This article is based on reports based on the experiences of your trade colleagues
|
|
Sanitation and plumbing trade companies test water energisers
Humbug or new perspective?
As part of the SBZ professional experiment looking into the effectiveness
of energising water treatment devices, we asked the question whether we
were dealing with humbug or new perspectives. An unvarnished summary
of the results based on the observations and reports of 35 people follows below.
If there has been some dispute over the effectiveness of physical water treatment
devices, the same can most certainly be expected with regard to the new
energising technologies with an emphasis on the esoteric. Several manufacturers
advertise their products with a mix of messages that can sometimes strike one
as rather bizarre. A so called activation is meant to give the water renewed powers in order to make it more refreshing and to improve the taste, or make the water
leave a pleasant sensation on the skin. Additional effects include, according to
the manufacturer, reduced formation of limescale from hard water, breakdown
of limescale, enhanced plant growth, reduced detergent consumption, less red discolouration of water through rust and much, much more.
However, it might not work all the time or in all areas. The effectiveness is also dependent on the composition of the water and the basic conditions.Nonetheless, several manufacturers generate a remarkable turnover from door-to-door selling in spite of these incalculable factors. A substantial section of the population is obviously receptive to products with esoteric leanings. Can the sanitation and plumbing trade afford to - or does it want to - let this opportunity pass by?
First of all, let us look at the energising process that is supposed to work without
chemistry, electricity or magnets. The theories on offer are sometimes weird and many statements in the brochures contradict basic scientifi c facts. On the other hand, it is known that there are many phenomena that cannot yet be explained by science. One of the first to look into the energising of water for healing purposes was the doctor Friedrich Anton Mesmer (1734-1815). The works of Viktor Schauberger (1885-1958) as well as those of Theodor Schwenk (1910-1986) and John Wilkes of the Institute of Flow Sciences in Herrischried, Germany are also known. They examined the spiral, formative flowing movements of water with regard to quality and activity. The self cleaning property of streams and rivers for example, can be traced back to their meandering courses and the resulting spiral movements of their water. Nature mechanically provides for the necessary
activity of the water with additional irradiation of light and cosmic rays.
| |
Diverse materials transmit the information |
The devices for energising and vitalising the water transmit subtle ethereal oscillations, so called information, onto the water. These subtle energies cannot be measured directly since they seem to reside outside generally accepted forces. Only by experimentation are their effects noticeable as phenomena. It is assumed that water is a carrier of information and therefore able to store frequency patterns. The structure of the water is modifi ed and under favourable conditions the storage of information lasts for a long time. Favourable, in this case, means no high temperatures, the absence of disrupting (electro) magnetic fields and little turbulence. The information for the water originates
from a store that consists of a crystalline or water-containing material. Silica sand and calcium carbonate are used as well as gems or wood. Metal is often used to transfer the information from the carrier onto the water.
Even though, or maybe because, there is great uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of such products, we picked one manufacturer at random, Penergetic from Meersburg. The editors of SBZ were quite sceptical and wanted to know - without scientifi c or representative pretence - from a neutral point of view, if anything at all happens with
these types of products. Accordingly we distributed 33 Aquakat test devices to
trade companies willing to experiment.These were chosen according to the
order the applications for last year’sSBZ professional testing campaign were received in. The duration of the test was three months. We asked our colleagues in the trade for subjective and unvarnished
reports based on experience.
Our test device, the Aquakat byPenergetic, Meersburg, is a device that was developed for the vitalisation of water in single apartments, single family homes or apartment blocks. Company director Daniel Plocher believes in his devices and therefore made 33 units available for the experiment. The device consists of a casing made of brushed stainless steel pipe and the layered inner, made of linen paper, aluminium foil and cotton. The aluminium foils have been “informed”: they are, according to Penergetic, charged with frequency patters of clean, natural spring water and oxygen during a special manufacturing process by means of a gravitational field using the implosion method. The water that is to be treated does not come into direct contact with the information carrier. Advertised are, besides biological and health-related advantages, also taste improvements and a higher effi ciency with wash and cleaning processes. Limescale and rust feature further down the list on the advertising material. The Aquakat is supposed to transfer the frequency patterns that it has previously been charged with onto the water. The device, that works electricity-free, is 28cm long and costs $810 before tax. The effects are said to last for a period of 15 to 17 years. The Aquakat is mounted onto the pipe behind the water meter and pressure reducer using the mounting screw.
|
Before testing, heating rod after 12 months of use: the limescale was hard as stone
The heating rod was descaled with
acid before testing commenced
After a three month run with the Aquakat installation, limescale has become noticeable again
These limescale deposits were, however, according to SBZ professional tester Karl Maierthaler, “totally soft” and “could easily be removed with a jet of water”.
|
|
33 devices were distributed to 33 trade companies. Two testers dropped out, but three companies tested the device in more than one household, so we received 35 signifi cant questionnaires in the end.
- First surprising result: Only 4 companies certifi ed the devices to be without any effect whatsoever.
- With the remaining 31 installations positive effects of the most varying degrees and forms were achieved.
- Soft factors: 28 professional testers reported a taste or haptic improvement Statements like “the water feels softer, it tastes better and fresher and no bubbles
form in the water” were often heard. It was repeatedly noted that an unpleasant chlorine taste was no longer noticeable. Another group of testers reported hair that felt softer and a pleasant effect on the skin.
- Limescale problems: 7 testers said that problems with limescale remained unchanged. 7 testers did not have any problems with limescale and merely wanted to check for effects on taste etc. 26 testers, however, noticed a signifi cant improvement of limescale problems. Their reports outline time and time again that limescale could be removed a lot easier. In cases where traditional cleaning agents had to be used to attack limescale on tiles and fi ttings prior to the test, it could now be removed by hand or with a soft cloth. Additionally it was said that less limescale built up and that the formation of limescale stains was reduced.
- 12 testers with severe limescale problems could signifi cantly increase (mostly double) the period between descalings on all technical devices.
- In 3 installations, where red discolouration of the water through rust
had to be treated, the red discolouration vanished after the Aquakat had been installed.
- Because water is supposed to improve its “dissolving properties” through vitalisation, the amount of washing detergent used can, according to the manufacturer, also be reduced. Correspondingly, about half of the households were able to reduce detergent consumption successfully by up to 50%. To be fair, it has to be said that it was not determined if the use of detergent had been optimised prior to the installations.
Apart from a few exceptions, the majority of the trade companies who took part in the experiment determined that the Aquakat - in whatever way - works. The effects found were of a diverse nature and ranged from weak singular effects to baffling problem solvers with regard to taste, limescale and rust. It cannot be deduced from the test results which influential factors lead to which action when the devices are used. For this, large scale scientifi c studies will be needed. A substantial section of the population is obviously receptive to products with esoteric leanings. This clientele should not be left to the traditional door-todoor salespeople. Inform your clients nabout the potential effectiveness and non-effectiveness of the device. If you offer your customers a right to return purchased devices, for example within a three month period, even with devices where effectiveness is not satisfactory, you can still make a good turnover without a guilty conscience.
On this note, a quote by SBZ professional tester Sabine Heymann from Seelze, who was one of the few participants that did not notice an effect: “Blessed be the believer – but the non-believer will also go to heaven. If people believe in it, why would anyone want to stand in the way of their happiness?” In light of this insight and the fact that more than 80% of the SBZ professional testers noticed significant effects, the sanitation and plumbing trade should not let this opportunity pass.
|
Daniel Plocher |
|
Plumbers instead of homeopaths
We talked to Daniel Plocher, manufacturer of the devices and director of Penergetic in Meersburg, about the results.
SBZ:
Mr Plocher, what is your opinion on the test results?
Plocher:
I am surprised that the assessments of the SBZ readers were even better. I expected about 60% of the tests to be positive. I am of course delighted that the result is so favourable.
SBZ:
And how do you explain the vast differences in the results?
Plocher:
That is normal; each of our customers perceives the effects to be a little different. Furthermore the actions and effects are also dependent on the surroundings and the composition of the water. Generally the results of the SBZ experiment do reflect the experiences of our customers.
SBZ:
Out of 10 devices that you install, how many do you have to take back?
Plocher:
On average two devices are taken back. But this is no problem since the Aquakat is merely clamped on and the tradesman selling it can easily show good will towards his customer without producing extra costs.
SBZ: How do you distribute the devices in Germany?
Plocher:
We are currently building up a distribution system through agents within the sanitation and plumbing trade. We also sell through selected homeopaths, because the sanitation and plumbing trade has so far only shown a little interest in our devices.
SBZ:
Is that not a contradiction? On the one hand distribution through plumbers, on the other hand through homeopaths?
Plocher:
You are right, but I cannot let our devices get old in storage only because the sanitation and plumbing trade is not willing to sell them. We will, however, make a fresh start now in selling our devices directly through the trade and therefore exclusively through the sanitation and plumbing sector.
SBZ:
Where do you see the largest customer base for your devices?
Plocher:
Health-conscious owners of one- or two-family homes. Basically, anyone who wants to achieve harmony with nature, the environment and comfort in the treatment of water. |
|
