Page 97 - Alpha Tech Pet, Inc. - Distributor Support Binder (April 2013)

©1998‐2012 Elliott Affiliates, Ltd. and may not be duplicated by any means. www.ealtd.com
CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY INFORMATION Page 10 of 10
Tersano LotusPro vs. Ionized Water by Type of Item
The Table below presents the raw ATP data measured during the conduct of this study.
Items LotusPro
Ionized
Water
Banister/railing 37.0 109
Bench 9.0 109
Call Button 12.5 151
Chair 12.0 129
Desk 38.5 120
Door 23.9 278
Drinking Fountain 39.5 237
Sink/fixtures 11.3 436
Soap dispenser 20.2 130
Table 53.0 237
Toilet/fixtures 9.0 102
Waste container 100.0 407
Overall Average 30.5 204
Overall, the data shows a 668+% reduced level of organic load for the LotusPro product
compared to the ionized water cleaning alternative.
OVERALL STUDY CONCLUSIONS
The Tersano LotusPro device delivered achieved a respectable 92.5% average reduction in
organic load for the rooms and items tested.
When compared to the ionized water alternative, ATP RLU readings were over 668% higher for the
ionized water approach. On the basis of the results of this study, we must conclude that the
LotusPro device delivers superior organic load reductions for Room and Item surfaces.
Submitted by: Vince Elliott, BS, MHS velliott@ealtd.com 410-584-8560
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
Chart 6: ATP Levels for Items
LotusPro vs. Ionized Water
LotusPro
Ionized Water
After cleaning ATP
levels were measured
to compare the extent
of organic reduction
delivered by the
LotusPro and the
ionized water
alternative. LotusPro
ATP reductions were
more effective for the
items and surfaces
evaluated. The organic
load reduction was
reduced to 30.5 for the
LotusPro strategy vs.
204 for the ionized
water approach