Dear David
you wrote:
"Actually it was me not Neville who wrote the quote that you open with
below."
I read the header in haste, and already made my apologies to Neville in private
'And perhaps I wasn't clear in my purpose. My question should
have been "What method is used to make these products that are at
least 50% colloidal?" If they are not MSP then how are they made?
Its something I've wondered about for a long time.'
For that you have to ask the manufacturer.
"Incidentally, Ron Gibbs conclusions can be viewed in a whole new light
when you realise that didn'tt actually know what he was studying."
That sounds like a direct quote from Silver-colloids.com
Prof Gibbs was more than well aware of what he was studying. He was studying
Retail "Colloidal Silver." He noted the Silver Ions in two of the Colloidal
Silver samples he had from commercial sources.
Prof Gibbs wasn't an undergraduate student.
He was the director of the Center for Colloidal Science
in the U of Delaware for 15 years, had published over 85 peer reviewed journal
articles and 5 technical reports, edited 14 books and had presented 61 talks
nationally and internationally. His research and teaching dealt with a wide
variety of topics involving colloidal materials; hot to analyse them, what they
are composed of, what happens the them in nature. He had a specialy involving
stuudies of metals accociated with colloidal particles, including toxicity and
benefits.
His book was written "after observing an abundance of incorrect and misleading
opinions in advertising and related literature, coupled with the lack of
availability of correct and useful information."(The above is taken from his
introduction to his book on Colloidal Silver.)
(I find this Ironic, as his book is available as a free download from
silver-colloids.com which is a best an infomercial site.)
Colloids and their properties had been known to science for than 120 years when
Gibbs took his post. The American Chemical Society Division of Colloid and
Surface Chemistry Symposium was celebrating its 66th annual event.
With all the resources of the U of Delware, I believe Prof Gibbs knew exactly
what he was dealing with.
"At the time of his reseach the techniques used to analyse CS were so
underdeveloped that he thought he was examining 'colloidal' silver
when in fact he was examining ionic silver. Thats why he makes the
rather odd statement that the best CS is 'clear' on a website thats
promoting a product that clearly isn't."
Another Silver-Colloids.com quote.
Transmission Electron Microscopes had been available since 1939, Scanning
Electron Microscopes had been commercially availalbe since 1965. Atomic
absorption spectroscopy had been available since the late 1950's. There are of
course other methods.
The Technology had been around for decades. Universities usually have access to
cutting edge tech long before the private sector does, too. This isn't to say
that in 8 years time there haven't been improvements and advances, this is a
given, but I wouldn't say Prof Gibbs was in the stone-age as the website
infers. Plus there are hundreds of independent FDA approved Labs he could have
accessed.
If as the website owner maintains that Prof Gibbs changed his opinion before
his death, why didn't Prof Gibbs write a letter confirming this? A verbal
"personal communication" that cannot be verified is a convenient explanation,
but hardly proof. A paper trail would be nice.
"You'll find this revealed in the FAQ's on silver-colloids website in
answer to a question about "Why is mesosilver colored?" The answer is
worth reading in full."
I have read it, many times, and come to the same conclusion each time:
Balderdash.
Here is why. If the particles are as small as manufacturer claims, even into
the hundreds of millions, these particles would be very diffuse and scattering
light in so many directions that insufficient light would reach the human eye.
One way to overcome this would be to increase the concentration to multiple
100s of PPM. Another explanation is the particle size isn't what it claims to
be.
The particle size he is claiming is so small that one would have to enlarge it
175,000 times to observe it. By comporasion, A small stone in the palm of one's
hand if magnified 175,000 would appear as large as Mt. Everest. His particle
size claim is about 56 angstrom. Visible light is between 4,000 violet
angstroms to 7,000 angstroms dark red. Yellow is at 5700 angstroms.
However, I have also read the rants against Transmission Electron Microscopy by
said owner of one of his websites. A TEM was used by Professor Gibbs to examine
potentional high quality Colloidal Silver in including those made by the
Electro Colloidal method which Gibbs noted the Silver Ion content in his book
and an Electron Microscope was more recently as 2006 to observe how Colloidal
Silver kills HIV 1 in the lab by U of Texas and the U of Mexico).
These rants appeared after a competitor used Electron Microscopy on MesoSilver
Samples, and the particles were neither as dispersed or as small as one was
lead to believe by advertising.
I don't doubt the MesoSilver works, all forms of Silver are valid as
antimicrobials, antivirals, etc. I just don't buy his 'story'. And as to his
research, with all do respect, Colloidal Science Laboraratory isn't an
independent, third party lab, it's an in house lab.
The Colloidal Silver website I referenced in my post was full of errors and
obfuscations. This is my opinion.
However, please check the definition I quoted from the IUPAC gold book on an
Ion. If the website owner is wrong on an ion's definition (relatively simple
middle school level science), then how can I trust his other science?
Best Regards,
Steve
--
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: [email protected]
Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected]
The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down...
List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
