Oh, yeah, sure Faith, and quite rightly so, Ode has points also, I have
points and you have points and so do many others, and I'm not going to get
involved any deeper than I have done with my couple of responses to indi. I
know only too well what the discussion is about and I now have an
opportunity to 're-avow' what I have always maintained........my personal
convictions! Others can argue the toss for an eternity for all I care, I am
satisfied, but I am only satisfied from the point of view that the VAST
majority of people just want to know that they have a very powerful tool in
their homes which can be used to GREAT advantage. I've read and researched
to the point of 'vomitting' and refuse to do any more. Most of us are not
chemists or physisists but just plain people who want to know what the hell
it is they are making in their kitchens.
Hey, (even though I was stunned to see my rather large and private email to
Mike appear in this forum for all to see), he inadvertantly backed up why I
tend to make statements rather than perpetuate all the hoo-haa about EICS by
stating that he took CS with salt in it for a year. See, I've learnt a long
time ago what NOT to do from research and reading information from those who
have gone before me, (a few names here, including Mike I may add, people
such as these have been my 'tutors' or 'mentors' if you like), and believe I
will not get into a situation such as that. I don't pretend for one second
to know it all about EICS but I do believe I know enough to not perpetuate
all this 'blueing' business. Time will tell I spose but I won't be drawn
into any of this 'it could do this', or 'it could do that', give me the
proof that 'pure' EICS will do this or do that and then I will know. I
don't believe I have seen proof yet, a lot of if's and maybes, but not
proof! Until I turn blue I will not be moved. Others can call me
headstrong or whatever they choose, I don't particularly care, I stand up
for what I believe in, it's as simple as that, however
ignorant/arrogant/naive or misguided that may appear to some.
Neville.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Faith Gagne" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: CS>blue moons revisited
Thanks very much. I would prefer not to chuck it but indi brings up a
very good point, don't you think? Faith G.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Neville" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: CS>blue moons revisited
Don't ever 'chuck it', filter it or 'skim' it if you want or use it
topically, but you won't ever need to 'chuck it' Faith, [my conviction].
N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Faith Gagne" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 3:48 AM
Subject: Re: CS>blue moons revisited
Dear indi:
Thank you very much for your efforts. I think, after all, that you are
right about anecdotal evidence. I appreciate the fact that you are
discussing this. Truthfully, I have wondered about the condition of CS
when stored for a while, and wonder how much it has changed, and what
its present condition is. I personally cannot afford to get lab
analysis on older CS. I wish I had some guidelines as to how long to
keep it before chucking it and making some new. Thanks again. Faith G.
--
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]>
