From: Steven Foss <[email protected]>
Date: 20 September 2008 4:40:55 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: CS>Re
Hello Steven
Professor Gibbs goes to great length to explain that he was
examining 15 different brands of commercially sold (retail)
Colloidal Silver.
Professor Gibbs states that the "DC Produced Colloidal Silver that
we have tested had the highest value of ionic silver present..."
Obviously, Professor Gibbs knew what Silver Ions were as opposed to
the Metallic particles and stated so. (Yes, I am repeating myself,
but it is worth repeating)
Sure he knew the difference between ions and particles, he just had
wrong info about the the proportions of those things in the batches
he was testing.
(Quote from FAQ page you referenced above:For example, the samples
that Ron tested, some of which were made for him in the Colloidal
Science Lab. Inc.(CSL) were believed by Ron to be at least 50%
colloidal when in fact they were mostly ionic (typically 90%). The
methods developed at CSL to determine ionic vs. particle
concentration were just being developed at the time Ron wrote the
book and so he was not fully informed about the ion/particle ratio
of the test samples and consequently made some erroneous
assumptions. Ron assumed the sample were at least 50% particles
when they were only 10%.)
Professor Gibbs explains the methodology used in examining the
samples. He even list the brand names of the equipment used, a
Confocal Microscope and a Transmission Electron Microscope. This
sounds like an in house job.
Professor Gibbs does not state that any tests on the 15 brands were
performed by any outside laboratory. If Prof Gibbs was such a good
friend and colleague, one would think that he would have mentioned
and acknowledge the assistance of such a good friend and his
business. As a Academic professional, anything outsourced to
another lab would have to be mentioned, the tests performed and on
what equipment, and the Lab's "pedigree." Not to do so would be a
source of criticism against the books findings.
I think its pretty obvious CSL did all the analysis of the physical
properties of the 15 samples. In addition to that, they actually
'made' some of the samples.
'Where' Ron Gibbs did the follow up testing on the samples I dont
know. Perhaps the booklet reveals 'where', but I just tried to read
Ron Gibbs booklet again and to be honest I gave up. Its a pointless
excercise. Obviously he did NOT know what he was playing with and
before he even began the tests he had a preconcieved idea that
particles not ions would be most effective. (See page 11). Knowing
what we now know, its not a very impressive publication at all. It
has some intersting observations (such as bateria growing on MSP)
but really its just a defacto sales pitch for mesosilver.
The Purpose of the book was: "The objective of this presentation is
to provided a clear, thorough understanding of what to look for and
and what to avoid in choosing good colloidal silver products.
He continues, "Information presently available about colloidal
silver products is sometimes confusing and is often misleading.
Much of the advertising and "literature" about colloidal silver is
written by non-experts and is slanted toward promoting a particular
product or particular devices to make it."
You additionally, wrote,
"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."
I do believe MesoSilver works, and have spoken to many users.
Conversely, I can say the same about EICS.
Other than 2 electrons missing, Silver Ions, and Silver Metallic
Particles are nearly identical. The Nucleus has the same number of
Protons. However, there is one difference, Silver Ions occur in
Food, Silver Metallic Particles do not.
2 electrons missing? I thought it was just one.
The IUPAC are who remove confusion from the world of Chemistry, etc
by precise definitions which after accepted by the Scientific
Community world wide as the "Gold Standard." The IUPAC is very well
researched and peer reviewed.
Particle: Small portion of matter.
Ions are Particles with an Electric Charge
That may be technically correct but it just confuses people. I think
most people on this list would say the terms 'particle' and 'colloid'
are interchangable, but an ion is neither of those. (Unless its a
Natural-Immunogenics Argentyn 23 Ionic Colloidal Particle)
Regards
David
--
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]>
