CureZone   Log On   Join
Re: Ultimate Zapper VS others
Ken Presner Views: 36,265
Published: 15 years ago
This is a reply to # 1,065,259

Re: Ultimate Zapper VS others

Hello David,

There are many issues evoked by your recent posting. I will address each of them individually in this long reply. When answering my postings in the past you have been consistently evasive. You prefer to edit postings rather than respond to them in their entirety. To accomplish this you cut and paste from my replies, as I have pointed out before on this forum. This enables you to avoid whatever issues you don’t want to deal with by cutting them out of the dialogue. In fact, you completely ignored a recent, long posting of mine addressed to you on this forum at


I will be uploading the above posting as well as this posting to the Competition I page of my site so that people will be able to find them easily. You can run but you cannot hide.

To justify your evasive tactics you claim to be short of time, so you can’t answer everything. But that is obviously not true because you have the time to post to at least 20 forums, according to your own admission and to maintain over a dozen websites, according to information you have posted on curezone. It is clear that you make time for what suits you. I would not be surprised at all to see you completely ignore this posting, as you did my earlier posting. If you do reply I would not be surprised to see your typical sound-bite answers to the various issues I am raising here, which is your favorite evasion technique. Your attitude is “I’ll answer whatever suits me, I’ll cut and paste as I see fit and I’ll ignore whatever I want to avoid answering”. This multi-faceted smoke and mirrors technique creates the impression that my postings, or parts of my postings that displease you, have never been written at all. They just disappear in the quicksand of the forum, quickly forgotten, which suits your purpose, of course. You can hide for a while, but you can’t hide the truth for long.

It is clear that domination of this forum for commercial purposes is your purpose for being here. Your claim of helping people is just a means to that end. It is designed to make you look good. But excising what you do not wish to respond to or avoiding responding altogether is lying by omission. A lie by omission is no less a lie than an overt one. It is a passive lie and it is designed to manipulate the readers of this forum. This is the essence of how you operate on this forum. The more you use this tactic the more your postings become irrelevant because they avoid the key issues that I raise in the postings I address to you. While I respond to all issues you manage your responses so that they will leave the best possible impression with the least amount of time devoted to composing them. Your object is to maintain a high profile on the forum with the least possible effort. What I will show in this posting, through a close examination of your reply to my previous posting, is how each and every one of your responses to the issues I raised in that posting falls apart under scrutiny. The tactics you use will be looked at in detail to bring your manipulation into clear focus.

Here is the table of contents for this posting:

1. You just ignore the bad stuff
2. Unsubstantiated Claims Part 1
3. Unsubstantiated Claims Part 2 – Dual frequency zappers
4. Zapper technology
5. Ken Presner vs. David Etheredge
Helping vs. the posting game and
the New Pathways hoax
6. David Etheredge’s support of Kevin Trudeau
7. David Etheredge’s pot shots and hype
8. David Etheredge’s attitude
9. What others say about David Etheredge
10. The Ultimate Zapper website


As I noted, above, there are some very important issues that I raise on this forum which you completely ignore. Here are 2 sections from the previous posting that you have glided past (the spelling mistakes are yours), refusing to even acknowledge them.

The excerpts are from my Dec. 18, 2007 posting at



“Your statement about dual zappers producing better results is undocumented and unsubstantiated. When I provide information on this forum that you claim is undocumented or unsubstantiated you are quick to criticize me. But when you do the same thing it is totally acceptable, according to you. "People need to know this information" you repeatedly proclaim, when offering undocumented and unsubstantiated information on this forum. There is clearly one rule for you here and another rule for all the other zapper makers, including me. And you are the one who makes those rules, of course. And when this obvious fact is pointed out and challenged you either claim you are being bashed or you ignore the issue completely. We see you using these tactics time and again on the forum.”


“… Anyone who takes your "authoritative" statements at face value only has to look a bit deeper to find out what is really going on. Your statements about only providing the truth on this forum, that you are only here to help people get accurate information, and that you have no commercial ax to grind are obviously false and self-serving. The more you try to hide the truth, and the more this is pointed out, the clearer it is to see who you really are: just one of many zapper makers who is trying to sell his zappers.”

Here is the full text of the current posting which I am responding to below, point by point.



>- Firstly, you emphasize the price advantage of buying dual frequency zappers. Your statement is totally false. Some dual frequency zappers available are less expensive than single frequency zappers, some are the same price, and some cost far more.

Actually, my statement is absolutely true. I have looked at dozens of zapper models from different companies and yours is more expensive than almost all of the dual frequency models that I have seen.

>- The only information we have, according to you, is "Symptoms seem to stop and cold/flu never advances." Well, this is hardly a convincing statement. Symptoms "seem" to stop. The cold/flu ... "never advances". What does this statement mean?

The symptoms stop seems to me to be that the symptoms no longer exist, but I can not put the words on paper for the originator. What I did was to quote what the person in chrge of the project told me that I could publish and nothing more, nothing less.

It would be my preference to provide more information but since I do not have it, I can not. We shipped 8 ParaZapper MFC zappers to the university for their studies on HIV infected individuals.

>- (the common cold is not the same at all as the influenza, by the way)

That is a mighty arrogant statement. I guess that you think that no one here knows that. The individual was stating that the results were the same for either.

>- The "Creedence" (actually spelled "credence")

I am aware of the spelling, At the time, I was using a remote keyboard which would either place multiple characters or miss some. I did not proofread very well before posting as my time was limited. It is not the first typing error that I have made and will not be the last. I have also missed some spelling errors because I do not use a spell checker except for myself.

>- If, according to you, "the source has removed themselves from any other statements", that does not prevent you from letting people know the content of the information that you claim to have in hand, if you indeed have any information.

I posted exactly what I received on the letterhead. If they were not clear in their meaning to you, I can not help that.

>- Without being challenged you would be able to continue to pass off these kinds of unsubstantiated statements as being factual, which I find manipulative, as I have pointed out before on this forum

Like your claim of producing the best, completely unsubstantiated, also very manipulative.

Just like your claims of helping people. The only forum that you have posted on is the Zapper Support Forum and all that you have done is hype your product. I post to over 20 forums and rarely even mention the zapper on several of those.

I still stand by my statements. While your zapper may be a good single frequency unit with some good features, it is not the best. Your understanding of electronics and physics appears to be skewed at the minimum and I am not the only one to note it.

On your website, your self promotion is as obvious as you are making yourself here. You extensively bash the competition with nitpicking and false claims. Your website postings about Dr. Lloyd's supposed admiration of your product are clearly incorrect. You refuse to accept third party evaluation because your smoke and mirrors would disappear in a poof. This puts all that you claim under suspicion.

BTW, I want to submit that your waveform does not produce even harmonics. It does produce 2 sets of harmonics but sadly, each of these 2 sets of harmonics are only capable of adding up to 100 percent of the available power. The total power can not exceed 100 percent. The second set of harmonics which is produced by the shorter down time might be close matching what the set of even harmonics might contain, but it is not even harmonics. Almost every zapper, by nature, produces 2 sets of harmonics unless the zapper signal is digitally created. The 555 does not allow for exact timing of the duty cycle to a pure perfect 50 percent. I believe that the perfect matching of harmonics as an odd / even set of frequencies would be produced by a 66.666666 % / 33.333333 % duty cycle setup so that the primary frequency of the second period is exactly twice that of the primary frequency of the first period. AK????

The only real advantage that I can see from your zapper is the 10.4 volts that is output because you use a wall adapter. The stabilized waveform producd by the output bypass capacitor has some advantage but we dumped it when we developed the CCa. What we found was that the capacitor provided a placebo effect in that the pulse felt stronger but the actual results decreased.

And one last comment: Good Grief! $40 for an e-book ???? That is the last thing that someone suffering from something like MS needs to do is pay out that kind of money when they can't even work.


KEN PRESNER (from the current posting):

Without being challenged you would be able to continue to pass off these kinds of unsubstantiated statements [about the ParaZapper being “tested at a major US university] as being factual, which I find manipulative, as I have pointed out before on this forum.

DAVID ETHEREDGE (your response in the current posting):

Like your claim of producing the best, completely unsubstantiated, also very manipulative.

Just like your claims of helping people. The only forum that you have posted on is the Zapper Support Forum and all that you have done is hype your product. I post to over 20 forums and rarely even mention the zapper on several of those.

I still stand by my statements. While your zapper may be a good single frequency unit with some good features, it is not the best. Your understanding of electronics and physics appears to be skewed at the minimum and I am not the only one to note it.

KEN PRESNER (my response to the above):

There are a number of interesting issues that you raise in your response. Let’s examine them one by one.

Firstly, I note that you do not refute or deny my statement that you make unsubstantiated claims. You simply avoid answering my statement directly. You offer a tit-for-tat response. What you are saying, in effect, is “You say I’m manipulative, Ken, well so are you.” I am simply pointing out what has already been pointed out by others on this forum, David. The facts speak for themselves. I have documented this in earlier postings, which you have also avoided answering. There is a pattern of evasion that emerges from reading your postings. Your stated reason for making unsubstantiated claims is that people need to know this “information”, never mind the fact that you don’t back any of it up. My question is what information are you providing that people need to know? The answer is that you are providing no information at all. You are simple creating a headline that is designed to catch attention. This is not the first time you have suggested that there is important information in favor of the ParaZapper then you refuse to produce any details to substantiate your claim. Of course, you have a plausible excuse each time for your evasiveness: your lawyers are telling you not to talk, you are bound by silent agreements, someone at the FDA is watching, you cannot say anymore because you’ve been gagged, etc. When I point out, as others have, that you never produce any real information, which is clearly true, you respond by slinging some dirt over the fence into my yard, accusing me of being “also very manipulative”, or you accuse me of “bashing” you. You don’t like the message so you try to kill the messenger by resorting to a technique we often see being used in U.S. politics by the worst of politicians who desperately try to destroy their opponents by using the lowest tactic in the bag: mud-slinging. Well, it looks like the pot is calling the kettle black, David, because you are the one who manipulates and bashes at will on this forum. I post to it very rarely, as the readers of this forum know. The fact is that your response is no answer at all. Your bottom line is that you need to dominate this forum and you will not brook any opposition in your quest for that domination, even if it means lying, manipulating and mud-slinging. You are totally intolerant of criticism. It is clear that you do not like being confronted about this and that you do not like your statements examined closely and critically. When someone on the forum says the emperor has no clothes, well you don’t like to hear that at all. I hope that, as a result of my comments, more people will wake up to the fact that the emperor is naked.

Secondly, your snide comment that my “…claims of helping people” are unsubstantiated and manipulative shows you are not interested in seeing people being helped except if it is by you. It is the name of the helper who is important to you, not the fact that people are being helped, no matter by whom. It only counts when you claim to be helping people, but not when competitors are seen as helpers because that makes them look good. And a competitor who looks good on this forum is not good for you. It is clear that you are very easily irked and that you are unhappy if you cannot see yourself as holding the high moral ground on the forum, dominating the landscape. Unfortunately for you, others do not share this view of you. I write more about what others say about you and about your helper role, below.

According to you, the “proof” of your helping others is that you post to 20 CureZone Forums . The content and quality of your postings is irrelevant in your non-critical, self-congratulatory self-evaluation. It is the volume of your postings that decides the matter, according to you. And by that measure you are the clear self-acclaimed winner of the “WHO-MAKES-THE-MOST-POSTINGS-COUNT’EM” CONTEST. On the other hand when I help people through my website, my zapper, through email and through phone calls, that doesn’t matter, because it’s me, not you, doing the helping and anyway, you can’t count’em. The inference that you are a helper by virtue of the mere fact of the volume of postings you make is a ridiculous one, of course. And the inference that I do not help people is a bald-faced lie. Deception is your stock in trade on this forum. I have been helping people through my site for nearly 12 years. You are only too glad to dismiss out of hand, without discussing any specifics about my site, the helpful information that it provides, and the helpfulness of my other work, most of which I do free of charge.

Taking pot shots is also fair game for you. You are only too glad to cast aspersions on the helping work that I do by whatever means you see fit to use. Your veneer of education and professional credentials does not hide the truth. Your self-centeredness, manipulation, lies and deception leave a lasting impression on this forum. I am not the only one who has taken notice of this here.

Thirdly, there is new evidence of your unsubstantiated claims on your revised website. It now features a very unimaginative “Better, Better, Better” prefix to all the features on the front page, even when it makes no grammatical sense. Your “Better” claim is unsubstantiated. Better than what? You do not say. Presumably, better than other zappers but there is no proof offered for this assertion. Here is an extract from a recent posting to this forum by a customer of yours and mine,(spelling mistakes unedited) from


This posting resoundingly contradicts your claim of “Better, Better, Better”.
He states, “The ParaZapper take a little long to notice the effects, (90 minutes).
The UZ is surprising faster (around 45 to 55 minustes.”

The ParaZapper is “Better, Better, Better” than other zappers? Really? That’s not what this informal study shows. Because this information does not back up the assertions you make for the ParaZapper you will probably say it lacks credibility, for one reason or another. It is, after all, merely anecdotal you may say – just like the important information about ParaZapper. Your assertion that the ParaZapper is “better” is certainly not backed up by the testimonials from my customers. But they don’t count, of course, because that makes you look bad. I’m sure you will have an explanation for all this. After all, you have “data” in the form of testimonials (although only 9 anemic testimonials actually appear on your site versus the 140 testimonials on my site, which does not represent resounding proof for the “better” claim you make for ParaZapper) and “customer surveys”. They count, of course. The words “data” and “survey” sound good. But you provide no evidence to support them. The testimonials on my site don’t count because, according to you, they’re not “data” and they are not in the “survey” category. But, in fact, they are data because data comes from the Latin word “datum” meaning piece of information. Data is the plural and means pieces of information. I don’t call this information data because it sounds a bit pretentious. But they are, nevertheless, data.

There are over 140 testimonials, and counting, on my site. But they’re from my customers, not yours. So, according to you, they are not to be believed because they belong in the category called “hype”. But your 9 testimonials belong in the category called “data”. They’re on a higher level only because you have elevated them to that level. Why? Because they come from your customers. But, most of your testimonials remain hidden away (according to you) unrevealed because of potential “legal problems”. More smoke and mirrors from ParaZapper.

David, I’d like you to tell the forum which is Better, Better, Better, ParaZapper 90 minutes or The Ultimate Zapper 45 to 55 minutes. I imagine we won’t be seeing this information paraded by you on this forum in one of your “EXTRA, EXTRA, read all about it” announcements, or presented authoritatively on your site as “need-to-know” information. You have already mentioned on this forum that you have never seen a negative testimonial on any site before. You obviously haven’t looked closely at my site. For those looking for negative testimonials for the ParZapper they are to be found on this forum, not on your site, and can be found by doing a search of the forum.

Your “need-to-know” rule applies to the ParaZapper, not to The Ultimate Zapper, of course. Whatever information I present on a “need-to-know” basis on my site is belittled and discounted by you, or simply avoided. You make the rules on this forum and you move the goal posts whenever there is an advantage in it for you. You are a hypocrite, David.

Fourthly, I respond to your statement, “your zapper may be a good single frequency unit with some good features, it is not the best”, below.


When talking about dual frequency zappers everyone should keep in mind that the dual frequency feature is only one of many possible zapper features. In fact, you also talk about the importance of a lower frequency and footpads on your site. But you now emphasize the importance of dual frequencies as though single frequency zappers have all-of-a-sudden become antiquated. For you, the dual frequency zapper has become God’s gift to the zapper world, even though there is no proof anywhere to support this, except in the hidden information you refer to on your site but never produce, of course, that having two frequencies is superior to having a single frequency. You claim, in an authoritative tone, the tone you always use on this forum, to have “data” to support your claim, but you keep it hidden so that it cannot be scrutinized, as usual. I discuss the evidence in detail, below. Fortunately there is a lot of information in the public domain about this subject and you cannot hide it. Unfortunately for you, it is beyond your control. I discuss this information, below. The “dual frequency feature” now takes top spot on your features list, displacing your users’ manual as the previous winner of top-feature-spot on the ParaZapper site. In fact the ParaZapper seems to be in a constant search for real features, unlike The Ultimate Zapper which has 10 features that place it head-and-shoulders above ParaZapper, and all the other zappers, too. You hate to hear this, of course. You call it hype. What else can you call it? You can’t call it need-to-know information because it does not apply to your zapper. If it did apply to your zapper I am sure we would be hearing “EXTRA, EXTRA, read all about it” from you on
Let’s look at the evidence closely, shall we? No sooner do you make statements about the superiority of dual frequency zappers than you set about hedging those statements, just in case you’re wrong. It is obvious that sticking to your guns, consistency, is not one of your strong points. Whatever happened to your users’ manual, the “feature-of-all-features” that used to be in the top spot on your site? Anyway, who ever heard of a user’s manual being touted as a zapper feature anywhere else in the zapper world except on your site? A manual is a guide, it’s not a feature. Since I pointed this interesting fact out on the forum a few months ago I note that your manual has quietly retired from your features list.
Now, according to you, single frequency zappers, for years the only zappers produced by zapper makers everywhere, including your MX and MX-2 ParaZappers have, all of a sudden, become relics of a bygone era, antiquated, not worth talking about anymore. You discredit single frequency zappers, including your own allegedly superior single-frequency zappers from the past, with the attitude that this is already an accepted fact, without any proof that single frequency zappers have become inferior overnight. If your statements are true then they also resoundingly discredit your own earlier models. But wait. After exhorting people to buy dual frequency zappers you turn around and emphasize the superiority of the single low frequency. You contradict yourself and hedge all your statements about dual frequencies, conspicuously I may add.

You admonish people on the front page of your site to “be sure” they purchase a dual frequency zapper. Why “be sure”? You provide no explanation why. This is merely an exhortation, of course, a call to action intended to draw attention to your own dual frequency zappers by proclaiming them superior, ipso facto, then turning around and telling everyone about the superiority of the low frequency.
Let take a close look at the statements you make.

Statement #1 on the ParaZapper site:

“Be SURE that the parasite zapper you buy is a dual frequency unit ( 2.5 kHz is better!) and quality tested (preferably on an oscilloscope).
What about zapper output frequency? In experimental testing, 2.5 kHz (2500 pulses per second) works significantly better than the 30 kHz suggested in Dr. Clark's book. as it provides deeper penetration.”
In the above statement on your site you tell people to buy a dual frequency zapper and then you turn right around and let them know that the lower frequency “works significantly better”.

Statement #2 on the ParaZapper site:
But wait. You have just changed the text on your site, contradicting the above statement. It now reads:
“Be SURE that the parasite zapper you buy is a dual frequency unit ( 2.5 kHz is better!) and quality tested (preferably on an oscilloscope).
What about zapper output frequency? In experimental testing, 2.5 kHz (2500 pulses per second) works significantly better than 30 kHz. In general, using both frequencies can be an improvement.”
You tell people to buy a dual frequency zapper. Then you turn around and let them know the lower frequency “works significantly better”. Then you turn around and tell people using both frequencies “can be an improvement”.

Statement #3 on the ParaZapper site:
But wait, there is yet another statement on your site:
“The 30 killohertz frequency suggested by Dr. Clark is not the best frequency for zapping. Neither 2500 Hz nor 2000 Hz used by others is the best frequency. ParaZapper™MX provides several specific frequencies near 30000 Hz and 2500 Hz to provide better results.”
Now you tell people that they have to use “several” frequencies “near” both the high and low frequency to get “better results”. Wow! White man speak with forked tongue. You change your story by the hour, David. If this is true then people will have to quit their jobs to get through the zapping day with all the frequencies that the ParaZapper says you have to use.

In this last statement you say 2,500 and 2,000 Hz (a clear reference to the 2,000 Hertz frequency of The Ultimate Zapper) are “not the best” frequencies. But your own dual frequency zapper offers 2,500 Hz!

Moreover, to confuse matters even more, you stated earlier that the 30,000 Hertz frequency may be more effective for the skin but not for penetrating into the organs. This is one more in a series of confusions you have created on your site. It’s clear that you don’t examine closely the implications of what you write. It looks like being an electrical engineer has been a hindrance for you, not an advantage. A professional proof-reader may be able to help solve this problem.
Here is yet another comment by you on this forum about dual frequency zappers:


“Your claim for being the best zapper according to Dr. Richard Lloyd are distorted. You claims are only true when compared to standard single frequency zappers. Multiple frequency zappers are far better than single frequency zappers.”
There is no distortion at all in my statement. According to the report from Dr. Mondo S., Dr. Loyd compared The Ultimate Zapper to ALL major zappers. There is no reference that dual frequency zappers were excluded. He concluded The Ultimate Zapper is superior to ALL zappers.

You have recently ramped up the importance of dual frequency zappers, now making a “far better” claim for multiple frequency zappers, not just a “better” claim, with hedging statements that follow it, of course. With each posting your hype in favor of dual frequency zappers reaches a higher level, accompanied by your customary hedging and disclaimers. The only conclusion that I can come to having read all this from you is that your statements cannot be trusted. It sounds as though you simply create them off the top of your head depending on which side of the bed roll out of in the morning.

(By the way, referring back to the quotes from your site, above, it’s spelled kilohertz, not killohertz. Your site is full of spelling mistakes, incidentally. You claimed in your previous posting that your spelling mistakes on the forum are due to posting from a remote site, but it is also clear that you do not take care with your site, either. Or maybe your website was updated from the same remote site. I know that this irks you but these are merely facts that are being pointed out. Anyone can verify them by reading your site. I understand that some people hate admitting mistakes. You are one of them. It appears there may be a slight ego problem here, as well as a spelling problem.) I correct mistakes on my site quickly, especially spelling mistakes. They make a site look sloppy. In fact, I corrected a recent mistake on my site that you pointed out here regarding Dr. Loyd’s credentials. This was an honest mistake, I take responsibility for it and it has already been corrected.)

Let’s examine how you have hedged and revised your statements, above. You add the phrase “In general”. What exactly does that mean? “In general” is unexplained and unsubstantiated. Then you hedge a bit further by saying “…can be an improvement”. “… In general … can be an improvement …” The whole thing sounds vague, nebulous and mysterious, lacking in detail, explanation and conviction. It feels like a very weak statement for what is being claimed as a very strong feature, also unsubstantiated. If it comes out sounding so weak it can’t be a strong feature now, can it.
Let’s get down to more basics, shall we, David? The fact is you don’t even explain what you mean by a dual zapper on your site. What is a dual zapper? What is a dual ParaZapper? What are the differences between various kinds of dual zappers? There is no discussion at all about this on your site. I find this very odd, indeed. I discuss all the features of my zapper at length on my site. Normally one explains the features of one’s products so that people will understand them and so that there will be less chance of misunderstanding. Vagueness in this area is not a good sign. Never mind. I’ll do it for you.

Let me explain the subject of dual zappers. There are actually two kinds of dual zappers.

The first kind of dual zapper is one that has a switch which enables you to choose one of 2 frequencies. This is the ParaZapper. Ooooh, maybe you avoid the subject of choosing frequencies because people will have to spend twice the time zapping if they want to use the 2 frequencies. That’s not so convenient. Of course this is not explained on your site. That’s a negative testimonial in the making. Taking more of people’s time can’t be a very popular subject to get into. The Ultimate Zapper takes less of people’s time. I guess we won’t be reading about that on your site. That makes my zapper look good and it makes yours look bad.

The second kind of dual zapper is one that has a composite wave made up of two frequencies which are produced concurrently. You don’t have to spend twice the time zapping with this one because this is a single composite wave. There is only one zapper in this category that I am aware of, the Harmonic Quad.
Is there an advantage to either kind of dual zapper? There is no evidence presented on any site by any zapper maker to support the superiority of either one, only unsubstantiated claims. The obvious disadvantage with dual zappers like the ParaZapper is that you need to zapper at least twice as long because you have to do 1-hour zapping cycles with each frequency, one at a time. It becomes more like a frequency generator, in that sense.

It is interesting to note that the Multi-Zap maker who makes a dual frequency zapper similar to the ParaZapper, and it’s cheaper than the ParaZapper, makes no claims about his dual zapper being more effective than a single low frequency zapper. In fact, he offers a lower frequency as well as a higher frequency because he says the lower frequency works better than the high frequency (“…it has been anecdotally reported that frequencies in the 2,000 - 3,000 Hz range may be more effective…”) The Ultimate Zapper is set to one special low frequency, 2,000 Hertz. This has not changed in 12 years because it continues to be the best possible frequency that gives the best results.

The above information is taken from the Multi-Zap site at

The following is an exchange from the current posting:


>- Firstly, you emphasize the price advantage of buying dual frequency zappers. Your statement is totally false. Some dual frequency zappers available are less expensive than single frequency zappers, some are the same price, and some cost far more.


Actually, my statement is absolutely true. I have looked at dozens of zapper models from different companies and yours is more expensive than almost all of the dual frequency models that I have seen.

KEN PRESNER (my response to the above exchange):

Let’s examine your statement closely. Your statement, like so many you make on this forum, is unsubstantiated but, in this case, unlike the other unsubstantiated statements you make that refer to hidden information that cannot be divulged, this statement is verifiable because the information is not hidden in your file cabinet. It is in the public domain. You say that you have looked at “dozens of zapper models” and The Ultimate Zapper is “… more expensive than almost all” dual frequency zappers. The only problem with this statement is that it’s a lie. The fact is that there are only a handful of major zappers in the world. Most people never bother searching for obscure zapper makers because they don’t even know they’re out there, in addition to the fact that it is very time-consuming to do the searches and the obscure, smaller makers are very hard to find. The bottom line is that it takes a lot of time to do the searching required and the fact is that most people just don’t do it. Most people stick with the major players in the zapper field because they are easy to find and there’s lots of information available about them. So, including the obscure, small makers in a statistical review skews the results and is a manipulation. The Ultimate Zapper is less expensive than all but two of the major dual frequency zappers, most of which are far more expensive than The Ultimate Zapper.
Another very important thing that you do not mention is that the ParaZapper and all the other zappers on the market are extremely expensive if you take into account the limited number of significant features they offer. You can make this comparison by looking over the 2 zapper comparison charts on my site at

If you look at all the significant features that The Ultimate Zapper offers on a dollar for dollar basis it is the cheapest zapper, by far, of any zapper available because, dollar for dollar, it not only offers the significant features that the other major zappers offer, it also offers many other important features that place it head and shoulders above all the others in terms of effectiveness.
Regarding dual frequency zappers, I have done a survey of the major zappers on the market. I present this survey below. The results absolutely contradict your statement that The Ultimate Zapper “is more expensive than almost all of the dual frequency models…” And The Ultimate Zapper offers a 3-month trial (only one other zapper offers this) and it is the only zapper in the world with a lifetime warranty. The results show that there are only 2 dual frequency zappers that are cheaper than The Ultimate Zapper: the Multi Zap and 2 models of the ParaZapper. The other ParaZapper models are more expensive than The Ultimate Zapper at regular price and when The Ultimate Zapper’s discounts are factored in the ParaZapper models definitely more expensive than The Ultimate Zapper, except for the 2 “non-best” choice ParaZappers.
For the sake of clarity when looking at the chart below, a Type 1 zapper is a single frequency zapper, a Type 2 zapper is a dual-frequency zapper with a switch for choosing the desired frequency, a Type 3 zapper is a compound-wave dual-frequency zapper (the Harmonic Quad). I have put the prices for all dual frequency zappers on the chart. As you can see, only the Multi-Zap and the “non-best choice” ParaZapper are cheaper than The Ultimate Zapper. The promotional price for The Ultimate Zapper makes it even cheaper than some of the “non-best choice” ParaZappers. The regular price of the “best choice” ParaZapper is more expensive than The Ultimate Zapper.

Zapper name Type Price Less or more
expensive than
The Ultimate Zapper?

The Ultimate Zapper 1 $170 with substantial discounts
for purchases of 2 or more zappers
Harmonic Quad 3 $345 more expensive than
The Ultimate Zapper
SyncroZap 1
Auto-Zap 1
Super Zapper Deluxe 2 $190 more expensive than
The Ultimate Zapper
Terminator II 1
Multi-Zap 2 $65 less expensive than
The Ultimate Zapper
RSG4 sweep 1
RSG1 combo 2 $259 more expensive than
The Ultimate Zapper
MiniFG 2 $449 more expensive than
The Ultimate Zapper
MiniZAP 1
Mini-Zapper 1
Zapper C3i 1
“non-best choice” 2 $67 to $167 only 2 models are
less expensive than
The Ultimate Zapper
“best choice” 2 $185 more expensive than
The Ultimate Zapper

I note that you now openly talk about zapper prices on the forum, belying your previous self-proclaimed role here as being only an interested observer with no commercial agenda. Your pretense of non-commercial posting has fallen away. You now openly talk about prices in an attempt to keep a high profile of competitiveness for the ParaZapper on this forum. It is clear that competitiveness is your main concern on this forum, hence your constant attempts to belittle the competition.

Here are 2 postings by third parties on this forum regarding the claim you make for the advantage of using the ParaZapper for the skin. It is the one single advantage you claim for the higher frequency (albeit well-hedged) and for the superiority of your zapper over single frequency zappers. One customer, below, used both The Ultimate Zapper and the ParaZapper for the skin and The Ultimate Zapper came out on top. How are you going to categorize this one, David, as Ultimate Zapper hype or as ParaZapper data? Uh, oh, you’re between a proverbial rock and a hard place on this one.

The following 2 postings are about high frequency and skin zapping


Referring to an article on Morgellons

“I also find the part on zappers not having enough voltage very interesting and must say the results with Ultimate Zapper which uses an Adapter (+ 10Volts) instead of a battery (-8.9 volts) has been telling.”


“Re: Using the zapper for Psoriasis”

“First I bought a Parazapper CE, this worked great with a fresh battery but that dropped off too quickly.”

[Comment by Ken Presner: This does not happen according to you. You make claims, unsubstantiated on your site, about the fact that your battery lasts longer than others. Does this include the Auto-Zap? I’m sure Arthur Doerksen will be interested in hearing about this. It doesn’t sound like the battery in the ParaZapper lasts very long from this posting. I comment on the inferiority of battery-powered zappers on the Competition pages on my site. The Ultimate Zapper does not have to worry about batteries, of course, since it runs off an AC adapter, which you and Arthur Doerksen of the Auto Zap insinuate may not be reliable, which of course is another lie by competitors with an eye on sales figures. I have written extensively about the reliability of the AC adapter on the FAQ page on my site.]

“Then I heard about the Ultimate Zapper and saw the 3 month trial offer and ordered it. Now using it for about a week and this is the one that works best for me. The penetrating power of the UZ is just what I needed.”

The high frequency of the ParaZapper is supposed to be “Better” for skin zapping, according to you. Not according to this customer. Never mind. Just cut and paste this one. On second thought just cut it out. That will make things a lot easier.

The fact is that The Ultimate Zapper’s single low frequency zaps the skin at the same time as it penetrates the body to reach deeper levels than any other zapper. It does not miss the skin along its path, otherwise it would not be capable of giving the amazing results for a wide variety of skin ailments, as documented in the testimonial archive, including Morgellons, melanoma, psoriasis, dermatitis, cold sores, warts, ringworm, and skin rash.

But wait. Here is yet another quote from your own site, hedging your statement about the superiority of dual frequencies. You contradict your own claim that 2 frequencies are necessary, referencing “users” as proof that “the 2.5 kHz frequency is more effective.”

DAVID ETHEREDGE (from his website):

“Some believed that the higher the frequency, the greater the skin effect. That is higher frequencies tend to travel along the surfaces of the body and lower frequencies tend to penetrate better. For this reason, many believe that the lower frequencies are more effective against intestinal parasites, urinary infections, and other infections that tend to occur in the various body cavities.”

“It might just be that the 30kHz frequency does not produce harmonics close enough to the parasite's frequency since its harmonics are 30 kHz apart while the lower frequency has harmonics that are only 2.5 kHz apart. Regardless of the reason, many users feel that the 2.5 kHz frequency is more effective.”

Of course, they do, because it IS more effective, for all complaints. Which explains the resounding success of The Ultimate Zapper’s single low frequency for nearly 12 years for all conditions, including skin conditions.

Below is an exchange from the previous posting as “proof” of the effectiveness of the dual frequency zapper. It is interesting that you do not mention which frequency was used to obtain the reported results. Since this was not a skin ailment one may hazard a guess that the low frequency was used. This exchange is a good example of how you try to manipulate this forum. It is from



>- The only information we have, according to you, is "Symptoms seem to stop and cold/flu never advances." Well, this is hardly a convincing statement. Symptoms "seem" to stop. The cold/flu ... "never advances". What does this statement mean?


The symptoms stop seems to me to be that the symptoms no longer exist, but I can not put the words on paper for the originator. What I did was to quote what the person in chrge of the project told me that I could publish and nothing more, nothing less.

KEN PRESNER (my response to the above exchange):

You have changed the language of the original posting. The original posting says “symptoms seem to stop”. You have changed this into the “symptoms stop”, thereby avoiding having to explain what you mean by the word “seem”. That might have been a problem, hence your legerdemain. You may imply that this is just your sloppy use of language, once again, which can be seen repeatedly in your postings on the forum and on your site. If this is so then you still have to explain what “seems” meant in the posting. If this is an intentional deception it still remains unexplained. After this sleight of hand, you hedge your response by stating that you cannot vouch for the person who actually made the original statement. You are quoting someone else and can say no more. This all points to the truth of my statement, that you make totally unsubstantiated and often vague and nebulous claims on this forum. Then you contradict yourself by denying that you are presenting any “data” as proof of anything at all on your site. You always try to find a way so that you can have it both ways. But this is a trap of your own making, of course, which you are caught in, to your dismay, when it is discovered and pointed out to the readers of this forum. This has been observed and commented on before by others on this forum as well as by me. In fact your entire website is a house of cards based on nebulous claims, “survey results” and “data”. Your house of cards collapses quickly under close scrutiny.
Your credibility on this forum has long since evaporated, David. Regarding the University “study” you referred to in the posting cited above you claim that "the source has removed themselves from any other statements". That may be so but you refused to answer my question directly, changing its meaning as you are wont to do in so many cases on this forum. May I repeat, there is absolutely nothing preventing you from answering the questions posed by the original poster. They are quoted below:

"- Which was the university;
- Which was the zapper model;
- What was the study setup;
- How the zapper was used (frequency, duration of sessions, etc)"


Here is the full exchange between you and the poster, referred to, above:


"I found on ParaZapper site the following statement :

Recently, one of our ParaZapper ™ models was tested at a major US university. Their results were reported as follows:

"25+ men with HIV use the zapper when feeling the signs of a cold or flu with almost immediate (within 24 hours) response. Symptoms seem to stop and cold/flu never advances."
On this site:

Could you provide some more details, because if it is true, it would be a big advantage for
a) zapper technology globaly
b) parazapper instance of zapper

Well, what are the details of the study:
- Which was the university;
- Which was the zapper model;
- What was the study setup;
- How the zapper was used (frequency, duration of sessions, etc);
and the evidence it happend at all :)


While we have the posted statement on University letterhead, the source has removed themselves from any other statements. It appears that someone got to them and they will not provide any other information.


Sorry, but it doesn't convince me, that such a study happen at all. In such case I think you should remove that information from your site, since there is lack of source and citation. Don't you think?


No, it is not presented as proof of anything. I believe that people should have the information presented to weigh on their own. I do agree that it does not provide much creedence, but it is certainly evident that someone does not want the information out.


My question is "What information?" You have provided no follow-up information at all, merely an initial statement that represents a claim. You have it on University letterhead, so you say, but refuse to divulge any details. The only information we have, according to you, is "Symptoms seem to stop and cold/flu never advances." Well, this is hardly a convincing statement. Symptoms "seem" to stop. The cold/flu (the common cold is not the same at all as the influenza, by the way) "never advances". What does this statement mean? Does it mean that the person is stuck with it forever, that it retreats, that it stops? This kind of nebulous statement does not stand up under even cursory inspection.

If, according to you, "the source has removed themselves from any other statements", that does not prevent you from letting people know the content of the information that you claim to have in hand, if you indeed have any information. The "Creedence" (actually spelled "credence") which you admit is lacking, is at the very root of the problem here because credence means believability, which is another word for credibility, which you are very short of on this forum, as I have already pointed out. Without being challenged you would be able to continue to pass off these kinds of unsubstantiated statements as being factual, which I find manipulative, as I have pointed out before on this forum. This is part of your modus operandi which I have expounded on in previous postings. The motto of the story: caveat emptor.

KEN PRESNER (follow-up):

Like so many of the statements you make on your site and on this forum a rabbit is waved before our eyes tempting us to believe that there are more rabbits in the hat. No sooner does the rabbit appear than it quickly jumps back in the hat, with a very plausible excuse offered each time why we can’t see all the other rabbits you tell us are in the hat, too. You are the David Copperfield of the zapper world, David Etheredge.


DAVID ETHEREDGE (from the current posting):

“Your understanding of electronics and physics appears to be skewed at the minimum and I am not the only one to note it.”

KEN PRESNER (my response to the above):

How is possible, according to you and others (unnamed, of course, like all of the “evidence” you allude to but never provide on the forum), that my understanding of electronics and physics “appears to be skewed at the minimum”, and my zapper is skewed at the top end of effectiveness and is one of the best selling zappers in the world, and has been for the past 12 years? How is it possible if you know so much as an electrical engineer and I know so little as a self-taught zapper inventor, that my zapper is skewed at the top of the zapper world along with a handful of others? According to your logic, my zapper should be skewed at the bottom of the zapper collection. There is obviously more than meets the eye here because I obviously know quite enough about electronics and physics to have created a superior zapper. I imagine you find this irksome. I can understand that. I believe that Arthur Doerksen of the Auto-Zap also finds this fact irksome. The fact is that Hulda Clark (the inventor of the original zapper in 1993) and countless other inventors and innovators, including me, are primarily self-educated researchers. That’s what research and experimentation is all about, discovering what works. Some of the electrical engineers in the zapper field apparently feel threatened by this. I can understand that. In response, they use the red herring of professional credentials to question the credibility of successful zapper makers who do not share those professional credentials, and they to try to discredit those zapper makers. All this is commercially motivated, of course. This is the “professional bully” syndrome that we can find you exhibiting on this forum.

In case you didn’t notice, Dr. Hulda Clark , the inventor of the original zapper, has no credentials at all in electronics. You belittle and try to discredit me at every turn on this forum yet I do not see you belittling Dr. Hulda Clark . I wonder why? I guess it wouldn’t look good. Dr. Clark was self-taught in the field of electronics, like me. She taught herself enough to be able to invent the original zapper, which was quite an accomplishment. The obvious fact is this. You don’t have to be an Albert Einstein, or a Nikola Tesla, or a Royal Rife to make a better zapper. Zapper making is not nuclear Science and it is not rocket science. It is really not all that difficult. You don’t have to be an electrical engineer to make a significant dent in the zapper world. Dr. Hulda Clark and I have both proven that. Others have, too. It takes at least average intelligence, some creativity, some inspiration, knowledge and understanding of concepts and principles, and a lot of hard work. That’s about it.
I had the concept of what I wanted to accomplish which was to create a unique zapper formula that would produce superior results. It took a few months of hard work to create The Ultimate Zapper. The results of my work are clear. My zapper, my site, my publications and my work have been a resounding success and they have helped thousands of people all over the world for nearly 12 years. You can never change this fact by trying to discredit my zapper, my site, my work and me. Ironically, you only end up discrediting yourself by trying to do so. I have taken a lot of sales away from you and other zapper makers. I can understand your displeasure at that. My success does not exactly have you clapping from the balcony. But if you were really concerned about helping people and if you had a spirit of generosity you would be happy that my zapper and my work have helped so many over the years. I am glad when the work of others helps people.

The success of The Ultimate Zapper has come through word of mouth. People from the 4 corners of the world have obtained amazing results with it and have recommended it to their families and friends. If my zapper were not superior it would never have become one of the best selling zappers in the world. That’s obvious. Customers write in and let me know the amazing results they are getting with my zapper and I post some of their emails to the testimonial archive. There are now 140 testimonials on my site. Would you like to tell my customers how little I know about electronics and physics and how ineffective my zapper is, and how useless my advice is? That is bound to make a big impression on them. You can never deny the results people get with my zapper no matter how hard you try to discredit The Ultimate Zapper on this forum. And you can never deny the help I have given people. Your various tactics include lying, innuendo, insults, misleading statements, pot shots and mud-slinging. But you can never win the battle to discredit me. Do you know why? Because you’re wrong about my zapper, about my work, about my site and about me. But more than being wrong, your efforts reveal you as a manipulator and, hence, as someone not to be trusted. Furthermore, the advice you give on this forum is very dubious, as I discuss, below. Beneath all your advice and endless postings on this and other forums, the fact is that you’re just another zapper salesman.

Your lack of respect is among the most outstanding features of your postings. I think you already know that when you take me on you are not dealing with some lightweight who will cower under your crude and ill-conceived attempts to discredit me. You screw with me at your own risk. In the end it has all backfired on you. You only ended up screwing yourself, as I elucidate, below. You may be able to dominate this forum. I could not care less. I have better ways to spend my time. But I will not let your lies dominate this forum. When I soon retire from this forum due to the demands of two projects I am working on you can shovel all the muck over the fence you like. Everything I want to say will already have been said. It will henceforth be impossible for me to devote the kind of time that is required to respond to postings in the way I feel is necessary, and that means in depth and with care, not with little sound bites delivering pearls of wisdom which is your preferred method of answering postings. In future you can print all the lies you want about my zapper, my site, my work and about me, with impunity. Only the handful of people who read these postings will know what’s really going on. But, that’s all that really matters to me, telling the truth and hopefully affecting the consciousness of a few people. One cannot ask for more.

In your previous posting you say, and I quote, The Ultimate Zapper “may be the best single frequency zapper…” You now say “While your zapper may be a good single frequency unit with some good features, it is not the best.” Oooh, that looks like a U-turn to me, David. Yesterday The Ultimate Zapper was the best today it’s not the best anymore. Yes it is, no it isn’t. The facts show that it is, of course, which is why you made the mistake of making your admission in the first place. Now you are putting your foot in your mouth. You have put your foot in your mouth many, many times on this forum. This is your “foot-in-mouth” syndrome.

You know more about electronics and physics than I do. I would think so since you are an electrical engineer. But the fact is that this fact is completely irrelevant. It doesn’t make any difference how much more you know than I do about capacitors and resistors and impedance and coils because I obviously know enough about electronics to have created one of the best selling zappers in the world, a truly superior zapper with a unique formula that you dismiss with a strong dose of contempt in your postings. My advice to you is to get off your high horse. High horses can lead to serious falls.

You have to be an electrical engineer to solve serious and complex electrical engineering problems, to be sure. But you don’t have to be an electrical engineer to invent the original zapper or to create a truly better zapper. What you must have is a sufficient understanding of electronics to be able to work with the concepts. But it is the concepts that are far more important than the details because the principles of electronics are really not that difficult to grasp. It requires study, perseverance, imagination, some inspiration and, most of all, hard work to create a winning formula.

The secret is that as long as The Ultimate Zapper works for people, and it surely does, they really don’t care if their zapper was created by someone who knows a bit less about electrical theory than the next fellow who has extra initials after their name but whose zapper is not as good. This fact may chagrin a few electrical engineer zapper makers such as you. I understand. Thousands of people are buying zappers from zapper makers like me who are not electrical engineers and they are more than satisfied with the results than with yours and with zappers made by others as reflected in the unsolicited testimonials I receive every week.

I would have thought that, with all the theoretical knowledge you and Arthur Doerksen have, you would have been able to create a zapper that is head and shoulders above The Ultimate Zapper. But this is not the case, which shows the limits of an electrical engineering education in the world of zapper making and the far greater importance of understanding concepts and principles. The details are really quite easy to master once one understand those concepts and principles.

May I remind you of a posting you made to the Kevin Trudeau forum, (the spelling mistake is yours, not mine):


“Yes, a good results over-rides anything that anyone else says.”
Does that include the results people obtain with The Ultimate Zapper in the face of your negative comments about it? Do the results of The Ultimate Zapper over-ride anything you say? I think so. In fact, that’s what you yourself have said, later contradicted by you, of course. You are not known for consistency in your writings, I may note. Contradiction is really your trademark.

Are the claims I make for The Ultimate Zapper exaggerated, as you claim?
Let the forum’s readers judge for themselves. Here is an unsolicited testimonial about toxoplasma which I have posted to the testimonial archive on my site. I preface it with a report from you about your hidden testimonials for toxoplasma:


“Yes, while we have not yet been able to collect actual percentage data, we do have customers reporting positive results on blood parasites such as toxoplasma.”

KEN PRESNER from the testimonial archive on my site:

“Hi Ken,
We purchased a zapper around Christmas time. Honestly, I was skepticle but very desperate for help. I have been fighting parasites for several years (along with the horrible symptoms they cause). Well, yesterday I received a clean parasite test--wow, I can't believe it.

I zapped faithfully for a month and it killed cryptosporidium, toxoplasma, and yeast. I still feel yucky but am looking forward to a better day now that I am not fighting critters anymore! …

… Also, be prepared because all those that I know and love who have listened to my cry over the past few years are going to be coming to you for a zapper!
Thank you!

-- from B
Apr. 25, 2005”

The above testimonial, typical of the testimonials on my site, sounds truthful to me. But it falls into your “exaggerated” category, for some strange reason. For some strange reason all my customers are either exaggerating or lying, according to you.
If this were true then there are 140 exaggerations or lies in the testimonial archive on my site. I would like to hear you tell everyone on this forum that those 140 people are lying. After all, an exaggeration of the kind you repeatedly infer can only amount to a form of lying.

When you asked zapper users on this forum to “weigh in” not a single person responded, such is the influence you wield on this forum. In your posting you asked them the following question: “What really makes a difference?” The answer is very easy to figure out, it’s obvious. The question didn’t even need to be posed. There can only be one answer to this question. Results are what make the difference. They are all that really count for zapper users.

5.KEN PRESNER vs. DAVID ETHEREDGE – Helping vs. the posting game and the New Pathways hoax

DAVID ETHEREDGE (from the current posting):

“Just like your claims of helping people. The only forum that you have posted on is the Zapper Support Forum and all that you have done is hype your product. I post to over 20 forums and rarely even mention the zapper on several of those.”
KEN PRESNER (my response to the above):

Well, David, you just opened up Pandora’s box.

Like a pretzel bender you twist the English language to leave the best impression. Your ability to use the English language clearly is put to the iron test here but you do manage to come up with a linguistic solution to the problem of your blatant promotion of the ParaZapper everywhere on curezone. You bravely declare that you “rarely even mention the zapper on several of those” forums? What does that mean? It means that you more-than-just mention it on most of the forums. You really had to twist the English language here to avoid the truth. Twist and turn as you may try you cannot avoid the need for Logic 101, David. This is the same way you create your customer surveys, by hiding the facts and twisting the English language when reporting the results to skew things in your favor and make things look good for ParaZapper, of course. Only the gullible will be caught in this trap.
Your statement regarding helping is based on the completely false premise that I post here to help people. Unlike your claims of helping people on this forum, I don’t post on this forum to help people and I have never made that claim. So the implication that I don’t help people because I only post to one forum is based on a false premise that you have created and which I do not measure up to, of course. What a sly manipulator you are. Your statement is a deliberate distortion of the truth, one of countless on this forum. It is one more manipulation in a long list of manipulations based on your twisting my statements in order to deceive people and dominate this forum. I only post on this forum to reply to postings such as yours that make comments about my zapper, my work, my site and me. And I do so very infrequently (that’s plain enough to see) because of my other obligations. The helping side of my work comes through my site, my zapper, my publications, emails and phone calls.
Secondly, by stating that helping people is merely my “claim” you are belittling not only The Ultimate Zapper but also the work that I have been doing for over a decade. Instead of replying to my postings in their entirety one of your favorite ploys is to try to discredit me, whatever it takes, be that through lies, distortion, pot shots or mud-slinging. Every tactic is fair game for you. Helping people is important on this forum, but only if you are seen to be the one doing the help. The help given by me is automatically suspect, according to you, and is automatically discredited by you, thereby leaving you in the enviable position, ipso facto, of being the only legitimate helper on the forum. You are like the cuckoo bird that is programmed to push its siblings out of the nest. I guess you just can’t help it, David. You’re just made that way. How convenient.

Let’s first examine your record of “helping” people. Then we’ll have a look at my record, shall we?

First of all, a little background information about how you try to skew public opinion in your favor on this forum will help readers understand what is really going on here. You have tried to sow doubts in the minds of the readers of this forum about the fact that The Ultimate Zapper helped me overcome MS and Crohn’s disease, but it seems that you have no doubt that the ParaZapper which is a less powerful and a far less effective zapper (having only 2 of the features that The Ultimate Zapper possesses) has helped many people recover from MS. As “proof” of this you cite a story in a New Pathways magazine, a magazine published by the Multiple Sclerosis Research Council in the UK.

In a cunning transmutation you change the facts to suit your purpose, and this is not the first time you have been caught red-handed. Let’s examine this closely to see how you lie in a glib and seamless manner, without even blinking.

DAVID ETHEREDGE (from an earlier posting):


“New Pathways is a publication of the Multiple Sclerosis Resource Centre which is a leading MS research organization in the United Kingdom.

The July-August edition of New Pathways features a 2 page article on the Hulda Clark Zapper and its benefits for sufferers of Multiple Sclerosis. Highlighted in pictures is ParaZapper PLUS.

The magazine is available from MSRC is is a valuable source of information and therapies for MS sufferers.”

The first relevant part of this quote from you is in regards to your statement that New Pathways “is a leading MS research organization”. With the kind of leadership the MSRC is offering no wonder why people with MS have little chance of recovering their health. I write more about the pitiful leadership record of the MS Research Centre below.

The second relevant part of this quote from you is that the article mentions benefits for the Hulda Clark zapper. It does not mention any specific benefits for the ParaZapper. The fact is ParaZapper is never even mentioned at all in the article, not even once.

The third relevant part of this quote from you is that the ParaZapper is highlighted in pictures. The fact is that there is one photo of the ParZapper that accompanies the article, with no caption for it or comment about it.
The fourth relevant part of this quote from you is in regards to your statement that New Pathways is a “valuable source of information”. Presumably the ParaZapper shares a place in the MSRC’s pantheon of “valuable … information”, without ever being cited. Regarding your claim that the MSRC is a “valuable source of information”, the truth is that the information the MSRC provides can be found in a hundred other places on the internet and the information it offers about dental mercury is hidden is the swamp of information on their site. And once you access the dental mercury page it becomes clear that the MSRC is simply parroting the ADA. I write more about this, below. So much for the MSRC being a “valuable source of information.”
The above quote of yours then becomes magically transmuted through innuendo and misstatement in a follow-up posting of yours that refers back to this original posting, and the article in question. You are a sly fellow, David.

DAVID ETHEREDGE (from an earlier posting):


“One last point. If the UZ is so great at curing MS, then why was ParaZapper chosen to be published in the "New Pathways" magazine of the MSRC, instead of UZ?”
The first relevant part of this quote from you is the reference to the “UZ [Ultimate Zapper]” being “so great at curing MS”. The fact is that I never use the word “cure” on my site. In fact I discuss the folly of doing so both on my site and in emails to people. I clearly refer to The Ultimate Zapper as having helped me in the final stages of my recovery and I clearly refer to it being part of My Recovery Protocol. There can be no possible doubt about my statements because I state this clearly on my site. Your reference to “cure” is a complete lie. That lie is then further transmuted into one more false premise by you: if The Ultimate Zapper claims to cure MS (which it does not, rendering the premise false) then why is the ParaZapper the clear-cut winner in the zapper-cure category, according to the MSRC. Well, you have made a real logical and linguistic pretzel of the whole matter, haven’t you, by basing a false conclusion on a false premise. It appears that you might benefit by taking a beginner’s course in logic. My advice is to start with LOGIC 101. It is beyond me how anyone reading this forum can continue to believe the misstatements, distortions and outright lies that you perpetrate here. They really must leave readers wondering.
The second relevant part of this quote attempts to put me on the defensive by posing a false question. It refers to “ParaZapper [being] chosen to be published in the New Pathways.” This second lie completes your deception. The ParaZapper was not chosen for anything, as the first quote, above, clearly shows. It was not even mentioned in the article. So there is no defense that is required to prove why it was chosen. This is another of your logic/linguistic pretzel benders. One photo of the ParaZapper appeared with the New Pathways article. By inference and by using the word “cure” you are cunningly inferring that the ParaZapper is associated with “curing” MS. This whole matter is a sly attempt to skew opinion on the forum by perpetrating two outright lies. Count ‘em.

This backs up my earlier statement that you will do absolutely anything to dominate this forum even resorting to lying in order to manipulate the opinions of its readers. You are not to be trusted.

Now, let us examine the New Pathways article more closely to see whether there is any value at all in it.

It was written by Suzie Cornell, a “healthcare practitioner” (whatever that means) who runs an assessment centre for people with symptoms of MS. There is no statement about what her “centre” actually does or who funds it. I would be interested in knowing this.

There is only one specific paragraph in the New Pathways article that refers to how the Hulda Clark zapper “may” help people with MS. The article concludes that after two years of zapping with the Hulda Clark zapper “symptoms may improve” but that “irreversible damage may also occur” if the parasites have been in the body for a long time. This sounds contradictory and very vague. The questions poses itself, what are they really trying to say? The author does not support her statements at all. There are no references to testimonials or to data collected. There is no reference to any study having even taken place in the two-year period referred to and there is no discussion of the methodology used or the data collected, or if any data was collected at all. In fact, there are no specifics at all to back up the assertions the article makes. If the evidence existed to support her statements one would logically assume that the author would be only too glad to be forthcoming. Such is not the case here. Does the content of the article mean that the author did in fact conduct a two-year study to arrive at her “conclusions” regarding the Hulda Clark zapper (never mind the ParaZapper, which is never mentioned in the article)? One would think that if anything significant were reportable then credit would have been given where it was due and evidence would have been forthcoming, but this is not the case. Since there is no information about a two-year study I can only assume it never actually happened. The report is anecdotal, at best. The matter of whether a study was actually conducted is not discussed, which makes one think of a whole list of questions. But to you, David Etheredge, the New Pathways article is conclusive proof that the ParaZapper helps people recover from MS. All of this is done by the clever use of innuendo by you. You even use the word “cure” in your deliberate attempt to deceive. But your transmuted and false conclusion has absolutely no basis in fact. There is no evidence in the article to support it at all. Where are the details in support of this false conclusion? They are nowhere to be found. Where are the testimonials, where is the “data”? Only unsubstantiated claims appear, once again. When the facts are examined closely one sees clearly that your assertions are out-and-out lies supported by nothing but hot air. This is your trademark on the forum. In the other instances on this forum you have been able to hide the truth because the “data” is in your hands and no one else’s, and you refuse to divulge it. In the case of the New Pathways article you cannot hide the evidence because it is in the public domain, and the truth is plain to see. The emperor has no cloths.
Let us look at more of the paragraph referred to above in New Pathways.
“When the parasites begin to die off, people with MS have reported feeling some improvement in many symptoms, in particular constipation/diarrhoea, sleeping patterns, tingling and numbness, and balance. Once the parasites are killed (this can take 2-3 months) the body’s natural healing system kicks in and the damage from the parasites in the areas affected begins to repair itself. The healing process after the parasites have gone may take up to 2 years. As the inflammation and cell damage is repaired, symptoms may improve. There is no test to prove the parasites have died. If the parasites have been present in the body for a long time, irreversible damage may also occur.”

What does this sequence of statements mean, “people with MS … some improvement in many symptoms … the healing process ... damage from the parasites in the areas affected … As the inflammation and cell damage is repaired, symptoms may improve.” What is one to make of all this vague and nebulous description that is presented without supporting evidence and which is then followed by the astonishing hedging statement which negates what has preceded it, “… If the parasites have been present in the body for a long time, irreversible damage may also occur.” It sounds like you can come to whatever conclusions you like, at this point. But all this is presented by you as evidence to support a fictitious claim by you that the ParaZapper helps people with MS and that New Pathways has confirmed this. What a tangled web of lies you have woven here, David. What inflammation? What cell damage? What repair? What healing process? What the heck is the author talking about? And what the heck are you talking about? The fact is there are no details about the number of people who supposedly zapped for MS who formed the basis of the article’s vague and unsupported conclusion, there is no mention about data collected, or of methodology, and there is no evidence for any improvements having actually been experienced by the people with MS this report refers to. And this, according to you, constitutes proof, by inference, that the ParaZapper cures MS, said proof having been offered in an article where the ParaZapper was not even mentioned by name. You want to take credit for something that was never even said or even implied. You just made my day, David. You just got caught with your knickers down.

Regarding the Hulda Clark zapper’s ability to help with MS there is no proof that parasites cause MS, which is the implication of this article and is also referred to on the MS page of your website. The insinuation of the article, that parasites cause MS and that a healing process after killing them can “cure” MS, is a total deception. Parasites and bacteria that may be associated with MS are opportunistic and may exacerbate certain symptoms, but that’s all. As I state on my site, and as is shown in the MS testimonials on my site zapping with The Ultimate Zapper can help in the latter stages of MS when the primary metal and/or chemical toxin or toxins have been largely eliminated. The primary cause of MS is toxicity and in most cases that toxin is dental mercury, but it can be any major toxic metal (s) and/or chemical (s), or a combination of both. Zapping will not eliminate these toxins (although the eliminative process in the case of metals can be aided by the electroporation effect of The Ultimate Zapper, as discussed on my site). In most cases any positive results for parasite killing with zapping will not be long-lasting until the toxicity issue or issues have also been addressed. I discuss this on my site, in emails, on the phone and in My Recovery Protocol. MS is a very complex disease, far more complex than the New Pathways article or your site acknowledge. I understand that it’s a lot easier, and a lot more profitable, for you to advise the visitors to your site to just click, buy and zap.

I must note that there is no mention anywhere in the New Pathways magazine about dental mercury which is the most common cause of Multiple Sclerosis, not a single word. The MSRC buries the information about dental mercury on their site in the swamp of other information they disseminate. I will discuss this subject shortly.
Of course, the important thing for you about the New Pathways article is that your ParaZapper made the news which gives you the opportunity to make an “important announcement”. After all, you have been cited in a single photo that accompanies the article so this must, ipso facto, according to the inference you are making, lend credence to your claims of helping people. You are the recipient of non-existent kudos, by association. After all, the MSRC is in the business of disseminating “valuable information”, according to you, is it not? Another pat on your back, another self-congratulatory moment created by and for the great ParaZapper. Well done, David, well done. Everything you say is self-serving. I am not the only one who has pointed this out on the forum. The New Pathways article concludes:

“More detailed information about Dr.
Clark’s work can be found in her book,
The Cure For All Diseases ” (New Century
Press, California, 1995.
ISBN 1-890035-01-7)”

One would think that if the ParaZapper had been shown to be effective for MS that a reference would have been made so that people with MS could find the ParaZapper easily to obtain similar help. The article concludes with a reference to Dr. Hulda Clark but with no reference at all to the ParaZapper.
Let us examine the MSRC and their New Pathways magazine more closely, as well as the article in question
Judy Graham, the editor of New Pathways, has published books about MS. In fact she wrote an article about MS in the New Pathways issue in question which is as wishy-washy and vague as her catch-all books on MS which lead the reader nowhere at all except into a jungle of details about sundry topics without focus. She gives a lot of advice about diet, auto-immunity (a nonsense theory perpetrated by the medical system and swallowed whole by just about everybody, that the body attacks its own cells - the immune system does not attack healthy cells, it attacks the toxins that are hiding in the cells) exercise, posture, yoga, hyperbaric oxygen treatment, incontinence, relationships, sexuality, pregnancy, childbirth, mental attitude and fatigue. But the bottom line is that she is basically drug-oriented. More about this, below. Where is the insight about toxicity issues, where’s the focus, where’s the beef? Nowhere to be found. Her book should be called “The Shot-Gun approach to MS”. I have talked to hundreds of people with MS over the past 19 years. In every single case I was able to identify the unaddressed toxicity issue that was clearly at the basis of their illness. In at least 90% of cases the source of the problem was clearly dental mercury, and mercury poisoning was later backed up by lab tests using a chelating provocative. I talk about all this at length on my site and in My Recovery Protocol.

Judy Graham is part of the medical system’s answer to MS. She is a mouthpiece for the status quo. This is clear from her statements, below, in the New Pathways issue in question. New Pathways is a grab-bag no-focus magazine published by a grab-bag no-focus organization, the MSRC. Their motto should be “Keep ‘em guessing, keep ‘em confused”. Here is the link to their site:

Here is a quote from the Mercury Amalgam Fillings Research page on their site at

The following quote sums up the MSRC’s attitude to mercury fillings:

“Many people believe there is a connection between MS and Amalgam Mercury Fillings and that it is beneficial to have them removed.”

Never mind “many people”, where does the MSRC stand on this central issue? You’ll never find out by reading their site or their publication because they never state their position anywhere.

They have a “balanced” site and a “balanced” page about dental mercury showing the pros and cons of the arguments on both sides. What pros? Who needs “balanced”? Who needs dental mercury? Is there anybody out there with a mercury deficiency? People need to hear the truth. Even the FDA is in the process of abandoning the ADA’s position on the safety of dental mercury. But that’s not good enough for the MSRC. They prefer sitting on the fence.

The subject headings that conclude the dental mercury page on their site tell the story of where they stand:

Study finds mercury fillings not harmful
New Research Finds Mercury Fillings Are Safe
Is mercury safe or not? The argument goes on.

Their dental mercury page concludes with the following lies about the absorption of mercury, the same lies that appear on the ADA’s website:

“The mercury in dental fillings is an amalgam, or blend, of copper, silver, and mercury that has been used for more than 150 years. Silver dental fillings contain very small amounts of inorganic mercury, which is not easily absorbed by the human body, according to the American Dental Association (ADA) and other public health groups.”

Can there be any doubt that the MSRC and their mouthpiece New Pathways are apologists for the ADA? For an excoriation of the criminal ADA read The ADA Lies thu’ their teeth on my site at

The MSRC site buries the truth of the dental mercury issue. It is clear that the dental mercury issue is the most important issue in the world of MS. The MSRC buries the importance of dental mercury on their dental mercury page by hedging all the statements they make about the dangers of mercury fillings and by, finally, agreeing with the ADA.

Here is the link to Judy Graham’s article in the above-mentioned issue of New Pathways magazine, for those who wish to examine it closely:

In her article she states, “Medical treatments that actually improve MS symptoms from virtually the moment you take them have so far eluded us. But writing this issue I actually got quite excited that we may be on the verge of big things. Firstly, Aimspro will hopefully be back in production soon. Please read the Update on pages 10 and 11. Anyone who thought Aimspro had disappeared will be pleased to know that it’s only strict Government rules and regulations which have been holding things up. It’s sad that some people have got worse since their supplies of Aimspro ran out, though this does prove the stuff works for them. There is also news of an MS vaccine that seems to reverse MS and of a pill for MS on the horizon which also works. So fingers crossed, and let’s hope these drugs won’t be too costly for MS patients to afford when they do at last become available.”

Wow, do you expect any insight at all into what’s really going on with MS in this magazine? Give me a break. Judy Graham, New Pathways and the MSRC have clearly been co-opted by the medical/pharmaceutical system.

With regard to the aspersions you cast on The Ultimate Zapper’s ability to help some people with MS it looks like you forgot to read the MS testimonials on my site, David. You give no credence to the fact that I overcame MS myself and have been helping people with MS from my site for nearly 12 years. In fact, you make so many contradictions and tell so many lies on this forum that I wonder if you consider the implications of what you write before you click the “send” button. No one else but me would bother to express their ideas at length as I do here in response to your often inane comments. The fact is that others do not have the same concern as I do, namely that you have continuously misrepresented my zapper, my site, my work and me for the selfish purpose of promoting your own products.

The fact is that you lose the argument about my not helping others at the very beginning of the debate because your insinuation is an obvious and flagrant lie. The facts show that The Ultimate Zapper has helped many people with MS, and a long list of other illnesses and diseases as documented on my site. To win the argument about my not helping people you must prove that The Ultimate Zapper has not helped people with MS and other illnesses, conditions and diseases, and that I do not help people with MS through my work, my publications, my site and my contact with people through emails and phone calls. You can only win this argument by lying, which is a practice you shamelessly indulge in on this forum.

May I point out to our readers that I recovered from both MS and Crohn’s disease after a 7-year struggle. I was paralyzed by MS in 1989 and I nearly died from Crohn’s disease in 1994. You never had MS or Crohn’s disease. Yet, according to you, you are able to help people with MS and I am not. According to you, you know more about these 2 diseases than I do and are better qualified in this area than I am. It is painfully obvious that you haven’t got a leg to stand on here. Your claim is a hollow assertion. It just fell like a dead cat on the forum floor and I just heard the thud.
Next, how does the mere fact of posting qualify you as a helper? What kind of nonsense is this? Let’s talk about the content of the help that we both provide to judge, firstly, if that content is helpful and, if so, to what extent. The word help has many meanings. It is a continuum, like the knowledge of electronics and physics. One can acquire the latter quite easily through study, but it is impossible to acquire through study the kind of knowledge that I acquired about MS and Crohn’s disease through personal experience. That’s rather obvious. In fact I wrote My Recovery Protocol to let people know the best possible information about how to recover from these two diseases. It includes a lot of information that has never before been written on these two diseases. You discredit my book, My Recovery Protocol, in spite of the fact that it is obvious that you have never read it. You have two objections to my book: the first is that I charge too much for it, and the second is that I am taking advantage of people who cannot work. What a load of horse manure. Most people with MS are still working. Of course, your zappers do not fall under the same scrutiny you reserve for My Recovery Protocol. I note that you support Kevin Trudeau and his book about “cures”, claiming that it is full of wonderful insights (none of which is original and which can be read hundreds of other books on health matters and free of charge on many, many websites). I don’t hear you complaining about the $100 price that Kevin Trudeau charges for an autographed copy of his book, yet I hear you complaining loudly about the $44.95 price of My Recovery Protocol. I write more about your support of Kevin Trudeau under the Kevin Trudeau heading, below. I write more about your cheap shots under the Pot Shots heading, below.

If I had made the commonplace assertions made by Kevin Trudeau and if I had been jailed for larceny and fraud he was, I am sure I and everyone else would have heard about it from you on this forum. It is strange that you find no problem in supporting Kevin Trudeau, a felon convicted of a number of serious crimes and who did time in the penitentiary for those crimes. A full history of his criminal history and legal proceedings is available at

Why do you have no absolutely no objection to Kevin Trudeau’s history of criminal activity which is a matter of public record, yet you object vociferously about me, my zapper, my work and my site? Could this just be because Kevin Trudeau mentions you and your zapper in his book? Then, all of a sudden this convicted felon and shameless opportunist is magically transmuted by you into a poor underdog who is really an altruist, a man who is trying desperately to help people with their health, according to you, and who has wonderful insights about health matters to impart to the waiting masses. Give me a break, David. Who would ever be fooled into believing this crock of horse manure? Need I say that you have an ax to grind on this forum and on all the forums? I will have more to say about your affiliation with Kevin Trudeau a bit later in this posting.

Let us turn to the health advice you give on your own site. The advice you give is often inaccurate and misleading, sometimes dangerous, and very often completely untrue.

Here are the two slim paragraphs of information about MS that you provide on your site (your spelling mistake, once again, not mine):

DAVID ETHEREDGE (from his website):

“If you suffer from Multiple Sclerosis or symptoms of MS then you may have parasites which are causing these problems or increase your succeptability.”
KEN PRESNER (my comments):
Increasing your susceptibility to what, exactly? This makes no sense at all. The cause of MS is toxicity caused by metals and/or chemicals. Here is a quote from my site:

“I was paralyzed by Multiple Sclerosis in 1989. I nearly died from Crohn's disease in 1994. Both diseases were caused by silver Amalgam fillings which are 50% mercury. Mercury leaches from fillings into organs where it attracts parasites and bacteria. My zapper played a vital role at the end of my recovery by killing the parasites and bacteria attracted to mercury in the brain and the intestines and by its electroporation therapy.”

Parasites are involved in the pathological process as opportunistic pathogens and they should be killed for complete healing to happen, to be sure. They can certainly be the cause of some symptoms, or they can exacerbate some symptoms, but they do not cause the pathology that creates MS. More serious toxins create that pathology.

DAVID ETHEREDGE (from his website):

“Recent medical evidence shows that many people have significant numbers of parasites living inside of themselves and that these parasites may be causing or aggravating your Multiple Sclerosis. Other frequent symptoms of these parasite infections are low resistance to illnesses such as colds and flu, asthma, allergies, colitis, chronic fatigue syndrome, and malaise as well as pains.”

KEN PRESNER (my comments):

This is the same cookie-cutter paragraph you have on many of your health-advice pages. You simply substitute one disease name for another, providing no original material at all on any of the health-advice pages.

Where’s the beef? Where is the “recent medical evidence” to show that parasites “may be causing or aggravating” MS? It’s nowhere to be found on your site. In fact I have yet to find any evidence to this effect anywhere. I suspect that it doesn’t even exist. Here is more evidence of the unsubstantiated claims of David Etheredge.
There is a lot of evidence to prove that the cause of MS is metal and/or chemical toxicity. Having discovered this I was able to reverse MS as well as Crohn’s disease, and others have done the same thing.

DAVID ETHEREDGE (from his website):

“If you suffer from frequent diarrhea , or sudden urgent need to rush to the restroom immediately after eating then you may have colitis or ibs ( irritable bowel syndrome ) also known as IBS/Crohn's disease or irrtated bowel syndrome. Other symptoms may include leg pains, fatigue and tiredness, alternating constipation and diahrrea, bloating, and gas. These symptoms may be caused by intestinal parasites.
Recent medical evidence shows that many people have significant numbers of intestinal parasites living inside of themselves and that these parasites may be the cause of your ibs or colitis. Frequent symptoms of these parasitic infections are ibs ( irritable bowel syndrome ), colitis, diarrhea, chronic fatigue syndrome, and malaise.”

Notice the cookie-cutter second paragraph rearing its head, once again. Very original, very original. This is what you call helping people? According to you every illness under the sun is caused by parasites and all you need to do is buy the ParaZapper and zap them away.

Toxicity issues are nowhere discussed. That would just get in the way of selling zappers. Besides, it takes, oh, so much time to talk about all this stuff and you have to post to 20 forums. The fact is that toxicity issues are once again at the heart of the matter, as I discuss on my site and in My Recovery Protocol, which I have already noted has been discredited by you without your having even read it. You can order your own personal copy at

You do sneak the possibility of your zapper not being able to help people with Crohn’s disease into the only posting you make about Crohn’s on the forum (complete with spelling mistakes, of course, yours, not mine):

below Crohn’s disease forum (only 1 posting)

>- I want to know if a parasite cleanse Clarkia is a good start to her wellness.Could parasites be a cause of this crohns?

Yes, parasites are frequently an overlooked cause of intestinal and colon disorders. Not always though. Sadly, because parasites have been ignored as a potential cause of illness, tests are often primative and unreliable. A set of 3 stool tests is only about 75 percent reliable in finding intestinal parasite problems.

The Clarkia may be uncomfortable but is likely to help. I strongly recommend that you find a good parasite zapper with copper handles and footpads as I do have strong support to show positive benefits when zapping to reduce the efects of IBS, colitis, and Crohn's. Please not that this does not always work as some Crohn's, etc, are cause by problems other than parasites.

Sorry, I do not sell zappers any longer but I can say for sure that they do help many users.”

So, your answer is to buy the ParaZapper but if it doesn’t help it must be something else causing the Crohn’s, according to you, completely contradicting the “recent medical evidence” (never produced by you) that shows parasites cause Crohn’s disease. Anyway, you closed the sale. What a convoluted and contradictory set of statements. I can see that you’re a real helper.

The fact is that the health advice you give on the CureZone Forums is often nebulous, very often worthless and sometimes highly misleading and dangerous. All your “helping” is motivated by your need to maintain a high profile here which helps you sell the ParaZapper.

After examining all the above it is clear that readers should be very cautious about taking seriously any of the “advice” you give on this or any other forum. And they should also be very wary of what you have to say about my zapper, my site, my work and me because of your manipulation and lies. You are a self-styled “helper” with no motivation other than a commercial one, like Kevin Trudeau, who you support. If your motive were other than a commercial one why else would you go to such trouble to use the forum as a free advertising board to publicize the following sales announcement: “We have been the number 2 zapper for several months and have reached number 1. We are naturally proud of that. I suspect that we are also very close to number 1 in sales if not already there.”

Let’s examine some of the statements you make on this and other forums about MS (your spelling mistake below, not mine). Here is the link to your customer survey published on curezone:


Why is there is no mention at all about results for MS here if your inference regarding the great things the ParaZapper does for MS in the New Pathways article is true? There is not one single report about your zapper helping anyone with MS under your listing of diseases entitled “Percentage of users reporting noticable improvement”. Let’s look at some of the statements from my site about MS:
“I didn't recover from Multiple Sclerosis, an "incurable" neurological disease and Crohn's disease, an "incurable" intestinal disease, by accident. My Recovery Protocol explains in 45 chapters how to detoxify and rebuild the immune system. Both diseases were caused by silver amalgam fillings which are 50% mercury. Mercury leaches from fillings into organs where it attracts parasites and bacteria. The Ultimate Zapper played a vital detoxifying role at the end of my recovery by killing the parasites and bacteria attracted to mercury in the brain and intestines, and by electroporation therapy. At 58 I am fit as a fiddle.”

Below are 3 quotes from people who purchased "My Recovery Protocol":

“Ken, I am reading your books now, those I bought from you a week ago [including My Recovery Protocol]. They are top reading material. And I have red A LOT in the last twenty years ... Nikos, Dec. 10, 2007.”

“Hello Ken, I'm Giselle H., a customer of yours who just finished reading both "My Recovery Protocol" (for which I'm absolutely GRATEFUL!) and "Chelation with DMSA, etc....." I've been talking to the staff of various Holistic Dentists ... I've never been as sick as you have been, but my list of symptoms has been very extensive ... Therefore, I am now GRATEFUL to YOU for having shared ... all the information you have in your e-books ... Giselle H., Aug. 25, 2007.”

“Hello Ken,

My name is Bill P.
You may remember me, we bought an Ultimate Zapper of you last year.

I have been reading your e-books on Chelation and your Protocol, as my wife has MS. We have tried just about everything in the alternative field and no real results we believe her symptoms are mercury related and realise unless we can detoxify the mercury, she will not make a full recovery.

So we have finally considered Chelation therapy. Your books and testimonys have been most helpful. We have had two appointments a doctor in Sydney who specializes in Chelation therapy.
Bill and Sharlette
Nov 3, 2007”

The front page of my site, the MS page on my site and My Recovery Protocol provide important information that has helped people recover from MS. Some of these people were bedridden, like I was back in 1989. The three comments from people who have bought the book are typical responses. They sound like those who have purchased the book are glad they did because of the valuable information it contains. But not according to you, David, although you have never even read it. The response to my book has also been positive from people suffering from Crohn’s disease.

Let’s examine some of the statements from the testimonial archive on my site:

109. MS (Multiple Sclerosis)

"My name is Ronald and I ordered a zapper from you guys. By the way this will be my second one. It is truly the best one out there. I'm also on the m.s. plan too and the zapper is a way of life for me. It's made my life worth living again. Thanx for inventing these things and keep 'em coming. i thought since the others were cheaper i tried a few of those models well dont waste my time with those others...if i cant have the ultimate zapper i wont have one. I could probably move a few of these zappers for you once people see me walking in a straightline without losing my balance...where i was to the way i must look to them now..."

before 2004

108. MS (Multiple Sclerosis)

Hi Ken,

Bought a zapper from you last year to help with my MS. Initially, I thought it wasn't having much of an effect, but then recently on a hunch I combined it with Wormwood , Black-Walnut and Cloves and I have noticed a real turnaround. My pins and needles are beginning to come under control. I have a sense of increased clarity after I've used the unit that lasts longer and longer each time. I am now convinced I'm not just knocking at the door of my problem but that I'm breaking the door down! The herbal cleanse above and the zapper have bought the natural colour back to my body and face. I have been pale as a ghost since childhood. My dermatitis in coming under control as well! ...
Hope you're keeping well.
Mar. 10, 2004

107. MS (Multiple Sclerosis)

Hi Ken,

I'm zapping right now and I've have seen it work for a 24 yr female with MS who had a bad bout last Jan-March (hospitalized) and she now zaps almost daily (since June) and feels fine! I gave it [The Ultimate Zapper] to her as a gift? Another unit was headed [as a gift] to the Phx Mayo clinic for diagnosis [referring to a friend]. After months of having anemia, taking Vit B-12 shots weekly; not able to retain Vit B-12 + (Dr. Clark's reference to parasites from dogs), well, he's doing much better after four weeks of zapping, along with a kidney & liver cleanse, that were very successful, now retaining vit B-12 + and is taking highest quality supplements and the doctors just ain't sure about this zapper thing, but they KNOW they didn't have anything to do with his recovery! His blood tests are almost all in normal ranges.
There'll be an order from Steve soon and there'll also be an order from Nancy soon.... as I was just out to see her, old friend, 65, wanting to cleanse etc, but didn't really want to do the "potions" routine... zapping is so much more convenient.

Thanks Ken
Nov. 18, 2005

The above testimonials from people with MS sound positive to me. How about you, David?

Here are 3 testimonials from people with Crohn’s disease:



Well, I must say I'm excited about my results so far! Tomorrow will mark the fourth week anniversary of zapping, and I have begun to see drastic reductions in the pain and cramping from Crohns. I am also having almost exclusively solid movements now, versus one solid movement per month (maybe!). The one thing I am surprised about is that my nose is still running pretty consistently. I was hoping to see signs of my incessent allergic reactions go away, but maybe these are truly allergic? Or maybe there is still a bunch of parasitic junk in my system that is being expelled via mucus? Anyway, I intend to recommend your Ultimate Zapper to everyone I come in contact with, although everyone seems to want to turn their nose up at the whole idea. My brother says it's "all in my head". I told him I don't particularly care - it works either way!

Thanks a million,
before 2004



I bought on of your Ultimate Zappers back in October and wanted to give you an update, and see if you had any suggestions. First off, I was diagnosed with Crohn's disease around 1996, after about 4 years of uncertainty as to what it was. I had exploratory surgery in 1992 and they removed a 2 inch section of small intestine. They were never certain from the pathology what it was. It wasn't until an allergist prescribed Humibid, which it turns out over a period of time, will cause irritation to the digestive system, when Crohn's flared up in full force and was detectable via upper GI (in Crohn's lab in NYC no less!) Anyway, I got the zapper in October, and shortly after, the pain and cramps were reduced from a 7,8,9, or 10 (10 being "shoot me now - please" to virually 0, meaning I still have discomfort, but mostly forget about the disease.
Thanks a bunch,
before 2004


Hi Ken

...You made my day !!!...My brother told me about this months ago and he gave yours [your zapper] to a friend...and this person had a lot of things happen to him ..I'm trying to remember a was his Arthritis (he's 48 or younger) cleared up totally...he can finally move his fingers without it hurting...he also had very very bad sinus problems...those are totally gone...I know there were many more things, but his face looks so much younger also... that person also gave this to some others and so did my brother...and one person had Crohn's Disease...that is now gone ...another had a rash on her leg the size of a hamburg and they were going to go to U of M because no one could do anything about it...its gone...and this was a young girl...
Thanks for helping so many people...I hear story after story from my brother Bruce...he's helped so many people with it...
Thanks Ken
Dec. 1, 2004

Do the above testimonials from people with Crohn’s disease sound positive to me. How about you, David?

Is the single frequency Ultimate Zapper a relic? Not according to these folks. It didn’t take 2 frequencies for the 140 people submitting testimonials to my site to get remarkable results for a wide variety of illnesses, conditions and disease, including those of the skin. I note that you have a grand total of only 9 testimonials on your site. Three of those testimonials are one-liners.
Let’s look at other ways that I help people.

Have you ever heard of L’Hermitte’s sign? Do you know what it is? If you don’t have MS you can only learn about it from reading about it or as reported by others who have experienced it personally. L’Hermitte’s is a sign of MS that many people with MS experience. It is an electrical sensation, sometimes painful, which varies in intensity from person to person, that shoots through the body when the head is lowered to the chest. This electrical sensation is due to “lesions” on the spinal cord. I have discovered a way to eliminate this sign completely, and I have succeeded in eliminating L’Hermitte’s sign from my body. What is the implication of eliminating this sign? It is very significant because this calls into question the notion of lesions and the popular notion promulgated by the neurological profession that they are permanent and progressive. This also calls into question the notion of “auto-immune disease” which is a widely accepted explanation for many diseases including MS and Crohn’s disease that says that the body attacks its own cells thereby creating a unique form of pathology called “auto-immune disease” that is permanent and irreversible. I don’t believe this theory. The body never attacks its own healthy cells. There is no proof for this assertion. It is a groundless theory. The body’s immune system attacks toxins in the cells in an attempt to eliminate those toxins from the body. (An excellent example of this is the formation of fistulas in people who have Crohn’s disease). This also calls into question the notion of MS as a pathology that is inexorable, irreversible, progressive and, therefore, incurable. Has anyone else in the medical literature reported reversing Hermitte sign? I have not been able to find one other case of it being reported that L’Hermitte’s sign disappeared in a person with MS through any means, let alone the successful application of natural, non-invasive therapies. I consider this very remarkable. It was not my intention when I started these therapies to eliminate L’Hermitte sign. I had no idea that L’Hermitte’s was reversible because I had been living with it for 18 years. Eliminating it was the farthest thing from my mind. Thus, I was quite astonished when this process began and continued to a successful conclusion. I changed nothing else in my lifestyle, so the fact that it was due to these therapies is incontrovertible. Doubters will undoubtedly have an explanation for this, especially the neurological profession. They will probably dismiss it out of hand. They like to call these sorts of things “spontaneous remission” which makes everything sound so mysterious. Others who are not members of the neurology profession may find the same kind of explanation for this, depending what ax they have to grind. But this does not change the truth one iota. Can you help people with these kinds of problems, David? Have you? Do you know them from the inside? Is this merely a “claim” I am making?

Some of the “pages” on my site comprise up to 150 book pages when you scroll down to read them. On your site 1 page usually means only 1 page. Maintaining my site and keeping the information up to date is a work in progress. My site is very information dense. There is a whole world of information on the site. Although I have not counted there must be nearly 1000 pages of health information on my site, if not more.

My site provides a wealth of information about illness and detoxification. Your site has very little information of interest or real worth for anyone suffering from any chronic illness. In fact, BUY MY ZAPPER is just about all you have to say on your site. Your site is an exercise in self-promotion, like your forum postings. I guess you’re too busy worrying about all those forums to make your site worthwhile reading. You say that My Recovery Protocol is not worth $44.95? Tell that to those it has helped, and to those who have saved thousands of dollars by reading it. Here is quote from the front page of my site:

“19 years ago I was flying blind when I embarked on my journey to recover from Multiple Sclerosis and Crohn's disease. I began looking beyond the medical system for answers because it was obvious the system was designed not to help people recover their health but to profit from their illness. Guided by intuition and determination I recovered my health after a 7-year journey of blood, sweat and tears. I wrote My Recovery Protocol so others could benefit from what I had learned. It is a unique guide which I continue to revise it as I gain new insight into the recovery process. Over the years many people have been helped by my book. I hope it will continue to be a useful guide for those who are as determined to recover their health as I was back in 1989.”

According to you I am merely making a “claim” when I talk about helping people. Only a fool or an ignoramus would make such a statement after examining the facts. You use the A-word, arrogant, in your message about me. Have a look in the mirror some time. The information in my book has helped many people regain their health, even come out of wheel chairs and even avoid surgery. You say that $44.95 is too much to pay for this information? What do all the drugs cost that people take, what does their health insurance cost, what do all the visits to alternative practitioners cost, what do all the vitamins and supplements cost, what do all the herbs and potions cost, what do all the alternative therapy sessions cost? What does your zapper cost, what does your user’s manual cost, what do your overpriced footpads cost? They cost $44 which is nearly as much as a copy of My Recovery Protocol. Good grief!! $44 for a pair of footpads? How can you charge ask such amount for just a pair of footpads from all those people who cannot work due to illness?

Give it up, David. You are doing the readers of this forum a grave disservice. The information you have to offer on Multiple Sclerosis is worth less than the cost of sheet of toilet paper. You have the gall to pretend to know something about MS and to be helping people with MS, and you have the gall to take a potshot at me about My Recovery Protocol when I have been helping people with Multiple Sclerosis for nearly 12 years. Do everyone with MS a favor. Get out of the helping business.
I have only received one complaint about the price of my book to date. That complaint has come from someone who never even read it. That person is you, David. Not one single customer or prospective customer has every complained about its price. On the contrary, everyone who has bought My Recovery Protocol has been very pleased with the valuable information it provides. I post some of their comments on my site.
If the New Pathways article was a report on the effectiveness of the ParaZapper for people with MS, which it clearly is not, then one would expect to see information on your site to corroborate this success. Your customer surveys would be the place to look. But when one looks at your customer surveys there is no mention at all about MS, not one word. This is very interesting for an implied claim regarding the article in New Pathways. The emperor has no clothes.

On your site you state (your spelling mistake):

“Among customers responding to our surveys, of those who used ParaZapper ™ CCa with copper paddles and augmentation footpads to help with Multiple Sclerosis, most reported good ( better than 50 percent inprovement ) results.”

But your survey itself does not show MS having been surveyed! In any case, because there are no specifics given about what “good results” there are I must suspect your report. Like most of what you say, it should be taken with a grain of salt.
How many people who could not walk because of MS have you helped get back on their feet, not only walking but also running, and for free, or for $44.95, or for any price? The problem with you, David, is your pride and your ignorance and your arrogance. At least if you could tell your personal story, and if it were significant, then you would have the credibility of a person who had actually accomplished something significant in the world of incurable, chronic illness. The fact is that you peddle dubious and often false information in order to sell your products.

MS and Crohn’s disease were a life-and-death struggle for me and I overcame them. You didn’t. Do you think any rational person would believe that you know more about these diseases than I do? I did not survive by accident. This fact, I believe, brings my credibility to the top of the heap. Your lack of experience in these matters places your credibility in the bargain basement. The evidence is here for all to see. You can parade your authority-bound statements all over this forum, but you will never possess the understanding that comes through the bitter experience that I lived through. You are in the novice category when you step into this forum and talk about these matters in the way you do and in the way that you portray them on your site. It is obvious that you never faced these diseases in the real flesh. So, the best you can do it quote other people. Go ahead, David, tell me you know more about MS and Crohn’s disease than I do. Go ahead, make my day.


Read about his criminal past, including his convictions and incarceration, at

For personal gain you have chosen to ride on the coat-tails of a convicted criminal, David. What we’re talking about here are not simple misdemeanors or minor transgressions but the criminal actions of a clearly criminal mind.

You vigorously support Kevin Trudeau the infomercially-famous felon, convicted of fraud and larceny, who just happens to be a health-know-it-all, like you. What is your motive in supporting Kevin Trudeau? I suppose that making money from being mentioned in his book has nothing at all to do with the support you have shown Kevin Trudeau. David, I would never consort with convicted criminals no matter how much money there might be in it for me. If someone wanted to mention my name in their book, that would be up to them. But it would be up to me whether I chose to take it any further. You have chosen to take it much further with Kevin Trudeau, which shows how unscrupulous you are and how dubious your sense of morality is. I am glad that I don’t have your sense of morality.


“[Kevin] Trudeau has criminal convictions in the early 1990s for fraud and larceny.” “On November 19, 2007, he was found in contempt of court again for making "patently false" claims in his weight loss book.” Using the word “cure” as liberally as Kevin Trudeau does poses definite risks. It requires the highest level of scientific proof, in my opinion.

Of course, you could find someone of higher standing to associate yourself with in the health area if you wanted to. But since you profit from your association with Kevin Trudeau I can understand your desire to publicize your link with him and to support him. You motive, of course, is money. The problem is that you have thereby lowered whatever credibility you had on this forum quite a few more notches. It appears that Mr. Trudeau learned a lot from his incarceration. “After serving time for criminal activity in the early nineties as detailed below, Trudeau partnered with his former cell mate and they joined Nutrition for Life, a multi-level marketing firm, where he was very successful. However, he and his partner were sued by the Illinois Attorney General for allegedly running a pyramid scheme and recruiting abuses.”

“In 1990, Trudeau posed as a doctor in order to deposit $80,000 in false checks, and in 1991 he pled guilty to larceny. Trudeau had used the credit cards of eleven customers of the mega memory product to fraudulently charge approximately $122,735.68. He spent two years in federal prison because of this conviction”.
And this is the person you not only choose to continue to associate yourself with but who you defend vigourly.

Kevin Trudeau indulges in the same practices as you: he loves making unsubstantiated claims:

“One of the major complaints about Trudeau's infomercials is that he makes only vague references to scientific studies, making them impossible to cross-check for accuracy. The same criticism exists for the anecdotal evidence he presents in his infomercials. He does not mention names of people who have been “cured” by his methods. For example, he tells a story in an infomercial about "a friend from England" who came to his house and complained of heartburn. He also references a study done on the antidepressant qualities of St. John’s Wort to two prescription medications. He claims that the media reported St. John's Wort was "proven ineffective in study," but critics say that none of the medicines tested were effective at combating depression.
Critics say that by not referencing studies to substantiate claims, Trudeau gets into a conflict with the FTC. The infomercials suggest that these subjects will be addressed further in the book, but critics don't believe this. Readers of his book are often referred to his website to find Trudeau's suggested natural cures, where a fee must be paid for its use.”

Here is a quote from Kevin Trudeau’s website about Multiple Sclerosis:


“Multiple sclerosis, or MS, is an autoimmune disease that progressively impairs the central nervous system. The body`s immune system attacks the protective insulation of nerve fibers, known as myelin, causing a buildup of plaques and the eventual scarring and hardening of multiple nerve fibers. This process is known as sclerosis, hence the name of the disease. Once nerve pathways become damaged, nerve impulses direct muscle movement to slow down or to stop altogether.

MS usually strikes between the ages of 15 to 60, with most cases occurring between 20 and 40 years of age. It affects women twice as often as men, and is most prevalent in the northern United States, Canada, and upper Europe, where the climate tends to be temperate. Overall, an estimated 350,000 Americans suffer from MS, which is considered to be incurable by conventional physicians, who also have little understanding about its causes.

As the buildup of plaque scars or strips the myelin sheath away from nerve fibers, nerve transmission becomes impaired, and the symptoms of MS begin to appear. They include loss of muscle control, problems with balance and gait, blurry or double vision, chronic pain, chronic fatigue, heightened sensitivity to heat and cold (especially heat, which can worsen other symptoms), and painful tingling sensations in the hands and/or feet. In advanced cases, patients can experience difficulty speaking, spastic movements, and weakness in the arms, hands, legs, and/or feet. Full or partial paralysis can also occur, and severe fatigue can make normal activities extremely difficult to carry out. Urinary incontinence or a frequent need to urinate can develop. In some cases, MS patients need to use a wheelchair; although in many cases, patients are able to continue living and working as before, but with increasing degrees of difficulty. A rarer symptom of MS is alexia, a sudden inability to understand written language.

MS tends to go into remission and then flare up again, intensifying and worsening with each episode. In some cases the progression of MS is swift, leading to serious degeneration within a few months or years, whereas others may experience less severe attacks that can occur on and off over many decades. No two cases of MS are exactly alike, making effective treatment extremely difficult. For this reason, it is essential that proper individualized treatment begin as early as possible following the initial appearance of MS symptoms.

Although conventional medicine claims that multiple sclerosis is caused by demyelination (the breakdown of the myelin sheath caused by the buildup of plaques), holistic health practitioners maintain that there are many other potential causes, as well. This view is strengthened by the fact that major symptoms of MS can be present even when there is little myelin damage; and, in some cases, major dymelination only produces minor symptoms. What follows is an overview of the other most common potential causes of MS.

There are natural cures for Multiple Sclerosis that do not involve the use of pharmaceutical drugs. They involve restoring the biochemical balance of the body, and making dietary and lifestyle changes designed to improve one's general health.”
I don’t see the word toxicity mentioned once by Kevin Trudeau. I don’t see the word mercury mentioned once. He holds out the promise of “natural cures” related to “dietary and lifestyle changes”. What a crock of horse manure. And this is the person you champion as a health-knight on shining armor? Give me a break, David. I don’t hear you complaining about the prices Kevin Trudeau’s is asking people to pay for this kind of worthless information on his site. I hear you complaining about how much I am charging for the very valuable information people receive when they purchase My Recovery Protocol (which includes free follow-up and free consultation priveleges) for $44.95 or $25, depending on their other purchase choices on my site, information which, if I had had it in 1989, would have saved me hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical costs and lost pay over a period of 7 years, never mind the years of suffering I would have avoided. The price of My Recovery Protocol is too high? I have given this information free to countless people over the years. How about your ParaZappers, David, and your manuals and your footpads? Are you giving them away free to everyone who says they cannot afford it? How about the scam-artist Kevin Trudeau and his prices? How about his Autographed Copy of Original Natural Cures for $100.00. No problem there, eh?

Become a Monthly Member of Kevin Trudeau’s site and get $9.95 billed monthly. That’s nearly $120 a year. No problem there either, eh?

Read about Kevin Trudeau’s dishonest business practices at

where people who have been cheated through his payment system go online to blow the whistle on him. This is the person you are defending? Kevin Trudeau has 9 testimonials on his site, the same number as you have on your site. And the anti-Kevin Trudeau site has probably hundreds of testimonials against him. That’s no problem for you, eh? According to you the big problem in the alternative health field is the $44.95 or $25 I charge for My Recovery Protocol. What a hypocrite you are, David.

You go out of your way to defend someone who is has been convicted of fraud and larceny. You say he has some good things to say. Anything of value he has to day can easily be found elsewhere. Even the worst people have something good to say occasionally. Even John Gotti probably said “I love you” to his wife and kids a few times. Did that make him a good guy? The fact that you associate yourself with Kevin Trudeau can only be explained by the fact that you profit from that association. There is no other possible reason that anyone in their right mind with a normal morality would ever do so. Your association with him has, by your own admission brought a lot of phone calls from people who read about you in his book, and that has brought you a lot of money. But, in the process, you threw away any integrity you may have had when you cast your vote for Kevin Trudeau in what can only be seen as a choice based on opportunism. You can tech talk all you want on this forum, you can pontificate all you want, you can criticize me, my zapper, my site and my work all you want, but it all comes tumbling down in the face of the criticisms I have leveled against you in this forum, not the least of which is your association with Kevin Trudeau.

You could have chosen any one of a number of people to show support for who are saying some of the same things that Kevin Trudeau has plagiarized, but you chose this terrible character because you profit by your association with him.


Here are some typical negative comments by third parties on about Kevin Trudeau’s book and how he does business. They reflect my own thoughts. Are you going to blame the predatory pricing on Kevin Trudeau’s website on people working for him, like you do for the illegal billing he practices on his site?

“The book is everything but not exactly what you would expect to get judging by the title. Kevin Trudeau constantly refers to his website where one supposedly would get full explanation for various topics. The only problem is that no one can get any explanation free of charge. Once you land at the website, you will realize that there is almost nothing that you could learn unless you come up with some kind of payment! Otherwise the book has some valid and valuable information. However, there are many other books at the market that discuss natural cures, stress reduction methods, proper nutrition, proper breathing techniques, yoga, etc. They are often not only much more informative but at the same time also cheaper. Just look around Amazon and you will find them. I find the best alternative to "Natural Cures" are books by Mikhail T. such as Cure the Incurable, or a longevity book titled Can we live... They are absolutely noncommercial and full of useful info. In addition, their website is not only free of any charges but also provides some free ebooks on other health issues.”



“I honestly don't feel this book is worth the paper it's written on for the following reasons:

1. Every other page refers you to his website and reads like an infamerical on TV. I would expect more detail from a book with 500 plus pages.

2. He keeps refering you to his website which you have to pay more money for. This information should have been in the book you paid good money for.

3. In the places where he does give truthful information it's common sense. Or at best you can get the information for free on the internet through a quality website like WEB MD.
The truth is there are better resources out there than this book. There are professionals within their fields that have written tremendous resources that are available to you. YOU The Owner's Manual by Dr. Roizen and Dr. oz just to name one. I applaud anyone who takes an active role in their own health, and research on your part is vital.

In the end I feel this book is misleading and a waste of your time and money.”



If you absolutely must take a look at this, as I felt compelled, check it out at the public library first. Very, very poor content. He offers simpleton solutions of his own that are absurd and he's simply not an authority on the topics he mentions, like how to handle spam.

This may be a rude awakening for the author, but sounds like he's into that so here goes:

If you're going to compile a book based upon interviewing others, step up to bat and offer their credentials and quotes and reference their works, not your website in every other paragraph, and your "thoughts." You are not the authority, and no one wants to read your `thoughts.' Package those in an essay book or other format, if you like, but you're putting too many eggs in one basket, and yours are rotten.

If you're going to knock everything and everyone under the sun for advertising their products, stop advertising yours in every paragraph, too. Otherwise shut up.

And if you hate the USA so much, we'll all be more than happy to see you go. Don't let the door hit you on the way out, or `gasp' I'm sure there'd be a book about it from you to let everyone know....sigh......along with all your self promotions in every paragraph. ...

Readers: note this is worth all negative stars, but Amazon does not have that option. Do not buy, is my advice. If you must check it out, do that with a library card and on the spot, because after even just two minutes of glancing through any topic and you'll place it back on the shelf. Pure garbage. There are no cures listed here, just pure junk and links to his cure website.”
David, your self-acclaimed helper role on is a self-serving one, like Kevin Trudeau’s self-proclaimed role in the world of health-helpers. Let’s examine your link to Mr. Trudeau a bit further, and how you are similar to him.
Let’s examine some of the statements you make on the Kevin Trudeau forum:



>- The man took lots of info you could get anywhere (this site for example) and is making a killing off of it,

DAVID ETHEREDGE (PARAZAPPER) (your spelling mistake):

“Sound like you may be upset that he beat you to it?

Sorry, but I can not agree with you. Much of the information that he published may be common to some of the more actively involved people on Curezone but to many this book is full of revelations.

I bought the book and I am glad that I did. I found it excellently prepared and written although somewhat repetetive at times.”



“So do I understand that you are saying that he should not be well rewarded for his efforts?

I have seen a lot of authors on the curezone by other names. As far as I can tell, they all get the same royalties from their books and make money from their websites.

As far as I can tell, Kevin has done a tremendous job of letting the world know about some serious problems. The truth is that he has reached many people that no one has reached before and he has successfully opened the eyes of many who had their heads in the sand (or somewhere).

I only find it sad that some have not pulled their heads out yet.”
POSTER: >- it's the same stuff you can get here on Curezone

DAVID ETHEREDGE (spelling mistakes unedited):

“Yes, I agree with this, but have you considered how few people even know that the CureZone exists? Kevin has reached millions of those.

As a note, I have received far more calls from Kevin's reference to one of my sites than I ever have from the Curezone. I do not protect him for this reason except that the numbers tell me that he is very effective in getting the message across.

His infommercials have awakened millions to the flaws in the US medical system and the FDA, FTC, AMA, etc.

Fair credit where credit is due.

One last note. I have been active on the curzone for years and was a lurker long befor that. I bought Kevin's book anyhow and still learned from it despite of all that is available on the CureZone and other internet sites.

Perhaps, if you read it completely through, you might learn something too.
POSTER: >- Shouldn't you critics shift some the criticism to the actions of the FDA and the FTC?


“I would suggest that most of these individuals are plants that support the AMA, FDA, etc.

I can vouch personally for the statements presented by Kevin Trudeau. Ater my product was listed in his book, my business and house was raided by the FDA along with about 15 to 20 officers.

In the process of aal this mess the FDA violated my constitutional rights at least 5 to 7 times.

The DA refused to prosecute and had them send a letter which is what I had told them that they should have done to begin with.

I receive dozens of calls every week from people who had read Kevin's book and were surprised how much they gained from it. In comparison, many of the individuals (commonly referred to as trolls) who post antagonistic remarks here have not actually read his book. Most are only here at the behest of the medical mafia to cause disruptive influences.

The crimes that Kevin had done in the past and which he freely admits to, pale incomparison to the constitutional abuses of the FDA.”

[Ken Presner: I guess this classic rationalization lets Kevin Trudeau off the hook. The greater crime negates the lesser crime? What about the current illegal practices of Kevin Trudeau? There are only exculpatory statements from you regarding these. Take my advice, David, retire. Your defense of Kevin Trudeau based on your assertion that thousands of people have learned things through his books they would not otherwise have known is a stupid and groundless claim. It is simply one more of your inane, groundless assertions based on your personal opinion and nothing more. Your statements have obviously been skewed by the financial gain you have reaped from your association with Kevin Trudeau. What you are saying is tantamount to saying “John Gotti contributed to the SPCA so he couldn’t be all that bad a fellow and he is worthy of our defense and admiration for his selflessness. As a result of his selflessness there are a lot more dog kennels in the world that would not have been built had he not offered his support to that noble of pet institutions, the SPCA.” This shows how poor your sense of judgment is, David, and the sad state of your morality, not to mention your lack of skills in even basic logic.]

Here is the link to the Kevin Trudeau complaints page related to his infomercials only:

As you can see there are 32 pages which detail 634 complaints, and counting, against Kevin Trudeau.

Typical of those complaints are the first two, which read as follows:

“9/21/2007 - David writes:

We ordered the book approx. 2 years ago. Was a waste of money at that time, but even more of a waste of money since we have had to pay for it several times over. We at first didn't notice the charge as we were not keeping very good track of the charges against our charge card. Dumb. Then several months ago we noticed a false charge on our charge card bill …”

9/19/2007 - Marya writes:

… I'm complaining about the product not being exactly what it claimed. Blatent false advertising. In the informercials, he blatently lies about what's in the books. First off, the 'cures' in the first 2 books include things like, stay away from Sugar if you want to loose weight, use Sweetener. Helpful stuff like that …”
And this is the person who is opening the eyes of thousands of people, according to you, and who is dispensing pearls of wisdom. This is a person who is worthy of being defended by you? Your complete lack of common sense, good judgment and morality makes one wonder about a whole slew of matters concerning your postings here, and your site.

Below is a compendium of positive statements you make about Kevin Trudeau with my comments that follow, in brackets.


This may be true, but at least K.T. has made the public far more aware of this than anyone else has. I receive lots of calls every week from people who have read Kevin's books and I never receive a negative comment about K.T. from any of them.
[Ken Presner: You don’t mention all the negative reviews of his book that are on Amazon and the anti-Trudeau site that publishes quotes from all the people he has cheated with illegal billing from his site, etc.]

So, lets talk statistics.

3000 complaints (actually, less than this) / 3,000,000 books sold (actually, far more) = 0.1 percent

Again, I want to point out that it would not surprise me that it was not K.T. who is bilking the customers but unscrupulous employees who get paid on comission. K.T. does not take your orders or credit card info.

[Ken Presner: What a beautiful example of the use of the double-negative. Your use of the English language leaves me breathless, David. “It would not surprise you that it was not…”, alas. Here are more exculpatory comments by David Etheredge on behalf of the ongoing criminal behavior of Kevin Trudeau. Why is it that honest businessmen don’t have these same problems, David, but people like Kevin Trudeau do? According to you this convicted criminal is the innocent victim and not the perpetrator of the next crime! Give me a break! This latest credit card fraud is the same kind of credit card fraud that sent him behind bars, where it looks like he may be heading again, if he keeps this up. By your exculpatory comments you sound like you want to make it a bit easier for this convicted felon to keep doing business in the way it does. He must be under a lot of stress. If he has some wayward employees working for him you have no words of admonition on this subject. You have clearly taken the side of the criminal, not the side of the victims. If I had a bunch of thieves working for me they would not last 24 hours. I would have them behind bars for their crimes. You have the sense of morality of an opportunist, David.]
Here’s a wonderful example of how you contradict Kevin Trudeau.
POSTER: >- How many cures do you know of?

I only know of one. The body's immune system. There are things that you can take to help the immune system and to assist in recovery, but otherwise, there are no known cures.

I have never heard of any real cure, least of all from professional medicine.
[Ken Presner: This is a perfect contradiction by David Etheredge of the title of Kevin Trudeau’s “Cures” book. If Kevin Trudeau has so many pearls of “cure” wisdom to impart to his readers they must be all lies if the immune system is the one real cure, eh, David?]

Speaking about pearls of wisdoms, here is a real pearl of wisdom from you on the same posting:


Vitamins do not cure scurvy, ricketts, etc. because if you stop taking them, the illness will return.

[Ken Presner: This is total nonsense, of course. It shows how you are completely unqualified to give health information. Scurvy is a disease caused by Vitamin C deficiency. As long as one has a minimal intake of Vitamin C one avoids scurvy. It is cured. Rickets is caused by Vitamin D deficiency. It is cured by Vitamin D. Vitamin and mineral deficiencies are usually easily cured when the substance that is lacking is introduced into the diet or by supplementation. Once again, we see that you are severely logic-challenged, David. Deficiency “diseases” are completely different from chronic diseases that are caused by toxicity. Extracting toxins is a lot more difficult, in most cases, than adding nutrients to solve the problem of nutritional deficiencies. Your professional credentials cannot save you, David.]


Finally, you lower yourself to the bargain basement of this forum by the sad tactic of taking cheap shots and pot shots.

David Etheredge:

“Good Grief! $40 for an e-book ????”

Ken Presner:

What an inane comment, David. An e-book is a real book. The content is the same as a book on the stands. In fact, many books on the stands are also e-books. I don’t hear you railing against Kevin Trudeau for the $100 he charges for an autographed copy of his “Cures” book, or for the $9.95 a month (Good Grief!!! That’s nearly $120 a year) that he charges for being a member of his site with all its second-hand and clearly worthless information disguised as pearls of wisdoms that he disseminates, defended by you who profits from your association with him. All that’s ok by you, but $44.95 for My Recovery Protocol ($25 with a zapper purchase, including free follow-up consultation privileges) merits a Charley Brown “Good Grief” from you. What a hypocrite you are!

David Etheredge (from the current posting):

“That is the last thing that someone suffering from something like MS needs to do is pay out that kind of money when they can't even work.”

Ken Presner (my response):

Well now, on top of deciding what people with MS need to do, this really shows your ignorance about Multiple Sclerosis. Most people with MS are not incapacitated. They are still working!
Your warped sense of morality, motivated by nothing but competitiveness, has turned something fundamentally helpful into something bad. I don’t think there’s any help for you, David. What could possibly be wrong about helping people at a very small fraction of what it would otherwise cost them in their search for valuable information? This is what happened to me and countless others. It cost me hundreds of thousands of dollars, including over seven years of lost earnings, to find the answers I needed to have in order to be able to recover my health. I put that information in my book. It is the only such resource in the world that exists for people suffering from MS and Crohn’s disease that I am aware of. Certainly Judy Graham’s book on MS called “Multiple Sclerosis, a Self-Help Guide” must be classified as worthless, not worth the price of a single sheet of toilet paper, yet I do not hear you complaining about the waste of nearly $30 spent on it by people who “cannot even work”, according to you. It is an insult when you say that My Recovery Protocol is not worth the sum of $44.95.What about the sums (still) illegally extracted by Kevin Trudeau on his website by illegal billing, which you excuse by saying that is probably the result of the action of his wayward employees on commission? Why don’t I and the other honest business people and website owners have these same problems, I wonder? There are thousands of people lining up to complain about the convicted felon, Kevin Trudeau, yet there is only one person, you, lining up to complain about me. The latter is far more important to you than the former on this forum, according to you, probably because I have had a negative impact on your image and on your business. I don’t hear you saying anything negative about Kevin Trudeau. On the contrary, you’d think he were a florist, he smells so good every time you talk about him.

What about the price of your zappers and the other products on your site? What about all those people who can’t work? There are millions of them out there, after all. Do you make them pay for your zappers or do you ship them free of charge? Why are your overpriced footpads worth $44 ($9 more than I charge for mine and I have to import them from the U.S., which you do not have to do) while My Recovery Protocol is not worth $44.95, according to you? Do you give your footpads away free of charge? What a hypocrite.

You charge $8.95 for your user’s manual. How can you possible justify that? You should add that cost to the cost of your zappers, but selling the manual which I would never even think of doing with mine manual, keeps the cost of your zappers artificially lower than their true cost, by $8.95. This a marketing ploy that you use to make it look like your zappers are cheaper than they really are. Why don’t you include the manual in the price of your zapper and offer it free of charge to all those who purchase it? That would be too honest for you. My instruction manual is free and it is also online. Of course it is not as long as yours, which is padded with commonplace fillers to make it appear book-size and therefore worthy of charging separately for it.

Most of the work I do is free of charge and it has always been free of charge. I often email my book free to those in need and there is a special offer on my site. The only complaint I have ever heard about it is not from anyone who has purchased My Recovery Protocol. In fact, the response to it has been overwhelmingly enthusiastic. The only objection I have heard about it is from someone who has never read it, a competitor, you.

This cheap shot is not the first time you have taken pot shots at my zapper. You falsely claimed in a snotty little posting on this forum that my alligator clips and footpads were cheap. The clips used to be stainless steel. They are now solid copper, and the footpads have always been of the highest quality solid copper, made in the U.S.A., as you advertize about your zapper. Made in U.S.A. is not good enough when it comes to me. When it comes to you it is transformed into an important feature, a huge asset. You hypocrite.

Here is another example of the David Etheredge’s penchant for taking pot shots at The Ultimate Zapper, from the long previous posting referred to, above. The observations and comments are those of a third party:

“Ken Presner:

Here is another pointed criticism of David Etheredge by this same forum poster [a third party] in reply to another disparaging comment about The Ultimate Zapper made by David Etheredge in his inimical backhanded style:

A few sentences before this you said "As for Ken Pressner's ultimate zapper (which I tried with a 9v battery) I have not complained about it. I do not like it plugged into the wall though." In the same sentence as saying you have not complained about it you come out and complain about it. A properly engineered product that is plugged into the wall has not been shown to be more dangerous or ineffective then using a 9 volt battery but you have to take every opportunity to take shots at any other products in order to make the parazapper appear superior.”

You take another potshot at me when you accuse me of “hype” when I talk about The Ultimate Zapper on my website. The fact is that no other zapper maker in the world provides the powerful documentation for their zapper that I do for The Ultimate Zapper. This is the truth, borne out by the facts. You provide hardly any evidence at all on your site to support your zapper. Everyone who compares sites can easily see the difference. You complain that your lawyers have hand-cuffed you. You hide behind them, using this lame excuse to support your lack of documentation. The FCC tried to shut me down years ago. I have continued to stand up to the FCC, Health Canada, the FDA and The ADA all through the years. My site is more outspoken than ever and I’m still here in the thick of the battle while you are busy hedging your statements and trying to drum up business by dominating the forums. The truth is that you have been hand-cuffed by your own ineptness. If it weren’t for Kevin Trudeau you’d be sitting in the bleachers of the zapper world. I have done very well without the likes of a Kevin Trudeau supporting me, and I never would have accepted that support had it been offered, let alone supported the likes of him in return. I note that you have been accused of “hype” many times on this forum. Please read the posting, above, submitted to this forum by a third party. I am not the only one on this forum who has observed that the emperor has no clothes. I am not the only one on this forum to have observed that the emperor is a hypocrite.


David, your attitude on this forum shows, first and foremost, a fundamental lack of respect. You regularly patronize everyone you do not agree with, including me. A person genuinely concerned for the welfare of others would never show the kind of attitude that you do here, which is obviously motivated by competitiveness. Snotty, snide, belittling, arrogant, sarcastic and patronizing are the words that first come to mind to characterize your comments on this forum. You are proud, controlling and manipulative, deceptive and dishonest. You do not like any opposition. You have abandoned the pretense of being an objective observer on the forum. You now talk about prices openly in order to convince people of the value of your over-priced zappers. You now openly take pot shots at my site. You pride prevents you from admitting mistakes. You cannot even admit making spelling mistakes, let alone more serious mistakes. You refuse to own up to the blatant contradictions you make on this forum and on your site, and you refuse to admit the truth of my analysis of your modus operandi on this forum, the fact that you ignore what you do not wish to reply to, that you choose to cut and paste replies to eliminate the trace of unpleasant truths, and that you pass off personal opinions as truth, with no substantiation for the many assertions you make.

Your “Time for readers to weigh in?” posting was the highlight of last year’s postings because it revealed your deluded sense of self-importance on the forum. Your attempt to martial support from readers fell like a dead cat on the forum floor. Your call to arms to the followers you imagine lurking in the wings to defend you was a complete and total flop. Not a single reader responded. The readers of this forum are far more intelligent than you give them credit for, David, to your chagrin by now, I am sure. Your attempt to manipulate and dominate this forum, and other forums, has failed miserably despite the fact that you spend a lot of time posting everywhere, ceaselessly, in an attempt to keep your visibility as high as possible. This pathetic posting game of yours shows how deluded you are in thinking that you wield influence over the readers of this or any forum. If this were not true you would never have made your “Time for readers to weigh in” posting. In the end, silence spoke louder than words. The emperor has no clothes. This forum belongs to the people, not to you or me or anyone else, David.

It is also clear that you are intolerant of criticism. Your snooty little comments, such as “… I’m not the only one …”, which I mock in this posting, in case you didn’t notice, reveal a lot about where you are really coming from. Your ignorance of health matters is becoming increasingly noteworthy here. Your motivation is simply money, and that is all. If it were more than money you would be very careful about the health-related statements that you make. All of your health-related activity here is mere pretense.

I must note that you are very casual about how you use the English language in your postings and on your website. You are very sloppy in your English usage and your spelling. More importantly, you use the English language to deliberately distort the meaning of various issues I raise here, on an ongoing basis, as I pointed out earlier in this posting. Your sloppy spelling can be excused, but your attempts to deliberately distortion the truth in order to manipulate people cannot be excused.


Here is a scathing indictment about you and your ParaZapper made by a third party, “darkgatherer” on curezone, complete with the accusation of “hype” made against you:

Anyone truly concerened about the health of people would not engage in taking shots at others in order to sell a product. Attempting to always belittle every other zapper that is even brought up in discussion is a sad statement. I think its great when a user of a product says "hey this worked for me" but to actually have someone with a finacial intrest in the sale of the product to be attempting to promote their product to sick people is just the same as what the drug companies do, with doctors as their agents usually.”

“You always say that the parazapper is not the average zapper and I was interested to find out what made it better and I have seen absolutely nothing in the specs. that make it anything more then the average zapper. It has a little more current then some but less then others...the frequencies that they use are widely available among other zappers. In fact there is absolutely nothing that is innovative about the parazapper products except the hype.”

“There are many excellent zappers that have made their reputation based on effectiveness and not on a sleazy sales pitch. If your zapper can stand on its own reputation then let it do so and don't push its use in every question asked by anyone about anything. I'm not one of these fans of the $10 zapper (in fact i think its a little weak) but it annoys me how parazapper comes on here and attempts to elevate his product above all others and its just sad that he so jealous to see even $10 dollars go to another zapper maker. In fact I applaud the zapperplans people for trying to make zapper that anyone can afford by selling so close to what it cost to make.”

“When we talk about effectiveness, showing the wave form as evidence of greater effectiveness is meaningless without any real hard data that shows that a particular wave will be that much more effective and we have no such evidence for anyone’s zapper. I'm still waiting for a similar comparison (as was done between the zp zapper and parazapper) between the ultimate zapper(or the terminator, standard clacrk zapper) and parazapper. He was very quick to post the results against the zp zapper, where are the comparisons to the other big boys? Without having made done these comparisons any claims made to be "not just the average zapper" are without any backing.”

“Testimonials from customers are wonderful but they don't show that any other zapper wouldn't have given them the exact same or better results and are therefore meaningless in a discussion or comparison of effectiveness. If people like their $10 dollar zapper and they are getting the results they desire then let them use it without being harassed (even about the instruction sheet, c'mon) for mentioning it. They are in a different position, they are users NOT the ones who profit financially from its sale.”

“Any other zapper that is mentioned on this forum is immediately attacked by parazapper as being inferior when many of these products produce the identical output. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE DESIGN OF THE PARAZAPPER THAT PUTS IT ANYWHERE ABOVE THE ORIGINAL CLARK ZAPPER BUILT IN A SHOEBOX! It is based on the same fact there haven't been any significant advances in the zapper since the original design was published. So whether you use the original design or one of the many based on it it really doesn't make much of a difference, none of them are far superior as some would claim. Please don't be taken in by these profiteers, save your money by making your own zapper or buying an affordable one and wait until some actual breakthroughs in the technology are made that move zappers to the next level (the parazapper as it is now has not done this at all).”

“Parazapper lurks in here and jumps on anyone who asks a question about their serious health issue in order to pounce on them and give them his sales pitch. I don't see Hulda Clark , or Don Croft or anyone else lurking in here trying to push their products, maybe its because they allow their products to stand on there own. I'm seriously waiting for the superbowl commercial this year for the parazapper with Britney spears lol. Anything 2 a make buck.”

There are people with serious health problems who come here for the objective help of others, not a sales pitch. Someone needed to finally say what so many are thinking in this forum.”

There is only one statement that I disagree with in the above posting, “…there haven't been any significant advances in the zapper since the original design was published…” It is clear that The Ultimate Zapper has a number of advances that make it clearly superior to all the other zappers. People can read about those advances on the front page of my site at

Otherwise, I agree completely with the person who posted this message on the forum.
David Etheredge’s reply to this above posting is pathetic at


It includes the following inane comment (complete with his spelling mistake): “Even the worst products in existance can find some good testimonials to publish.” This is typical of the twisted logic and false implications that characterize ParaZapper’s postings. He cannot say even something positive when it is clear and obviously merited. He has to twist everything in ParaZapper’s favor.

Here is “darkgatherer’s” scathing reply to your inane comments at


“Ok now let me respond to the half truths and outright lies…

“At no point did I ever say it was wrong to run a business and make a profit, what I was criticizing was your overall sleazy method of attempting to lead sick people to your product in a forum where they should be able to get many opinions and not one that is clearly biased and suspect in the opinion of many on these forums. I don’t object to any company whether its parazapper or Don croft making money but I don’t see croft here and yes obviously he does make a lot more then parazapper…clearly his product is able to stand on its own reputation and has gained wide appeal due to its effectiveness. If Croft were on this forum using your methods I would be saying the same thing to him because it has nothing to do with the amount of money made, it has to do with methods and false claims (which we will get to momentarily). So since it has nothing to do with money the hypocrisy you claimed to see is non existent. See in your own statements as follows…”

In one breath you say "we feel that testimonials are not a reliable source of information as they are one-sided. I have never seen a site that published a negative testimonial, but I can guarantee that they exist, even for the best products such as penicillin and aspirin."

in the next you say “We tell them what other customers tell us about what does work and what does not work when it comest to zapping.”

Followed later by “The CCa is only available from ParaZapper and it produces a distintively noticable difference in results according to our users”

Not according to any independent studies but “according to our users” even though you just stated that testimonials are unreliable.

“Now, either you don’t except testimonials as reliable or you base your statements on them, which is it? I think the hypocrisy is yours alone.”

“Its really ridiculous to claim that I haven’t read all your material just because you don’t like the conclusions that I reached from reading it (so every time you are about to write that I missed something, please refer to this sentence…I haven’t missed a page on your site, my conclusions are just not the ones you would like me to draw). I know the site inside and out because I always read your statements and wanted to learn about the parazapper and it seems I have learned quite enough to know that it is nothing special.”

Now lets discuss this “innovative technology” lol…

From the parazapper site “The CCa has an internal device that senses the current flowing out to the body and if it is not sufficient, the circuit adapts to increase the current until the correct level is reached ( if possible ).”

Followed directly by “Also, because it can deliver a stronger signal, it has a control for you to adjust if it gets too strong.”

“Why would one need to adjust the current if the device is able to adjust to apply “correct level” automatically? It should not be needed because it couldn’t get too strong if it is sensing the amount of current and applying it exactly. If a zapper outputs the correct current in the first place then this is a pretty meaningless feature and in the contradicting statements just noted it makes one wonder if it even works as advertised. This is not a advanced technological advance it is a smoke and mirrors technique to attempt to make the zapper standout in the croud, kind of like Crofts use of pennies for electrodes.”

“Lets get to the next technological advancement…

“Footpads may be more effective but that is still not a reason to buy the parazapper, as footpads can be connected to ANY GOOD ZAPPER, can they not? Since they can be connected to any good zapper and bought for a few bucks at any hardware store, they are not a reason to claim that the parazapper is better zappers because you offer them as an accessory. That’s like saying one ipod is better then the other mp3 players because it has headphones, when one can easily connect them to any mp3 player. So the headphones are not a reason to buy an ipod. They are an accessory not a part of an advanced device. Let me inform you that copper pads made in the shape of feet are not a “technological advancement” LOL…it is another smoke attempt to make it seem as though it is vastly different when the truth is it is not. Footpads are just another means of applying the output to the body. What if I came out with a zapper that had an entire copper suit that one could wear, would that be a technological advancement because it is a ble to apply the signal to more areas of the body? If you are just attempting to apply the signal to as much of the body as we can then my copper suit would be far better then footpads lol. But in no way would my patented copper zapping suit be a technological advancement or make the zapper more then the average zapper any more then footpads. Nothing mentioned on the parazapper site or in your response qualifies (in the mind or any sane person) as a “major innovation.” A major innovation would be to truly discover the mechanism at work in effecting the bodies when zapping is concerned and finding another method (other then electrical current) to apply a treatment with a near 100% success rate. That would be a major innovation. But there is still a debate about what the mechanism for healing is and there is no conclusive proof as to which side of the debate is correct.”

“If your only selling point is the better instruction manual then that is a sad statement to make…there are many free, thorough, and comprehensive zapping articles on the net which require no purchase from a ill person who needs there money for other”

You said “I am seeking to protect the person who needs a good zapper from ignorance.”

“The only ignorance you are protecting people from is the ignorance of where provide there credit card numbers to purchase the parazapper. Because that is the only product you provided such valuable info on. You say that you have tried a “dozen other zappers” as well… wow that’s an amazing coincidence that you just happen to work for the company of the best zapper you’ve ever tried. That is the definition of bias, is it not? Those who have only used one zapper may be limited in their scope but at least their experiences are not blatantly motivated by anything other then caring for others.”

“As for the $10 zapper, the chip may be inferior but if people who have used it are satisfied with the results they have received, then who are you to downplay their testimonials in favor of your own biased counter testimonial?”

I said “Any other zapper that is mentioned on this forum is immediately attacked by parazapper as being inferior when”

you said “Please provide the specific pages where this claim is made.”

A few sentence before this you said “As for Ken Pressner's ultimate zapper ( which I tried with a 9v battery ) I have not complained about it. I do not like it plugged into the wall though.”

“In the same sentence as saying you have not complained about it you come out and complain about it. A properly engineered product that is plugged into the wall has not been shown to be more dangerous or ineffective then using a 9 volt battery but you have to take every opportunity to take shots at any other products in order to make the parazapper appear superior.”

You said “There is not any other zapper out there with CCa technology built in, so they may produce a similar but not identical output.”

“No two zappers, even built by the same company, are going to produce the exact same output just because of the variations in individual parts so “similar” is about as close as one can get.”

You said “Even our shoebox zapper produces better results than the standard Clark zapper.”

“According to whom? I have not seen any competent independent lab studies showing this to be the case”

You said “If our customers were dissatisfied, you would be hearing from a lot of them here. You do not!”

“I have also never seen any customers praising your products either, so that is blatantly false/ flawed argument.”

You said “Based on the same circuit but with definite improvements. First, the chip that we use is far better.

“You in no way provide any info on how this chip is better in terms of its effect on a patient. You can not be so certain of its superiority as there is still the debate about what the mechanism is that is causing the positive effects on user’s health.”

You said “First, Dr. Clark does not have the time or you would see her here providing information.”

“Yes this is true, she would be giving info on her protocols not attempting to steer people toward a zapper manufactured for her profit. In fact as far as I know she does not have a line of zappers that she profits from.”

You said “From what I have seen, you definitly have presented a biased hypocritical viewpoint.”

“LoL, how to you ever call anyone biased…you have some nerve don’t you. I have no interests in the use or lack in of any product (so that rules out bias) and my statements have in no way been hypocritical (as I never objected to having business, just to disgusting methods of bias profiteers like yourself) but yours on the other hand have been clearly shown to be so.”

You said “I do not know what your problem is but I work 12 to 16 hours a day 6 to 7 days a week looking for improvements and trying to help people get better. I do know one thing though. You have not tried the ParaZapper CCa because if you had, you would not have written this.”

“Well if you are spending that much time trying to find improvements then it truly has not been a very fruitful search because their have not been any major improvements as I’ve said. Are you saying that no one who has used a parazapper product has sent it back or been dissatisfied with the results? You said earlier that there were negative testimonials. So I think those people, having used it would agree with what I wrote. So to say that no one who ever used the product would ever write anything critical is an absolute fallacy. I was opened to using the parazapper when I first came on this site but after seeing your sleazy methods and your blatantly unsupported statements, I wouldn’t spend one cent the parazapper products and think they should be ashamed of the way there product is being marketed.”

“The parazapper may be a good zapper (though I see nothing that makes it superior to the crowd) but the form of ambulance chasing that you engage in on this site reflects very poorly on the company and its product. If I were your employer you would be out on your ass and no longer be a “salaried employee.” I had to write this because it sickens me to see people who are sick and frightened, looking for help having to deal with people with vested interests.”
Here is David Etheredge’s inane reply at


which includes the following typically contradictory statement:
“…but my presence here is not to sell our particular product although I am certainly going to plug it …”


DAVID ETHEREDGE (from the previous posting):

“On your website, your-self promotion is as obvious as you are making yourself here. You extensively bash the competition with nitpicking and false claims. Your website postings about Dr. Lloyd's supposed admiration of your product are clearly incorrect. You refuse to accept third party evaluation because your smoke and mirrors would disappear in a poof. This puts all that you claim under suspicion.”

“BTW, I want to submit that your waveform does not produce even harmonics. It does produce 2 sets of harmonics but sadly, each of these 2 sets of harmonics are only capable of adding up to 100 percent of the available power. The total power can not exceed 100 percent. The second set of harmonics which is produced by the shorter down time might be close matching what the set of even harmonics might contain, but it is not even harmonics. Almost every zapper, by nature, produces 2 sets of harmonics unless the zapper signal is digitally created. The 555 does not allow for exact timing of the duty cycle to a pure perfect 50 percent. I believe that the perfect matching of harmonics as an odd / even set of frequencies would be produced by a 66.666666 % / 33.333333 % duty cycle setup so that the primary frequency of the second period is exactly twice that of the primary frequency of the first period. AK????”

“The only real advantage that I can see from your zapper is the 10.4 volts that is output because you use a wall adapter. The stabilized waveform producd by the output bypass capacitor has some advantage but we dumped it when we developed the CCa. What we found was that the capacitor provided a placebo effect in that the pulse felt stronger but the actual results decreased.”

KEN PRESNER (in response to the above):

Nitpicking and false claims? Are you saying there is no substance to my criticisms of your zapper, your site and you? You have to be kidding. The evidence is overwhelmingly in my favor, as this detailed posting shows, incontrovertibly.

First of all you state, “On your website, your-self promotion is as obvious as you are making yourself here.” Is sales promotion a crime. What in God’s name is a website for if not to promote your products? Do you mean that you don’t promote your products on your website? Do you mean that you do not promote your products on this forum and on about 20 other forums, which you have posted to for years? David, you a complete hypocrite.

You state “You extensively bash the competition with nitpicking and false claims.” What you really mean is that you feel uncomfortable with my pointing out quite extensively here and in my earlier posting the truth about the false claims you make. I have also pointed out the casual and sloppy work that is evident on your site.

You state, “Your website postings about Dr. Lloyd's supposed admiration of your product are clearly incorrect.” Are you are calling me a liar? The fact is that they are absolutely correct and true. They were cut and pasted as received from Dr. Mondo. S.’s report after he visited Dr. Loyd. The fact that you disagree with the content of that report is where you are really coming from, and the fact that it makes The Ultimate Zapper look good and the ParaZapper not so good, by comparison. This is what really irks, for sure. You have tried to tech talk your way out of this, inferring thereby that the quote is false because the information it contains is not correct. The fact is that the quote which refers to Dr. Loyd’s comments about The Ultimate Zapper is cut and pasted from Dr. Mondo S.’s email to me. You are trying to re-write history to make The Ultimate Zapper look bad and make the ParaZapper look good. That figures. That’s your modus operandi all over this forum.

You state, “You refuse to accept third party evaluation because your smoke and mirrors would disappear in a poof. This puts all that you claim under suspicion.”

Third party evaluation is a crock. It’s a red herring that I have responded to this in an earlier posting and that I will respond to once again here. What the hell are you talking about “claims”? The specs of The Ultimate Zapper are in the public domain and have already been verified. This whole issue of “third party evaluation” is a red herring. Spec evaluation has already been done. The specifications of my zapper and yours are in the public domain and can easily be compared. My zapper easily beats your zapper, hands down. As I have pointed out many times here, the only thing that matters is results, which you refuse to compare (hiding all but 9 of your testimonials away in an office file) because the results obtained by people zapping with The Ultimate Zapper are clearly superior. Now, that kind of evaluation I would agree to in a heartbeat. The testimonials are posted on my site for all to see. In don’t hide behind my lawyers. There is not a single one of the testimonials on your site that is remarkable, unlike the testimonials on my site. I suppose that you must be keeping your remarkable testimonials in your file for a rainy day, at the behest of your lawyers. If the results obtained with The Ultimate Zapper are superior to those obtained by other zappers, and they clearly are, then the specs, ipso facto must have produced those superior results. Its formula must therefore be superior. This is simple deductive reasoning, David, Logic 101. Inferior specs cannot produce superior results. Superior results cannot result from inferior specs. The amazing results produced by The Ultimate Zapper are posted on the testimonial archive on my site. Smoke and mirrors? Really? Do you mean that my customers are liars? This inane and ridiculous argument of yours just fell on the forum floor and I just heard the thud. Smoke and mirrors? You are the emperor of smoke and the emperor of mirrors. My advice to you is to stop smoking and take a look at yourself in the mirror.

It would take double blind tests and millions of dollars to accomplish what is really needed in order to test the comparative effectiveness of all major zappers scientifically. I would gladly submit my zapper to this kind of truly scientific, independent testing related to zapper effectiveness, the only testing that would provide meaningful data for all to see, testing done on a large scale with a methodology that was agreed upon by all participants.
Here is the link of double-talk and deception that you engage in when talking about the specifications of The Ultimate Zapper. You state “The only real advantage that I can see from your zapper is the 10.4 volts that is output because you use a wall adapter.” Of course you can see only one small advantage to my zapper. You cannot see the other 9 features because that would be embarrassing. They are what help make The Ultimate Zapper produce superior results: The all-positive pulses (nearly 100% duty cycle), the stabilized wave, the undistorted wave, electroporation, its superior harmonics, its food zappicator capability and its tooth zappicator capability. Not to mention two other features, the footpads and the lower frequency, which are the only features I can see that the ParaZapper offers. You just put your foot in your mouth, again, because when I offer footpads and a lower frequency they are not real advantages that are worthy of note, according to you. But if you offer those same features they make your zapper superior and certainly worthy of note on your site. Logic 101, David. Do you even think about what you write before you hit the keypad?

It appears that you do not understand the implications of the accusations you make. If you condemn the features of my zapper you automatically condemn the same features that your own ParaZapper offers. In addition, while it really does appear that you may have a high electronics and physics quotient you have a very low quotient when it comes to logic and reasoning, sadly. This is the reason why I was able to create a better zapper than you were able to create. You are caught in a trap of your own making, hoist by your own petard. Your hypocrisy is flagrant. You even take the trouble to make one more inane statement about The Ultimate Zapper, belittling the stabilized wave by referring to a placebo effect. Does that mean that the less square the wave under load the more effective it is, and the quicker it breaks down the better the results one can expect from it? This implication is totally contradictory to the basic principle of the square wave zapper invented by Dr. Hulda Clark. She stated that the zapper’s effectiveness is based on its square wave. This implication of your statement defies all logic because the square wave is the basis for the effectiveness of the zapper. You are caught in a trap of your own making. This points to the truth of what I talk about when I say that when one understands the concepts then the technical knowledge can be easily put to work to create the reality of that concept. This is not, after all, rocket science.

You and the Auto Zap are proof that getting caught up in technical matters while ignoring the basic concepts actually prevents you from producing a better zapper. You have lost the forest for the trees. You have lost the plot. You have neglected to note that some of the features The Ultimate Zapper offers are also offered by your own zapper. How is it possible that my zapper shares 2 of those features and goes far beyond yours, yet is inferior to yours? The results that users of The Ultimate Zapper have obtained for nearly 12 years show that your convoluted reasoning is obviously false. This is one more addition to the pantheon of lies about my zapper, my site, my work and me that you have posted to this forum.

David, there is a backfire effect that happens when you try to deceive people. People know what is genuine and what is not genuine. Only a foolish competitor would make the mistake of lying about me, my zapper, my site and my work in order to try to pull the wool over people’s eyes. Your claim to be telling only the truth on this forum is a farce. You have ended up discrediting yourself. Fortunately for you very few people will ever read this posting here. But just in case people may be looking for it I will be uploading this posting and my previous long posting, referred to above, to my site so that people will be able to find them easily.
I gracefully retire from this forum now. I have said everything that needed to be said. The two projects I am working on are taking all my time up.

So good-bye, one and all, and good luck!

Ken Presner


Here are 3 miscellaneous post-scripts that I find interesting.

P.S. # 1. David, you talk about Wayne Green of “magazine publishing fame” on your site on the technical information page, in very small print. If he is so famous why is it that you have to tell people he is famous? Why, because no one has ever heard of him. Not one in a million has ever heard of this small-time radio publisher, I am quite sure.

P.S. # 2. From the front page of your updated website: “The dual frequency zappers offered by ParaZapper™ are far better than any single frequency zapper, even better than those with higher voltage and higher duty cycle.” It looks my site has had an impact on your marketing. This is an obvious reference to The Ultimate Zapper which is the only zapper that offers both a “higher voltage and higher duty cycle”. Of course, there is no proof anywhere for this assertion.

P.S. # 3. From your site: “Batteries last longer in the ParaZapper™MX than other advanced units.” “ParaZapper provides a stronger output than many other zappers and uses less power from the battery thereby making the battery last longer.” I think this will come as a surprise to Arthur Doerksen of the Auto Zap. One of you two electrical engineers must be wrong and it’s certainly not Arthur Doerksen. I guess there are limits to the benefits of being an electrical engineer, David. I avoided the whole problem of batteries by developing The Ultimate Zapper as an AC adapter zapper.

Printer-friendly version of this page Email this message to a friend

This Forum message belongs to a larger discussion thread. See the complete thread below. You can reply to this message!


Donate to CureZone

CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with

Contact Us - Advertise - Stats

Copyright 1999 - 2023

21.313 sec, (15)