Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Ozonics

Status
Not open for further replies.
This should be fairly simple to test. Go find a bachelor group of bucks feeding in a beanfield. Setup in the beans the next night with a terrible wind. And film it.

If you can consistently get away with deer feeding downwind then it works.

Seriously if you documented this real good where you can visible see where the wind is headed and had a beautiful group of bachelor bucks feed thru at 60-70yds downwind without clearing the field. Then go post it on all the hunting forums you'd sell thousands of these before season. To me this would be considered solid evidence and I couldn't resist trying one.

BTW I did sell one of these to a fella last fall and he used it out of his shooting houses. Said on several occasions that he had deer downwind that didn't blow out of the field.
 
Last edited:
Read carefully between the lines

I can never understand why hunters are so afraid to use real science when it comes to testing are much more willing to trust a set up that has some many holes you can never know for sure.

Here's an example. Boiling points as it related to dryer temperature. When Scentlok published its science it tested EMA which has a boiling point of 96.8F which could easily be remover in a home dryer at a temperature of 150F. When Scent Blocker tested they used Hexane with a boiling point of 136F.

According to science a compound of say 230F could never be removed from carbon in a home dryer. Case closed according to science.
Case open because of advertising. paid endorsements.false claims (Actually I thought the court had ruled on that) Oh well they just arrived at the truth no sense listening to them. Actually its better to trust those who have something to gain from a product. Its called marketing ??? Actually I wish those who market would stick closer to the truth.

As for ozonics there is lots of scientific available to see the inheritent dangers for those who have health problems ( Lungs is mentioned by some in other discussions) When I read the report on ozonics it said a lot of mights and maybe could but if there was a "does" I missed it
 
Last edited:
I can never understand why hunters are so afraid to use real science when it comes to testing are much more willing to trust a set up that has some many holes you can never know for sure.

Here's an example. Boiling points as it related to dryer temperature. When Scentlok published its science it tested EMA which has a boiling point of 96.8F which could easily be remover in a home dryer at a temperature of 150F. When Scent Blocker tested they used Hexane with a boiling point of 136F.

According to science a compound of say 230F could never be removed from carbon in a home dryer. Case closed according to science.
Case open because of advertising. paid endorsements.false claims (Actually I thought the court had ruled on that) Oh well they just arrived at the truth no sense listening to them. Actually its better to trust those who have something to gain from a product. Its called marketing ??? Actually I wish those who market would stick closer to the truth.

As for ozonics there is lots of scientific available to see the inheritent dangers for those who have health problems ( Lungs is mentioned by some in other discussions) When I read the report on ozonics it said a lot of mights and maybe could but if there was a "does" I missed it


I'll chime in on a serious note here. Its not that most hunters are afraid of technology, hell, I use a range finder every once in awhile. Its not the technology aspect of the Ozonics at all. Its the fact that most people feel more accomplished as hunters when they kill a 160 inch plus buck on their turf on their terms. If Ozonics take human scent away, isn't that kind of taking away the edge that a mature deer has on us, the scent?

I know Todd will come back on here and say its not easy to kill mature deer, even without scent, and I agree, but I still want to go one on one with him, outsmart him on his turf, with the edge going to him, and I will feel much more accomplished as a hunter, knowing that I did that. If I get winded, hell, I get winded. Part of the game.

Todd, I hope you continue to kill deer, and without scent or getting winded. If Ozonics helps you kill mature whitetail, then hats off to you, but personally, I want to outsmart him on his time, turf, and everything in his favor. In the end, when I run an arrow through him, I will sit back and grin and think, "He had the edge, and I out did him." I know, I know, I'm just "one of those guys" who is not going to put the odds in my favor for a whitetail. I've always liked being the "underdog". :grin:
 
Earl E. November said:
Being fully dressed going to and from your stand, we are not leaving much if any human dander.. Now if you were running naked thought the forest, I would believe you would leave a fair amount behind

Honestly you're leaving alot of scent as you walk. You are constantly shedding what are called skin rafts. Constantly- by the millions. You can't see them, but they're there. Even if you're fully clothed you usually have some exposed skin, and that's all it takes.
 
I guess that's my point.. When I go to my stand from Oct on, probably the only exposed skin is that part of my head, a cap doesn't cover, Pretty much everything else is covered and if all of your cloths are Ozonic cleansed, the dander issue is pretty much eliminated and not an issue or a relatively small one, that could if necessary be handled with a mask or something.. Now July and August, you bet,, major issue
 
I know Todd will come back on here and say its not easy to kill mature deer, even without scent, and I agree, but I still want to go one on one with him, outsmart him on his turf, with the edge going to him, and I will feel much more accomplished as a hunter, knowing that I did that. If I get winded, hell, I get winded. Part of the game.

Todd, I hope you continue to kill deer, and without scent or getting winded. If Ozonics helps you kill mature whitetail, then hats off to you, but personally, I want to outsmart him on his time, turf, and everything in his favor. In the end, when I run an arrow through him, I will sit back and grin and think, "He had the edge, and I out did him." I know, I know, I'm just "one of those guys" who is not going to put the odds in my favor for a whitetail. I've always liked being the "underdog". :grin:

Great post Nanny!! I've followed thread with great interest and a lot of chuckles. I don't shoot the newest,fastest bow or the flatest shooting arrow or the bucket of blood broadhead or the scent free clothing in fact I don't own a trail cam. I scout late summer, set my stands and come Nov. when a buck I like walks by I take the shot. I love the surprise and the pure joy of rustling leaves in that pre shooting light time.

Been at this bowhunting thing a long time, seen some really great ideas and advances. If I was still hunting with that first compound(40% let off) I most likely couldn't pull a bow. Some have left me scratching my head and a few that scream "with enough money I can sell anything"

If any of these new products let you set in a tree 1 hour longer that's a good thing. So, if it's legal, hunt the way you want, use what you want and enjoy yourself.

My days in the tree are limited, my pack is lighter, my sits are longer and I LOVE every minute of it. With nothing to prove and no one to impress I'll just sit back and take in all of God's splendor in the greatest state and the most awesome 2 weeks of the year,Nov. 1-15.

I must admit I do miss the good old days. The pre texting can't wait to get home and call my buddy and tell him what I saw tonight days. I realize all things change but not all change is for the better.
 
Earl E. November said:
I guess that's my point.. When I go to my stand from Oct on, probably the only exposed skin is that part of my head, a cap doesn't cover, Pretty much everything else is covered and if all of your cloths are Ozonic cleansed, the dander issue is pretty much eliminated and not an issue or a relatively small one, that could if necessary be handled with a mask or something.. Now July and August, you bet,, major issue

That's what I'm saying Earl. If there is ANY exposed skin you're leaving a lot of scent. And clothes aren't going keep skin rafts in anyways because they are not airtight.
 
Great post Nanny!! I've followed thread with great interest and a lot of chuckles. I don't shoot the newest,fastest bow or the flatest shooting arrow or the bucket of blood broadhead or the scent free clothing in fact I don't own a trail cam. I scout late summer, set my stands and come Nov. when a buck I like walks by I take the shot. I love the surprise and the pure joy of rustling leaves in that pre shooting light time.

Been at this bowhunting thing a long time, seen some really great ideas and advances. If I was still hunting with that first compound(40% let off) I most likely couldn't pull a bow. Some have left me scratching my head and a few that scream "with enough money I can sell anything"

If any of these new products let you set in a tree 1 hour longer that's a good thing. So, if it's legal, hunt the way you want, use what you want and enjoy yourself.

My days in the tree are limited, my pack is lighter, my sits are longer and I LOVE every minute of it. With nothing to prove and no one to impress I'll just sit back and take in all of God's splendor in the greatest state and the most awesome 2 weeks of the year,Nov. 1-15.

I must admit I do miss the good old days. The pre texting can't wait to get home and call my buddy and tell him what I saw tonight days. I realize all things change but not all change is for the better.
couldn't agree more although I do admit I like texting in the tree I used to be able to kill two or three books in a week of all day hunting now with my circle of friends that are out hunting at the same time I don't know if I should shoot the buck that walks by or send out the mass text that I just saw one of course after I snap a cell phone pic of him
 
My days in the tree are limited, my pack is lighter, my sits are longer and I LOVE every minute of it. With nothing to prove and no one to impress I'll just sit back and take in all of God's splendor in the greatest state and the most awesome 2 weeks of the year,Nov. 1-15.

I hear that.....:drink1:
 
Skin Cells

As was mentioned earlier the skin cells that are let of just may be more important in trying determine just what it is that animals are reacting to. In my work with a blood hound search and rescue dog trainer he has supplied me with some information that seems to indicate that the reduction of skin cells should be high on the list. Maybe we need to take a new look in what we are doing ?
 
As was mentioned earlier the skin cells that are let of just may be more important in trying determine just what it is that animals are reacting to. In my work with a blood hound search and rescue dog trainer he has supplied me with some information that seems to indicate that the reduction of skin cells should be high on the list. Maybe we need to take a new look in what we are doing ?
If you have a trained bloodhound you could have ten of them ozonic things strapped to your back and one where the sun don't shine and still not get away from the hound guaranteed
 
bloodhoundhandler said:
If you have a trained bloodhound you could have ten of them ozonic things strapped to your back and one where the sun don't shine and still not get away from the hound guaranteed

The dog could track on ground disturbance alone in that situation.

In all fairness to Todd he has said from the get go that they are not effective in regards to the walk in.
 
I've been off-line for a few days guys. Sorry I haven't been communicating.

1st, the K-9 thing has been tried. The artical has discussed it. I actually already lent a unit out to a K9 team out of Michigan that one of my buddies was hooked up with. They're testing was again with drugs, not humans. At the end of the day, no-matter what we provide the nay-sayers won't believe it.

I've been hunting with and without Ozonic's. It works on deer, and I'm not going to waste any time defending K9 testing one way or another. It's not relevent because I have the field data on-video to prove Ozonic's works on WHITETAILS. I've also heard they work excellent on bears, but I've never hunted them so I can't say much about that.

I'm working on getting a video link posted on here showing the video PROOF you are asking for. Some of you will never agree they work; so be it. You can't make everyone happy!

Any of the other topics/ posts/ questions that have to do with me or whether these things make hunting "easy" have already been answered so I won't waste any more of my time re-addressing the same thing over and over.

Thanks to all who are participating in this discussion. Judging by the PM's and emails I've been getting, there are obviously some guys out there who must know someone other than me using them. Alot of people are buying to try, and that's all I'm trying to get you to do! PROVE ME WRONG!!!!!

Link coming soon....
 
Here is the link to a video we produced for Ozonic's from our team members footage from 2010. I asked my guys to film their first "ah-hah" moment. Just asked them to tell the truth based on their observations. The combined experience between the all of the hunters here are hundreds of years of hunting experience. I wish we had more 5-1/2+ year old encounters on-camera, but it's not like those deer run around the woods asking to be on-camera. We filmed what we encountered, which included everything from young does and fawns to immature bucks, mature does, mature bucks, and a couple studs. Enjoy and make up your own mind!

http://vimeo.com/25713174
 
You're links don't work, but it's not something I'm concerned with anyway. I can assure you that Ozonic's didn't hire a PHD Chemist from the beginning because they wanted to spend more money!

It has met and exceeds the same regulations that dictate ozone machines in restaurants, hotels, bars, casino's, dentist's offices, and hospitals. Beyond that, I'm sure alot of the competition (that produces products that don't work) will try anything they can do discredit a technology that makes they're products obsolete.
 

From the second link: These guidelines do not apply to Todd's device because it is not intended for medicinal applications, though the exposure to ozone is still present, whatever the concentration.


TITLE 21--FOOD AND DRUGS CHAPTER I--FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SUBCHAPTER H--MEDICAL DEVICES PART 801 -- LABELING
Subpart H--Special Requirements for Specific Devices
Sec. 801.415 Maximum acceptable level of ozone. (a) Ozone is a toxic gas with no known useful medical application in specific, adjunctive, or preventive therapy. In order for ozone to be effective as a germicide, it must be present in a concentration far greater than that which can be safely tolerated by man and animals.
(b) Although undesirable physiological effects on the central nervous system, heart, and vision have been reported, the predominant physiological effect of ozone is primary irritation of the mucous membranes. Inhalation of ozone can cause sufficient irritation to the lungs to result in pulmonary edema. The onset of pulmonary edema is usually delayed for some hours after exposure; thus, symptomatic response is not a reliable warning of exposure to toxic concentrations of ozone. Since olfactory fatigue develops readily, the odor of ozone is not a reliable index of atmospheric ozone concentration.
(c) A number of devices currently on the market generate ozone by design or as a byproduct. Since exposure to ozone above a certain concentration can be injurious to health, any such device will be considered adulterated and/or misbranded within the meaning of sections 501 and 502 of the act if it is used or intended for use under the following conditions:
(1) In such a manner that it generates ozone at a level in excess of 0.05 part per million by volume of air circulating through the device or causes an accumulation of ozone in excess of 0.05 part per million by volume of air (when measured under standard conditions at 25 deg. C (77 deg. F) and 760 millimeters of mercury) in the atmosphere of enclosed space intended to be occupied by people for extended periods of time, e.g., houses, apartments, hospitals, and offices. This applies to any such device, whether portable or permanent or part of any system, which generates ozone by design or as an inadvertent or incidental product.
(2) To generate ozone and release it into the atmosphere in hospitals or other establishments occupied by the ill or infirm.
(3) To generate ozone and release it into the atmosphere and does not indicate in its labeling the maximum acceptable concentration of ozone which may be generated (not to exceed 0.05 part per million by volume of air circulating through the device) as established herein and the smallest area in which such device can be used so as not to produce an ozone accumulation in excess of 0.05 part per million.
(4) In any medical condition for which there is no proof of safety and effectiveness.
(5) To generate ozone at a level less than 0.05 part per million by volume of air circulating through the device and it is labeled for use as a germicide or deodorizer.
(d) This section does not affect the present threshold limit value of 0.10 part per million (0.2 milligram per cubic meter) of ozone exposure for an 8-hour-day exposure of industrial workers as recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists.
(e) The method and apparatus specified in 40 CFR part 50, or any other equally sensitive and accurate method, may be employed in measuring ozone pursuant to this section.
 
VMan's first link:
Study Finds No Safe Level For Ozone

ScienceDaily (Feb. 16, 2006) — Even at very low levels, ozone--the principal ingredient in smog--increases the risk of premature death, according to a nationwide study to be published in the April edition of the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.


The study, sponsored by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Centers for Disease Control, found that if a safe level for ozone exists, it is only at very low or natural levels and far below current U.S. and international regulations. A 10 part-per-billion increase in the average of the two previous days' ozone levels is associated with a 0.30 percent increase in mortality.
The current study builds on research published in November 2004 in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which was the first national study of ozone and mortality.

"This study investigates whether there is a threshold level below which ozone does not affect mortality. Our findings show that even if all 98 counties in our study met the current ozone standard every day, there would still be a significant link between ozone and premature mortality," said Michelle Bell, lead investigator on the study and assistant professor of environmental health at the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies. "This indicates that further reductions in ozone pollution would benefit public health, even in areas that meet regulatory requirements."
Researchers found that even for days that currently meet the EPA limit for an acceptable level of ozone--80 parts per billion for an eight-hour period--there was still an increased risk of death from the pollutant.
An effort is now under way by the EPA to consider whether more stringent standards for ozone are needed. The agency is mandated to set regulations for ozone under the Clean Air Act. Ozone, a gas that occurs naturally in the upper atmosphere, is created in the lower atmosphere when vehicle and industrial emissions react with sunlight. Levels typically rise when sunlight and heat are highest in the summer.
"Over 100 million people in the United States live in areas that exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone. Elevated concentrations of ozone are also a growing concern for rapidly developing nations with rising levels of ozone from expanding transportation networks," said Francesca Dominici, co-author of the study and associate professor of biostatistics at Johns Hopkins.
###​
The study is online at http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2006/8816/abstract.html
 
Ozonic's has far more relevent test information because it was done with their machines, in a hunting environment. You don't aim the machine into your lungs. You occasionally catch a wiff of it, but 99.9% of the time it's blowing above your head. I would agree Ozone is not healthy if consumed in high levels. Anyone who has put an Ozonic's into a air-tight blind, shut all the windows guess what happens? You will feel "woozy" - YOU AREN'T SUPPOSED TO DO THIS as per instructed by Ozonic's time and time again. I've heard of several big name pro's who did this and now won't use them because they think they'll get sick. You MUST have a minimum of 2 open windows and the machine blowing over your head and through those windows. From a treestand it's a mute point.

Ok, they're safe and they work. Now what?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom