` Dear Diana.
Bronchial spasm is, simply, repeated
coughing.....usually caused by epithelial irritation and/or partial blockage of
the air passageways. The onset may be caused by many different
things---including throat irritations. A full-blown spasm is characterized by
uncontrolled coughing, and on occasion (but very rarely) may be
life-threatening. Smokers are at much greater risk than are non-smokers.
Smokers, almost without exception, have varying degrees of alveolar
damage.....resulting in reduced pulmonary capacity. Additionally, due to
irritating coal-tar derivatives (mucous generating) and the vaso-constrictions
imposed by nicotine sulphate, there results an actual, quantitative reduction
in available exchange volume in the lungs proper. Unfortunately, a high dosage
of "second-hand" smoke (passive smoking) is, almost, as deleterious to ones
health----as is direct primary inhalation.
There is a simple, general maintenance, protocol which appears to
have greatly aided a number of our more severely-compromised volunteers: it
includes the ingestion of one 265 mg capsule of micronized silica hydride
(generic microhydrin) taken twice daily; accompanied by a two 1000 mg
capsules of MSM and two 1000 mg vitamin C (from natural sources). The
procedure results in taking one capsule of each substance, together, twice
daily. Our microscopy examinations (dark field type) reveal SPLENDID
short-time base recoveries from Rouleaux-type (cells sticking together like
poker-chips) complications----from among our researach volunteers. We have,
sometimes, observed almost complete cell separation and increased oxygen
transport characteristics in as little as 15 minutes. Interestingly, the
incidence of compromised blood cell structure/arrangement was MUCH higher among
the very young volunteers (11 to 16 years), than we ever speculated to be the
case.
Our researches revealed that both animal and human volunteers
exhibited a much-enhanced degree of favorable response when we used oxygen as
the driving gas medium----instead of atmospheric air. .
Please be advised these comments are not to be construed as
ANY type of medical advice. We are an experimental research group and do not
practice, or recommend ANY type of medical procedure......for any condition..
I hope this information is of value to you in your
personal research efforts.
Sincerely. Brooks Bradley.
fedtol...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> Brooks,
> Can you tell me a little more about bronchial spasm? I bought the air
> brush kit you mentioned in an earlier post and am planning to try this
> nebulizer set up.
>
> My mom is coming to visit from out of state. She frequently gets bad sinus
> problems from the smog when here in San Jose, Ca. She will get so
> congested she looses her hearing, has to have tubes put in to drain her
> ears, and vomits accumulation of mucus.
>
> I thought I might try a nebulizing system if she begins to develop this
> problem. She was a heavy smoker up till two years ago when she quit
> following quadruple bypass surgery, but still lives in a house of smokers.
> Do you consider this would have a relationship to the likelihood of
> bronchial spasm? Is this a rush to the emergency room situation or just
> a back-off on or stop treatment type reaction?
>
> At any rate I am looking forward to trying it for myself also.
>
> Thanks,
> Diana
>
> ----------
> > From: BROOKS BRADLEY <liat...@flash.net>
> > To: silver-list@eskimo.com
> > Subject: Re: CS/nebulizer & CS and saline solution/Brooks Help?
> > Date: Monday, September 27, 1999 10:28 PM
> >
> > To all interested list members.
> > I will try to shed a little light on this
> nebulizer-mist
> > protocol discussion; at least to the limit of my present knowledge.
> There are
> > several considerations involved in this issue.....I will try to address
> those of
> > which I have some direct knowledge.
> > First, the issue of using saline solutions. We
> did use
> > saline solutions in several of our protocols----some with CS....and some
> without.
> > Because of the surface tension variations between saline and distilled
> water,
> > saline is more readily passed through epithelial tissue, than is plain
> water.
> > However, we found that it was the suspended "particle size" moreso than
> the type
> > of H2O solution, that made the principal difference as to whether or not
> bronchial
> > spasm occurred. Additionally, the "fluid density" had an effect as to
> whether or
> > not bronchial spasm occurred (e.g. as the mist concentration went up, the
> > likelihood of spasm increased---without regard to the solutions; so long
> as no
> > tissue-irritants were included).
> > There is another consideration----the depth and duration
> of the
> > inhalation.
> > Long (8 seconds, plus) inhalations caused much more bronchial spasm, than
> did
> > shorter ones (5 to 6 seconds)----no matter what the nature of the fluid
> solution
> > being employed.
> > Additionally, the pressure setting had an influence on
> both the
> > volume and the velocity of the mist-stream. Because of this, to overcome
> spasms
> > (when they occurred in susceptible volunteers) from this cause, we simply
> reduced
> > the driving pressure to about 20 psi. This adjustment, in almost every
> case,
> > solved the problem of bronchial spasm. Please remember that there is
> very wide
> > variation in the pulmonary capacity, and response, among every age group.
> Also,
> > remember that the existing condition of the volunteer's pulmonary system,
> has a
> > pronounced influence in their immediate response to any
> externally-imposed
> > "insult".....beneficial or otherwise. Most formal physicians, especially
> > alleopaths, have little patience in addressing these
> variations----choosing
> > instead---more of a one-size must fit all, approach. I do not mean to be
> > denigrating, but this is just the way things are.
> > Both penetration distance and volunteer's tolerance were
> affected
> > by the particle size characteristic. The mist-stream geometry yielded by
> the
> > nebulizer was the determining factor between acceptable and
> non-acceptable
> > variations. Some rather costly main-stream medical-supply nebulizers
> were
> > "completely unacceptable" when examined for this characteristic. The
> very
> > economically-priced (less than $10.00) artist's airbrush was superior to
> > most----for this characteristic. While it is true that our little $10.00
> airbrush
> > was more than adequate, although being a single-action, internal mix
> device; the
> > "best" droplet-size and flow-control came from our double-action,
> internal mix
> > airbrushes (cost about $50.00). We did not deem the improvement worth
> the
> > additional cost----for our experimental/research purposes.
> > No matter the assumed cause for bronchial spasm among
> your
> > experimental population, I suggest the FIRST correction you might
> consider is
> > reducing the driving pressure of the airstream (or O2 source). I repeat;
> we have
> > found that the major cause for bronchial spasm to be the "Volume" and
> geometry of
> > suspended liquid delivered within the time-window of a given
> inhalation----and not
> > the specific nature (exluding tissue-irritants) of the solutions used.
> > I hope this information is of value to the
> discussion.
> > Sincerely. Brooks Bradley.
> > p.s. There are other, secondary considerations such as the variation of
> the
> > "cough reflex" among individuals, but they are not, really, germane to
> this
> > discussion.
> > > --
> > > 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
> > >
> > > List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@id.net>
> >
> >
