Dear Terry, Much of what you say is true!
However, the people on this list are probably the most informed lay group in the world. Much of this information comes from the vendors of CS and CSGens and probably is born from the duty of concern for their customers and the want to make the best, most stable colloid possible. As the people on this list are human and varied in their backgrounds, the full gamut of human emotion and motivation is expressed, but this group of people are the most sensible and considerate that I have had the privilege of being associated with. After all, without continuing investigation whatever the motivation, the progress and understanding that you note would not have taken place. Kind regards, Ivan. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry Wayne" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, 27 June 2000 08:06 Subject: CS>Harmony > I have watched the extensive and detailed discussion > of the production of Colloidal Silver for the whole > time I've been on the list. This discussion has been > interesting and provocative, with positions being > advocated, tempers being stimulated, and opinions > being declared. > > Several points seem to have coalesced into the center, > which seem never to be resolved, partially because > neither the science appears to be there for resolving > them, nor the facilities (money, labs, adequate > equipment). > > We all do seem to agree that if the silver particles > are big enough to sink to the bottom of the container, > or are big enough to actually be visible, they are too > big. Others are of the opinion that if the particles > cause the water to change color, that also is too big > (although there is the "yellow is OK, but brown or > purple is not" party vs. the "clear is fine, any color > is not" party). The general consensus seems to be > that, if the particles are too big, the body will not > be able to utilize them. The concept seems to be that > the cell walls in the body will absorb the silver > particles if they are small enough. I've read > statements declaring the optimal size for silver > particles in order for them to be best assimilated. > I've seen nothing to corroborate this stance. > > In the last while, "colloidal" has been increasingly > replaced with or connected to words such as "ionic", > "non-ionic" "atomic", "uncharged", "metallic", > "loosely-bonded", "biologically active", > "bioavailable", etc. For awhile it was held that the > "sludge" which accumulated on the cathode was not > something to be ingested internally, though few > resisted applying it topically. To prevent this > sludge, it was felt that polarity reversal and > frequent or constant stirring was needed. Now I'm > seeing the opinion that polarity reversal merely > dissolves the "sludge" back into the water, and some > feel that this re-dissolved "sludge" is somehow not > "ionic", or is "uncharged", or not "bioavailable", or > will soon aggregate and sink to the bottom. > > When I first began to research CS, the big controversy > was whether to use salt or not. Also argued was the > use of DW vs. reverse osmosis vs. deionised water. > Nearly everyone frowned on tap or even spring water. > > Yet we nearly all hold to the fact that no one has > demonstrated any toxicity with basic CS, whatever the > voltage or current, whatever the shape of the silver > (wire, bar, coin, etc.) or even how long the brewing > time is. A friend of mine bought some wire from me. He > went home and put the wires in 8 oz. of DW and left it > there for 24 hours! The anode wire was almost totally > dissolved, and the water was a dark, murky brown, with > a thick, silvery film on top of the water, and heavy > plating in the sides and bottom of the jar. He then > drank all 8 oz., all at once! This fellow has > struggled with chronic-fatigue syndrome for years. > Within 20 minutes of drinking that batch, he had a > rush of energy like he had not felt in years! He > drinks 8-10 oz. per day (been nearly a year), though > he brews it for a much shorter time now (silver wires > aren't free!). > > My own perspective is that the silver-list is valuable > because it brings together a wide range and > combination of experience and perspectives. In my own > opinion, the single most important factor in effective > scientific inquiry is the capacity to remain objective > during research. When we find ourselves being offended > by the disagreement of others, it is no longer > objective scientific inquiry. I have watched members > of this list using insensitive and even insulting > communication to others who see differently, and I > have seen contempt, superiority and disrespect from > the more "educated" members of the list towards those > who are merely curious, or those who express > themselves in a less than articulate way. It reminds > me very much of the attitude and expression we have > become so used to receiving from the medical > establishment. We have expressed our own > disappointment and anger at such close-minded, > arrogant snobbishness, yet I fear it is similarly > active on this list. > > Though I produce and sell a large amount of CS, it > pleases me to see CS being made and used with such a > wide range of applications. It is to our long-range > benefit that it can be produced so easily and with > such variety. We should be encouraging each other, not > competing with each other. > > Respectfully submitted, > Terry Wayne -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: [email protected] -or- [email protected] with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: [email protected] Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
