At the risk of wasting time and energy, let me say the following:
Here's one theory to explain the recent surge:
"There seems no limit to the number of times Ed Marshall can raise false hopes, get a little bump in the share price, suck in some new investor money, then watch the price erode and a few months later play the game all over again."
I assume you're referring to our recent spike, followed by a few days' sliding and sideways movement. So let's figure this out. The claim apparently is that by wielding his devious control over the mass media, Ed got Jen Weiszener (sp.?) to write about bed bugs in her MarketWatch column, and probably paid her off to mention Dick Zoutman and AsepticSure in the article.
He then could suck in unsuspecting suckers who fell for it. But the bubble couldn't sustain itself, since there's nothing at all behind it other than Ed's machinations. Hmmmm... Pretty sinister stuff indeed.
The contract with the largest medical supplier in Canada? The initial sales? The patents both issued and pending? Hospital testing begun? The peer reviewed results, showing that Medizone is working slowly and methodically to build a solid scientific base for its product? The stated intention to bring in more experienced executives as commercialization develops, continuing the process that began with Glen Balzer coming on board?
All that is totally irrelevant. All that created the spike in volume and price was Ed's conspiracy to snare poor innocent Mom and Pop types who fell for his "false hopes".
On the very day of the huge jump, several posters, myself included, and others who are much more savvy than I, predicted that the price will fall back and consolidate. It looks like we have formed a new base at around .14. Whenever the next news comes in, we will hopefully be seeing a climb from there.
The public deserves a little more credit. When AsepticSure got more exposure, people looked into it, and saw a tiny company that seems poised to make an impact with a new technology. That narrative makes a lot more sense IMO than the "Evil Ed" theory.