In a message dated 9/11/2001 1:39:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, dtmil...@midiowa.net writes:
> Subj:Re: CS>controversy concerning concentrated CS > Date:9/11/2001 1:39:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time > From: dtmil...@midiowa.net (Dean T. Miller) > Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:silver-list@eskimo.com";>silver-list@eskimo.com</A> > To: silver-list@eskimo.com > > > > > On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 08:08:07 +0600, Reid Harvey > <ceram...@bol-online.com> wrote: > > >Also, can anyone indicate what is wrong with yellow CS? > > Yellow CS is effective, but not as effective as clear CS having the > same ppm of silver. > > >I'm aware the > >particles may be a bit larger, but to what bad effect? > > No bad effect, but a lesser effect. > > Let's say we have two different bottles of CS, one yellow and one > clear, both measured at 10 ppm. Let's also say that the particles of > silver in the yellow CS are 10 times the size of the clear CS (yellow > CS particles could be 100+ times larger than clear CS). > > Since the ppm is the same in both, the clear CS will have 10 times the > number of silver particles as the yellow CS -- making it potentially > 10 times more effective. Also, CS having smaller particles might have > a better chance of getting into the body (that's conjecture, as I know > of no research that has tested particle size in the body). > > >I believe that we > >can get CS to a lot more people in the concentrated form, but I'm > >uncomfortable with the controversy. As dilute CS in bulk it seems too > >expensive for many. > > I don't understand that comment. Dilute CS is easy to make, much > easier than trying to obtain concentrated "CS." > > -- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF > Dean: Can you cite any research, including your own, that supports your statements above, or are your conclusions theoretical? Roger
