First come I, my name is Jowett,
There’s no knowledge but I know it,
I am the Master of this College.
What I don’t know isn’t knowledge.
Consumer Reports magazine (Denver 1996) tested a $535 magnetic water treatment device from Descal-A-Matic Corporation. Two electric water heaters were installed in the home of one of the Consumer Reports staffers. The hard water (200 ppm) entering one of the heaters was first passed through the magnetic treatment device. The second water heater received untreated water. The water heaters were cut open after more than two years and after more than 10,000 gallons of water were heated by each heater. The tanks were found to contain the same quantity and texture of scale. Consumer Reports concluded that the Descal-A-Matic unit was ineffective.
Here is a June 2001 report:
If you read this report, notice that the complete water analyses are included, the test was run for 60 days, test log was submitted, several de-scaling devices were evaluated, and the crystalline structure of the scaling deposit was identified.
The conclusion:
The results of this study do not indicate any clear advantage for any of the three devices tested versus a control for the inhibition of mineral scale formation or the corrosion of copper. The test protocol was designed to simulate the method of production of hot water used in many larger institutional type settings that employ a shell and tube heat exchanger for the production of hot water. The findings do not support the claims of the manufacturers regarding the ability of their respective devices prevent mineral scale formation in hot potable water systems. The amount of mineral scale formed for the control versus device heat exchange tubes was relatively constant, and proved to be an effective insulator of heat transfer across the tube surface. The scale formed was found to be a type of calcite (calcium carbonate), and had the same crystalline structure for each heat exchange tube. There was no discernible effect on the crystalline structure of the scale formed by any of the tested.
How long should one wait for science to achieve certainty before we must move ahead with the timely, just, efficient, and reliable resolution required by modern society?
For every Copernicus, there is the phrenology advocate and the alchemist. The truth may be relative, but there are certain things that we can definitely exclude as not being true, more likely than not.
The scientific consensus with >99 percent certainty is that these magnetic devices do not work.
People on this forum have periodically argued back and forth as to whether magnetic devices work or not. The bottom line is that there is not a single user or organization with a major investment (say >$100K) in water treatment equipment that uses one of these magnetic devices.
