Re: CSNewbie
Anyone have a quick flush for kidney stones? Having my second attack in a week. Two percocets and copius herbal teas are my solutions so far. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. On Aug 10, 2014, at 7:05 PM, Deborah Gerard devorah...@yahoo.com wrote: Can you post a pic of your's? Thanks Debbie On Sunday, August 10, 2014 5:51 PM, TJ Garland ironguard...@gmail.com wrote: Been making and selling for 20 years. Using HP regulated power supply- 1/2 amp at 30 vdc. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie.
Re: CSNewbie
I don't know about quick flush...but I read something about coconut oil helping...do search on kidney stones /coconut oil or coconut waterhttp://coconutoilorganic.com.au/using-coconut-oil-to-combat-disease/kidn ey-stones-melt-away-with-coconut-water In a message dated 8/11/2014 2:53:22 A.M. Central Daylight Time, ironguard...@gmail.com writes: Anyone have a quick flush for kidney stones? Having my second attack in a week. Two percocets and copius herbal teas are my solutions so far. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. On Aug 10, 2014, at 7:05 PM, Deborah Gerard _devorahg99@yahoo.com_ (mailto:devorah...@yahoo.com) wrote: Can you post a pic of your's? Thanks Debbie On Sunday, August 10, 2014 5:51 PM, TJ Garland _ironguard866@gmail.com_ (mailto:ironguard...@gmail.com) wrote: Been making and selling for 20 years. Using HP regulated power supply- 1/2 amp at 30 vdc. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. =
Re: CSEvery kind of silver kills bacteria.
*Sterling silver* is an alloy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alloy of silver http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver containing 92.5% by mass of silver and 7.5% by mass of other metals, usually copper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper. The sterling silver standard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_standards has a minimum millesimal fineness http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millesimal_fineness of 925. /Fine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millesimal_fineness silver/, for example 99.9% pure silver, is generally too soft for producing functional objects; therefore, the silver is usually alloyed with copper to give it strength while preserving the ductility http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ductility and beauty of the precious metal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precious_metal. Other metals can replace the copper, usually with the intention of improving various properties of the basic sterling alloy such as reducing casting porosity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porosity, eliminating firescale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firescale, and increasing resistance to tarnish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarnish.These replacement metals include germanium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanium, zinc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinc and platinum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platinum There is no nickle in sterling Nickle Silver on the other hand, has no silver in it. *Nickel silver*, *German silver*,is a copper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper alloy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alloy with nickel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel and often zinc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinc. The usual formulation is 60% copper, 20% nickel and 20% zinc.^[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_silver#cite_note-6 Nickel silver is named for its silvery appearance, but it contains no elemental silver http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver unless plated. Ode On 8/10/2014 5:55 AM, Victor Cozzetto wrote: Whoa, I agree with your general gist that basically all silver is good, and even think it agrees with my earlier post that 'nano' is used mostly as marketing hype. I agree with you on 1 2, but your points 2 3 scare me a bit: - Never use jewelry or sterling silver of any kind, as you could end up with nickel poisoning. You always want the purest silver available when making CS, to avoid any unwanted contaminants. - There is endless documentation that shows colloidal silver is effective, as it was even used by the pharmaceutical companies a hundred years ago. And there are thousands of years of history showing silver being effective. In my opinion, mentioning published, 'official' clinical trials or trying to differentiate CS from nanosilver only adds confusion. (And as you said, CS has nanosilver). I was just worried that some people might get the wrong idea about your comments. I agree with the intend of your message completely. Victor On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 6:22 PM, alchemysa da...@alchemysa.com.au mailto:da...@alchemysa.com.au wrote: You'll probably be hearing lots about nanosilver and ebola in the next few weeks. All sorts of quacksters will be jumping on the bandwagon claiming that only 'their' colloidal silver is full of the right kind of 'nanoparticles' or 'micro-particles'. Heres a few facts to think about... 1. All home made colloidal silver contains nanoparticles. 2. Theres not a SINGLE clinical (human) trial that proves nanosilver does a damn thing to ebola or anything else. In fact there have been no clinical trials that prove that ANY KIND of colloidal silver does a damn thing. And theres certainly no evidence that '10 ppm' is some kind of perfect strength. 3. All types of silver HAVE been proven to kill bacteria in lab tests. (e.g in test tubes). Silver ions, particles, compounds, silver nitrates, etc have all worked. (For all we know colloidal silver made from old jewellery in dishwater may be the most effective colloidal silver of all). 4. You can make and drink your own colloidal silver at home knowing that no silver product made anywhere, by anyone, by any method. has any credible evidence to prove it is more effective than yours!! David -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
CSClinical Trials
On 11/08/2014, at 10:16 PM, silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com wrote: From: Victor Cozzetto victor.cozze...@gmail.com Date: 11 August 2014 9:18:46 AM To: silver-list@eskimo.com silver-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: CSClinical Trials David, Why do you care about clinical trials, I think its important to know the difference between a clinical trial and a lab test. If you don't, you will just look like a fool and get shot down pretty quickly as soon as you venture into territory where the opponents have some scientific or medical training. But if you can talk their language and say No, we don't have any clinical trials, but we do have thousands of pretty impressive lab tests, (including some using animals), and we do have tens of thousands of anecdotes (including many from people in the medical professions) then you will usually gain some respect and people will start listen. Its also important to know that when someone says he has proof that his colloidal silver is more effective than someone elses, he's lying. David -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSNewbie
Seems I recall lemon juice, and olive oil. Do you know if they are uric acid, or calcium type? Marshall On 8/11/2014 3:53 AM, TJ Garland wrote: Anyone have a quick flush for kidney stones? Having my second attack in a week. Two percocets and copius herbal teas are my solutions so far. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. On Aug 10, 2014, at 7:05 PM, Deborah Gerard devorah...@yahoo.com mailto:devorah...@yahoo.com wrote: Can you post a pic of your's? Thanks Debbie On Sunday, August 10, 2014 5:51 PM, TJ Garland ironguard...@gmail.com mailto:ironguard...@gmail.com wrote: Been making and selling for 20 years. Using HP regulated power supply- 1/2 amp at 30 vdc. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3955/7510 - Release Date: 08/10/14
CSClinical Trials
From: M.G. Devour mdev...@gmail.com Date: 11 August 2014 9:46:20 AM To: silver-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: CSClinical Trials What is probably right, though, is to say that clinical trials have not and will not happen any time soon. Mike D. Its not hard to imagine that, under normal circumstances, a clinical trial for CS would cost hundreds of millions of dollars. You would need hundreds of participants, all having regular comprehensive medical assessments throughout a trial that could last for 10 years. It would especially be complicated by the fact that the scientists wouldnt really even have a clear idea what they are looking for. (Fewer colds? Less cancers? Longer lives?). In my opinion it will never happen unless someone like Bill Gates gets interested. On the other hand, in an emergency, a fast tracked trial specifically addressing, say Ebola, may be something that the government might be interested in. David -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSNewbie
Thats a recipe for gallstones. Thanks. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. On Aug 11, 2014, at 9:58 AM, Marshall mdud...@king-cart.com wrote: Seems I recall lemon juice, and olive oil. Do you know if they are uric acid, or calcium type? Marshall On 8/11/2014 3:53 AM, TJ Garland wrote: Anyone have a quick flush for kidney stones? Having my second attack in a week. Two percocets and copius herbal teas are my solutions so far. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. On Aug 10, 2014, at 7:05 PM, Deborah Gerard devorah...@yahoo.com wrote: Can you post a pic of your's? Thanks Debbie On Sunday, August 10, 2014 5:51 PM, TJ Garland ironguard...@gmail.com wrote: Been making and selling for 20 years. Using HP regulated power supply- 1/2 amp at 30 vdc. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3955/7510 - Release Date: 08/10/14
Re: CSClinical Trials
The fact of the matter is that clinical trials have landed us many dud drugs that killed a lot of PPL, because clinical trials can be misleading, easy to manipulate, easy to create the outcome you want by manipulating the data and the trial proceedings. Science is so easy to corrupt that drug companies and the Allopathic medical community even have English Majors working for them, that massage the way the results are spoken. Consequently I have more faith in faith healers than the results of modern clinical trials. They are and have been a scam to sell product right from the beginning. Science has taken on the mantle of religion, as Rupert Sheldrake has called it Sciencism. Lots of books on the topic of big pharma/allopathic fibbing, but one of the latest is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg I agree that there should be objective inquiry into things medical, but it is so difficult to be objective when the PPL who are out to objectify the results all have a major financial/reputation/ego stake in the outcome. So Victor who would pay for this? You? Alan On 2014-08-10, at 17:16 PM, M.G. Devour wrote: Victor asks David: Why do you care about clinical trials, the FDA, etc.? David replies: We do ourselves a disservice by claiming there is proof where there is none. Its a stick that our opponents will continually beat us with. Far better for us to concentrate on the results of the thousands of lab tests and on the compelling anecdotal 'evidence'. I'd say that about answers the question... There is a major distinction to be made between lab tests vs. clinical trials vs. anecdotal reports. To make any claims about clinical results BASED ON LAB TESTS is foolish, at best, and far too many such claims are made by folks attempting to sell CS, one way or another. What proof we have for clinical results is based on *extensive* anecdotal evidence... literally the experience of many thousands of users and applications over decades. However, that experience isn't systematically documented or presented anywhere I know of... It's basically a word of mouth, over the back fence kind of thing. What is probably right, though, is to say that clinical trials have not and will not happen any time soon. There's just not enough profit to be made from silver that anybody can make in their home to justify the investment of 10's or 100's of millions of dollars (US) for the clinical trials and applications for FDA approval... If you add the institutional resistance due to commercial influence on the regulatory and funding processes, it will be pretty hard to get anything through. I think David's point, that we should keep our claims realistic and limited to what we actually *do* have proof for, would leave us better off in the marketplace of ideas. Be well, Mike D. -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com
CSKidney stones
Try Stonebreaker which is a tincture available in most HFS Teri -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CS DOD Study finds CS works against Ebola virus
2009 Department of Defense funded study found that silver nanoparticles neutralize hemorrhagic fever viruses http://drrimatruthreports.com/wp-content/uploads/Analysis-of-DTRA-Nano-Silver-Study.pdf
Re: CSClinical Trials
One thing that is really bad is that drug companies are allowed to use anything they want as the placebo, then they are allowed to call it a sugar pill. Generally the only time they really use a sugar pill for a placebo is when testing drugs for diabetes. What is generally done is to use a placebo that makes the condition the drug is used for worse, so when the drug is tested against it, the results will be that it preformed better than the (toxic) placebo even it it really does nothing. Marshall On 8/11/2014 12:28 PM, Alan Faulkner wrote: The fact of the matter is that clinical trials have landed us many dud drugs that killed a lot of PPL, because clinical trials can be misleading, easy to manipulate, easy to create the outcome you want by manipulating the data and the trial proceedings. Science is so easy to corrupt that drug companies and the Allopathic medical community even have English Majors working for them, that massage the way the results are spoken. Consequently I have more faith in faith healers than the results of modern clinical trials. They are and have been a scam to sell product right from the beginning. Science has taken on the mantle of religion, as Rupert Sheldrake has called it Sciencism. Lots of books on the topic of big pharma/allopathic fibbing, but one of the latest is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg I agree that there should be objective inquiry into things medical, but it is so difficult to be objective when the PPL who are out to objectify the results all have a major financial/reputation/ego stake in the outcome. So Victor who would pay for this? You? Alan On 2014-08-10, at 17:16 PM, M.G. Devour wrote: Victor asks David: Why do you care about clinical trials, the FDA, etc.? David replies: We do ourselves a disservice by claiming there is proof where there is none. Its a stick that our opponents will continually beat us with. Far better for us to concentrate on the results of the thousands of lab tests and on the compelling anecdotal 'evidence'. I'd say that about answers the question... There is a major distinction to be made between lab tests vs. clinical trials vs. anecdotal reports. To make any claims about clinical results BASED ON LAB TESTS is foolish, at best, and far too many such claims are made by folks attempting to sell CS, one way or another. What proof we have for clinical results is based on *extensive* anecdotal evidence... literally the experience of many thousands of users and applications over decades. However, that experience isn't systematically documented or presented anywhere I know of... It's basically a word of mouth, over the back fence kind of thing. What is probably right, though, is to say that clinical trials have not and will not happen any time soon. There's just not enough profit to be made from silver that anybody can make in their home to justify the investment of 10's or 100's of millions of dollars (US) for the clinical trials and applications for FDA approval... If you add the institutional resistance due to commercial influence on the regulatory and funding processes, it will be pretty hard to get anything through. I think David's point, that we should keep our claims realistic and limited to what we actually *do* have proof for, would leave us better off in the marketplace of ideas. Be well, Mike D. -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions:mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devourmailto:mdev...@eskimo.com - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3955/7510 - Release Date: 08/10/14
Re: CSClinical Trials
There is lots of tricks. Like if the scientists know that certain populations are more likely to be negatively impacted by the drug, in other words if older PPL or younger PPL cannot handle the side effects then they are excluded by the trials. They can exclude who they wish by certain tricks of the trade. It is quite amazing how the real 'science' of quackery works. Alan On 2014-08-11, at 09:59 AM, Marshall wrote: One thing that is really bad is that drug companies are allowed to use anything they want as the placebo, then they are allowed to call it a sugar pill. Generally the only time they really use a sugar pill for a placebo is when testing drugs for diabetes. What is generally done is to use a placebo that makes the condition the drug is used for worse, so when the drug is tested against it, the results will be that it preformed better than the (toxic) placebo even it it really does nothing. Marshall On 8/11/2014 12:28 PM, Alan Faulkner wrote: The fact of the matter is that clinical trials have landed us many dud drugs that killed a lot of PPL, because clinical trials can be misleading, easy to manipulate, easy to create the outcome you want by manipulating the data and the trial proceedings. Science is so easy to corrupt that drug companies and the Allopathic medical community even have English Majors working for them, that massage the way the results are spoken. Consequently I have more faith in faith healers than the results of modern clinical trials. They are and have been a scam to sell product right from the beginning. Science has taken on the mantle of religion, as Rupert Sheldrake has called it Sciencism. Lots of books on the topic of big pharma/allopathic fibbing, but one of the latest is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg I agree that there should be objective inquiry into things medical, but it is so difficult to be objective when the PPL who are out to objectify the results all have a major financial/reputation/ego stake in the outcome. So Victor who would pay for this? You? Alan On 2014-08-10, at 17:16 PM, M.G. Devour wrote: Victor asks David: Why do you care about clinical trials, the FDA, etc.? David replies: We do ourselves a disservice by claiming there is proof where there is none. Its a stick that our opponents will continually beat us with. Far better for us to concentrate on the results of the thousands of lab tests and on the compelling anecdotal 'evidence'. I'd say that about answers the question... There is a major distinction to be made between lab tests vs. clinical trials vs. anecdotal reports. To make any claims about clinical results BASED ON LAB TESTS is foolish, at best, and far too many such claims are made by folks attempting to sell CS, one way or another. What proof we have for clinical results is based on *extensive* anecdotal evidence... literally the experience of many thousands of users and applications over decades. However, that experience isn't systematically documented or presented anywhere I know of... It's basically a word of mouth, over the back fence kind of thing. What is probably right, though, is to say that clinical trials have not and will not happen any time soon. There's just not enough profit to be made from silver that anybody can make in their home to justify the investment of 10's or 100's of millions of dollars (US) for the clinical trials and applications for FDA approval... If you add the institutional resistance due to commercial influence on the regulatory and funding processes, it will be pretty hard to get anything through. I think David's point, that we should keep our claims realistic and limited to what we actually *do* have proof for, would leave us better off in the marketplace of ideas. Be well, Mike D. -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions:mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devourmailto:mdev...@eskimo.com - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3955/7510 - Release Date: 08/10/14
Re: CSClinical Trials
Clinical trials are not considered proof of anything by the FDA Triple Blind Studies are. Several Clinical Trials have been performed with CS and all were dismissed by the FDA as they formed The Final Word published in 1999 Ode On 8/11/2014 12:28 PM, Alan Faulkner wrote: The fact of the matter is that clinical trials have landed us many dud drugs that killed a lot of PPL, because clinical trials can be misleading, easy to manipulate, easy to create the outcome you want by manipulating the data and the trial proceedings. Science is so easy to corrupt that drug companies and the Allopathic medical community even have English Majors working for them, that massage the way the results are spoken. Consequently I have more faith in faith healers than the results of modern clinical trials. They are and have been a scam to sell product right from the beginning. Science has taken on the mantle of religion, as Rupert Sheldrake has called it Sciencism. Lots of books on the topic of big pharma/allopathic fibbing, but one of the latest is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg I agree that there should be objective inquiry into things medical, but it is so difficult to be objective when the PPL who are out to objectify the results all have a major financial/reputation/ego stake in the outcome. So Victor who would pay for this? You? Alan On 2014-08-10, at 17:16 PM, M.G. Devour wrote: Victor asks David: Why do you care about clinical trials, the FDA, etc.? David replies: We do ourselves a disservice by claiming there is proof where there is none. Its a stick that our opponents will continually beat us with. Far better for us to concentrate on the results of the thousands of lab tests and on the compelling anecdotal 'evidence'. I'd say that about answers the question... There is a major distinction to be made between lab tests vs. clinical trials vs. anecdotal reports. To make any claims about clinical results BASED ON LAB TESTS is foolish, at best, and far too many such claims are made by folks attempting to sell CS, one way or another. What proof we have for clinical results is based on *extensive* anecdotal evidence... literally the experience of many thousands of users and applications over decades. However, that experience isn't systematically documented or presented anywhere I know of... It's basically a word of mouth, over the back fence kind of thing. What is probably right, though, is to say that clinical trials have not and will not happen any time soon. There's just not enough profit to be made from silver that anybody can make in their home to justify the investment of 10's or 100's of millions of dollars (US) for the clinical trials and applications for FDA approval... If you add the institutional resistance due to commercial influence on the regulatory and funding processes, it will be pretty hard to get anything through. I think David's point, that we should keep our claims realistic and limited to what we actually *do* have proof for, would leave us better off in the marketplace of ideas. Be well, Mike D. -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: CSKidney stones
Seems good, but is slower than K-B Tea by American Botanicals. When goods don't cross borders, armies will. Otto Mallery Are you a zombie? Here's how to tell: Ask yourself, in the absence of the government, would people voluntarily pay you to do what you do? If not, you're probably a zombie. On Aug 11, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Teri t...@welshspringers.com wrote: Try Stonebreaker which is a tincture available in most HFS Teri -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CS Clinical Trials Fertilizer
Report finds drug industry funded studies almost always yield good results. A recent study published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine has revealed that industry-funded clinical trials -- that is drug trials funded by pharmaceutical companies -- almost always show positive results for the drugs they test. By contrast, only about half of government-funded studies show the same drug to be safe and effective.
Re: CS Clinical Trials Fertilizer
Everything the government does and says is a lie. On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Phil Morrison philmorrison...@gmail.com wrote: Report finds drug industry funded studies almost always yield good results. A recent study published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine has revealed that industry-funded clinical trials -- that is drug trials funded by pharmaceutical companies -- almost always show positive results for the drugs they test. By contrast, only about half of government-funded studies show the same drug to be safe and effective.
Re: CS Clinical Trials Fertilizer
I agree... On Monday, August 11, 2014 5:38 PM, Jim Holmes gooogleis...@gmail.com wrote: Everything the government does and says is a lie. On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Phil Morrison philmorrison...@gmail.com wrote: Report finds drug industry funded studies almost always yield good results. A recent study published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine has revealed that industry-funded clinical trials -- that is drug trials funded by pharmaceutical companies -- almost always show positive results for the drugs they test. By contrast, only about half of government-funded studies show the same drug to be safe and effective.
Re: CSClinical Trials
Well said. My posts agree with you 100% Alan, so I think your question was intended for David or Mike? Victor On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Alan Faulkner ala...@gmail.com wrote: The fact of the matter is that clinical trials have landed us many dud drugs that killed a lot of PPL, because clinical trials can be misleading, easy to manipulate, easy to create the outcome you want by manipulating the data and the trial proceedings. Science is so easy to corrupt that drug companies and the Allopathic medical community even have English Majors working for them, that massage the way the results are spoken. Consequently I have more faith in faith healers than the results of modern clinical trials. They are and have been a scam to sell product right from the beginning. Science has taken on the mantle of religion, as Rupert Sheldrake has called it Sciencism. Lots of books on the topic of big pharma/allopathic fibbing, but one of the latest is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg I agree that there should be objective inquiry into things medical, but it is so difficult to be objective when the PPL who are out to objectify the results all have a major financial/reputation/ego stake in the outcome. So Victor who would pay for this? You? Alan On 2014-08-10, at 17:16 PM, M.G. Devour wrote: Victor asks David: Why do you care about clinical trials, the FDA, etc.? David replies: We do ourselves a disservice by claiming there is proof where there is none. Its a stick that our opponents will continually beat us with. Far better for us to concentrate on the results of the thousands of lab tests and on the compelling anecdotal 'evidence'. I'd say that about answers the question... There is a major distinction to be made between lab tests vs. clinical trials vs. anecdotal reports. To make any claims about clinical results BASED ON LAB TESTS is foolish, at best, and far too many such claims are made by folks attempting to sell CS, one way or another. What proof we have for clinical results is based on *extensive* anecdotal evidence... literally the experience of many thousands of users and applications over decades. However, that experience isn't systematically documented or presented anywhere I know of... It's basically a word of mouth, over the back fence kind of thing. What is probably right, though, is to say that clinical trials have not and will not happen any time soon. There's just not enough profit to be made from silver that anybody can make in their home to justify the investment of 10's or 100's of millions of dollars (US) for the clinical trials and applications for FDA approval... If you add the institutional resistance due to commercial influence on the regulatory and funding processes, it will be pretty hard to get anything through. I think David's point, that we should keep our claims realistic and limited to what we actually *do* have proof for, would leave us better off in the marketplace of ideas. Be well, Mike D. -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSClinical Trials
Sorry Victor, when I get on a rant I usually make at least one blooper. Alan On 2014-08-11, at 15:12 PM, Victor Cozzetto wrote: Well said. My posts agree with you 100% Alan, so I think your question was intended for David or Mike? Victor On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Alan Faulkner ala...@gmail.com wrote: The fact of the matter is that clinical trials have landed us many dud drugs that killed a lot of PPL, because clinical trials can be misleading, easy to manipulate, easy to create the outcome you want by manipulating the data and the trial proceedings. Science is so easy to corrupt that drug companies and the Allopathic medical community even have English Majors working for them, that massage the way the results are spoken. Consequently I have more faith in faith healers than the results of modern clinical trials. They are and have been a scam to sell product right from the beginning. Science has taken on the mantle of religion, as Rupert Sheldrake has called it Sciencism. Lots of books on the topic of big pharma/allopathic fibbing, but one of the latest is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg I agree that there should be objective inquiry into things medical, but it is so difficult to be objective when the PPL who are out to objectify the results all have a major financial/reputation/ego stake in the outcome. So Victor who would pay for this? You? Alan On 2014-08-10, at 17:16 PM, M.G. Devour wrote: Victor asks David: Why do you care about clinical trials, the FDA, etc.? David replies: We do ourselves a disservice by claiming there is proof where there is none. Its a stick that our opponents will continually beat us with. Far better for us to concentrate on the results of the thousands of lab tests and on the compelling anecdotal 'evidence'. I'd say that about answers the question... There is a major distinction to be made between lab tests vs. clinical trials vs. anecdotal reports. To make any claims about clinical results BASED ON LAB TESTS is foolish, at best, and far too many such claims are made by folks attempting to sell CS, one way or another. What proof we have for clinical results is based on *extensive* anecdotal evidence... literally the experience of many thousands of users and applications over decades. However, that experience isn't systematically documented or presented anywhere I know of... It's basically a word of mouth, over the back fence kind of thing. What is probably right, though, is to say that clinical trials have not and will not happen any time soon. There's just not enough profit to be made from silver that anybody can make in their home to justify the investment of 10's or 100's of millions of dollars (US) for the clinical trials and applications for FDA approval... If you add the institutional resistance due to commercial influence on the regulatory and funding processes, it will be pretty hard to get anything through. I think David's point, that we should keep our claims realistic and limited to what we actually *do* have proof for, would leave us better off in the marketplace of ideas. Be well, Mike D. -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com
CSDOD Study finds CS works against Ebola virus
From: Phil Morrison philmorrison...@gmail.com Date: 12 August 2014 2:20:13 AM To: silver-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: CS DOD Study finds CS works against Ebola virus 2009 Department of Defense funded study found that silver nanoparticles neutralize hemorrhagic fever viruses http://drrimatruthreports.com/wp-content/uploads/Analysis-of-DTRA- Nano-Silver-Study.pdf Its just another lab test. Its not a clinical trial. (Vero cells are used in cell cultures. i.e petri dishes). Its not proof that CS cures Ebola and its not proof of a Big Pharma/ CIA coverup either. What it does mean is that CS should be investigated further but we already knew that didn't we. David -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com List Owner: Mike Devour mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com
