Ann: Trading Halt, page-18

@tukebay ... A long post not addressing a single point..

Authorities don't care what a management of a company thinks about their products, they want independent experts opinions, therefore their a*** is covered legally. This is right across the ASX in every field and also everywhere in government and most corporations.

There simply is no announcements showing the product is safe to use with anything other than the 'word' of the company.

You keep ignoring that the company itself has described the FRG unit as an ozone generator in ambient air. It doesn't matter who's qualifications are bigger than others, it doesn't change the fact that it is JUST the company saying it is 'safe'. There is no independent expert report stating it.

The ASX obviously didn't like Thursday's announcement and have put out a please explain, which Purifloh was unable to do in a couple of hours on Friday after trading was paused. Hopefully we all find out the questions and answers on Monday morning.

The fact you don't see a problem with the company 'calling' the government to install a device that hasn't had rigorous testing for safety, states a lot about your thinking in regard to Purifloh. You are obviously in way too deep to think clearly.

I've seen lots of companies make big mistakes with products, resources, reporting to the ASX, and all of those companies have had people on these threads support them as if the company could do no wrong, the directors wouldn't make mistakes etc.

Look at the leadership in companies like Westpac, AMP, Rio Tinto over the last couple of years all make huge errors of judgement in their decision making. Do you really think that directors of a minor company couldn't make some serious mistakes??

In regards to tech, I remember back to Ceramic Fuel Cells where shareholders were bled dry until the company went bust, but despite obvious mistakes, none of the insiders could see anything wrong. On these threads I had people defending the company and telling me I was so wrong for a couple of years until I was proven correct when the company folded. It was exactly the same head in the sand approach that you are using, putting management on a pedestal as if they were gods, when they are only people that make mistakes like the rest of us.

The FRG unit is an ozone generator in ambient air as described by the company. That is the company stating that, which you seem to ignore, as if the FRG ozone was different to other ozone. It isn't different it's just ozone.
Health authorities have put out statements that ozone generators are bad for occupied spaces.

Purifloh have not mentioned anything that would 'neutralize' the ozone coming out of the FRG unit. Last year there was a vague mention of a 'neutralizer' (no details of what it was or how it worked), that has since disappeared from the last presentation. 17/3/21. It is on the company webpage still.

If you think any company or government department would allow an ozone generator to be used in occupied areas, without independent testing for safety, given OH&S rules you are dreaming.

I'll even concede that if the company could come up with a way to neutralize the ozone (and possible other chemicals like by-products of 'smells' breaking down), then it would be unique, as no other ozone generator has such a device. However it makes the 'neutralizer' the valuable IP not the ozone generator.

Of course the best way forward, and the best advertising, is to have an independent lab prove all the claims the company is making, so it should easily be seen as the BEST thing to do, yet you seem against it!!

Why are you against independent testing?? Are you worried the independent lab will find ozone in the residual air??

7 years of R&D according to the Purifloh web page, but no testing for safety or residual by-product output!! Why hasn't the company had it tested for safety??