Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

[Guest guest]

CS may kill bugs in several different ways. I do not see any evidence that CS

causes encysting of lyme. In fact, I am confident in saying it does not cause

encysting of lyme.

~

>

> I have had a bit of success over the last few weeks using colloidal silver. I

noticed a difference literally after the first 2 doses. My main symptoms still

persist and are relatively unchanged but my immune system just feels a lot

stronger. I used to feel 'ill' and 'fluey' very very easily. Am I right in

thinking that this is probably the CS inhibiting viruses? You can't make that

much progress on the bacterial load so quickly?

>

> I have read (I think in one of Rosner's books) that ALL antibiotics

(pharmaceutical, herbs, etc) will activate the spirochete defense mechanism and

they will convert to cysts so they are unharmed by the antibiotics. Does anyone

know if this is the case with CS? I don't know the exact mechanism by which it

works but understand that it disabless the bacterial enzyme which the bacteria

use to utilise oxygen. Or something like that???

>

> We have ordered a rife machine which should hopefully be here within a week. I

would like to use the CS along with the rife as I have noticed a big benefit

from it but not if I'm going to be converting everything to cysts? Or is CS

effective against cysts?

>

> Anyone else had any experience with CS?

>

> Thanks everyone

>

> (Debra's son)

>

[Guest guest]

CS may kill bugs in several different ways. I do not see any evidence that CS

causes encysting of lyme. In fact, I am confident in saying it does not cause

encysting of lyme.

~

>

> I have had a bit of success over the last few weeks using colloidal silver. I

noticed a difference literally after the first 2 doses. My main symptoms still

persist and are relatively unchanged but my immune system just feels a lot

stronger. I used to feel 'ill' and 'fluey' very very easily. Am I right in

thinking that this is probably the CS inhibiting viruses? You can't make that

much progress on the bacterial load so quickly?

>

> I have read (I think in one of Rosner's books) that ALL antibiotics

(pharmaceutical, herbs, etc) will activate the spirochete defense mechanism and

they will convert to cysts so they are unharmed by the antibiotics. Does anyone

know if this is the case with CS? I don't know the exact mechanism by which it

works but understand that it disabless the bacterial enzyme which the bacteria

use to utilise oxygen. Or something like that???

>

> We have ordered a rife machine which should hopefully be here within a week. I

would like to use the CS along with the rife as I have noticed a big benefit

from it but not if I'm going to be converting everything to cysts? Or is CS

effective against cysts?

>

> Anyone else had any experience with CS?

>

> Thanks everyone

>

> (Debra's son)

>

[Guest guest]

Well, sorry but I must disagree. I think CS can encyst Lyme and should be pulsed like all other abx.I think one good measure of encysting is if you start feeling too good too soon.  If something is consistently killing Lyme over a long period of time you should continue to herx.

Just my two cents,

 

CS may kill bugs in several different ways. I do not see any evidence that CS causes encysting of lyme. In fact, I am confident in saying it does not cause encysting of lyme.

~

>

> I have had a bit of success over the last few weeks using colloidal silver. I noticed a difference literally after the first 2 doses. My main symptoms still persist and are relatively unchanged but my immune system just feels a lot stronger. I used to feel 'ill' and 'fluey' very very easily. Am I right in thinking that this is probably the CS inhibiting viruses? You can't make that much progress on the bacterial load so quickly?

>

> I have read (I think in one of Rosner's books) that ALL antibiotics (pharmaceutical, herbs, etc) will activate the spirochete defense mechanism and they will convert to cysts so they are unharmed by the antibiotics. Does anyone know if this is the case with CS? I don't know the exact mechanism by which it works but understand that it disabless the bacterial enzyme which the bacteria use to utilise oxygen. Or something like that???

>

> We have ordered a rife machine which should hopefully be here within a week. I would like to use the CS along with the rife as I have noticed a big benefit from it but not if I'm going to be converting everything to cysts? Or is CS effective against cysts?

>

> Anyone else had any experience with CS?

>

> Thanks everyone

>

> (Debra's son)

>

[Guest guest]

With regard to saying all pharma abx cause encysting, he doesn't say that.

He says cell wall inhibitors run that risk. And that protein synthesis

inhibitors or cyst busters are preferable because of this.

About CS, also says:

" Of all the antibiotics discussed in this book, including pharmaceutical and

non-pharmaceutical, CS has the largest number of successful user reports. In

any antibiotic out there is capable of successfully fighting Lyme Disease, CS is

probably it. "

Rosner

From " When Antibiotics Fail: Lyme Disease and Rife Machines "

Also about CS, is that it kills in several different ways. And NONE of these

are equivalent to the way cell wall inhibiting drugs work. Cell wall inhibitors

stop bacteria from making cell walls. CS literally and instantly rips a hole in

the cell wall on contact. These mechanisms are not at all alike and an analogy

cannot be made.

Also, over on the DP100 group, there are dozens of people using CS. I could be

wrong, but I haven't heard any info that indicated it even might be causing

encysting.

~

> > >

> > > I have had a bit of success over the last few weeks using colloidal

> > silver. I noticed a difference literally after the first 2 doses. My main

> > symptoms still persist and are relatively unchanged but my immune system

> > just feels a lot stronger. I used to feel 'ill' and 'fluey' very very

> > easily. Am I right in thinking that this is probably the CS inhibiting

> > viruses? You can't make that much progress on the bacterial load so quickly?

> > >

> > > I have read (I think in one of Rosner's books) that ALL antibiotics

> > (pharmaceutical, herbs, etc) will activate the spirochete defense mechanism

> > and they will convert to cysts so they are unharmed by the antibiotics. Does

> > anyone know if this is the case with CS? I don't know the exact mechanism by

> > which it works but understand that it disabless the bacterial enzyme which

> > the bacteria use to utilise oxygen. Or something like that???

> > >

> > > We have ordered a rife machine which should hopefully be here within a

> > week. I would like to use the CS along with the rife as I have noticed a big

> > benefit from it but not if I'm going to be converting everything to cysts?

> > Or is CS effective against cysts?

> > >

> > > Anyone else had any experience with CS?

> > >

> > > Thanks everyone

> > >

> > > (Debra's son)

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

It is believed that since CS is a foreign substance and does poison the spiro's

environment

that it most likely causes encysting... Lymies should use CS for short

periods...

You could use MMS instead, since this already is found in the body, it is

believed it doesn't

cause encysting. You can not use MMS and CS together as you will waist the MMS

as it

oxidizes heavy metals of which CS is and much of the MMS will be spent oxidizig

it..

Take care,

Jim

>

> I have had a bit of success over the last few weeks using colloidal silver. I

noticed a difference literally after the first 2 doses. My main symptoms still

persist and are relatively unchanged but my immune system just feels a lot

stronger. I used to feel 'ill' and 'fluey' very very easily. Am I right in

thinking that this is probably the CS inhibiting viruses? You can't make that

much progress on the bacterial load so quickly?

>

> I have read (I think in one of Rosner's books) that ALL antibiotics

(pharmaceutical, herbs, etc) will activate the spirochete defense mechanism and

they will convert to cysts so they are unharmed by the antibiotics. Does anyone

know if this is the case with CS? I don't know the exact mechanism by which it

works but understand that it disabless the bacterial enzyme which the bacteria

use to utilise oxygen. Or something like that???

>

> We have ordered a rife machine which should hopefully be here within a week. I

would like to use the CS along with the rife as I have noticed a big benefit

from it but not if I'm going to be converting everything to cysts? Or is CS

effective against cysts?

>

> Anyone else had any experience with CS?

>

> Thanks everyone

>

> (Debra's son)

>

[Guest guest]

Hey Whitney,

I PMed you two messages.

~

> > > > >

> > > > > I have had a bit of success over the last few weeks using colloidal

> > > > silver. I noticed a difference literally after the first 2 doses. My

> > main

> > > > symptoms still persist and are relatively unchanged but my immune

> > system

> > > > just feels a lot stronger. I used to feel 'ill' and 'fluey' very very

> > > > easily. Am I right in thinking that this is probably the CS inhibiting

> > > > viruses? You can't make that much progress on the bacterial load so

> > quickly?

> > > > >

> > > > > I have read (I think in one of Rosner's books) that ALL

> > antibiotics

> > > > (pharmaceutical, herbs, etc) will activate the spirochete defense

> > mechanism

> > > > and they will convert to cysts so they are unharmed by the antibiotics.

> > Does

> > > > anyone know if this is the case with CS? I don't know the exact

> > mechanism by

> > > > which it works but understand that it disabless the bacterial enzyme

> > which

> > > > the bacteria use to utilise oxygen. Or something like that???

> > > > >

> > > > > We have ordered a rife machine which should hopefully be here within

> > a

> > > > week. I would like to use the CS along with the rife as I have noticed

> > a big

> > > > benefit from it but not if I'm going to be converting everything to

> > cysts?

> > > > Or is CS effective against cysts?

> > > > >

> > > > > Anyone else had any experience with CS?

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks everyone

> > > > >

> > > > > (Debra's son)

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

> --

> Whitney Schmucker

>

[Guest guest]

Hey Whitney,

I PMed you two messages.

~

> > > > >

> > > > > I have had a bit of success over the last few weeks using colloidal

> > > > silver. I noticed a difference literally after the first 2 doses. My

> > main

> > > > symptoms still persist and are relatively unchanged but my immune

> > system

> > > > just feels a lot stronger. I used to feel 'ill' and 'fluey' very very

> > > > easily. Am I right in thinking that this is probably the CS inhibiting

> > > > viruses? You can't make that much progress on the bacterial load so

> > quickly?

> > > > >

> > > > > I have read (I think in one of Rosner's books) that ALL

> > antibiotics

> > > > (pharmaceutical, herbs, etc) will activate the spirochete defense

> > mechanism

> > > > and they will convert to cysts so they are unharmed by the antibiotics.

> > Does

> > > > anyone know if this is the case with CS? I don't know the exact

> > mechanism by

> > > > which it works but understand that it disabless the bacterial enzyme

> > which

> > > > the bacteria use to utilise oxygen. Or something like that???

> > > > >

> > > > > We have ordered a rife machine which should hopefully be here within

> > a

> > > > week. I would like to use the CS along with the rife as I have noticed

> > a big

> > > > benefit from it but not if I'm going to be converting everything to

> > cysts?

> > > > Or is CS effective against cysts?

> > > > >

> > > > > Anyone else had any experience with CS?

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks everyone

> > > > >

> > > > > (Debra's son)

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

> --

> Whitney Schmucker

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Jim,

I will try to read all this tomorrow and respond after a nights sleep.

~

>

> h

> Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

>

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

>

>

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> Message

> #19857 of 19890 <

> Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> | Next > <http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

>

> Hi ,

>

> Hi Jim,

>

> When I get my CS together I will let people know.

>

> Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly any

> actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was actually

> a

> poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> down

> in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

>

> Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> periods

> of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> It is

> the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> pleasant trip

> and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> in high

> amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> and

> causing problems with the gut?

>

> I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> periods of time, I did

> once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I have

> it under

> control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important especially

> for anyone

> with a chronic illness...

>

> I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> Humble

> says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> people

> generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> the

> same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill gut

> flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> flora.

>

> MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> bacteria,

> only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is the

> mineral

> MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> beneficial

> bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> important to note

> that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> also,

> Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used for

>

> over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> sanitizer

> in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who over

> the years

> discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating what

> he has

> learned from them..

>

> One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides himself

> in bowing

> to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using the

> best

> supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> harm

> good bacteria...

>

> http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

>

> >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

>

> >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that it

> does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> microbes<<<

>

>

> Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> Hypochlorous acid is what our

> immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able to...

> ..

>

>

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

>

> >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> acid<<<<

>

>

>

>

> http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

>

> >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

>

> Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

>

> Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and processing

> the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate reductase

> enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger oxidizing

> agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> pathogen dies.

>

> Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> chlorite. Therefore,

> the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme systems,

> and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

>

> And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know a

> lot about it...

>

>

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

>

> >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine dioxide,

> a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might exist

> in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not have

> the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system is

> what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

>

>

> Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I see

> it:

> 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> or

> less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration, " PPM " )

>

> 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> evaluable

> qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> distribution " .

>

> Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic about

> it

> compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

>

> Here's what he says about the size of CS:

>

> http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

>

> >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> small. <<<

>

> >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than on

> their concentration.<<<<

>

> There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> said

> earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have not

> seen any evidence of it.

>

> What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low powered

> that

> does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is also

> directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker than

> other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> select

> frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> causing

> encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> initially, but

> at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> group felt the same...

>

> That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> Also,

> I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> success

> of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> borrelia).

>

> If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him. I

> only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> argyria,

> because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it is

> the same guy is referring to.

>

> I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your inbox...

>

> Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> day

> to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> invest

> in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

>

> I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one of

> the best

> made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands seem

> to have the smallest particle sizes..

>

> About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> huge

> success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> things

> to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300 is

> the

> best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> machines is very very small.

>

> Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> good

> protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple contact

> machine.

> I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced it!

>

> In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90 watt

> AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> machines

> thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would be

> my choices...

> Most of the members of our group own air machines...

>

> Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has to

> do

> with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> neither

> one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> not.

> Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> hypothesis only.

>

> Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> from Lyme for years, not working

> and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> her DP machine

> and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about anything

> will take a person

> to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not impressed

> at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> from Lyme... So the intensity

> of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> successful any

> treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> for many years starts to

> improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's group,

> he was very disabled from

> Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a double

> tube EMEM

> and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> when from being

> very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> success story, this was in 2006

> and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> well...

>

> And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got these

> folks to good health, if so,

> is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad... And

> of course the question

> several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> other machine better,

> then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> about this...

>

>

> Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red blood

> cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the 99th

> percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> much

> at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> RELATIVE

> TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW UP

> IN

> THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!! That

> is

> in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

>

> True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> also does

> not say anything about it being safe!

>

> click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> Chart "

> and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily dose.

> I checked

> mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> from that

> other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> and for

> way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> does this also

> mean there are unsafe levels?

>

> http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

>

> You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> others...

> If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> But

> if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is not

> a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have to

> be

> pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> others...

> I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to whether

> this is safe or not...

>

> Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> in

> his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is 66%

> eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> exactly

> came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may not

> pertain to everyone...

>

> Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> of

> reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> they

> did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> and

> they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> proper

> use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> of time,

> such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> quart

> of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> pint to a

> a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

>

> CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

>

> Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered the

> most

> effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most, then

> converts

> to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and it

> doesn't

> kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a heavy

> metal... :-)

>

> ~

>

> Jim

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Jim,

I will try to read all this tomorrow and respond after a nights sleep.

~

>

> h

> Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

>

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

>

>

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> Message

> #19857 of 19890 <

> Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> | Next > <http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

>

> Hi ,

>

> Hi Jim,

>

> When I get my CS together I will let people know.

>

> Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly any

> actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was actually

> a

> poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> down

> in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

>

> Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> periods

> of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> It is

> the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> pleasant trip

> and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> in high

> amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> and

> causing problems with the gut?

>

> I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> periods of time, I did

> once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I have

> it under

> control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important especially

> for anyone

> with a chronic illness...

>

> I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> Humble

> says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> people

> generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> the

> same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill gut

> flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> flora.

>

> MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> bacteria,

> only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is the

> mineral

> MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> beneficial

> bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> important to note

> that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> also,

> Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used for

>

> over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> sanitizer

> in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who over

> the years

> discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating what

> he has

> learned from them..

>

> One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides himself

> in bowing

> to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using the

> best

> supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> harm

> good bacteria...

>

> http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

>

> >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

>

> >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that it

> does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> microbes<<<

>

>

> Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> Hypochlorous acid is what our

> immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able to...

> ..

>

>

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

>

> >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> acid<<<<

>

>

>

>

> http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

>

> >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

>

> Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

>

> Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and processing

> the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate reductase

> enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger oxidizing

> agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> pathogen dies.

>

> Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> chlorite. Therefore,

> the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme systems,

> and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

>

> And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know a

> lot about it...

>

>

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

>

> >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine dioxide,

> a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might exist

> in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not have

> the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system is

> what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

>

>

> Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I see

> it:

> 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> or

> less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration, " PPM " )

>

> 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> evaluable

> qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> distribution " .

>

> Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic about

> it

> compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

>

> Here's what he says about the size of CS:

>

> http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

>

> >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> small. <<<

>

> >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than on

> their concentration.<<<<

>

> There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> said

> earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have not

> seen any evidence of it.

>

> What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low powered

> that

> does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is also

> directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker than

> other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> select

> frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> causing

> encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> initially, but

> at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> group felt the same...

>

> That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> Also,

> I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> success

> of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> borrelia).

>

> If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him. I

> only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> argyria,

> because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it is

> the same guy is referring to.

>

> I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your inbox...

>

> Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> day

> to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> invest

> in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

>

> I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one of

> the best

> made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands seem

> to have the smallest particle sizes..

>

> About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> huge

> success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> things

> to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300 is

> the

> best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> machines is very very small.

>

> Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> good

> protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple contact

> machine.

> I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced it!

>

> In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90 watt

> AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> machines

> thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would be

> my choices...

> Most of the members of our group own air machines...

>

> Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has to

> do

> with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> neither

> one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> not.

> Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> hypothesis only.

>

> Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> from Lyme for years, not working

> and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> her DP machine

> and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about anything

> will take a person

> to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not impressed

> at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> from Lyme... So the intensity

> of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> successful any

> treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> for many years starts to

> improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's group,

> he was very disabled from

> Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a double

> tube EMEM

> and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> when from being

> very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> success story, this was in 2006

> and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> well...

>

> And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got these

> folks to good health, if so,

> is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad... And

> of course the question

> several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> other machine better,

> then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> about this...

>

>

> Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red blood

> cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the 99th

> percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> much

> at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> RELATIVE

> TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW UP

> IN

> THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!! That

> is

> in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

>

> True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> also does

> not say anything about it being safe!

>

> click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> Chart "

> and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily dose.

> I checked

> mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> from that

> other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> and for

> way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> does this also

> mean there are unsafe levels?

>

> http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

>

> You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> others...

> If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> But

> if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is not

> a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have to

> be

> pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> others...

> I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to whether

> this is safe or not...

>

> Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> in

> his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is 66%

> eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> exactly

> came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may not

> pertain to everyone...

>

> Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> of

> reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> they

> did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> and

> they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> proper

> use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> of time,

> such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> quart

> of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> pint to a

> a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

>

> CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

>

> Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered the

> most

> effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most, then

> converts

> to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and it

> doesn't

> kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a heavy

> metal... :-)

>

> ~

>

> Jim

>

[Guest guest]

I would like to chime in here. In the other group, the members who had

purchased the DP100 and were using it with Colloidal Silver were reporting

symptoms abating within several weeks. As a person who has never done any abx,

colloidal silver and minimal herbal abx, and more then 6 years of treating this

disease with rife, I don't know of any rife machine that could claim to make

Lyme symptoms disappear in a matter of weeks. I have used many different Rife

machines over the course of my treatment. I started with a small unit similar

to the KMT that Dr. Klinghart recommends called the LifeForce 2000. After 6

months of herxing and not seeing a lot of improvement, I switched to a Dan

EMEM. After a year on the EMEM, I got tired of the fact that it was not a

programmable unit, so I bought an Atelier Robin frequency generator to drive my

EMEM. After another year of treating with the EMEM. I quit herxing, but

plateaued and wasn't entirely well. I then bought a coil machine and after a

year and a half using it, I am now nearly past lyme, though my Mycoplasma load

is pretty strong. I bought a GB4000 to take with me to Mexico when I travel

down to visit my homeopath/doctor. The point of all of this is that with all of

my experience using many different machines, I have never found one that would

eliminate symptoms so rapidly as those using the DP100 claim. This leads me to

conclude that the Colloidal Silver was indeed encysting the disease, which

obviously would cause a lessening of symptoms.

> >

> > h

> > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> >

> >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > Message

> > #19857 of 19890 <

> > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > | Next > <http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> >

> > Hi ,

> >

> > Hi Jim,

> >

> > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> >

> > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly any

> > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was actually

> > a

> > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> > down

> > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> >

> > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > periods

> > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> > It is

> > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > pleasant trip

> > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> > in high

> > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> > and

> > causing problems with the gut?

> >

> > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > periods of time, I did

> > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I have

> > it under

> > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important especially

> > for anyone

> > with a chronic illness...

> >

> > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > Humble

> > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > people

> > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> > the

> > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill gut

> > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > flora.

> >

> > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > bacteria,

> > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is the

> > mineral

> > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > beneficial

> > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > important to note

> > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> > also,

> > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used for

> >

> > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > sanitizer

> > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who over

> > the years

> > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating what

> > he has

> > learned from them..

> >

> > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides himself

> > in bowing

> > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using the

> > best

> > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> > harm

> > good bacteria...

> >

> > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> >

> > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> >

> > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that it

> > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > microbes<<<

> >

> >

> > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able to...

> > ..

> >

> >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> >

> > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > acid<<<<

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> >

> > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> >

> > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> >

> > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and processing

> > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate reductase

> > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger oxidizing

> > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > pathogen dies.

> >

> > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > chlorite. Therefore,

> > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme systems,

> > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> >

> > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know a

> > lot about it...

> >

> >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> >

> > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine dioxide,

> > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might exist

> > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not have

> > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system is

> > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> >

> >

> > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I see

> > it:

> > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> > or

> > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration, " PPM " )

> >

> > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > evaluable

> > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > distribution " .

> >

> > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic about

> > it

> > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> >

> > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> >

> > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> >

> > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> > small. <<<

> >

> > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than on

> > their concentration.<<<<

> >

> > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > said

> > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have not

> > seen any evidence of it.

> >

> > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low powered

> > that

> > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is also

> > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker than

> > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > select

> > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > causing

> > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > initially, but

> > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > group felt the same...

> >

> > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > Also,

> > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > success

> > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > borrelia).

> >

> > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him. I

> > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > argyria,

> > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it is

> > the same guy is referring to.

> >

> > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your inbox...

> >

> > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> > day

> > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > invest

> > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> >

> > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one of

> > the best

> > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands seem

> > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> >

> > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> > huge

> > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > things

> > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300 is

> > the

> > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> > machines is very very small.

> >

> > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > good

> > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple contact

> > machine.

> > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced it!

> >

> > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90 watt

> > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > machines

> > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would be

> > my choices...

> > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> >

> > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has to

> > do

> > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > neither

> > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> > not.

> > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > hypothesis only.

> >

> > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> > from Lyme for years, not working

> > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> > her DP machine

> > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about anything

> > will take a person

> > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not impressed

> > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> > successful any

> > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> > for many years starts to

> > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's group,

> > he was very disabled from

> > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a double

> > tube EMEM

> > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> > when from being

> > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > success story, this was in 2006

> > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> > well...

> >

> > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got these

> > folks to good health, if so,

> > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad... And

> > of course the question

> > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> > other machine better,

> > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > about this...

> >

> >

> > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red blood

> > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the 99th

> > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> > much

> > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > RELATIVE

> > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW UP

> > IN

> > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!! That

> > is

> > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> >

> > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> > also does

> > not say anything about it being safe!

> >

> > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> > Chart "

> > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily dose.

> > I checked

> > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> > from that

> > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> > and for

> > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> > does this also

> > mean there are unsafe levels?

> >

> > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> >

> > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> > others...

> > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> > But

> > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is not

> > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have to

> > be

> > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > others...

> > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to whether

> > this is safe or not...

> >

> > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> > in

> > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is 66%

> > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > exactly

> > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may not

> > pertain to everyone...

> >

> > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> > of

> > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> > they

> > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> > and

> > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > proper

> > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> > of time,

> > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > quart

> > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> > pint to a

> > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> >

> > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> >

> > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered the

> > most

> > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most, then

> > converts

> > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and it

> > doesn't

> > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a heavy

> > metal... :-)

> >

> > ~

> >

> > Jim

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I would like to chime in here. In the other group, the members who had

purchased the DP100 and were using it with Colloidal Silver were reporting

symptoms abating within several weeks. As a person who has never done any abx,

colloidal silver and minimal herbal abx, and more then 6 years of treating this

disease with rife, I don't know of any rife machine that could claim to make

Lyme symptoms disappear in a matter of weeks. I have used many different Rife

machines over the course of my treatment. I started with a small unit similar

to the KMT that Dr. Klinghart recommends called the LifeForce 2000. After 6

months of herxing and not seeing a lot of improvement, I switched to a Dan

EMEM. After a year on the EMEM, I got tired of the fact that it was not a

programmable unit, so I bought an Atelier Robin frequency generator to drive my

EMEM. After another year of treating with the EMEM. I quit herxing, but

plateaued and wasn't entirely well. I then bought a coil machine and after a

year and a half using it, I am now nearly past lyme, though my Mycoplasma load

is pretty strong. I bought a GB4000 to take with me to Mexico when I travel

down to visit my homeopath/doctor. The point of all of this is that with all of

my experience using many different machines, I have never found one that would

eliminate symptoms so rapidly as those using the DP100 claim. This leads me to

conclude that the Colloidal Silver was indeed encysting the disease, which

obviously would cause a lessening of symptoms.

> >

> > h

> > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> >

> >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > Message

> > #19857 of 19890 <

> > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > | Next > <http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> >

> > Hi ,

> >

> > Hi Jim,

> >

> > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> >

> > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly any

> > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was actually

> > a

> > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> > down

> > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> >

> > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > periods

> > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> > It is

> > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > pleasant trip

> > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> > in high

> > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> > and

> > causing problems with the gut?

> >

> > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > periods of time, I did

> > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I have

> > it under

> > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important especially

> > for anyone

> > with a chronic illness...

> >

> > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > Humble

> > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > people

> > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> > the

> > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill gut

> > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > flora.

> >

> > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > bacteria,

> > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is the

> > mineral

> > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > beneficial

> > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > important to note

> > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> > also,

> > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used for

> >

> > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > sanitizer

> > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who over

> > the years

> > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating what

> > he has

> > learned from them..

> >

> > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides himself

> > in bowing

> > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using the

> > best

> > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> > harm

> > good bacteria...

> >

> > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> >

> > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> >

> > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that it

> > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > microbes<<<

> >

> >

> > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able to...

> > ..

> >

> >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> >

> > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > acid<<<<

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> >

> > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> >

> > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> >

> > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and processing

> > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate reductase

> > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger oxidizing

> > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > pathogen dies.

> >

> > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > chlorite. Therefore,

> > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme systems,

> > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> >

> > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know a

> > lot about it...

> >

> >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> >

> > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine dioxide,

> > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might exist

> > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not have

> > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system is

> > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> >

> >

> > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I see

> > it:

> > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> > or

> > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration, " PPM " )

> >

> > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > evaluable

> > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > distribution " .

> >

> > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic about

> > it

> > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> >

> > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> >

> > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> >

> > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> > small. <<<

> >

> > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than on

> > their concentration.<<<<

> >

> > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > said

> > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have not

> > seen any evidence of it.

> >

> > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low powered

> > that

> > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is also

> > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker than

> > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > select

> > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > causing

> > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > initially, but

> > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > group felt the same...

> >

> > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > Also,

> > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > success

> > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > borrelia).

> >

> > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him. I

> > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > argyria,

> > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it is

> > the same guy is referring to.

> >

> > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your inbox...

> >

> > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> > day

> > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > invest

> > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> >

> > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one of

> > the best

> > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands seem

> > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> >

> > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> > huge

> > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > things

> > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300 is

> > the

> > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> > machines is very very small.

> >

> > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > good

> > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple contact

> > machine.

> > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced it!

> >

> > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90 watt

> > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > machines

> > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would be

> > my choices...

> > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> >

> > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has to

> > do

> > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > neither

> > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> > not.

> > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > hypothesis only.

> >

> > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> > from Lyme for years, not working

> > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> > her DP machine

> > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about anything

> > will take a person

> > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not impressed

> > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> > successful any

> > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> > for many years starts to

> > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's group,

> > he was very disabled from

> > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a double

> > tube EMEM

> > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> > when from being

> > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > success story, this was in 2006

> > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> > well...

> >

> > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got these

> > folks to good health, if so,

> > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad... And

> > of course the question

> > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> > other machine better,

> > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > about this...

> >

> >

> > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red blood

> > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the 99th

> > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> > much

> > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > RELATIVE

> > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW UP

> > IN

> > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!! That

> > is

> > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> >

> > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> > also does

> > not say anything about it being safe!

> >

> > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> > Chart "

> > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily dose.

> > I checked

> > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> > from that

> > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> > and for

> > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> > does this also

> > mean there are unsafe levels?

> >

> > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> >

> > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> > others...

> > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> > But

> > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is not

> > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have to

> > be

> > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > others...

> > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to whether

> > this is safe or not...

> >

> > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> > in

> > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is 66%

> > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > exactly

> > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may not

> > pertain to everyone...

> >

> > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> > of

> > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> > they

> > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> > and

> > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > proper

> > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> > of time,

> > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > quart

> > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> > pint to a

> > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> >

> > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> >

> > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered the

> > most

> > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most, then

> > converts

> > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and it

> > doesn't

> > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a heavy

> > metal... :-)

> >

> > ~

> >

> > Jim

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I would like to chime in here. In the other group, the members who had

purchased the DP100 and were using it with Colloidal Silver were reporting

symptoms abating within several weeks. As a person who has never done any abx,

colloidal silver and minimal herbal abx, and more then 6 years of treating this

disease with rife, I don't know of any rife machine that could claim to make

Lyme symptoms disappear in a matter of weeks. I have used many different Rife

machines over the course of my treatment. I started with a small unit similar

to the KMT that Dr. Klinghart recommends called the LifeForce 2000. After 6

months of herxing and not seeing a lot of improvement, I switched to a Dan

EMEM. After a year on the EMEM, I got tired of the fact that it was not a

programmable unit, so I bought an Atelier Robin frequency generator to drive my

EMEM. After another year of treating with the EMEM. I quit herxing, but

plateaued and wasn't entirely well. I then bought a coil machine and after a

year and a half using it, I am now nearly past lyme, though my Mycoplasma load

is pretty strong. I bought a GB4000 to take with me to Mexico when I travel

down to visit my homeopath/doctor. The point of all of this is that with all of

my experience using many different machines, I have never found one that would

eliminate symptoms so rapidly as those using the DP100 claim. This leads me to

conclude that the Colloidal Silver was indeed encysting the disease, which

obviously would cause a lessening of symptoms.

> >

> > h

> > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> >

> >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > Message

> > #19857 of 19890 <

> > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > | Next > <http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> >

> > Hi ,

> >

> > Hi Jim,

> >

> > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> >

> > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly any

> > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was actually

> > a

> > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> > down

> > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> >

> > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > periods

> > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> > It is

> > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > pleasant trip

> > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> > in high

> > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> > and

> > causing problems with the gut?

> >

> > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > periods of time, I did

> > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I have

> > it under

> > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important especially

> > for anyone

> > with a chronic illness...

> >

> > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > Humble

> > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > people

> > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> > the

> > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill gut

> > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > flora.

> >

> > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > bacteria,

> > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is the

> > mineral

> > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > beneficial

> > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > important to note

> > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> > also,

> > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used for

> >

> > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > sanitizer

> > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who over

> > the years

> > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating what

> > he has

> > learned from them..

> >

> > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides himself

> > in bowing

> > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using the

> > best

> > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> > harm

> > good bacteria...

> >

> > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> >

> > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> >

> > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that it

> > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > microbes<<<

> >

> >

> > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able to...

> > ..

> >

> >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> >

> > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > acid<<<<

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> >

> > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> >

> > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> >

> > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and processing

> > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate reductase

> > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger oxidizing

> > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > pathogen dies.

> >

> > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > chlorite. Therefore,

> > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme systems,

> > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> >

> > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know a

> > lot about it...

> >

> >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> >

> > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine dioxide,

> > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might exist

> > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not have

> > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system is

> > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> >

> >

> > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I see

> > it:

> > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> > or

> > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration, " PPM " )

> >

> > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > evaluable

> > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > distribution " .

> >

> > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic about

> > it

> > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> >

> > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> >

> > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> >

> > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> > small. <<<

> >

> > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than on

> > their concentration.<<<<

> >

> > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > said

> > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have not

> > seen any evidence of it.

> >

> > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low powered

> > that

> > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is also

> > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker than

> > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > select

> > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > causing

> > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > initially, but

> > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > group felt the same...

> >

> > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > Also,

> > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > success

> > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > borrelia).

> >

> > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him. I

> > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > argyria,

> > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it is

> > the same guy is referring to.

> >

> > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your inbox...

> >

> > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> > day

> > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > invest

> > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> >

> > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one of

> > the best

> > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands seem

> > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> >

> > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> > huge

> > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > things

> > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300 is

> > the

> > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> > machines is very very small.

> >

> > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > good

> > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple contact

> > machine.

> > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced it!

> >

> > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90 watt

> > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > machines

> > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would be

> > my choices...

> > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> >

> > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has to

> > do

> > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > neither

> > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> > not.

> > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > hypothesis only.

> >

> > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> > from Lyme for years, not working

> > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> > her DP machine

> > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about anything

> > will take a person

> > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not impressed

> > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> > successful any

> > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> > for many years starts to

> > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's group,

> > he was very disabled from

> > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a double

> > tube EMEM

> > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> > when from being

> > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > success story, this was in 2006

> > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> > well...

> >

> > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got these

> > folks to good health, if so,

> > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad... And

> > of course the question

> > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> > other machine better,

> > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > about this...

> >

> >

> > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red blood

> > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the 99th

> > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> > much

> > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > RELATIVE

> > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW UP

> > IN

> > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!! That

> > is

> > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> >

> > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> > also does

> > not say anything about it being safe!

> >

> > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> > Chart "

> > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily dose.

> > I checked

> > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> > from that

> > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> > and for

> > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> > does this also

> > mean there are unsafe levels?

> >

> > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> >

> > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> > others...

> > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> > But

> > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is not

> > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have to

> > be

> > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > others...

> > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to whether

> > this is safe or not...

> >

> > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> > in

> > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is 66%

> > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > exactly

> > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may not

> > pertain to everyone...

> >

> > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> > of

> > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> > they

> > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> > and

> > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > proper

> > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> > of time,

> > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > quart

> > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> > pint to a

> > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> >

> > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> >

> > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered the

> > most

> > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most, then

> > converts

> > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and it

> > doesn't

> > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a heavy

> > metal... :-)

> >

> > ~

> >

> > Jim

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I would like to chime in here. In the other group, the members who had

purchased the DP100 and were using it with Colloidal Silver were reporting

symptoms abating within several weeks. As a person who has never done any abx,

colloidal silver and minimal herbal abx, and more then 6 years of treating this

disease with rife, I don't know of any rife machine that could claim to make

Lyme symptoms disappear in a matter of weeks. I have used many different Rife

machines over the course of my treatment. I started with a small unit similar

to the KMT that Dr. Klinghart recommends called the LifeForce 2000. After 6

months of herxing and not seeing a lot of improvement, I switched to a Dan

EMEM. After a year on the EMEM, I got tired of the fact that it was not a

programmable unit, so I bought an Atelier Robin frequency generator to drive my

EMEM. After another year of treating with the EMEM. I quit herxing, but

plateaued and wasn't entirely well. I then bought a coil machine and after a

year and a half using it, I am now nearly past lyme, though my Mycoplasma load

is pretty strong. I bought a GB4000 to take with me to Mexico when I travel

down to visit my homeopath/doctor. The point of all of this is that with all of

my experience using many different machines, I have never found one that would

eliminate symptoms so rapidly as those using the DP100 claim. This leads me to

conclude that the Colloidal Silver was indeed encysting the disease, which

obviously would cause a lessening of symptoms.

> >

> > h

> > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> >

> >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > Message

> > #19857 of 19890 <

> > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > | Next > <http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> >

> > Hi ,

> >

> > Hi Jim,

> >

> > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> >

> > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly any

> > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was actually

> > a

> > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> > down

> > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> >

> > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > periods

> > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> > It is

> > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > pleasant trip

> > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> > in high

> > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> > and

> > causing problems with the gut?

> >

> > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > periods of time, I did

> > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I have

> > it under

> > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important especially

> > for anyone

> > with a chronic illness...

> >

> > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > Humble

> > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > people

> > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> > the

> > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill gut

> > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > flora.

> >

> > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > bacteria,

> > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is the

> > mineral

> > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > beneficial

> > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > important to note

> > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> > also,

> > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used for

> >

> > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > sanitizer

> > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who over

> > the years

> > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating what

> > he has

> > learned from them..

> >

> > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides himself

> > in bowing

> > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using the

> > best

> > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> > harm

> > good bacteria...

> >

> > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> >

> > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> >

> > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that it

> > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > microbes<<<

> >

> >

> > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able to...

> > ..

> >

> >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> >

> > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > acid<<<<

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> >

> > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> >

> > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> >

> > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and processing

> > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate reductase

> > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger oxidizing

> > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > pathogen dies.

> >

> > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > chlorite. Therefore,

> > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme systems,

> > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> >

> > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know a

> > lot about it...

> >

> >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> >

> > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine dioxide,

> > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might exist

> > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not have

> > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system is

> > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> >

> >

> > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I see

> > it:

> > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> > or

> > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration, " PPM " )

> >

> > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > evaluable

> > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > distribution " .

> >

> > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic about

> > it

> > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> >

> > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> >

> > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> >

> > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> > small. <<<

> >

> > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than on

> > their concentration.<<<<

> >

> > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > said

> > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have not

> > seen any evidence of it.

> >

> > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low powered

> > that

> > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is also

> > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker than

> > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > select

> > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > causing

> > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > initially, but

> > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > group felt the same...

> >

> > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > Also,

> > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > success

> > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > borrelia).

> >

> > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him. I

> > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > argyria,

> > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it is

> > the same guy is referring to.

> >

> > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your inbox...

> >

> > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> > day

> > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > invest

> > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> >

> > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one of

> > the best

> > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands seem

> > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> >

> > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> > huge

> > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > things

> > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300 is

> > the

> > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> > machines is very very small.

> >

> > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > good

> > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple contact

> > machine.

> > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced it!

> >

> > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90 watt

> > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > machines

> > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would be

> > my choices...

> > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> >

> > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has to

> > do

> > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > neither

> > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> > not.

> > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > hypothesis only.

> >

> > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> > from Lyme for years, not working

> > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> > her DP machine

> > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about anything

> > will take a person

> > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not impressed

> > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> > successful any

> > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> > for many years starts to

> > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's group,

> > he was very disabled from

> > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a double

> > tube EMEM

> > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> > when from being

> > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > success story, this was in 2006

> > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> > well...

> >

> > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got these

> > folks to good health, if so,

> > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad... And

> > of course the question

> > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> > other machine better,

> > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > about this...

> >

> >

> > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red blood

> > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the 99th

> > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> > much

> > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > RELATIVE

> > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW UP

> > IN

> > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!! That

> > is

> > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> >

> > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> > also does

> > not say anything about it being safe!

> >

> > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> > Chart "

> > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily dose.

> > I checked

> > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> > from that

> > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> > and for

> > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> > does this also

> > mean there are unsafe levels?

> >

> > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> >

> > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> > others...

> > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> > But

> > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is not

> > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have to

> > be

> > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > others...

> > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to whether

> > this is safe or not...

> >

> > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> > in

> > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is 66%

> > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > exactly

> > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may not

> > pertain to everyone...

> >

> > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> > of

> > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> > they

> > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> > and

> > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > proper

> > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> > of time,

> > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > quart

> > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> > pint to a

> > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> >

> > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> >

> > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered the

> > most

> > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most, then

> > converts

> > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and it

> > doesn't

> > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a heavy

> > metal... :-)

> >

> > ~

> >

> > Jim

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Again, this is just a handful of cases we are talking about. Herxing is not

necessary to get well, though not herxing is also not necessary to get well. In

Connies Lyme book one practitioner reported 10% of her patients NEVER herx.

I know of one person who cured himself of borrelia with CS. In fact, he is the

only case that exists (as far as I know) of a person who got argyria. He used

6oz a day for 6 years, and he says he is cured of his Lyme still after 10 years.

Nor have any of 's cases come on these forums and reported relapse. And

they were long enough ago by now that at least some of them should have it CS

caused encysting.

As far as I can tell, the only evidence anyone has supplied for CS causing

encysting is 1 or 2 people got well pretty quickly. Geez...no CS success have

reported relapses that I know of.

~

> > >

> > > h

> > > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> > >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> > >

> > >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > > Message

> > > #19857 of 19890 <

> > > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > > | Next >

<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> > >

> > > Hi ,

> > >

> > > Hi Jim,

> > >

> > > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> > >

> > > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly

any

> > > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was

actually

> > > a

> > > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> > > down

> > > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> > >

> > > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > > periods

> > > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> > > It is

> > > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> > > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> > > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > > pleasant trip

> > > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> > > in high

> > > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> > > and

> > > causing problems with the gut?

> > >

> > > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > > periods of time, I did

> > > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I

have

> > > it under

> > > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important

especially

> > > for anyone

> > > with a chronic illness...

> > >

> > > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > > Humble

> > > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > > people

> > > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> > > the

> > > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill

gut

> > > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > > flora.

> > >

> > > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > > bacteria,

> > > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is

the

> > > mineral

> > > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > > beneficial

> > > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> > > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > > important to note

> > > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> > > also,

> > > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used

for

> > >

> > > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > > sanitizer

> > > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who

over

> > > the years

> > > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating

what

> > > he has

> > > learned from them..

> > >

> > > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides

himself

> > > in bowing

> > > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using

the

> > > best

> > > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> > > harm

> > > good bacteria...

> > >

> > > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> > >

> > > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> > >

> > > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that

it

> > > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > > microbes<<<

> > >

> > >

> > > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> > > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able

to...

> > > ..

> > >

> > >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> > >

> > > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > > acid<<<<

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> > >

> > > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> > >

> > > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> > > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> > >

> > > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and

processing

> > > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate

reductase

> > > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger

oxidizing

> > > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > > pathogen dies.

> > >

> > > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > > chlorite. Therefore,

> > > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme

systems,

> > > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> > >

> > > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know

a

> > > lot about it...

> > >

> > >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> > >

> > > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine

dioxide,

> > > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might

exist

> > > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not

have

> > > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system

is

> > > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> > >

> > >

> > > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I

see

> > > it:

> > > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> > > or

> > > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration,

" PPM " )

> > >

> > > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > > evaluable

> > > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> > > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > > distribution " .

> > >

> > > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic

about

> > > it

> > > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> > >

> > > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> > >

> > > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> > >

> > > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> > > small. <<<

> > >

> > > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than

on

> > > their concentration.<<<<

> > >

> > > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > > said

> > > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have

not

> > > seen any evidence of it.

> > >

> > > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low

powered

> > > that

> > > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is

also

> > > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker

than

> > > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > > select

> > > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > > causing

> > > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > > initially, but

> > > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> > > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > > group felt the same...

> > >

> > > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> > > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > > Also,

> > > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > > success

> > > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > > borrelia).

> > >

> > > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him.

I

> > > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> > > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > > argyria,

> > > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it

is

> > > the same guy is referring to.

> > >

> > > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your

inbox...

> > >

> > > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> > > day

> > > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > > invest

> > > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> > >

> > > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one

of

> > > the best

> > > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands

seem

> > > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> > >

> > > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> > > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> > > huge

> > > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > > things

> > > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300

is

> > > the

> > > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> > > machines is very very small.

> > >

> > > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > > good

> > > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple

contact

> > > machine.

> > > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced

it!

> > >

> > > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90

watt

> > > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > > machines

> > > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would

be

> > > my choices...

> > > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> > >

> > > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has

to

> > > do

> > > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> > > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > > neither

> > > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> > > not.

> > > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > > hypothesis only.

> > >

> > > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> > > from Lyme for years, not working

> > > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> > > her DP machine

> > > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about

anything

> > > will take a person

> > > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not

impressed

> > > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> > > successful any

> > > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> > > for many years starts to

> > > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's

group,

> > > he was very disabled from

> > > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a

double

> > > tube EMEM

> > > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> > > when from being

> > > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > > success story, this was in 2006

> > > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> > > well...

> > >

> > > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got

these

> > > folks to good health, if so,

> > > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad...

And

> > > of course the question

> > > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> > > other machine better,

> > > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > > about this...

> > >

> > >

> > > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red

blood

> > > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the

99th

> > > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> > > much

> > > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > > RELATIVE

> > > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW

UP

> > > IN

> > > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> > > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!!

That

> > > is

> > > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> > >

> > > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> > > also does

> > > not say anything about it being safe!

> > >

> > > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> > > Chart "

> > > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily

dose.

> > > I checked

> > > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> > > from that

> > > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> > > and for

> > > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> > > does this also

> > > mean there are unsafe levels?

> > >

> > > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> > >

> > > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> > > others...

> > > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> > > But

> > > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is

not

> > > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have

to

> > > be

> > > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > > others...

> > > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to

whether

> > > this is safe or not...

> > >

> > > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> > > in

> > > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is

66%

> > > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > > exactly

> > > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may

not

> > > pertain to everyone...

> > >

> > > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> > > of

> > > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> > > they

> > > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> > > and

> > > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > > proper

> > > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> > > of time,

> > > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> > > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > > quart

> > > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> > > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> > > pint to a

> > > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> > >

> > > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> > > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> > >

> > > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered

the

> > > most

> > > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most,

then

> > > converts

> > > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and

it

> > > doesn't

> > > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a

heavy

> > > metal... :-)

> > >

> > > ~

> > >

> > > Jim

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Again, this is just a handful of cases we are talking about. Herxing is not

necessary to get well, though not herxing is also not necessary to get well. In

Connies Lyme book one practitioner reported 10% of her patients NEVER herx.

I know of one person who cured himself of borrelia with CS. In fact, he is the

only case that exists (as far as I know) of a person who got argyria. He used

6oz a day for 6 years, and he says he is cured of his Lyme still after 10 years.

Nor have any of 's cases come on these forums and reported relapse. And

they were long enough ago by now that at least some of them should have it CS

caused encysting.

As far as I can tell, the only evidence anyone has supplied for CS causing

encysting is 1 or 2 people got well pretty quickly. Geez...no CS success have

reported relapses that I know of.

~

> > >

> > > h

> > > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> > >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> > >

> > >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > > Message

> > > #19857 of 19890 <

> > > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > > | Next >

<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> > >

> > > Hi ,

> > >

> > > Hi Jim,

> > >

> > > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> > >

> > > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly

any

> > > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was

actually

> > > a

> > > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> > > down

> > > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> > >

> > > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > > periods

> > > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> > > It is

> > > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> > > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> > > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > > pleasant trip

> > > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> > > in high

> > > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> > > and

> > > causing problems with the gut?

> > >

> > > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > > periods of time, I did

> > > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I

have

> > > it under

> > > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important

especially

> > > for anyone

> > > with a chronic illness...

> > >

> > > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > > Humble

> > > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > > people

> > > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> > > the

> > > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill

gut

> > > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > > flora.

> > >

> > > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > > bacteria,

> > > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is

the

> > > mineral

> > > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > > beneficial

> > > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> > > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > > important to note

> > > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> > > also,

> > > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used

for

> > >

> > > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > > sanitizer

> > > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who

over

> > > the years

> > > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating

what

> > > he has

> > > learned from them..

> > >

> > > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides

himself

> > > in bowing

> > > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using

the

> > > best

> > > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> > > harm

> > > good bacteria...

> > >

> > > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> > >

> > > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> > >

> > > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that

it

> > > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > > microbes<<<

> > >

> > >

> > > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> > > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able

to...

> > > ..

> > >

> > >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> > >

> > > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > > acid<<<<

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> > >

> > > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> > >

> > > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> > > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> > >

> > > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and

processing

> > > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate

reductase

> > > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger

oxidizing

> > > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > > pathogen dies.

> > >

> > > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > > chlorite. Therefore,

> > > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme

systems,

> > > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> > >

> > > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know

a

> > > lot about it...

> > >

> > >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> > >

> > > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine

dioxide,

> > > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might

exist

> > > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not

have

> > > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system

is

> > > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> > >

> > >

> > > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I

see

> > > it:

> > > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> > > or

> > > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration,

" PPM " )

> > >

> > > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > > evaluable

> > > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> > > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > > distribution " .

> > >

> > > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic

about

> > > it

> > > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> > >

> > > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> > >

> > > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> > >

> > > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> > > small. <<<

> > >

> > > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than

on

> > > their concentration.<<<<

> > >

> > > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > > said

> > > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have

not

> > > seen any evidence of it.

> > >

> > > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low

powered

> > > that

> > > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is

also

> > > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker

than

> > > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > > select

> > > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > > causing

> > > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > > initially, but

> > > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> > > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > > group felt the same...

> > >

> > > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> > > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > > Also,

> > > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > > success

> > > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > > borrelia).

> > >

> > > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him.

I

> > > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> > > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > > argyria,

> > > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it

is

> > > the same guy is referring to.

> > >

> > > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your

inbox...

> > >

> > > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> > > day

> > > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > > invest

> > > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> > >

> > > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one

of

> > > the best

> > > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands

seem

> > > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> > >

> > > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> > > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> > > huge

> > > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > > things

> > > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300

is

> > > the

> > > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> > > machines is very very small.

> > >

> > > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > > good

> > > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple

contact

> > > machine.

> > > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced

it!

> > >

> > > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90

watt

> > > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > > machines

> > > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would

be

> > > my choices...

> > > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> > >

> > > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has

to

> > > do

> > > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> > > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > > neither

> > > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> > > not.

> > > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > > hypothesis only.

> > >

> > > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> > > from Lyme for years, not working

> > > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> > > her DP machine

> > > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about

anything

> > > will take a person

> > > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not

impressed

> > > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> > > successful any

> > > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> > > for many years starts to

> > > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's

group,

> > > he was very disabled from

> > > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a

double

> > > tube EMEM

> > > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> > > when from being

> > > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > > success story, this was in 2006

> > > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> > > well...

> > >

> > > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got

these

> > > folks to good health, if so,

> > > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad...

And

> > > of course the question

> > > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> > > other machine better,

> > > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > > about this...

> > >

> > >

> > > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red

blood

> > > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the

99th

> > > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> > > much

> > > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > > RELATIVE

> > > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW

UP

> > > IN

> > > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> > > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!!

That

> > > is

> > > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> > >

> > > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> > > also does

> > > not say anything about it being safe!

> > >

> > > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> > > Chart "

> > > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily

dose.

> > > I checked

> > > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> > > from that

> > > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> > > and for

> > > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> > > does this also

> > > mean there are unsafe levels?

> > >

> > > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> > >

> > > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> > > others...

> > > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> > > But

> > > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is

not

> > > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have

to

> > > be

> > > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > > others...

> > > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to

whether

> > > this is safe or not...

> > >

> > > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> > > in

> > > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is

66%

> > > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > > exactly

> > > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may

not

> > > pertain to everyone...

> > >

> > > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> > > of

> > > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> > > they

> > > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> > > and

> > > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > > proper

> > > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> > > of time,

> > > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> > > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > > quart

> > > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> > > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> > > pint to a

> > > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> > >

> > > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> > > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> > >

> > > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered

the

> > > most

> > > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most,

then

> > > converts

> > > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and

it

> > > doesn't

> > > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a

heavy

> > > metal... :-)

> > >

> > > ~

> > >

> > > Jim

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Again, this is just a handful of cases we are talking about. Herxing is not

necessary to get well, though not herxing is also not necessary to get well. In

Connies Lyme book one practitioner reported 10% of her patients NEVER herx.

I know of one person who cured himself of borrelia with CS. In fact, he is the

only case that exists (as far as I know) of a person who got argyria. He used

6oz a day for 6 years, and he says he is cured of his Lyme still after 10 years.

Nor have any of 's cases come on these forums and reported relapse. And

they were long enough ago by now that at least some of them should have it CS

caused encysting.

As far as I can tell, the only evidence anyone has supplied for CS causing

encysting is 1 or 2 people got well pretty quickly. Geez...no CS success have

reported relapses that I know of.

~

> > >

> > > h

> > > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> > >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> > >

> > >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > > Message

> > > #19857 of 19890 <

> > > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > > | Next >

<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> > >

> > > Hi ,

> > >

> > > Hi Jim,

> > >

> > > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> > >

> > > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly

any

> > > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was

actually

> > > a

> > > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> > > down

> > > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> > >

> > > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > > periods

> > > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> > > It is

> > > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> > > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> > > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > > pleasant trip

> > > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> > > in high

> > > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> > > and

> > > causing problems with the gut?

> > >

> > > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > > periods of time, I did

> > > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I

have

> > > it under

> > > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important

especially

> > > for anyone

> > > with a chronic illness...

> > >

> > > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > > Humble

> > > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > > people

> > > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> > > the

> > > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill

gut

> > > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > > flora.

> > >

> > > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > > bacteria,

> > > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is

the

> > > mineral

> > > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > > beneficial

> > > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> > > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > > important to note

> > > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> > > also,

> > > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used

for

> > >

> > > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > > sanitizer

> > > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who

over

> > > the years

> > > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating

what

> > > he has

> > > learned from them..

> > >

> > > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides

himself

> > > in bowing

> > > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using

the

> > > best

> > > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> > > harm

> > > good bacteria...

> > >

> > > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> > >

> > > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> > >

> > > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that

it

> > > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > > microbes<<<

> > >

> > >

> > > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> > > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able

to...

> > > ..

> > >

> > >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> > >

> > > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > > acid<<<<

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> > >

> > > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> > >

> > > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> > > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> > >

> > > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and

processing

> > > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate

reductase

> > > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger

oxidizing

> > > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > > pathogen dies.

> > >

> > > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > > chlorite. Therefore,

> > > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme

systems,

> > > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> > >

> > > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know

a

> > > lot about it...

> > >

> > >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> > >

> > > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine

dioxide,

> > > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might

exist

> > > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not

have

> > > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system

is

> > > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> > >

> > >

> > > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I

see

> > > it:

> > > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> > > or

> > > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration,

" PPM " )

> > >

> > > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > > evaluable

> > > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> > > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > > distribution " .

> > >

> > > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic

about

> > > it

> > > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> > >

> > > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> > >

> > > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> > >

> > > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> > > small. <<<

> > >

> > > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than

on

> > > their concentration.<<<<

> > >

> > > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > > said

> > > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have

not

> > > seen any evidence of it.

> > >

> > > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low

powered

> > > that

> > > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is

also

> > > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker

than

> > > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > > select

> > > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > > causing

> > > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > > initially, but

> > > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> > > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > > group felt the same...

> > >

> > > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> > > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > > Also,

> > > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > > success

> > > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > > borrelia).

> > >

> > > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him.

I

> > > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> > > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > > argyria,

> > > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it

is

> > > the same guy is referring to.

> > >

> > > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your

inbox...

> > >

> > > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> > > day

> > > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > > invest

> > > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> > >

> > > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one

of

> > > the best

> > > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands

seem

> > > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> > >

> > > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> > > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> > > huge

> > > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > > things

> > > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300

is

> > > the

> > > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> > > machines is very very small.

> > >

> > > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > > good

> > > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple

contact

> > > machine.

> > > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced

it!

> > >

> > > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90

watt

> > > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > > machines

> > > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would

be

> > > my choices...

> > > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> > >

> > > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has

to

> > > do

> > > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> > > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > > neither

> > > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> > > not.

> > > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > > hypothesis only.

> > >

> > > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> > > from Lyme for years, not working

> > > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> > > her DP machine

> > > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about

anything

> > > will take a person

> > > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not

impressed

> > > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> > > successful any

> > > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> > > for many years starts to

> > > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's

group,

> > > he was very disabled from

> > > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a

double

> > > tube EMEM

> > > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> > > when from being

> > > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > > success story, this was in 2006

> > > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> > > well...

> > >

> > > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got

these

> > > folks to good health, if so,

> > > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad...

And

> > > of course the question

> > > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> > > other machine better,

> > > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > > about this...

> > >

> > >

> > > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red

blood

> > > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the

99th

> > > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> > > much

> > > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > > RELATIVE

> > > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW

UP

> > > IN

> > > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> > > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!!

That

> > > is

> > > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> > >

> > > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> > > also does

> > > not say anything about it being safe!

> > >

> > > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> > > Chart "

> > > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily

dose.

> > > I checked

> > > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> > > from that

> > > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> > > and for

> > > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> > > does this also

> > > mean there are unsafe levels?

> > >

> > > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> > >

> > > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> > > others...

> > > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> > > But

> > > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is

not

> > > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have

to

> > > be

> > > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > > others...

> > > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to

whether

> > > this is safe or not...

> > >

> > > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> > > in

> > > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is

66%

> > > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > > exactly

> > > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may

not

> > > pertain to everyone...

> > >

> > > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> > > of

> > > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> > > they

> > > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> > > and

> > > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > > proper

> > > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> > > of time,

> > > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> > > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > > quart

> > > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> > > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> > > pint to a

> > > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> > >

> > > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> > > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> > >

> > > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered

the

> > > most

> > > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most,

then

> > > converts

> > > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and

it

> > > doesn't

> > > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a

heavy

> > > metal... :-)

> > >

> > > ~

> > >

> > > Jim

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I mean " who got argyria from properly made CS "

~

> > > >

> > > > h

> > > > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> > > >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> > > >

> > > >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > > > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > > > Message

> > > > #19857 of 19890 <

> > > > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > > > | Next >

<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > > > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> > > >

> > > > Hi ,

> > > >

> > > > Hi Jim,

> > > >

> > > > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> > > >

> > > > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly

any

> > > > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > > > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was

actually

> > > > a

> > > > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get

bogged

> > > > down

> > > > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> > > >

> > > > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > > > periods

> > > > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of

time.

> > > > It is

> > > > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me,

not

> > > > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > > > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > > > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned

this

> > > > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > > > pleasant trip

> > > > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using

CS

> > > > in high

> > > > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using

abx

> > > > and

> > > > causing problems with the gut?

> > > >

> > > > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > > > periods of time, I did

> > > > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I

have

> > > > it under

> > > > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important

especially

> > > > for anyone

> > > > with a chronic illness...

> > > >

> > > > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > > > Humble

> > > > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > > > people

> > > > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would

think

> > > > the

> > > > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill

gut

> > > > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > > > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > > > flora.

> > > >

> > > > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > > > bacteria,

> > > > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is

the

> > > > mineral

> > > > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > > > beneficial

> > > > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and

MMS

> > > > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > > > important to note

> > > > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS...

But

> > > > also,

> > > > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used

for

> > > >

> > > > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > > > sanitizer

> > > > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who

over

> > > > the years

> > > > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating

what

> > > > he has

> > > > learned from them..

> > > >

> > > > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides

himself

> > > > in bowing

> > > > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using

the

> > > > best

> > > > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will

not

> > > > harm

> > > > good bacteria...

> > > >

> > > > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> > > >

> > > > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > > > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> > > >

> > > > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that

it

> > > > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > > > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > > > microbes<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > > > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > > > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good

bacteria,

> > > > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > > > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able

to...

> > > > ..

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> > > >

> > > > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > > > acid<<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> > > >

> > > > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> > > >

> > > > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > > > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability

is

> > > > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> > > >

> > > > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > > > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > > > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and

processing

> > > > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate

reductase

> > > > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger

oxidizing

> > > > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > > > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > > > pathogen dies.

> > > >

> > > > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > > > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > > > chlorite. Therefore,

> > > > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > > > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme

systems,

> > > > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> > > >

> > > > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to

know a

> > > > lot about it...

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> > > >

> > > > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine

dioxide,

> > > > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might

exist

> > > > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > > > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not

have

> > > > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > > > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune

system is

> > > > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I

see

> > > > it:

> > > > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results

more

> > > > or

> > > > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration,

" PPM " )

> > > >

> > > > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > > > evaluable

> > > > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the

actual

> > > > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > > > distribution " .

> > > >

> > > > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic

about

> > > > it

> > > > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> > > >

> > > > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> > > >

> > > > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> > > >

> > > > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is

very

> > > > small. <<<

> > > >

> > > > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than

on

> > > > their concentration.<<<<

> > > >

> > > > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > > > said

> > > > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have

not

> > > > seen any evidence of it.

> > > >

> > > > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low

powered

> > > > that

> > > > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is

also

> > > > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker

than

> > > > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > > > select

> > > > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > > > causing

> > > > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > > > initially, but

> > > > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but

also

> > > > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > > > group felt the same...

> > > >

> > > > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > > > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products

(not

> > > > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > > > Also,

> > > > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > > > success

> > > > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > > > borrelia).

> > > >

> > > > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with

him. I

> > > > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > > > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one

of

> > > > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > > > argyria,

> > > > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet

it is

> > > > the same guy is referring to.

> > > >

> > > > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your

inbox...

> > > >

> > > > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz

a

> > > > day

> > > > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > > > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > > > invest

> > > > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> > > >

> > > > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one

of

> > > > the best

> > > > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > > > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands

seem

> > > > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> > > >

> > > > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with

ANY

> > > > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack

of

> > > > huge

> > > > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > > > things

> > > > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300

is

> > > > the

> > > > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using

rife

> > > > machines is very very small.

> > > >

> > > > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > > > good

> > > > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple

contact

> > > > machine.

> > > > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced

it!

> > > >

> > > > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > > > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90

watt

> > > > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > > > machines

> > > > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would

be

> > > > my choices...

> > > > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> > > >

> > > > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it

has to

> > > > do

> > > > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people

have

> > > > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > > > neither

> > > > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it

or

> > > > not.

> > > > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > > > hypothesis only.

> > > >

> > > > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very

ill

> > > > from Lyme for years, not working

> > > > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she

got

> > > > her DP machine

> > > > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about

anything

> > > > will take a person

> > > > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not

impressed

> > > > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > > > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > > > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > > > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining

how

> > > > successful any

> > > > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep

infection

> > > > for many years starts to

> > > > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's

group,

> > > > he was very disabled from

> > > > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a

double

> > > > tube EMEM

> > > > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story,

he

> > > > when from being

> > > > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > > > success story, this was in 2006

> > > > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still

doing

> > > > well...

> > > >

> > > > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got

these

> > > > folks to good health, if so,

> > > > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad...

And

> > > > of course the question

> > > > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of

that

> > > > other machine better,

> > > > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > > > about this...

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red

blood

> > > > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the

99th

> > > > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their

diets

> > > > much

> > > > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > > > RELATIVE

> > > > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL

SHOW UP

> > > > IN

> > > > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever

about

> > > > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > > > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!!

That

> > > > is

> > > > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> > > >

> > > > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then

it

> > > > also does

> > > > not say anything about it being safe!

> > > >

> > > > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement

Safety

> > > > Chart "

> > > > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily

dose.

> > > > I checked

> > > > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew

some

> > > > from that

> > > > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too

much

> > > > and for

> > > > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume

silver,

> > > > does this also

> > > > mean there are unsafe levels?

> > > >

> > > > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> > > >

> > > > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself

or

> > > > others...

> > > > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is

okay...

> > > > But

> > > > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is

not

> > > > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would

have to

> > > > be

> > > > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > > > others...

> > > > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to

whether

> > > > this is safe or not...

> > > >

> > > > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of

silver

> > > > in

> > > > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is

66%

> > > > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > > > exactly

> > > > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may

not

> > > > pertain to everyone...

> > > >

> > > > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a

number

> > > > of

> > > > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at

how

> > > > they

> > > > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non

toxic,

> > > > and

> > > > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > > > proper

> > > > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended

periods

> > > > of time,

> > > > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non

toxic

> > > > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > > > quart

> > > > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say

30

> > > > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking

a

> > > > pint to a

> > > > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> > > >

> > > > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by

itself.

> > > > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> > > >

> > > > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered

the

> > > > most

> > > > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most,

then

> > > > converts

> > > > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and

it

> > > > doesn't

> > > > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a

heavy

> > > > metal... :-)

> > > >

> > > > ~

> > > >

> > > > Jim

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I was not referring to the herx effect caused by treating Lyme. When I

mentioned that Jim Meissner claimed that many of those using the DP100 and

Colloidal silver were free of symptoms in a matter of weeks to a few months. I

have been treating Lyme for 5 years and It was only after a year on the Coil

machine that I had an abatement of Lyme symptoms. When I bought the LifeForce

2000, I was told that in 6 months of running it that my Lyme would be cured. I

was still sick after 6 months. I have learned through experience to take

everything in terms of information given by builders who stand to make a profit

with a grain of salt. I used the EMEM and Ateleir Robin for several years and

though I improved, my symptoms never completely went away. My practitioner does

energetic testing on me and said that my Lyme load is down from 15% of my body

to 8% just since last summer and this can only be attributed to the coil machine

since I was not doing any other treatments except a homeopathic for my immune

system. He said 8% is actually what most normal people who are not showing any

symptoms of Lyme have. I personally do not feel that it is possible to

eradicate Chronic Lyme in a matter of weeks. If symptoms went away that

quickly, then it stands to reason that the Colloidal silver played a role in

encysting the disease. I was warned by my MD to not rife and do Samento

simultaneously as Samento can encyst Lyme as well and if I am rifing, it is

better to keep the Lyme out where it can be reached as no rife machine can kill

Lyme while it is in it's L form. I have a friend who chose to use only Samento

for treating her Lyme. She is totally symptom free, but when she goes off of

it, the Lyme symptoms return with a vengence. If she goes back on Samento in a

matter of weeks her Lyme symptoms go away again. I am pretty well recovered

from Lyme, but I have a big Mycoplasma infection that I am now working on. I

hang around this group only to offer help to others who may be new to navigating

rife and Lyme. I probably have more experience with a variety of machines and

different treatment modalities, then most people in this group and that is

because I am still working and can afford to buy different machines and try them

out. I even have an ABPA AM3 and can use my Atelier Robin to do distance

frequencies as Lena does. I have the EPFX SCIO machine, I have owned a Photon

Genie in the past and I currently own the PE 1 Photon Light. I haver the coil,

the LifeForce 2000, the GB 4000, the EMEM with the Ateleir Robin and the

truerife F 117 that I inherited from my friend who died of Cancer. I am

familiar with a lot of treatment modalities and many types of machines. I don't

know of a one that will cause lyme symptoms to go away that quickly unless the

person wasn't really that sick to begin with. Lyme is often a complex of many

symptoms and health problems and I have discovered over the years that just

killing the organism and detoxing isn't enough, there is also a lot of repair

work that needs to be done to recover. You are right, that carrying on a debate

on this issue will not get us anywhere as there is no way to prove one way or

the other that Colloidal Silver acts like most antibiotics and causes Lyme to

retreat into a cyst. I just know from what I have read about the L form of

Lyme, makes me acutely aware that I do not want my infection in a cyst because,

it can breed while in the L form and it is not able to be killed while in that

form. So I guess I am not willing to take my chances with Colloidal Silver. I

am doing a Homeopathic antibiotic right now that is really kicking but on

Mycoplasma and I feel that since it is basically frequencies in water, it won't

likely have the side effects of pharmaceutical abx or even the herbal abx. I

believe that the frequencies of the homeopathic Clarithromycin is just

energetically nudging my own system to fight the disease, because I am herxing

from using it so it is doing something. We all are our own best experiment and

we must all find our own pathway to recovery and if Colloidal Silver is helping

you, then by all means keep doing it. I also appreciate Jim presenting the

other side, because I think with every treatment it is important to weigh out

the risk benefits. Unfortunately, people who do Colloidal Silver can tend to be

almost cult-like and dogmatic in their beliefs about it's benefits. I know

this, because I own a Silver Puppy and am in the online Colloidal Silver support

group.

> > > >

> > > > h

> > > > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> > > >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> > > >

> > > >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > > > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > > > Message

> > > > #19857 of 19890 <

> > > > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > > > | Next >

<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > > > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> > > >

> > > > Hi ,

> > > >

> > > > Hi Jim,

> > > >

> > > > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> > > >

> > > > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly

any

> > > > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > > > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was

actually

> > > > a

> > > > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get

bogged

> > > > down

> > > > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> > > >

> > > > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > > > periods

> > > > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of

time.

> > > > It is

> > > > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me,

not

> > > > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > > > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > > > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned

this

> > > > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > > > pleasant trip

> > > > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using

CS

> > > > in high

> > > > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using

abx

> > > > and

> > > > causing problems with the gut?

> > > >

> > > > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > > > periods of time, I did

> > > > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I

have

> > > > it under

> > > > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important

especially

> > > > for anyone

> > > > with a chronic illness...

> > > >

> > > > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > > > Humble

> > > > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > > > people

> > > > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would

think

> > > > the

> > > > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill

gut

> > > > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > > > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > > > flora.

> > > >

> > > > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > > > bacteria,

> > > > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is

the

> > > > mineral

> > > > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > > > beneficial

> > > > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and

MMS

> > > > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > > > important to note

> > > > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS...

But

> > > > also,

> > > > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used

for

> > > >

> > > > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > > > sanitizer

> > > > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who

over

> > > > the years

> > > > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating

what

> > > > he has

> > > > learned from them..

> > > >

> > > > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides

himself

> > > > in bowing

> > > > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using

the

> > > > best

> > > > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will

not

> > > > harm

> > > > good bacteria...

> > > >

> > > > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> > > >

> > > > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > > > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> > > >

> > > > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that

it

> > > > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > > > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > > > microbes<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > > > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > > > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good

bacteria,

> > > > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > > > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able

to...

> > > > ..

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> > > >

> > > > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > > > acid<<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> > > >

> > > > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> > > >

> > > > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > > > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability

is

> > > > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> > > >

> > > > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > > > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > > > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and

processing

> > > > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate

reductase

> > > > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger

oxidizing

> > > > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > > > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > > > pathogen dies.

> > > >

> > > > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > > > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > > > chlorite. Therefore,

> > > > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > > > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme

systems,

> > > > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> > > >

> > > > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to

know a

> > > > lot about it...

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> > > >

> > > > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine

dioxide,

> > > > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might

exist

> > > > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > > > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not

have

> > > > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > > > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune

system is

> > > > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I

see

> > > > it:

> > > > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results

more

> > > > or

> > > > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration,

" PPM " )

> > > >

> > > > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > > > evaluable

> > > > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the

actual

> > > > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > > > distribution " .

> > > >

> > > > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic

about

> > > > it

> > > > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> > > >

> > > > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> > > >

> > > > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> > > >

> > > > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is

very

> > > > small. <<<

> > > >

> > > > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than

on

> > > > their concentration.<<<<

> > > >

> > > > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > > > said

> > > > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have

not

> > > > seen any evidence of it.

> > > >

> > > > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low

powered

> > > > that

> > > > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is

also

> > > > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker

than

> > > > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > > > select

> > > > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > > > causing

> > > > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > > > initially, but

> > > > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but

also

> > > > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > > > group felt the same...

> > > >

> > > > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > > > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products

(not

> > > > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > > > Also,

> > > > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > > > success

> > > > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > > > borrelia).

> > > >

> > > > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with

him. I

> > > > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > > > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one

of

> > > > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > > > argyria,

> > > > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet

it is

> > > > the same guy is referring to.

> > > >

> > > > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your

inbox...

> > > >

> > > > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz

a

> > > > day

> > > > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > > > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > > > invest

> > > > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> > > >

> > > > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one

of

> > > > the best

> > > > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > > > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands

seem

> > > > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> > > >

> > > > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with

ANY

> > > > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack

of

> > > > huge

> > > > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > > > things

> > > > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300

is

> > > > the

> > > > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using

rife

> > > > machines is very very small.

> > > >

> > > > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > > > good

> > > > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple

contact

> > > > machine.

> > > > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced

it!

> > > >

> > > > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > > > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90

watt

> > > > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > > > machines

> > > > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would

be

> > > > my choices...

> > > > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> > > >

> > > > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it

has to

> > > > do

> > > > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people

have

> > > > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > > > neither

> > > > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it

or

> > > > not.

> > > > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > > > hypothesis only.

> > > >

> > > > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very

ill

> > > > from Lyme for years, not working

> > > > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she

got

> > > > her DP machine

> > > > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about

anything

> > > > will take a person

> > > > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not

impressed

> > > > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > > > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > > > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > > > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining

how

> > > > successful any

> > > > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep

infection

> > > > for many years starts to

> > > > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's

group,

> > > > he was very disabled from

> > > > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a

double

> > > > tube EMEM

> > > > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story,

he

> > > > when from being

> > > > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > > > success story, this was in 2006

> > > > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still

doing

> > > > well...

> > > >

> > > > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got

these

> > > > folks to good health, if so,

> > > > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad...

And

> > > > of course the question

> > > > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of

that

> > > > other machine better,

> > > > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > > > about this...

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red

blood

> > > > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the

99th

> > > > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their

diets

> > > > much

> > > > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > > > RELATIVE

> > > > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL

SHOW UP

> > > > IN

> > > > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever

about

> > > > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > > > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!!

That

> > > > is

> > > > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> > > >

> > > > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then

it

> > > > also does

> > > > not say anything about it being safe!

> > > >

> > > > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement

Safety

> > > > Chart "

> > > > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily

dose.

> > > > I checked

> > > > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew

some

> > > > from that

> > > > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too

much

> > > > and for

> > > > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume

silver,

> > > > does this also

> > > > mean there are unsafe levels?

> > > >

> > > > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> > > >

> > > > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself

or

> > > > others...

> > > > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is

okay...

> > > > But

> > > > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is

not

> > > > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would

have to

> > > > be

> > > > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > > > others...

> > > > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to

whether

> > > > this is safe or not...

> > > >

> > > > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of

silver

> > > > in

> > > > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is

66%

> > > > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > > > exactly

> > > > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may

not

> > > > pertain to everyone...

> > > >

> > > > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a

number

> > > > of

> > > > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at

how

> > > > they

> > > > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non

toxic,

> > > > and

> > > > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > > > proper

> > > > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended

periods

> > > > of time,

> > > > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non

toxic

> > > > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > > > quart

> > > > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say

30

> > > > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking

a

> > > > pint to a

> > > > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> > > >

> > > > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by

itself.

> > > > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> > > >

> > > > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered

the

> > > > most

> > > > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most,

then

> > > > converts

> > > > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and

it

> > > > doesn't

> > > > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a

heavy

> > > > metal... :-)

> > > >

> > > > ~

> > > >

> > > > Jim

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi B,

<<<< The point of all of this is that with all of my experience using many

different machines, I have never found one that would eliminate symptoms so

rapidly as those using the DP100 claim. This leads me to conclude that the

Colloidal Silver was indeed encysting the disease, which obviously would cause a

lessening of symptoms.>>>>

Precisely my dear !!

Jim :-)

> > >

> > > h

> > > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> > >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> > >

> > >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > > Message

> > > #19857 of 19890 <

> > > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > > | Next >

<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> > >

> > > Hi ,

> > >

> > > Hi Jim,

> > >

> > > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> > >

> > > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly

any

> > > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was

actually

> > > a

> > > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get bogged

> > > down

> > > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> > >

> > > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > > periods

> > > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of time.

> > > It is

> > > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me, not

> > > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned this

> > > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > > pleasant trip

> > > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using CS

> > > in high

> > > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using abx

> > > and

> > > causing problems with the gut?

> > >

> > > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > > periods of time, I did

> > > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I

have

> > > it under

> > > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important

especially

> > > for anyone

> > > with a chronic illness...

> > >

> > > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > > Humble

> > > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > > people

> > > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would think

> > > the

> > > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill

gut

> > > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > > flora.

> > >

> > > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > > bacteria,

> > > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is

the

> > > mineral

> > > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > > beneficial

> > > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and MMS

> > > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > > important to note

> > > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS... But

> > > also,

> > > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used

for

> > >

> > > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > > sanitizer

> > > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who

over

> > > the years

> > > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating

what

> > > he has

> > > learned from them..

> > >

> > > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides

himself

> > > in bowing

> > > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using

the

> > > best

> > > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will not

> > > harm

> > > good bacteria...

> > >

> > > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> > >

> > > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> > >

> > > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that

it

> > > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > > microbes<<<

> > >

> > >

> > > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good bacteria,

> > > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able

to...

> > > ..

> > >

> > >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> > >

> > > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > > acid<<<<

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> > >

> > > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> > >

> > > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability is

> > > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> > >

> > > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and

processing

> > > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate

reductase

> > > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger

oxidizing

> > > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > > pathogen dies.

> > >

> > > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > > chlorite. Therefore,

> > > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme

systems,

> > > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> > >

> > > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to know

a

> > > lot about it...

> > >

> > >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> > >

> > > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine

dioxide,

> > > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might

exist

> > > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not

have

> > > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune system

is

> > > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> > >

> > >

> > > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I

see

> > > it:

> > > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results more

> > > or

> > > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration,

" PPM " )

> > >

> > > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > > evaluable

> > > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the actual

> > > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > > distribution " .

> > >

> > > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic

about

> > > it

> > > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> > >

> > > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> > >

> > > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> > >

> > > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is very

> > > small. <<<

> > >

> > > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than

on

> > > their concentration.<<<<

> > >

> > > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > > said

> > > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have

not

> > > seen any evidence of it.

> > >

> > > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low

powered

> > > that

> > > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is

also

> > > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker

than

> > > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > > select

> > > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > > causing

> > > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > > initially, but

> > > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but also

> > > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > > group felt the same...

> > >

> > > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products (not

> > > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > > Also,

> > > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > > success

> > > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > > borrelia).

> > >

> > > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with him.

I

> > > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one of

> > > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > > argyria,

> > > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet it

is

> > > the same guy is referring to.

> > >

> > > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your

inbox...

> > >

> > > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz a

> > > day

> > > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > > invest

> > > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> > >

> > > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one

of

> > > the best

> > > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands

seem

> > > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> > >

> > > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with ANY

> > > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack of

> > > huge

> > > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > > things

> > > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300

is

> > > the

> > > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using rife

> > > machines is very very small.

> > >

> > > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > > good

> > > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple

contact

> > > machine.

> > > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced

it!

> > >

> > > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90

watt

> > > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > > machines

> > > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would

be

> > > my choices...

> > > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> > >

> > > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it has

to

> > > do

> > > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people have

> > > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > > neither

> > > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it or

> > > not.

> > > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > > hypothesis only.

> > >

> > > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very ill

> > > from Lyme for years, not working

> > > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she got

> > > her DP machine

> > > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about

anything

> > > will take a person

> > > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not

impressed

> > > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining how

> > > successful any

> > > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep infection

> > > for many years starts to

> > > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's

group,

> > > he was very disabled from

> > > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a

double

> > > tube EMEM

> > > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story, he

> > > when from being

> > > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > > success story, this was in 2006

> > > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still doing

> > > well...

> > >

> > > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got

these

> > > folks to good health, if so,

> > > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad...

And

> > > of course the question

> > > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of that

> > > other machine better,

> > > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > > about this...

> > >

> > >

> > > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red

blood

> > > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the

99th

> > > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their diets

> > > much

> > > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > > RELATIVE

> > > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL SHOW

UP

> > > IN

> > > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever about

> > > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!!

That

> > > is

> > > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> > >

> > > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then it

> > > also does

> > > not say anything about it being safe!

> > >

> > > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement Safety

> > > Chart "

> > > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily

dose.

> > > I checked

> > > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew some

> > > from that

> > > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too much

> > > and for

> > > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume silver,

> > > does this also

> > > mean there are unsafe levels?

> > >

> > > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> > >

> > > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself or

> > > others...

> > > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is okay...

> > > But

> > > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is

not

> > > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would have

to

> > > be

> > > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > > others...

> > > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to

whether

> > > this is safe or not...

> > >

> > > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of silver

> > > in

> > > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is

66%

> > > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > > exactly

> > > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may

not

> > > pertain to everyone...

> > >

> > > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a number

> > > of

> > > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at how

> > > they

> > > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non toxic,

> > > and

> > > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > > proper

> > > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended periods

> > > of time,

> > > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non toxic

> > > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > > quart

> > > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say 30

> > > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking a

> > > pint to a

> > > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> > >

> > > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by itself.

> > > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> > >

> > > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered

the

> > > most

> > > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most,

then

> > > converts

> > > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and

it

> > > doesn't

> > > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a

heavy

> > > metal... :-)

> > >

> > > ~

> > >

> > > Jim

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

A few random tibdits of possible interest:

If you google colloidal silver and lyme, there are varied testimonials to be dug

through. Here is one that caught my eye from my biased perspective =):

" Our 8 year old daughter was diagnosed with Lyme Disease after a lengthy and

baffling illness. She was put on oral antibiotics for several years with fairly

good results (they knocked the symptoms down from 40 to 4 ) but, as soon as she

got off of the antibiotics, all the symptoms would return. We heard about

Colloidal Silver through a newsletter we subscribed to and decided to give it a

try. Within 4 weeks there was a tremendous improvement and not long after that,

all symptoms were gone! This was almost 5 years ago, she has just turned 17 and

remains symptom free. " - "

Here is Jenna's blog post in 2008 which mentioned 8 oz or more of CS was used

even back then:

http://www.lymediseaseresource.com/wordpress/colloidal-silver-a-safe-treatment-f\

or-lyme-disease/

, I just realized, mentions CS in both his books. In addition to the quote

from the first book, he says this in the second book:

" Of all the antibiotics discussed in this book, including pharmaceutical and

non-pharmaceutical, colloidal silver has garnered the largest number of

successful user reports. "

http://www.lymebook.com/lyme-grapefruit-lauricidin-colloidal-silver-samento

I found another girl named katrina who had a blog and said that 12 ounces or

more were what was needed to get well for here. She gave up on abx and went to

CS.

I admit, it has not been proven that CS does not cause encysting, but it must be

admitted that CS has quite a lot of success behind it with Lyme.

~

> > > >

> > > > h

> > > > Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts?? Message

> > > >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> > > >

> > > >

Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & messageN\

um=19857>

> > > > |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > > > Message

> > > > #19857 of 19890 <

> > > > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > > > | Next >

<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > > > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> > > >

> > > > Hi ,

> > > >

> > > > Hi Jim,

> > > >

> > > > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> > > >

> > > > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen hardly

any

> > > > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking a

> > > > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was

actually

> > > > a

> > > > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get

bogged

> > > > down

> > > > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> > > >

> > > > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for long

> > > > periods

> > > > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of

time.

> > > > It is

> > > > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me,

not

> > > > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time... Enough Lymies have

> > > > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is taking

> > > > them long periods of time to try to correct this... I first learned

this

> > > > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > > > pleasant trip

> > > > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel using

CS

> > > > in high

> > > > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using

abx

> > > > and

> > > > causing problems with the gut?

> > > >

> > > > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > > > periods of time, I did

> > > > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I

have

> > > > it under

> > > > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important

especially

> > > > for anyone

> > > > with a chronic illness...

> > > >

> > > > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > > > Humble

> > > > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > > > people

> > > > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would

think

> > > > the

> > > > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would kill

gut

> > > > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > > > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills gut

> > > > flora.

> > > >

> > > > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > > > bacteria,

> > > > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this is

the

> > > > mineral

> > > > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not the

> > > > beneficial

> > > > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and

MMS

> > > > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > > > important to note

> > > > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS...

But

> > > > also,

> > > > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been used

for

> > > >

> > > > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > > > sanitizer

> > > > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who

over

> > > > the years

> > > > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just repeating

what

> > > > he has

> > > > learned from them..

> > > >

> > > > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides

himself

> > > > in bowing

> > > > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by using

the

> > > > best

> > > > supplements. He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will

not

> > > > harm

> > > > good bacteria...

> > > >

> > > > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> > > >

> > > > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does not

> > > > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> > > >

> > > > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is that

it

> > > > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even our

> > > > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > > > microbes<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > > > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > > > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good

bacteria,

> > > > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > > > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able

to...

> > > > ..

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> > > >

> > > > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than hypochlorous

> > > > acid<<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> > > >

> > > > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> > > >

> > > > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > > > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability

is

> > > > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> > > >

> > > > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > > > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the nitrate

> > > > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and

processing

> > > > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate

reductase

> > > > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger

oxidizing

> > > > agent than nitrite – which is then deposited on the inside of the cell.

> > > > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally the

> > > > pathogen dies.

> > > >

> > > > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > > > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > > > chlorite. Therefore,

> > > > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the GIT.

> > > > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme

systems,

> > > > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical reaction.<<<<

> > > >

> > > > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to

know a

> > > > lot about it...

> > > >

> > > >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> > > >

> > > > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine

dioxide,

> > > > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might

exist

> > > > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power to

> > > > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not

have

> > > > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > > > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune

system is

> > > > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as I

see

> > > > it:

> > > > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results

more

> > > > or

> > > > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration,

" PPM " )

> > > >

> > > > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > > > evaluable

> > > > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the

actual

> > > > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > > > distribution " .

> > > >

> > > > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic

about

> > > > it

> > > > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural antibiotic.

> > > >

> > > > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> > > >

> > > > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> > > >

> > > > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is

very

> > > > small. <<<

> > > >

> > > > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids than

on

> > > > their concentration.<<<<

> > > >

> > > > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I have

> > > > said

> > > > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I have

not

> > > > seen any evidence of it.

> > > >

> > > > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low

powered

> > > > that

> > > > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and is

also

> > > > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker

than

> > > > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users to

> > > > select

> > > > frx's and times per frx? To me, the only answer I can see is the CS is

> > > > causing

> > > > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > > > initially, but

> > > > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but

also

> > > > several other long time group members who were also members of the other

> > > > group felt the same...

> > > >

> > > > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > > > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products

(not

> > > > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its effectiveness.

> > > > Also,

> > > > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports of

> > > > success

> > > > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > > > borrelia).

> > > >

> > > > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with

him. I

> > > > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all of

> > > > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one

of

> > > > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > > > argyria,

> > > > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet

it is

> > > > the same guy is referring to.

> > > >

> > > > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your

inbox...

> > > >

> > > > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl oz

a

> > > > day

> > > > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a good

> > > > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > > > invest

> > > > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> > > >

> > > > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for one

of

> > > > the best

> > > > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products and

> > > > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands

seem

> > > > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> > > >

> > > > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with

ANY

> > > > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack

of

> > > > huge

> > > > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > > > things

> > > > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the DP300

is

> > > > the

> > > > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using

rife

> > > > machines is very very small.

> > > >

> > > > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or more

> > > > good

> > > > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple

contact

> > > > machine.

> > > > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who produced

it!

> > > >

> > > > In a contact machine, I would opt for the GB4000 with

> > > > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90

watt

> > > > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > > > machines

> > > > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines would

be

> > > > my choices...

> > > > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> > > >

> > > > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it

has to

> > > > do

> > > > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people

have

> > > > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > > > neither

> > > > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it

or

> > > > not.

> > > > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > > > hypothesis only.

> > > >

> > > > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very

ill

> > > > from Lyme for years, not working

> > > > and considered disabled? I remember one, she was 95% healed when she

got

> > > > her DP machine

> > > > and claimed it cured her! Well if abx took her to 95%, just about

anything

> > > > will take a person

> > > > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not

impressed

> > > > at all with her " success. " And as I recall there

> > > > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very ill

> > > > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > > > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining

how

> > > > successful any

> > > > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep

infection

> > > > for many years starts to

> > > > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's

group,

> > > > he was very disabled from

> > > > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a

double

> > > > tube EMEM

> > > > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success story,

he

> > > > when from being

> > > > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was a

> > > > success story, this was in 2006

> > > > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still

doing

> > > > well...

> > > >

> > > > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got

these

> > > > folks to good health, if so,

> > > > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very bad...

And

> > > > of course the question

> > > > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of

that

> > > > other machine better,

> > > > then why do they need the other machine? No clear answers ever surfaced

> > > > about this...

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red

blood

> > > > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the

99th

> > > > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their

diets

> > > > much

> > > > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > > > RELATIVE

> > > > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL

SHOW UP

> > > > IN

> > > > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever

about

> > > > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > > > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!!

That

> > > > is

> > > > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> > > >

> > > > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but then

it

> > > > also does

> > > > not say anything about it being safe!

> > > >

> > > > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25™ rule and Silver Supplement

Safety

> > > > Chart "

> > > > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily

dose.

> > > > I checked

> > > > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp! I knew

some

> > > > from that

> > > > other group who were drinking a quart daily! Just seems like way too

much

> > > > and for

> > > > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume

silver,

> > > > does this also

> > > > mean there are unsafe levels?

> > > >

> > > > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> > > >

> > > > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm myself

or

> > > > others...

> > > > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is

okay...

> > > > But

> > > > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that is

not

> > > > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would

have to

> > > > be

> > > > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > > > others...

> > > > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to

whether

> > > > this is safe or not...

> > > >

> > > > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of

silver

> > > > in

> > > > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically is

66%

> > > > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > > > exactly

> > > > came out. That is one person. Correct, that is just one person and may

not

> > > > pertain to everyone...

> > > >

> > > > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a

number

> > > > of

> > > > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at

how

> > > > they

> > > > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non

toxic,

> > > > and

> > > > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > > > proper

> > > > use. Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended

periods

> > > > of time,

> > > > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non

toxic

> > > > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took a

> > > > quart

> > > > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of say

30

> > > > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies drinking

a

> > > > pint to a

> > > > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> > > >

> > > > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by

itself.

> > > > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> > > >

> > > > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is considered

the

> > > > most

> > > > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most,

then

> > > > converts

> > > > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains and

it

> > > > doesn't

> > > > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a

heavy

> > > > metal... :-)

> > > >

> > > > ~

> > > >

> > > > Jim

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Jane,

It is important to note, Kenda S was 95% well when she bought her DP machine...

I was talking to her off -group a lot, she asked my opinion about a lot of

things, one was stay on abx or buy the DP? My answer, if abx got you this

healthy, stick with it... She bought the DP machine and used it with CS...

She actually was right where my wife was at 10 months, my wife's doc told her no

more abx, you will have some lingering joint symptoms, but they will be gone in

a year. They ended in 11 months... To this day I have wondered if Kenda actually

did nothing if she too would have had just lingering symptoms and thus a

complete cure in a year by doing nothing...

In any case, as you reported, she was already healthy, 95% cured, when she

bought her DP machine and then claimed it was curing her Lyme....

Take care,

Jim

> > > > >

> > > > > h

> > > > >  Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??   Message

> > > > >

List<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/messages/19857?o=1 & xm=1 & \

l=1>

> > > > >

> > > >

>   Reply<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/post?act=reply & m\

essageNum=19857>

> > > > >  |

Delete<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19857?delete=c\

onfirm>

> > > > > Message

> > > > > #19857 of 19890 <

> > > > > Prev<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19856>

> > > > >  | Next >

<http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Lyme_and_Rife/message/19858>

> > > > > Re: Colloidal Silver turns spirochetes to cysts??

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi ,

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi Jim,

> > > > >

> > > > > When I get my CS together I will let people know.

> > > > >

> > > > > Ya, it is not ideal that CS kills gut flora, but I have not seen

hardly any

> > > > > actual health consequences in hundreds of long term users when taking

a

> > > > > probiotic (actually I doubt most even took a probiotic). There was

actually

> > > > > a

> > > > > poll on this on a silver forum. I think it is important not get get

bogged

> > > > > down

> > > > > in theory, and focus on the evidence more.

> > > > >

> > > > > Before JM started suggesting Lymies use large amounts of CS and for

long

> > > > > periods

> > > > > of time, most Lymies used smaller amounts and for shorter periods of

time.

> > > > > It is

> > > > > the higher amounts for longer periods of time that really concerns me,

not

> > > > > the smaller amounts for shorter periods of time...  Enough Lymies

have

> > > > > posted that long term abx has destroyed their gut flora and it is

taking

> > > > > them long periods of time to try to correct this...  I first learned

this

> > > > > while I was on 14 weeks of IV Rocephin and oral Flagyl... It wasn't a

> > > > > pleasant trip

> > > > > and I would not want to do that again to my gut.. Why do you feel

using CS

> > > > > in high

> > > > > amounts and for long periods of time would be any different from using

abx

> > > > > and

> > > > > causing problems with the gut?

> > > > >

> > > > > I like using ozone water, but I am careful not to use much or for long

> > > > > periods of time, I did

> > > > > once and found I was dealing with gut issues for a while... Now that I

have

> > > > > it under

> > > > > control, I think preserving a normal gut flora is very important

especially

> > > > > for anyone

> > > > > with a chronic illness...

> > > > >

> > > > > I do not know of any evidence that MMS does not kill gut flora. I know

> > > > > Humble

> > > > > says so, but I never see his evidence for this. However, I can imagine

> > > > > people

> > > > > generally do not have problems with MMS. So in this regard, I would

think

> > > > > the

> > > > > same thing about it as I do about CS. In theory, I think MMS would

kill gut

> > > > > flora. But if there is no evidence that it actually causes negative

> > > > > consquences, then that is more important than a theory that it kills

gut

> > > > > flora.

> > > > >

> > > > > MMS is a very weak oxidizer, not capable of killing the stronger good

> > > > > bacteria,

> > > > > only kills pathogens... Here's some links that sodium chlorite (this

is the

> > > > > mineral

> > > > > MMS is produced from) that clarifies only pathogens are killed, not

the

> > > > > beneficial

> > > > > bacteria. Some good bacteria may be more acidic than the body's pH and

MMS

> > > > > will kill it, but Jim Humble says this is a very small amount. It is

> > > > > important to note

> > > > > that Jim Humble is a chemist an has a good understanding about MMS...

But

> > > > > also,

> > > > > Chlorine Dioxide which is the end result of acidifying MMS has been

used for

> > > > >

> > > > > over 50 years to purify drinking water, sanitize food and used as a

> > > > > sanitizer

> > > > > in hospitals... So much of his info actually comes from scientists who

over

> > > > > the years

> > > > > discovered the benefits of using chlorine and thus JH is just

repeating what

> > > > > he has

> > > > > learned from them..

> > > > >

> > > > > One of the best NDs on the planet is Dr. Walter Last, ND. He prides

himself

> > > > > in bowing

> > > > > to no government, thus freely practices getting people healthy by

using the

> > > > > best

> > > > > supplements.  He is a big proponent of MMS and clearly states it will

not

> > > > > harm

> > > > > good bacteria...

> > > > >

> > > > > http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index/Articles/Last/MMS_Sodium_Chlorite

> > > > >

> > > > > >>>>While it destroys all anaerobic microbes and parasites, it does

not

> > > > > damage the beneficial lactobacteria of out intestinal flora. <<<<

> > > > >

> > > > > >>>Another advantage of chlorine dioxide as compared to chlorine is

that it

> > > > > does not react with organic matter, such as food, body cells or even

our

> > > > > " good " intestinal bacteria, but is specific in destroying pathogenic

> > > > > microbes<<<

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Here is a reference to chlorine dioxide being a weak oxidizer....

> > > > > Hypochlorous acid is what our

> > > > > immune system uses to kill pathogens, thus too weak to kill good

bacteria,

> > > > > Chlorine Dioxide is even weaker

> > > > > If hypochlorous can't kill good bacteria, then neither will CD be able

to...

> > > > > ..

> > > > >

> > > > >

http://www.lenntech.com/processes/disinfection/chemical/disinfectants-chlorine-d\

ioxide.htm

> > > > >

> > > > > >>>Chlorine dioxide is weak, it has a lower potential than

hypochlorous

> > > > > acid<<<<

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

http://www.aquatize.com/animal_water_purification/aquatize_mechanism.html

> > > > >

> > > > > >>>Nitrate Reductase, Chlorate & Microbes

> > > > >

> > > > > Many microbes use an enzyme system called nitrate reductase to reduce

> > > > > nitrate to nitrite and eventually to gaseous nitrogen. This capability

is

> > > > > vital for many pathogens to compete in a wide variety of environments.

> > > > >

> > > > > Scientists have overwhelming evidence that one of the best analogs of

> > > > > nitrate is chlorate. Chlorate is very similar to nitrate so the

nitrate

> > > > > reductase enzyme system is tricked into accidentally binding and

processing

> > > > > the chlorate. Instead of reducing nitrate to nitrite, the nitrate

reductase

> > > > > enzyme mistakenly reduces chlorate to chlorite -- a much stronger

oxidizing

> > > > > agent than nitrite †" which is then deposited on the inside of the

cell.

> > > > > Consequently, chlorite oxidizes the cellular machinery until finally

the

> > > > > pathogen dies.

> > > > >

> > > > > Most of the good bacteria in the GIT do not have the nitrate reductase

> > > > > enzyme and therefore do not accidentally reduce the chlorate to

> > > > > chlorite. Therefore,

> > > > > the good bacteria are unaffected by the presence of chlorate in the

GIT.

> > > > > Moreover, animal cells also do not possess nitrate reductase enzyme

systems,

> > > > > and are not impacted by the chlorate to chlorite chemical

reaction.<<<<

> > > > >

> > > > > And here is some info about Sodium Chlorite by someone who appears to

know a

> > > > > lot about it...

> > > > >

> > > > >

http://www.content4reprint.com/health/alternative-medicine/why-has-sodium-chlori\

te-been-overlooked-all-these-years.htm

> > > > >

> > > > > >>>>What sodium chlorite really does for us is it gives us chlorine

dioxide,

> > > > > a chemical that selectively destroys almost all bad things that might

exist

> > > > > in the body. Each tiny chlorine dioxide molecule has tremendous power

to

> > > > > destroy those things from which it can draw electrons, but it does not

have

> > > > > the power to draw electrons from healthy cells or aerobic bacteria.

> > > > > Remember, it ultimately aids the immune system and a strong immune

system is

> > > > > what keeps us healthy and disease free.<<<<

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Ya, CS products are hard to tell apart. In short, here is the truth as

I see

> > > > > it:

> > > > > 1. All of them will give you the nearly the same exact health results

more

> > > > > or

> > > > > less (per volume consumed, assuming they are the same concentration,

" PPM " )

> > > > >

> > > > > 2. The only real differences are price and risk of argyria. The only

> > > > > evaluable

> > > > > qualities of CS are things that affect risk of argyria, and not the

actual

> > > > > effectiveness. These qualities are the " PPM " and the " particle size

> > > > > distribution " .

> > > > >

> > > > > Walter Last did write an article CS, he doesn't appear as enthusiastic

about

> > > > > it

> > > > > compared to MMS, but says it has a long history as a natural

antibiotic.

> > > > >

> > > > > Here's what he says about the size of CS:

> > > > >

> > > > > http://www.health-science-spirit.com/colloidalsilver.html

> > > > >

> > > > > >>>viruses appear to be killed only when the size of the colloids is

very

> > > > > small. <<<

> > > > >

> > > > > >>>>the effectiveness depends much more on the size of the colloids

than on

> > > > > their concentration.<<<<

> > > > >

> > > > > There won't be a section in my CS guide about encysting. But what I

have

> > > > > said

> > > > > earlier is all I have to say about it. That in dozens of lymies, I

have not

> > > > > seen any evidence of it.

> > > > >

> > > > > What has me perplexed then, how can a new kind of rife machine, low

powered

> > > > > that

> > > > > does not allow the user to choose his frx's and the time per frx and

is also

> > > > > directed to use CS, claims to get better in what appears to be quicker

than

> > > > > other rife machines that are more powerful and all allow their users

to

> > > > > select

> > > > > frx's and times per frx?  To me, the only answer I can see is the CS

is

> > > > > causing

> > > > > encysting.. By removing the bacteria to cysts, one will feel better

> > > > > initially, but

> > > > > at some point a relapse will ensue. This is not only my concern, but

also

> > > > > several other long time group members who were also members of the

other

> > > > > group felt the same...

> > > > >

> > > > > That to me is more important that the theory. I can

> > > > > also tell you I know of some LLMDs that are doing IV silver products

(not

> > > > > exactly the same type as CS) and say it miraculous in its

effectiveness.

> > > > > Also,

> > > > > I quoted that his observation was that it had the most reports

of

> > > > > success

> > > > > of any antimicrobial against Lyme (which I think he means specifically

> > > > > borrelia).

> > > > >

> > > > > If that person with mild argyria is around, I would like to talk with

him. I

> > > > > only know of 2 cases of POSSIBLE argyria from properly made CS in all

of

> > > > > history. So a possible third is significant for my research. Also, one

of

> > > > > those guys WILLINGLY kept taking the CS after he started getting mild

> > > > > argyria,

> > > > > because it ultimately cured him of Lyme. Now that I think of it, I bet

it is

> > > > > the same guy is referring to.

> > > > >

> > > > > I will send you both a copy of the post and his email addy to your

inbox...

> > > > >

> > > > > Buying CS is not cost effective. You need to take at least 8 to 16 fl

oz a

> > > > > day

> > > > > to battle serious Lyme and Company. You have to make it home with a

good

> > > > > quality generator, which requires learning a little more. But once you

> > > > > invest

> > > > > in that, it costs about $1 to make an entire gallon of CS!

> > > > >

> > > > > I still feel if I was going to get serious about CS, I would opt for

one of

> > > > > the best

> > > > > made commercial brands... They seem to have the top shelve products

and

> > > > > according to Walter Last, size is very important and commerical brands

seem

> > > > > to have the smallest particle sizes..

> > > > >

> > > > > About rife machines, I am not seeing many people get mostly well with

ANY

> > > > > STANDALONE THERAPIES WHATSOEVER (that includes rife machines). So lack

of

> > > > > huge

> > > > > success is not the proper metric to use. Almost everyone takes several

> > > > > things

> > > > > to get mostly well. But my anecdotal observations tell me that the

DP300 is

> > > > > the

> > > > > best machines to try first. Ultimately, the number of people of using

rife

> > > > > machines is very very small.

> > > > >

> > > > > Here I agree with you! This is why I suggest everyone consider 2 or

more

> > > > > good

> > > > > protocols to use... When I look at the DP300, all I see is a simple

contact

> > > > > machine.

> > > > > I have never seen one of these effective for Lyme no matter who

produced it!

> > > > >

> > > > > In a contact machine, I  would opt for the GB4000 with

> > > > > optional 10 watt Amp at a minimum, but preferably the optional MOPA 90

watt

> > > > > AMP... I do feel that " air " machines are more effective than contact

> > > > > machines

> > > > > thus the Doug Coil, EMEMs and the Perl or other Rife-Bare machines

would be

> > > > > my choices...

> > > > > Most of the members of our group own air machines...

> > > > >

> > > > > Why use CS with rife machines? That is a good question, but again, it

has to

> > > > > do

> > > > > with theory. Whatever the theory is, the fact is, maybe 2 or 3 people

have

> > > > > become totally free of symptoms using a combo of rife and CS. Whereas

> > > > > neither

> > > > > one alone was able to do that. It is a fact, whether we can explain it

or

> > > > > not.

> > > > > Ultimately, we do not know why rife machines work. We have a bunch of

> > > > > hypothesis only.

> > > > >

> > > > > Of those you say are " totally free of symptoms, " were any of them very

ill

> > > > > from Lyme for years, not working

> > > > > and considered disabled?  I remember one, she was 95% healed when she

got

> > > > > her DP machine

> > > > > and claimed it cured her!  Well if abx took her to 95%, just about

anything

> > > > > will take a person

> > > > > to the next 5%, all you have to do is keep using it, so I was not

impressed

> > > > > at all with her " success. "   And as I recall there

> > > > > was another who was just about cured, but he did not seem to be very

ill

> > > > > from Lyme... So the intensity

> > > > > of one's infection and thus their success is important in determining

how

> > > > > successful any

> > > > > treatment protocol is.. I am impressed when someone with a deep

infection

> > > > > for many years starts to

> > > > > improve... Did you catch my post a week ago about a member on 's

group,

> > > > > he was very disabled from

> > > > > Lyme, quit his job and was very ill... He became symptom free using a

double

> > > > > tube EMEM

> > > > > and ozone as his main treatments.. To me, that is a real success

story, he

> > > > > when from being

> > > > > very ill to being symptom free... His was not a quick fix, but it was

a

> > > > > success story, this was in 2006

> > > > > and I haven't heard from him since, so I have to assume he is still

doing

> > > > > well...

> > > > >

> > > > > And sorry, I still have to wonder if the CS caused encysting that got

these

> > > > > folks to good health, if so,

> > > > > is is absolute they will be back as the relapses are usually very

bad... And

> > > > > of course the question

> > > > > several of us also had, perhaps it is the CS that is making owners of

that

> > > > > other machine better,

> > > > > then why do they need the other machine?  No clear answers ever

surfaced

> > > > > about this...

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Levels of silver in the body: I have also had silver levels in my red

blood

> > > > > cells tested after months of heavy CS usage. My level showed me in the

99th

> > > > > percentile. Now think about it....people do not get silver in their

diets

> > > > > much

> > > > > at all. So when someone drinks CS, they do in fact get a lot of silver

> > > > > RELATIVE

> > > > > TO THE AMOUNT OTHER PEOPLE TAKE. Because of this OF COURSE THEY WILL

SHOW UP

> > > > > IN

> > > > > THE 99th of 100th PERCENTILE! This does not say anything whatsoever

about

> > > > > silver being dangerous. In fact, the fact that I was ONLY in the 99th

> > > > > percentile said that 1% of people ACTUALLY HAD MORE SILVER THAN ME!!!!

That

> > > > > is

> > > > > in fact a sign that I WAS ELIMINATING SILVER VERY WELL.

> > > > >

> > > > > True, this does not say anything about silver being dangerous, but

then it

> > > > > also does

> > > > > not say anything about it being safe!

> > > > >

> > > > > click on " Safe usage with the 12-for-25â„¢ rule and Silver Supplement

Safety

> > > > > Chart "

> > > > > and see what these folks who sanction using silver suggest as a daily

dose.

> > > > > I checked

> > > > > mine just for the heck of it and came up with about 1/2 tsp!  I knew

some

> > > > > from that

> > > > > other group who were drinking a quart daily!  Just seems like way too

much

> > > > > and for

> > > > > way too long... If this link says there are safe levels to consume

silver,

> > > > > does this also

> > > > > mean there are unsafe levels?

> > > > >

> > > > > http://www.silverfacts.com/safety.html#Rule

> > > > >

> > > > > You can call me chicken, but the last thing I want to do is harm

myself or

> > > > > others...

> > > > > If something does not work, as long as we are not harmed, that is

okay...

> > > > > But

> > > > > if something is working and may be doing harm at the same time, that

is not

> > > > > a good choice for me nor would I suggest it to others... And I would

have to

> > > > > be

> > > > > pretty sure first of something being safe before I would present it to

> > > > > others...

> > > > > I do question high amounts of CS for extended periods of time as to

whether

> > > > > this is safe or not...

> > > > >

> > > > > Someone paid with his own money to do a study on the elimination of

silver

> > > > > in

> > > > > his own body. He showed that after ingesting lots of CS, it basically

is 66%

> > > > > eliminated in a month, and 100% eliminated in 3 months. What came it,

> > > > > exactly

> > > > > came out. That is one person.  Correct, that is just one person and

may not

> > > > > pertain to everyone...

> > > > >

> > > > > Also, the EPA has done multiple toxicology studies on silver. For a

number

> > > > > of

> > > > > reasons, these studies are actually very pessimistic when you look at

how

> > > > > they

> > > > > did them. Even so, they all conclude that silver is apparently non

toxic,

> > > > > and

> > > > > they also imply the risk of argyria with long term CS use it low, with

> > > > > proper

> > > > > use.  Do you know of any studies of high silver usage for extended

periods

> > > > > of time,

> > > > > such as what those on the other group are using? Many things are non

toxic

> > > > > in smaller amounts, but toxic in higher amounts... Even MMS, if I took

a

> > > > > quart

> > > > > of MMS daily, that would be highly toxic... But in small amounts of

say 30

> > > > > drops daily, it is non toxic. I honestly never heard of Lymies

drinking a

> > > > > pint to a

> > > > > a quart of CS before JM started talking about it.

> > > > >

> > > > > CS " is the bomb " =). Like most everything, it will not cure you by

itself.

> > > > > Though it anything will, it is probably CS IMO.

> > > > >

> > > > > Well I have to take the other side on that with MMS.... It is

considered the

> > > > > most

> > > > > effective pathogen killer, it remains in the body for 2 hours at most,

then

> > > > > converts

> > > > > to simple table salt and is flushed out of the body, nothing remains

and it

> > > > > doesn't

> > > > > kill good bacteria and it costs so little... And for sure, it is not a

heavy

> > > > > metal...  :-)

> > > > >

> > > > > ~

> > > > >

> > > > > Jim

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> If your post is not about electronic devices used in the treatment of Lyme

then please put an OT: in the subject line.

>

> -------------------------------

>