It seems it is against a particular company. They are concerned it's not sterile. That it may *cause* infection. That's funny.
http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=768052 And here is a report from British Colombia ministry of environment on the effect of silver in groundwater. It does not see silver as a threat. ....from the report:below.... Summary This document is one in a series that establishes ambient water quality criteria for British Columbia. It includes an overview which is followed by the main body of the report. This document sets criteria for silver to protect freshwater and marine aquatic life. Criteria were not set for human, livestock or wildlife drinking water, recreational waters, irrigation water or industrial water uses, since, either suitable data documenting the effects of silver for these uses were lacking, or the criteria would have been about 1000 times higher than the aquatic life criteria and therefore redundant. Silver is most toxic to microscopic organisms or larval forms of aquatic animals. There is no evidence that silver is naturally transformed to a hazardous biologically-available form (such as mercury into methyl mercury). Ionic silver is more toxic to aquatic organisms than silver compounds. Thiosulphate-complexed silver breaks down to silver sulphide which is less toxic than the silver ion. Silver criteria are summarized in the chapter on Recommended Criteria. A more detailed discussion of the criteria is presented in the main body of the report. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/silver/silver.html
