Hi;
First off, ionic silver is hardly "unique" in it's "strong" tendency to
combine with chloride, nor is it unique in that the compound will
precipitate out in neutral water.
Secondly the Petri experiments are hardly flawed by the absence of chloride
ions, in fact the addition of chloride ions, given the physical chemistry
you invariably mention, would flaw them irrevocably unless the full panoply
of organic constituents of our systems were also present in appropriate form.
Thirdly, in fact the Petri experiments under discussion are limited, as all
such experiments are, by being what all such experiments are, in vitro
approximations of the systems under examination; hardly a reason to damn
them as "flawed". On the contrary, the evidence they provide is often much
more clear and unambiguous because of their limited nature. This type of
evidence may be of great value in designing further hypotheses and
experimental testing.
Just think how you might be trumpeting the results of this "flawed
experiment" which "misleads" so perniciously had they turned out indecisive
or even negative; that is, shown ionic silver not effective in control of
pathogens? What then?
And speaking of that, what are the results of adding purely particulate
silver to a petri dish overgrown with the same pathogens?
Malcolm
At 01:37 AM 3/3/03 -0500, you wrote:
My comments on the Petri dish experiments is limited to the case where ionic
silver is being tested against pathogens. Ionic silver is unique because of
its strong tendency to combine with chloride. If chloride is not present in
the environment then the test is flawed.
I did not mean that all testing in Petri dishes is flawed, only those for
ionic silver where chloride is not present.
frank key
> My understanding that petrie dish was quick easy way to test effect only.
A
> first step.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Malcolm Stebbins" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 3:18 PM
> Subject: Re: CS>Anthrax Comment - mesosilver
>
>
> > Hi Catherine;
> > Regarding the phrases: ("...but it
> > >has nothing what so ever to do with how it will behave inside the
human
> > >body. All such studies fail to ever mention that fact,...")
> >
> > What, then, is the point of even making Petrie dishes, much less making
> the
> > hundreds of thousands of researches within the medical field alone which
> > employ petrie dish experiments to explore the possible outcomes of
various
> > hypotheses?
> > Should Petrie dishes be sold only to non-medical users?
> > Are all these researchers deceitful, or only those exploring the medical
> > applications of various forms of finely divided silver? Is the deceit
> > contained in the lack of specificity which the colloidal silver
> researchers
> > exhibit in presenting their clearly labelled in vitro experiments, or is
> it
> > contained in the implication that they fail to specifically state (in
> > contrast to the more relaxed requirements imposed on the rest of the
> > medical research community) That THEIR research is of course totally
> > inapplicable to any immediate human therapeautic concerns? Would THAT
> > statement be more accurate, or just more consonant with Mr. Key's
agenda?
> > Perhaps, rather, the deceit is to be found in the rhetoric of Mr. Key's
> > categorically emphatic remarks: "...nothing what so ever ..." and: "All
> > such studies fail to ever mention that fact ..."
> > Let's proceed to the next statement, directly following the above: ("...
> > and in fact leave the
> > >reader with the false impression that it would work just as well
inside
> the
> > >body. Nothing could be farther from the truth.")
> > Which readers are left with what false impression? Well, I'll coin the
> > phrase; "All the world are fools, excepting thee and me, and I sometimes
> > have my doubts about thee."
> > If you find this offensive and demeaning, consider how the rest of
"...the
> > reader[s] ..." might also feel, and quite justifiably so.
> > Before I leave the rhetorical quagmire of Mr. Key's statement, I'd
invite
> > you to comment on his remark that: "Nothing could be farther from the
> > truth...," in the context of the studies referred to, rather than the
> > context of Mr. Key's evaluation of all us readers' intellectual
> > ineptitude. In other words, do the in vitro studies indicating the high
> > efficacy of ionic and/or colloidal silver in Petrie dishes really
> establish
> > their total, categorical inapplicability to conditions of human
> > disease? That would indeed turn the research community on it's
collective
> > head!
> > You may find Mr. Key to be an honest, helpful and dedicated person in
his
> > response to your queries, and indeed he may well be, but his rhetoric
> > SUCKS!! That flaw, if no other, calls ALL of his remarks into serious
> doubt.
> > My concern here is not to use your posts as once-removed springboards
to
> > attack Mr. Key's, rather I am dismayed that someone with your high
> > dedication and great research capacity would endorse, and thus give
> > greater weight to, such self-serving cant.
> > Take care, Malcolm
> >
> > At 06:44 AM 3/2/03 -0800, you wrote:
> >
> > >Dear Malcolm,
> > >
> > >
> > > You said:
> > >
> > ><<Hi Catherine, I think it would be worthwhile for you to clarify and
> > >delimit
> > >your blanket approval of "this" to one or several of the statements
> and/or
> > >dependent implications Frank Key makes in the first paragraph you
quoted;
> > >you can nit-pick it as well as I, the first three sentences alone...>>
> > >
> > >
> > > ** This is the statement to which I was referring:
> > >
> > > >Killing power of ionic silver in a Petri dish may be interesting but
it
> > > >has nothing what so ever to do with how it will behave inside the
human
> > > >body. All such studies fail to ever mention that fact, and in fact
> leave
> > >the
> > > >reader with the false impression that it would work just as well
inside
> the
> > > >body. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
> > >
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Catherine
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ----
>
>
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 1/21/03
> >
>
>
> --
> 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]>
>
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 1/21/03
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 1/21/03
