We have not evaluated EIS against the bacterial agents referenced by your colleague.... in any isolated environemnt, specifically designed to measure toxicity. However, we have found that combining EIS with DMSO, has demonstrated
to"greatly increase effectivity"......sometimes by an order-of-magnitude------against a multiplicity of bacterial pathogens, both in vitro and in vivo.
It is my belief that very few, IF ANY, bacteria relying upon protein shields (or any tissue-based isolation medium) to bind or block the EIS component...are able to do so in the presence of EIS entrained in a weak (e.g. 10% ) DMSO solution. In past research evaluations we discovered that MANY conditions which served to greatly lower or prevent the effective intervention of EIS against pathogens (mucous isolation, some epithelial tissue interferences and even dead-tissue debris fields), were easily overcome through the addition of DMSO as an entrainment/transport medium. Our first successes with such protocols came circa 1996----
when we prosecuted our earliest evaluations of the airbrush system as a successful intervention against double, bi-lateral, viral pneumonia [at which time there was NO known treatment of effective nature).
We DID encounter circumstances in which applying EIS to in vitro colonies of pathogens were...initially....unsuccessful-----but when the EIS solution was mixed with a companion DMSO (10% by volume) and reapplied......complete control resulted in less than
6 minutes in most cases----and in 10 minutes in 95% of the cases. This result presented
against EVERY bacteria we confronted in these evaluations.
As a postscript I might add that at that time (circa 1996-98) we encountered only one bacteria which successfully resisted EIS....after experiencing actual physical contact. The bacteria (which name escapes my memory, but can be supplied if someone wants to put me "on-the-rack") was one found in silver mines proper. Interestingly, after 9 generations of isolation from the silver-impregnated environment of the mines, themselves-----the bacteria LOST its tolerance against EIS.
With Warmest Regards, Brooks.
-- 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
---------[ Received Mail Content ]----------
Subject : CS>microbes resistant to silver
Date : Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:02:00 -0700
From : "nenahsylver" <[email protected]>
To : <[email protected]>
A colleague I trust pointed out that published reports now cite pathogens
that are resistant to silver.
The following article explains the mechanism and cross-bacterial transfer of
silver resistance genes among bacteria.
http://www.wwdmag.com/Coping-with-Resistance-to-Copper-Silver-Disinfection-a
rticle2768
At the bottom of the page is list of some known resistances to copper and
silver:
Escherichia coli bacteria Cu
Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteria Cu & Ag
Legionella pneumophilia bacteria Cu & Ag
Salmonella sp. bacteria Ag
Vibrio cholerae bacteria Cu & Ag
Candida albicans yeast Cu
Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast Cu & Ag
Hartmenella vermiformis protozoa Cu & Ag
Tetrahymena pyriformis protozoa Cu & Ag
Paramecium sp. protozoa Cu & Ag
Amoeba sp. protozoa Cu & Ag
My colleague also did a PubMed search on "silver resistance." She found that
article 12829274 mentions that in 2003, E. coli strain O157:H7 was found to
have silver resistance genes in its genome.
I am wondering if we should be cautious about using CS routinely (meaning
even when we aren't ill). Or do you think the article is flawed? If so, what
are the flaws?
Thanks.
Nenah
