We are happy to help you with any questions you may have

Open 7 days: 888-688-8889 For Technical Support call M-F 6 am to 6 pm

Alkaline Water Ionizers

Water Ionizer Comparison Study

  • Life Ionizers Admin
  • September 14th, 2010

Pilot study conducted by The Natural Therapies Research Board

Products Tested

  • Enagic® Leveluk SD501 Ionizer *
  • Enagic® Leveluk Super 501 *
  • Aquarius Rejuvenator Water Ionizer *
  • Ion Life Jupiter Athena Water Ionizer *
  • Ion Life Jupiter Orion Ionizer *
  • KYK Genesis Water Ionizer *
  • Life Ionizer 7500 *
  • Sanastec Lotus Alpha Water Ionizer *
  • Tyent MMP-7070 Turbo Ionizer *
  • Tyent Alkalux Water Ionizer *
  • Tyent Rettin TY2505W Water Ionizer *
  • Watershed Aquatonic 700 Water Ionizer *

Preliminary Procedure

Our preliminary tests were to compare units from the same manufacturer to retain the best unit from each manufacturer. Until this test was completed we were unaware the Aquarius and Orion were the same unit in a different package though the Orion performed slightly better in our initial tests. We were previously aware the Enagic devices were essentially the same and they performed statistically the same.

Preliminary Tests

Preliminary tests were conducted consecutively with five minutes between each test device to allow connecting and disconnecting each unit. Tests were conducted using filters supplied by the manufacturer at several different locations within the same water supply area. These test results were compared to tests run using two different pre-filtered water supply systems. The results confirmed that the manufacturer supplied filters were statistically effective at removing contaminants.

Initial tests were conducted by collecting five consecutive 100 ml flasks of filtered water from each device after the device indicated alkaline water was being produced. The differences in pH and ORP readings between the five samples for each unit were statistically insignificant.

The counter top devices chosen for the comprehensive tests were:

  1. Enagic® Leveluk SD501
  2. Ion Life Jupiter Orion
  3. KYK Genesis
  4. Life Ionizer 7500
  5. Sanastec Lotus Alpha
  6. Tyent 7070 Turbo
  7. Watershed Aquatonic 700

Head to Head pH and ORP Tests Procedure

Stage A: Two side-by-side sinks were used in the head to head tests. Unit #1 was connected to the left faucet and unit #2 to the right. Following the first run, consecutive runs were made using units #3 through #7 in order.

Stage B: Unit #1 was replaced by unit #2 for the first run; then by units # 3-7 for the next five runs. Stages C through G were conducted with units #3 – 7 connected to the left faucet and the other units connected to the right faucet in numerical order for each run during each stage.

The collection flasks were tested for contaminants, thoroughly cleansed, sterilized and labeled prior to collecting the water samples for each test run. The flasks were randomly selected and labeled by Stage, from A through G, and Unit number, from 1 through 7.

Three pH meters were tested and calibrated to measure pH and three were tested and calibrated to read ORP values. Six 500 ml beakers were filled with neutral tap water adjusted to 7.00 and 300 ml was poured into each of the six beakers. The test meters were placed in these beakers to neutralize them between tests. The water was replaced after each Stage of six head-to-head water comparisons.

All units were prepared to deliver water samples in the same manner. The units were turned on, adjusted to the highest alkalinity output and allowed to reach a stable output level. When the units were ready, a 300 ml water sample was collected in the appropriate flask and taken to the laboratory area where the pH was read by the three pH test instruments. The highest and lowest readings were rejected if these two results were within 5% of each other.

If the higher and lower readings were not within 5% of each other, the entire experiment was to be run again. Since this did not occur during any of the tests, none of the tests were rerun during any of the seven stages.

The middle pH and ORP scores were recorded for further analysis. The highest pH score was used as the basis for pH evaluation. All lower pH scores were converted to a percentage of the highest reading. The seven units were then ranked by this percentage. The average ORP score for all tests is given.

Alkaline Water Degradation Test Procedure

Seven 8.9 – 9.1 pH water samples from each of the seven units were inoculated according to the mixing directions given on the pesticide containers with one of the following popular pesticide chemicals:

  1. Diazinon
  2. Dursban
  3. Malathion
  4. Sevin
  5. Dycarb
  6. Dithane
  7. Azatin

These 49 test samples were tested for toxic chemical degradation daily. The tests were concluded when the pesticide became inert.

Clinical Test Procedure

 

Fourteen volunteers had saliva pH readings taken on days 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25 and 30 of a 30 day trial. At the same time a tongue evaluation was made and compared to the saliva pH readings. The results of the initial saliva tests were ranked 1-14; and volunteers were paired

So the sum of their saliva test ranks totaled 15. Thus the highest and lowest scoring subjects were paired as were the middle two scoring subjects and so on. The test subjects were told they were randomly placed into pairs.

The volunteers were allowed to come to headquarters at any time, seven days a week, to collect a gallon or two of alkaline water from their assigned water ionizer unit. They were further instructed to use the test water for all cooking, coffee, tea and drinking water. The units numbered 1-7 were assigned by number to the test subjects with saliva test scores ranked 1-7 and their partners. All test subjects were told the partners were randomly assigned to the alkaline ionization units.

The four investigators were given the task to discover any relationship between pH readings and the condition of the test subject’s tongues. Each investigator was asked to keep copious notes about the tongues of the test subjects and to pay special attention to any changes in the tongue’s condition.

Head to Head pH Test Results

A total of 36 sets of pH statistics were gained for each unit tested from each of the 18 tests consisting of seven stages. These scores were tabulated. The mean and medium test score was derived for each unit. Test reliability and variance were calculated using standard methods and converted to a percentile range that captures the true pH percentiles 95% of the time.

The range of pH for each device varied considerably depending upon the water supply. At one location the Life Ionizer 7500 consistently generated a pH of 11.35 – 11.37 while at another location it generated ionized water with a pH of 8.86 – 9.41 using the same settings. The first water supply was much more mineralized than the second. Some units performed better with mineralized water supplies. Others did not. In fairness to all unit manufacturers the pH results were converted to rank and percentile data.

Unit Tested
Rank
Percentile
1. Enagic Leveluk SD501
4
89 – 92
2. Ion Life Jupiter Orion
6
91 – 95
3. KYK Genesis
5
86 – 88
4. Life Ionizer 7500
1
96 -100
5. Sanastec Lotus Alpha
7
77 – 81
6. Tyent 7070 Turbo
2
94 – 97
7. Watershed Aquatonic 700
6
79 – 84

Head to Head ORP Test Results

A total of 36 sets of ORP statistics were gained for each unit tested from each of the 18 tests consisting of seven stages. These scores were tabulated and the average ORP calculated. The raw score averages were ranked from 1 to 7 for reporting purposes. The results given here are based on the average ORP for a total of 648 test scores for each ionization unit. We decided to use the average ORP over all tests as better representing the data.

Unit Tested
Rank
Avg. ORP
1. Enagic Leveluk SD501
7
-171
2. Ion Life Jupiter Orion
3
-358
3. KYK Genesis
6
-186
4. Life Ionizer 7500
1
-832
5. Sanastec Lotus Alpha
5
-213
6. Tyent 7070 Turbo
2
-410
7. Watershed Aquatonic 700
4
-227

Alkaline Water Degradation Test Results

Cornel University has done extensive research on the degradation of herbicides, pesticides and other petrochemical compounds in alkaline water. This research was done to encourage farmers to use acidic ground water because alkaline water denatured the chemicals. In other words, alkaline water neutralized the toxic effects of petrochemicals.

Our intention was to replicate the Cornel findings. All seven pesticide samples of Diazinon became inert within seven days. All seven samples of Dithane became inert within 5 days. All seven samples of Dycarb became inert within 4 days. All seven samples of Dursban became inert within 3 days. All seven samples of Azatin, Malathion and Sevin became inert within two days. The term “became inert” was defined the point where 80% of the pesticide solution was chemically altered through oxygenation, hydrogenation or both and no longer toxic.

Clinical Test Results

More than anything these clinical trials indicated a distinct correlation between low pH and the color of the mucus coating on the test subject’s tongues: the lower the saliva pH, the whiter the coloration of the mucus covering the top of the test subject’s tongue. We obviously need more study in this area to create a diagnostic chart for acidosis.