Without becoming adversarial, I believe you will find that
Frank Key is correct in his contention that the particles exhibit a negative
charge. Our lab personnel verified this in 1995....when we were just
getting starting in this line of investigation.
It may just be my personal perception, but I seem to detect a
tendency for some contributors to be overly challenging of Mr. Key's
positions........especially since ---with the notable exception of Stephen
Quinto and Ivan Anderson---they seem to do so from a position of relative
technical/scientific weakness. My problem is I find it somewhat bothersome
these critics seem to demand quantitative resolution on Frank's part---while
offering none of their own.
I do not wish to start a controversy and am quite confident Mr.
Key can account for himself quite adequately....without my intervention;
neither am I attempting to pre-empt Mr. Devour's regime.
I just feel that if people are going to challenge Mr. Key's
quantified positions......such should be based/translated in
quantified---technically identifiable---terms, and not qualitative
generalizations.
Please forgive my excessive use of list bandwidth for this
intemperate outburst.
I will attempt a measured effort to restrain myself in
such liberties.....at least in the near future.
Sincerely, Brooks Bradley.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Key" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:00 PM
Subject: CS>ions & particles
> "A.V.R.A." wrote: (reproduced at the bottom).
>
> Clearly there are two schools of thought on this. I am by no means alone
in my
> belief that ionic silver forms silver chloride in the bloodstream. Dr.
Meade
> estimated the half life of silver ions to be 7.8 seconds in the blood.
>
> Many get excited about testing ionic silver in a petri dish. It is true
that
> ionic silver is great for killing pathogens when chloride is not present,
but
> when are the petri dish tests going to be conducted in a chloride
environment
> that duplicates the blood serum? Why is everyone so silent on this
subject? Is
> it because they already know the answer and they don't like it?
>
> > "but exactly how many people are making pure particle silver solutions?"
>
> I don't know, perhaps we are the only ones. We make them because we feel
it
> the correct way to solve the problem. Making high particle concentration
> silver colloids is not a walk in the park like making ionic silver.
>
> Many who have done their own tests of efficacy and have satisfied
themselves
> go about their business and just use the high particle colloids. If the
> products didn't work, there would be no repeat sales.
>
> You might consider making your own tests with high particle
concentrations.
> Perhaps nothing else would really convince you.
>
> > I have never seen a post where you describe how your colloidal silver
has
> actually worked against any condition.
>
> I am very careful not to make such claims, I will let others tell what
they
> have done with the product. If you want to see testimonials about what
high
> particle silver works against, you might consider visiting a web site that
is
> devoted to retail selling of the product. See:
www.Advanced-Colloidal-Silver.co
> m
>
> Regarding the science of colloids; our work is reviewed by Dr. Maass, a
> professor of chemistry with 30 years experience in industry and academia.
>
> For a good example of the science that others choose to believe, just take
a
> look at how many books have been written and how many web site explain
that
> silver particles have a positive charge. Ask the writers of these words if
> they actually ever measured the charge on the particles.
>
> The scientific fact is that the particles have a negative charge, not a
> positive charge. It is measurable in the lab if you have the right
equipment.
> I have made hundreds of such measurements, which always show the particles
are
> negative. See the plotted results of these measurement on the Commercial
> Product Reports, Zeta Potential Plot.
>
> Particle charge is good example of the science that people want to hang
their
> hat on. I have written a paper on this subject and it on the
silver-colloids
> web site.
>
> Many may choose to believe in positively charged particles and pretend
that
> silver ions will survive in a chloride environment. That is their choice.
>
> I chose to believe otherwise and act accordingly.
>
> frank key
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> below is the complete post being responded to.
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > Forgive me if I am being presumptious Frank, but exactly how many people
are
> > making pure particle silver solutions? I'm aware of two people. I've
> > always been incredibly interested in particle silver research. However,
I've
> > seen no reports of efficacy, and the science I've seen ( that I've been
able
> > to understand, not being a specialist in chemistry ) has been sloppy.
> >
> > For example, the "scientific experiment" where ionic silver is added to
> > saliva and silver chloride is produces disproving protein adsorption of
> > ionic silver is borderline negligance.
> >
> > I think you are being extremely unfair in stating that those using ionic
> > silver ignore the silver chloride issue. The archives prove
differently. I
> > will remind you yet again that ionic silver products HAVE received FDA
> > approval, and there are a few companies spending an incredible amount of
> > money learning how to deliver ionic silver successfully into the body.
> > These same companies could far spend less money learning how to deliver
> > particle silver into the body, yet the predominant viewpoint among
silver
> > professionals is that ionic silver is ideal if there is a guarantee that
the
> > ionic silver will reach the site of an infection.
> >
> > I think that by taking the stance in the manner that you do, you not
only
> > misrepresent the scientific ideals you apparently hold so highly, but
also
> > do science itself an injustice.
> >
> > Personally, I use a high particle concentration for external
applications
> > because silver is silver, and higher concentrations externally have
proven
> > to me ) to be more effective with no added risk. However, I'm working
on a
> > simple method that will allow ionic silver to remain ionic for extended
> > periods of time. In cases where this method is feasible, I will then
opt
> > for a "more" ionic silver solution.
> >
> > The majority of the work I've seen is a futile attempt to prove that
ionic
> > silver does not work, and that particle silver is theoretically the
better
> > alternative. I've seen very little on the practical application of a
pure
> > particle silver solution in the human body and what it can or cannot do.
> >
> > The only thing that has stopped me from doing some clinical research on
the
> > real efficacy of ionic silver is the fact that I don't have the
equipment to
> > control ionic silver production to standards, nor do I have the funds to
> > purchase the colloidal silver at this time for use in such an endevour.
> >
> > I would ask you to realize that your words have the potential to bring
harm
> > to those people new to silver. Having an extraordinary amount of
respect
> > for scientific professionals, had I met you and heard your words about
ionic
> > silver, my wife very well could be dead as the result. Fortunately, I
"met"
> > Lindeman instead. Scientific ethics were developed to preserve the
value of
> > science itself. While it is true that every person must accept personal
> > responsibility for their choices, is it really your intention to bring
> > possible harm to others based on what is clearly some vendetta?
> >
> > I have never seen a post where you describe how your colloidal silver
has
> > actually worked against any condition. Yet you criticize those who
report
> > and are working to achieve a greater understanding through practical
> > application. I think your theoretical base for the efficacy of particle
> > silver is excellent, and I always have.
> >
> > Why not simply take your particle silver solution, put it to WORK, and
let
> > the results speak for themselves? Why not focus on the IS of your own
work?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Frank Key" <[email protected]>
> > To: "*Silver-List*" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 6:11 AM
> > Subject: Re: CS>Where to find 50 ppm......
> >
> >
> > > Ivan wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I think most of us have reached the conclusion that colloidal
> > > > > silver is more effective than ionic silver for killing pathogens.
> > > >
> > > > I think not Marshall. Surely most think that ionic silver is more
> > effective
> > > > in killing pathogens, or at least don't know which is more
effective.
> > > >
> > > > Just who is the us you refer to... the same 'many' that Frank
referred
> > to a
> > > > while ago?
> > > >
> > > > Ivan.
> > >
> > > It would seem that those producing silver solutions (all ionic silver)
are
> > the ones most inclined to:
> > >
> > > 1. claim ionic silver is more effective in killing pathogens.
> > > 2. claim silver solutions are really colloids
> > > 3. ignore that chloride combines with silver ions to form silver
chloride.
> > >
> > > Maybe what is needed is a list devoted to silver solutions and
producers
> > thereof.
> > >
> > > frank key
>
>
> --
> 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]>
>
