Hi Brooks,
Thank you, it's great to have all this information on one
page.
My experience so far with CS (LVDC) is a year old itch in my groin has
disappeared.
My wife and myself both experienced overall light skin itch, not severe,
after we started drinking CS. This started a it's peak severity and
diminished gradually over a period of about one week. We viewed this itch in
a positive light, an indication that our CS was working and were delighted
with it.
Leo.
----- Original Message -----
From: "brooks bradley" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 2:49 AM
Subject: Re: CS>Generators and Methods
> Dear Leo,
> Since I am "sidelined" today....with an aggravation of an
> ancient knee injury (football 1943), I am pandering to a series personal
> biases-----and your inquiry has "struck another nerve",
> As the bulk of the older list membership is aware, we have---over
> the past 5 years---invested sizeable effort and resources in evaluating a
> rather wide array of generation techniques for producing acceptable
> colloidal silver solutions. The principal goal of our endeavors was not
to
> identify the state-of-the-art protocol, but rather to identify acceptable
> means.... achievable by the intelligent but untrained individual.....to
> economically produce a CS substance yielding results near the middle of
the
> spectrum for proven/measureable CS solutions then extant (RMS nomograms
> derived from CS generated from Current/Voltage controlled variations of
LVDC
> (49VDC AND LESS); HVDC up to 240 vdc; half-wave DC, from 60 hz
> source.....up to 200 volts; and HVAC FROM 5 TO 15 KV). These data were
> achieved against a variety of some of the more prevalent
> pathogens-of-consequence---both viral and bacterial.
> A brief summary of our data reveals some interesting
information
> including: (1) Neither the HVDC or HVAC systems produced a product
> superior enough to the voltage-regulated LVDC (30 to 40 volt
range)......to
> justify (in our view) the additional complications imposed upon the
> "technically challenged". (2) We were unable to verify ANY effectivity
> advantage of the HVAC/HVDC products over the "monitored generation" LVDC
> ones......in direct comparison evaluations in vitro----excepting a time
> advantage in favor of the HVAC (especially in tests involving the more
> virulent viral pathogens). However, even this advantage, rarely over 2 to
> 1, would not seem to be great enough to pre-empt use of LVDC cs in favor
of
> HVAC------for the typical do-it-yourself experimenter. e.g. A typical
> comparison was flu virus (several types); 10 min. average for replication
> nullification for HVAC; 18 min. for LVDC.
> In vivo comparisons were so close (due to the problems of
> anecdotal nature of tests) as to prevent any detectable difference in
> efficacy.
> It is of consequence to mention that all LVDC solutions were
> generated using low-grade instrumentation (e.g.$8.00 DVM., LOW-COST Reg
DC
> power supplies......less than 50.00). Evaluations using high-quality,
> lab-grade DC supplies did not improve the product quality.
> The single, most important LVDC parameter revealed to be
the
> current flow ----both as a determinant of ppm magnitude.....and particle
> size. For dc voltages at or below 40 vdc, consequential excursions in
> particle size did not occur until the current level rose beyond 12 MA for
> single element electrodes with 5" wetted exposure.......and 20 MA for dual
> element electrodes. Above these levels the particle size began to rise
> rapidly.....sometimes exponentially. Note: Scanning Electron Microscopy
> revealed ABSOLUTELY NO comfirmable increase particle size differentiation
> populations between current levels of .75 MA and 5.65 MA at regulated
> D.C. voltages (at constant settings) between 30 and 40 vdc. One other
> anomaly we discovered may serve to precipitate contention/controversy by
> some on the list. However, we determined---beyond any reasonable
> doubt----that the use of a properly installed aquarium air pump and
bubbler
> to be equal to....or superior in some cases....to the various stirring
> motor/magnetic stirring techniques employed. The most simple....and cost-
> effective system we evaluated proved to be one composed of a small air
pump
> (Aquaculture 10 gallon model) obtained from Walmart for a cost of about
> $6.00; silicone rubber hose (8' for $1.25); plus the small, cylindrical,
> ceramic bubble-stone (About $1.00). This inexpensive system, with the
> bubble-stone placed upon the bottom of either a 32 ounce or 64 ounce glass
> container (Mason jars)---and located between the electrode
> assemblies----works splendidly. The volume of air is quite large and the
> aggitation achieved is more than adequate for a continual
> mixing/dilution......even for the half-gallon container. Contenders
> holding this is inferior to low-cost motor-driven stirrers, only have to
> replicate our setup for direct comparisons. I am not attempting to
> denigrate mechanical stirring......it works splendidly. I simply mention
> our experiences for the benefit of those who might like to utilize an
> effective alterntive. One, additional, comment......product resulting
from
> water preheated to an average of 180 F. resulted in product of a quality
> totally INDISTINGUISHABLE from product derived from water temperatures
> around 80 F------but with the added advantage of an average 50% reduction
in
> generation time.. Although there are a myriad of related comments I could
> add, this epistle has, already, exceeded---by an order of magnitude---my
> original intent.
> Upon detailed examination, we found it an obvious
conclusion
> that a commercial producer would be well-served to utilize HVAC
> methodologies for product preparation.......but found no such compelling
> reason for the average do-it-yourselfer.
> Sincerely,
> Brooks Bradley
>
>
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: "Leo Keaveney" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 6:48 PM
> Subject: Re: CS>Generators and Methods
>
>
> > Hi All,
> > At this time I am unable to afford a HVAC generator and
therefore
> > some innovation is called for.
> > I made a 175volt DC unit by using voltage doubling electronics (diodes &
> > capacitors).
> > When making the CS I clean the negative electrode frequently and stir
the
> > solution in a circular motion.
> > As the solution saturates with silver and the current rises near 3mA I
> swap
> > the positive lead to one with a resistor connected in series.
> > The electrodes are separated by about 3" apart to keep the current down
> and
> > the bubbles on the negative electrode are very small, barely visible.
> > When I started making CS first I used an air ioniser with the current
> > limiters shorted out.
> > This made half a pint of crystal clear CS over a period of about two
days,
> > at first I thought that I had failed to make CS until I measured it's
> > resistance with an multi meter.
> > Be careful using a modified air ioniser, my one rectifies the 220V ac
> mains
> > voltage supply, then doubles it 14 or 15 times, removing the current
> > limiting resistors makes it lethal to go near when the power is applied
as
> > the voltage would be in the order of 15,000volts and will arc or leap
half
> > an inch or so, I don't know just how far, I'll probably find out some
day
> > when I'm careless.
> >
> > Leo
> > > 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]>
