After the arrest of ATSC owner and maker of the ADE-651, Unival which sold the Sniffex, Sniffex Plus, and now the HEDD1 (Sniffex with a battery stuck inside) put out the press release below to explain why their dowsing rod is so much better than the ADE651, H3 Tec, GT200, or any other similar dowsing device for explosives, weapons, or drugs. Enjoy the laughs!
Unival Group comments alleged fraud linked to ADE651 explosive detectors
16:17 GMT, January 25, 2010 On 22 January 2010 BBC 2 television reported on an alleged fraud linked to the sale of 1,500 ADE651 reference-card based explosive detectors sold to the Iraqi government, claiming these devices did not function as promised.
During the related investigation, the device was tested by Cambridge University's Computer Laboratory. Dr. Kuhn of CU stated unambiguously that the ADE651 contained nothing but the type of anti-theft tag sensor used to prevent theft from retail shops. He added, “It was impossible that it could detect anything at all” and that the card had “absolutely nothing to do with the detection of TNT or other explosives”.
Against this background, unival® group would like to pro-actively inform its clients and distributors that the HEDD1®, along with all previous generations of our handheld explosive detection devices, are completely different from reference-card based devices, as our systems work on the patented Magneto-Electrostatic-Detection (MED) principle. That is, they are active devices that modulate a specific magnetic field detecting only the modulation of the special bond balance (energy) between Nitrogen and Oxygen found in -NO2/-NO3 and H2O2 compounds, which are part of almost all conventional, military and also liquid explosives.
HEDD1 works by creating a magnetic field that is specifically modulated through its internal container which houses a non explosive/ non radioactive reference source generated for explosive detection. HEDD1, in comparison to the previous generation models, also contains a specific Lithium battery that further enhances the magnetic field to make the device even more sensitive and user-friendly and now allows for static detection, which is especially helpful for detection scenarios at access points. The operator does not need to move but can detect explosives in persons, cars and objects, even while operating behind barriers during covert detection operations.
The only similarity between HEDD1 and ADE651 (or similar devices such as GT200, MOLE, Alpha6 etc.) is the antenna. The antenna is currently needed in the HEDD1 to point the direction towards explosives by applying the cross-bearing-method to detect the exact location of explosives. The antenna installed in the HEDD1, however, is unique and is specially produced for our devices. Even though the antenna is often criticized for making HEDD1 a rather analogue device, it allows the device to remain handheld and independent from a continuous power-supply, making possible real-time and stand-alone detection of explosives.
For this reason, HEDD1 is highly complementary to currently available detection methods based upon trace detection and other technologies. We are also working in cooperation with specialized research laboratories on sensor integration to digitize the device and remove the antenna, but this will take additional time and intensive R&D as the currently available technology is not capable of being integrated into handheld devices. In addition, we are also working on a stationary version that will be available in 2010 that will contain communication interfaces allowing for the seamless integration into electronic access control scenarios.
We have strong reason to believe that the reference-card based devices have been created by a group of people who initially tried to copy our technology but failed to reproduce the MED method. This is why they only copied the general shape and had to add another method, which they believed would be close to our approach. The result has been disastrous and they have created a massive scam, which is despicable.
Rumours about the malfunctioning of the ADE 651/ GT200 have circulated in several international markets for some time now. These rumours finally escalated when bombings in Iraq could not be prevented at ADE651-equipped checkpoints . The perpetrators and vehicles used in these attacks were able to transport explosives and weapons unhindered, as the ADE651 simply did not work. This obviously comes as no surprise.
As a consequence of the related skepticism about these types of devices that has been mounting for quite some time, we have had to overcome very serious, yet understandable, doubts from our clients. As a result, all of our recent sales, concluded either directly or through our local distributors, were based upon highly intensive demonstrations and audits. All demonstrations that we have conducted since 2005 have been successful, leading to our clients purchasing the device and its technology based upon these test results. The average detection rate has always been between 70-80% and with the further improvement of the HEDD1, which is based upon very intensive research and development, we have recently achieved demonstrations with 80-100% detection rates of hidden explosives, weapons and ammunition.
The last demonstration of the HEDD1 to European Special Police and EOD forces took place on 18th January 2010. This demonstration achieved a 100% detection rate and the original wording from this client’s review of our product is as follows:
- C4 M112
- TNT-block 125 gr.
- TNT-Block 250 gr.
- detonating cord PETN
- detonating cord (black powder)
- Yugoslavian hand grenade M75 PETN
- Glock 17 pistol with magazine
- SIG 228 assault rifle without magazine (detection was thus only possible through residual gun powder traces left from firing 4 months previously)
The above explosives have been positioned in misc. cases and hiding spots (up to 50 meters away) and have all been detected and located with the HEDD1 (reference available from unival group).
HEDD1 is therefore perfectly capable to improve security standards significantly if embedded into the correct scenarios. For this reason, our clients will be specially trained for use in the required scenarios in order to provide the best possible device for them. All unival distributors are widely trained on HEDD1 and our product portfolio in order to generate real values for our clients. This also includes a transparent, fair and adequate price strategy that is constantly reviewed by our sales department in order to prevent any potential malpractice.
Serial production of the HEDD1 is ISO 9001 certified and the device is in full compliance with CE regulations. In addition, HEDD1 has been tested and approved by TUV in 2010.
In early February 2010 we will begin testing, along with German authorities, and within this framework we will also certify the device in its function once it is determined which certification body is best suitable for our international clients.
We pledge that unival group will only supply reliable technologies that have been tested and approved by independent testing authorities. We are strongly committed to supporting our clients in the fight against global terror and will continue to strive for the best products and technologies.
Let us look at some of these claims
"The only similarity between HEDD1 and ADE651 (or similar devices such as GT200, MOLE, Alpha6 etc.) is the antenna."
That is because all of them are dowsing rods! The long antenna swings freely, and is not controlled by a motor, servo, actuator, or any other method. It is on a pivot, and will tilt easily with gravity or wind. This magnifies the slight hand movements of the user when they tilt their hand without noticing it.
All demonstrations that we have conducted since 2005 have been successful, leading to our clients purchasing the device and its technology based upon these test results. The HEDD1 is a new version of Sniffex and Sniffex Plus. Are they calling the test of the Sniffex in front of the US Navy explosives experts successful? The American representative of the company was the one doing the demonstration and admitted to the Dallas Morning News that it was a complete failure. The device was less accurate at finding a hidden explosive than flipping a coin or randomly guessing. A DEMONSTRATION IS NOT THE SAME AS A SCIENTIFIC DOUBLE BLIND TEST! A demonstration is ADVERTISING, to make the product look good and to sell it to the customer!
"we have recently achieved demonstrations with 80-100% detection rates of hidden explosives, weapons and ammunition." Prove it! In the tests by the US Navy, the improvement in finding hidden weapons over guessing was ZERO percent. Now you are saying it is 100 percent accurate?? Why not take Mr. James Randi up on his challenge and win the $1 million from him. That would be great publicity if your device really did work. But since it does not work, I will bet you will not take the challenge.