RE: CS>Silver Sol>

[Sandy]

P.S. Not having a go Sandy, just exercising my freedom to air an opinion in a 
free and open manner .


N.
 
I was not having a go either, Nevilleas was I.  ;) 
 
S.

--- On Sun, 4/28/13, Neville Munn  wrote:


From: Neville Munn 
Subject: RE: CS>Silver Sol>
To: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Date: Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:52 PM














 
 
--- On Sun, 4/28/13, Cyndi  wrote:


From: Cyndi 
Subject: CS>Silver Sol
To: silver-list@eskimo.com
Date: Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:54 AM


There is a Yahoo group called germkiller which usually sticks to electronic 
currents to heal but the owner of the group just posted that cs is no good, 
that it doesn't do anything taken internally and that we should all be using 
Silver Sol instead. What is it, does anyone know?

She gave a link
http://www.rxsilver.com/html/silver_sol_versus_colloidal_si.html

When I posted that I've had successes with cs she refused to post that. I'm 
kinda pissed that she would post what she did and not let anyone refute her.

Cyndi


--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org

Unsubscribe:

Archives:  http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html

Off-Topic discussions: 
List Owner: Mike Devour 

CS>Silver Sol>>for the sake of clarity

[Sandy]

Since bits and pieces of bG's post from the microelectricitygermkiller forum on 
the subject of Silver Sol has been posted I thought it only fair to post the 
whole thing so certain parts will not be taken out of context.
 
I believe you will find bG wants posters to report their results using Silver 
Sol for Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS 'NOT' their results using CS for 
Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS.
 
I do have a quibble with CS and Silver Sol claims that these products will not 
kill the good bacteria in the intestines. I
 
Sandy
 
Here is bG's complete post
 
I am mentioning Silver Sol here for benefit of people with Lyme's and other
things like Hep-C, HIV, etc. We have nothing yet for them and this looks
promising.

I won't be allowing discussions about it and anything else related to it since
it is very off topic here. However, if someone were to read this information
then go buy some and try it, then report results, I will post the results. If
it's encouraging enough, I may start another group to track it. It really needs
some people to try it and measure test results and so forth in order to evaluate
it independently. It already has some studies here and there, lots of users,
etc. But no one really doing anything carefully with it against the "big
systemics".

So here is some info on it, try it and post results good, bad, indifferent. If
I delete your post I don't mean to be mean, but if it is a report against your
Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS, I will post it.

thanks, bG


Here is the info:

Silver Sol is NOT 'colloidal silver'. Not at all. Don't mix up the 2. They are
different. Water vs gasoline. The names are confusing everyone, so no shame in
getting them mixed up. I refer to them simply as CS and SS. CS is good for
external use, not effective for internal use. SS works both ways. CS you can
make using simple low voltage home devices. SS you must buy. Swanson's has it
for about 15/bottle that should last about a month of daily uses for one person
using it for systemic infections, even the 'big' ones.

CS is a one particle-per-germ molecule. It gets used up when it kills a germ.
SS does not get used up with just one germ, in fact, it can kill any number of
germs all using the same particle of SS!! The dose, therefore, it many times
less than CS, even if CS could work inside the body, which it can't. SS's
chemical structure is such that killing a germ both discharges and recharges the
SS molecule. So, the SS acts as a catalyst, rather than as a reactant, to use
the big words. Catalysts do not change during a reaction. SS stays active in
the body 99 percent. It is excreted 100 percent and does not stand a chance to
create argyria.

Those with chronic systemic infection, such as HIV, Hep-C, Lyme's etc would be
wise to at least try this SS stuff and see if it affects your test numbers and
or symptoms.

Studies on malaria showed it wiped out the germ in 3-7 day average in all 56
subjects tested, which means SS survives in blood, unlike CS which does not
retain its active charge in bloodstream, which is why HIV viral load does not
respond to CS. It can penetrate liver cells to kill virus that drugs cannot.
Thus killing malaria in blood is only part of the story: the SS can also get to
it inside the liver cells to attack malaria in the liver. Blood electrification
cannot do this, so only treats part of the malarial parasites, while SS reaches
all of it.

Remember, SS is new, it is NOT CS. The world still thinks it is all the same
and does not work. And sure enough CS will not work internally except in rare
cases of food poisoning if gotten very quickly, and of course CS is great on
surface infections on the skin where it does not enter the body to any major
extent. The body's fluids such as stomach acid, and acetic acid in the
bloodstream, nullifies CS.

But NOT SS.

The world seems asleep to this new substance, thinking the word 'silver' is all
the same thing. This new molecule is composed of both silver and oxygen.
Instead of a single disposable electrical charge like colloidal silver, it has 3
permanent charges which interchange and restore themselves whenever the molecule
kills a germ. One molecule of SS can kill an unlimited number of germs, thus
the dosage for SS is 100 times lower than for CS. It continues killing germs as
long as it remains in the body, which is about 24 hours per dose. It does not
deplete itself or get tired out. It has shown ability to get into the blood and
kill germs, where CS did not. It does not kill off gut flora, either, as most
of it gets into bloodstream before it can reach them in large numbers.

It is a fatal mistake to confuse Silver Sol with 'silver' or 'colloidal silver'.
One is a miracle, the other is just an ointment of sorts. There will be stories
about CS doing great things, but check closer, it will be found ineffective
long-term, and often delusory. Studies exist on SS which do show the results,
none for CS except in labs where it r

Re: CS>Silver Sol>>for the sake of clarity

[Sandy]

As I
--- On Mon, 4/29/13, Sandy  wrote:


From: Sandy 
Subject: CS>Silver Sol>>for the sake of clarity
To: "CS" 
Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 2:44 AM







Since bits and pieces of bG's post from the microelectricitygermkiller forum on 
the subject of Silver Sol has been posted I thought it only fair to post the 
whole thing so certain parts will not be taken out of context.
 
I believe you will find bG wants posters to report their results using Silver 
Sol for Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS 'NOT' their results using CS for 
Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS.
 
I do have a quibble with CS and Silver Sol claims that these products will not 
kill the good bacteria in the intestines. I
 
Sandy
 
Here is bG's complete post
 
I am mentioning Silver Sol here for benefit of people with Lyme's and other
things like Hep-C, HIV, etc. We have nothing yet for them and this looks
promising.

I won't be allowing discussions about it and anything else related to it since
it is very off topic here. However, if someone were to read this information
then go buy some and try it, then report results, I will post the results. If
it's encouraging enough, I may start another group to track it. It really needs
some people to try it and measure test results and so forth in order to evaluate
it independently. It already has some studies here and there, lots of users,
etc. But no one really doing anything carefully with it against the "big
systemics".

So here is some info on it, try it and post results good, bad, indifferent. If
I delete your post I don't mean to be mean, but if it is a report against your
Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS, I will post it.

thanks, bG


Here is the info:

Silver Sol is NOT 'colloidal silver'. Not at all. Don't mix up the 2. They are
different. Water vs gasoline. The names are confusing everyone, so no shame in
getting them mixed up. I refer to them simply as CS and SS. CS is good for
external use, not effective for internal use. SS works both ways. CS you can
make using simple low voltage home devices. SS you must buy. Swanson's has it
for about 15/bottle that should last about a month of daily uses for one person
using it for systemic infections, even the 'big' ones.

CS is a one particle-per-germ molecule. It gets used up when it kills a germ.
SS does not get used up with just one germ, in fact, it can kill any number of
germs all using the same particle of SS!! The dose, therefore, it many times
less than CS, even if CS could work inside the body, which it can't. SS's
chemical structure is such that killing a germ both discharges and recharges the
SS molecule. So, the SS acts as a catalyst, rather than as a reactant, to use
the big words. Catalysts do not change during a reaction. SS stays active in
the body 99 percent. It is excreted 100 percent and does not stand a chance to
create argyria.

Those with chronic systemic infection, such as HIV, Hep-C, Lyme's etc would be
wise to at least try this SS stuff and see if it affects your test numbers and
or symptoms.

Studies on malaria showed it wiped out the germ in 3-7 day average in all 56
subjects tested, which means SS survives in blood, unlike CS which does not
retain its active charge in bloodstream, which is why HIV viral load does not
respond to CS. It can penetrate liver cells to kill virus that drugs cannot.
Thus killing malaria in blood is only part of the story: the SS can also get to
it inside the liver cells to attack malaria in the liver. Blood electrification
cannot do this, so only treats part of the malarial parasites, while SS reaches
all of it.

Remember, SS is new, it is NOT CS. The world still thinks it is all the same
and does not work. And sure enough CS will not work internally except in rare
cases of food poisoning if gotten very quickly, and of course CS is great on
surface infections on the skin where it does not enter the body to any major
extent. The body's fluids such as stomach acid, and acetic acid in the
bloodstream, nullifies CS.

But NOT SS.

The world seems asleep to this new substance, thinking the word 'silver' is all
the same thing. This new molecule is composed of both silver and oxygen.
Instead of a single disposable electrical charge like colloidal silver, it has 3
permanent charges which interchange and restore themselves whenever the molecule
kills a germ. One molecule of SS can kill an unlimited number of germs, thus
the dosage for SS is 100 times lower than for CS. It continues killing germs as
long as it remains in the body, which is about 24 hours per dose. It does not
deplete itself or get tired out. It has shown ability to get into the blood and
kill germs, where CS did not. It does not kill off gut flora, either, as most
of it gets into bloodstream before it can reach them in large numbers.

It is a fatal mistake to confuse Silver Sol with 'silver' or 'colloidal silver'.
One is a miracle, the other is just an ointment of sorts. There will be stories
about CS doing great things, but

Re: CS>Silver Sol>>for the sake of clarity

[Sandy]

I apologize for my unfinished posts. For some reason they are sending before I 
can finish.

As I was saying [again]...I do have a quibble with CS and Silver Sol claims 
that these products will not kill the good bacteria in the intestines. I do not 
understand how these products can distinguish between good or harmful bacteria. 
Maybe someone can explain how they can do that.
 
Sandy
 
 
 
--- On Mon, 4/29/13, Sandy  wrote:


From: Sandy 
Subject: CS>Silver Sol>>for the sake of clarity
To: "CS" 
Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 2:44 AM







Since bits and pieces of bG's post from the microelectricitygermkiller forum on 
the subject of Silver Sol has been posted I thought it only fair to post the 
whole thing so certain parts will not be taken out of context.
 
I believe you will find bG wants posters to report their results using Silver 
Sol for Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS 'NOT' their results using CS for 
Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS.
 
I do have a quibble with CS and Silver Sol claims that these products will not 
kill the good bacteria in the intestines. I
 
Sandy
 
Here is bG's complete post
 
I am mentioning Silver Sol here for benefit of people with Lyme's and other
things like Hep-C, HIV, etc. We have nothing yet for them and this looks
promising.

I won't be allowing discussions about it and anything else related to it since
it is very off topic here. However, if someone were to read this information
then go buy some and try it, then report results, I will post the results. If
it's encouraging enough, I may start another group to track it. It really needs
some people to try it and measure test results and so forth in order to evaluate
it independently. It already has some studies here and there, lots of users,
etc. But no one really doing anything carefully with it against the "big
systemics".

So here is some info on it, try it and post results good, bad, indifferent. If
I delete your post I don't mean to be mean, but if it is a report against your
Lyme's, HIV, Hep-C, or possibly CFS, I will post it.

thanks, bG


Here is the info:

Silver Sol is NOT 'colloidal silver'. Not at all. Don't mix up the 2. They are
different. Water vs gasoline. The names are confusing everyone, so no shame in
getting them mixed up. I refer to them simply as CS and SS. CS is good for
external use, not effective for internal use. SS works both ways. CS you can
make using simple low voltage home devices. SS you must buy. Swanson's has it
for about 15/bottle that should last about a month of daily uses for one person
using it for systemic infections, even the 'big' ones.

CS is a one particle-per-germ molecule. It gets used up when it kills a germ.
SS does not get used up with just one germ, in fact, it can kill any number of
germs all using the same particle of SS!! The dose, therefore, it many times
less than CS, even if CS could work inside the body, which it can't. SS's
chemical structure is such that killing a germ both discharges and recharges the
SS molecule. So, the SS acts as a catalyst, rather than as a reactant, to use
the big words. Catalysts do not change during a reaction. SS stays active in
the body 99 percent. It is excreted 100 percent and does not stand a chance to
create argyria.

Those with chronic systemic infection, such as HIV, Hep-C, Lyme's etc would be
wise to at least try this SS stuff and see if it affects your test numbers and
or symptoms.

Studies on malaria showed it wiped out the germ in 3-7 day average in all 56
subjects tested, which means SS survives in blood, unlike CS which does not
retain its active charge in bloodstream, which is why HIV viral load does not
respond to CS. It can penetrate liver cells to kill virus that drugs cannot.
Thus killing malaria in blood is only part of the story: the SS can also get to
it inside the liver cells to attack malaria in the liver. Blood electrification
cannot do this, so only treats part of the malarial parasites, while SS reaches
all of it.

Remember, SS is new, it is NOT CS. The world still thinks it is all the same
and does not work. And sure enough CS will not work internally except in rare
cases of food poisoning if gotten very quickly, and of course CS is great on
surface infections on the skin where it does not enter the body to any major
extent. The body's fluids such as stomach acid, and acetic acid in the
bloodstream, nullifies CS.

But NOT SS.

The world seems asleep to this new substance, thinking the word 'silver' is all
the same thing. This new molecule is composed of both silver and oxygen.
Instead of a single disposable electrical charge like colloidal silver, it has 3
permanent charges which interchange and restore themselves whenever the molecule
kills a germ. One molecule of SS can kill an unlimited number of germs, thus
the dosage for SS is 100 times lower than for CS. It continues killing germs as
long as it remains in the body, which is about 24 hours per dose. It does not
deplete itself or get tired out. It

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Dorothy Fitzpatrick]

I thought our silver was a nano product!  I thought Œcolloidal¹ meant
Œsmallest particle i.e Œnano¹.  dee



From: Sandy 
Reply-To: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:22:42 -0700 (PDT)
To: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
Resent-From: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:22:46 -0700 (PDT)

FYI...
 
In the first place, the owner of the germkiller forum is a 'he' not a "she."
 
In the second place, he gave a very strict criteria for posting to the
silver sol subject. We were warned if we did not follow that criteria he
would not post our comments so clearly you refused to follow the criteria.
He told you not to be offended if he did not post your comment and that it
was nothing personal. If you're pissed it's because you want to be pissed,
IMO.
 
Thirdly, he never said CS was of no use...he said it worked quite well for
external uses and as many others have claimed in the past, CS is destroyed
by stomach acids and is not allowed to reach the intestines. Is this true? I
have no idea?
 
Forthly, the owner of the germkiller site was and is not trying to sell a
darn thing and I take offense of anyone saying such a thing on the word of
someone who did not even know he was a male or who did not personally read
his post.
 
Silver Sol is represented as being a nano product and not CS as we know it.
I've done some research and suggest others do the same before making
comments about itpositive or negative. I've personally never tried it so
cannot speak to it's effectiveness.
 
Sandy
 
--- On Sun, 4/28/13, Cyndi  wrote:
> 
> From: Cyndi 
> Subject: CS>Silver Sol
> To: silver-list@eskimo.com
> Date: Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:54 AM
> 
> There is a Yahoo group called germkiller which usually sticks to electronic
> currents to heal but the owner of the group just posted that cs is no good,
> that it doesn't do anything taken internally and that we should all be using
> Silver Sol instead. What is it, does anyone know?
> 
> She gave a link
> http://www.rxsilver.com/html/silver_sol_versus_colloidal_si.html
> 
> When I posted that I've had successes with cs she refused to post that. I'm
> kinda pissed that she would post what she did and not let anyone refute her.
> 
> Cyndi
> 
> 
> --
> The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
> Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org 
> 
> Unsubscribe:
>  
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> Archives:  http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html
> 
> Off-Topic discussions:   > >
> List Owner: Mike Devour   >
> 
> 

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Joe Huard]

Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking of 
making, as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is Bob 
Luhrs who signs as baby_grand or bG.
This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the difference 
between these 2 possible forms of nano silver before coming to the 
conclusion that Silver Sol is just marketing hype? To do that we need a 
person with an open mind who has already experienced CS/EIS and knows 
how it acts with them. Then, compare how Silver Sol acts.
I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little experience 
with CS to compare it to.


Joe H.

On 28/04/2013 6:22 PM, Sandy wrote:

FYI...
In the first place, the owner of the germkiller forum is a 'he' not a 
"she."
In the second place, he gave a very strict criteria for posting to the 
silver sol subject. We were warned if we did not follow that 
criteria he would not post our comments so clearly you refused to 
follow the criteria. He told you not to be offended if he did not post 
your comment and that it was nothing personal. If you're pissed it's 
because you want to be pissed, IMO.
Thirdly, he never said CS was of no use...he said it worked quite well 
for external uses and as many others have claimed in the past, CS is 
destroyed by stomach acids and is not allowed to reach the intestines. 
Is this true? I have no idea?
Forthly, the owner of the germkiller site was and is not trying to 
sell a darn thing and I take offense of anyone saying such a thing on 
the word of someone who did not even know he was a male or who did not 
personally read his post.
Silver Sol is represented as being a nano product and not CS as we 
know it. I've done some research and suggest others do the same before 
making comments about itpositive or negative. I've personally 
never tried it so cannot speak to it's effectiveness.

Sandy
--- On *Sun, 4/28/13, Cyndi //* wrote:


From: Cyndi 
Subject: CS>Silver Sol
To: silver-list@eskimo.com
Date: Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:54 AM

There is a Yahoo group called germkiller which usually sticks to
electronic currents to heal but the owner of the group just posted
that cs is no good, that it doesn't do anything taken internally
and that we should all be using Silver Sol instead. What is it,
does anyone know?

She gave a link
http://www.rxsilver.com/html/silver_sol_versus_colloidal_si.html

When I posted that I've had successes with cs she refused to post
that. I'm kinda pissed that she would post what she did and not
let anyone refute her.

Cyndi


--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org


Unsubscribe:
?subject=unsubscribe>
Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html

Off-Topic discussions: >
List Owner: Mike Devour >

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Cyndi]

On 4/29/2013 9:41 AM, Joe Huard wrote:
Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking of 
making, as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is Bob 
Luhrs who signs as baby_grand or bG.
This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the difference 
between these 2 possible forms of nano silver before coming to the 
conclusion that Silver Sol is just marketing hype? To do that we need 
a person with an open mind who has already experienced CS/EIS and 
knows how it acts with them. Then, compare how Silver Sol acts.
I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little experience 
with CS to compare it to.


Joe H.


Why not allow posts defending cs's ability to kill internally on the 
germkiller group? I have direct and personal experience with it. The 
only reason I can think of is that it disproves bg's assumption that it 
doesn't work internally. Why would someone with an open mind not want to 
hear real life proof that cs can reduce a viral load and share it with 
the group?


I am totally open minded, want to know what Silver Sol is and what it 
may do for me, but when it's attached to statements that are flat out 
lies how can I trust what that person says? When I refute those lies 
with personal, factual evidence and it's hidden from the group how can I 
give that person my trust? I have viral load tests that show in black 
and white what happened when I took cs. It's totally relevant to the 
original post and other posts related to SS were put through.


What happened was dishonest and definitely slanted towards this other 
product. The list owner isn't encouraging testing them against each 
other at all. He's pushing one while sitting on information about the other.


Cyndi

RE: CS>Silver Sol>

[Neville Munn]

It is a nano product, and don't listen to anyone who says any different.
Literature states that anything under one (1) micron in size is generally 
termed 'nano'.  Marketers can argue the toss over the size of those 'nano 
particles' until the cows come home as far as I'm concerned.  There wouldn't me 
too many membranes that our 'nano' product would fail to pass through relative 
to the human body.
Academia had to come up with a new definition for anything which came under one 
(1) micron in size, thus 'nano' was invented.  It's based on the metric system 
'nano' as in nanometre or nanometric, what's that, a billionth of a meter or 
something?
N.

Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:28:46 +0100
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
From: d...@deetroy.org
To: silver-list@eskimo.com



Re: CS>Silver Sol>


I thought our silver was a nano product!  I thought ‘colloidal’ meant ‘smallest 
particle i.e ‘nano’.  dee









  

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Joe Huard]

Yes, he is very tight about keeping his list on topic; that is, only 
talk about the godzilla apparatus. For the record, that has to be the 
cheapest way to get rid of germs, but it has limitations. He seems very 
excited to learn about Ag_4 O_4.
 I'm suggesting that we test it in this group, not his group. After 
this group comes to a decision, then we can share that with bG.
You know how much cs it takes to reduce your viral load to a certain 
number. If you took smaller amounts of Silver Sol as they suggest and 
got better results, that is info that anyone will want to know, even bG. 
If you and others find that SS is just CS with marketing hype, like 
Kephra claims on the http://www.cgcsforum.com/index.php?topic=1052.0, we 
all want to know that, too.


Joe H.
On 29/04/2013 10:27 AM, Cyndi wrote:

On 4/29/2013 9:41 AM, Joe Huard wrote:
Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking 
of making, as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is 
Bob Luhrs who signs as baby_grand or bG.
This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the difference 
between these 2 possible forms of nano silver before coming to the 
conclusion that Silver Sol is just marketing hype? To do that we need 
a person with an open mind who has already experienced CS/EIS and 
knows how it acts with them. Then, compare how Silver Sol acts.
I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little 
experience with CS to compare it to.


Joe H.


Why not allow posts defending cs's ability to kill internally on the 
germkiller group? I have direct and personal experience with it. The 
only reason I can think of is that it disproves bg's assumption that 
it doesn't work internally. Why would someone with an open mind not 
want to hear real life proof that cs can reduce a viral load and share 
it with the group?


I am totally open minded, want to know what Silver Sol is and what it 
may do for me, but when it's attached to statements that are flat out 
lies how can I trust what that person says? When I refute those lies 
with personal, factual evidence and it's hidden from the group how can 
I give that person my trust? I have viral load tests that show in 
black and white what happened when I took cs. It's totally relevant to 
the original post and other posts related to SS were put through.


What happened was dishonest and definitely slanted towards this other 
product. The list owner isn't encouraging testing them against each 
other at all. He's pushing one while sitting on information about the 
other.


Cyndi

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Dorothy Fitzpatrick]

I agree Cyndi.  I was on a homeopathic list and the list owner would NOT
allow ANY reference to colloidal silver (EIS) OR any information about how
it cured so many ailments.  To me this smacks of vested interest.

I have used EIS on ALL my dogs, and you can¹t fake cures with dogs!  There
was a horrendous enteritis type epidemic in my local park, which had many
friends dogs in the vets on drips.  Mine were given EIS at the first sign of
vomiting and/or disinterest in food (always a dire warning of things not
right) and were cured within a day.  This happened so many times that I am
totally sure of the internal use power of silver.  Indeed, my dogs never
went to the vets at all.  dee



From: Cyndi 
Reply-To: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:27:39 -0400
To: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
Resent-From: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 07:27:55 -0700 (PDT)

   
On 4/29/2013 9:41 AM, Joe Huard wrote:
 
 
>   Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking of
> making, as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is Bob Luhrs who
> signs as baby_grand or bG.
>  This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the difference between
> these 2 possible forms of nano silver before coming to the conclusion that
> Silver Sol is just marketing hype? To do that we need a person with an open
> mind who has already experienced CS/EIS and knows how it acts with them. Then,
> compare how Silver Sol acts.
>  I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little experience with
> CS to compare it to.
>  
>  Joe H.
>  
 
 Why not allow posts defending cs's ability to kill internally on the
germkiller group? I have direct and personal experience with it. The only
reason I can think of is that it disproves bg's assumption that it doesn't
work internally. Why would someone with an open mind not want to hear real
life proof that cs can reduce a viral load and share it with the group?
 
 I am totally open minded, want to know what Silver Sol is and what it may
do for me, but when it's attached to statements that are flat out lies how
can I trust what that person says? When I refute those lies with personal,
factual evidence and it's hidden from the group how can I give that person
my trust? I have viral load tests that show in black and white what happened
when I took cs. It's totally relevant to the original post and other posts
related to SS were put through.
 
 What happened was dishonest and definitely slanted towards this other
product. The list owner isn't encouraging testing them against each other at
all. He's pushing one while sitting on information about the other.
 
 Cyndi
 

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[James McDonald]

Most of us will want your info as to add to our store of knowledge. All your 
info can gelp us determine doseages and effects. Every little bit of info adds 
to the whole and with enough info we will be able to produce a chart of 
doseages/body weight/ppm of silver. Some people just don't want us to have the 
info to help others as it could/would/ reduce the money going into their 
pockets."They" will do almost anything, including disinformation, mudding of 
the "waters" and outright distortion of what kind of silver/make up/production 
of/what it actually is.




 From: Joe Huard 
To: silver-list@eskimo.com 
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
 


Yes, he is very tight about keeping his list on topic; that is, only talk about 
the godzilla apparatus. For the record, that has to be the cheapest way to get 
rid of germs, but it has limitations. He seems very excited to learn about 
Ag4O4.
 I'm suggesting that we test it in this group, not his group. After this group 
comes to a decision, then we can share that with bG.
You know how much cs it takes to reduce your viral load to a certain
number. If you took smaller amounts of Silver Sol as they suggest
and got better results, that is info that anyone will want to know,
even bG. If you and others find that SS is just CS with marketing
hype, like Kephra claims on the 
http://www.cgcsforum.com/index.php?topic=1052.0, we all want to know that, too.

Joe H.   
On 29/04/2013 10:27 AM, Cyndi wrote:

On 4/29/2013 9:41 AM, Joe Huard wrote:
>
>Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking of making, 
>as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is Bob Luhrs who signs 
>as baby_grand or bG.
>>This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the
difference between these 2 possible forms of nano silver before
coming to the conclusion that Silver Sol is just marketing hype?
To do that we need a person with an open mind who has already
experienced CS/EIS and knows how it acts with them. Then,
compare how Silver Sol acts. 
>>I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little
experience with CS to compare it to.
>>
>>Joe H.
>>
>Why not allow posts defending cs's ability to kill internally on
  the germkiller group? I have direct and personal experience with
  it. The only reason I can think of is that it disproves bg's
  assumption that it doesn't work internally. Why would someone with
  an open mind not want to hear real life proof that cs can reduce a
  viral load and share it with the group? 
>
>I am totally open minded, want to know what Silver Sol is and what
  it may do for me, but when it's attached to statements that are
  flat out lies how can I trust what that person says? When I refute
  those lies with personal, factual evidence and it's hidden from
  the group how can I give that person my trust? I have viral load
  tests that show in black and white what happened when I took cs.
  It's totally relevant to the original post and other posts related
  to SS were put through.
>
>What happened was dishonest and definitely slanted towards this
  other product. The list owner isn't encouraging testing them
  against each other at all. He's pushing one while sitting on
  information about the other.
>
>Cyndi
>

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[olushola camara]

Does Ag4O4 offer up any of it's oxygen? I think MSM has 4 oxygen as well
and it does offer them up?

Olushola

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Sandy]

Thanks Joe!
 
The very ironic thing about the person who was so pissed with bG for what he 
said about CS [and of course for deleting her post] in fact did validate it. 
She has a chronic illness and admits that CS has taken her just so far and 
though it's helped better than anything else it seems to no longer to be 
working [on that illness]. This would have been the perfect test subject to see 
just how well Silver Sol works [or not] and she could have reported her results 
with it to bG. Sad.
 
I've had great results with CS and will continue to make it and use it but will 
also try the Silver Sol because I also have some issues that CS is not 
addressing.
 
bG is a very fine person and he only posted about Silver Sol in the hope of 
helping someone who CS and the g'zilla is not helping. I can not thank him 
enough for the help he's personally given me.
 
Sandy
 
 

--- On Mon, 4/29/13, Joe Huard  wrote:


From: Joe Huard 
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
To: silver-list@eskimo.com
Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8:41 AM



Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking of making, 
as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is Bob Luhrs who signs as 
baby_grand or bG.
This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the difference between 
these 2 possible forms of nano silver before coming to the conclusion that 
Silver Sol is just marketing hype? To do that we need a person with an open 
mind who has already experienced CS/EIS and knows how it acts with them. Then, 
compare how Silver Sol acts. 
I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little experience with CS 
to compare it to.

Joe H.


On 28/04/2013 6:22 PM, Sandy wrote:






FYI...
 
In the first place, the owner of the germkiller forum is a 'he' not a "she."
 
In the second place, he gave a very strict criteria for posting to the silver 
sol subject. We were warned if we did not follow that criteria he would not 
post our comments so clearly you refused to follow the criteria. He told you 
not to be offended if he did not post your comment and that it was nothing 
personal. If you're pissed it's because you want to be pissed, IMO.
 
Thirdly, he never said CS was of no use...he said it worked quite well for 
external uses and as many others have claimed in the past, CS is destroyed by 
stomach acids and is not allowed to reach the intestines. Is this true? I have 
no idea?
 
Forthly, the owner of the germkiller site was and is not trying to sell a darn 
thing and I take offense of anyone saying such a thing on the word of someone 
who did not even know he was a male or who did not personally read his post.
 
Silver Sol is represented as being a nano product and not CS as we know it. 
I've done some research and suggest others do the same before making comments 
about itpositive or negative. I've personally never tried it so cannot 
speak to it's effectiveness.
 
Sandy
 
--- On Sun, 4/28/13, Cyndi  wrote:


From: Cyndi 
Subject: CS>Silver Sol
To: silver-list@eskimo.com
Date: Sunday, April 28, 2013, 7:54 AM


There is a Yahoo group called germkiller which usually sticks to electronic 
currents to heal but the owner of the group just posted that cs is no good, 
that it doesn't do anything taken internally and that we should all be using 
Silver Sol instead. What is it, does anyone know?

She gave a link
http://www.rxsilver.com/html/silver_sol_versus_colloidal_si.html

When I posted that I've had successes with cs she refused to post that. I'm 
kinda pissed that she would post what she did and not let anyone refute her.

Cyndi


--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org

Unsubscribe:

Archives:  http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html

Off-Topic discussions: 
List Owner: Mike Devour 

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Sandy]

So now bG is dishonest, is he? Do you think he does not know about all the uses 
of CS? Do you think you're the only one allowed to have an opinion?
 
What part do you not get that the subject was Silver Sol and 'it's' benefits 
not CS? He told you up front that he would delete any posts not having to do 
with Silver Sol. Yeah, what a dishonest guy. 
 
Sandy
 
--- On Mon, 4/29/13, Cyndi  wrote:


From: Cyndi 
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
To: silver-list@eskimo.com
Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 9:27 AM




On 4/29/2013 9:41 AM, Joe Huard wrote:

Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking of making, 
as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is Bob Luhrs who signs as 
baby_grand or bG.
This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the difference between 
these 2 possible forms of nano silver before coming to the conclusion that 
Silver Sol is just marketing hype? To do that we need a person with an open 
mind who has already experienced CS/EIS and knows how it acts with them. Then, 
compare how Silver Sol acts. 
I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little experience with CS 
to compare it to.

Joe H.

Why not allow posts defending cs's ability to kill internally on the germkiller 
group? I have direct and personal experience with it. The only reason I can 
think of is that it disproves bg's assumption that it doesn't work internally. 
Why would someone with an open mind not want to hear real life proof that cs 
can reduce a viral load and share it with the group? 

I am totally open minded, want to know what Silver Sol is and what it may do 
for me, but when it's attached to statements that are flat out lies how can I 
trust what that person says? When I refute those lies with personal, factual 
evidence and it's hidden from the group how can I give that person my trust? I 
have viral load tests that show in black and white what happened when I took 
cs. It's totally relevant to the original post and other posts related to SS 
were put through.

What happened was dishonest and definitely slanted towards this other product. 
The list owner isn't encouraging testing them against each other at all. He's 
pushing one while sitting on information about the other.

Cyndi

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Sandy]

Wow! The 'owners' of yahoo groups are allowed to say what the posters can post 
about and to delete the posts the deviate from that. If any of you know Garnet 
of the LDN and DMSO groups used to be very strict about what could be posted on 
'her' forums. Mike of this forum used to be pretty strict about what people 
were posting on 'his' forum too.
 
The only vested interest these owners have is to help others and keep the 
subjects to the forum interests so it moves smoothly.
 
I suggest you and Cyndi start you own forum and just let it be a free for all.

Sandy
 
--- On Mon, 4/29/13, Dorothy Fitzpatrick  wrote:


From: Dorothy Fitzpatrick 
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
To: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 11:16 AM



I agree Cyndi.  I was on a homeopathic list and the list owner would NOT allow 
ANY reference to colloidal silver (EIS) OR any information about how it cured 
so many ailments.  To me this smacks of vested interest.  

I have used EIS on ALL my dogs, and you can’t fake cures with dogs!  There was 
a horrendous enteritis type epidemic in my local park, which had many friends 
dogs in the vets on drips.  Mine were given EIS at the first sign of vomiting 
and/or disinterest in food (always a dire warning of things not right) and were 
cured within a day.  This happened so many times that I am totally sure of the 
internal use power of silver.  Indeed, my dogs never went to the vets at all.  
dee




From: Cyndi 
Reply-To: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:27:39 -0400
To: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
Resent-From: "silver-list@eskimo.com" 
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 07:27:55 -0700 (PDT)

   
On 4/29/2013 9:41 AM, Joe Huard wrote:
 
 

 Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking of making, 
as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is Bob Luhrs who signs as 
baby_grand or bG.
 This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the difference between 
these 2 possible forms of nano silver before coming to the conclusion that 
Silver Sol is just marketing hype? To do that we need a person with an open 
mind who has already experienced CS/EIS and knows how it acts with them. Then, 
compare how Silver Sol acts. 
 I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little experience with CS 
to compare it to.
 
 Joe H.
 

 Why not allow posts defending cs's ability to kill internally on the 
germkiller group? I have direct and personal experience with it. The only 
reason I can think of is that it disproves bg's assumption that it doesn't work 
internally. Why would someone with an open mind not want to hear real life 
proof that cs can reduce a viral load and share it with the group? 
 
 I am totally open minded, want to know what Silver Sol is and what it may do 
for me, but when it's attached to statements that are flat out lies how can I 
trust what that person says? When I refute those lies with personal, factual 
evidence and it's hidden from the group how can I give that person my trust? I 
have viral load tests that show in black and white what happened when I took 
cs. It's totally relevant to the original post and other posts related to SS 
were put through.
 
 What happened was dishonest and definitely slanted towards this other product. 
The list owner isn't encouraging testing them against each other at all. He's 
pushing one while sitting on information about the other.
 
 Cyndi
 

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[James McDonald]

When a bad flu/infection/cold/virus comes along that does not respond to 
anti-virals & anti-microbials and bacterial inections that antibiotics don't do 
anything anyone who has any kind of silver generator is going to be very 
popular! as any amount of IS/CS will be welcome by people that are infected!




 From: James McDonald 
To: "silver-list@eskimo.com"  
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
 


Most of us will want your info as to add to our store of knowledge. All your 
info can gelp us determine doseages and effects. Every little bit of info adds 
to the whole and with enough info we will be able to produce a chart of 
doseages/body weight/ppm of silver. Some people just don't want us to have the 
info to help others as it could/would/ reduce the money going into their 
pockets."They" will do almost anything, including disinformation, mudding of 
the "waters" and outright distortion of what kind of silver/make up/production 
of/what it actually is.




 From: Joe Huard 
To: silver-list@eskimo.com 
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
 


Yes, he is very tight about keeping his list on topic; that is, only talk about 
the godzilla apparatus. For the record, that has to be the cheapest way to get 
rid of germs, but it has limitations. He seems very excited to learn about 
Ag4O4.
 I'm suggesting that we test it in this group, not his group. After this group 
comes to a decision, then we can share that with bG.
You know how much cs it takes to reduce your viral load to a certain
number. If you took smaller amounts of Silver Sol as they suggest
and got better results, that is info that anyone will want to know,
even bG. If you and others find that SS is just CS with marketing
hype, like Kephra claims on the 
http://www.cgcsforum.com/index.php?topic=1052.0, we all want to know that, too.

Joe H.   
On 29/04/2013 10:27 AM, Cyndi wrote:

On 4/29/2013 9:41 AM, Joe Huard wrote:
>
>Way to go, Sandy. You covered all of the points that I was thinking of making, 
>as I am on that germkiller group also. The list owner is Bob Luhrs who signs 
>as baby_grand or bG.
>>This might be already suggested, but why not "test" the
difference between these 2 possible forms of nano silver before
coming to the conclusion that Silver Sol is just marketing hype?
To do that we need a person with an open mind who has already
experienced CS/EIS and knows how it acts with them. Then,
compare how Silver Sol acts. 
>>I plan to buy some SS to test internally, but I have little
experience with CS to compare it to.
>>
>>Joe H.
>>
>Why not allow posts defending cs's ability to kill internally on
  the germkiller group? I have direct and personal experience with
  it. The only reason I can think of is that it disproves bg's
  assumption that it doesn't work internally. Why would someone with
  an open mind not want to hear real life proof that cs can reduce a
  viral load and share it with the group? 
>
>I am totally open minded, want to know what Silver Sol is and what
  it may do for me, but when it's attached to statements that are
  flat out lies how can I trust what that person says? When I refute
  those lies with personal, factual evidence and it's hidden from
  the group how can I give that person my trust? I have viral load
  tests that show in black and white what happened when I took cs.
  It's totally relevant to the original post and other posts related
  to SS were put through.
>
>What happened was dishonest and definitely slanted towards this
  other product. The list owner isn't encouraging testing them
  against each other at all. He's pushing one while sitting on
  information about the other.
>
>Cyndi
>

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[M.G. Devour]

Sandy wrote:

> So now bG is dishonest, is he? Do you think he does not know about all
> the uses of CS? Do you think you're the only one allowed to have an 
> opinion?

Sandy,

Do not rag on Cyndi or others for objecting to bG's proclamations and
his decision to reject correction to his misstatements from being posted
to his group. While he has every right to do what he wants to on his own
group, others have the right to criticize. 

It is a known fact that well made CS is just fine for internal use, and
bG's insistence that it is not is WRONG. So long as he STARTS his
advocacy for the new product by saying things about CS that are patently
false, it calls into question his entire position and harms the very
case he is trying to make. 

His SS might in fact be better in some ways than CS. I don't claim to
know, and I'd be happy to find out if it was. His claims about CS are
seriously misleading, however, and that I do know. His decision to try
to discourage the uninitiated from using CS where it can be helpful can
also do harm to any people he succeeds in misinforming.

Such shenanigans are -- or at least should be -- beneath the bG that I'm
acquainted with. I'm disappointed he feels the need to state false
information about a preparation that has helped so many.

No further drama now, hear me? Everybody pull in your horns and try to
get back to the primary goal of HELPING everyone we can.

Be well,

Mike D.




--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
  Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org

Unsubscribe:
  
Archives: 
  http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html

Off-Topic discussions: 
List Owner: Mike Devour 

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[Cyndi]

On 4/29/2013 2:16 PM, Sandy wrote:

Thanks Joe!
The very ironic thing about the person who was so pissed with bG for 
what he said about CS [and of course for deleting her post] in fact 
did validate it. She has a chronic illness and admits that CS has 
taken her just so far and though it's helped better than anything else 
it seems to no longer to be working [on that illness]. This would have 
been the perfect test subject to see just how well Silver Sol works 
[or not] and she could have reported her results with it to bG. Sad.




There you go, assuming again. Now hear the rest instead of attacking me. 
It didn't stop working at all.  I stopped taking it only because my 
doctor talked me into trying the conventional therapy, Interferon and 
Riboviron. What she forgot to mention was that Interferon can cause 
permanent brain damage (and it did) and other damage (Cotton wool patch 
in my eye). I'm unable to keep a checking account from bouncing because 
of my brain fog. I miss doctor appointments, two of them in the last 10 
days. I can't stay focused long enough to read an entire book. That's 
what modern medicine did to me. The cs didn't harm me and didn't stop 
working. You are quite venomous Sandy! Why is that? Are you really bG? I 
wanted civil conversation on this group, and to know what Silver Sol is. 
That's it!


Cyndi

Re: CS>Silver Sol>

[James McDonald]

If you look for any scientific research and/or tests you will not find any. 
There are two forms of silver Ionic and Colloidal, there is no scientific 
evidence of another form. Ionic silver is ionic if missing an electron. 
Colloidal silver is metallic(particulate) silver. In researching to find if 
there was any info for the "other" type there was none found. A more common 
name for the above compound is silver peroxide with a chemical formula of Ag2O3 
or Ag(III) oxide.  It has been around a long time and is actually a 
pretty good disinfectant.  It is also the main ingredient in silver 
oxide batteries.   Its action in vivo is not known though. One molecule of SS 
can kill an unlimited number of germs, thus the dosage for SS is 100 times 
lower than for CS. Who says?  There is no data to support that assertion, and 
it is neither logical nor reasonable. CS is a one particle-per-germ molecule. 
That would be true for a silver ion, but not metallic silver nanoparticles. It 
is excreted 100 percent and does not stand a chance to create argyria. Again, 
no data to support such an assertion. Silver Sol is just another form of ionic 
silver oxide. A search of the science literature failed to turn up even one 
in-vivo study of silver 
peroxide, Ag2O3, Ag(III) oxide, or Ag(I,III) oxide.



 From: Cyndi 
To: silver-list@eskimo.com 
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
 


On 4/29/2013 2:16 PM, Sandy wrote:

Thanks Joe!
> 
>The very ironic thing about the person who was so pissed with bG for what he 
>said about CS [and of course for deleting her post] in fact did validate it. 
>She has a chronic illness and admits that CS has taken her just so far and 
>though it's helped better than anything else it seems to no longer to be 
>working [on that illness]. This would have been the perfect test subject to 
>see just how well Silver Sol works [or not] and she could have reported her 
>results with it to bG. Sad. 
There you go, assuming again. Now hear the rest instead of attacking
me. It didn't stop working at all.  I stopped taking it only because
my doctor talked me into trying the conventional therapy, Interferon
and Riboviron. What she forgot to mention was that Interferon can
cause permanent brain damage (and it did) and other damage (Cotton
wool patch in my eye). I'm unable to keep a checking account from
bouncing because of my brain fog. I miss doctor appointments, two of
them in the last 10 days. I can't stay focused long enough to read
an entire book. That's what modern medicine did to me. The cs didn't
harm me and didn't stop working. You are quite venomous Sandy! Why
is that? Are you really bG? I wanted civil conversation on this
group, and to know what Silver Sol is. That's it!

Cyndi



> 

RE: CS>Silver Sol>

[Neville Munn]

"There are two forms of silver Ionic and Colloidal"..."Ionic silver is ionic if 
missing an electron {thus giving the ion a positive electrical charge}. 
"Colloidal silver is metallic" {thus having a neutral charge}.
{} are mine.
Good to hear someone else make the distinction and draw a line in the sand 
between the two, so few people fail to do that in my experience and from what 
one reads in the public domain, the term 'CS' is used, abused and misused.  
Each will have their own characteristics after entering the body.  Both serve a 
purpose ~ efficacy dependant on the purpose.
N.

Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:23:35 -0700
From: kscma...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: CS>Silver Sol>
To: silver-list@eskimo.com

If you look for any scientific research and/or tests you will not find any. 
There are two forms of silver Ionic and Colloidal, there is no scientific 
evidence of another form. Ionic silver is ionic if missing an electron. 
Colloidal silver is metallic(particulate) silver. In researching to find if 
there was any info for the "other" type there was none found. A more common 
name for the above compound is silver peroxide with a chemical formula of Ag2O3
 or Ag(III) oxide.  It has been around a long time and is actually a 
pretty good disinfectant.  It is also the main ingredient in silver 
oxide batteries.   Its action in vivo is not known though. One molecule of SS 
can kill an unlimited number of germs, thus the dosage for SS is 100 times 
lower than for CS. Who says?  There is no data to support that assertion, and 
it is neither logical nor reasonable. CS is a one particle-per-germ molecule. 
That would be true for a silver ion, but not metallic silver nanoparticles. It 
is excreted 100 percent and does not stand a chance to create argyria. Again, 
no data to support such an assertion. Silver Sol is just another form of ionic 
silver oxide. A search of the
 science literature failed to turn up even one in-vivo study of silver 
peroxide, Ag2O3, Ag(III) oxide, or Ag(I,III) oxide.