From: Steven Foss <[email protected]>
Date: 19 September 2008 6:20:34 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: CS>re: CS-silver-colloids.com
Dear David
Hello Steven
My comments are below....
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
I'm confused about your point here. That comment in quotes above is
mine. It's not a quote from silver-colloids and I'm not sticking up
for mesosilver.
Silver-colloids use the Ron Gibbs material to promote mesosilver. I
was trying to point out how 'odd' this is when its clear Ron Gibbs
findings about the success of CS is not based on using a product like
mesosilver at all. In fact (and this is what many people don't
realise) Ron Gibbs book proves the effectiveness of CS that is
largely ionic.
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.
I basically agree. But I believe Frank when he implies that the
techniques for determining THE RATIO of ions to colloids was not
perfected. (At least not at Colloidal Science Labs who, I think, did
the analysis).
"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.
Thats an interesting interpretation. I hadn't looked at it like that.
But I don't agree. I don't believe Frank Key would simply lie about
this. I havent studied the site for a few years but (as i recall)
heres how the situation appeared to me. (And apologies if I have this
wrong).
Frank Key and Ron Gibbs were friends and colleagues. The purpose was
to release a booklet that would have the effect of promoting their
colloidal CS (mesosilver) whilst casting doubt on ionic CS. Frank
Key made and analysed the 'good' CS, using technology he had
available at the time, and mistakenly told Ron it was 'colloidal'.
Ron did the follow-up research and, as predicted, found that
colloidal CS worked better than ionic CS.
But then a problem popped up. Frank discoved the 'good stuff' he had
made wasn't colloidal (by his definition) at all. It was at least 50%
ionic, just like all the other stuff. So Ron Gibbs had simply proved
that Franks good ionic CS worked better than other peoples crappy
ionic CS. So what does Frank do about it? Easy... just admit (in the
hard to find FAQs) that a mistake was made but leave the brochure on
the website hoping that not too many people realise its got almost
nothing to do with mesosiver at all. You gotta admire Franks
solution. It's not dishonest, it doesn't show disrespect for his
friend, and it still has the effect of promoting mesosilver!
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?
Silver ions and silver particles (colloids) are obviously very
different critters. Unlike many of his competitors (such as Natural-
Immunogenics) Frank always makes this very clear and I applaud him
for that. I don't know if mesosilver works or not, but at least i
think I know what it IS.
Any site (or book like your 'gold book') that doesnt clearly explain
that particles and ions and are not the same thing is just adding to
the confusion.
Regards
David
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]>
