it was clear from the Front Page of my site that I was also offering a 3-month trial for The Ultimate Zapper.
Issue number eleven.
The heading on Mr. Doerksen's website is clearly misleading. It states:
"Want GUARANTEED Results?Use the Professional Auto-Zap Hulda Clark Zapper RISK-FREE
Three month full 100% money-back guarantee"
The fact is that Arthur is not guaranteeing medical results with his zapper, which is implied by this heading, because that's impossible for any zapper maker to do. But it appears he would like to have people believe that he is capable of doing so. The only thing that he can and does do with any assurance is to guarantee the specifications of his zapper which any self-respecting zapper maker should be doing, and to guarantee to give you your money back if you are not satisfied. I do the same for my zapper. Arthur is implying that he is guaranteeing medical results by creating this heading. No zapper maker should do this because even implying a medical claim is against the law. I believe that it is reckless and also unethical. I do not guarantee results with my zapper or make any medical claims, either explicit or implicit, for it. And I am honest and straightforward on my trial offer page. For returns I charge $14.95 for cleaning, retesting, restocking and repackaging. This is the charge that my shipper charges me for these services. It also serves to discourage frivolous orders, having an already very busy production and shipping team. Yes, Arthur, everyone wants guaranteed results. But you should not being implying that your zapper guarantees medical results. It cannot. No zapper can make that claim. I certainly do not.
Issue number twelve.
On the front page of his website Arthur declares,"No other site has this info!"
Following the link, he quotes Dr. Hulda Clark as saying "It takes three treatments to kill everything."
I don't know about other zapper sites but my site certainly does not have this "info", and it never will. Why? Because it is misleading.
Saying that 3 treatments kill everything amounts to offering an across-the-board medical guarantee to each and every one of his customers. That is illegal. Athough there may be some outstanding cases where results were obtained quickly, and some have been reported to me and appear on the testimonial archive on my website, I would never tell people that 3 treatments will "kill everything", implying that 3 treatments will kill all the pathogens in their body and solve all their health problems. In most cases it takes many treatments to get results, up to 3 months or more if, in fact, any lasting results are to be obtained.
Arthur quotes Dr. Clark, again. "Dr. Clark did not publish until she had 100 theoretically cured cases in December 1993."
First of all, using the word cure on any website is misleading, and it is also against the law. I never use the word "cure" on my website. Secondly, what does "theoretically cured cases" mean? Cases that are cured only in theoretically means they are not actually cured. What's the use if the theory says you're cured but you're not? And where is the clinical proof of these "theoretical" cures? I have yet have to see that proof. I talk in detail about the case histories used to prove "cure" on the Hulda Clark Page and the fact that this claim, when examined closely, is false. How can the people who were reported by Dr. Clark as having died be used as proof of "cure"?
Issue number thirteen.
Arthur quotes Dr. Clark, again. "Dr. Clark did not publish until she had 100 theoretically cured cases in December 1993."
First of all, using the word cure on any website is misleading, and it is also against the law. I never use the word "cure" on my website. Secondly, what does "theoretically cured cases" mean? It seems to mean cases that are cured, but only in theory, which would not constitute cure in my books. What's the use if the theory says you're cured but you're not? And where is the clinical proof of these "theoretical" cures? I have yet have to see that proof.
Issue number fourteen.
Before I publicized the odd fact that you had to be "authorized" to view the zapper
comparison chart on the Auto-Zap site access to this page was restricted on the
Auto-Zap site. Here is the message that appeared when you clicked on the margin
to access the comparison chart on the Auto-Zap site: "You are not authorised to
view this resource. You need to login." Since I published this information the Auto-Zap
comparison chart miraculously opened without autorization. He probably should have
kept it locked away from public view because even a cursory look shows that his
7-zapper chart is a sham that is designed to highlight Auto-Zap's "bells and whistles".
His chart does not include the 11 features that make zappers effective that appear
on my 5 zapper comparison charts (no authorization needed
for viewing) that compare 29 zappers. Auto-Zap has only one of the 11 features that
make zappers effective -- low frequency. I received 2 letters (below) from concerned
customers regarding Arthur Doerksen's deceptive marketing. Here is a quote from
one of them:
"I would also like to see you add some extra columns into your comparison chart
to ensure that all zapper-type features are addressed - including features which
your unit does not possess. If you truly believe your Zapper is the best on the
market, then surely you would not hesitate to incorporate this enhancement into
your comparison chart. Otherwise I think you owe it to your web site visitors to
tell them that your particular comparison chart does not address all the different
aspects that someone might consider when selecting a brand of zapper."
2 LETTERS FROM CONCERNED CUSTOMERS
Here are 2 unsolicited letters I recently received
concerning Mr. Doerksen's site and
the statements that he makes about my site.
Letter # 1.
Hi Ken,
Just went through your site. Nice job. Your antagonist at Auto-Zap is using argumentative techniques taught to most debate team members, who use them in that "win at all costs" activity. They are the "Illicit Minor", not particularly sophisticated and the "Undistributed Middle" very effective. I.E. Everybody who lives on this street loves peaches. Joe absolutely loves peaches. Therefore Joe must live on this street. Not great fun if done with any type of style will fool or at least confuse a lot of folks. As a Jesuit trained Logician, it's a little easier to spot the techniques because you use them so often. I'm not a Jesuit, just someone who went to St Joseph as an undergrad. Just wanted to tell you that your story gave me hope and made me feel a ton better when I really needed it.
Be well, Warren
Letter # 2 is a letter emailed to Mr. Doerksen by Robert (last name withheld) from Sydney , Australia regarding Mr. Doerksen's website and my website.
Hello Arthur,
I clicked on the link to take me to your comparison chart and after I studied your comparison chart I felt I needed to write you this message.
Firstly, I should let you know that I am currently in the market to buy a very high quality Dr Clark zapper unit, and to help me decide which particular brand & model to purchase I have recently been carefully studying all the information I can possibly get my hands on about the various types of zappers. This has included studying information that you have posted on your web site, as well as information posted on the web sites of other zapper manufacturers/marketers.
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that as part of my pre-purchase studying I also spent some time studying the web site of Ken Presner - who markets a unit known as the "Ultimate Zapper" - and as a result of studying Ken's site I believe you have included some inaccurate information in your comparison chart. In particular:
1) I can confirm that your unit is NOT the only unit to be offered to customers with a 3-month no-risk trial period, hence surely you cannot make the assertions you do about your unit being the only one that comes with a 3-month free-trial period. Ken also offers a 3-month free-trial period.
2) After studying & comparing the specifications of both your zapper unit and Ken's zapper unit, it is my opinion that you are not being fully honest with visitors to your web comparison chart - because from my study of Ken's unit it is my understanding that he also claims his unit is of a "fail safe" design. Admittedly it appears both you and he are using the term "fail safe" to describe quite different qualities - in his case it is my understanding that he is mainly using this term to describe features of his unit that assure 100% electrical safety, whereas you appear to be using the term with respect to the quality of the output signals at the handheld electrodes, but nonetheless is it fair to say his unit entirely lacks failsafe features?
3) My final comment about comparison charts is that if it is your intention with this comparison chart to try and convince potential buyers to select your brand and model of zapper over competitors' brands/models, then in my opinion that type of comparison chart should not only highlight the features that the subject brand of zapper has that other brands do not have, but they should also highlight the features that are absent from the subject brand but which are present in other brands. What this means is that I would also like to see you add some extra columns into your comparison chart to ensure that all zapper-type features are addressed - including features which your unit does not possess. If you truly believe your Zapper is the best on the market, then surely you would not hesitate to incorporate this enhancement into your comparison chart. Otherwise I think you owe it to your web site visitors to tell them that your particular comparison chart does not address all the different aspects that someone might consider when selecting a brand of zapper.
Arthur, I don't pretend to be either an electrician or an electronics buff, but even with my lay level of knowledge, once I find some statements on anyone's web site that just plainly I know cannot be true, then clearly I have no choice but to doubt the veracity of the entire site. It is my opinion that you guys who are marketing these types of products need to be absolutely accurate with all and any assertions you make about both your own products, as well as about competitors' products. You owe at least this much to the people who visit your web site - surely you understand only too well that many of these visitors are very likely experiencing major health difficulties in life - and because they are often looking for anything of hope to cling onto, they may not always have the frame of mind to see past partial truths &/or outright lies. So please do not put any such additional burden on visitors to your web site. Another aspect of this is simply to ask yourself: "How would you like one of your competitors to post untruths about either you or your products on their web site?"
The doubt that you have now given me makes me also wonder if I would be wise to get a qualified independent electronics person to examine each of the oscilloscope wave forms of both your and Ken's machines in order to seek an independent opinion about the veracity of all technical statements you make. What would in fact be helpful is if all manufacturers/marketers of Dr Clark zappers were to submit their machines to an independent laboratory in order to certify the specifications of those machines - and of course then to make the report produced by the independent laboratory available to potential customers.
So Arthur, please keep things totally easy and honest so as not to confuse people like me who are trying their best to do honest research to decide what is the best zapper for them to buy. I suspect it would only take a few disgruntled people like me to post their gripes to various web forums to do a lot of damage to the commercial reputation of anyone selling zappers by anything less than totally honest means.
I hope you have appreciated the time I have taken to write this note to you, and I expect that you will promptly review/edit the content of your comparison chart.
Yours sincerely,
Robert from
Sydney , Australia
The above letter was received over 2 years ago. It is now June 24, 2007. Arthur Doerksen has yet to review/edit the content of his comparison chart.
2.AUTO-ZAP'S "ULTIMATE ZAPPER"
WEBSITE FIASCO
In this section I will clarify matters surrounding the ultimatezapper.com website which was recently created by Arthur and Fraser Doerksen. They have just changed the name of their site to to myzapper.com after an exchange of emails with me. It was not clear when they created their new ultimate zapper site that Arthur Doerksen and his son Fraser Doerksen were in business together. It appeared that this was Arthur Doerksen's site, alone, because all references on the site are to Arthur Doerksen. There was no mention anywhere on the site about Fraser Doerksen. I discovered that Fraser Doerksen was behind the ultimatezapper.com website after I published an open letter to his father, Arthur Doerksen, which provoked a heated response from Fraser Doerksen which you can read, below. Fraser Doerksen is still using the phrase "Discover the ultimate Zapper" at the top of his new myzapper.com website which he has recently re-named fraserjohn.com. He is now developing this website into the new Auto-Zap site which features the same old Auto-Zap zapper that the bestzapper.com has been featuring for the past 13 years.
I originally emailed Arthur Doerksen the following message on March 20, 2007:
Dear Arthur,
As you are well aware, having known me personally back in 1996, I gave my zapper and my website the name The Ultimate Zapper 11 years ago. With all the domain names to choose from last month for your new ghost website you chose the name Ultimate Zapper for your very own. You are now calling my Ultimate Zapper the so-called Ultimate Zapper and you are calling your new website ultimatezapper.com where you are selling the perfect Dr. Clark zapper. You never explain what is "perfect" about the Auto-Zap.
The only thing so-called about The Ultimate Zapper is that you use the words so-called to describe it, also without explanation. When people click on the links to purchase your so-called "perfect" zapper they are led back to your old Auto-Zap website where they can purchase the same old Auto-Zap zapper you have been selling for the past 12 years [now 13 years]. You have made no changes at all to your Auto-Zap. I call it the "so-called" perfect zapper for a good reason. I explain all of this, and much more, in this open letter and in part 3 of this series of articles on the Auto-Zap entitled THE AUTO-ZAP PART 3: OTHER SERIOUS ISSUES.
I sent the following email to Fraser Doerksen, Arthur Doerksen's son, on April 1, 2007.
Dear Fraser,
Thank you for your messages. I have combined them, below. I have also cut and pasted your father's email reply to me, below. First of all, in your father's email reply to me he made no mention at all that he is not associated with ultimatezapper.com. The use of his picture on the site, his story on the site, and the links that take the visitor back to bestzapper.com, his website, indicated to me that ultimatezapper.com was his site. Further creating this impression was his polite and considerate apology to me, and his statement that he stands by his technical assessments. Given all this evidence it never even occurred to me that the situation might be more complex than it looked. I was not wrong in coming to the logical conclusion that I came to, that ultimatezapper.com was your father's site. Your name was not mentioned anywhere on the site and there was not even a hint of anyone else being involved. Please see below for my comments.
I received the following email from Arthur Doerksen. I have made some comments and they are embedded in the email and are in bold:
Dear Ken,
I never did receive the letter you posted and said you had sent to me March 20th, 2007. What was the subject line? When did you send it to me? I cannot find anything from you in my spam filter either. [This was an open letter on my site which appears below.] We have certainly meant you and [your wife] no harm with anything we have said or done on the web or the phone. I stand by my technical assessments and Dr. Clark quotes as accurate. The 8.9 volt spec by Dr. Clark applies only to plate zapping, as far as I can see in her books. Please give me the reference if I am wrong in this. [Dr. Clark actually states that the voltage for plate zapping has to be 9.4 volts or more, and that it must not fall below 8.9 volts. I infer from this that unless the voltage is kept at a similar level for normal zapping that the results will be sub-par. All the evidence I have been able to accumulate over the years supports this inference.] Just for the record, our Auto-Zap has never had a 555 timer or any variant of a 555 timer chip (e.g. 7555, TLC555, or similar) in it. Only CMOS logic. And we offered footpads about 8 years ago, then simply told people how to make them in our instruction sheet because they cost more to ship than they were worth. You can make lovely footpads from kitchen aluminum foil in 30 seconds. I did notice that half way down your Competition page you give a link to www.DrClark.com as Hulda's only real site, yet you correctly say farther down that this site (and the Dr. Clark Research Association) is in fact not linked to her at all. Her only site is www.HuldaClark.net [I have made this correction on my site.]By the way, their Super Zappers all have constant voltage output, adjustable from 9 to 16 volts. [This is not true. I have checked the Dr. Clark Research Association site. The Super Zapper is battery powered. Only an AC powered zapper can produce constant voltage.] And the SyncroZap A6 zapper also has a constant 10 volt output. [This is not true. I have checked the SyncroZap site. It is battery powered. Only an AC powered zapper can produce constant voltage.] You should update your chart and feature list to reflect this. [No update is necessary. All the information is accurate on the charts and on the other pages on my site.] Are you still living in [the name of my residence]? Sounds like a great place to find mangosteen. But the peel is the healing part. [This is not true. Please see below for more information about mangosteen juice.] Peace to you and [your wife]!
Here is my reply to the above email. My additional comments are embedded in bold:
Dear Arthur,
Thank you for your sympathic message. I appreciate it very much.
The letter I was referring to is the open letter on the Competition page of my site.
I will trace the reference to 8.9 volts in my files. When I reviewed this information
for publication it clearly stated that Dr. Clark was referring to the need for more
than 8.9 volts for the mobilization of red blood cells and complete detoxification.
[My files show that this reference is to plate zapping. I infer from Dr. Clark's
references to voltage in her publication at http://www.drloyd.com/syncrometer.pdf
that she must now surely be placing a similar importance on voltage levels for body
zapping. It would make no sense to assume otherwise, in my opinion. She does not
talk publicly about this aspect of zapping since a constant voltage of over 9.4
volts implies the use of an AC adapter which she has eschewed in the past. She has
made reference to 5 to 10 volts in the distant past but like her references to 25,000
to 30,000 Hertz these old yardsticks are now outmoded. I believe that Dr. Clark
knows this but is choosing to steer clear of the debate. Dr. Clark is avoiding making
any comments on the controversy about voltage and frequency at the present time.
Reports coming back to me show the overwhelming importance of a high and constant
voltage and a low frequency for optimum therapeutic results.]
Thank you for informing me about the CMOS logic in the Auto-Zap. I will clarify
this on my site. I do not know what the difference is between this and the CMOS
or TTL chips. [I have clarified this on my site.]
I will review the Dr. Clark links that you are referring to. If I have made a mistake
I will certainly correct it. [I have made one link correction.]
When I refer to a constant voltage I refer to a voltage that does not discharge,
that remains at a constant level at all times. I will check the information on the
SynchroZap A6 and I will correct any errors on my site. [This is the Hulda Clark
A6 zapepr. It does not have constant voltage. I checked this out on the SynchroZap
website.]
I will check out any information I can find about mangosteen peels. They are very
bitter. I have never heard of juice being made from them. I have never seen mangosteen
juice made from the peels in Thailand or Cambodia. I was under the impression that
the references on your site and on the links were referring to the juice from the
mangosteen fruit which is very tasty. I checked out the link on your site at
www.mangosteenexperiences.com
Here is a quote from their site. They mention the fruit, not the peel.
"It took American and German ingenuity to come up with the answer. A botanical expert
from Utah ran across the fruit several years ago in a Thailand restaurant. It tasted
delicious. After researching the benefits of the fruit, he contacted the world's
most respected botanical beverage company, Wild Flavors, (produces SoBe, Capri Sun,
Misty, Etc.) a multi-billion Co., out of Heidelberg, Germany to solve the manufacturing
challenge."
[One paragraph with personal information only has been deleted.]
Peace to you and yours!
Sincerely,
Ken Presner
I subsequently received 2 emails from Fraser Doerksen. My comments are embedded in his messages. I have not yet received a reply from Fraser Doerksen.
Fraser Doerksen's second email:
Fraser Doerksen:
Hello again Mr. Presner,
To appease my father, I've moved the website to a new domain (myzapper.com) and redirected the ultimatezapper domain to it.
Ken Presner:
I appreciate this gesture. I just checked this out. The new link (myzapper.com) leads the visitor back to bestzapper.com.
Fraser Doerksen:
Hopefully you won't be confused when you see the change.
Ken Presner:
I'm not confused at all.
Sincerely, Fraser D.
Fraser Doerksen's first email:
Fraser Doerksen:
Mr. Presner,
I am the webmaster and sole owner of the ultimatezapper.com domain. You might want to re-read the first sentence again, and then fire the hack who does your fact-checking;
Ken Presner:
Only your father's name and photo appear on this site. It is clear that the fact of your ownership is being hidden from view. Since this fact is not published on ultimatezapper.com why would one even think of checking it? The hack who does my fact-checking? Well, I guess I'll have to fire myself. Since your father's picture is on the ultimatezapper.com site, since there is a link that is called Arthur's Story, and since the links lead back to his Auto-Zap site, and since he talks about his new updated site I assumed that the site was his. That is what all the indications were and still are, in my opinion. There is no indication at all that anyone else owns the site. Why would one logically assume otherwise? There is no mention of you anywhere on the site. Since your father did not deny the site was his when he replied to me was I to logically assume the contrary, that the site did not belong to him when I saw his picture on the site, his story and the links back to bestzapper.com, his original site? Was my assumption a reasonable one or not? Do only a hacks make such logical assumptions? Will you be letting people know that you own the site and are working on it with the knowledge and approval of your father? This is what I would call being honest and up front with the public. [I have recently done an internet check to find out the name of the person who owns the domain name www.ultimatezapper.com. A Google search comes up blank. There appears to be no way to find out the name of the individual who owns a particular domain name.]
Fraser Doerksen:
You're clearly not getting your money's worth.
Ken Presner:
For what, exactly. I am not clear about what you mean here.
Fraser Doerksen:
While you're at it, ditch the moron who manufactures your conspiracy theories too.
Ken Presner:
What moron are you referring to? Using such inflammatory language does not touch me in the least. You are not dealing with a lightweight when you talk to me, I will have you understand that. So please disabuse yourself of that notion very quickly, if you are of such a mind. What conspiracy theories are you referring to? Could you possibly be referring to the dental mercury industry or the medical extablishment, including the ADA? Or are you referring to something else? Please let me know. I am the moron behind everything on my site, so I may have to fire myself again.
Fraser Doerksen:
Ultimatezapper.com is a test site, owned by me.
Ken Presner:
I don't understand. What is this site testing? Is it testing its ability to use the name of my zapper and my site in a theoretical way, for no specific purpose at all, or is it testing its ability to use the name of my zapper and my site for a specific reason, with future plans in mind. Please elucidate this for me.
Fraser Doerksen:
Arthur OK'd some articles.
Ken Presner:
Oh, so he actually did know about the site and he approved of some of the content. It was not as though you were using his name and his photo and his story and the links to his site on your own without his approval.
Fraser Doerksen:
but he didn't put up the site, he has no hand in running it, and he has absolutely nothing to do with the choice of the site name. I did that, and I'm quite happy with it.
Ken Presner:
In other words you are acting as a self-appointed agent to promote his site, working on his behalf with his full knowledge. Why are you happy about the choice of the site name ultimatezapper.com? Is it because you thought up such an original name, because you wanted to tweek my interest, or because you wanted to use my name for your father's benefit? With all the possible site names to choose from you chose the name of my zapper and my site. Did you expect me to lie down and keep quiet? I can imagine that you are happy about the name because it's a great name, to be sure, the name I took 13 years ago, but morally it's my name, not yours and not your father's, even if you did purchase the domain name. I have purchased the domain name The Ultimate Zapper.
Fraser Doerksen:
It's a mock-up,
Ken Presner:
A mock-up for what purpose? I think it's pretty clear who you are trying to mock when you use the phrase "so-called Ultimate Zapper" on your site.
Fraser Doerksen:
the address was given out to less than 10 customers in the past 3 months for feedback purposes, and aside from some broken links (and many missing articles) it's been quite the success.
Ken Presner:
"The success" at what, exactly? I found the site and it was never given out to me.
Fraser Doreksen:
Since it's only the second website I've ever made, I considered it prudent to limit the exposure until I could transfer the website to a proper hosting service and hopefully, eventually, replace bestzapper's current design.
Ken Presner:
What domain name and what zapper name do you intend to use when you host it? Since you are apparently in business with your father are you planning on using the name ultimatezapper.com when you replace bestzapper.com's design? Are you planning on renaming the Auto-Zap the Ultimate Zapper? You are happy about the domain name ultimatezapper.com. Are you planning to using the words "ultimate zapper" in any way on your new site? Will they replace "Rolls Royce"?
Fraser Doerksen:
We will optimize the content for the search engines when all the features (shopping cart, etc.) are working as intended. To be perfectly clear, the domain name itself has no intrinsic value, and no SEO value; any rank amateur would realize that.
Ken Presner:
Yes, I realize full well that it has no SEO value, as yet. A rank amateur? I probably am in many ways, but aren't we all? Please answer the following questions for me. Do the results that my zapper has achieved these past 13 years fall under your category of "rank amateur"? Have you read the testimonials on my site [now 300]? Are these results what one would call inferior results from an inferior zapper? Would you say that my story of recovery from 2 incurable diseases also falls under your category of "rank amateur"? How many people do you know who have done the same thing? Does the work that I do from my site helping people from all over the world also fall under your category of "rank amateur"? If the answer to all these questions is yes then I consider the words "rank amateur" a compliment for which I thank you.
Fraser Doerksen:
The reason I chose it: it's an apt description of Arthur's Professional Auto-Zap zapper, which, contrary to your fact-checker's poorly conceived notions, has seen several advances over its lifetime.
Ken Presner
I am the poor fact-checker. Like your father, I stand by my technical assessments. Aside from the lower frequency he has added nothing to the Auto-Zap that makes it a more effective zapper. The advances he has made are functions which I call "bells and whistles". They are not substantive advances that make for a more effective zapper. I explain on my site why the advances I have made to The Ultimate Zapper create a more effective zapper. The testimonials back that up very strongly.
Fraser Doerksen:
Just like BestZapper, the domain name ultimatezapper is a generic description
Ken Presner:
Generic in the technical sense, yes. But you still have not admitted that of all the domain names you could have chosen you purposely chose the name of my zapper and my site. Your credibility is not quite 100% on this point. I believe that your father chose the name bestzapper.com for a very good reason. He did not draw it out of a hat. I assume that you chose the name ultimatezapper.com for a very good reason, too.
Fraser Doerksen:
of a product which has set the gold standard for zappers worldwide.
Ken Presner:
What does "gold standard" mean? Can you please explain this to me specifically? Your opinion, to which you are entitled, is not completely unbiased. Others may not be in total agreement with you.
Fraser Doerksen:
The words "ultimate zapper" are not trademarked (nor trademarkable, see sections 9 and 12 of the Trade-Mark Act here:
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/T-13/index.html), just as "reliable car" or "great house construction" aren't trademarked; this makes the ultimatezapper domain well suited for my purposes.
Ken Presner:
I know that zapper names are not trade-markable. That is entirely beside the point. You chose the name ultimatezapper.com precisely because it is "well suited for [your] purposes". That is very clear. But you have not explained in detail what your purposes are?
Fraser Doerksen:
For somebody who claims more a modicum of intellect,
Ken Presner:
Please let me know where I make this claim explicitly? I don't seem to recall. Or do you mean that this is an implicit claim that people might infer after reading my site and after reading my story?
Fraser Doerksen:
you've nicely bungled every single point in your ranting letter.
Ken Presner:
What exactly do you mean by "nicely bungled every single point"? Please be specific. I think I covered every point very well.
Fraser Doerksen:
I particularly enjoyed the part wherein you claimed that Google is an arbiter of truth.
Ken Presner:
I don't recall making that statement. If I am wrong please correct me, with a specific reference. What I did say was that Google is not stupid. I stand by that assessment.
Fraser Doerksen:
That paragraph furnished many hearty laughs.
Ken Presner:
I'm always glad when I can make people laugh.
Fraser Doerksen:
To touch on another point you mentioned: as you've already seen, we haven't done any SEO on our websites. Nearly all of our business comes through personal referrals from satisfied customers including Dr. Clark and her clinic. Internet business is currently only a fraction of our total output.
Ken Presner:
I'm glad to hear your business is flourishing in this way.
Fraser Doerksen:
We use the internet primarily to inform our customers and to provide easily referenced information regarding Dr. Hulda Clark and her research. You might think Arthur chose this website domain name to steal customers from you, but the facts remain: 1. Arthur has nothing to do with it,
Ken Presner:
Oh, I see. He didn't steal my name. You did. I will make this correction on my site.
Fraser Doerksen:
and 2. a rudimentary check with Alexa or any SEO service should show you that nobody searches for ultimatezapper anyways.
Ken Presner:
I know very well that few people search for zappers using "ultimate zapper" as keywords. That is not the point. My point is a moral one, your stealing the name of my zapper and my site.
Fraser Doerksen:
Also, despite your rant to the contrary (do you even believe that nonsense yourself?)
Ken Presner:
Which nonsense are you specifically referring to?
Fraser Doerksen:
many links on ultimatezapper.com are broken because (surprise, surprise!) it's a TEST SITE. I'm glad you've taken an interest but it simply isn't ready for widespread use yet.
Ken Presner:
That's apparent. But it is also apparent that you intend to do more with this Test Site. It is not simply an intellectual pursuit.
Fraser Doerksen:
Have you seen any links to ultimatezapper.com from BestZapper? No?
Ken Presner:
Of course not. It is obvious why not. Because it is a ghost site. Having a link from a real site back to a ghost site would make no sense at all.
Fraser Doerksen:
Maybe you should ask yourself why,
Ken Presner:
Don't worry. I have.
Fraser Doerksen:
and then reconsider your theory about PageRank jealousy
Ken Presner:
Page rank is a matter of fact. I hold the #1 Google ranking for zappers, so it is obvious that it is not I who have anything to be jealous about.
Fraser Doerksen:
... I haven't submitted it to any search engines, haven't sent out any newsletters, haven't advertised it - indeed, more of a "ghost site" than you'd imagined. I hope you get the gist.
Ken Presner:
I know very well the extent to which this is a ghost site.
Fraser Doerksen:
In point of fact my father (Arthur Doerksen, the guy you have ignorantly slagged in your poorly conceived rant)
Ken Presner:
Unfortunately you brought my response on yourself by not explaining to me or on your ultimatezapper.com site what you are now explaining in this message. You have only yourself to blame for the response that your actions elicited, which you characterize as a "rant" and which I characterize as a passionate and cogent reply to a clear moral offense.
Fraser Doerksen:
asked me, long ago, to offer the domain to you.
Ken Presner:
You should have considered his request more seriously at the time.
Fraser Doerksen:
I have no idea why, and after your shenanigans, I must confess further ignorance of the reasons for his kindness toward you.
Ken Presner:
I also have kind feelings toward your father. At the age of 58 we have both been through a lot in life and compasssion is what we have both learned to offer others. The differences I have with him and with you are strictly on the professional plane. I harbor absolutely no personal ill will.
Fraser Doerksen:
I would consider letting you have the domain if you posted a public apology
Ken Presner:
An apology for what, exactly? Please explain. If you and your father posted a public apology on his bestzapper.com website and your ultimatezapper.com website (now the myzapper.com website) and you changed the references to ultimate zapper on your ghost site to the so-called "Ultimate Zapper" when referring to my zapper I might take you up on that.
Fraser Doerksen:
and take the time to check your facts in future,
Ken Presner:
I would request that you do the same. From my point of view, when the facts are well hidden from view, as in the case of who owns the ultimatezapper.com site (which you have just changed to the myzapper.com site) it is not obvious that one should assume the contrary, that someone other than the person mentioned on the site owns that site, let alone to begin searching for evidence to support that contrary notion. Did you ever think that anyone but me owns my site?
Fraser Doerksen:
but until that day (which I believe will never arrive) the domain remains my plaything and I shall do with it as I please.
Ken Presner:
That is your prerogative.
Fraser Doerksen:
Your ridiculous, unresearched opinions mean less than nothing to me.
Ken Presner:
Which opinions are you referring to? Please let me know. To tell you the truth I am not overly concerned that my opinions mean nothing to you. I haven't lost any sleep over this.
Fraser Doerksen:
If I remember correctly, my Dad is the same guy who had you over for tea many years ago & attempted to explain the "skin effect" and why our zapper has a lower frequency, and why it is more effective. You didn't listen very well, as evidenced by your blatantly untutored "explanations" for the "innovations" you've "invented."
Ken Presner:
Yes, I remember very well the visit with your father and mother and their kindness. I know we talked about zappers and other things but to tell you the truth I don't remember all the content of our conversation in detail. After all that was 13 years ago. When your father corrected me a few years back about a statement I made on my site about having been the first one to create a lower frequency zapper I took that statement off my site. It was an honest mistake on my part which I freely admit. You are entitled to your opinions about my "untutored" explanations for the innovations I have made to my zapper. But, like your father, I stand by my technical assesments and by my explanations. They may be "untutored" in your opinion, but that opinion may not be shared by everyone. No matter what you say about my zapper and my site you will never be able to refute the amazing results people are getting with my zapper. There will be more important news about these results in the months to come. Rank amateur? Well, I think a lot of people would disagree with you. If I am in the "amateur" category there are people who are certainly very happy about that, according to their testimonials. They might, in fact, place me rather high up in that amateur category if they were asked, much to your chagrin and displeasure. The rank of amateur and professional are totally irrelevant, in my opinion. The only thing that matters are results when it comes to zappers and for people who are looking for relief. It is clear that people are getting superior results with The Ultimate zapper despite the fact that I am an inventor who is not a professional electrical engineer. Dr. Hulda Clark, the inventor of the original zapper, is not a professional engineer, nor is her son, Geoff.
Fraser Doerksen:
Arthur also explained how to lower the frequency in Dr. Clark's reference design. I can imagine your surprise and delight when, after twiddling with the other bits and pieces of your home-built zapper, you found a way to alter the duty cycle too.
Ken Presner:
No more delighted than when Dr. Clark twiddled with her ideas and came up with the original zapper. She is not a professional engineer, you know, so I wonder what rank she merits from you? Is she a rank amateur or a better-than-rank amateur?
Fraser Doerksen:
Is it funny, or just sad that you're now claiming to have "innovated" these features?
Ken Presner:
It is a fact that I innovated the 100% positive pulses, 10.5 constant volts, an undistorted square wave, the 2,000 Hertz frequency, and a unique way to create a Super Stabilized wave, to the possible dismay of the Dr. Clark Research Association that claims this feature exclusively for themselves. These are irrefutable facts, alas. Oh, by the way, have you emailed the Dr. Clark Research Association about their using Dr. Clark's name rather blatantly and misleadingly, and for their making false medical claims about their zapper, for which they were convicted in court? Or is your rancor reserved only for the far more important transgressions, in your opinion, of the maker of The Ultimate Zapper.
Fraser Doerksen:
I leave it as an exercise to the reader to discern.
Ken Presner:
So do I. And I have no fear at all about what readers discern. I created my zapper and my website 13 years ago. I receive dozens of emails everyday, 365 days a year, and I take special pride in the replies from people who have been helped by using The Ultimate Zapper, and by following some of my suggestions. Would you like to call them liars in public, or only in private?
Fraser Doerksen:
Ken, you are *not* an inventor, *not* an innovator, and clearly *not* an honest person with any shred of integrity of your own.
Ken Presner:
Well, there's nothing like getting personal, is there. Your comments do not touch me in the least. The fact that I am an inventor and an innovator is clear for all to see from the statements on my website. I did not invent the zapper concept or the original zapper. I make no statement on my site inferring that I did. That is very clear. I give Dr. Hulda Clark full credit for her invention and her research on my site. But I did invent The Ultimate Zapper, thanks to her inspiration. On the contrary, I don't milk her name like some sites do in order to promote sales. My assessment of her accomplishments is a very balanced one, which has been noted by many of my readers. Integrity? Please email me the names of all the people you know who have dedicated their life to helping others, who have helped thousands of people over the past 13 years through their experience of having overcome 2 incurable diseases, MS and Crohn's disease, and and who have been able to help thousands of people overcome illness with the help of a modest electronic invention they invented. I await your reply. It is clear from the email I receive that people who have compared my zapper with many others, including the Auto-Zap, find my zapper superior. Not an inventor? Not an innovator? My satisfied customers, among whom are counted many medical practitioners, would respectfully disagree, I'm sure. Not "an honest person with any shred of integrity of [my] own"? With all due respect, you are obviously too young and foolish, and too filled with anger over what I have written on my Competition page, to know what you are saying. You have obviously not read my site dispassionately and closely enough to find out about the person you are talking to. If you had you would have shown me respect instead of contempt in your message. As a parting comment I will quote my dear departed father in the hope that one day you will realize the folly of your own words: "Son, your beard of wisdom will grow".
Fraser Doerksen:
You stand on the shoulders of giants yet have the ill grace to shamelessly badmouth Dr. Clark and my father, who still regards you as a "friend" of sorts.
Ken Presner:
And I regard him as a friend, as well. He [recently] invited me to tea when I visit Vancouver [in the future}, and I would be glad to share a cup with him. My differences with him are professional, not personal. I have a tribute to Dr. Clark on my site. She was a true innovator and those of us who have followed in her footsteps are grateful for her research. But I do not worship her. Her methodology is often less than scientific, in my opinion. I do not agree with her use of the word "cure" and the evidence that she has presented for those "cures". I consider these comments direct and to the point. I do not consider them "badmouthing" and I have yet to hear from a single reader of my site who considers them as such. I do not consider your father a giant, nor do I consider myself one. I consider myself very fortunate, and a very hard worker. I severely criticized your father on my site because of what I read on the ultimatezapper.com site. I would never have done such a thing as stealing the name of someone else's zapper and their website name, even as a test. I now understand, from what you are saying in your email, that you are responsible for this, with the foreknowledge of your father. I will make this correction on the Competition page of my site.
Fraser Doerksen:
You disgust me.
Ken Presner:
Well, that's not exactly news. You need a box of Kleenex to wipe away the contempt. Your disgust doesn't touch me. It's like water off the proverbial duck's back. You brought my response on yourself by stealing the name of my zapper and my site. My response to your actions gave you the opportunity to express your opinions about me and my zapper.
Fraser Doerksen:
Hopefully I've cleared up some issues for you,
Ken Presner:
Yes, you have. There are many things that are very clear now, abundantly clear.
Fraser Doerksen:
and mayhap you've even learned something here.
Ken Presner:
I certainly have.
Fraser Doerksen:
I hope you will someday assume less, and pay more attention to the facts.
Ken Presner:
I would like to say the very same thing to you.
Fraser Doerksen:
For future reference, if you have anything meaningful or constructive to say, you can reach me through the "contact" form on ultimatezapper.com;
Ken Presner:
And if you have anything meaningful and constructive to say about me or my so-called "Ultimate Zapper" [the way my zapper is referred to on the ultimatezapper.com website] you can email me at kenpresner@yahoo.com
Fraser Doerksen:
I've been quite busy lately (within the last month, I have moved to a new city, bought a new house, and married my sweetheart - hence zero website updates) but I do make a point of checking the email regularly.
Ken Presner:
I do too.
Sincerely,
Ken Presner http://zap.intergate.ca
Fraser Doerksen:
Sincerely,
Fraser D.
THE SINCEREST FORM OF FLATTERY
Below is the series of updates that I originally posted to this page concerning the ultimatezapper.com ghost site.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I'm truly flattered that Arthur Doerksen has gone to the trouble of stealing the name of my zapper and my website to create an Ultimate Zapper website all his own, a ghost site designed to draw customers looking for my site to his own site so that he can draw business away from my site and increase his business. Please read my open letter to him, below. It is long, but well worth reading. His new site can be found at ultimatezapper.com. There is nothing new or different on this ghost site from what you find on his bestzapper.com site, except for the links that lead back to his old site where he is selling the same old 1995 Auto-Zap zapper that he has been selling for the past 13 years, the basic Hulda Clark model, with a lower frequency added. The main thing that strikes the eye when reading about his Auto-Zap is all the "bells and whistles" that are added added for distraction: a low battery indicator, a timer and an alert bepper, none of which adds a single thing to the effectiveness of his zapper. I write about Arthur's "bells and whistles", in the 12 additional serious issues below my open letter.
I emailed Arthur a few weeks back congratulating him on his courage in developing this new site, using my name. Within a few days the site was down. It was no longer available. But when I recently tried to access it again there was a message that Arthur's Ultimate Zapper ghost site was coming back after January 27, 2007. I waited with baited breath to see what tricks Arthur might have up his sleeve.
Update on April 1, 2007.
I received an email from Arthur Doerksen's son, Fraser, a couple if days ago. He states that it is he who owns the ultimatezapper.com domain name, not his father, and that it was his idea, not his father's, to create the ultimatezapper.com site to promote his father's Auto-Zap zapper. He mentions in his email that his father approved of a number of the articles for the new site, which he, Fraser, is in the process of developing into a full website, not merely a ghost site. I quote Fraser Doerksen from his message: "To appease my father, I've moved the website to a new domain (myzapper.com) and redirected the ultimatezapper domain to it...", in effect saying that he will no longer be using the name ultimatezapper.com for his new site. I sent a reply to Fraser letting him know that I appreciate this gesture. I will be making a report about these new events, including both Arthur's and Fraser's recent emails, in the near future. I am very glad to report that what was stolen has been returned to its rightful owner. The name of my zapper and my website are now back where they belong.
If Fraser Doerksen lives up to his word and does not use my name in the future I will report this here and I will be glad to remove any unsubstantive issues related to the Auto-Zap from this page because the current dispute will have become irrevant and devoting space to it here will have become a moot point. I sincerely hope that this will be the case.
Update on March 21, 2007
I received a very kind email from Arthur Doerksen today after informing him that I had uploaded an open letter to him on this page. He makes no mentions about stealing the name of my zapper and my site for commercial advantage. Among other things he does state is that his Auto-Zap contains CMOS circuitry, not a CMOS chip. The Ultimate Zapper contains a TTL chip that has a higher voltage rating. Arthur also states that he stands by his "technical assessments". But he doesn't state what technical assessments he is referring to. I guess that vagueness serves a useful purpose at this point in time since it would be very hard to criticize both the merits of my zapper and the results that people have been obtaining with it for 12 years [now 13 years].
I stand by the statements I make about his Auto-Zap zapper and his websites. They are clearly stated on this page.
Update on March 20, 2007
Arthur's new ghost site has been up and running for over a month now. It features a "question of the day". In one month there have been only 2 "questions of the day" uploaded to the site. Soon he'll have to rename this site feature "question of the month".
Arthur has a new link on his ghost site called "Order the Zapper". When you click on it you are taken, surprise, surprise, to his real website at bestzapper.com. On his ghost site it doesn't say "Order The Ultimate Zapper", it says "Order the Zapper". I wonder why? Ultimate Zapper is the name of his new site, isn't it? It's very odd that the order link should take you to a zapper with name that is different from the name of his "new" site. When you click on the order link on my site it doesn't take you to another site with a different zapper name. It takes you to my order page where you can order The Ultimate Zapper from The Ultimate Zapper website. That's a very simple concept. It's known as honesty.
Update on March 6, 2007. Arthur's Ultimate Zapper ghost site features a logo called "Auto-Zap Pro" on the top left of the front page. Below the logo Arthur says "There is no substitute." Well, he certainly got that correct. His ghost site is called www.ultimatezapper.com. There is no substitute for The Real Ultimate Zapper which I have been making since 1996, and for the real Ultimate Zapper website that I have had since 1996. But there are lots of substitutes for Arthur's Auto-Zap which has only one feature that distinguishes it from the original 1995 Hulda Clark model, a lower frequency of 2,500 Hertz which is also featured in The Ultimate Zapper. All the other so-called features of Arthur's zapper are what I call "bells and whistles". Please read below for a detailed explanation about Arthur's bells and whistles. The Ultimate Zapper has 11 unique features, making it truly the best zapper in the world. It has no bells and no whistles.
Update on February 20, 2007. Arthur's Ultimate Zapper ghost site is now up and running. It states "We've upgraded & revamped the zapper website to get you what you want, faster than ever!" Well, it certainly gets you what Arthur wants, faster than ever: it gets you back to his bestzapper website lickety-split. And it does so by using the name of my zapper and my site. This is a truly creative marketing scheme. There is a slight hint of deception in all this.
When you click on "Our Products" it takes you back to Arthur's old Auto-Zap site. Arthur's ghost site has a new link called "New zapper website". When you click on the link it takes you to a new page with another link called "Find the latest zapper information here." When you click on that link you reach a page that says "The page you are trying to access does not exist. Please select a page from the main menu." Yes, the page with zapper information about his Ultimate Zapper does not exist because his "Ultimate Zapper" does not exist. Arthur Doerksen has created the first Ghost Ultimate Zapper in the world.
If you want to see a really upgraded and revamped website, you're looking at it now. I have upgraded and revised a lot of my site this month, especially the front page and the Competition page. It reads more like a book than a web page. But the index above enables you to click directly to the sections that you want to read so that you don't have to scroll down all 92 book pages of the Competition page to find things.
The Ultimate Zapper is mine. I invented it in 1996. I will always will be mine. I have no intention of playing any games with Arthur Doerksen by taking his name to create a ghost site to try to draw people away from his site to increase business on my site. I won't be creating an Auto-Zap ghost site anytime soon. Or anytime, for that matter. Doing such a thing never even occurred to me. I'm far too busy putting my energy into productive work. I leave such devious undertakings to others. Arthur must have a lot of time on his hands. I wonder how his ministry is going. I note that he says on his site that he zaps while reading his Bible every morning. My motto is "practice what you preach". Real Christians don't covet what belongs to their neighbor and they don't steal. Those are the 8th and 10th Commandments, if I remember correctly.
Most of the work I do, and have done for the past 13 years, is free of charge, disseminating information to one and all who request it. My site now comprises over 30 pages of information about health. Some of those pages run to 200 actual book pages. This is how I spend my time, working on my site and helping others via email, not trying to figure out "special" ways to increase business. Integrity has always been the foundation of what I do. That integrity is based on my having recovered from 2 "incurable" diseases, helping others 365 days a year through the experience I have accumulated, and through my invention, The Ultimate Zapper, which is truly the best zapper in the world. I imagine it must irk some professional electrical engineers, like Arthur Doerksen, that a researcher and inventor like myself could come up with a zapper that is far superior to the so-called professional models out there. I can understand their frustration. But Hulda Clark is not an electrical engineer, either, and that did not prevent her from inventing the original zapper.
Incidently, regarding Arthur's stealing the name of my zapper, it has been The Ultimate Zapper since I invented it in 1996. It has never been Ultimate Zapper, as Arthur has named his ghost site. I have bought the domain name www.theultimatezapper.com and my affiliate program will be up and running soon from my new Ultimate Zapper site. When anyone refers people to my new site, if they purchase The New Improved Ultimate Zapper both the person buying my zapper and the person who refers them to my site will receive a generous cash credit, with my many thanks.
Update on February 16, 2007.
Arthur's Ultimate Zapper site came back yesterday, on February 15th. I sent him this email last night:
"Dear Arthur,
It must have taken a lot of thought to come up with such an imaginative domain name
for your new website. But I gotta give you credit. It's a really great name.
All the best,
Ken Presner"
3. AN OPEN LETTER TO ARTHUR DOERKSEN
THE MAKER OF THE AUTO-ZAP
Update on Dec. 7, 2007. Arthur Doerksen's ghost site has been taken down. His Auto-Zap site now has a new format.
Update on May 1, 2007.
I wrote the following open letter to Arthur Doerksen before I received the emails, above, from his son Fraser Doerksen, clarifying the fact that it was Fraser Doerksen who actually created the ultimatezapper.com ghost site, with his father's foreknowledge. So, my open letter, below, is now addressed to both Fraser Doerksen and his father, Arthur Doerksen, in light of the above noted facts. Arthur Doerksen approved some of the pages on the ultimatezapper.com website, now the myzapper.com website, according to Fraser Doerksen, and it is clear that Arthur Doerksen was aware of the domain name for the new site when it was created. I will leave it to each reader to come to his own conclusions. Some of this open letter is now irrelevant and some of it must be read in the context of Fraser Doerksen and Arthur Doerksen now working together to create a new website to replace the Auto-Zap site. The ultimatezapper.com site, which has now become the myzapper.com site, is the pilot project for their new website. It is the test launch for their new Auto-Zap site.
I am reproducing the entire original open letter that I addressed to Arthur Doerksen, below, because of the references that Fraser Doerksen makes to it, above. It would be grossly unfair to cite his emails if I did not also publish the open letter that those emails refer to. Parts of my open letter also refer to THE AUTO-ZAP PART 3: OTHER SERIOUS ISSUES, below.
YOUR IMAGINATION AND COURAGE
I have already commented, above, on your imagination and courage in stealing my name. Of course I was being sarcastic. The whole purpose of your ghost site is to piggyback it to my Ultimate Zapper site in an attempt to get a free ride to instant attention and, hopefully, increase your sales by boosting your Google ratings, because your Google ratings are low and mine are high. The only problem is that you only have your old 1995 Auto-Zap model to offer people, which is certainly not ultimate, or Ultimate, or perfect in any way. When people click on the links on your new ghost site they are led back to your old Auto-Zap website, which is why I call your new site a ghost site. The name "ghost site" is quite apt because your new site has nothing new to offer, is is simply a marketing ploy to lead people from my name to your order page.
YOU CAN STEAL MY NAME
BUT YOU CANNOT STEAL THE TRUTH
You are only creating problems for yourself by trying to improve your sales in such a dishonest way. The fact that you have gone to all this trouble shows that my zapper and my site have had a major impact on your business. Your game of deception is doomed from the start. Stealing the name of my zapper and my site is easy. But you cannot steal the truth of my story, you cannot steal my integrity and you cannot steal the fact that I created the best zapper in the world 13 years ago, the one and only Ultimate Zapper.
IMPLYING THAT MY CUSTOMERS ARE LYING
When you cast doubt on The Ultimate Zapper and my site, calling my zapper the so-called "Ultimate Zapper", you should realize that you also cast aspersions on my customers, placing in doubt the veracity of their 250 testimonials which are overwhelmingly positive. I note that you have no testimonials from customers to support your claim that the Auto-Zap is the "best zapper". The implication you are making is that since The Ultimate Zapper is merely the "so-called" Ultimate Zapper, the 250 testimonials [now 300 testimonials] and the amazing results my customers are reporting must also be "so-called". The only problem with this implication is the following: if The Ultimate Zapper is in the "so-called" category, how can it produce results that are in the remarkable category?
This shows how little regard you have for my customers, for the truth of their testimonials, for the fact that many of them have been suffering greatly, and for the fact that The Ultimate Zapper has helped them back to good health. Each disease and ailment that appears on the lists on the front page of my site has been taken from an unsolicited testimonial. Each of the unsolicited testimonials on the front page and the testimonial page is authentic and is reported on my site word for word as it was received from each customer. Calling me liar is one thing. Calling into question, by implication, the veracity of the testimonials from my customers is quite another thing. It greatly compounds the problem you have created for yourself. The problem is your credibility.
[In my original open letter I did not mention that there is also an implied calling into question of the veracity of the dowsers who have reported to me about The Ultimate Zapper being the most effective zapper available. It is not only the veracity of customers that is brought into question here but also the veracity of the many dowsers I have heard back from with very positive reports. Every single dowser I have heard from ranked my zapper the best zapper available, by far, when they compared it to all the other major zappers available. I have no idea how the Doerksen's can deny the importance of such overwhelmingly positive reports. I would think that if such were the case for the Auto-Zap that they would have this prominently on their website. Which is not the case. Once again, the credibility of the Doerksens is called into question when they demean The Ultimate Zapper.]
[One additional matter that adds to the credibility problem is that I have a return rate of between 1% and 2% year in and year out. If my zapper were ineffective people would not be satisfied with the results and the return rate would certainly be much higher than it is. One can infer from this, and from the testimonials that the vast majority of my customers are satisfied customers.]
YOU JUST PUT A LINK FROM YOUR SITE TO MINE
On your ghost site you talk about the so-called "Ultimate Zapper" by Ken Presner. The only thing that is so-called about The Ultimate Zapper is your calling it so-called. By doing so you are drawing attention to my website and you are creating a strong impression of dishonesty. If your efforts are unintentional they are nonetheless appreciated. Instead of going to all the trouble of creating a ghost Ultimate Zapper site you might just as well have put a link from your bestzapper.com website to mine because your efforts have accomplished exactly the same thing. I appreciate the attention you are drawing to my website and my zapper.
YOU CAN'T FOOL THE STATISTICS COUNTERS
When all is said and done about the search engines the fact of the matter is that very few people percentage-wise search for zappers using the keywords "Ultimate Zapper" or "The Ultimate Zapper". And the percentage of whose who do use those keywords who end up placing orders is proportionately very small. And the proportion of those people who will be fooled into buying your zapper instead of the true Ultimate Zapper is slim to nil. So, all your efforts are wasted. Any improvement of your Google rating using the keywords "Ultimate Zapper" will come to nothing in the end. I analyze the statistics from my website because I have a company that tracks all the comings and goings on my site and produces a detailed statistical report for me everyday. So I know that creating a ghost website with the address (URL) "Ultimate Zapper" in an attempt to boost your business is an exercise in futility. The ultimate result of all your efforts is free advertising for me. I have no illusions. In the end I know that the actual boost in sales for me will be minimal. But my credibility will be boosted and yours will be diminished. The strongest net effect of all your present efforts will be to show people the extent to which you are willing to resort to deception in order to try to improve your sales. So the real net effect will be marginally positive for me and more than marginally negative for you. That's not smart marketing. Personally I would never have done such a foolish thing.
YOU JUST DESTROYED YOUR CREDIBILITY
As you well know I discuss your zapper and your website on the Competition page on my site and have done so for years. I have yet to read one single word of rebuttal on your website regarding this discussion. I have never received a single negative comment about my analysis of your site and your zapper in the email I receive. On the contrary, I have received a lot of positive feed-back about it. I imagine that the information on my Competition page about your zapper and your site, not being entirely complimentary, has not boosted your sales to any great extent, otherwise you would not have gone to all the trouble of stealing the name of my site and my zapper to try to boost your zapper sales. You have now made the only rebuttal you could think of: stealing the name of my zapper and my site. Your credibility just went into the trash can.
HOIST BY YOUR OWN PETARD
Let's talk about the content of your Ultimate Zapper ghost site. The quote below is taken from your ghost Ultimate Zapper site: "The Competition: Here is a list of commonly available zappers which are all based on the venerable "555 timer" circuit in Dr. Clark's books. This list is not exhaustive: many other generic zappers exist which are sold in health stores and on the internet, also based on this same inferior design. * the so-called "Ultimate Zapper" by Ken Presner * Don Croft's "Terminator" series, including the "Terminator II" * Parazap by paradevices.com"
1. Do you mean that your zapper is not "commonly available"?
2. That it is not "generic", whatever that means?
3. Do you mean that your zapper has no "venerable" 555 (of 7555) timer chip inside that offers what you now call Dr. Clark's "inferior design", the same design your Auto-Zap has been based on for 12 years?
4. Do you mean that The New Improved Ultimate Zapper with its high quality 555 CMOS timer chip, plus its 7 unique features, is an "inferior design"?
You are hoist with your own petard. On the same page of your ghost site where you talk about the "flawed design" of zappers with CMOS timer chips you state there is "ultra-efficient CMOS circuitry" in the Auto-Zap. That's the 555 timer chip (or the 7555). The Ultimate Zapper features a higher voltage rated TTL chip. Of course you are well aware that without a 555 or 7555 CMOS timer chip or a TTL chip there is no zapper.
HOW CAN AN INFERIOR DESIGN
PRODUCE A SUPERIOR ZAPPER?
If The Ultimate Zapper has an "inferior design" I wonder what explanation you might have for these 3 facts.
1. The Ultimate Zapper produces amazing results as attested to by hundreds of remarkable testimonials I have received over the past 13 years, 250 of which are on the testimonial page of my site.
2. Word of mouth from all over the world for The Ultimate Zapper is overwhelmingly positive.
3. Sales are booming and the return rate is extremely low.
This clearly adds up to the fact that somebody's not telling the truth about The Ultimate Zapper. All the evidence is pointing in your direction, Arthur.
RATING THE COMPETITION
I'm glad you didn't call your new ghost site The Ultimate ParaZapper or The Ultimate Terminator II Zapper. Whatever you do or say about me, my zapper and my website I would appreciate if you would not change the name of your ghost site. Although I can easily survive without it I do appreciate the free advertising you are providing me. I am glad to see that my so-called Ultimate Zapper has made it to the top of your competition list on your ghost site. By doing so you are drawing further attention to my website, of course. Besides you, only David Etheredge of ParaZapper has gone to the trouble to say outlandish things regarding me, my zapper and my website. But no one other than you has stolen my name.
TRYING TO FOOL PEOPLE IS PURE FOLLY
An expose of your latest chicanery is now on my site for all to read. Do you really think you can fool people into visiting your Auto-Zap site and into buying your zapper by using the ploy of creating a ghost Ultimate Zapper site that uses my name, and by denigrading what I have worked so hard to accomplish these past 13 years? You obviously think that you can, otherwise you would not have devoted time, energy and money to such a project. The fact is that most people who are willing to spend over $100 for a zapper take their time before deciding to make their decision about which zapper to purchase. They look around carefully, assess the various zapper sites, email me if they are considering buying my zapper, then make their choice based on as much information as they have been able to obtain. It is not easy to fool intelligent people who are trying to make informed choices. Trying to do so is pure folly.
COUNTING ON PEOPLE BEING GULLIBLE
Unfortunately for you, Arthur, most people are not fools. Only the most gullible people could possibly be tricked by your ghost site, bearing the name of my website and my zapper, into purchasing your old "bells and whistles" 1995 Auto-Zap model that has only one feature that distinguishes it from the old Hulda Clark model, its lower frequency. I offer my customers a truly Ultimate Zapper with 11 unique features, and a website filled with over 30 pages of health-oriented information, most of it related to the toxicity issues with which I am intimately familiar because of the 2 "incurable" diseases I overcame. I give my customers a superior zapper, a lot of information, and a lot more credit than you give your customers. You are counting on people being gullible. I am counting on them being intelligent. And do you know what? They are intelligent. I answer their emails 365 days a year. So I know that for a fact.
MY MISSION IS UNSHAKEABLE
According to you, The Ultimate Zapper is inferior. But others do not agree. If it were inferior I would not be spending over 12 hours a day, 365 days a year filling orders, answering email and working on my site just to keep up with the demand. I have not taken a day off in 13 years. The trouble you have gone to in lying about my zapper and my site can never undo what I have accomplished these past 13 years, and the long hours I devote to my zapper and my site and to helping people everyday of the year, free of charge. This is my mission. You cannot affect my mission in any way, shape or form, no matter what you do or say about me, about my zapper or about my website. You have lost the war before the battle has begun because I don't know of anyone in the zapper industry who works harder than me, because I have an unshakeable mission to help people, because I provide as much information as I can on my site about important issues, because I am honest and straightforward with people, and because your scheme is based on lies and deception. It is true that you overcame cancer twice. But, with all due respect, that was a piece of cake compared to what I went through to stay alive and to recover my health. Here's why. You had a surgical procedure done in 1987 to remove a skin cancer and you did a 3-month herbal parasite cleanse in 1994 for a breast tumor. Your problems were solved rather quickly and rather painlessly. Your recovery is easily told in one page on your new ghost site. I went to hell and back twice and the process of my recovery took 7 long years. I write about my recovery in my 110-page e-book entitled My Recovery Protocol. I am writing the complete story of my recovery in a 250-page book that will be published next year.
RESPECT
You have no idea what it means to be up against someone who went through what I did, and who prevailed against all the odds. If you did you would never even have considered taking the dishonest action that you have chosen to take by stealing my name. You would have shown me respect and left well enough alone, concentrating on your work, not using your energy to cook up an ill-fated marketing scheme.
I went through total paralysis with Multiple Sclerosis, unable to walk, unable to feed myself, written off as a basket case by the medical profession, and I came as close to death as one can come without stepping over the line thanks to Crohn's disease, and I was given no hope of survival. I ran a fever everyday for 7 months before being operated on in 1994. I could do little else but scream in pain and beg God to take me because life had become so utterly unbearable. You have no idea how strong those 7 years of blood, sweat and tears made me.
BY THE GRACE OF GOD
By the grace of God, I found the strength and courage and inspiration to overcome
these 2 "incurable" diseases, struggling to walk again, struggling to hold a fork
without dropping it, struggling to do everything that others take for granted, struggling
to find the answers to this paralysis, which I finally discovered was due to dental
mercury poisoning and opportunistic parasite, as was the Crohn's disease I was suffering
from. I spent 7 long years filled with blood, sweat and tears trying to survive
and regain my health. Losing nearly all the blood in my body due
to hemmhoraging after a life-saving gastro-intestinal resection, in a state of total
physical collapse in the Emergency Ward with a hemoglobin count of 41, but still
conscious and talking, to the amazement of the nurses, when I should have been in
shock, with 29 metal staples holding my abdomen together on the outside after my
operation, and with fistulas that were impossible to excise on the inside, one having
grown through the pelvic wall, 6 weeks spent on a hospital bed close to death, my
doctor taking on only the most difficult cases at the end of his long career, saying
that if my heart had not been strong I would not have survived the operation.
To the point where, at age 59, 20 years after being paralyzed and 15 years after being operated on I am fit as a fiddle. I stay fit by swimming and bicycling and lifting weights. I have taken no medication and I have not seen a doctor for major illness since 1994. I lead a normal life, taking things for granted again like everyone who leads a normal life does. I worked harder than one would think humanly possible to overcome these two "incurable" diseases. You have no idea how strong I now am in body, mind, spirit and character after going through those 7 years. I now work hard at keeping healthy and at helping others recover their health. You have the gall and the nerve to disrespect me and my work and my customers by stealing the name of my zapper and my website that I have put my life into these past 13 years. You have made a very big mistake by doing so. Your actions will inevitably draw a lot of negative response to you, much of it unexpressed and unseen. They will visit my site and read the truth, and they will turn their back and walk away from your site, even moreso than in the past.
YOUR GHOST SITE
Your little ghost site is insignificant, Arthur. What I do give a damn about is your stealing and your lying and your deception. This is a question of morality and you definitely do not hold the moral high ground at the present time. That's plain for all to see. The fact that you call yourself a Christian and have a Ministry and read your Bible while zapping every morning with the picture on your site is testament to your hypocrisy.
It would not surprise me at all to access your ghost site one day and read about my so-called recovery from MS and my so-called recovery from Crohn's disease and the so-called unsolicited testimonials on my so-called website. Frankly, nothing would surprise me from you anymore, Arthur. Go ahead. Make my day, if you wish. All of your efforts will be in vain. I can assure you that. Like Chubby Checker used to sing in the Limbo Rock back in 1962 "how low can they go?" I am waiting with baited breath for the next chapter. The latest news will be uploaded to the page, of course.
APPROVAL
It must have been been irking you for a very long time that a researcher and inventor such as myself invented a far better zapper than you, an electrical engineer, were able to invent. You were obviously so irked that you were impelled to go to the extreme measure of stealing my name to create a ghost website to try to draw business from my site to yours. It's strange that it has never irked you that Dr. Hulda Clark is not an electrical engineer, either, but a researcher and inventer. And you never objected to the fact that the approval you sought for your Auto-Zap from her son Geoff, and that you still wave like a flag on your site, was done by someone who is basically a businessman. Incidentally, Geoff Clark's "approval", a service he no longer provides zapper makers, consisted of testing zappers to see if they produced a square wave at a frequency of 30,000 Hertz, and nothing more. You don't mention this anywhere on your site. I wonder why not? One more lie by omission. You milk the names of Dr. Hulda Clark and Geoff Clark on your site as though you were a dairy farmer and you talk about the "Clark approval" as though you had just received communion from the Pope. Talk about deception, you sure know how to cover the football field, Arthur.
CREDIBILITY
Dr. Hulda Clark was a true inspiration to me in 1995. But I don't exploit her name to sell my zapper. I have a tribute to her on my site as well as a critique of her research methods. There are two sides to the Hulda Clark story, in my opinion. The good that she has done far outweighs the negative side. But both sides should be there for all to view. The result of the inspiration I received from Dr. Clark was The Ultimate Zapper and the result of inventing my zapper are the hundreds of testimonials I have received these past 13 years attesting to the incontrovertible fact that my zapper is a superior electronic device. You cannot change that fact no matter how many lies you tell on your ghost site, no matter how many times you use the words "so-called" when referring to my zapper, no matter how hard you try to denigrade my work, no matter how irked you are and no matter how hard you try to capitalize on my success. Your actions are destined to fail to create the results you want because they are based on lies and deception. The primary lie being that my zapper is inferior to yours and that you are therefore entitled to steal my name, in good conscience, of course, and to stand on my shoulders via your new ghost site in an effort to create new business for yourself. You will pay the price for your dishonesty in a loss of respect and credibility by the public who visits our sites.
NAMING YOUR SITE
AFTER AN INFERIOR ZAPPER?
You claim that The New Improved Ultimate Zapper is inferior, but an inferior zapper cannot produce superior results. You never explain this contradiction. And you never explain why on Earth you would want to name your new ghost website after a zapper you claim to be inferior. This would make absolute no sense if this claim were true. But you know it isn't true and that the contrary is true. Which is why you want to capitalize on my success. The increased sales you hope to receive as a result of your chicanery will inevitably attract more attention and interest to my site than to yours because people will see through your ploy like a child looking through a window pane. People are not stupid.
DIRE WARNINGS
I see that you offer some dire warnings on your "ghost" site: "Designs based on the 555 timer are inherently flawed, offering little to no protection against many causes of circuit damage, and offering no indication of actual pulsed output - in other words, you'll never be certain that your zapper is working. Flaws in the original circuit include: * fragility: the showbox zapper can be destroyed by static electricity shocks * poor battery life leading to the use of dangerous wall plugs, despite Dr. Clark's explicit warnings".
The only thing you don't explain is why, despite your dire warnings, The Ultimate Zapper has been, and continues to be, so successful and why people keep writing me about the amazing results they are getting with my zapper. The word of mouth it has produced all over the world, in over 50 countries on all 6 continents, is truly phenomenal. The Ultimate Zapper has proven to be very, very effective for 13 years. And completely safe. You cannot change these facts no matter what you say on your websites to disparage me and my zapper.
DEATH BY AC SHOCK?
AND MY NAME IS ELEANOR ROOSEVELT
On your bestzapper.com website you state "... adding a GFCI to prevent death by AC shock does not guaratee correct zapper output per Dr. Clark's specs." The GFCI is redundant and is no longer being shipped, as you can read below. By using the phrases "to prevent serious shock hazard if cheap AC adapter fails..." and "death by AC shock" and "dangerous wall plugs" you are indulging in scare-mongering which you hope will turn to your commercial advantage. It has not turned to your advantage in 13 years. There has not been a single failure of my AC adapter in all the years you have kept these lies on your site, and there never will be. In 13 years I have replied to 3 inquiries about this completely bogus statement of yours. There has been no "death by AC shock" or any "shock hazard" at all. What you call my "cheap AC adapter" is the most expensive component of The Ultimate Zapper. It is UL and CSA-approved by the U.S. and Canadian governments and meets the highest safety standards in the adapter industry.
No matter how much scare-mongering you indulge in on your Auto-Zap site you can never change the fact that The Ultimate Zapper is guaranteed 100% safe. There has never been a single solitary safety problem with the high quality AC adapter in 13 years. And there never will be a problem because it is fool-proof. Thousands of units have been sold all over the world. It has been taken apart piece by piece and tested rigorously not only by U.S. and Canadian government experts but by my own independent experts. They have even exposed its double insulation to open flame for an extended period of time without this provoking any internal fire or the slightest hint of failure or possible failure. My AC adapter has come through all the tests with flying colors. It has a 100% safety record over a period of 13 years, which you probably find rather irksome. You keep hoping for a failure and keep assuring people that it's coming very soon. You have been assuring people of this for 13 years. All your talk to the contrary, and all the waving of your expert engineering credentials in the air, and all your talk about the sky about to fall in any minute now have not changed the fact, in the slightest, that my AC adapter is 100% safe.
PLUS THE FAIL-SAFE COMPUTER CHIP
Oh yes, I forgot. There's one more thing worth mentioning in the discussion about the sky falling. The computer chip inside The Ultimate Zapper has a maximum tolerance of 16 volts according to the specification sheet from the manufacturer. I have experimented with batteries in series and parallel and I have produced up to 25 volts with prototype Ultimate Zappers while holding the handholds. When the voltage rises above the 16-volt tolerance level the chip inside the zapper is always destroyed. It pops and in a poof of smoke and that spells the end of the zapper. It is impossible for any voltage higher than 16 volts ever to get through to the handholds. The zapper dies above 16 volts. The Ultimate Zapper has an output of 10.5 constant volts which is the optimum voltage for therapeutic benefit.
WHO'S GAB IS TRULY BAFFLING?
Helping people is what I have dedicated my life to. It is my greatest reward. The fact is that my zapper does a better job at helping people than any other zapper available, by far, including your Auto-Zap. And I explain on my site exactly why it does such a good job and why it is superior, point by point and line by line. You once wrote me an email calling my website "baffle gab". By implication I imagine you were calling my zapper a "baffle zapper". Well, that really baffles me because the problem with making that statement is that it contradicts the clarity with which I discuss everything on my site and the truth of the amazing results people using The Ultimate Zapper have emailed me about these past 13 years. After reading our respective sites I wonder if people think it is you or me offering up baffle gab.
TEST CIRCUIT RED HERRING
Your emphasis on your testing circuit falls into the "bells and whistles" category that I talk about below. If your zapper were well designed why in the world would you need to test it everytime you turn it on? My zapper's design is fool proof and everytime you turn it on it is guaranteed to produce all the operating features it is designed to produce. It's that simple. A test circuit? It's a red herring, another of your ploys to draw attention away from the lack of features that the Auto-Zap offers while ignoring 6 of the operating features that The Ultimate Zapper offers that make it a truly superior zapper that produces superior results. You only mention the 100% positive pulses that my zapper produces, desperately clinging to the fact that all zappers produce a positive offset square wave, without admitting that 100% positive pulses, twice as long as your zapper and all other zappers produce, is truly a major innovation that no other zapper in the world, including your Auto-Zap, is designed to produce. I explain all this in detail on the front page of my site. You make no mention of the other 11 operational features of The Ultimate Zapper on either one of your websites because that would open a Pandora's Box that consists of the irrefutable facts on my site and the unsolicited testimonials that back up those facts in the testimonial archive on my site. There is no way you would be able to explain away the effectiveness of those features, no matter how hard you might try, because it is precisely those features that make my zapper superior to your Auto-Zaps and all the others: a Super Stabilized wave, a higher constant voltage, the most effective lower frequency, an undistorted wave, footpads and electroporation. And there is no way you would be able to explain away the amazing testimonials.
DR. HULDA CLARK GUARANTEES THAT
THE AUTO-ZAP PRODUCES INFERIOR RESULTS
You now claim your 9-volt battery lasts for 1 1/2 years. Perhaps it does. I am not questioning that claim. But please answer the following questions. How many volts does your 9-volt battery put out after 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and at the end of 1 1/2 years when you are supposed to change the battery? Does your Auto-Zap produce 1 to 2 volts for the last 3 months, or 4 to 5 volts? How do you know? Have you tested it for 1 1/2 years? Or have you measured the rate of discharge for a specific period of time to assure that your battery discharges at a constant rate and then extrapolated from there? How do you know the voltage does not fall off quickly when it reaches a critical point 1 year down the line with inferior 9-volt batteries? As you know, all 9-volt batteries are not the same. Their quality varies greatly from one maker to another, some are alkaline, others are not, some are rechargeable, others are not, some are long life, others are not. Some 9-volt batteris discharge much faster than others. Have you tested your Auto-Zap zapper using a wide variety of 9-volt batteries to be able to assure your customers of the truth of your claim regarding 1 1/2 years of zapping from one 9-volt battery? One thing you don't talk about on your sites is how effective zapping is with the Auto-Zap at the 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1-volt levels. Dr. Hulda Clark says that zapping at less than 9 volts produces inferior results. So, by definition, the Auto-Zap always produces inferior results.
LYING BY OMISSION
Ironically, after all is said about the long life of the 9-volt battery you used then testing your Auto-Zap, the fact is that it is totally irrelevant if a battery lasts 1 year, 5 years or 100 years in the Auto-Zap. The fact is that a 9-volt battery begins discharging the moment it is first used. It always delivers less than 9 volts. You need more than 9 volts for optimum results according to Dr. Hulda Clark, who you like to quote so liberally on your site. Although I can find photo ops with you and your wife and Dr. Clark on your site, used to promote your sales, I cannot find this specific quote of hers anywhere on your site. You are very selective about Dr. Clark's quotations that you choose for your site. I wonder why? Furthermore, I can't find a discussion of the diminished effectiveness of zappers that produce less than 9 volts on your site, either. I wonder why not? Because your zapper always produces less than 9 volts. You can find this discussion prominently on the front page of my site. I have nothing to hide, but you obviously do. If you told people the truth they would click right out of your site, lickety-split. You can't afford to tell the truth. Lying by omission is your only option. It is your modus operandi.
SUFFICIENT VOLTAGE
TO PRODUCE INFERIOR RESULTS
You now state on your Auto-Zap site that your zapper produces "sufficient voltage (5 to 10 volts)". Sufficient for what? First of all, no 9-volt battery produces 10 volts. They all discharge from 9 volts to zero volts. Second of all, Dr. Hulda Clark states that you need more than 9 volts for optimum therapeutic benefit. You fail to mention this on your site. This is another of your lies by omission. How can 5 to 9 volts be "sufficient"? 9 volts or less is clearly insufficient for optimum therapeutic benefits. 5 volts is sufficient? Sufficient for what? 5 volts to 9 volts are only sufficient for producing inferior results. It looks like you just hanged yourself with your own words. The Ultimate Zapper always produces optimum results, never "sufficient" results.
MIRED IN REVERENCE
13 years ago you dedicated your zapper to Dr. Clark's specific formula and you have not strayed from that formula for the past 13 years, except for the lower frequency. I dedicated The Ultimate Zapper to Dr. Clark's basic concept but not to her specific formula. I left myself free to improve on it, and I have. I have left myself open to fundamental change because I found that change can produce improved results. You have remained stuck in a reverential mode regarding Dr. Clark. I have not. That's the basic difference between your approach and mine. The Ultimate Zapper not only has a lower frequency, a more effectgive lower frequency than your Auto-Zap, but it also offers 6 more unique features that make it superior, truly the best zapper in the world, unexcelled in its features and its effectiveness. You have resented the success The Ultimate Zapper has brought me. This could not be more obvious because of the trouble you have gone to in creating a ghost site by stealing the name of my zapper and my website. The price of revering Dr. Clark is clear. You end up stuck selling an old style zapper, trying to make it look impressive using "bells and whistles", while envying those who have passed you by.
THE AUTO-ZAP'S BELLS AND WHISTLES
If you ever try to explain away the success of The Ultimate Zapper you'll have big problems, of course. You'll have to continue using the label "so-called" to disparage it without any explanation why you label it the "so-called" Ultimate Zapper, or you'll have to compare in detail the difference between the operational features of your Auto-Zap zapper and The Ultimate Zapper. You will then be forced to discuss the features that create a more effective zapper which appear on the front page of my site and in my zapper comparison charts. You'll lose the debate before it begins because your zapper has only 1 feature, its low frequency -- nothing to compare with the features of The Ultimate Zapper's 11 features. Your 6 "bells and whistles" including a long-lasting 9-volt battery and a timer and an sound alert beeper do not contribute in any way to a zapper's therapeutic effectiveness. In fact, all the Auto-Zap really has to offer is bells and whistles.
MANGOSTEEN JUICE
I devote over 30 pages on my site to helping people understand a wide variety of health issues concerning toxicity. Some of those "pages" run to 150 scrolled pages or more. Thousands of people are helped by this information every year, free of charge, and I back up my site with free email follow-up. Your small Auto-Zap site is dedicated strictly to selling your zapper and accessories, plus mangosteen juice. I have been eating mangosteens for years. They're really delicious. They may even have some therepeutic benefits, though I have never felt any. Mangosteen juice is one of a number of red herrings on your site to distract people from the main course: zapper issues. Your site smells very fishy after dragging a series of red herrings across it for the past 13 years. If you were ever to enter into a discussion of the hard facts about zappers in a scientific manner you would lose that discussion, hands down. Because your Auto-Zap's features, except for the lower frequency, do not create a more effective zapper, let alone a superior one worthy of the name The Ultimate Zapper. That's the plain and simple truth.
BATTERY MONITORS
AND TIMERS AND SOUND ALERTS
Your Auto-Zap features consist of a battery output monitor which you emphasize as though it were a feature of such monumental importance that one could not possibly live without one. And your zapper features a timer. You talk about the importance of a timer as though without it people would be dying in the streets. Since people can't count from 1 to 7 you're going to take that onerous task on your shoulders and do the counting for them. The fact is that counting from 1 to 7 is not all that difficult and the 7-minute timer creates a lack of flexibility. Flexibility is essential for people who use my zapper because each person is different and this requires a flexible approach. And you offer an additional bell and whistle, a sound alert beeper. I guess a lot of people fall asleep during your 7-minute zapping cycle and when the sound alert beeps the user knows they can let go of the handholds during the 20-minute break. You describe all this on your site. Well isn't that just dandy. I give my customers a lot more credit than you do. In 13 years I have yet to hear back from a single customer who needed a sound alert beeper or a low battery monitor.
Regarding the need for a timer, with The Ultimate Zapper some people only need one minute of zapping because it is so powerful. With others the zapping duration varies from person to person, from 2 to 7 minutes. Some people like to ramp up the zapping time in one-minute increments over a period of weeks. Some people like to zap even longer than 7 minutes. Children should only zap for one minute. There is no universal formula for everyone. A 7-minute timer would destroy the flexibility that is essential for the therapeutic success of The New Improved Ultimate Zapper.
THEY'D RATHER DIE THAN COUNT TO 7
On your Auto-Zap site you state "many people will use a manually timed zapper only as long as they feel their life is threatened." I am very surprised by the implication of this statement. Do you mean people have emailed you and said they would rather die than count to seven? Please give me break. Who in their right mind would believe such a story. I have had many people ask me why I don't offer a timer and when I explain to them the necessity for flexibility with my zapper they accept it easily, with no suicide threats yet recorded. I have yet to hear back from one single person in 13 years who was willing to die rather than count to 1, 3, 5 or 7 with my zapper.
THE NEW UNIMPROVED AUTO-ZAP
If you entered into a discussion of zapper features, one at a time, like I do on my site, the discussion would inevitably backfire on you because people would see that The Ultimate Zapper has 11 operational features that make it a truly superior zapper compared to the one distinguishing operational feature that your Auto-Zap offers, a lower frequency. I see on your ghost site that you now call your Auto-Zap "The Zapper Improved". My question to you is "What improvements have you made to your zapper that make it more effective?" On your new ghost site you say "We've expanded and improved it to make the most powerful, effective zapper available anywhere." But you offer no proof at all to back up this statement. You offer no explanation on your site of a single improvement to your zapper that makes it more powerful or more effective than it was in 1995. Because there has been none. Your Auto- Zap is the same old Auto-Zap you have been producing for 13 years. It is no more powerful or effective than it was in 1995, and you know it. How can it be? It still uses a 9-volt battery. More powerful means more voltage. That's plain and simple. This is one more in a series of overt lies on your websites. It appears that you'll say just about anything to make a sale.
HARD STATISTICS ARE HARD TO REFUTE
Your "zapper improved" on your ghost site leads people where? Right back to your Auto-Zap site with the same old unimproved zapper you have been offering for the past 13 years. People looking for a superior zapper will see this, of course. They're are not stupid. It all adds up to a win-win situation for me. When you use the label "so-called" to denigrade my zapper you display an obvious lack of respect. When you avoid discussing important zapper features you create an instant comparison between your site and mine. People like my direct approach. You cannot talk away the growth that my website experiences week in and week out, 52 weeks a year, no matter what you say. My statistics counter shows that people are staying longer and longer on my site, reading more and more pages, and placing more orders than ever. One day it would not surprise me to read on your ghost site about the so-called increase in visits to the 30+ health-oriented pages on my site, the so-called increase in time people spend on my site, and the so-called increase in orders that I receive every month. The phrase "so-called" is your desperate last resort.
THE HOUSE OF AUTO-ZAP
IS MADE OF VERY THIN GLASS
Your attempt to improve your sales by standing on my shoulders while casting aspersions on my work and my zapper will inevitably backfire on you, Arthur. People in glass houses should never throw stones. Your house is made of very thin glass. What goes around comes around. That's a universal law. You do have a Christian Ministry and you do read your Bible every morning while zapping, according to your website. Perhaps you should review the following:
NEITHER SHALL YOU STEAL
NEITHER SHALL YOU COVET
THE 8th COMMANDMENT. Neither shall you steal.
THE 10th COMMANDMENT. Neither shall you covet your neighbour?s wife. Neither shall you desire your neighbour?s house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
I think theft of website names and zapper names can be included in the 8th Commandment. It comes under the rubrique "Intellectual Property".
I think that coveting your competitor's zapper can be included in the 10th Commandment because The Ultimate Zapper belongs to me, as you know. It has belonged to me for 13 years. Neither you nor anyone can take that away from me, and no one can take the work I have done these past 13 years away from me no matter what chicanery, tricks or lies they resort to. Your covetousness regarding the success of The Ultimate Zapper, the name I gave my zapper and my website 13 years ago, has provoked you into stealing the name of my zapper and my website for your own ghost site. Do you intend to rechristen your Auto-Zap zapper The Ultimate Zapper to complete the deception? At that point my business will go right through the roof. Any business that you are able to syphon off from The New Improved Ultimate Zapper by using your ghost Ultimate Zapper site will be dwarfed by the negative attention it will draw to you, and the positive attention it will draw to my site.
THE ROLLS ROYCE
IS REALLY THE FORD EDSEL
After all is said and done I thank you for helping boost my business, albeit unintentionally. One thing is for sure. Everytime you draw attention to your ghost Ultimate Zapper site you draw attention to my New Improved Ultimate Zapper, to my Ultimate Apper website and, to an even greater extent, your own deceptiveness. Of course you also draw attention to your "bells and whistles" 1995 model Auto-Zap zapper that you have just waved a wand over so that it has now magically been transformed into the ultimate zapper, "the perfect Dr. Clark zapper", a wonderful accomplishment created through the stealing of a name. It's like the story of the frog that became a prince. If life were only so simple.
This message is already on the Competition page on my site. I always put interesting zapper developments on my site, as you know. People are really interested in reading about all this. I know this for a fact because the statistical counter on my website tells me how many people read the Competition page. And people really do know which is the best zapper once they use The Ultimate Zapper. After they use the Terminator II and the ParaZapper and the Super Deluxe 2006 and the Mini Zapper and the Auto-Zap and all the others, and then they try The Ultimate Zapper they know the difference right away. They know which is truly the most effective zapper in the world. And they email me telling me so, and I put their testimonials on my site. The Google ratings show without any doubt that the public has voted The Ultimate Zapper the best zapper in the world. You call your Auto-Zap the Rolls Royce of zappers. I think a more apt name would be the Ford Edsel of zappers.
The actions you have recently taken to create a new ghost site by stealing my name have detroyed any credibility and integrity you may have had in the zapper industry.
Sincerely,
Ken Presner
March 20, 2007
1. SILVER TERMINATOR:
KEN ADACHI AND I EXCHANGE EMAILS
Dear Ken Presser,
I haven't read your "reply" yet, but I will. I'll just work from this e-mail for
the moment. I didn't attempt to e-mail you or attempt to debate you about anything,
so your "reply" is apparently an attempt on your part to rebutt what I had to say
about your blowhard ways and your exaggerated claims concerning your over-hyped
generator and your claims to it being similar to a Beck electrifier. I don't insult
people who I haven't yet engaged in conversation, so your characterization is misplaced.
I think the word you're looking for is CRITICISM. You apparently don't like what
I had to say about your unremitting hype, so you choose to call that insulting and
hypocritical. You have difficulty distinguishing between A and B, I notice. After
I read your "reply", I'll get back to you. I'm sure I'll have more to say.
Sincerely,
Ken Adachi
Dear Ken Adachi,
My last name is spelt P-R-E-S-N-E-R.
I have just read your reply which I do not demean, although perhaps I should, by
putting it in quotation marks as I note you have described my "reply". This snide
attitude is exactly the kind of thing that I talk about in my reply on my site at
http://zap.intergate.ca/root.html
to the information on your site about The Ultimate Zapper and me. I find it interesting
that your reply is a reply, with no quotation marks, but a reply on my site is a
"reply". I never claimed that you emailed me or that you attempted to debate me.
This is another in a series of your paper tigers that I talk about in my reply,
no quotation marks, at
http://zap.intergate.ca/root.html
I stated in my reply that you have made statements on your site that are clearly
false. I suggest that you "work from" the information that I have provided in my
email and that I uploaded to my site at
http://zap.intergate.ca/root.html
I note that you like to use CAPITAL LETTERS on your site and in this reply to HYPE
the importance of your statements. MOST PEOPLE find it normal to use upper and lower
case and any EMPHASIS they wish to place on THEIR STATEMENTS comes from what they
say, not from THEIR OVERUSE OF CAPITAL LETTERS. It is readily apparent that you
do in fact insult those, including me, who you "haven't yet engaged in conversation".
Your tone is clearly bullying. That will not get very far with me, I assure you.
You have not "engaged" me in conversation before yet your tone is clearly lacking
in respect, deliberately provocative and insulting. My characterization is not misplaced.
It is completely accurate and to the point. It is based on your statements.
By the way, does your statement that you "don't insult people who I haven't yet engaged in conversation" mean that you merely wait until you have "engaged" someone "in conversation" before beginning to insult them? In which case, may I point out, you have not provided me with this consideration.
"Blowhard"? Take the mote out of thine own eye ...
As I point out in my reply, on my site my customers' testimonials "blow" far harder than I ever would dare to do. In fact, I deliberately understate things lest people like you accuse me of exaggeration. It is obvious that you have a very large ax to grind. And you waste no effort in grinding it.
You insist on claiming that I say things that I do not say on my site. Here is one more paper tiger. I never say that The Ultimate Zapper is similar to the Beck electrifier. I say that it has been shown to provide the same results but that these two devices are completely different in design. That's right, I don't like what you say not because I am sensitive to CRITICISM but because what you say is clearly false. I have provided the details about this on my site since your site forbids "negative" replies on its "forum", although I note that you are very liberal with your own negativity about others, including me and my site, on your "Educate-Yourself" site.
Yes, I choose to call your negativity hypocritical because
it is very clear that it is the word that describes it most appropriately. Arthur
Doerksen of Auto-Zap and David Etheredge of ParaZapper have pointed out factual
errors on my site in the past and I have been very quick to correct them. I try
my very best to keep my site as factually accurate as possible and am glad when
people, especially competitors, let me know about any inaccuracies so that I can
correct them. Corrections have also been made over the years thanks to emails from
customers. I have a site that comprises nearly 20 megabytes, all of it written by
me, I might note (which makes it challenging to keep up with changing events), as
opposed to your own site which contains copious information "taken" from a wide
variety of sources, information that has not been penned by yourself. I will not
abide the outright lies that you spout about me and The Ultimate Zapper on your
site, statements without any basis in fact and that carry a tone of authority and
BULLY PULPIT that is particularly offensive. I provide the details about this on
my site at
http://zap.intergate.ca/root.html
If you would specify what A is and what B is then perhaps we can see if I have "difficulty
in distinguishing" between them, as you so patronizingly comment, thank you very
much. This instance, as with so many of the other statements you have made about
The Ultimate Zapper, as I point out in my reply on my site, is one more example
of how you are totally vague in the statements that you make on your site, conveniently
omitting to provide any details whatsoever, and how your tone is lacking in the
kind of respect one would expect from a third party who might be making a simple
inquiry or comment. As I have already pointed out, you have a very large ax to grind.
I will be writing more about this soon on my site. Your emails and my replies will
be uploaded to my site at
http://zap.intergate.ca/root.html
As of yet I have received no reply from Ken Adachi and
none appears on his site.
Sincerely,
Ken Presner http://zap.intergate.ca
Here is a posting by "Jack" on Ken Adachi's "Educate-Yourself" site
here.
Jack:
Dear Ken,
Thanks for the fast response. I must understand a little more on it this SOTA made
item. I am keen on a device that kills all virus and similar pathogens. Currently
I have just purchased a "Ultimate Zapper" .
With Best Regards,
Jack
Here is Ken Adachi's reply to "Jack" with my comments in red:
Ken Adachi: [Please note Ken Adachi's persistent use of
CAPITAL LETTERS to emphasize his statements, as though by using capitals his statements
somehow become truthful even though they are not.]
Hi Jack,
There are many web sites that sell a single frequency zapping device. The one you
got is based on a 2500Hz frequency. It is based on the original design of Dr. Hulda
Clark, but Ken Presner (http://zap.intergate.ca/) "improved" it
[by putting the word improved in quotation marks you are obviously inferring that
The Ultimate Zapper is not an improved version of the original Dr. Hulda Clark Zapper
-- which is totally false -- the front page of my site explains precisely why it
is by fat the best zapper available] by changing the duty cycle to about
90% (even though he ERRONEOUSLY claims that it's 100%).
This statement is completely false. I state on my site that the Duty Cycle is near
100%. There is no such thing as a 100% Duty Cycle.
It is not the "Ultimate Zapper" as Ken Presner claims.
[That is Ken Adachi's opinion. His opionion is certainly not shared by the thousands
of satisfied customers who have bought The Ultimate zapper since 1996 and on can
fairly infer that it is certainly not the shared by the 300 people who have sent
in testimonials which can be read on my site. You may note that Ken Adachi provides
no evidence whatsoever to support this opinion.] There are many things
that he says on his web site that are either not true, or are distortions of the
truth, or are misleading statements. [You will note that,
as I point out repeatedly -- I have also emailed Ken Adachi about this -- he provides
not a scintilla of evidence to support his opinion, not a single specific response
to any specific statement I make on my site.]
He leaves you with the impression that his zapper will produce the same bio electrification
results that Beck achieved to neutralize HIV. That is NOT true.
[It is absolutely true. The HIV testimonial on my site shows this very clearly --
and there are many others that I have not yet been authorized to publish that are
coming in from Africa.] He even references the Kaali experiments at the
Albert Einstein NYC College of Medicine that Bob Beck based his research on! Beck's
design is FUNDAMENTALLY different in waveform, frequency, method of application
and RESULTS. [This is absolutely true, as I have written.
The Beck device and The Ultimate Zapper work on very different principles but they
accomplish the same thing. There is more than 1 way to skin a cat. The other way
is with The Utimate Zapper. The testimonials in the archive on my site under the
category BLOOD show beyond a shadow of a doubt that The Ultimate Zapper is easily
as effective for blood-related illnesses as Beck blood purifiers. By the way, Bob
Beck did not invent the principles behind blood electrification. Those principles
were invented by Dr. Royal Raymond Rife on whose shoulders Bob Beck stood. Dr. Rife
was the true genius of electronic medicine. Bob Beck, Dr. Hulda Clark and every
maker of frequency generators and zappers has stood in his shadow. Dr. Rife owed
a debt of gratitude, in turn, to the great genius Nikola Tesla.]
Many of the things that Ken Presner says may be true, [Thank
you very much but, once again, Ken Adachi refuses to provide a single detail. He
talk in generalities and does so with an authoritative tone, neither of which mean
that he either knows what he is talking about or that he is telling the truth.]
but many things he says are also misleading and some are not accurate at all. [Once again, where's the beef. No details or specifics are
provided.] Many of his statements are utterly specious and designed to
make you believe that his zapper is the Be All and End All of zappers.
[Where's the beef? Yackety yackey yack, and nothing more.] He's a hype-ster
of the First Magnitude. [Actually, I am very careful not
to overstate the attributes of The Ultimate Zapper left people like Ken Adachi accuse
me of exaggeration. It is my customers who are so effusive that anything I say pales
in comparison. All you have to do is look over the 300 testimonials in the archive
on my site to see that this is absolutely true.]
Presner's claims of success are based on Hulda Clark's pioneering research, not
his. [This is absolutely false. The Ultimate Zapper was
inspired by Dr. Hulda Clark which I state up front on the Home Page of my site.
And I pay tribute to Dr. Clark on the Dr. Clark Page on my site, as well. But The
Ultimate Zapper is head and shoulders above the original zapper that Dr. Clark invented
in 1996 and the success that it has attained is based on its own merits. It is not
a 1993 model Hulda Clark zapper -- and I explain the difference very clearly on
the Home Page of my site.] He seems to want to take far more credit than
he deserves. [I only take credit where it is fair for me
to do so. I think that this is abundantly clear from reading my site. Except in
the case of jealous competitors who will say just about anything to try to discredit
me. Many of them including Ken Adachi who sells his own Silver Terminator, David
Etheredge who sells ParaZapper and Arthur Doerksen who sells Auto-Zap have been
making false statements about The Ultimate Zapper, my site and my work for years.
I have been responding to their statements for years, as well, and you can read
what I have to say on the Deceptive Marketing Page, the Competition 1 Page and the
Competition 2 page on my bsite, all accessible on the right-hand margin of the Home
Page.] He's mainly interested in MARKETING and selling his zapper.
[Well, if that's not the pot calling the kettle black I don't know what is. Of course
I want to market The Ultimate Zapper. Does Ken Adachi mean to say that he is not
interested in marketing his Silver Terminator. You be the judge of who is really
interested in MARKETING when you see the long line-up of products Ken Adachi markets
and the one zapper, footpads and AC adapter, plus my 4 books, marketed on my site.]
He's OVERSTATING and hype-ing the capabilities of that zapper to the nth degree. [Once again, I'm getting tired of repeating the same thing,
WHERE"S THE BEEF, KEN ADACHI?]
The Ultimate Zapper will do what a positive offset, 90% duty cycle, pulsing DC square
wave will do running at 2500Hz, [Now what the heck does
that cconvoluted sentence mean? It will do what it will do? It certainly will do
what it will do, and it certainly does, but I don't think that Ken Adachi means
this in the positive way that I do and that The Ultimate Zapper's customers have
attested to for the past 13 years.] but it CAN'T reproduce the same results
as the Beck electrifier because it's FUNDAMENTALLY different and not the same design
at all. [Wrong again, Ken Adachi. As I pointed out, above,
The Ultimate Zapper can do the very same blood purification work that the Beck device
can. Testimonials in the archive on my site show this beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Not to the consternation of satisfied customers but to the consternation of a number
of compeititors.]
Beck's positive clinical trial results (involving THOUSANDS of people WITH
AIDS) were based on using the BECK ELECTRIFIER [This is
obviously true. Bob Beck died in 2002 and I believe his clinical trials happened
long before his death. How in the world, and why in the world, would Bob beck be
use The Ultimate Zapper for clinical trials to prove the effectiveness of his own
device? The logic of this excapes me completely. Ken Adachi is becoming famous for
creating paper tigers. I believe this is an example of this propensity on his part.]
and NOT based on Ken Presner's adulterated version [Adulterated?
I am surprised that Ken Adachi did not take the opportunity to put this word in
CAPITAL LETTERS for emphasis. I don't see anywhere that he characterizes his own
Silver Terminator as an adulterated Terminator II. I don't see anywhere that he
characterizes any zapper that was developed from the original Dr. Hulda Clark Zapper
as adulterated? This is the equivalent of using the word "improved" in quotation
marks, as her does above, a sarcastic and negative way to characterize the product
of a competitor. This speaks volumes about Ken Adachi and his "Educate-Yourself"
site, in my opinion.] of a Clark zapper that he decided to hype
[Yada, yada, yada. More put-downs from Ken Adachi.] as the "Ultimate
Zapper." [In quotation marks, one again. A similar tactic
is employed by Arthur Doerksen of Auto-Zap fame, another jealous competitor. Have
a look at the 5 zapper comparison charts on my site to see how their zappers stack
up side by side with 29 other zappers, and the 11-feature Ultimate Zapper which
needs no hyping at all. The charts and the testimonials, along with endorsements
and scientific backing, all referred to on the Home Page of my site, tell the true
story. None of Ken Adachi's negative talk can erase the truth.]
Caveat emptor. [Indeed.
May the buyer beware. Take your time before deciding which zapper to purchase. Examine
carefully not only what zappers makers say about their own products but also what
they say about their competitiors and how they talk about their competitors. All
this should be carefully noted in your evaluation so that you can make the best
possible choice.
Sincerely,
Ken Presner]
Regards,
Ken
TRIAL OFFER |
kenpresner
|
ORDER HERE |
MAIN MENU
-
- kenpresner
@hotmail.com - Ordering
- Trial Offer
- Distributors
- Instructions
- Comparison Charts
- Testimonials
- My Recovery Protocol
- FAQ