I believe that Brooks Bradley indicated that the airbrush nebulizer was superior since it could make smaller particles. The airbrush using oxygen was particularly effective.
Dan -----Original Message----- From: ransley [mailto:rans...@atmc.net] Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 12:24 PM To: silver-list@eskimo.com Subject: RE: CS>Ultrasonic Nebulizer question John wrote: >The ultrasonic gets the product deeper into the lung where the problems are.< Not trying to be argumentative, but why do you say that? At first glance it would seem that mist is mist, but actually I already know that's not always so after my experiments with an airbrush. So is an ultrasonic nebulizer capable of making a finer mist? And if it is, is there a kind that has a better mechanism than any other? (I don't want one that uses a wick) I already have extensive experience with a standard atomizing chamber- compressed air- type nebulizer, and an airbrush rig; now I want to determine if it's really worth it for me to invest in an ultrasonic neb. Daddybob -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Address Off-Topic messages to: silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down... List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com>
