I think you will find the majority of people on this and other silver lists advocate the use of primarily ionic silver such as you can produce at home with either the Silver Puppy or the Silvergen SG6 or SG7. Ionic silver solutions are clearly the safest and are very effective.
The argument between the particulate and ionic camps is ongoing. I am no expert, but I will quote someone who is, and from that you can make your own decision: Del ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. There is no silver in measureable existance smaller than a silver ion, except the possibility of monoatomic silver. 2. Different particle sizes do not effect different conditions. Ogliodynamic properties are soley responsible for silver effectiveness. Whether or not different sized "particles" reach different areas of the body is a different question all together. There is no direct biological advantage to "larger" particles of silver, under any circumstances. A silver ion will always be more effective directly than a silver particle. Every single study in modern history supports this fact. There are some properties to charged particles than may have a different and beneficial biological effect; this has nothing to do with sizing, but rather, zeta potential. Zeta potential is related to particle sizing, and smaller particles will effect a larger surface area with a greater potential. This is beneficial, as far as particles are concerned. However, no facts have been documented concerning what these effects are. As far as anybody knows, the silver particles may be converted to silver ions "at-site", and it is the silver ions that are actually being effective, but the initial particulate form which allowed biological delivery. There is a precidence for this: Silverlon wound care dressing. The minute "energetic" properties of the different states of silver cannot be ignored. Unfortunately, they as of yet cannot be directly correlated with a biological response. Direct Current can and has. There is no reason to assume that colloids and ionic solutions are any different. But it is important to keep the "theories" in proper perspective: Theories. There are alot of opinions on the benefit of particulate silver, and very little documented data to support claims. I do believe some of the ascertations are correct. I believe having a "mix" of both ions and the smallest possible particles is certainly advantageous. I believe we reach a point very quickly where the debate is simply splitting hairs, as far as biological effectiveness is concerned. HVAC sounds like a great idea, but it has been my experience that few companies truly create a superior product via the high voltage method. I've never liked how the particles tend to clump together with HVAC. I prefer a product with proper particle dispersion, examples being TEM's from Natural Immunogenics, and Trem's Silvergens. We have no basis to compare products based on sales-focused terminology; we require a TEM, AAS, and ideally an antibacterial time-kill study. These three measurements, when compared with other products, give a fantastic basis for evaluating CS. We expect a high particulate silver to perform poorly against pathogens ( as compared with ionic silver ), as every test we've seen has detailed. This does not negate the potential benefit of silver particles. Particles are more "chemically" stable in the body. We've never had, as an example, a report of Mesosilver being innefective in comparison to ionic silver. It's hard to speculate on the differences between particles and ions, as they perform in the human body. For home brewers with good CS generators, keeping the PPM relatively reasonable ( in the 5-10PPM range ) will, we believe, produce a product that is very effective. I would never buy into a sales pitch pushing HVAC without hard data being displayed. As an example, 'ole Bob has excellent data on his methods of CS production. If a company is not displaying any of this information, they either don't know what they have, or don't want you to know what they have: They want to you have their sales pitch, which is NEVER in your best interest, and ALWAYS in theirs. Their theorizing may or may not be accurate, and theorizing should be presented in a manner consistant with "theory" and not "fact". The public, it is my opinion, should not settle for less than accurate information that is presented in an authentic manner. If they state that fulvic acid and silver is better, then they should simply demonstrate it, which is not difficult to do; not only would their constituents be happy ( so to speak ), but it would be good to avoid potential problems with the FTC. Best Regards, Jason
