Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
09-21-2006, 07:57 PM
#31
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Damascus MD
Posts: 2,751
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
I own some and I wearthem periodically. I do think it helps, some. But if you prepare yourself properly, scent free shower soap,, deodorant, anddetergent, as well as spraying down beforeyou walk to your stand,you can control the scent pretty darn good and I dont really see a need for scent control clothes anyway. Today for example I wasnt wearing any scent control clothing. I was hunting the edge of a field in a stand. There were 25 to 30 deer in the field all around me, some as close as 10 feet. The wind changed on me about an hour after I was in my stand and not 1 deer winded me or picked up a scent where I walked in through the beans even though the wind ended up blowing directly out towards the field. Im sure this debate will go on forever with no real right or wrong answer. If you dont want to, or dont have the time to properly prepare yourself before hunting with scent elimination products, then I think Scentlok will be more beneficial to you.
09-21-2006, 08:11 PM
#32
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 97
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
ORIGINAL: nybowhunter
I think it's a TOTAL waste of money. There is no way to keep the clothing scent free over a long period of time. Maybe they work when you first buy them, but after that, I do not believe they work. As the studies have shown, there is not way to reactivatethe carbon. additionally, there are too many variables for them to remain effective over1...2 ora 3year period.Sorry,I'm not that meticulouswith my clothes that I worry about keeping my them totally sealed when I return from a day of hunting, let alone after a couple of years.Thisis EXACTLY what Scent-lok expects.This way we buy more of their product because it's our fault it's not working anymore.Who would actually go after a refund if you used it for a season...NOBODY! In my opinon, They need to show more proof, oh yea one more thing....close the loop-holes in your so called "guarentee" and MAYBE you'll convice a few more ofus. HUNT THE WIND!
I think it's a TOTAL waste of money. There is no way to keep the clothing scent free over a long period of time. Maybe they work when you first buy them, but after that, I do not believe they work. As the studies have shown, there is not way to reactivatethe carbon. additionally, there are too many variables for them to remain effective over1...2 ora 3year period.Sorry,I'm not that meticulouswith my clothes that I worry about keeping my them totally sealed when I return from a day of hunting, let alone after a couple of years.Thisis EXACTLY what Scent-lok expects.This way we buy more of their product because it's our fault it's not working anymore.Who would actually go after a refund if you used it for a season...NOBODY! In my opinon, They need to show more proof, oh yea one more thing....close the loop-holes in your so called "guarentee" and MAYBE you'll convice a few more ofus. HUNT THE WIND!
I'd rather take that $800-1000 every 3 or 4 years and buy a new bow.
09-21-2006, 08:34 PM
#33
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Starlight, Indiana
Posts: 547
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
If it matters I just saw a comercial for Carbon controled cat litter. There are some great points being made about Scent Lok- which I do wear. You know it just comes down to personal choice. I choose to wear it and my hunting partner doesn't. So what will I stop hunting with him..NO
09-21-2006, 08:38 PM
#34
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 97
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
ORIGINAL: Scent-Lok G.Designer
We have had in place a FIELD EFFECTIVE GUARANTEE that warrants performance,quality and results.
We have had in place a FIELD EFFECTIVE GUARANTEE that warrants performance,quality and results.
I'm giving you the chance to convince me because I am in the process of choosing a new camo outfit and moving to scent-lok will only be another $150-200.
09-21-2006, 09:03 PM
#35
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 4,668
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
ORIGINAL: jachunter
Is this article completely bogus? And if so, what was his agenda? I took mine back before ever wearing it in the field after reading this study. If this is completely inaccurate, I'd go back to Dicks and buy it again.
http://www.outdoorscentral.com/artman/publish/article_169.shtml
Whitetail Deer Hunting - Scent Control
By T.R. Michels
Jun 17, 2006, 16:34
Emailthisarticle
Printerfriendlypage
Activated carbon is used as a filter medium because it has an affinity to "volatile organic compounds". When humans perspire they emit volatile organic compounds and other chemicals, such as hydrogen sulfides, which can be trapped by activated carbon. The manufacturers of activated carbon scent-control suits claim their clothing works because the activated carbon (which is glued to or impregnated into the fabric of the clothing) blocks the release of human odors, or "traps" the odors by a chemical bonding process called "adsorption".
Adsorption occurs when activated carbon grabs and holds other compounds, including gases, scents and odors, at the molecular level. The amount of odor any activated carbon filter medium holds (such as a scent-elimination suit) is determined both by the amount of activated carbon in the entire medium (the suit) and by how thick the layer of activated carbon on the fabric is. In the case of a scent-elimination suit, the carbon layer is very thin, which means there is very little activated carbon in the suit. In fact, the scent elimination suits are so thin that they hold relatively small amounts of activated carbon, and the activated carbon is so widely spaced in some suits that the suits allow air and odors to go through the suit without coming into contact with and being trapped by the small amounts of carbon in the suit.
One of the problems with trapping odors by adsorption is that adsorption continuously occurs, unless the activated carbon is kept in an airtight unscented bag from the moment it is first activated. Since activated carbon will eventually become full of odors, it cannot work any great length of time. If activated carbon clothing is not put into a sealed bag the moment it is activated, and kept that way until it is used for hunting, it will have adsorbed numerous odors. Depending on how thick the layer of activated carbon is in the suit, it may not work to stop human odors the very first time it is used.
In an attempt to bring some legitimacy to their products, the manufacturers of scent-control clothing have acknowledged this to some extent. Many manufacturers recommend that the clothing should be immediately washed, and then "re-activated" by placing the suits in a clothes dryer as soon as they are purchased.
Do activated carbon suits work as claimed?
When one independent laboratory was asked to test a popular activated carbon scent-control suit they found there wasn't enough carbon in the suit to chemically adsorb the amount of scent claimed by the manufacturers, especially the human perspiration molecules, which are quite complex. In fact, they found there wasn't enough activated carbon in the suit to even test.
In a test with search dogs, by JA Shivik, Ph.D., forty-two people were hidden from Colorado search and rescue dogs. Twenty-one of the people wore activated carbon suits; twenty-one did not. The dogs found all twenty-one people who didn't wear activated carbon suits, and twenty of the people who wore activated carbon suits. There was no noticeable difference in the time it took the dogs to find the humans. It took the dogs 2.7 minutes to detect the humans who were not wearing activated carbon, and 3.4 minutes to find the humans who were wearing activated carbon suits.
Shivik's report states, "That the dogs detected humans wearing the suit indicates that the system failed to prevent detection of human odors." Since deer have a sense of smell equal to if not better than dogs, it is safe to assume that deer would have detected the humans too. The report adds, "The suits are probably not worth the cost to researchers or managers who want to approach canids undetected." They probably aren't worth $150 to $300 to hunters either, if they can't keep deer from detecting the hunters.
The military also uses activated carbon clothing, commonly referred to as Chemical Warfare Suits, but they are limited-use, disposable garments, not intended for multiple use, because, according to the paper The War Next Time: Countering Rogue States and Terrorists Armed with Chemical and Biological Weapons, the new JS-LIST suits worn by the armed services "provide 45 days of wear versus 22 days for the BDOs." These chemical warfare suits have several times more activated carbon in them than the suits currently being offered for hunting purposes; and they only last for 45 days! This document can viewed on-line at: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cpc-pubs/war_next_time/schneider2.pdf
An interesting comment in the document states, "In addition they can be washed up to six times without losing protective qualities." This suggests that clothing made with activated carbon becomes less effective every time it is washed. It also suggests that after six washings, the Chemical Warfare Suits, which are made to US Government specifications, and have more activated carbon in them than the activated carbon suits worn by hunters, are ineffective after six washings! And yet, the loss of activated carbon due to washing, and the eventual ineffectiveness of the suits due to washing, is not clearly stated by the manufacturers of the activated carbon scent-elimination suits in any of their literature, or on their web sites.
In 2005 the washing instructions on the Scent-Lok web site recently stated that during warm weather "when perspiration is occurring" their undergarments should be washed periodically. And that the suits can be washed "1-4 times per season without fear" of the suit losing carbon. Note the reference to heavy perspiration, which will be talked about later.
In 2005, the Scent Lok web site at www.scentlok.com stated:
"When and how to wash: During warm weather when only a T-shirt is being worn as an undergarment and heavy perspiration is occurring, it is advised to wash your suit periodically. During cool weather when heavier undergarments or layers are worn, there is no need to wash the suit. Washing does not have anything to do with reactivation, but does get rid of unwanted body oils (caused by perspiration), blood, and dirt. Washing a Scent-Lok suit can be done 1-4 times per season without fear of losing carbon from the suit. The permanent ClimaFlex treatment, that is on all Scent-Lok branded suits made during and after 2001, aids in the extraction of unwanted body oils in high perspiration areas when washed. Use only non-scented liquid clothes wash or preferably carbon wash. Once a garment is washed per label instructions it should be put in the dryer on a no heat setting until dry. Once the garment is dry, follow the reactivation instructions. ClimaFlex treatment is also a wicking agent, which adds to the overall comfort of the suit during warm weather."
Note: This article has since been removed from the web site.
One of the things hunters noticed about Scent-Lok suits in the early 90's was that the activated carbon often made their skin black, and there was often black residue in the washing machine after they washed their suits. This black residue (of activated carbon lost from the suits) appears to have been addressed as much as possible by the manufacturers. However, as any hunter knows, the abrasive action of clothing being tumbled dry in a clothes dryer removes some of the fabric from both the inner and outer surfaces of the fabric, which results in "fading" of the colors of the camouflage printed on the fabric. The comments in the US Government document mentioned above suggest that it is likely that the actions of both household washers and dryers may result in the loss of some of the activated carbon in the scent-elimination clothing worn by hunters.
Can Activated Carbon suits be re-charged as manufacturers claim?
Scent-Lok, one of the largest producers and the only licensor of activated carbon suits, states that their suits can be re-charged by placing them in the clothes dryer for 20 to 30 minutes to re-activate the carbon. On their web site in 2005 they also stated that heat from a clothes dryer causes "Brownian molecular motion" causes the scent to move very fast, which breaks the molecules free from the activated carbon particles, which supposedly re-activates the suits.
In 2005 the Scent Lok web site stated:
"How are odors released?
It is common knowledge that heat makes molecules move more rapidly. Reactivation is only obtained by using a clothes dryer. Reactivation is achieved by placing the suit in a dryer for twenty to thirty minutes on a medium to high heat setting or according to the label instructions. The heat from the clothes dryer creates what is scientifically known as Brownian molecular motion, which causes the scent molecules to move rapidly. This movement breaks the molecules free from the surfaces of the activated carbon particles and interior pores of the carbon, and allows them to eventually exit out of the dryer vent."
(end quote)
Note: This article has since been removed from the site.
According to a chemist employed by 3M, this statement is not correct, because it is not possible to recharge activated carbon by putting it in the dryer for twenty to thirty minutes on a medium to high heat setting. According to the chemist, the human sweat molecule is so complex that the activated carbon would have to be heated to over 700 degrees F before it would release human sweat odors. At 500 degrees F the suit will be nothing but carbon. At that temperature there would no longer be any cloth left, there would only be carbon!
In order to re-activate activated carbon a process referred to as Pyrolysis has to be used. To completely re-activate a saturated activated carbon suit, it has to be heated to about 800 °C, or 1472 °F. And it would have to be done in a controlled atmosphere with low oxygen concentration to reduce the possibility of combustion. This is clearly stated in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Engineering and Design, Adsorption Design Guide, Design Guide No. DG1110-1-2, which can be viewed on the internet.
Most household clothes dryers do not reach temperatures over 200°F, which is not high enough to release the trapped odors in the activated carbon in scent-elimination suits. It is highly unlikely that activated carbon suits for hunting use can be recharged, with the result that the suits will eventually become full of odors, to the point where the charcoal will no longer trap odors.
In defense of their statements that their suits can be re-activated the manufacturers of activated carbon clothing maintain that the word "reactivation" is a loosely used term. In reality "reactivation", as it applies to activated carbon, means that the adsorption capability of the carbon has been totally and completely re-activated. Some manufacturers of activated carbon scent-elimination clothing have stated that the garments aren't "totally reactivated" after they are first washed and put in the dryer, but that they are partially "regenerated" or "desorbed". Supposedly this partial regeneration is enough to allow the clothing to again adsorb more odors.
While some desorption can occur when activated carbon is exposed to temperatures lower than 750 to 1500 degrees F, there is a point when the temperature is too low to desorb activated carbon. A Virginia Technical University study shows that activated carbon can be partially desorbed between temperatures of 100 to 649 degrees Celsius. One hundred degrees Celsius is 212 degrees Fahrenheit. This is the extreme low temperature during which "partial desorption" of odors and gases may occur. However, as stated above, most household clothes dryers produce less than 150 degrees Fahrenheit; which suggests that the activated carbon suits sold to hunters cannot even be "partially regenerated or desorbed".
(The above-cited study is study was originally available on the Internet by logging on to: http://www.ce.vt.edu/program_areas/environmental/teach/wtprimer/carbon/sketcarb.html)
The use of the term Brownian molecular motion on the Scent-Lok web site is also inaccurate. The use of this scientific term seems to add some credibility to the claims about activated carbon. There is no reference to Brownian "molecular" motion, because Brownian motion does not involve molecules, but rather small particles.
The web site at http://xanadu.math.utah.edu/java/brownianmotion/1/ states, "In 1827 the English botanist Robert Brown noticed that pollen grains suspended in water jiggled about under the lens of the microscope..."
The web site at http://schools.matter.org.uk/Content/BrownianMotion/Default.htm states, "Brownian motion (or Brownian movement) can be defined as 'the random movement of microscopic particles suspended in a fluid.' "
The definition of Brownian Motion at http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/BrownianMotion.html states, "The random walk motion of small particles suspended in a fluid due to bombardment by molecules obeying a Maxwellian velocity distribution. The phenomenon was first observed by Jan Ingenhousz in 1785, but was subsequently rediscovered by Brown in 1828. Einstein used kinetic theory to derive the diffusion constant for such motion in terms of fundamental parameters of the particles and liquid, and this equation was subsequently used by Perrin to determine Avogadro's number. Brownian trajectories are continuous, but of infinite length between any two points."
Brownian motion has nothing to do with the re-activation or de-adsorbtion of activated carbon, because the term is only used only in reference to "particles suspended in a fluid," not to the motion or activity of gaseous odor molecules released by activated carbon that is subjected to heat in a clothes dryer.
Are activated carbon suits adversely affected by humidity?
One of the statements on the Scent Lok web site in 2005 mentioned "heavy perspiration", which may occur as a hunter walks to their hunting site, and may result in high humidity between the hunter's skin and the suit for several hours after the hunter stops walking.
The Army Corps of Engineers document cited above also states: “Relative humidity above 50 percent may result in adsorbed and condensed water vapor blocking the pores of the particles and interfering with the diffusion of the contaminants to the adsorption pores.”
What this means is that if a hunter wears activated carbon clothing while hunting, when the relative humidity conditions are above 50 percent, or if he sweats, the suit won't work. No matter what the relative humidity conditions are outside, activated carbon clothing may not work, because the act of walking alone will cause the human body to sweat, resulting in a relative humidity of 50 percent or more between the body and the suit. By the time the hunter arrives at their hunting site the activated carbon in the suit will be saturated with moisture, and it will be useless.
Hunters can find this government document on the Internet, and so can the manufacturers of activated carbon clothing. But, neither it, nor the information in it, is mentioned by any of the activated carbon clothing manufacturers in their advertising, nor is it mentioned on their web sites.
Conclusion: If there is not enough activated carbon in the suits to trap human odors; if the suits used for Chemical Warfare lose effectiveness after six washings and are effective for a maximum of 45 days; if activated carbon scent-elimination suits do not keep dogs from detecting humans; if the effectiveness of activated carbon is affected by humidity above 50 percent; then it is unlikely that scent-elimination suits using activated carbon can work to keep hunters from being detected by deer during hunting situations, especially if the clothing is worn more than 45 days, or washed more than six times. Many hunters use their suits more than 45 days in a year, and wash it more than six times in a year, which means they will probably have to buy a new suit every one to two years.
Licensing Agreements
In the early 1990's Scent-Lok applied for and received a patent on the use of activated carbon for several different applications and/or articles of clothing used in conjunction with the control, reduction or elimination of scents, including human related or human produced odors, while hunting. Since the granting of that patent Scent-Lok has done what any company holding a patent does; they have aggressively protected the patent, warning several companies not to produce clothing meant to control, reduce or eliminate unwanted odors while hunting, whether the clothing contained activated carbon or not.
Is the Scent-Lok patent valid?
Recently some questions have arisen as to whether or not the Scent-Lok Patent is valid. That is a question that should be answered by the end of 2005. On May 11, 2005, the United States Patent and Trademark Office mailed a document to Scent-Lok, notifying them that "Claims 1-10" of their patent were temporarily "subject to reexamination" and were temporarily "rejected". According to the document, Scent-Lok had until July 11, 2005 to respond to this document. Failure by Scent-Lok to respond "will result in termination of the process and issuance of an ex parte reexamination certificate in accordance with this action."
The document cites "Popper" and "Floyd" as previous patent holders and may imply that Claims 1-10 of the Scent-Lok patent are invalid, because either Popper or Floyd covers the claims under previous use. Previous use of those claims would invalidate the portion of the Scent-Lok patent making those same claims. The Patent Office document states, "The clothing of Popper is capable of being used to avoid detection of wildlife through the senses of smell as the clothing in its normal use is worn on the body." This seems to suggest that several of the claims in the Scent-Lok patent were already patented in the Popper patent.
If Scent-Lok claims the same claims as a previous patent, it would be considered "'double patenting".
The document further states, "The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the 'right to exclude' granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees."
If the Scent-Lok patent is invalid, hunters could benefit, by seeing several new products designed to help keep them from being detected (by smell) by the big game animals they hunt.
As of 2006 the Patent claims 1-10 of the originally applied for Scent Lok patent on activated carbon suits used for the purpose of eliminating human scent or odors hunting have been rejected.
Do hunters have other options?
Fortunately for hunters there are other types of clothing designed to reduce or eliminate human odors on the market. One of them is No-Trace, which uses cyclodextrene (the same active ingredient used in some popular new air fresheners) to trap human odors. The manufacturers claim that placing it in a washing machine with unscented hunter's detergent can recharge their clothing.
Does anti-bacterial or anti-microbial type clothing work?
Hunters can also use anti-bacterial type suits work for the reduction or elimination of odors caused by bacteria when used for hunting purposes. These suits include Contain, which uses anti-bacterial ingredients in the fibers of the fabric of the clothing, and X Scent, which uses silver threads in the fabric of the clothing. Both products reduce or kill the bacteria or microbes that produce the odors associated with human perspiration, thus they reduce the amount of human odors that might be detected by deer and other big game animals.
Is this article completely bogus? And if so, what was his agenda? I took mine back before ever wearing it in the field after reading this study. If this is completely inaccurate, I'd go back to Dicks and buy it again.
http://www.outdoorscentral.com/artman/publish/article_169.shtml
Whitetail Deer Hunting - Scent Control
By T.R. Michels
Jun 17, 2006, 16:34
Emailthisarticle
Printerfriendlypage
Activated carbon is used as a filter medium because it has an affinity to "volatile organic compounds". When humans perspire they emit volatile organic compounds and other chemicals, such as hydrogen sulfides, which can be trapped by activated carbon. The manufacturers of activated carbon scent-control suits claim their clothing works because the activated carbon (which is glued to or impregnated into the fabric of the clothing) blocks the release of human odors, or "traps" the odors by a chemical bonding process called "adsorption".
Adsorption occurs when activated carbon grabs and holds other compounds, including gases, scents and odors, at the molecular level. The amount of odor any activated carbon filter medium holds (such as a scent-elimination suit) is determined both by the amount of activated carbon in the entire medium (the suit) and by how thick the layer of activated carbon on the fabric is. In the case of a scent-elimination suit, the carbon layer is very thin, which means there is very little activated carbon in the suit. In fact, the scent elimination suits are so thin that they hold relatively small amounts of activated carbon, and the activated carbon is so widely spaced in some suits that the suits allow air and odors to go through the suit without coming into contact with and being trapped by the small amounts of carbon in the suit.
One of the problems with trapping odors by adsorption is that adsorption continuously occurs, unless the activated carbon is kept in an airtight unscented bag from the moment it is first activated. Since activated carbon will eventually become full of odors, it cannot work any great length of time. If activated carbon clothing is not put into a sealed bag the moment it is activated, and kept that way until it is used for hunting, it will have adsorbed numerous odors. Depending on how thick the layer of activated carbon is in the suit, it may not work to stop human odors the very first time it is used.
In an attempt to bring some legitimacy to their products, the manufacturers of scent-control clothing have acknowledged this to some extent. Many manufacturers recommend that the clothing should be immediately washed, and then "re-activated" by placing the suits in a clothes dryer as soon as they are purchased.
Do activated carbon suits work as claimed?
When one independent laboratory was asked to test a popular activated carbon scent-control suit they found there wasn't enough carbon in the suit to chemically adsorb the amount of scent claimed by the manufacturers, especially the human perspiration molecules, which are quite complex. In fact, they found there wasn't enough activated carbon in the suit to even test.
In a test with search dogs, by JA Shivik, Ph.D., forty-two people were hidden from Colorado search and rescue dogs. Twenty-one of the people wore activated carbon suits; twenty-one did not. The dogs found all twenty-one people who didn't wear activated carbon suits, and twenty of the people who wore activated carbon suits. There was no noticeable difference in the time it took the dogs to find the humans. It took the dogs 2.7 minutes to detect the humans who were not wearing activated carbon, and 3.4 minutes to find the humans who were wearing activated carbon suits.
Shivik's report states, "That the dogs detected humans wearing the suit indicates that the system failed to prevent detection of human odors." Since deer have a sense of smell equal to if not better than dogs, it is safe to assume that deer would have detected the humans too. The report adds, "The suits are probably not worth the cost to researchers or managers who want to approach canids undetected." They probably aren't worth $150 to $300 to hunters either, if they can't keep deer from detecting the hunters.
The military also uses activated carbon clothing, commonly referred to as Chemical Warfare Suits, but they are limited-use, disposable garments, not intended for multiple use, because, according to the paper The War Next Time: Countering Rogue States and Terrorists Armed with Chemical and Biological Weapons, the new JS-LIST suits worn by the armed services "provide 45 days of wear versus 22 days for the BDOs." These chemical warfare suits have several times more activated carbon in them than the suits currently being offered for hunting purposes; and they only last for 45 days! This document can viewed on-line at: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cpc-pubs/war_next_time/schneider2.pdf
An interesting comment in the document states, "In addition they can be washed up to six times without losing protective qualities." This suggests that clothing made with activated carbon becomes less effective every time it is washed. It also suggests that after six washings, the Chemical Warfare Suits, which are made to US Government specifications, and have more activated carbon in them than the activated carbon suits worn by hunters, are ineffective after six washings! And yet, the loss of activated carbon due to washing, and the eventual ineffectiveness of the suits due to washing, is not clearly stated by the manufacturers of the activated carbon scent-elimination suits in any of their literature, or on their web sites.
In 2005 the washing instructions on the Scent-Lok web site recently stated that during warm weather "when perspiration is occurring" their undergarments should be washed periodically. And that the suits can be washed "1-4 times per season without fear" of the suit losing carbon. Note the reference to heavy perspiration, which will be talked about later.
In 2005, the Scent Lok web site at www.scentlok.com stated:
"When and how to wash: During warm weather when only a T-shirt is being worn as an undergarment and heavy perspiration is occurring, it is advised to wash your suit periodically. During cool weather when heavier undergarments or layers are worn, there is no need to wash the suit. Washing does not have anything to do with reactivation, but does get rid of unwanted body oils (caused by perspiration), blood, and dirt. Washing a Scent-Lok suit can be done 1-4 times per season without fear of losing carbon from the suit. The permanent ClimaFlex treatment, that is on all Scent-Lok branded suits made during and after 2001, aids in the extraction of unwanted body oils in high perspiration areas when washed. Use only non-scented liquid clothes wash or preferably carbon wash. Once a garment is washed per label instructions it should be put in the dryer on a no heat setting until dry. Once the garment is dry, follow the reactivation instructions. ClimaFlex treatment is also a wicking agent, which adds to the overall comfort of the suit during warm weather."
Note: This article has since been removed from the web site.
One of the things hunters noticed about Scent-Lok suits in the early 90's was that the activated carbon often made their skin black, and there was often black residue in the washing machine after they washed their suits. This black residue (of activated carbon lost from the suits) appears to have been addressed as much as possible by the manufacturers. However, as any hunter knows, the abrasive action of clothing being tumbled dry in a clothes dryer removes some of the fabric from both the inner and outer surfaces of the fabric, which results in "fading" of the colors of the camouflage printed on the fabric. The comments in the US Government document mentioned above suggest that it is likely that the actions of both household washers and dryers may result in the loss of some of the activated carbon in the scent-elimination clothing worn by hunters.
Can Activated Carbon suits be re-charged as manufacturers claim?
Scent-Lok, one of the largest producers and the only licensor of activated carbon suits, states that their suits can be re-charged by placing them in the clothes dryer for 20 to 30 minutes to re-activate the carbon. On their web site in 2005 they also stated that heat from a clothes dryer causes "Brownian molecular motion" causes the scent to move very fast, which breaks the molecules free from the activated carbon particles, which supposedly re-activates the suits.
In 2005 the Scent Lok web site stated:
"How are odors released?
It is common knowledge that heat makes molecules move more rapidly. Reactivation is only obtained by using a clothes dryer. Reactivation is achieved by placing the suit in a dryer for twenty to thirty minutes on a medium to high heat setting or according to the label instructions. The heat from the clothes dryer creates what is scientifically known as Brownian molecular motion, which causes the scent molecules to move rapidly. This movement breaks the molecules free from the surfaces of the activated carbon particles and interior pores of the carbon, and allows them to eventually exit out of the dryer vent."
(end quote)
Note: This article has since been removed from the site.
According to a chemist employed by 3M, this statement is not correct, because it is not possible to recharge activated carbon by putting it in the dryer for twenty to thirty minutes on a medium to high heat setting. According to the chemist, the human sweat molecule is so complex that the activated carbon would have to be heated to over 700 degrees F before it would release human sweat odors. At 500 degrees F the suit will be nothing but carbon. At that temperature there would no longer be any cloth left, there would only be carbon!
In order to re-activate activated carbon a process referred to as Pyrolysis has to be used. To completely re-activate a saturated activated carbon suit, it has to be heated to about 800 °C, or 1472 °F. And it would have to be done in a controlled atmosphere with low oxygen concentration to reduce the possibility of combustion. This is clearly stated in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Engineering and Design, Adsorption Design Guide, Design Guide No. DG1110-1-2, which can be viewed on the internet.
Most household clothes dryers do not reach temperatures over 200°F, which is not high enough to release the trapped odors in the activated carbon in scent-elimination suits. It is highly unlikely that activated carbon suits for hunting use can be recharged, with the result that the suits will eventually become full of odors, to the point where the charcoal will no longer trap odors.
In defense of their statements that their suits can be re-activated the manufacturers of activated carbon clothing maintain that the word "reactivation" is a loosely used term. In reality "reactivation", as it applies to activated carbon, means that the adsorption capability of the carbon has been totally and completely re-activated. Some manufacturers of activated carbon scent-elimination clothing have stated that the garments aren't "totally reactivated" after they are first washed and put in the dryer, but that they are partially "regenerated" or "desorbed". Supposedly this partial regeneration is enough to allow the clothing to again adsorb more odors.
While some desorption can occur when activated carbon is exposed to temperatures lower than 750 to 1500 degrees F, there is a point when the temperature is too low to desorb activated carbon. A Virginia Technical University study shows that activated carbon can be partially desorbed between temperatures of 100 to 649 degrees Celsius. One hundred degrees Celsius is 212 degrees Fahrenheit. This is the extreme low temperature during which "partial desorption" of odors and gases may occur. However, as stated above, most household clothes dryers produce less than 150 degrees Fahrenheit; which suggests that the activated carbon suits sold to hunters cannot even be "partially regenerated or desorbed".
(The above-cited study is study was originally available on the Internet by logging on to: http://www.ce.vt.edu/program_areas/environmental/teach/wtprimer/carbon/sketcarb.html)
The use of the term Brownian molecular motion on the Scent-Lok web site is also inaccurate. The use of this scientific term seems to add some credibility to the claims about activated carbon. There is no reference to Brownian "molecular" motion, because Brownian motion does not involve molecules, but rather small particles.
The web site at http://xanadu.math.utah.edu/java/brownianmotion/1/ states, "In 1827 the English botanist Robert Brown noticed that pollen grains suspended in water jiggled about under the lens of the microscope..."
The web site at http://schools.matter.org.uk/Content/BrownianMotion/Default.htm states, "Brownian motion (or Brownian movement) can be defined as 'the random movement of microscopic particles suspended in a fluid.' "
The definition of Brownian Motion at http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/BrownianMotion.html states, "The random walk motion of small particles suspended in a fluid due to bombardment by molecules obeying a Maxwellian velocity distribution. The phenomenon was first observed by Jan Ingenhousz in 1785, but was subsequently rediscovered by Brown in 1828. Einstein used kinetic theory to derive the diffusion constant for such motion in terms of fundamental parameters of the particles and liquid, and this equation was subsequently used by Perrin to determine Avogadro's number. Brownian trajectories are continuous, but of infinite length between any two points."
Brownian motion has nothing to do with the re-activation or de-adsorbtion of activated carbon, because the term is only used only in reference to "particles suspended in a fluid," not to the motion or activity of gaseous odor molecules released by activated carbon that is subjected to heat in a clothes dryer.
Are activated carbon suits adversely affected by humidity?
One of the statements on the Scent Lok web site in 2005 mentioned "heavy perspiration", which may occur as a hunter walks to their hunting site, and may result in high humidity between the hunter's skin and the suit for several hours after the hunter stops walking.
The Army Corps of Engineers document cited above also states: “Relative humidity above 50 percent may result in adsorbed and condensed water vapor blocking the pores of the particles and interfering with the diffusion of the contaminants to the adsorption pores.”
What this means is that if a hunter wears activated carbon clothing while hunting, when the relative humidity conditions are above 50 percent, or if he sweats, the suit won't work. No matter what the relative humidity conditions are outside, activated carbon clothing may not work, because the act of walking alone will cause the human body to sweat, resulting in a relative humidity of 50 percent or more between the body and the suit. By the time the hunter arrives at their hunting site the activated carbon in the suit will be saturated with moisture, and it will be useless.
Hunters can find this government document on the Internet, and so can the manufacturers of activated carbon clothing. But, neither it, nor the information in it, is mentioned by any of the activated carbon clothing manufacturers in their advertising, nor is it mentioned on their web sites.
Conclusion: If there is not enough activated carbon in the suits to trap human odors; if the suits used for Chemical Warfare lose effectiveness after six washings and are effective for a maximum of 45 days; if activated carbon scent-elimination suits do not keep dogs from detecting humans; if the effectiveness of activated carbon is affected by humidity above 50 percent; then it is unlikely that scent-elimination suits using activated carbon can work to keep hunters from being detected by deer during hunting situations, especially if the clothing is worn more than 45 days, or washed more than six times. Many hunters use their suits more than 45 days in a year, and wash it more than six times in a year, which means they will probably have to buy a new suit every one to two years.
Licensing Agreements
In the early 1990's Scent-Lok applied for and received a patent on the use of activated carbon for several different applications and/or articles of clothing used in conjunction with the control, reduction or elimination of scents, including human related or human produced odors, while hunting. Since the granting of that patent Scent-Lok has done what any company holding a patent does; they have aggressively protected the patent, warning several companies not to produce clothing meant to control, reduce or eliminate unwanted odors while hunting, whether the clothing contained activated carbon or not.
Is the Scent-Lok patent valid?
Recently some questions have arisen as to whether or not the Scent-Lok Patent is valid. That is a question that should be answered by the end of 2005. On May 11, 2005, the United States Patent and Trademark Office mailed a document to Scent-Lok, notifying them that "Claims 1-10" of their patent were temporarily "subject to reexamination" and were temporarily "rejected". According to the document, Scent-Lok had until July 11, 2005 to respond to this document. Failure by Scent-Lok to respond "will result in termination of the process and issuance of an ex parte reexamination certificate in accordance with this action."
The document cites "Popper" and "Floyd" as previous patent holders and may imply that Claims 1-10 of the Scent-Lok patent are invalid, because either Popper or Floyd covers the claims under previous use. Previous use of those claims would invalidate the portion of the Scent-Lok patent making those same claims. The Patent Office document states, "The clothing of Popper is capable of being used to avoid detection of wildlife through the senses of smell as the clothing in its normal use is worn on the body." This seems to suggest that several of the claims in the Scent-Lok patent were already patented in the Popper patent.
If Scent-Lok claims the same claims as a previous patent, it would be considered "'double patenting".
The document further states, "The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the 'right to exclude' granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees."
If the Scent-Lok patent is invalid, hunters could benefit, by seeing several new products designed to help keep them from being detected (by smell) by the big game animals they hunt.
As of 2006 the Patent claims 1-10 of the originally applied for Scent Lok patent on activated carbon suits used for the purpose of eliminating human scent or odors hunting have been rejected.
Do hunters have other options?
Fortunately for hunters there are other types of clothing designed to reduce or eliminate human odors on the market. One of them is No-Trace, which uses cyclodextrene (the same active ingredient used in some popular new air fresheners) to trap human odors. The manufacturers claim that placing it in a washing machine with unscented hunter's detergent can recharge their clothing.
Does anti-bacterial or anti-microbial type clothing work?
Hunters can also use anti-bacterial type suits work for the reduction or elimination of odors caused by bacteria when used for hunting purposes. These suits include Contain, which uses anti-bacterial ingredients in the fibers of the fabric of the clothing, and X Scent, which uses silver threads in the fabric of the clothing. Both products reduce or kill the bacteria or microbes that produce the odors associated with human perspiration, thus they reduce the amount of human odors that might be detected by deer and other big game animals.
I was just about to post this too. I had to tell them they were spelling van der Waals forces incorrectly as well. This stuff is taught in high school chemistry..................basic knowledge like being incorrect is not a good sign.
09-21-2006, 10:14 PM
#36
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,673
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
Personally, I think its a waste of money. I bet if I bought it and wore it, I would think it makes a difference just because your brain makes you think it is because of the money you spent. If Scent Lok was a little cheaper it wuold be worth the try, but its so expensive its rediculous. I havent had a deer smell me yet and I just spray myself.
http://www.fastestbows.com/articles/corrigan/scent_suits.htm This is my reasoning for being against Scent Lok.
http://www.fastestbows.com/articles/corrigan/scent_suits.htm This is my reasoning for being against Scent Lok.
09-21-2006, 10:47 PM
#37
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Woodsboro Md USA
Posts: 176
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
I dont really think the stuff works either but im not a chemist!!!!!!!If this article is wrong in what there saying about not being able to reactivate the carbon and also not being enough carbon to begin with scent lock should prove it . if a product that i had was getting bashed like scent lock is on these forums i would do something about it!!!!!!!! now about refunding your money if it dont work. alot of products state that and they know that most likely people arent going to take the time to return it. also its in alot of peoples mind that once you spend 400 or 500 dollars on scent loc it works great....( IT BETTER) i also love the statment that i saw tons more deer this year with my scent loc then last!!!!!!!! if you seriously want to kill a big mature buck take that 400 or 500 dollar suit and put it on a down payment on a good hunt in IOWA. THATS HOW YOU GET THE BIG ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
09-22-2006, 05:09 AM
#38
Dominant Buck
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ramsey , Indiana
Posts: 22,545
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
Your company's "guarantee" is worthless for exactly the reason that Atlasman stated , there is no such thing as "scent free" to a whitetail when you're upwind of it . Case closed .
09-22-2006, 05:30 AM
#39
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: North Lima Ohio & Clarion Pa
Posts: 6,453
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
Well Scentlok gets my vote. I believe in the products and wear'em head to toe! My study shows it works. I get closer to deer even in shifting winds and they don't spook. That's enough for me.
I wish the guarentee was against loss..lol
I swear I lose a mask and a glove every year, It's always the right glove too...!
I wish the guarentee was against loss..lol
I swear I lose a mask and a glove every year, It's always the right glove too...!
09-22-2006, 05:32 AM
#40
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: North Lima Ohio & Clarion Pa
Posts: 6,453
RE: Scent-Lok Guaranteed!
ORIGINAL: kdsberman
Personally, I think its a waste of money. If Scent Lok was a little cheaper it wuold be worth the try, but its so expensive its rediculous.
Personally, I think its a waste of money. If Scent Lok was a little cheaper it wuold be worth the try, but its so expensive its rediculous.