A bow hunter that hunts my place uses it. Bottom line is that he sees a lot more than I do.
Do you blame that on the fact he uses ozone? Or do you have other reasons he sees more deer than you do?
Yeah, depending on where you are on my place will often determine where you see more or less game.
The claim that the bow hunter uses one and sees more deer would assume that absolutely everything else is exactly the same and that just isn't the case in nature. It would assume that the deer are evenly distributed across the property in the first place such that both locations have equal chances of seeing deer. It would assume that both locations are in comparable geographic positions relative to deer travel patterns, wind patterns, food resources, and water resources. It would assume that both locations suffer equal amounts of outside disturbances such as road noise. It assumes that both hunter are equally quiet and motionless. It assumes that both hunters are equally observant. It assumes that both hunters report their observations equally accurately. In other words, it assumes that the only difference in the two situations is that one guy is using an ozone generator. This is highly unlikely to be true.
Case and point, at my place where I have a box stand, we have two feeders set up, one at 45 yards and one at 100 yards. We used to run cameras on each. It was common for deer and hogs to hit one feeder but not the other, despite the feeders being only 55 yards apart and line of sight visible to one another. We were going to take one down until we realized that each seemed to have their own particular draw or attraction for game.
Two weeks ago, I hunted with Chuck and David, sitting with Chuck. David was in another blind. I was the only one who spotted hogs that evening. I saw more hogs than Chuck despite the fact that he was sitting less than a foot away from me.
Here is a test that is sometimes cited as proof. Notice how much is going into this. Notice that the target is in an enclosed environment that has been saturated by ozone in preparation before entry and sat inside the box with the ozone generator running. This is NOT how ozone is used in the field and is potentially hazardous to the user. Never mind all the other stuff that was being done as well.https://www.fieldandstream.com/does-scent-control-work/
What is interesting to note is that when people are successful when using a product such a a HECS suit, new camo, scent locker, scent cover, etc., they attribute the success to the product they are using. If they don't have luck despite using said product, there are claims such as "Well, the deer/hogs just weren't moving." "I must have been making too much noise." "Other hunters scared away the game." In other words, there is no way for the product to fail as failure is always attributed to other factors, success only being attributed to the new product. In other words, it becomes non-falsifiable.
Often times, people will modify their own behavior, albeit unconsciously, to make the product work better. There are people who actually got better gas mileage using magnets on their fuel line, using the vornado, etc. Some people really do get better gas mileage when they use them because they start driving better. The products themselves don't actually work. Pretty soon, they are back to their crappy gas mileage despite using the product and that is because their behavior changed.https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0057-gas-saving-products
Then there is the factor of buyer embarrassment. Nobody wants to admit to spending big bucks on a piece of garbage.
Looking at some reviews, it is interesting to see where you can get better results with a $11 spray (4.5 stars) than with $530 Ozonics generator (3.5 stars).https://smile.amazon.com/Scent-Kill...KBGHJ0YFB2F&psc=1&qid=1584229477https://smile.amazon.com/Ozonics-HR...ds=ozonics&qid=1584229265&sr=8-7