On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 15:02:14 +1000, "Kevin Nolan" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I was under the impression that silver does not constitute any part of the >body's many hormone, enzyme, protein etc components, and therefore is not >really a trace mineral in the same sense that say copper or chromium is. In >other words a diet totally lacking in silver would not per se lead to >serious illness or death. Can you provide some more info on this? Two or three weeks ago I was looking for info on silver for another (non-health related) purpose. As I was looking, I ran across a site that listed the percentages or ppm of different elements in various things, including the human body. My memory is fuzzy on the exact amount of silver listed for the human body, but it was above 1 ppm. Some animals had more, fish had less. :) There is a WWW site called "webelements" or something like that has a really good periodic table with lots of details. Unfortunately, their info on the biology of many elements is somewhat askew -- almost like their info was from the 1920's. Adding to that, there is anecdotal evidence provided by National Geographic and other publications that shows the lifespan of populations living in silver-bearing mountainous regions is much greater than areas where there is no silver in the natural surroundings. Mountainous areas that have little silver don't seem to have populations that are any longer lived than other groups. BTW, both lead and aluminum are in the body in trace amounts and I've read that both have biologic activity. I suspect we (science) haven't yet discovered what silver's role is in the body. -- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: [email protected] Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
