Hi Francis, sorry about the name mispelling...
> Please let the producer of Mesosilver respond: I waited over a week after the initial inquiries, imagining, erroneously it seems, that you'd jump in. > > Far be it for me to jump to support Mesosilver, as I don't agree with > their marketing > > strategy that includes bending and twisting the truth. > > Would you please tell what truth you think we have bent? Let me give you one example, of about five that I've documented, this one you've made in your last email: > > The so called scientific testing done in Petri dishes are scientifically > flawed. The scientific study is not flawed. That is one example of the way your words twist the truth. The scientific experiments are DESIGNED to test the DIRECT killing power of silver. The are not DESIGNED to replicate real world conditions. You are not careful with your qualifications. The truth is that if the studies are APPLIED to real world conditions, the RESULTS would not be comparible. You're just lucky that the one DESIGNED to test real world applications are not publically available. There is no scientific flaw. A scientific flaw is where you design an experiment that has fundamental errors in execution, measurement, theory, or doesn't account for key variables within the context of the study. > > If ionic silver were able to exist in the bloodstream it would seem that one > would be able to ingest ionic silver, draw a blood sample and measure the > ionic silver concentration found in the blood using an Ion Selective > Electrode (ISE). > > So why do all such measurements come up zero? > > We challenge anyone to find ionic silver in the blood after ingesting ionic > silver. > Funny thing is, Francis, I haven't heard anyone claiming that silver ions last in the bloodstream in a long time. I'm actually far more interested in the lymphatic system, of late. > 10% of the silver content is in the form of particles which survive in the > bloodstream to kill pathogens. Which would mean that your product is at least 80% more effective than the ones that I use. That's a mighty high claim, one that I feel you could easily prove -- if it were true -- with basic and safe sore throat studies. You'll find that it is not true. Since I have viewed data showing that a highly ionic silver injected into the bloodstream reduces Hep C loads by about 85% in a three week period of time, show me that Mesosilver injected into the bloodstream reduces it, in, what? A few hours? Two days? Tetrasil did studues, and they weren't even selling a product at the time. On your website, you state that ionic silver doesn't work topically... Again, a twisting of the truth, or have you not reviewed Dr. Bart Flick's work with silver oxide? Anyone who takes some time to research how to use ionic silver topically understands that you don't allow the solution to evaporate. But rather than state the truth, you twist it, ignoring details and slanting your information, which is misleading your customer base for your own personal ends. Your product is now standing on its own, don't you think its time to back down on your "is not" attack based marketing campaign? I figure you have enough market penetration now to perhaps focus some energy on studies, and simply state the benefits of a particulate silver based on your understanding and data. At least understand that statements like particle silver cannot cause argyria, which is blatantly not true according to medical history, don't make you look very good among those educated in silver applications. Don't you think that just maybe, stating something like: "Our particles are too small to cause argyria, even at high concentrations?" would be more accurate, and lend credence to your more than capable logical capacity? I "talk" to alot of your customers, they are very pleased with your product, and I have never had any reason to discourage them from use, or even recommend that they utilize a different product. However, when they start asking questions, I feel it is my obligation to send them to documented sources showing the truth, and then I spend way too much time qualifying and clarifying what HAS been scientifically and medically demonstrated, and what HAS NOT. This should be your job, not mine; I'm not getting paid. I'm certain many of these customers have not appreciated being misled, even if it is only a subtle twist of the truth. Furthermore, I think you ought to reign in that affiliate program one of your suppliers has going. I know it is good for sales, but some of them have no business selling your product saying the things that they do. There's more at stake than Mesosilver sales. Most companies with any ethical sense have guidelines for their public relations for those marketing their products. As always, Best Regards, Jason > For those who missed it, here is more information on ionic silver: > http://www.purestcolloids.com/ionic.htm > > For those who think ionic silver solutions should be called "colloidal > silver": > http://www.purestcolloids.com/notcs.htm > > For future reference, my name is not spelled Frances. > > Francis(Frank) Key > PurestColloids.com > > Andy: > > Far be it for me to jump to support Mesosilver, as I don't agree with their > marketing strategy that includes bending and twisting the truth. > > However, Brooks Bradley, in the not-too-distant past, commented that their > group evaluated quite a few colloidal silvers, and found the two best brands > to be Natural Immunogenics & Mesosilver. Kind of ironic, all things > considered. He further commented that they could not tell the difference > between the effectiveness of the two. > > Brooks was not clear if their testing was against conditions that required > that the silver be adsorbed through the stomach or not, although I would > certainly be interested in knowing. > > I don't remember Frances ever making the claim that an ion is larger than a > particle, al contrar: > > http://www.silvermedicine.org/attributesofsilverparticlesandsolutions.html > > You'll note that Frances clearly states that one silver atom has a radius of > 0.144 nanometers, and that a silver ion has a radius of about .28 > nanometers. > > He now states that Mesosilver has particles measuring .65 nanometers in > diameter, although previoiusly he claimed Mesosilver had particles measuring > 1.4 nanometers. At any rate, either measurement is not a claim that the > particles are smaller than ions, as this is not physically possible ( to my > knowledge, anyway ). > > Frances Key cannot be correct in all of his claims, just as the ionic > supporters, when it comes to silver particles, cannot be correct in all > claims. If one was correct over the other, there would be about an 80% > difference in effectiveness between the two different classes of products, > and this just isn't true. > > I find silver particles just as fascinating as silver ions. My > understanding on the silver colloid is as follows: > > Clusters of atoms organize to form a net negative charge ( zeta potential ). > > Apparently, there is something being overlooked, at least in the comparison > of effectiveness between silver ions and a silver colloid. > > I prefer a highly ionic solution over a highly particulate one because the > direct action of silver ions against pathogens and with human cells has been > scientifically and conclusively demonstrated. The silver particles have > less "killing power", although they are more stable. > > I don't buy the fact that ionic silver is ineffective in the body, because > it is contrary to my personal experience. > > It would be nice to understand why a quality silver colloid and a quality > ionic silver are equally effective, if indeed they are. The obvious answer > is that they are both isolated silver products. I'm sure if we search hard > we could find a complicated one, and this might be revealing. > > Best regards, > > Jason > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 11:51 PM > Subject: Re: CS>Anthrax Comment - mesosilver > > > Hi Charles, > > I guess I get confused by the nomenclature. This is my understanding: > > Ionic = Single silver atoms with a charge of +1. > Particulate = Several silver atoms clumped together with a charge of less > than +1. > Colloid = Anything that is small enough to stay in solution without > falling out of suspension. Including molecules that contain other atoms. > > Some people claim that smaller is better because there is more surface > area exposed and that ions work best. Others claim that ions combine with > other atoms and form bad molecules and that silver particles work best. I'm > thinking that either way, the exposed surface area is going to combine with > something and form a compound. The exposed surface area is what is supposed > to kill the pathogens isn't it? > > Anyhow, unless anyone can explain it better, Mesosilver looks like a bunch > of bad marketing for overcooked silver and nothing else. > > Just a brain fart, > Andy > > From: Charles Sutton > Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:34:09 > > Reads like the stuff I make. 24ppm by PWT and from the list (by now at > least a thousand posts) it is part colloid and part ionic. The ionic can > penetrate cells, and the colloid kills pathogens and other bugs. Where am I > wrong??? > > > > > > -- > 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]> >
