Username:
Password:
Log me on automatically each visit
 
 
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:18 am
Post a new topic Post a reply  [ 5 posts ]   
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2016 10:12 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 10:20 am
Posts: 515
From Dr. Rowen MD:


The following information is very important to all interested in ozone therapy.
Date: February 10, 2016
Dear Oxidation Group,

Quote:
As I promised, I am forwarding you all our findings on two “major” machines which findings were just confirmed the night of February 8, 2016, totally independently of me.

First, some recitals.
You probably all know that I have been using and teaching on a German machine (Zotzmann) for well over 20 years. Suddenly, last year, a new German company burst onto the American scene with a totally different machine and it was heavily promoted to oxidation-interested people. I had to look into it.

I was invited to, and spoke at a recent meeting in Palo Alto where this “green machine” was featured. The enthusiastic young German salesman and the very supportive local company representative made many statements, which caused great pause for me. Among these were:

1. The technology of the Zotzmann machine was stolen from the owner of the green machine company.

2. The technology of the Zotzmann machine was antiquated and unchanged over the past 23 years (I’ve had a Zotzmann machine since 1992).

3. There was considerable lies coming from the Zotzmann company.

4. The green machine has a built in real time analyzer constantly monitoring the output of the machine.

5. The green machine’s analyzer will last 50,000 hours!!!! (This was a MAJOR red flag for me. I had already researched and purchased a very expensive Teledyne ozone analyzer, as did Howard Robins, to clear up huge discrepancies in ozone machines and problems. I knew that the analyzer itself has to go back for recalibration every so often, as the source of the calibration decays with time.

6. The green machine is automated, therefore HIGHLY superior.

7. The green machine generates automated passes of treatment, and automatically flushes and self calibrates against oxygen, making it “superior”.

8. The green machine generates treatments at various settings you can preset. So, we were told that if you preset for 0.8 barr, it will deliver 0.8 barr pressure.

9. The green machine company had just come out with a “brand new” ozone resistant plastic set, which they had an exclusive on, but was patented by a Spanish company. It was to be the “cat’s meow” of delivery sets.

10. The green machine company was bragging that everyone in Europe was buying their machine, had analyzers, and were pleased with this machine.

Now I will respond to these.

1. If the technology was stolen, then the green machine company was absolutely stupid (in my humble and professional opinion) in abandoning what you will learn is absolutely superior technology. Hence, the technology was unlikely to be “stolen” as claimed.

2. While the outer casing of the Zotzmann has remained relatively unchanged for 23 years, has the outer casing of an airplane changed much during this time? The guts of both planes and the Zotzmann machine have changed with new and ever more modern and better parts. Dr. Peter Jovonovich of Malaysia ozone RHP re-circulatory hemoperfusion EBOO fame got to see into my machine’s innards on Monday and said, “Wow, this machine is the Panzer Rolls Royce of ozone machines.” He was highly impressed by the technology, safeties, and self-protections inside the Zotzmann machine. Who cares if a Rolls Royce did not change its outer appearance in 20 years if it performs exactly as you expect it to?

3. I have not yet found even a single deception coming from the Zotzmann company about its technology or machine. So, far, everything I have been told about their machine has been proven out. I couldn’t care less about inter company competition.

4. In September, when I was loaned my first green machine, I analyzed the concentration in “free flow”. It was accurate and I was pleased. However my two RNs who had each been with us approx. 3 yrs. each doing hyperbaric ozone with the Zotzmann machine, surprisingly didn’t like the automation, even with its apparent ease of use. They said it was harder to use if there was a problem with the patient’s vein, blood flow, clotting, etc. So we sent the green machine back. I have now a brand new green machine delivered a few days ago and analyzed the concentration in real time performance delivery to a syringe, without any filter attached. The concentration was way off. A second green machine, right out of the box, also failed the “concentration accuracy test” in Howard’s hands. It appears the only way to get accurate ozone concentration into a patient from the green machine would be to free flow into a patient’s vein at 0.8 liters per minute! You can do that, not me!

5. I have spoken with SEVERAL experts in ozone analysis. It is pure BS that an analyzer can last for 50,000 hours of use. If they had such an analyzer, they could cease making ozone machines and get fabulously wealthy with this small compact indestructible analyzer. This claim made me suspicious the first day.

6. Automation is dangerous. If something fails in the machine, you don’t know what you are giving, and your patient could be at great risk. Electronic parts do fail, and you might not know. Evidence? Toyota Prius acceleration requiring recalls after deaths. A mechanical failure will be detected immediately.

7. The alleged calibration is defective, possibly fraudulent based on our Teledyne measurements.

8. The green machine AVERAGE pressure at its highest pressure setting is between 0.5-0.6 barr. Hence, a clearly inferior treatment, in my scientific opinion, for hyperbaric ozone. This is because of the “advanced” automation of the machine, which electronically sets pressure instead of you manually adjusting pressure. Yet you are told it is delivering at 0.8 barr. I can deliver at between 0.9 and 1.0 barr on my Zotzmann. Do I think it makes a difference? The science surely suggests it. The science I have put together surely suggests it.

9. I carefully watched the green machine in action with OHT ten pass in Palo Alto, using the new exclusive iSet. I noticed immediately that something was dreadfully wrong with the system. No one else did, including Lahodny, not the green machine company representative, nor the sales lady. Lahodny did complain about the pressure needing to be higher, but it appears he did not realize what was going on. I showed him this past weekend at my office workshop.

10. Few if any doctors will pony up $4400 for an external analyzer. They will trust the company, and in this case foolishly. If the Europeans are using this machine and happy with it, so be it. I can only conclude that they have not looked at the machine with the same scientific eyes and experience like I have, so I have to question their understanding of ozone machine technology, which I was ignorant of until I spent hours looking into it after seeing the discrepancies. Their results might be good, but we have no clue if their results would be as good as using a mechanical machine. I suspect they cannot be since the concentration is way off, and the pressure is not nearly as high.

The new “exclusive” iSet had come with a cheap defective filter. It totally defeated the treatment. I tracked down the source of the “dreadfully” wrong problem to the filter as soon as I took delivery of 100 iSets.
I have to ask why I, a clinician, not a scientist or maker of machines, had to be the one to track this down. Why did not the green machine company not know of this before putting out thousands of defective filters? I didn’t have to even see the filter to know. I saw it by observing the machine’s readouts real-time. How could this have been missed by their people, who are now essentially issuing a “recall” by sending out new filters? Can I now trust anything told me about this machine?

As you may know, this weekend at my workshop, in full view of the entire group, I simultaneously tested two machines, practically side by side under the same circumstances and without any filters attached. Howard Robins demanded that it be checked at 55 gamma since that is the key concentration he uses. In my office, one hyperbaric machine measured about 35 gamma. This machine was alleged to have an internal analyzer and to be state of the art. We were told that the competing machine, the machine I had been using for well over 20 years, was ancient technology.

In the meantime, my “ancient” machine, which I have taught on for more than a decade, under the same circumstances, checked in “way off” at 55.5 gamma. I tested both machines at different commonly used concentrations. At 10 gamma, the green machine put out 3-4. My “ancient” machine put out 10. All tested concentrations had the same significant discrepancy.

I reported this to the company with the “new and advanced” technology. In a conference call yesterday, I heard many excuses for this, ranging from the filter used for the syringe, to the electric circuits, to many other factors, such as flushing the syringe. Even my expensive brand new analyzer was attacked. The company lauded me for discovering the defect and was rushing to fix it and supply new filters to its customers. (Why was this not picked up by the company? I merely watched it perform and knew a serious problem.


After the Palo Alto conference last month, I had still wanted to give the green machine a fair shake in the remote chance that the claims made about its internal analyzer were true and that its automation might be superior, so Terri and I ponied up the money. After my first treatment on the Zotzmann machine with the iSet, I knew something was dreadfully wrong with the iSet and tracked it down in 10 minutes. Then using the same set up with the green machine, it was clear that the iSet filter gas line was one major problem with its performance (their own set was sabotaging the treatment), but not the only one. By its “superior” automated technology, the green machine cannot deliver the higher pressure average I want. (Those who attend my workshops will understand why the higher pressure is desirable..)

After the Palo Alto “Master Class” I did send out an email to all of my past attendees that I thought the iSet might have better blood flow properties than glass bottles. With experience now, I think that the advantages are minimal at best. The iSet still clots up.

Moving on, I wanted to give the green machine company a fair chance again, as I was planning to have them attend our March workshop. However, I would not want them to be present if their machine is really what I was observing it to be. It would be an embarrassment to them, as well as to me.

I decided to direct Howard Robins to do an independent test (with his Teledyne analyzer) on his unpacked machine WITHOUT a filter, which the company of the green machine alleged was destroying the ozone coming out of it.

Dr. Robins had taken delivery of this $12,500 machine and was ready to send it back to the company unopened, aghast at what he saw at my workshop. However, after talking with the new company yesterday morning, I wanted to be as honorable and ethical and fair as possible. Hence, I demanded that Robins unpack his new machine and put it through the same procedure but again WITHOUT a filter, which was blamed by the company. He took out the gas in a large syringe, exactly as I did. The company claimed that the syringe filter must be destroying the ozone, even though I didn’t use a filter either. But, I gave them the benefit in my instructions to Robins.

Robins, very upset with me for asking him to do this late at night when he just returned from my seminar, complied. He called me immediately (12:30 am his time), calling me foul names for keeping him up (smile), then gave me the results. At 55 gamma setting, his green machine, with an alleged built in calibrator, was putting out just 45 gamma. UNACCEPTABLE!!!! Other settings were well beyond the allowable limits as well.

Howard will be returning his machine. I teach in groups, and may consider eating the cost of the machine to show my attendees deception or ignorance going on in the ozone machine making world. Robins admitted to me that he had wanted to see the green machine perform correctly in his office, hoping my machine might have had a “bad day” or “bad part". I also wanted it to be so simple. Competition is a good thing.

I feel the responsibility to let my own trainees know of this and inform the broader world of integrative physicians, so that they will not be lured into deceptive sales pitches about advances and stolen technology. If my machine was based on stolen technology, then this new-in-the-American market company made a really dumb decision in abandoning their technology for the highly inferior current technology they are peddling today. In fact, my old machine was so accurate in its output, that I just might check the accuracy of my very expensive Teledyne ozone analyzer with my “ancient” machine. When the analyzer does not match what the machine says, I will send back the analyzer for recalibration! This same problem exists with virtually all ozone machines, I assure you, so you really don’t know what you are giving your patient. It is quite possible that ALL the ozone research of the past 30 years will have to be redone as no one really knows, real time, the doses they are giving. I have gotten what I believe are superior results to my colleagues. I discover now one possible reason – concentrations of ozone I was using for prolozone was far different that what I thought and what others think they are using. And for MAH, which I do as HBO3, my total ozone weight delivery is MUCH higher than what most others are giving.

I don’t want to get into a pissing match with companies. I will not mention the names of machines other than the one that seems to be spot on - Zotzmann. Terri and I took a multi-thousand dollar hit with the green machine, but it was worth it to get to the bottom of a dark story in ozone.

Finally regarding “egg sets”, I am looking into a different design. The current design of the iSet has an insufficient filter at the bottom of the chamber that likely shears blood cells and platelets leading to clotting. I don’t recommend these sets at this time and will return to bottles after I use up my supply. After I get the slightly revised “eggs” and check them out, I will let everyone know its performance. This might take some time to get them, however. This iSet, unlike what we were told, is not exclusive to the green machine company. It, or a variant, has been around in Germany for 20 years.

If you have questions, please email Howard Robins at: howardrobins@verizon.net or Dr. Peter Jovanovic at: peter@ozoneuniversity.com

Warm regards,
RJR

PS You have my permission to share this and forward it on to whatever list you have, now that my findings have been confirmed independently by an anally compulsive (smile) perfectionist - Dr. Robins.

PPS For those of you, who have not been to our workshops, please visit the following link to hear from the doctors who attended last weekend. While this message is going out to my entire list, I usually only send updates and new information to my attendee list. We do plan another workshop in the summer and will announce a date.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXiGX0nrzeg

Top
OfflineProfileReply with quote
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2016 12:58 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 10:20 am
Posts: 515
Dr. Howard Robins had this to say:

Quote:
In answer to what you wrote Robert above, I would offer the following as My Feelings about it all. These are the issues, like it or not. Please share them with Marius.

First I wanted the machine to work as intended. I felt it would be easier for my Rn staff to use and thus I would allow them to do the Hyperbaric while I was away which is often after I trained them. Also, I would have an alternative to using just one company for machines and service. You never know when a company might go out of business, etc.

Next, I saw in January, the time problem in filling syringes in doing DIV. I then decided I would not use the machine for DIV though this is the main treatment we do. The gas loss problem was uncovered when I had more time to work with the machine personally. I am happy that Herrmann will do something about it. I kind of feel they should have known and fixed it without my discovering it first as most other machines I have used have that covered. After all they are not a new company. I am glad I could help even though its not my job to do so.

The defective filter issue is another big concern as I feel a company that holds themselves out to be "on the cutting edge", producing expensive machines of high quality, would have quality control standards watching out for these things constantly. Clearly its very bad for a customer to uncover this first. More importantly patients would not be getting what they paid for nor the help they badly needed as well due to this oversight.

The total lower pressure during Hyperbaric is another concern. Please understand that Boyles Law is important to patient benefit from the therapy. Greater pressure means more dissolved ozone in the blood that is returning to the patient. Thus more benefit. Its not about the speed of re-entry that matters as much five or six minutes is no difference in time.

Here are two examples of why its so meaningful:

If you have ever filled up a tire, you will normally fill it to between 30-35 PSI (lbs/ in2). This is a measurement of pressure. When you add more and more air into your tire, you force all the gas molecules to get packed together, reducing their volume. As long as the air temperature always stays the same, you would be doing an example of Boyle's Law , as you see your PSI change.

Syringes of all types utilize Boyle's Law on a basic level. If you pull the plunger out on a syringe it causes the volume within the chamber to increase. As we know, this will cause the pressure to do the opposite and will create a vacuum that attempts to re-pressurize back to atmospheric levels. Because the only fluid available on the other side of the needle is usually liquid such as blood, it gets sucked into the chamber, reducing the volume and increasing the pressure back to where it has to be. (This is the basic science behind Hyperbaric Ozone)

However the most important issue is the concentration in a syringe. Like the children's story of "Goldilocks and the three bears", The Longevity machine was too high, the Herrmann machine was too low, and the Zotzmann machine was perfect!

If the Zotzmann machine had performed "off", then the "syringe method" for measurement would have been invalid. It did not. So the syringe method of measuring the gas concentration was accurate and acceptable. Most of the doctors today do Prolozone and some like me do DIV ( though that will change in the future due to small veins in the majority of patients). Syringes and accuracy of concentration are vital to our work.

Please understand that Herrmann may have calibrated their machines for continuous flow directly from the machine into an "egg" only. Perhaps it is accurate only under those circumstances as measured by an analyzer. Unfortunately, that is not the only way the machine is set up to be used, nor do we as doctors use a machine only for one method of administration.

Most doctors (here and in Europe) either don't understand all the above or haven't considered all this. We are either not so smart or way to busy. We expect the manufacturer to know this and do this for us. We trust manufactures way too much. Trust should only come after we prove the company's claims like we did for Zotzmann.

I trust in the future the Herrmann company will consider all this and more and fix those issues. Then they will have a true competitive product. I might reconsider owning one of their machines at that time.

Thank you and I await that return information and my check.
Warmest regards,
H

Top
OfflineProfileReply with quote
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 10:24 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 10:20 am
Posts: 515
Quote:
Hello everyone,

When everything was going down on our "self testing" of the Herrmann machines, there were many emails with lots of information being offered. I am inclined to give Mary-Lis the "benefit of the doubt" that she some how misunderstood what I did and which regulator I used.

Allow me to repeat what I found (I have all my past emails to verify all of this). Also, Robert did much more testing than me and found other additional problems. Robert and I are in complete agreement that there is nothing personal in this for us to denigrate anyone or any company. It was not then nor now our intention.

So for the record, I tested my brand new Herrmann machine ONLY with the new regulator that Herrmann sent with it. The concentration was way off by 20% or more at every concentration as per the pictures I sent. I used a 60cc syringe, only, to test the concentration with my Teledyne 454H analyzer which had only about one hour of use at the time, so it was "like new". While only one analyzer, it confirmed what I saw at Robert's office with his!

My additional concern was also over the fact that when filling a syringe or NOT doing anything but having the machine turned on, the machine was using oxygen continually at a rate of .8liters per minute! Hermann said they would correct this "design flaw". I was congratulated for discovering it as a problem. As the majority of the work that I do uses nothing but syringes at this time (two hundred to three hundred fills per week) this is a major issue for me as my machine is continually on for hours at a time. This is NO problem for the Zotzmann machine nor for the TOMCO machines I have been using for years as oxygen is used only when filling a syringe.

Lastly, the filter the Herrmann company chose to use on their "Egg" for Hyperbaric HDOT was defective. This was admitted by the company. Sad that we discovered this first and not them, but at least it was found out before any damage was done here.

I have learned the hard way that it is important and ideal to have more than one company to count on for quality ozone machines. What if something would happen to the Zotzmann company? What would I do then? Even the TOMCO machines that I have been using for years, getting excellent results with, are no longer acceptable to me as compared to the Zotzmann for accuracy. Fortunately the Zotzmann has been absolutely excellent for the last 7 months I have been using them. This accuracy has validated my use of 55 gamma concentration for safety and results.

As a teacher/instructor in IV ozone, accurately calibrated machines no matter which ozone treatment is being performed are absolutely mandatory for consistent duplicable results.

Clearly only the Zotzmann Ozone 2000 machine so far at this time meets this need and criteria (in my clinical opinion).

I hope and trust that the Herrmann company can correct their design flaws and so become competitive in my mind again as a choice. It is interesting that the German FDA does very little testing on accuracy, etc. before giving a machine a Class II-B rating. Apparently it is up to the companies to supply them with this data so only safety testing is done by their FDA (similar to the way our FDA works).

Regards,
H

Top
OfflineProfileReply with quote
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 02, 2016 10:31 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 10:20 am
Posts: 515
Also, NOTE, that ozone machines can vary from what is expected because of the O2 regulator which is often not very accurate! Dr. Rowen posted this:


Quote:
Dear Colleagues,
I had a most interesting talk with Roger of Longevity Resources and he filled me in on a most important matter relevant to his machines. Just as Zotzmann calibrates the expensive German machine to a specific regulator, Roger has found the need to do the same with the pediatric regulators.
He found a 20-30% difference in what the dial says to the actual flow (he can analyze the flow as I can analyze the ozone). This alteration, especially at the low flow rates we use for syringes is more than enough to alter the ozone output of the machine more than the 10% grace we give machines. Hence, he has taken the outstanding step of matching his machines to a specific regulator and calibrating the machine to the regulator. That machine’s output will be matched to that machine’s regulator.
This connects most of the rest of the dots as to why there have been discrepancies in machines. I am really pleased he has looked into this as now we have a “domestic” machine matched to a regulator and calibrated specifically for that regulator. This should increase reliability of what we are doing considerably, and perhaps explain discrepancies in results and problems with veins.


Regards,
RJR



I agree with Dr. Rowen, O2 reglators are often way off! An easy test system can be put together as seen below:

Attachment:
regulator testin.jpg


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Top
OfflineProfileReply with quote
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:04 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 10:20 am
Posts: 515
Global Medical Ozone Therapy Apparatus Market Research Report 2016
________________________________________
Published On : Dec 2016
Published By : QYResearchReports.com: One-Stop Solution to all Market Research Requirements
Category : Medical Equipment
No. of Pages : 109 pages


This report studies Medical Ozone Therapy Apparatus in Global market, especially in North America, Europe, China, Japan, Southeast Asia and India, focuses on top manufacturers in global market, with production, price, revenue and market share for each manufacturer, covering:


1.-Zotzmann, GERMANY - OZON 2000 (hyperbaric) and OZON N

2.-Unicare, CHINA - UC30-LFG Gynecological Ozone Therapy Apparatus

3.-Tecnolaser, ITALY - OZONE THREE

4.-MIO Int. OZONYTRON GmbH – GERMANY - different OZONYTRON models for dental app.

5.-Kastner-Praxisbedarf - GERMANY - OZOMED UNIVERSAL

6.-Humares – GERMANY - Humazon Pro Medic, Humazona

7.-Herrmann Apparatebau – GERMANY - Hyper Medozon Comfort (hyperbaric), Medozon Compact

8.-Dr. Haensler- Ozonosan – GERMANY - Ozonosan:- alpha plus, - photonic, - cytozon

9.-CLEM prevention – FRANCE – Triozone 5210, 5220, 5230

10.-APOZA Enterprise Co., Ltd – OZONE DTA for dentistry

Top
OfflineProfileReply with quote
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topic Post a reply  [ 5 posts ] 
 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
Search for:
Jump to:  
cron