On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 05:50, M. G. Devour wrote: > > I don't own a copy of Walker's book, though I think it was one of the > ones I read a year or two back (from the library) when I was getting > familiar with DMSO. > > So, does the book give actual journal references to back up the claims? > Anybody actually *looked* to see? Called them up on Medline or ordered > the journals up via inter-library loan? It might require some work, > since most of the "good stuff" is likely to date from before the FDA > got stupid about it.
Yes it does have actual journal references for many of the reports. He does not exclude reports by private correspondance due to the nature of DMSO research many clinicians were reluctant to attach their names to the results and stated the anecdotal nature of the reports from the outset. I have checked on line sources such as Medline and Pub Med. There are articles listed but no abstracts. I have not gone to the medical library or ordered these journal articles yet. I am an hour away from that particlular library and have not had a day to look up journal citations in many months. Rest assured I will get to it, probably in the very near future and will post what I find. > > Apart from that, I expect that most of us have outgrown our insistence > on double-blind controlled studies on statistically significant > populations. If that were the only trustworthy standard we might as > well close down this list right now and give up on colloidal silver... > 'Cause there just aren't many people in the world willing to shell out > many millions of dollars to "prove" that CS does what we all know that > it does. While I have respect for double blind studies I am much more inclined to put the most faith in my own personal experience. Generally I start there and then look for validation in others experiences and in journal articles. However the journal articles often lag behind the personal experiences by many years and in some cases hundreds of years. Strictly speaking science is observation and requires no double blind studies. If it did we would be tossing thousands of accepted medical precepts accumulated over centuries of observation. > > Given the way DMSO has been treated by our government, it would hardly > surprise me that few large scale studies have been done in this country > over the last 40 years since the FDA squashed it. I do wonder about > activity in other countries, however... Part of the problem with viral studies is in defining dead and alive. In rereading Goodman and Gilman's section on anti-viral agents in becomes clear that this line is not clear when it comes to viruses. Terms used in reference to viral affects are not "dead" or "kill", they are "inhibit", "uncoat", intereferes with viral replication through affects on the RNA or DNA processes and structures and similar descriptions of activity. It becomes clear that the issue of virucidal as regards any anti-viral agent is as much a matter of semantics and definition of terms as it is of actual demonstration of effects. DMSO is known to uncoat viruses. It is also known to stop viral symptoms. It would appear this is as close as anyone is going to get in defining its action against virues. And is a widely accepted level of knowledge from which to go forth with therapeutic applications in the absence of toxicity. DMSO has zero toxicity in therapeutic applications and indeed requires inhalation of vapors upon boiling to some 370* or consumption of 40,000 times the therapeutic dose, a highly unlikely occurence. It has one of the safest therapeutic indexes (Therapeutic Dose divided by the Lethal Dose in 50%) of any agent out there. Stedman's Medical Dictionary 22nd Ed defines virucidal and viricidal as "destructive to a virus". With this definition in mind as well as the terminology used by the standard in Clinical Therapeutics, Goodman and Gilman, I believe the issue of discussing DMSO's ability to kill viruses in vivo (in the body) is hampered by the current concepts of alive or dead formed from knowledge of other life forms. I would also remind those with high levels of curiosity as to the mechansims of action of DMSO that many agents are still a mystery to us. That does not stop use from using them for situations where we get positive results. I stated that DMSO kills viruses. I stand by that statement. Garnet -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: [email protected] Silver List archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected] OT Archive: http://escribe.com/health/silverofftopiclist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
