Replies to post #37121 on Medizone Intl. (fka MZEIQ)

[Joe_NY]

Captain Clueless put a political hack in charge of the Ebola "scandal." That's what we need to get out of the starting gate. Someone with a track record and success in the medical industry, has proven so far, from what we know, to be too forward thinking.

[GreenOwner]

From what I recall, EPA mandated new requirements just as Medizone sent in the Asepticsure application.
New Validation runs were required (160 of them).
The validation runs were completed nearly a year ago.
Now the application goes through the bureaucracy of the agency.
No telling how long it will take.

[teq0904]

Here is my post that Ben replied to, edited.
EPA could care less about needs. Many posters here think you just stand in line at an EPA wicket and wait for an available employee to listen to your proposition and if it makes sense you have approval. Reality is it is a giant government bureaucracy.
As soon as he got in, Obama cancelled the EPA emergency approval process for new plant seed chemical treatments (which is the EPA's jurisdictional area among many other areas) that I was familiar with, so they stiffened in that area at least. My investment company was about to apply for a new chemical that was environmentally benign - the existing grandfathered chemicals are very toxic - until Obama came along. This company ran out of money trying to do all the testing the EPA requested, and put the chemical on the back burner. Obama likely stiffened the EPA elsewhere where he could too.
EPA is government and cares only about the environment, so all the posts about hurrying the EPA up and enlightening them about the value of your tech are like writing Obama for whatever you happen to want and expecting he has nothing else to do but comply.
btw, I talked to the CEO of a company in bacterial control who is not in mzei target space of disinfecting rooms, and brought up mzei's tech and the EPA. He said EPA and FDA signed a turf treaty years ago, so the 2 departments have specified turf to stick to and the other one stays off. The history, per him, was that previously at least once, the EPA approved something the FDA didn't like so this treaty ended that issue.
He said what I had posted before, "This EPA review is purely about environmental issues and has nothing to do with efficacy."