I would think that would be prohibitively expensive here in the UK even if there is anywhere that could do it. dee
On 6 Feb 2010, at 00:41, Neville Munn wrote: > Dick's snipped quote: > [10-20% colloidal silver particles, and 80-90% ionic silver particles] > > > I would suggest a number of people should get a number of home made samples > tested, of differing ppm or uS readings, and over various time frames *after* > cessation of production and give some feedback. There's no way in this world > I can accept published ion/particle ratio's should be accepted as the general > rule, a guide perhaps, some I believe would interpret it as meaning *that* is > what they should be getting when *that* could be far removed from the > actuallity. While it may be a generalization, home producers should not > consider it the rule, unless they have more information supplied to go on > which will enable them to make better determinations. Published material is > based on science, Joe and Jenny Bloggs can't base their home produced > solutions on science, but moreso on *artistic flair* is how I see it, in > combination with some science principals praps. And I assume there are a > number of 'Joe and Jenny Bloggs' on here, if not, then I'm *well* out of my > depth and will fade away. > > I welcome anyone to shoot holes through all this in the interest of > furthering my knowledge, have to add though that in all probability I won't > be in a position to reply cos I'm no scientist and don't savvy the lingo, but > I'd be more than happy to READ any thoughts or considerations on it. > > N. >
