BobCo19-65

There are those who do buy items based onthe manufacturers specifications and details. There are laws to protect the consumers, so I canunderstand their purchases based on them. I don't believe there is any reason to ridicule them for that.

You have made your claim and it seems if people don't accept your opinion as final, then it's time for some ridicule. But maybe I misunderstood your "sticking your head in the sand" comment to mean something that it was not meant to be.

FWIW, I have never owned any scent eliminating garment, but depending on the outcome of this case, I may.

Charlie P

Sorry missed that one,or I don't remeber reading or responding to it. I don't ask questions I know the answers to.

whitetailhunter01

I do not believe Scent-Lok works and I am sort of happy they are being questioned. Activated carbon takes high temps of 800 degrees to reactivate it, there is no way their suits can handle that sort of heat.

I am not sure why it took so long to sue but it was inevitable.

hardcorehunter

Hey BobCo, not ridiculing but the info is out there, and people here and on other forums just sit here and say that they saw deer while wearing it,REFUSINGscienceand choosing make believe instead.Just do a google on reacivation of carbon. I have even called upcompanies that use carbon in their business's and specialize in using and reactivating carbon and asked them whether or not carbon clothing could possibly be reactivated in a homeowners' dryer. They just laugh and say no way.


http://www.chemvironcarbon.com/en/reactivation

http://www.water.siemens.com/SiteCol...on_q_and_a.pdf

http://www.onionenterprises.com/nws_June99.pdf


Here is the lawsuit for those interested.

http://www.skinnymoose.com/ALSLawsuit.pdf

LebeauHunter

The point of this thread is not to debate for the 5,000th time if Scent-Lok works, it is to debate
whether it is a matter that should be left to the individual consumer or if people should file a
lawsuit over a piece of clothing. I don't have my "head in the sand" - I was commenting
specifically on the propriety of filing a suit.

GMMAT

So Don....the scientist from NC State is a fraud?He said the home dryer could handle the task. I think we're choosing to believe what we want....on BOTH sides......but to say one scientist is incorrect and another isn't.....isabove my expertise.

Todd1700

You are being intentionally ridiculous. That is quite obviously just a spokesperson using a "Figure of Speach". No reasonable human with an undamaged brain could honestlytake from that statement that Waddell is claiming that this camowill grant actual literal invisibiity. It is completely different however to make a straight foward comment like "Just throw the scent-lok suit inyour dryer for 30 minutes and it will be reactivated". That's not a figure of speach. That's not an attempt at humour. That's a lie.

And you are trying to use a technicallity to dodge the example. The point being that a car company would not be excused for false advertising so why should a hunting related clothing company? But hell, I'll give you an even better example that relates exactly to activated carbon clothing. What if Ford sold you a car that quit working a week after you bought it.So you call them and they tell you another lie about how to get your car working again. Later you discover theyknew that the car would stop working rather quickly and they also knew there was actually no way to ever get it working again. Would you let them slide on that deal and just go buy another new car?

You do know that it is a complete and utter myth that any scientist has ever said that a helicopter or a bee should not be able to fly?

Call Calgon Carbon Corporation or Chemviron Carbon and tell them that the multimillion dollar equipment they use togenerate temps of 1000 plus degrees inthe literal vacuum environment required to reactivate carbon is no longer needed. Tell them all they need is a 500 dollar Lady Kenmore dryer from Sears to accomplish the same task. When they get through laughing at you, come back here and post what they say to you.

VaSavage270

I don't post comments often, but at times I find some topics of great interest, with that being said.

Defendants have uniformly misrepresented to consumer that their "innovations would not only eliminate 100% of human odor but, could be reactivated or regenerated in a household dryer after becoming saturated with odors (Fallacious statement of itself). This is the premisses of the Law suit not that it may have worked for some and not others.

This is the focal point of the law suit and I can see where each side of the forum is having polemic debate thereof. Those who choose and have purchased the suits and have some success be it the suit or not, and those who had no success at all have their ostentatious beliefs it’s not practical according to the slogan(s), or the very little amount of carbon the suit bares in it’s eliminating abilities to lure in consumers.

I take no sides, but find it amazing that there’s so much polemic debate about ALS vs the consumer of a product that may have aided others, and misrepresented a majority few who acted upon it’s own advertisement. We know the Tobacco industry has been through it, yet people still make the purchase after the numerous law suits it faced.

Again after litigation of such case giving, a settlement will be reached, no Company wants bad press and I assure you ALS will change it’s wording, advertisement etc. and continue to do business with those consumers who choose to have their ostentatious beliefs thereof. As the consumer we learn lessons everyday about any particular product and it’s marketing, advertisement and yet many still make such purchase as they see fit. "What’s good for me, may not be good for you" and vise vera we all want that edge, and many will pay the price to achieve such so be it I say.. My aphorism Choose your own Poison!

I see many acquisitions made by both sides of this forum, one that protects the product and one that never used or has no interest in such. However the key here should be focused on the Marketing and the Advertisement it utilized to misrepresent, defraud etc. as the said Law Suit mentions by Minnesota Law.

buffhntr

I dont think it is 100percent but I think it helps give you a slight edge

hardcorehunter

Yea. If he is claiming carbon can be reactivated in a homeowners' dryer.