AVRA / Jason wrote: > All: > > None of these things are true. Argyria is not a condition that is limited > to the skin. Cosmetic Argyria gets the most attention because it has a > noticeable effect. However, silver can be deposited in organs and other > tissues.
Yes it can but it then would not be cosmetic argyria. I would love to have silver deposited in my organs, then I wouldn't need to take it daily. > As long as a critical level is not achieved, it is not toxic. The > fact that light is required ( and perhaps acid ) to cause a VISIBLE > disfiguration has nothing whatsoever to do with silver being actually > DEPOSITED into tissues. Silver deposited into tissues is not considered argyria from what I can determine. I would consider it great if I could have it deposited into my tissues without being cosmetic since silver is basically non toxic and kills most all pathogens. > Both ionic silver and particulate silver have been documented to cause > argyria. How can particulate silver cause argyria? If it is big enough to get stuck, how could it get there in the first place? If it grew while there, then there had to have been silver ions plating out on it. > If the ionic silver remained ionic, it would be impossible for it > to cause Argyria. Correct. But we know chemically what conditions will cause it to plate out onto silver particles. > But the fact is that I'm sure that many chemical > processes in the body can cause the silver to "plate-out". Plating out requires the silver to be in ionic form, since particles of silver are already "plated out". For argyria the silver must grow into particles that become stuck. What is required is well known chemically. Akalinity, a developer, and silver particles to plate out on. A huge amount of research has been done on this issue by Kodak and Polaroid and other photo companies. > > It IS true, though, that the studies were done with toxic forms of silver > compounds. This was soley due to the forms of silver that were available > and in use at the time. It may be that the most minute silver particles do > not accumulate in the body at all with long term use. But it should be > clarified that this has never been established as fact. Perhaps Francis Key > et al could conduct a long term study ( 2-3 years ) with a few willing > voluteers. Since their measuring equipment is capable of extremely precise > analysis of total silver content, and their product is unique, it, I think, > would be a worthy endevour... In conjunction, levels of selenium, vitamin > E, magnesium and calcium could be monitored throughout the period. Take an > average individual, an individual with a compromised liver, and an > individual with severe immunodeficiency disorder, and do a comparative > study. While I don't think you could take three test cases to the FDA, it > would no doubt be the first steps in clarifying the whole issue. > Any testing to clarify would be good. Of course as you say it would be worthless for the FDA, they don't want to allow any cures that don't make the pharms lots of money. > > Of course, if anyone wants to bankroll the study, I would love to do such a > study with a highly ionic silver and a highly particulate silver! It could be done with mice, maybe. Of course the mice would die of old age probably before you could get enough silver in them to likely get any results. Marshall -- 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]>
