In a message dated 9/17/2001 7:21:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
> Subj:Re: CS Questions > Date:9/17/2001 7:21:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time > From: [email protected] (Arthur Rambo) > Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:[email protected]";>[email protected]</A> > To: [email protected] > > > > > Nick, I hope your daughter recovers quickly... > This issue of using "unapproved" substances brings to mind my own > experience with helping my son recover from a lingering infection that 3 > courses of anti-biotics didn't kill. He would be okay for 2 weeks, and > then have a fever/flu type symptoms that put him in bed for 2-3 days, > and this was repeated for over a year. > We never did find out the cause; however, I was just finding out about > CS and making an inferior product at the time; (yellow, larger > particles) and started him on at least a glass a day, and he recovered > quickly, but if I hadn't monitored his actions and reactions, my efforts > could have been useless, because he was very passive about drinking it, > although he was tired of being sick. > Actually, his treatment and recovery did take several months. ( BTW, > I was dealing with a very laidback, teenager 30 miles away, which is > tough when their in the next chair) > As for my own recovery, CS alone does not Arthur: It is precisely your experience that leads me to believe that the jury is still out (probably way, way out) with regard to the "optimum" CS particle size, as well as ionic:particulate ratio, especially when you throw in the complicating factor that all diseases may not respond equally to a given CS ion: particle ratio or CS particle size. So I think one should not be too hasty in condemning any CS electrolytic process, even the so called "mud makers". They all seem to work. They all seem to have a place in our medical arsenal. Roger
