Cesium is the most alkaline of all metals. Essentially harmless to humans in large doses, although it will compete with potassium. Cesium will enter cancer cells and raise the pH to the point of cell death, neutralising cancer cell waste and toxins (generally the cause of death) and the associated pain.
http://www.mwt.net/~drbrewer/highpH.htm BREWER, A. K. The high pH therapy for cancer tests on mice and humans. PHARMACOL BIOCHEM BEHAV 21: Suppl. 1, 1-5. 1984.---Mass spectrographic and isotope studies have shown that potassium, rubidium, and especially cesium are most efficiently taken up by cancer cells. This uptake was enhanced by Vitamins A and C as well as salts of zinc and selenium. The quantity of cesium taken up was sufficient to raise the cell to the 8 pH range. Where cell mitosis ceases and the life of the cell is short. Tests on mice fed cesium and rubidium showed marked shrinkage in the tumor masses within 2 weeks. In addition, the mice showed none of the side effects of cancer. Tests have been carried out on over 30 humans. In each case the tumor masses disappeared. Also all pains and effects associated with cancer disappeared within 12 to 36 hr; the more chemotherapy and morphine the patient had taken, the longer the withdrawal period. Studies of the food intake in areas where the incidences of cancer are very low showed that it met the requirements for the high pH therapy. Sunlight: In areas of low sunlight hours, or high or low latitude, one should supplement with Vit D3 (cholecalciferol) up to 10,000 IU per day with calcium and magnesium. If a lot of time is spent under artificial lighting, that lighting should be full spectrum. The use of sun-blocks and dark glasses (excepting grey tint that allow passage of reduced amount of full spectrum light) is counter productive to good health. http://www.direct-ms.org/vitamind.html ...On the question of how much, Vieth (1999) first notes that humans evolved having a relatively large intake of vitamin D, with a naked human in Africa likely getting at least 10000 IU a day. He then reviews all the literature on intake of vitamin D and resultant levels of 25(OH)D and PTH. The key here is that when adequate levels of 25(OH)D (an intermediate metabolite of vitamin D) are circulating there is no need for the body to produce PTH (parathyroid hormone). On the basis of all the available data, Vieth (1999) concludes that it is desirable to have 100-125 nmol/litre of 25(OH)D in circulation. Furthermore, he notes, that to achieve this amount, an intake of about 4000 IU of vitamin D a day is required. As described earlier, the main source of vitamin D is the sun and in hot climates (south of 40 N) such an intake is readily possible if an individual spends a reasonable time in the sun. However, in colder climates, like those of Canada, northern USA and northwest Europe, it is almost impossible to average 4000 IU a day because for at least six months of the year intake from the sun is negligible at best. Even during the few hot summer months an individual would have to spend considerable time in the sun to achieve the required intake. Thus in areas of low sunlight, supplements provide a reasonable alternative for vitamin D intake. As Vieth (1999) notes "From what is known now, there is no practical difference whether vitamin D is acquired from ultraviolet exposed skin of through diet". Cod liver oil, fish and vitamin D fortified foods are the usual dietary sources used to get vitamin D. However these sources usually supply much less than 1000 IU/day and the fortified foods provide a synthetic form of vitamin D (D2) which is substantially inferior to the natural vitamin D3 (Trang et al,1998). Furthermore, because cod liver oil also contains large amounts of vitamin A, it would not be feasible to get 4000 IU of vitamin D from it because of potential problems with too much vitamin A. Fortunately there are specific vitamin D3 supplements which are usually small 1000 IU pills and a bottle of 100 costs less than $10 ($5 CDN in Calgary). This would seem to be the most reasonable source of 4000 IU a day. Vieth (1999) also addresses the safety issue of vitamin D at length. He shows that the "no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL)" is at least 10,000 IU/day. The lowest observed adverse effect level (LAOEL) is 40,000 IU/day. Thus 10,000 IU/day is definitely safe (assuming no hypersensitivity) and 40,000 IU/day is definitely a problem. It would be next to impossible for anyone living in a northern area to get too much vitamin D from sunlight and a 4000 IU supplement. Thus such a supplementation level is safe for anyone who is not hypersensitive to vitamin D. It must be stressed that adequate calcium and magnesium intake must accompany vitamin D supplementation as discussed by Goldberg et al (1986). Cantorna et al (1999) recently demonstrated that calcium levels strongly affect the action of vitamin D for suppressing EAE in mice. Calcium intake should be in the range of 600-900 mg/day with magnesium intake being about the same as this... Regards Ivan -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 16 August 2002 9:49 a.m. To: [email protected] Subject: Re: CS>Ivan the Terrible... In a message dated 8/14/2002 7:19:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: >>I became aware of Barefoot sometime after beginning to supply cesium chloride as a cancer supplement of which I discovered he was also an advocate, and was more than happy to realise that we shared quite a few ideas on the progress to ill health, and its remedy.<< I joke around a lot. OK, Ivan. Let me ask you this, what is cesium choloride? Tell me what you know. Also, what does a person do who lives in a full season climate? We only get a few months of strong sunlight. -- 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]>
