CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Hello, Ivan. Thanks for your response. It seems that symantics has been the main reason for disagreement. We agree then that available silver ion concentration is the prime determinant for 'CS' effectiveness, and that water contaminated with chloride or sulphide ion acts to reduce silver ion via precipitation. I would welcome any feedback on the mattter of chelation, though. For many mineral supplements, the claim is made that, eg magnesium or potassium is delivered far more effectively within the body as say orotate or aspartate than as say, a simple salt like chloride. Could this also apply to CS for instance? On the matter of ions being neutralized by polar water molecules I must disagree. Certainly the potential energy of 'naked' ions is reduced via solvation, ie the process is spontaneous. The oriented dipole moments of the cluster of water molecules surrounding each ion 'blunts' the ion's electric intensity, but that in no way effects the overall charge balance. The only way to neutralize charge of one sign is the presence of an equal quantity of charge of the opposite sign. Hence ions in solution must always exist as components of a salt, acid, or base. (By application of a high electrostatic potential, a tiny amount of excess ions is possible, but hardly practical or useful!) An analogy between conservation of charge and Newton's law of action and reaction might help. Imagine poking someone with a sharp stick (read 'bare' ion) versus with a cushion (read solvated ion), equal force (read charge) being applied in each case. Owing to the greater pressure, the stick will feel like a lot more force is being applied, but in fact the person must react back with equal force in both instances, in order not to fall over. It's the old pull yourself up by your bootstraps thing. regards, Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au Original: Kevin, I was trying to show that it is not the salt but the silver load thatmay cause argyria or other problems. Most salts are absorbed as dissolved ions, the cations taking different pathways to the anions. If a salt was to be absorbed as a compound, then the fact that this is so would suggest that the salt does not disassociate readily, and therefore would be less reactive than the component ions. The difference between compounds and CS is the concentration at with they are supplied. It matters only that free silver ions are available to react with body tissue, and the number of ions that do so. If several different salt solutions, containing the same concentrations of free silver ions are tested against microbes, I would expect the results to be similar, disregarding the effect the anion may have. In aquatic environments, waters which have high sulphide or chloride conditions, high silver concentrations have little effect on susceptible marine creatures as there is little in the way of free silver ions, however in places that have a high concentration of dissolved silver pollution, aquatic creatures can be severely effected. I am always wary when someone says that this physical event cannot occur ;-) Surely the electrostatic effect of ions in solution is rendered neutral by the solvation by the polar water molecules, creating large crystal like structures which are essentially neutral at their boundary with the bulk solution. I do not think this has been well investigated, mainly due to the difficultly of forming and capturing ions of a single species. Your thoughts good sir?Ivan.
RE: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Kevin, I was trying to show that it is not the salt but the silver load that may cause argyria or other problems. Most salts are absorbed as dissolved ions, the cations taking different pathways to the anions. If a salt was to be absorbed as a compound, then the fact that this is so would suggest that the salt does not disassociate readily, and therefore would be less reactive than the component ions. The difference between compounds and CS is the concentration at with they are supplied. It matters only that free silver ions are available to react with body tissue, and the number of ions that do so. If several different salt solutions, containing the same concentrations of free silver ions are tested against microbes, I would expect the results to be similar, disregarding the effect the anion may have. In aquatic environments, waters which have high sulphide or chloride conditions, high silver concentrations have little effect on susceptible marine creatures as there is little in the way of free silver ions, however in places that have a high concentration of dissolved silver pollution, aquatic creatures can be severely effected. I am always wary when someone says that this physical event cannot occur ;-) Surely the electrostatic effect of ions in solution is rendered neutral by the solvation by the polar water molecules, creating large crystal like structures which are essentially neutral at their boundary with the bulk solution. I do not think this has been well investigated, mainly due to the difficultly of forming and capturing ions of a single species. Your thoughts good sir? Ivan. -Original Message- From: Kevin Nolan [mailto:ken...@optusnet.com.au] Sent: Tuesday, 18 December 2001 2:15 p.m. To: silver-list@eskimo.com Subject: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' In digest #1195, Ivan anderson wrote, in two separate postings: If a silver salt or protein were to enter the body as a compound, then it is much less likely that it will be deposited in the tissue, simply because the compound must have a high affinity for the silver and would be far less reactive. This is why silver salts and proteins have less germicidal effect in the test tube than silver ions. However, because these compounds are often supplied at very high concentrations, the available silver ions (while small as a percentage of total dose) may in fact be large enough to cause some deposition in tissue. The term 'salt' should really only be applied to the solid compound. When a salt is dissolved it ceases to be a compound and is then a aqueous mixture of the two separate and distinct ions from which it was formed. Silver hydroxide, when dissolved, is simply silver ions in slightly more alkaline water. The same applies to silver nitrate, which completely dissolves at very high concentrations. The silver is available as silver ions, as is the nitrate. Unfortunately, the nitrate is corrosive to tissue It is most likely not the species that the silver ions are derived from that can cause problems, but rather the concentration in which they are present. Leaving aside organic silver compounds and mild silver proteins, there seems to be a contradiction between the first and second quotes above, in relation to salts vs ions. We agree that whether as a silver salt such as silver nitrate, or (as Marshall Dudley would point out) a base such as silver hydroxide, when dissolved in water such ionic compounds dissociate fairly well completely to give just a mixture of ions. How then can it be said that dissolved silver salts are much less effective than silver ions? Are they not in effect one and the same? A while back I pointed out it is impossible to have just one ionic species in solution - charge neutrality requires that ionic silver (or any other cation) must always be accompanied by anions of some kind, whether hydroxyl, nitrate, acetate or whatever. This brings the matter back full circle. Despite all the words so far, the following basic issue has not been answered: Suppose we have different ionic silver compounds each made up to the same PPM dissolved silver ion in solution. Examples might be 10PPM silver each as silver hydroxide, silver acetate, silver citrate, silver bicarbonate. For none of these is the anion either poisonous or germicidal. Should we expect the germicidal power to be essentially equivalent, whether in the test tube, or in the body? If not, on what basis? regards, Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
In digest #1195, Ivan anderson wrote, in two separate postings: If a silver salt or protein were to enter the body as a compound, then it is much less likely that it will be deposited in the tissue, simply because the compound must have a high affinity for the silver and would be far less reactive. This is why silver salts and proteins have less germicidal effect in the test tube than silver ions. However, because these compounds are often supplied at very high concentrations, the available silver ions (while small as a percentage of total dose) may in fact be large enough to cause some deposition in tissue. The term 'salt' should really only be applied to the solid compound. When a salt is dissolved it ceases to be a compound and is then a aqueous mixture of the two separate and distinct ions from which it was formed. Silver hydroxide, when dissolved, is simply silver ions in slightly more alkaline water. The same applies to silver nitrate, which completely dissolves at very high concentrations. The silver is available as silver ions, as is the nitrate. Unfortunately, the nitrate is corrosive to tissue It is most likely not the species that the silver ions are derived from that can cause problems, but rather the concentration in which they are present. Leaving aside organic silver compounds and mild silver proteins, there seems to be a contradiction between the first and second quotes above, in relation to salts vs ions. We agree that whether as a silver salt such as silver nitrate, or (as Marshall Dudley would point out) a base such as silver hydroxide, when dissolved in water such ionic compounds dissociate fairly well completely to give just a mixture of ions. How then can it be said that dissolved silver salts are much less effective than silver ions? Are they not in effect one and the same? A while back I pointed out it is impossible to have just one ionic species in solution - charge neutrality requires that ionic silver (or any other cation) must always be accompanied by anions of some kind, whether hydroxyl, nitrate, acetate or whatever. This brings the matter back full circle. Despite all the words so far, the following basic issue has not been answered: Suppose we have different ionic silver compounds each made up to the same PPM dissolved silver ion in solution. Examples might be 10PPM silver each as silver hydroxide, silver acetate, silver citrate, silver bicarbonate. For none of these is the anion either poisonous or germicidal. Should we expect the germicidal power to be essentially equivalent, whether in the test tube, or in the body? If not, on what basis? regards, Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Sufficient to burn the skin off! It was supposed to burn the proud flesh off - but only sting for about 15 minutes... So it had to be a good strength. The son I had then is the one that has just produced my latest grand daughter... so it happened a few years ago - 33 I think.. Judith. One has to look at the strengths. Just like H2O2, 3% is harmless, but 35% will burn your skin off. What concentration did the doctor use. I wonder what concentration is used in the eyes. Marshall Judith Thamm wrote: You know, in 1968 when my older son was born, the dr couldn't wait so he sliced me through so the birth canal was wider and the baby came more quickly. Where I was stitched up, I developed proudflesh. When I went back to the dr he put silver nitrate on it. For 24 hours that stuff burned - I didn't sleep at all until the pain stopped - I couldn't sit down and even lying down was little help. It was a nightmare - and they are going to put that in a baby's eyes!!! How horrifying! Judith. - Original Message - From: Marshall Dudley mdud...@execonn.com To: silver-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:34 AM Subject: Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' It appears that silver nitrate is being used again on babies: http://www.parenthoodweb.com/articles/phw1380.htm http://www.sangfroid.com/babypix/plan.html http://www.lamaze.com/baby/firsthour/articles/0,9474,167862_80951,00.html From what I recall silver nitrate was discontinued in the 70's due to pharmacutical companies pressing for the use of patented antibiotics which would earn them more money. Sometime (I believe in the late 80's in Knoxville), a hospital was sued because a baby went blind because the antibiotic was not broad enough spectrum to kill something it was exposed to in the birth canal. At the trial they presented evidence that silver notrate would have killed it and that the only reason they stopped using silver nitrate was to increase profits by using a patented antibiotic. I remember thinking at the time it serves them right, even though I knew nothing of CS at the time. I did not realize they had started using it again until a little while ago when I was researching the history. Since they now offer both, my suspicion is that they are doing this to cover themselves against another law suit, but tell the parents that the silver nitrate will burn the eyes to get them to use the other as much as possible. Marshall Ode Coyote wrote: Reid My chemistry is also pretty limited. I think you have me mixed up with someone elses postings. From what I gather, silver nitrate is dangerous because very small amounts contain a lot of silver ...and... silver nitrates are corrosive to body tissues and leave black stains. Even still, until fairly recently, it was used in virtually all new born babies eyes to prevent infections. Ken Reid Harvey wrote: Ken, Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. You have a good point here, although gold chloride is not a good example since chlorine is deadly toxic.A good example would be hydrogen cyanide, HCN, which is deadly toxic, yet hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen alone are totally harmless. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
RE: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Reid, The term 'salt' should really only be applied to the solid compound. When a salt is dissolved it ceases to be a compound and is then a aqueous mixture of the two separate and distinct ions from which it was formed. Silver hydroxide, when dissolved, is simply silver ions in slightly more alkaline water. The same applies to silver nitrate, which completely dissolves at very high concentrations. The silver is available as silver ions, as is the nitrate. Unfortunately, the nitrate is corrosive to tissue. Gold chloride dissolves as gold 3+ ions and chloride ions. The chloride is non toxic but the gold ions will oxidise body tissue and enzymes and can cause problems. Metallic gold on the other hand, has all its electrons and is quite non-reactive. It is most likely not the species that the silver ions are derived from that can cause problems, but rather the concentration in which they are present. Ivan. -Original Message- From: Reid Harvey [mailto:ceram...@bol-online.com] Sent: Thursday, 13 December 2001 3:00 p.m. To: silver list Subject: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' Ken, I never stopped to think that the silver may be the hydroxide, evedince that my understanding of chemistry is limited. (Sometimes I stop and think and sometimes I just stop.) Can you fill me in on how it is that the hydroxide is a salt? Does anybody else have an answer? I feel sure that you're correct that the reason this is not harmful to us CS lovers in the long run is that 10ppm is extremely dilute. Of course this begs a question about assertions here that it's not a problem to ingest ionic silver at the really high concentrations. If this sort of CS is practically unattainable without the salts then responsible people should talk about some kind of an upper ppm limit for ingesting. On the other hand finding that number may be difficult. Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. Salaam, Reid -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
RE: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Jason, The body reacts to metals electro-chemically. The fate of these metals depends upon the physical properties they exhibit. Silver will bind to albumin in the blood plasma, selenides, sulphides, ascorbates, metaloproteins and so on. Some will inevitably bind to these groups which may be found in tissue and organs. If the concentration of silver is high, and the concentration of selenium (for example) is low, then more silver is likely to bind with tissue. When the bodies supply of metaloproteins become low, because of their use in binding with silver (or some other metal) then more are manufactured, if large amounts are required this may trigger an immune response, a rise in the white blood cell count, and an increase in body temp. If a silver salt or protein were to enter the body as a compound, then it is much less likely that it will be deposited in the tissue, simply because the compound must have a high affinity for the silver and would be far less reactive. This is why silver salts and proteins have less germicidal effect in the test tube than silver ions. However, because these compounds are often supplied at very high concentrations, the available silver ions (while small as a percentage of total dose) may in fact be large enough to cause some deposition in tissue. Don't be fooled into thinking that solid food is treated any differently to liquid food. Food enters the body as ions and molecules, and water enters as water. Even when silver was normally supplied as highly concentrated salts or proteins, only a very small percentage of its users developed argyria. Ivan. -Original Message- From: Jason / AVRA [mailto:silverd...@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, 13 December 2001 3:44 p.m. To: silver-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' From: Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au But is argyria solely due to the high silver dosage possible with silver nitrate (very high solubility), or is there some kind of synergy effect as well? regards, Kevin Nolan Kevin: The slate blue colour of argyria is not entirely due as one might suspect, to the deposition of metallic silver (Petering, 1976), but largely to an increased deposition of melanin. Apparently, the issue of Argyria ( the two types ), is not as simple as it may first appear. Silver, in any form, when it reaches a certain theoretical concentration in the body is a toxic substance. Like most toxic substances, the effects will only last while the substance is active in the body. The question is: When and why does silver accumulate in the body, and when and why does it not? The body knows, and responds, to a toxic substance when detected in the body. This is a toxic response... It happens every time one eats garlic, for instance. The body moves to remove the substance as quickly as possible. This is a system-wide, metabolic response of the body. This response is markedly different than the normal elimination responses in the body. First, I believe that with the colloidal silver that most use, the body does NOT detect the silver as toxic. I don't believe the concentration is great enough, even at say a liter per day. I believe that isolated silver, whether in ion form or in colloidal particle form, is not deposited nor accumulated in organs or skin tissue, whether a toxic response is experienced or not. I believe that some, if not many, silver salts and proteins DO deposit silver in the tissue, because the body does not handle these substances in the same manner as it does water. This is the key concept. What is the body trying to do with these salts and proteins? I can induce a toxic reaction to isolated silver through heavy lung use. If the silver accumulated in the organs, then the symptoms would continue as documented in many materia medicas. However, the symptoms are temporary, corresponding very closely with the conclusions drawn in Roger Altman's informal study on silver elimination. However, I believe that even a teaspoon of silver protein/salts can easily cause a toxic reaction in the body. I believe this based upon the documented cases of Argyria from the old school medical documents and the EPA listed studies. When a toxic reaction occurs to these substances, silver begins to accumulate in tissues. Obviously, this doesn't ( or should say 'didn't ) occur in every case, or there would be thousands of more documented cases of Argyria back then. Evidently, Argyria ( to the point where it was noticed and recorded ) only occured in a small percentage of the people using silver-based products. These people may have accumulated silver more quickly through vitamin E and Selenium deficiencies. There may be other factors involved as well. The whole idea here: One wants the silver product to be treated exactly like water, not like a food substance or a solid. That is exactly what you get
RE: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Ivan: Granted, I am certainly not yet an expert on how substances are handled by the body, biologically speaking. However, the belief that water is handled in the same manner as foods in the body is not a universally accepted concept. In Your Body's Many Cries for Water, Fereydoon Batmanghelidj M.D. expounds upon his general premise that free water ( as he calls it ) is not handled by the body in the same manner as water included in food or other liquids. Here is a very interesting quote from an interview: Biser: That brings up a good point. When we talked to Mr. Clevenger, he said that he got a lot more energy from drinking water. Was he just imagining this or does this really happen? Batmanghelidj: It has to happen, because water is one of the main sources of energy for the brain and the entire body. Biser: What? A source of energy? How could that be? I thought water was just an inert substance. Batmanghelidj: This is the tragic mistake made by modern medicine. In their minds, what is important to the solids in the body - the proteins, the minerals, the vitamins. To them, water is incidental. It is merely a solvent - a packing material and a means of transport. But this view is incorrect. Biser: So what role does water play in body chemistry? Batmanghelidj: Water is a source of energy. One of the ways water produces energy is through hydrolysis. Hydrolysis means the splitting of water into its two components: hydrogen and oxygen. Whenever this occurs, energy is released. The energy generated by water helps produce ATP, a compound that stores body energy. Just as there is solar energy, there is hydro-electric energy. I think certain parts of the brain draw most of their energy from water. Biser: How important a source of energy is hydrolysis? Batmanghelidj: Certain parts of the brain draw most of their energy from water. Neurotransmission is heavily dependent on energy from water. Water affects nerve transmission in one other way to. There seem to exist small waterways or micro-streams along the length of nerves that float the packaged materials along biological structures called microtubules. These waterways transport the products manufactured in the brain to their destinations in the nerve endings. Biser: It's pretty amazing. I had no idea. Batmanghelidj: Most people don't. Especially doctors. What occurs along the the nerves is an exchange of charged minerals, called cations. Cation exchange gets its energy from water. Batmanghelidj: Dehydration is a primary factor in the producing of disease all over the body. Dehydration is one of the greatest producers of free radicals in the body. Water is the greatest free radical remover. Free radicals cut amino acids from the proteins. They do damage to the cell architecture. The mechanism of water's role in preventing free radicals is extremely complicated to explain. It involves white cell metabolism in the bloodstream. The body mechanisms that are supposed to prevent the generation of free radicals get destroyed by dehydration. Biser: So people who eat good foods and vitamins and who avoid water are in for a big surprise if they think they have avoided pre mature aging? Batmanghelidj: That's right! People are overemphasizing the solids and ignoring the role of water in energy generation and body metabolism. Biser: Another problem is that the healthful people drink fruit juices instead of water. Batmanghelidj: They don't realize that everything gets turned into glucose. Excess sugar has an effect on the brain. And too much insulin will dry out the system. It will take water out of the extra cellular environment, and as a result, more food will be eaten - because insulin produces artificial hunger. When we eat excessively as a result of insulin, that which cannot be used will be converted to fat. Readers should not concentrate on fruit juices instead of water. Biser: One man wrote in after our initial interview claiming that - no pun intended - you were all wet about hydrolysis. He said the process does'n't release energy, it requires it. What is your response? Batmanghelidj: The man is not acquainted with new scientific findings. I am not talking about hydrolysis in a test tube. I am talking about hydrolysis (the splitting of water) as it occurs in living systems. * I think chemistry, especially organic chemistry, is wrought with misunderstandings ( such as the recent post clarifying that when substances are in H2O, and the solution is further diluted, the molecules become closer - this is only common sense based on the super-principle that like attracts like and opposites polarize ) because the science has lost the perspective of viewing systems as a whole. When you drink one glass of quality drinking water, there is an instant resonance with the whole body, as a living, energetic system. I can't fault either your logic or
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
One has to look at the strengths. Just like H2O2, 3% is harmless, but 35% will burn your skin off. What concentration did the doctor use. I wonder what concentration is used in the eyes. Marshall Judith Thamm wrote: You know, in 1968 when my older son was born, the dr couldn't wait so he sliced me through so the birth canal was wider and the baby came more quickly. Where I was stitched up, I developed proudflesh. When I went back to the dr he put silver nitrate on it. For 24 hours that stuff burned - I didn't sleep at all until the pain stopped - I couldn't sit down and even lying down was little help. It was a nightmare - and they are going to put that in a baby's eyes!!! How horrifying! Judith. - Original Message - From: Marshall Dudley mdud...@execonn.com To: silver-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:34 AM Subject: Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' It appears that silver nitrate is being used again on babies: http://www.parenthoodweb.com/articles/phw1380.htm http://www.sangfroid.com/babypix/plan.html http://www.lamaze.com/baby/firsthour/articles/0,9474,167862_80951,00.html From what I recall silver nitrate was discontinued in the 70's due to pharmacutical companies pressing for the use of patented antibiotics which would earn them more money. Sometime (I believe in the late 80's in Knoxville), a hospital was sued because a baby went blind because the antibiotic was not broad enough spectrum to kill something it was exposed to in the birth canal. At the trial they presented evidence that silver notrate would have killed it and that the only reason they stopped using silver nitrate was to increase profits by using a patented antibiotic. I remember thinking at the time it serves them right, even though I knew nothing of CS at the time. I did not realize they had started using it again until a little while ago when I was researching the history. Since they now offer both, my suspicion is that they are doing this to cover themselves against another law suit, but tell the parents that the silver nitrate will burn the eyes to get them to use the other as much as possible. Marshall Ode Coyote wrote: Reid My chemistry is also pretty limited. I think you have me mixed up with someone elses postings. From what I gather, silver nitrate is dangerous because very small amounts contain a lot of silver ...and... silver nitrates are corrosive to body tissues and leave black stains. Even still, until fairly recently, it was used in virtually all new born babies eyes to prevent infections. Ken Reid Harvey wrote: Ken, Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. You have a good point here, although gold chloride is not a good example since chlorine is deadly toxic.A good example would be hydrogen cyanide, HCN, which is deadly toxic, yet hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen alone are totally harmless. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
He was supposed to be somewhere else at 7.30 am and it was already 7.15 am. proudflesh is where an infection occurs in the scar tissue. So I would not have had the problems unless he had not been in a hurry. He was later kicked out of the practice he was in. He told our next door neighbour to 'take two aspirins and lie down' - and she was dead of a heart attack when her husband got home from work that day. Judith. - Original Message - From: Josephine joseph...@poidogs.com To: silver-list@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 2:40 AM Subject: Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' I think the horrifying part was also the impatient doctor. What was his rush? Did he have a hot date that night? Excuse me, but I am already assuming it is a HE because it sounds like a HE. I wonder if you would have had to endure the burning pain had the doctor allowed you to deliver without the slicing. Josephine Hawaii You know, in 1968 when my older son was born, the dr couldn't wait so he sliced me through so the birth canal was wider and the baby came more quickly. Where I was stitched up, I developed proudflesh. -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
You know, in 1968 when my older son was born, the dr couldn't wait so he sliced me through so the birth canal was wider and the baby came more quickly. Where I was stitched up, I developed proudflesh. When I went back to the dr he put silver nitrate on it. For 24 hours that stuff burned - I didn't sleep at all until the pain stopped - I couldn't sit down and even lying down was little help. It was a nightmare - and they are going to put that in a baby's eyes!!! How horrifying! Judith. - Original Message - From: Marshall Dudley mdud...@execonn.com To: silver-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:34 AM Subject: Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' It appears that silver nitrate is being used again on babies: http://www.parenthoodweb.com/articles/phw1380.htm http://www.sangfroid.com/babypix/plan.html http://www.lamaze.com/baby/firsthour/articles/0,9474,167862_80951,00.html From what I recall silver nitrate was discontinued in the 70's due to pharmacutical companies pressing for the use of patented antibiotics which would earn them more money. Sometime (I believe in the late 80's in Knoxville), a hospital was sued because a baby went blind because the antibiotic was not broad enough spectrum to kill something it was exposed to in the birth canal. At the trial they presented evidence that silver notrate would have killed it and that the only reason they stopped using silver nitrate was to increase profits by using a patented antibiotic. I remember thinking at the time it serves them right, even though I knew nothing of CS at the time. I did not realize they had started using it again until a little while ago when I was researching the history. Since they now offer both, my suspicion is that they are doing this to cover themselves against another law suit, but tell the parents that the silver nitrate will burn the eyes to get them to use the other as much as possible. Marshall Ode Coyote wrote: Reid My chemistry is also pretty limited. I think you have me mixed up with someone elses postings. From what I gather, silver nitrate is dangerous because very small amounts contain a lot of silver ...and... silver nitrates are corrosive to body tissues and leave black stains. Even still, until fairly recently, it was used in virtually all new born babies eyes to prevent infections. Ken Reid Harvey wrote: Ken, Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. You have a good point here, although gold chloride is not a good example since chlorine is deadly toxic.A good example would be hydrogen cyanide, HCN, which is deadly toxic, yet hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen alone are totally harmless. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
I think the horrifying part was also the impatient doctor. What was his rush? Did he have a hot date that night? Excuse me, but I am already assuming it is a HE because it sounds like a HE. I wonder if you would have had to endure the burning pain had the doctor allowed you to deliver without the slicing. Josephine Hawaii You know, in 1968 when my older son was born, the dr couldn't wait so he sliced me through so the birth canal was wider and the baby came more quickly. Where I was stitched up, I developed proudflesh. -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Jason - between myself and Reid we have been working you pretty hard. Thanks for your thoughtful feedback. There are specifics not covered (like which other silver salts are problematic) but I understand your point - stick to pure CS and you can't go far wrong. Go take a break! Reid - on your question about where does the hydroxide come from. It's part-and-parcel of the electrolysis process in producing ionic silver. To a lesser extent I believe bicarbonate ions, HCO3- are also produced, owing to dissolved CO2 present in the water. Roger Altman's course covered it all better than I can - search the archives for more. regards, Kevin Nolan - Original Message - From: Jason / AVRA silverd...@hotmail.com To: silver-list@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 1:44 PM Subject: Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' From: Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au But is argyria solely due to the high silver dosage possible with silver nitrate (very high solubility), or is there some kind of synergy effect as well? regards, Kevin Nolan Kevin: The slate blue colour of argyria is not entirely due as one might suspect, to the deposition of metallic silver (Petering, 1976), but largely to an increased deposition of melanin. Apparently, the issue of Argyria ( the two types ), is not as simple as it may first appear. Silver, in any form, when it reaches a certain theoretical concentration in the body is a toxic substance. Like most toxic substances, the effects will only last while the substance is active in the body. The question is: When and why does silver accumulate in the body, and when and why does it not? The body knows, and responds, to a toxic substance when detected in the body. This is a toxic response... It happens every time one eats garlic, for instance. The body moves to remove the substance as quickly as possible. This is a system-wide, metabolic response of the body. This response is markedly different than the normal elimination responses in the body. First, I believe that with the colloidal silver that most use, the body does NOT detect the silver as toxic. I don't believe the concentration is great enough, even at say a liter per day. I believe that isolated silver, whether in ion form or in colloidal particle form, is not deposited nor accumulated in organs or skin tissue, whether a toxic response is experienced or not. I believe that some, if not many, silver salts and proteins DO deposit silver in the tissue, because the body does not handle these substances in the same manner as it does water. This is the key concept. What is the body trying to do with these salts and proteins? I can induce a toxic reaction to isolated silver through heavy lung use. If the silver accumulated in the organs, then the symptoms would continue as documented in many materia medicas. However, the symptoms are temporary, corresponding very closely with the conclusions drawn in Roger Altman's informal study on silver elimination. However, I believe that even a teaspoon of silver protein/salts can easily cause a toxic reaction in the body. I believe this based upon the documented cases of Argyria from the old school medical documents and the EPA listed studies. When a toxic reaction occurs to these substances, silver begins to accumulate in tissues. Obviously, this doesn't ( or should say 'didn't ) occur in every case, or there would be thousands of more documented cases of Argyria back then. Evidently, Argyria ( to the point where it was noticed and recorded ) only occured in a small percentage of the people using silver-based products. These people may have accumulated silver more quickly through vitamin E and Selenium deficiencies. There may be other factors involved as well. The whole idea here: One wants the silver product to be treated exactly like water, not like a food substance or a solid. That is exactly what you get with a low PPM, fine particle/ionic isolated silver. Luckily, there is every indication that silver oxide and silver chloride do not deposit silver into tissues. Keep in mind: just because silver comes in CONTACT with tissues, does not mean it will be DEPOSITED in tissues. It certainly APPEARS as if the protein/salt combination CAUSES silver to be deposited in tissues. Undoubtedly, there is a lot we don't know. We don't know it, probably because nobody does! Based on the information provided by Ken ( the lung study of metallic silver ), it is becoming clearer that the issue of permanent silver toxicity is one of compounds and not silver itself. However, it is good to keep in mind that it IS the silver that ultimately is responsible for the effects. _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Reid My chemistry is also pretty limited. I think you have me mixed up with someone elses postings. From what I gather, silver nitrate is dangerous because very small amounts contain a lot of silver ...and... silver nitrates are corrosive to body tissues and leave black stains. Even still, until fairly recently, it was used in virtually all new born babies eyes to prevent infections. Ken Reid Harvey wrote: Ken, Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. You have a good point here, although gold chloride is not a good example since chlorine is deadly toxic.A good example would be hydrogen cyanide, HCN, which is deadly toxic, yet hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen alone are totally harmless. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Sure. And it might explain why all CS is effective no matter how badly it's made. No matter how many huge particles there are, there are also small ones present. The body just sorts them out according to what it can use, sending them to where they can go. What can't get in goes through and what can get in..does. [Working like a simple membrane filter] BTW I filled a jug with my 300+ PPM tap water. It also appears darker than distilled but not as dark as the jug full of clear CS [in indirect lighting] The well water has a weaker TE than the CS...but many times the meter reading. It follows that the conductivity of the tap water is due to ionic or dissolved minerals and ions don't reflect red laser light [too small for the wavelength?] and the tap water has a lower concentration of suspended particles than the CS. They both have a metallic taste but the CS has a much stronger metallic flavor. Could it be that we don't taste ions very well? Could the metallic flavor be from a battery effect on the tongue similar to tasteing metal when touching a nine volt battery onto the tongue? If we had a variable color laser, or even a bright flashlight, could the dominant particle size be determined by which wavelength gets reflected the most? Ken At 08:33 AM 12/14/01 +0600, you wrote: Ken, This is all very interesting, a new twist I haven't seen here before. So an indication of a majority of particles of small size is to be found where there is pale yellow with good TE. If this is a large majority I would imagine there would be an argument to suggest that this CS is no less beneficial than the 10ppm CS. In this scenario the fine particles would be penetrating where the large particles could not go, but the large particles would be beneficial at the outer surfaces, which also need CS. Reid Ode Coyote wrote: Can you get any color CS without a TE? I haven't found it yet. I believe that having a color requires a particle and a particles are what makes a TE visible. If the TE is weak and the color is ,say, pale yellow... That would indicate to me that the majority of the particles are fairly largish. But getting a pale yellow with a strong TE would indicate that the minority of particles are that of the yellow color producing size and the majority are of the smaller colorless variety. Something i noticed the other day.. A gallon of 25 +/- PPM crystal clear CS that's returned to the milk jug the distilled water came out of is significantly darker than an identical jug of distilled water. ...some sort of refraction effect i suppose. Humm, I wonder if my 300PPM tap water does the same? Ken -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
It appears that silver nitrate is being used again on babies: http://www.parenthoodweb.com/articles/phw1380.htm http://www.sangfroid.com/babypix/plan.html http://www.lamaze.com/baby/firsthour/articles/0,9474,167862_80951,00.html From what I recall silver nitrate was discontinued in the 70's due to pharmacutical companies pressing for the use of patented antibiotics which would earn them more money. Sometime (I believe in the late 80's in Knoxville), a hospital was sued because a baby went blind because the antibiotic was not broad enough spectrum to kill something it was exposed to in the birth canal. At the trial they presented evidence that silver notrate would have killed it and that the only reason they stopped using silver nitrate was to increase profits by using a patented antibiotic. I remember thinking at the time it serves them right, even though I knew nothing of CS at the time. I did not realize they had started using it again until a little while ago when I was researching the history. Since they now offer both, my suspicion is that they are doing this to cover themselves against another law suit, but tell the parents that the silver nitrate will burn the eyes to get them to use the other as much as possible. Marshall Ode Coyote wrote: Reid My chemistry is also pretty limited. I think you have me mixed up with someone elses postings. From what I gather, silver nitrate is dangerous because very small amounts contain a lot of silver ...and... silver nitrates are corrosive to body tissues and leave black stains. Even still, until fairly recently, it was used in virtually all new born babies eyes to prevent infections. Ken Reid Harvey wrote: Ken, Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. You have a good point here, although gold chloride is not a good example since chlorine is deadly toxic.A good example would be hydrogen cyanide, HCN, which is deadly toxic, yet hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen alone are totally harmless. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
The hydroxide radicals are already there in the dyhydrogen monoxide which composes 99.% of the CS. This is nothing more than H(OH) a hydrogen ion and an hydroxide radical. If any hydrogen bubbles off, then the hydroxide radical is freed. BTW here is an msds on the substance: http://www.radix.net/~fornax/me/msdsdhmo.html and a complete web site devoted to it: http://www.dhmo.org/ which states: Its basis is the unstable radical Hydroxide, the components of which are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol. Of course to most of us, we call it water. Marshall Reid Harvey wrote: Kevin, First off I should say that we produce concentrated CS using de-ionized water, of TDS less than 10. I am unclear as to just where the dissociated hydroxide ions are coming from. Reid Kevin Nolan wrote: Silver hydroxide would not be a salt, but rather a base. IE sodium hydroxide is lye. Marshall Technically speaking, that is true. But silver hydroxide is a very weak base, and in fact it's pH is lower than many 'genuine' salts. The point is, it exists in solution as dissociated ions - not as colloidal silver particles. Owing to claims made on the list that nitrate ion was the main problem with silver nitrate (even though argyria is a deposited silver condition), the question arises as to what species or combination of species potentially does the damage, and under what conditions. I think there is general agreement that unrealistically massive doses are required before home brew 'CS' would be a problem. But I got the impression that silver nitrate could cause trouble at much lower relative dosage - ie it's not just a matter of silver ion dosage alone. Nitrate is a known carcinogen (less so than nitrite), and an irritant at high enough concentration. But is argyria solely due to the high silver dosage possible with silver nitrate (very high solubility), or is there some kind of synergy effect as well? Anything taken to excess will cause trouble. The gist is this - do certain anions, innocuous of themselves (eg, acetate, citrate) somehow significantly and selectively 'promote' toxicity of silver ion relative to say, silver hydroxide at the same concentration? Maybe there is simply no definitive data on that, but if there is it would be a good thing to know. regards, Kevin Nolan -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
## Somehow my name got attached to something I didn't write. But, hydroxide or not, salt or not...at 10 to 30 PPM, you'd drown long before you get anything like a toxic dose. At a 94% elimination rate per 48 hrs, you'd drown for years before you'd get argryia. [note below that ingest per day might need to be changed to retain over all to get that total load of 3 grams...so 94x300? Or is that 6x 300 litres?] Note also that the 94% elimination rate was for an inhaled or ingested by mouth dose of silver 'dust' eliminated via the feces. It has been postulated that the blue bloods got that name because they ate off silver a lot and turned blue. It seems they ate their dinnerware for desert. A teaspoon a day keeps the bloodletter away? The requirement is very much higher than could possibly gained by taking normal strength CS, Roger. To become blue you would need to ingest about 3 grams of silver per day, according to Alexander G. Schauss, Ph.D. Director, Life Sciences Division John Hopkins University. A litre of 10 ppm CS contains 10 milligrams of silver, therefore one would need to ingest 300 litres per day to reach this point. This is quite a bit higher than some of the references I have seen, but even the most conservative estimate has one drinking tens of litres per day. Ivan. At 08:00 AM 12/13/01 +0600, you wrote: Ken, I never stopped to think that the silver may be the hydroxide, evedince that my understanding of chemistry is limited. (Sometimes I stop and think and sometimes I just stop.) Can you fill me in on how it is that the hydroxide is a salt? Does anybody else have an answer? I feel sure that you're correct that the reason this is not harmful to us CS lovers in the long run is that 10ppm is extremely dilute. Of course this begs a question about assertions here that it's not a problem to ingest ionic silver at the really high concentrations. If this sort of CS is practically unattainable without the salts then responsible people should talk about some kind of an upper ppm limit for ingesting. On the other hand finding that number may be difficult. Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. Salaam, Reid Ode Coyote wrote: Jason, Thanks for the reference material. The conditions seem to be pretty extreme - not many of us are going to be using 1500 PPM solution of silver salts of any kind as drinking water. Nevertheless it raises an interesting matter. Most of the home made CS has the silver in the form of a silver salt - namely silver hydroxide, more so than actual colloid. So is it only the low concentration and/or dosage that prevents poisoning? It has been stated previously on this list that in the case of silver nitrate, nitrate is the actual culprit. But acetate is from vinegar, so it seems safe to assume that in the case of silver acetate, only the silver could be to blame. Is the picture more complicated than this - meaning the stuff exists in the body in part as undissociated complex that acts differently to either ionic species? regards, Kevin Nolan -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Reid Harvey wrote: Ken, Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. You have a good point here, although gold chloride is not a good example since chlorine is deadly toxic.A good example would be hydrogen cyanide, HCN, which is deadly toxic, yet hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen alone are totally harmless. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Reid Harvey, Ode Coyote wrote: Ken, I never stopped to think that the silver may be the hydroxide, evedince that my understanding of chemistry is limited. (Sometimes I stop and think and sometimes I just stop.) Can you fill me in on how it is that the hydroxide is a salt? Silver hydroxide would not be a salt, but rather a base. IE sodium hydroxide is lye. Marshall Technically speaking, that is true. But silver hydroxide is a very weak base, and in fact it's pH is lower than many 'genuine' salts. The point is, it exists in solution as dissociated ions - not as colloidal silver particles. Owing to claims made on the list that nitrate ion was the main problem with silver nitrate (even though argyria is a deposited silver condition), the question arises as to what species or combination of species potentially does the damage, and under what conditions. I think there is general agreement that unrealistically massive doses are required before home brew 'CS' would be a problem. But I got the impression that silver nitrate could cause trouble at much lower relative dosage - ie it's not just a matter of silver ion dosage alone. Nitrate is a known carcinogen (less so than nitrite), and an irritant at high enough concentration. But is argyria solely due to the high silver dosage possible with silver nitrate (very high solubility), or is there some kind of synergy effect as well? Anything taken to excess will cause trouble. The gist is this - do certain anions, innocuous of themselves (eg, acetate, citrate) somehow significantly and selectively 'promote' toxicity of silver ion relative to say, silver hydroxide at the same concentration? Maybe there is simply no definitive data on that, but if there is it would be a good thing to know. regards, Kevin Nolan
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
From: Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au But is argyria solely due to the high silver dosage possible with silver nitrate (very high solubility), or is there some kind of synergy effect as well? regards, Kevin Nolan Kevin: The slate blue colour of argyria is not entirely due as one might suspect, to the deposition of metallic silver (Petering, 1976), but largely to an increased deposition of melanin. Apparently, the issue of Argyria ( the two types ), is not as simple as it may first appear. Silver, in any form, when it reaches a certain theoretical concentration in the body is a toxic substance. Like most toxic substances, the effects will only last while the substance is active in the body. The question is: When and why does silver accumulate in the body, and when and why does it not? The body knows, and responds, to a toxic substance when detected in the body. This is a toxic response... It happens every time one eats garlic, for instance. The body moves to remove the substance as quickly as possible. This is a system-wide, metabolic response of the body. This response is markedly different than the normal elimination responses in the body. First, I believe that with the colloidal silver that most use, the body does NOT detect the silver as toxic. I don't believe the concentration is great enough, even at say a liter per day. I believe that isolated silver, whether in ion form or in colloidal particle form, is not deposited nor accumulated in organs or skin tissue, whether a toxic response is experienced or not. I believe that some, if not many, silver salts and proteins DO deposit silver in the tissue, because the body does not handle these substances in the same manner as it does water. This is the key concept. What is the body trying to do with these salts and proteins? I can induce a toxic reaction to isolated silver through heavy lung use. If the silver accumulated in the organs, then the symptoms would continue as documented in many materia medicas. However, the symptoms are temporary, corresponding very closely with the conclusions drawn in Roger Altman's informal study on silver elimination. However, I believe that even a teaspoon of silver protein/salts can easily cause a toxic reaction in the body. I believe this based upon the documented cases of Argyria from the old school medical documents and the EPA listed studies. When a toxic reaction occurs to these substances, silver begins to accumulate in tissues. Obviously, this doesn't ( or should say 'didn't ) occur in every case, or there would be thousands of more documented cases of Argyria back then. Evidently, Argyria ( to the point where it was noticed and recorded ) only occured in a small percentage of the people using silver-based products. These people may have accumulated silver more quickly through vitamin E and Selenium deficiencies. There may be other factors involved as well. The whole idea here: One wants the silver product to be treated exactly like water, not like a food substance or a solid. That is exactly what you get with a low PPM, fine particle/ionic isolated silver. Luckily, there is every indication that silver oxide and silver chloride do not deposit silver into tissues. Keep in mind: just because silver comes in CONTACT with tissues, does not mean it will be DEPOSITED in tissues. It certainly APPEARS as if the protein/salt combination CAUSES silver to be deposited in tissues. Undoubtedly, there is a lot we don't know. We don't know it, probably because nobody does! Based on the information provided by Ken ( the lung study of metallic silver ), it is becoming clearer that the issue of permanent silver toxicity is one of compounds and not silver itself. However, it is good to keep in mind that it IS the silver that ultimately is responsible for the effects. _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Not such a good example, either. The problem is the cyano anion: CN-, which is deadly whether as HCN, NaCN, KCN etc. The only 'synergy' effect I can see here is the solubility and hence dosage available between one cyanide compound and another. The cation per se is of little consequence, unless toxic in it's own right (eg, mercury). Kevin Nolan - Original Message - From: Marshall Dudley mdud...@execonn.com To: silver-list@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 2:20 AM Subject: Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' Reid Harvey wrote: Ken, Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. You have a good point here, although gold chloride is not a good example since chlorine is deadly toxic.A good example would be hydrogen cyanide, HCN, which is deadly toxic, yet hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen alone are totally harmless. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Greetings All..
since my last update about my arthritisI have severely relapsedI am
personally 99% sure that what I am dealing with is none other than leaky gut
syndrome...I experience alergic-like reactions whenever I eat..the
main symptom besides the arthritis is watery eyes.this is just about to
drive me nuts!!!My arthritis pain comes and goesand thus far is
still avoiding my hands{Thank God}..My worst spot is my
shoulders.the attacks jump around...from place to place...right now
it is very very bad in my left shoulder..Feels like it has eate all the
way through the soft tissues...and is on raw boneI had no choice but
to take vioxx...nothing else I know of will take the edge off of the
pain.I'm about to go nuts from all of this stuffif anyone can
offer any advice.it would be much appreciated..I'm still hell bent
against letting the medical proffesion do its thing...here's what
I'm doing right nowI'm on the water cure..have been for a long
time..since I weigh about 200.give or take.I'm drinking about
100 ounces.I'm also on MSM6000 mg per day..b-12..6000 mcg per
day...I just started liquid alo vera.3 ounces per dayand
also just started PDA.these last two supplements were given by the
advice of my local health food store guru.I've also stopped
swallowing CS..I am doing the holding it in my mouth for 4 minute
thingI'm afraid of further damaging my flora
If I fast for 2 or 3 days..the pain almost tottally
disappears..but I gotsta eat.other than the hunger...I feel
great while doing thisperhaps a marathon fast is in order??..I
don't know if I can stand doing that or not..Many thanks to those of you
who have offered help in the past.and many thanks in advance for what I
know will be good advice in the future.Robb
_
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
--
The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver.
To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to:
silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com
with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line.
To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com
Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html
List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
R.e. bluebloods -- I have heard this anecdote many times. I have also heard that the popular glass harmonica, invented I think by Benjamin Franklin, or at least enjoyed by him, caused big problems because players got led poisioning by rubbing away at their crystal glasses! That is hard to imagine, but from what I read, it is true. Some people advise never to drink from crystalware.This seems pertinent when considering the possibility of argyria from silverware. It could well be true. JBB Ode Coyote wrote: ## Somehow my name got attached to something I didn't write. But, hydroxide or not, salt or not...at 10 to 30 PPM, you'd drown long before you get anything like a toxic dose. At a 94% elimination rate per 48 hrs, you'd drown for years before you'd get argryia. [note below that ingest per day might need to be changed to retain over all to get that total load of 3 grams...so 94x300? Or is that 6x 300 litres?] Note also that the 94% elimination rate was for an inhaled or ingested by mouth dose of silver 'dust' eliminated via the feces. It has been postulated that the blue bloods got that name because they ate off silver a lot and turned blue. It seems they ate their dinnerware for desert. A teaspoon a day keeps the bloodletter away? The requirement is very much higher than could possibly gained by taking normal strength CS, Roger. To become blue you would need to ingest about 3 grams of silver per day, according to Alexander G. Schauss, Ph.D. Director, Life Sciences Division John Hopkins University. A litre of 10 ppm CS contains 10 milligrams of silver, therefore one would need to ingest 300 litres per day to reach this point. This is quite a bit higher than some of the references I have seen, but even the most conservative estimate has one drinking tens of litres per day. Ivan. At 08:00 AM 12/13/01 +0600, you wrote: Ken, I never stopped to think that the silver may be the hydroxide, evedince that my understanding of chemistry is limited. (Sometimes I stop and think and sometimes I just stop.) Can you fill me in on how it is that the hydroxide is a salt? Does anybody else have an answer? I feel sure that you're correct that the reason this is not harmful to us CS lovers in the long run is that 10ppm is extremely dilute. Of course this begs a question about assertions here that it's not a problem to ingest ionic silver at the really high concentrations. If this sort of CS is practically unattainable without the salts then responsible people should talk about some kind of an upper ppm limit for ingesting. On the other hand finding that number may be difficult. Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. Salaam, Reid Ode Coyote wrote: Jason, Thanks for the reference material. The conditions seem to be pretty extreme - not many of us are going to be using 1500 PPM solution of silver salts of any kind as drinking water. Nevertheless it raises an interesting matter. Most of the home made CS has the silver in the form of a silver salt - namely silver hydroxide, more so than actual colloid. So is it only the low concentration and/or dosage that prevents poisoning? It has been stated previously on this list that in the case of silver nitrate, nitrate is the actual culprit. But acetate is from vinegar, so it seems safe to assume that in the case of silver acetate, only the silver could be to blame. Is the picture more complicated than this - meaning the stuff exists in the body in part as undissociated complex that acts differently to either ionic species? regards, Kevin Nolan -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Kevin, First off I should say that we produce concentrated CS using de-ionized water, of TDS less than 10. I am unclear as to just where the dissociated hydroxide ions are coming from. Reid Kevin Nolan wrote: Silver hydroxide would not be a salt, but rather a base. IE sodium hydroxide is lye. Marshall Technically speaking, that is true. But silver hydroxide is a very weak base, and in fact it's pH is lower than many 'genuine' salts. The point is, it exists in solution as dissociated ions - not as colloidal silver particles. Owing to claims made on the list that nitrate ion was the main problem with silver nitrate (even though argyria is a deposited silver condition), the question arises as to what species or combination of species potentially does the damage, and under what conditions. I think there is general agreement that unrealistically massive doses are required before home brew 'CS' would be a problem. But I got the impression that silver nitrate could cause trouble at much lower relative dosage - ie it's not just a matter of silver ion dosage alone. Nitrate is a known carcinogen (less so than nitrite), and an irritant at high enough concentration. But is argyria solely due to the high silver dosage possible with silver nitrate (very high solubility), or is there some kind of synergy effect as well? Anything taken to excess will cause trouble. The gist is this - do certain anions, innocuous of themselves (eg, acetate, citrate) somehow significantly and selectively 'promote' toxicity of silver ion relative to say, silver hydroxide at the same concentration? Maybe there is simply no definitive data on that, but if there is it would be a good thing to know. regards, Kevin Nolan -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Ken, This is all very interesting, a new twist I haven't seen here before. So an indication of a majority of particles of small size is to be found where there is pale yellow with good TE. If this is a large majority I would imagine there would be an argument to suggest that this CS is no less beneficial than the 10ppm CS. In this scenario the fine particles would be penetrating where the large particles could not go, but the large particles would be beneficial at the outer surfaces, which also need CS. Reid Ode Coyote wrote: Can you get any color CS without a TE? I haven't found it yet. I believe that having a color requires a particle and a particles are what makes a TE visible. If the TE is weak and the color is ,say, pale yellow... That would indicate to me that the majority of the particles are fairly largish. But getting a pale yellow with a strong TE would indicate that the minority of particles are that of the yellow color producing size and the majority are of the smaller colorless variety. Something i noticed the other day.. A gallon of 25 +/- PPM crystal clear CS that's returned to the milk jug the distilled water came out of is significantly darker than an identical jug of distilled water. ...some sort of refraction effect i suppose. Humm, I wonder if my 300PPM tap water does the same? Ken -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Jason, Thanks for the reference material. The conditions seem to be pretty extreme - not many of us are going to be using 1500 PPM solution of silver salts of any kind as drinking water. Nevertheless it raises an interesting matter. Most of the home made CS has the silver in the form of a silver salt - namely silver hydroxide, more so than actual colloid. So is it only the low concentration and/or dosage that prevents poisoning? It has been stated previously on this list that in the case of silver nitrate, nitrate is the actual culprit. But acetate is from vinegar, so it seems safe to assume that in the case of silver acetate, only the silver could be to blame. Is the picture more complicated than this - meaning the stuff exists in the body in part as undissociated complex that acts differently to either ionic species? regards, Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au --Original Message- Kevin: Addition of silver acetate to the diet (130-1000 ppm) or drinking water (1500 ppm) of weaning rats fed a vitamin E deficient diet, precipitated a rapidly fatal hepatocellular necrosis and muscular dystrophy on day 14 of the treatment or subsequently. ( Grasso P. et al, 1967 Exp. Mol. Pathol., 11,186-199 ). According to the study, the silver acetate ( NOT isolated silver! ) depletes the body of Vitamin E and Selenium. If the body is deficient in either ( as in the above reference ) than severe symptoms of silver poisoining manifest, including increased silver retention in the kidneys and liver. This was taken from a stock manufacturer's datasheet on silver acetate: POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS Inhalation: Mild irritant and nuisance dust. Coughing, sneezing or possibly breathing difficulty upon the inhalation of large amounts. Ingestion: Effect will be similar to but normally less severe than with silver nitrate. Acute poisoning can cause pain or burning sensation in mouth and throat, salivation, vomiting, diarrhea, methemoglobinemia, anuria and, in extreme cases, shock, coma and death. Skin Contact: Causes irritation to skin. Symptoms include redness, itching, and pain. Eye Contact: Possibly some chemical or mechanical irritation of the conjunctiva. Chronic Exposure: Prolonged or repeated inhalation, application or ingestion of silver compounds may cause a permanent bluish discoloration of the skin and mucous membranes. Aggravation of Pre-existing Conditions: Persons with heavy metals accumulation should cease contact with silver compounds. Label Hazard Warning: WARNING! HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED OR INHALED. CAUSES IRRITATION TO SKIN, EYES AND RESPIRATORY TRACT. Now this datasheet is for pure silver acetate. Still, silver acetate is silver acetate. Documented cases of Argyria exist for six months of regular silver acetate usage. In one case, 6.4 grams was the estimated silver accumulation in the individual from taking silver acetate lozenges. I don't have any information on silver citrate!
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Reid Harvey wrote: Ken, I never stopped to think that the silver may be the hydroxide, evedince that my understanding of chemistry is limited. (Sometimes I stop and think and sometimes I just stop.) Can you fill me in on how it is that the hydroxide is a salt? Silver hydroxide would not be a salt, but rather a base. IE sodium hydroxide is lye. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Ken, I never stopped to think that the silver may be the hydroxide, evedince that my understanding of chemistry is limited. (Sometimes I stop and think and sometimes I just stop.) Can you fill me in on how it is that the hydroxide is a salt? Does anybody else have an answer? I feel sure that you're correct that the reason this is not harmful to us CS lovers in the long run is that 10ppm is extremely dilute. Of course this begs a question about assertions here that it's not a problem to ingest ionic silver at the really high concentrations. If this sort of CS is practically unattainable without the salts then responsible people should talk about some kind of an upper ppm limit for ingesting. On the other hand finding that number may be difficult. Also, back to my limited chemistry, I would like to know why it is that one would have to isolate one element in a simple compound as the culprit in a health problem. For example with silver nitrate why does the problem have to be either the silver or the nitrate. I think the problem is probably the compound. Another example: it's been stated here that gold chloride is highly toxic, yet gold metal is beneficial and chlorine is a lot less toxic. Salaam, Reid Ode Coyote wrote: Jason, Thanks for the reference material. The conditions seem to be pretty extreme - not many of us are going to be using 1500 PPM solution of silver salts of any kind as drinking water. Nevertheless it raises an interesting matter. Most of the home made CS has the silver in the form of a silver salt - namely silver hydroxide, more so than actual colloid. So is it only the low concentration and/or dosage that prevents poisoning? It has been stated previously on this list that in the case of silver nitrate, nitrate is the actual culprit. But acetate is from vinegar, so it seems safe to assume that in the case of silver acetate, only the silver could be to blame. Is the picture more complicated than this - meaning the stuff exists in the body in part as undissociated complex that acts differently to either ionic species? regards, Kevin Nolan -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
In digest #1177, Jason/AVRA wrote: When you tell someone a stabilizer is safe, you are risking their health and well-being on very serious level. You are giving them the impression that silver is not a toxic substance in the human body. While your own understanding may be great, theirs may not. They just might see something like silver acetate, a stabilized silver product ( though of course not a protein )and assume it is safe to use.. Jason - would you mind filling in a bit on the danger with silver acetate? What about silver citrate? regards, Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Kevin: Addition of silver acetate to the diet (130-1000 ppm) or drinking water (1500 ppm) of weaning rats fed a vitamin E deficient diet, precipitated a rapidly fatal hepatocellular necrosis and muscular dystrophy on day 14 of the treatment or subsequently. ( Grasso P. et al, 1967 Exp. Mol. Pathol., 11,186-199 ). According to the study, the silver acetate ( NOT isolated silver! ) depletes the body of Vitamin E and Selenium. If the body is deficient in either ( as in the above reference ) than severe symptoms of silver poisoining manifest, including increased silver retention in the kidneys and liver. This was taken from a stock manufacturer's datasheet on silver acetate: POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS Inhalation: Mild irritant and nuisance dust. Coughing, sneezing or possibly breathing difficulty upon the inhalation of large amounts. Ingestion: Effect will be similar to but normally less severe than with silver nitrate. Acute poisoning can cause pain or burning sensation in mouth and throat, salivation, vomiting, diarrhea, methemoglobinemia, anuria and, in extreme cases, shock, coma and death. Skin Contact: Causes irritation to skin. Symptoms include redness, itching, and pain. Eye Contact: Possibly some chemical or mechanical irritation of the conjunctiva. Chronic Exposure: Prolonged or repeated inhalation, application or ingestion of silver compounds may cause a permanent bluish discoloration of the skin and mucous membranes. Aggravation of Pre-existing Conditions: Persons with heavy metals accumulation should cease contact with silver compounds. Label Hazard Warning: WARNING! HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED OR INHALED. CAUSES IRRITATION TO SKIN, EYES AND RESPIRATORY TRACT. Now this datasheet is for pure silver acetate. Still, silver acetate is silver acetate. Documented cases of Argyria exist for six months of regular silver acetate usage. In one case, 6.4 grams was the estimated silver accumulation in the individual from taking silver acetate lozenges. I don't have any information on silver citrate! From: Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au Reply-To: silver-list@eskimo.com To: silver-list@eskimo.com Subject: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:03:37 +1100 In digest #1177, Jason/AVRA wrote: When you tell someone a stabilizer is safe, you are risking their health and well-being on very serious level. You are giving them the impression that silver is not a toxic substance in the human body. While your own understanding may be great, theirs may not. They just might see something like silver acetate, a stabilized silver product ( though of course not a protein )and assume it is safe to use.. Jason - would you mind filling in a bit on the danger with silver acetate? What about silver citrate? regards, Kevin Nolan ken...@optusnet.com.au _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour mdev...@eskimo.com
Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration'
Greetings all silverlist members, Jason/AVRA wrote: According to the study, the silver acetate ( NOT isolated silver! ) depletes the body of Vitamin E and Selenium. If the body is deficient in either ( as in the above reference ) than severe symptoms of silver poisoining manifest, including increased silver retention in the kidneys and liver. The rationale of advocating wholesome raw food is based on the preservation of the complete complement of the enzyme systems and whole nutrients present in the food to drive the Kreb Cycle in maintaining homeostatic metabolism. Denatured food leads to robbing Peter to pay Paul in the body in order to complete the Kreb Cycle , resulting in drainage and defiencies of concomitant components [ Zinc, Copper, Magnesium, Selenium, Vitamins,Amino-acids etc ]. Ill-health subsequently results. This applies to all patho-physiological processes in the human system. In radonics, I advise colloidal mineral supplementation to maintain at least a minimal basal supportive level for those on radonic treatment. There has been reported instances of deaths when the radonic beam was suddenly switched off. In radonics, distance is not the criterion but the resonance of vibrational signatures.The latter may be from homeopathics, flower essences, nutrients, trace minerals, sounds and colours. Each element has its specific frequency and this is its vibrational signature. These are beamed at the subject from afar.The reported fatalities may be attributed to the sudden interruption in the biological transmutational processes [ Professor Louis C. Kevran ] under cold nuclear fusion [ Professor Panos Pappas ] due to low supportive mineral reserve in the body and other geomagnetic factors. Minerals in the form of cell-salts regulate the vitality and viability of tissue cells,electromagnetically - The Autonomous Nervous System , The Cardio-Vascular System, namely . Any interference to electromagnetic transmission in these vital systems may lead to their dysfunction and eventual death. These systems are regulated by the geomagnetic rhythmicity of 7.83 Hz conforming to Schumann's Resonance. There is still the mootable cloud over the silver ion. What determines the proverbial properties of colloidal silver: in the biologically transmutated form, after absorption in the body or in the form generated from my Robey Deluxe Mark II generator ? The topic on Biological Transmutation by Prof Louis C Kevran was posted in the recent past in the Silverlist. I practise Isopathy, Homeopathy, Biochemic Therapy [ 12 tissue salts ], Orthostatic Nutrition and Naturotherapy in the morning cup of mid-stream urine I partake daily with skin scrubbing using my own urine. I recycle my mineral reserves, phytonutrients, immuno-endocrine secretions [ Melantonin, DHEA ] from my own cistern. Those with uro-genital tract infection, please abstain fron urinetherapy,until such time when the infection is under control. The psychological block to this mode of treatment is inevitable. There is a lot of information on this topic in cyberspace. I recycle what my body has given back to me, transmutated but good for the next cycle,with minimal energy expenditure under cold nuclear fusion. Scientists have narrowed down to minerals from outer space which provide vestigial signatures to substantiate that life on Earth may indeed originated from outerspace. The linking evidence is found in bacteria containing minerals,on earth. Why silver is bactericidal to some microbes and not to others ? And why Argyria manifests in some and not in others? I share Prof Louis C Kevran 's view in accepting mainstream Chemistry for what it is and that there is more to it in life that does not conform to exact sciences. With regards Lew - Original Message - From: Jason / AVRA silverd...@hotmail.com To: silver-list@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 5:22 AM Subject: Re: CSRe: concentrated CS and 'aglomeration' Kevin: Addition of silver acetate to the diet (130-1000 ppm) or drinking water (1500 ppm) of weaning rats fed a vitamin E deficient diet, precipitated a rapidly fatal hepatocellular necrosis and muscular dystrophy on day 14 of the treatment or subsequently. ( Grasso P. et al, 1967 Exp. Mol. Pathol., 11,186-199 ). According to the study, the silver acetate ( NOT isolated silver! ) depletes the body of Vitamin E and Selenium. If the body is deficient in either ( as in the above reference ) than severe symptoms of silver poisoining manifest, including increased silver retention in the kidneys and liver. This was taken from a stock manufacturer's datasheet on silver acetate: POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS Inhalation: Mild irritant and nuisance dust. Coughing, sneezing or possibly breathing difficulty upon the inhalation of large amounts. Ingestion: Effect will be similar to but normally less severe than
