Re: CS>one for brooks

[Brooks Bradley]

Hello Bob,
We have never encountered any compromising effects from using DMSO fractions as high as 20% (by volume) for external, topical open wounds and blunt force trauma insults presenting with open lesions. We have used concentrations of DMSO as high as 50% (by volume)....but the parent solutions were amended with 1% (by volume) of 2% (strength) of Lidocaine----for discomfort control. We have used 5% (BY VOLUME) OF FULL-STRENGTH DMSO, in various parent solutions, in direct application....for many
conditions involving the eyes, of many different animal species---including humans (myself for example). Unless their is an open
lesion presenting it is highly unlikely any form of discomfort or stinging would be experienced. In any event, we are unaware of
any adverse pain reaction or tissue insult from the application of DMSO to any of the epithelial tissues in the body.
I would remind you that DMSO is quite hygroscopic and thus quite effective in aiding in drying the exposed surfaces of
all epithelial tissue beds.
As testimony to the absence of cell-damage or toxicity from DMSO, is the fact that Dr. Stanley Jacob (the father of the DMSO research effort) consumes a tablespoon of UNDILUTED DMSO daily-----and has done so for the past 20+ years. All without any, but health-supporting results.
NOTE: The foregoing comments are made with the understanding that substances/components which do---in themselves---present
a possible tissue-compromising feature.....will be entrained and transported across mucous barriers and into any tissue form extant in the human or animal body, through their being combined with DMSO.
Best Regards, Brooks.



>

---------[ Received Mail Content ]----------

Subject : Re: CS>one for brooks

Date : Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:54:23 -0800

From : "Bob Banever" <bbane...@earthlink.net>

To : <silver-list@eskimo.com>



Brooks,



When you get the chance I have one question for you regarding DMSO and CS. That is.... is it safe to mix 5 - 10% DMSO and CS to use as a nasal and sinus wash? Since DMSO is so effective at breaking the mucosal barrier it would seem to me an effective way of dealing with germs in the sinus cavity. Looking forward to your response.



Bob

----- Original Message -----

From: Brooks Bradley

To: silver-list@eskimo.com

Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 5:18 PM

Subject: Re: CS>one for brooks





I have only a few moments of time, at present. However, I offer a couple of comments on your inquiry.

First, there are a wide variety of enzymes which will act as solvents/penetrants of MANY membrane-type tissues/films. Bromelain

is one (a very effective one) of many. Some enzymes are "narrow spectrum" in effect and some are "wide spectrum". I have no knowledge of the effects of specific enzymes on the effectiveness/enhancement of antibiotics.

Briefly, the most effective liposomal substances are...as a general rule....the smallest in particle size. Ultrasonic

devices and HIGH PRESSURE DIFFRACTION DEVICES are, at present, the most effective for accomplishing this. Conventional air compressors could serve, quite adequately, in a large number of applications. The proviso being that one is aware that geometry

of the discharge assembly is of great importance (small particles are vital to non-injurious success).

We have utilized 90% colloidal silver X 10% DMSO SOLUTIONS to very powerful effect in addressing serious pulmonary insults in equines (all ages). We have not used enzymes in direct-address situations involving horses. Primarily, because nothing we have ever evaluated has approached the ability of DMSO as a mucous-barrier penetrating agent. Coarse-particled

gases (liquid mixtures) pose a potential threat for enabling pneumonia-type insults.

Liposomal encapsulation does, indeed, offer some profound advantages.....especially when utilized through proper

supporting equipment. However, I would counsel that "fiddling/experimenting" with pulmonary challenges among horses, by inexperienced persons (even professionals), is a very DANGEROUS endeavor. The least threatening/effective protocols we have ever utilized involved oxygen-driven fluids which were micro-sized and furnished via systems of the re-breather type.

I must go now. I hope these comments are of value to you.

Sincerely, Brooks Bradley.



















---------[ Received Mail Content ]----------



Subject : Re: CS>one for brooks



Date : Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:58:16 -0600



From : Dan Nave



To : silver-list@eskimo.com







Oral bromelain was reported to be very effective in potentiating



antibiotics. I think this is due to it's action in



penetrating/dissolving biofilms, or some similar action.







Dan







On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 9:47 AM, polo wrote:



> Hopefully Brooks will have time to consider and comment on this.



>



> I have long been interested in protocols that will efficiently attack



> biofilm infections. It seems that inhaled (nebulized) liposomal



> medications are very effective in penetrating very difficult to treat lung



> biofilms. Some recent studies have suggested that liposomal antibiotics are



> superb treatments. Here is one:



>



> http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/61/4/859



>



>



> The above study used a compressor type of nebulizer (nebulizer PARI LC



> Star). Anyway, I would like to try liposomal colloidal silver in a



> nebulizer for biofilm lung infections, particularly in racehorses. Normally



> we use ultrasonic nebulizers as opposed to the older compressor type



> nebulizers as was used in the above study. Ultrasound nebulizers vaporize



> the medication into super small droplets that can be pushed into the lung



> via an air jet. The older compressor type uses a small air compressor to



> vaporize the inhaled medication producing larger medication particles to be



> breathed in. Naturally, the ultrasound nebulizer technology produces small



> droplet size which is more conducive to lung inhalation efficacy.



>



> What I would like to know, do you see any problems with producing



> colloidal silver liposomes using your home made protocol and (2) would an



> ultrasonic nebulizer be detrimental to the liposomal structure? Would an



> older compressor type nebulizer as used in the study be better in putting



> liposomes into solution for inhalation purposes or would the newer utrasonic



> nebulizers not over-whelming affect liposomal structure upon vaporzation or



> might it even be beneficial?



>



> As a side note, I want to add that heavy metals seem particularly



> effective against biofilms of which I would venture a guess that colloidal



> silver would be a superb medication, if one could only get it to be absorbed



> by the biofilm. Liposomal technology may be the key!



>



> doug











--



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