CureZone   Log On   Join
Answers and questions for Veronicalives...
 

Lugol’s Iodine Free S&H
J.Crow’s® Lugol’s Iodine Solution. Restore lost reserves.



Transformational Tarot Readings
Move stagnated energy into transformation



Dr. Clark Shop
Hulda Clark Cleanses


SilverFox Views: 2,464
Published: 15 y
 

Answers and questions for Veronicalives...


Veronicalives has been wondering what the problems are with the current Miracle-Mineral-Supplement protocol. Here are some of those comments followed by corrections, when needed, and the "issues" with the current Miracle-Mineral-Supplement protocol, and Miracle-Mineral-Supplement .

[quote=veronicalives]
"You say MMS will hurt you, but saying that is the equivalent of saying that quick breaths in succession will cause an explosion inside of you..." [end quote]

MMS is high concentration of NaClO2 that is very alkaline. Skin contact with the MMS solution during preparation can cause chemical burns. If you happen to get some in your eyes, it can damage your eyes. If you ingest it in high enough quantities (in the area of 2 - 4 ounces) it can cause kidney failure and kill you. If you spill some MMS on a table cloth and it dries out, it can become unstable and ignite when the sun hits the table cloth with the dried MMS on it.

Yes, I do say that MMS can hurt you, but perhaps by saying MMS you are referring to taking MMS according to the MMS protocol. You have already indicated that you understand that a high concentration sodium chlorite solution is a toxic chemical, so let's go on.

I am not sure what the comparison of taking short breaths and ingesting a toxic chemical have in common, but let me see if I can work this out. By taking several breaths you get extra oxygen into your system and remove carbon dioxide from your system. OK, I get it, I think... This is supposed to illustrate the oxidation process. Unfortunately, compared to chlorine dioxide, oxygen is a very weak oxidizer at the concentrations available in the air we breathe. Sodium chlorite is pretty stable, so there is no comparison there. Come to think of it, I am still a bit lost on just what you mean by this. Perhaps you could state it a little differently and expand on what you mean by this.

Oops, Veronicalives actually didn't say these things, these are a quote from Jim Humble. We all know that Jim Humble is an inventor and not a scientist, and that he doesn't provide answers to questions like this... While it is "novel" to try to illustrate oxidation as an explosion, I have a bit of a problem thinking in those terms when I see a rusty nail in a board...

[quote=veronicalives]
"We all know that stabilized oxygen oxidizes (yes, little explosions) on contact with pathogens. Our bodies control Chlorine dioxide. So:" [end quote]

So now I see that you are equating the change in electron state (oxidation) with a little explosion. I still have a problem with this in a real sense, but now understand it in a literary sense. On a microscopic level, if a cell is oxidized it can be brought to a point where it no longer exists, kind of like an explosion took place.

Stabilized oxygen is 1 - 5% NaClO2. Note that this is a much lower concentration than MMS, and much safer to handle and use. It also is recognized worldwide as being a non haschem and non hazardous concentration. NaClO2 does not oxidize. It has to be activated to release the chlorine dioxide (ClO2) in it, and the ClO2 that is released is the oxidizer.

When a pathogen comes into contact with NaClO2, it dies, not because of oxidation, but because of a sudden PH change. The PH of NaClO2 solutions is in the 10 - 13 range depending on the concentration of the solution.

We could take the same pathogen and put it into contact with the 10% citric acid solution and it will also die, but not because of oxidation. It dies because of a sudden PH change. The PH of 10% citric acid is about 3.

After reviewing the inaccuracies of these last couple of statements, let's look at the next one. ClO2 is an unstable gas that is foreign to our bodies. Our bodies do not control it, other than making a decision on what concentration we are ingesting.

There are no tests that have been done that show that ClO2 is controlled by the body. Jim Humble can state an opinion, but there is no basis for it and no test results that back it up.

[quote=veronicalives]
"Chlorine dioxide is a powerful explosive. It explode on contact with a pathogen or some other item MORE ACIDIC than the body. It accepts 5 electrons of charge and instantaneously results in an instant oxidation. Our bodies cannot tell the difference between oxygen and chlorine dioxide, so the blood picks it up and carries it through the body; the electrons travel with the red blood cells as its own. When it touches a pathogen it destroys it, or it keeps traveling until it finds one. Chlorine dioxide has over a hundred times more energy to do the same thing that the oxygen would do, and still not harm healthy cells – more than likely because the immune system has control over the chlorine dioxide. With the “explosion” the chlorine ion is completely neutralized and is basically a negligible amount of table salt (and much safer than the chlorine in our water which is proved to create at least 3 different carcinogenic compounds when it enters the body – but not sodium chloride)." [end quote]

There is so much wrong with this statement that it will be difficult to address all of it... However, let me give it a try.

ClO2 is an unstable gas. It is explosive in high concentrations (greater than 10% or 100000 PPM in air). Concentrations of ClO2 have never been able to be measured in the body, so Science and the medical community have determined that ClO2 is so unstable that it does not exist inside the body.

Chlorine dioxide is not selective. It kills germs, mold, fungus, virus, and bacteria, both good and bad. Water treatment plants love ClO2 because it kills everything in a wide PH range from acid to basic. Chlorine is most effective only at a very narrow range of PH values, but ClO2 works very well across a very wide range. Bacteria that are present in alkaline environments are as quickly killed as those in acid environments.

We don't know if our bodies can tell the difference between ClO2 and O2 or not because ClO2 does not exist inside the body.

Fortunately, Jim Humble is an inventor and not a chemist or medical professional. It may not be fair to hold him to the same standard you would someone who is trained in chemistry or medicine.

Another thing is that [edit Cl- is the cloride ion, it should be] ClO2- is not a chlorine ion, but is called a chlorite ion. People who have studied chemistry know this..., it appears that inventors don't.

Jim Humble is correct that eventually some ClO2 breaks down to salt, but his time table is a bit off. Since ClO2 is so unstable and it can't be measured inside the body, the scientists understand that chlorine dioxide, when introduced inside the body, immediately breaks down and forms chlorite ions. They attached radioactive isotopes to these chlorite ions and discovered that some of them indeed do form salt, but a majority of them (about 70%) simply float around in the body and end up in all of the organs of the body, including the brain, and the half life of these chlorite ions, in animals, is around 35 - 40 hours.

Jim Humble states that the ClO2 only lasts for a couple of hours and then quickly breaks down to table salt . This is not correct. The ClO2 immediately breaks down upon entering the mouth and forms chlorite ions. Some of the chlorite ions break down to form salt, but a majority of them circulate through the body and have a half life of 35 - 40 hours. Most of them are eliminated as chlorite ions in the urine.

Chlorite ions have been well studied by Science and the medical profession for years and years. The amount of chlorine dioxide that can be used in a water treatment plant is governed by these chlorite ion concentrations. There are levels set for intermediate and long term exposure to them. It just so happens that the levels involved in the MMS protocol are below those that cause death, but above the minimum risk levels that water treatment and industry have to stay below. If you research the studies on chlorine dioxide and chlorite you can figure out where you fit in on the studies by looking at the various adverse effect levels. Many people following the MMS protocol experience nausea and diarrhea and sometimes vomiting. These are adverse effects, so you are at the lowest observable adverse effect level for that concentration of chlorite in solution.

[quote=veronicalives]
"The American Society of Analytical Chemists stated in 1999 that Chlorine dioxide was the most powerful pathogen killer known to man (bacteria, viruses and germs). So, That being the case, why wouldn’t the pharmaceuticals embrace it?" [end quote]

This quote is correct, but the context was for external use. Water treatment is done outside the body, disinfecting surfaces are done outside the body, killing pathogens associated with meat, fish, vegetable, and fruit processing are all done outside the body. The pharmaceutical companies have explored this and found it to be a non selective, broad spectrum biocide and sanitizer. They have formulations for various sanitizing solutions and make lots of money from providing those to medical facilities.

However, they draw the line at introducing a non selective, broad spectrum toxic chemical into the body. The body has billions of germs and bacteria on and in it. Only a very small number of these germs are pathogenic, and in a healthy balanced body the good germs keep the bad germs in check. However, when an imbalance occurs, you get sick. ClO2, via the chlorite ion (Cl02-) is non selective and kills off everything it comes in contact with. The pharmaceutical companies reserve this approach as a last ditch effort and call this treatment chemotherapy. And, even with chemotherapy they are making efforts to adjust the mix to kill specific targets. The MMS protocol is like a broad spectrum chemotherapy.

The amazing thing is that in some cases chemotherapy works, and in the same way sometimes the MMS protocol works. However, I have noticed that often the benefits from following the MMS protocol come early on before the person reaches the concentrations that produce adverse effects. This is where the MMS protocol is flawed. The MMS solution is too high a concentration, is being improperly activated, and people are taking too much of it and experiencing adverse effects.

[quote=veronicalives]
"You are wrong. Sodium chlorite is produced from chlorine dioxide and sodium hydroxide (you have to add a third element to make it). Once you have the acidic solution of Sodium chlorite and sodium hydroxide it breaks down into chlorine dioxide." [end quote]

Mmmm... Not sure where you got this, but here is a web site that explains how NaClO2 is made.

http://www.madehow.com/Volume-6/Sodium-Chlorite.html


You will notice that chlorine dioxide is used to remove iron and maganese from water. It could possibly do the same thing in the body. Have you had your iron and magnesium levels checked lately?

[quote=veronicalives]
"As for your assertions about MMS by Mr. Humble causing oxidation and thereby stressing the body = you are wrong. Thats like saying oxidation is bad for the body... are you thinking about hydrogen peroxide? Because Yes that will hurt you. But not MMS. The body controls it and it only hurts pathogens with the opposite charge from healthy tissue.

You really are freaking yourself out on bad and wrong information." [end quote]

I agree that some oxidation in the body is good and without it we all would die. The problem is that we don't know the point when oxidation is beneficial or when it becomes oxidative stress.

One of the major components in aging is oxidative stress. All of the free radicals cause damage in the body. The chlorite ion is a free radical. Chemotherapy produces free radical damage to the body. The hair falls out, the skin looses its texture, and so on. The MMS protocol increases the amount of oxidation going on inside the body. A little of this may be beneficial, but when you get to the level where it is producing adverse effects, you have gone to far. Fortunately, people generally understand the importance of antioxidants and try to have a diet rich in antioxidant foods. This will offset some of the oxidative stress involved in following the MMS protocol. However, now we are on a seesaw. Take the dose of MMS, then a couple of hours later take your antioxidants. If the dose is too strong, mix some antioxidant rich foods in with it (juice and apples) to "use up" some of the ClO2 so it isn't as strong as it was. If you don't see the healing effects you hoped for, simply take more and take it more often.

While this approach sometimes does produce benefits, it is hardly a scientific or responsible approach. I does allow for an explanation of the failure of the protocol. If it doesn't work, either you didn't take enough, or take it often enough, or take it long enough. Any adverse effects observed during taking the MMS protocol, must be from internal die off, and couldn't be associated with the natural poisoning involved with ingesting a toxic chemical and the natural effect of drinking an acid solution.

[quote=veronicalives]
"Because you don't think it can be safe if used sensibly, wouldn't it be more responsible to state facts that support your thinking, or just plain respect other's point of view since you have had no supporting facts against MMS?" [end quote]

I happen to think that a sodium chlorite solution can be used sensibly, however when I ask Jim Humble for test results or references to how he developed his ideas that the MMS protocol was sensible, he supplies nothing. "Just do it because I say it is OK and I say its safe." I am sorry, this doesn't cut it with me. Now I am having to find the references myself, and I come up with a lot of scientific testing that say that the MMS protocol involves concentrations of chlorite that are above the minimum risk levels set down for water treatment. If it is unsafe to treat water at the levels the MMS protocol uses, how can it be safe to follow the MMS protocol?

[quote=veronicalives]
"Wrong. You are purposely running around in circles saying the same thing again and again. CHLORINE DIOXIDE is not Sodium Chlorine. What is the matter with you???

..................and

MMS / Sodium Chlorite is ACTIVATED WITH citric acid and then DILUTED WITH WATER and is perfectly safe. ASK A CHEMIST or Read up on your chemistry.

IFFFFFFFFFFFFF YOU INGEST Sodium Chlorite in its natural state YES YOU ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.

Key: ACTIVATE, DILUTE. DONE.
Sheesh, try keeping it real!" [end quote]

I am not sure what sodium chlorine is, but while the MMS protocol does call for diluting the mixture after activation, it does not go far enough. Jim Humble, and Adam Abraham, have stated that the MMS dose ends up with a concentration of about 1 PPM chlorine dioxide. This is a lie. The dose from MMS activated with citric acid has a much higher concentration of chlorine dioxide than 1 PPM.

You can verify this yourself. Mix up a dose of MMS and take it down to your water treatment plant and ask them if they can run a test on it and tell you the concentration of ClO2 in it. Tell them that you have been told that it should be 1 PPM. If that is too much trouble, you can order some chlorine dioxide test strips and measure the concentrations yourself.

I assume that Adam Abraham doesn't know any better, and he is just mouthing what Jim Humble is saying. However, when I find out that Jim Humble is lying about this aspect of MMS, that he doesn't understand the chemistry involved with MMS, and that he isn't willing to share how he determined that MMS is safe, I am left wondering about every other aspect of the MMS protocol.

I have taken the time to do the research and have called Jim Humble out to verify what he says. He has responded simply by saying that I should read his book. This seems to indicate that the inventor doesn't know how to talk about the Science of MMS, and is only guessing with his statements.

The fact is that no one knows what the chlorite ion does inside the body. Lots of people have tried MMS. Some have had some relief from the symptoms of their illness, but no one has come back with before and after tests illustrating that their illness has been cured.

The current MMS protocol presented by Jim Humble is flawed. The concentrations recommended are far higher than that used for water treatment, and the claims of safety go against the testing done on the safety of using chlorine dioxide for water treatment.

[quote=veronicalives]
"Ok FINALLY, something I can debate. You are confused and have to understand what it is you are talking about:

You are confusing Sodium chlorite (MMS without the Citric Acid), with Chlorous acid, HClO2 (which is only stable at low concentrations).

1.) Chlorous acid HClO2 can't be used concentrated, so it is not a commercial product.

2.) Sodium Chlorite NaClO2 is not Sodium Chloride NaCl.

3.) Sodium Chlorite NaClO2 is stable and inexpensive enough to be commercially available (the other is not). It is derived indirectly from sodium chlorate, NaClO3. First, the explosively unstable gas chlorine dioxide, ClO2 is produced by reducing sodium chlorate in a strong acid solution with a suitable reducing agent (for example, sodium chloride, sulfur dioxide, or hydrochloric acid).

4.) Sodium chlorite (stabilized oxygen) is highly alkaline, the opposite of acid. When neutralized it becomes unstable and begins to release, not oxygen but chlorine dioxide. The chlorine dioxide ion are already neutral which for oxygen is a minus 2 state. The oxygen ion cannot oxidize anything; it can only become a part of the water in the body and cannot be utilized for any kind of oxygen. The chlorine ion basically becomes a minute amount of table salt which has no power either. Both now have no charge for any kind of oxidation, so you see, it is the CHLORINE DIOXIDE that does all the work but only because it supplies ELECTRONS (not oxygen) !! Again, the Chlorine dioxide ion is the oxidizer, not the oxygen (if that were the case, several deep breaths of air would cause great injury ... the little explosions that they are saying would erupt inside our bodies... lol). Check your chemistry book. Any reaction in which electrons are transferred is considered oxidation - brb again ... dindin calls" [end quote]

I think we have already covered this, but since you were so kind as to list it step by step, let's go over it step by step.

Your first statement is wrong. When you activate sodium chlorite by adding citric acid to it, it forms a solution of chlorous acid and releases some of the available chlorine dioxide as free chlorine dioxide in water. The rest of the available chlorine dioxide is held in the unstable chlorous acid solution. As the chlorous acid solution breaks down, chlorine dioxide is released.

Your #1 statement is not correct. The meat, seafood, vegetable, and fruit processing industries all commercially use chlorous acid. It is used commercially used to keep cut flowers looking better, longer. It is also used to kill mold and fungus in buildings, and keep that mold and fungus from returning.

These commercial industries have been using chlorous acid longer than Jim Humble has been involved with MMS. The interesting thing is that they use a 5% sodium chlorite solution and activate it with 50% citric acid in a ratio that uses 1 part 50% citric acid to 5 parts 5% sodium chlorite. One could speculate that Jim Humble stumbled across this and simply switch some of the numbers around and introduced MMS and the MMS protocol...

Your #2 statement is correct.

In statement #3, I will refer you to the earlier link I posted on how sodium chlorite is manufactured.

In statement #4, I will simply remind you that sodium chlorite is a stable way to contain chlorine dioxide. When the PH of sodium chlorite is reduced, chlorine dioxide is released. When chlorine dioxide breaks down it form a chlorite ion.

The amount of available chlorine dioxide is directly related to the concentration of the sodium chlorite solution. If we are looking a concentrations in PPM we simply multiply the % strength of the sodium chlorite solution by 1000000. MMS is 28% sodium chlorite by weight made from technical grade sodium chlorite. Technical grade sodium chlorite is 80% pure, so MMS is actually 22.4% sodium chlorite. The available chlorine dioxide in 22.4% sodium chlorite is 224000 PPM. That means that if you put 1 ml of 22.4% sodium chlorite in 1 liter of water you will have 224 PPM of ClO2 available. 1 ml is about 17 drops. If you put it into half a liter, the concentration doubles to 448 PPM. Since the MMS protocol involves only diluting with about 200 ml, you have to take the 1 liter concentration and multiply it by 5. That means that 17 drops MMS in 200 ml of water (half a glass) gives you 1120 PPM of available chlorine dioxide. As you can see, this is much higher than the 1 PPM that Jim Humble and Adam Abraham have stated.

Just because there is chlorine dioxide available does not mean that it is all released. To measure the amount released, we look at the free ClO2 in water. There are several methods available to measure this, but the easiest (yet least accurate) is to use test strips. You can also look at the color of the solution and get a very rough approximation of the concentration of free ClO2 in it. A 1 PPM concentration looks basically clear, like water. At 5 PPM there is a slight yellow color to the solution. At 10 PPM it is quite yellow-green, and at 100 PPM it is a much darker yellow-green than the 10 PPM was.

I might add that a 1 PPM free ClO2 solution does not taste like there is something in the water, and has little, or no, odor. If the MMS protocol actually ended up with a 1 PPM free ClO2 concentration, no one would complain of the awful taste and odor.

When you figure out why Jim Humble lied about the concentration of chlorine dioxide involved in the doses mixed up using the MMS protocol, and why he won't share his test data that shows that MMS is safe, even when it involves concentrations higher than those allowed in water treatment, come back and we can discuss this a little more.

Keep in mind that the water treatment studies involved chlorine dioxide. This is different from what is involved with MMS. MMS is following the acidified sodium chlorite technology that is commercially used in food processing, and all of the studies in that industry are for external applications, not ingestion. Dentists have studied mouthwashes and toothpaste solutions containing unactivated sodium chlorite, but they are using concentrations much lower than MMS and they don't recommend swallowing. Spit it out.

I use a sodium chlorite solution daily, but do not use MMS, nor do I follow the MMS protocol. I think that Jim Humble could come up with an excellent protocol if he was interested in doing that, but his actions speak otherwise. I don't think a sodium chlorite solution can eliminate all disease, but a safe concentration may be able to help with some.

Tom
 

 
Printer-friendly version of this page Email this message to a friend
Alert Moderators
Report Spam or bad message  Alert Moderators on This GOOD Message

This Forum message belongs to a larger discussion thread. See the complete thread below. You can reply to this message!


 

Donate to CureZone


CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with https://www.netatlantic.com


Contact Us - Advertise - Stats

Copyright 1999 - 2024  www.curezone.org

0.145 sec, (12)