The information below is very interesting indeed.  However, I can not
help but wonder whether the apparently higher efficacy of the new-method
CS was in fact merely coincidental,  a result of the new CS being taken
at a time when the virus was vulnerable,  and further at a time
following the use of "ordinary" CS which had rendered the virus much
weaker.  

>From the information provided,  it seems difficult to exclude this
possibility.  If there is a way to exclude this interpretation, it would
be good to know.   


JBB




Mike Monett wrote:
> 
> url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60357.html
> Re: CS>Re: Nebulizing CS for SARS Redux
> From: C Creel
> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 17:32:04
> 
>   > Dear Mike,
> 
>   [...]
> 
>   > I became involved with this group and actually had the opportunity
>   > to present  CS to them during a conference call. At that  time, my
>   > thoughts were running along the lines of nebulizing.
> 
>   > Since then,  they've considered oral (very difficult  because most
>   > patients are  too ill to drink) and IV. They are  really skeptical
>   > about the  latter  because I can't  produce  enough  material that
>   > speaks of efficacy with this.
> 
>   > Thanks for your input, Mike.
> 
>   > Regards,
>   > Catherine
> 
>   Perhaps this may help give some more documentation that is needed.
> 
>   I was  in  a  severe mold  environment  that  compromised  my immune
>   system. Previous  to this, I never had reason to visit  doctors, was
>   never hospitalized, and any injury healed very quickly.
> 
>   It took a long time to realize the effects the mold was having on my
>   body. By then it was too late.
> 
>   One of the effects is I got Shingles.
> 
>   Shingles is  due  to the chickenpox virus eveyone  has  as  a child.
>   Medicine has  no cure against it. The remedies that  are recommended
>   have serious side effects.
> 
>   About 20  percent of the population of my age gets Shingles,  but it
>   is unheard  of in my family. I am the only one  to  have experienced
>   it.
> 
>   I started  taking  cs  as soon as I found what it  was.  I  posted a
>   detailed report (warning - unpleasant photos)
> 
>     http://www.geocities.com/mrmonett/shingles/0shin.htm
> 
>   (Since then, Yahoo bought Geocities and my password no longer works.
>   I cannot update that page.)
> 
>   The cs  that I made was effective against the Shingles. But  it came
>   back.
> 
>   This is  not   unusual,   especially   when   the  immune  system is
>   compromised.
> 
>   The cs  that I made according to the specifications on  my  web page
>   no longer had any effect.
> 
>   I increased the dosage by increasing the brew time to 1 hr,  then to
>   1.5 hr. The Shingles remained. The scabs would not go away,  and the
>   infection sites were very painful.
> 
>   In conjunction with another project, I tried three different methods
>   of stirring.  My  motivation was to reduce the  need  for constantly
>   cleaning the electrodes and the the glass that held the cs.
> 
>   To my surprise, the Shingles got worse. The scabs  started bleeding,
>   which never happened before, and the cavities in my teeth  hurt much
>   sooner. This  cs lasted only several hours before  another  dose was
>   needed.
> 
>   A friend who moved in with me around the same time reported the same
>   result on  her cavities. Stirring did not work for her either,  so I
>   abandoned stirring.
> 
>   However, her  family lives in Moldavia. She knew what  cs  could do,
>   and she wanted to send a cs generator to her brother.
> 
>   The 160VDC system described on my web page would not be  suitable. I
>   started looking for a simple low voltage system, perhaps running off
>   a single 9V battery.
> 
>   If it could be made to work, there are many ways to get power. A 12V
>   car battery  would work, a standard Wallwart power  supply,  or even
>   used 1.5V  alkalines from a boombox. I posted my goals to  the list,
>   then started working on the problem on a Thursday.
> 
>   The challenge  was  to  figure   out   how  to  get  enough Coulombs
>   transferred from a low voltage supply in a reasonable time.
> 
>   The solution  was to increase the wetted area by folding  the  12 ga
>   wire into  a  "W",  then finding  the  series  resistance  needed to
>   approximate a constant current source. I can show the  equations and
>   derivations needed  in a separate post, but it is  not  important to
>   this topic.
> 
>   I made  a  great  deal of black and  gray  sludge  that  weekend. By
>   Monday, I  finally figured out what was happening with the  mist and
>   the invisible ion cloud. My interpretation of the ion  cloud density
>   is posted in other ULVDC threads.
> 
>   But the astonishing thing was the first trial of the new cs.
> 
>   I am  sceptical  of  anything new, and did not  gulp  it  down  as I
>   normally do. The first test was only a mouthfull on that Monday.
> 
>   The following  Wednesday,  the  Shingles   scabs  fell  off.  I have
>   reported this in other ULVDC posts.
> 
>   I cannot tell you how surprised I was.
> 
>   Now, the  Shingles  scabs  are gone, the  cavities  are  silent, and
>   nobody has cold sores anymore.
> 
>   According to  references in a previous post, cold sores  are easiest
>   to kill,  Herpes genital viruses are next, and Shingles  viruses are
>   the most difficult. The cs made at 87 uA/sq. in killed the Shingles.
> 
>   If these  things  were  not true, and stirring  worked,  I  would be
>   promoting stirring and analyzing which method worked the best.
> 
>   But none of these methods worked against the viruses we faced.  I do
>   not know  why, and you know I am capable of  taking  accurate enough
>   measurements of my process to tell if there was any change.
> 
>   I believe  the  difference between running at 1.4 mA/sq.  in  and 87
>   uA/sq. in.  is that fewer particles are generated and more  ions are
>   available to kill viruses.
> 
>   I would be happy to supply the derivations and detailed calculations
>   if you like.
> 
>   And I hope this information is useful to document the effects  of cs
>   on different viruses.
> 
>   I feel  the  current  density used to make the  cs  is  crucial, and
>   nobody else  runs at densities this low. But once it  is  made, very
>   little is needed to have a significant effect.
> 
>   I believe this would help you in your goal.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Mike Monett
> 
> --
> 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]>