Apparently if one wants to split those particle clusters up that is so, but I
don't need, or don't have a desire to use H2O2, if I use my product immediately
after production there's minimal particles anyway, and what there are would
still be useful as a 'side benefit'...It's all useful.
Besides, my understanding is the body produces an amount of H2O2 naturally
{don't know how much?} if so then I suspect whatever amount is produced
naturally would do something similar *within* the body.
N.
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:54:00 -0500
Subject: Re: CS> New Member - Jan
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Isn't this where the H2O2 comes in?
Jaxi
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Neville Munn <[email protected]> wrote:
I'm no chemistry guru so I can only speak in laymans language.
The drop or reduction in ppm readings is a good indicator of purity of water
used, don't be surprised if that reading drops almost 50% [based on literature
and evidenced from experience].
Some people may be surprised to see their readings seemingly drop significantly
over time until the solution reaches a point of stability, I take that reading
drop as a complement to the quality of water I'm using. If it failed to drop
by an appreciable amount...then I have something else in the water besides
silver. I believe the amount it drops is proportionate with the ppm level at
cessation of the brewing process {based on my own experiences, the higher the
end ppm result on production cessation, the greater the drop in reading} and I
have had it drop near on 50% from initial reading on the day it was produced.
Meters only give me a point of reference to shut my process down, I don't rely
on them for any accuracy in silver content, just a ballpark figure {commonly
referred to as a 'guesstimate'}.
*Immediately* upon cessation of the brewing process the solution will be at
it's highest in ionic content {positively charged silver ions} and as time goes
by {few days praps} there will be a number of ions colliding with other ions
forming atomic clusters {these would be called particles or particle clusters I
guess}.
The distinction between two solutions I referred to is just that...a solution
which is high in ionic content, and a solution that has stabilized over time
and has lost some of those ions to particle clusters, and I use whichever I
consider will be most efficacious for a given circumstance, hence my comment
about 'oils ain't oils' and 'EIS/CS ain't EIS/CS'.
That's my backyard scientists way of explanation <g>, I'll leave it to the
chemistry guru's to explain in better language and/or clear up any errors. But
all I've said here is based on my experience over several years involvement
with this 'stuff', not saying it's 100% accurate, just my experience.
N.
> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 06:13:15 -0700
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: CS> New Member - Jan
> To: [email protected]
>
> No -- lol -- I'll leave that one to Neville! There is some evidence, via our
> Hanna Testers, that the ppm-level of CS/EIS will drop a ppm or two within a
> couple days of brewing. Some refer to this as *stabilizing*. I believe that
> it
>
> is the contention of the knowledgeable members here that some of the ionic
> portion of the brew will change over to particulate matter, resulting in a
> lower
>
> ppm reading. The real question is whether it's the ionic portion that is
> effective in killing pathogens, or the particulate portion. Or is it both?
> I
> don't know the answer -- for my own purposes, it doesn't matter. But
> apparently
>
> Neville feels differently, and he was sharing that with Jan. So I'm looking
> forward to his answer, as I'm sure Jan is! :-)
> MA
>
>
>
>
> --
> The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
> Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org
>
> Unsubscribe:
> <mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
> Archives:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.html
>
> Off-Topic discussions: <mailto:[email protected]>
> List Owner: Mike Devour <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>
