Dear Tracy,
First, I do not ingest ANY H202 other than "food
grade". However, I would have no compunctions over ingesting the conventionally
available 3.5% H202.....in an emergency, or short-term. It is my belief that
the stabilizers consitute a very minor potential problem----one at present not
determined by any source to which we have access. At 3.5%, H202 has been used
as a mouthwash by millions of people---worldwide---without serious insult. It
is true that H202, even at these low concentrations, can cause
discomfort....and even minor pain, if anaerobically- based bacteria is
manifesting in an infective mode and or in cases of very thin dentyne....where a
superficial nerve receives a direct insult. H202 will, even at 3.5%
concentration---cause a bleaching of DISEASED gum tissue. Such white residue is
an excellent means of tracking the control and ultimate demise of such disorders
as gum disease. When one can no longer generate any bleached tissue after a
H202 irrigation (coupled with a gentle brushing with a SOFT toothbrush) of 15 to
30 seconds duration ----- the odds are overwhelming that the gum infection is
under excellent control.
The irritation/burning potential of H202 is a
function of concentration only. 3% H202 will not, normally, even burn the
tender tissue around the eyes of a healthy child over 5 to 6 years of age.
The weakest concentration we have ever been able to
generate detectable skin surface bleaching (of healthy tissue) is 6%; and
normally it is closer to 10 %. 16% caused tissue-burn (bright white bleaching)
topically.....on all subjects ever subjected to it. We have experimented, in
past evaluations, with solutions as strong as 35%. This is a DANGEROUS
concentration level and represents a POWERFUL tissue-burner. This said, we did
achieve some rather remarkable responses to certain types of skin
cancer----using a carefully applied 35% solution---placed directly/only on the
affected tissue----during some of our experimental researches..
I hope this satisfactorily addresses your
questions.
Sincerely, Brooks Bradley.
Nick Grant wrote:
> HI Kehoe
>
> Gosh, you poor thing. I guess I am glad to hear that amalgam removal wasn't
> the issue. it seems that everyone blames mercury for anything. I have been
> told to get mine removed because of my candida. it would be a last resort -
> cannot afford it. Hey Brooks, great going....I hope this works for you
> Kehoe. Please keep me informed.
>
> BROOKS - a question. As a hairdresser I used to use 3 % peroxide on peoples
> hair in colours. You would put this stuff in your mouth? Even at this
> concentration, isn't it enough to burn out your mouth? Or is it different
> H2o2 that you use? Is commercial different from what you use?
>
> Thanks
>
> Tracy
>
> --
> 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]>
