Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 31, 4:35�am, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Chuck,
Why can't the FTC and EPA duplicate these results? �Even more amazing is
if Diesel-Tex DTX is not a scam, why don't they provide the EPA with the
test results, so they can conduct the tests, and the EPA can remove this
product from it's list of useless products?

According to the site your furnished, the EPA has never tested the two
most popular devices used for marine application. Neither of the two
most popular marine devices appear on the FTC's list of "useless
products" in the sub sections where various brands are listed. I don't
think the EPA is likely to accept test results provided by anybody
else as valid. It is interesting to note that at the state level a
laboaratory in California that is certified to conduct testing for
California Air Resource Board compliance purposes measured some
differences in combustion with vs. without a device installed. (And
yes, the lab could have made an error).


�It not only would be good
for business, but it would be good for the environment. �Why don't you
ask the mfg'er why he has not provided this independent data to the FTC
and EPA? �This would not only be a more interesting article, but also
provide a true service to your readers. �I understand that your magazine
relies on advertisement dollars to make money, but the magazine
creditability is what makes your "reviews" worthwhile to the readers.
If they believe your "reviews" are nothing more than unpaid ads, they
will discount all of your "reviews".- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



Why hasn't the mfg'er request a testing by the EPA? This is almost as
good as a perpetual motion machine. Trust me, if it works, the EPA
will want to endorse it as another method to reduce pollution and
decrease consumption.

As an X saleman, wouldn't you think this product would be as easy as
selling sliced bread, if it worked?