One of the inclosures sent to me was a letter from a young physician on the staff of the Michael Reese Hospital, Chicago, who was paid $25 to make bacteriologic tests in pure cultures. He reported: "This is to certify that the fluid Liquozone handed to me for bacteriologic examination has shown bacteriologic and germicidal properties." At the same time he {026}informed the Liquozone agent that the mixture would be worthless medicinally. He writes me as follows: "I have never used or indorsed Liquozone; furthermore, its action would be harmful when taken internally. Can report a case of gastric ulcer due probably to its use." Later in my investigations I came on this certificate again. It was quoted, in a report on Liquozone, made by the head of a prominent Chicago laboratory for a medical journal, and it was designated "Report made by the Michael Reese Hospital," without comment or investigation. This surprising garbling of the facts may have been due to carelessness, or it may have some connection with the fact that the laboratory investigation was about that time employed to do work for Mr. Douglas Smith, Liquozone's president. Another document is an enthusiastic "puff" of Liquozone, quoted as being contributed by Dr. W. H. Myers in _The New York Journal of Health_. There is not nor ever has been any such magazine as _The New York Journal of Health_. Dr. W. H. Myers, or some person masquerading under that name, got out a bogus "dummy" (for publication only, and not as guarantee of good faith) at a small charge to the Liquozone people. For convenience I list several letters quoted or sent to me, with the result of investigations. The Suffolk Hospital and Dispensary of Boston, through its president, Albert C. Smith, writes: "Our test shows it (Liquozone) to possess great remedial value." The letter I have found to be genuine. But the hospital _medical_ authorities say that they know nothing of Liquozone and never prescribe it. If President Smith is prescribing it he is liable to arrest, as he is not an M.D. A favoring letter from "Dr." Fred W. Porter of Tampa, Fla., is quoted. The Liquozone recipients of the letter forgot to mention that "Dr." Porter is not an M.D., but a veterinary surgeon, as is shown by his letter head. Dr. George E. Bliss of Maple Rapids, Mich., has used Liquozone for cancer patients. Dr. Bliss writes me, under the flaming headline of his "cancer cure," that his letter is genuine and "not solicitated." Dr. A. A. Bell of Madison, Ga., is quoted as saying: "I found Liquozone to invigorate digestion." He is _not_ quoted (although he wrote it) as saying that his own personal experience with it had shown it to be ineffective. I have seen the original letter, and the unfavorable part of it was blue-penciled.