or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Women's Health  › Spin-off discussion about Chlorine Dioxide/MMS and the eradication of disease
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Spin-off discussion about Chlorine Dioxide/MMS and the eradication of disease - Page 3

post #41 of 339

I don't really know anything about MMS, but how is this issue different from the dozens of moms on MDC who claim that eating placenta is the best thing ever?  Are there independent, double-blind studies to back that up?  Because I don't see women getting attacked all over this board for recommending ingesting placenta.

post #42 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

I don't really know anything about MMS, but how is this issue different from the dozens of moms on MDC who claim that eating placenta is the best thing ever?  Are there independent, double-blind studies to back that up?  Because I don't see women getting attacked all over this board for recommending ingesting placenta.



I don't know anything about mms either.  The difference I see though is that eating placenta is something that animals do, so it is at least a natural thing.  Maybe animals eat it to hide evidence of birth, but I know actual people who have eaten it and said that it helped in various ways (I didn't eat it, so I can't say personally).  Placebo or not, it's a natural thing.

 

 I've never heard of MMS/chlorine dioxide before the recent discussions here.  I'd like to know who's using it, where they're using it, how they're documenting the information, what's the idea behind it?  

 

 

post #43 of 339

Honestly, I roll my eyes at the placenta thing all the time.  It's hooey.  There is absolutely no evidence to support the idea that placentophagia does anything (besides maybe solve a disposal problem), and it drives me bats that people recommend it.  The only difference, as far as I'm concerned, is that there's no one going around selling books on eating your placenta, or encouraging people to forego medical treatment for AIDS, cancer, etc., because all you need is placenta.  So even though placenta for hemorrhage and PPD sounds like BS to me, and makes me mad on that level, I'm capable of leaving it alone.  For now.  Sorta.  It really would not take much to push me over that edge.

post #44 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

I don't really know anything about MMS, but how is this issue different from the dozens of moms on MDC who claim that eating placenta is the best thing ever?  Are there independent, double-blind studies to back that up?  Because I don't see women getting attacked all over this board for recommending ingesting placenta.



well just as a starting point for you...the placenta is a product created organically in the body to NUTURE life specifically. It is not toxic or poisonous. Eating it is akin to eating any other organ from any animal.

 

MMS is a glorified bleach solution...I would strongly urge you to just read through this thread then read some other stuff...it is fascinating, the claims about mms are fantastical, unproven and full of holes, interesting though!

post #45 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeepyCat View Post



 

Calm, I am not WildKingdom, but here's one issue:  paperwork regarding blood tests can be faked.  Faxing is a fantastic way to obscure the indications of forgery.  (Seriously.  Give me one original lab report, a PC, and a multi-function copier and within 24 hours, I can fax you a lab report that says anything you want it to say about anyone you name.)  Furthermore, a single run of bloodwork proves nothing.  Sure, a test may genuinely show that Patient A has a good CD4 count and low/no viral loads, but what were those values last week?  Did this person ever test HIV+, or exhibit symptoms of AIDS?

 

Plenty of AIDS patients are asymptomatic, and we have various tactics for attempting to return patients to that state or to keep them there in the first place.  What researchers want to do is to cure the disease - to assist the body in mounting a successful immune response against the retrovirus, such that they cease to carry it.

 

 


This is decidedly NOT standard chemistry.  How can an oxidiser "rip electrons" from a retrovirus encased within lipids and glycoproteins?  How can bleach operate to rip electrons from a pathogen already contained within a human host cell without doing catastrophic damage to that cell, and ultimately to the host? 

 

I have seen a lot of scientific hoaxes, and this one has many of the red flags I associate with those:  fundamental misunderstanding of the problem, vague and scientifically questionable descriptions of the mechanism of the solution, and "proof" consisting of poorly documented individual cases, resulting in rejection and indifference from the larger scientific community.

 


oh I am no science genius but I agree with all of this, especially the bolded

 

post #46 of 339

Ingesting placenta is a choice that an individual makes for herself.  That decision involves a woman and her own personal placenta.  Virtually all moms will then seek more treatment if bleeding continues, and thus, even if it doesn't work, the choice is harmless. 

 

MMS is a product being hawked around the world with promises of curing a variety of illnesses, that is actually industrial bleach.  When it causes diarrhea and vomiting, which are classic reactions to ingesting dangerous chemicals like bleach, customers are told that this is a sign of toxins leaving the body (to be fair, it is - the toxins in the bleach are leaving the body).  This does not result in any verifiable cures for any of the conditions it is alleged to cure, and has killed at least one person.  If you want to tell people that drinking industrial-grade bleach is a good idea and cures AIDS (or malaria, cholera, or a host of other conditions), then you are encouraging them to poison themselves for no benefit.  The choice is harmful, and encouraging other people to try it is perpetuating a con.  

 

A bottle of MMS sells for around $20.  It costs about 35 cents to manufacture the quantity of bleach contained in the bottle.  The difference is a tidy profit even before you factor in Jim Humble's book sales.  MMS is sold as a water purifier, because that is the only legitimate health use for bleach.  Customers are told on the internet or through word of mouth (not on the bottle, because that would violate marketing laws in most countries) that they can "activate" the health benefits by mixing it with fruit juice, which makes it more acidic and more dangerous.  And then when it makes them sick(er), proponents/sales-people encourage customers to think that every time a sufficiently enlightened person gets diarrhea, an angel gets its wings and that everyone who says MMS is poison is part of a worldwide conspiracy out to suppress a cure for all three of the largest public health threats in the world today.  

 

Calm, if I sound hostile to you here, it's because I am.  Your claims are well beyond the realm of reason.  I don't believe that you have "healed" anyone of anything.  


Edited by stik - 4/26/11 at 2:15pm
post #47 of 339

This is all very interesting - (the topic - not the insults hurled by certain members - totally unneccessary IMO). I know zero about MMS. I look forward to looking into the topic. From a logical standpoint - ingesting bleach seems dangerous and counterintuitive but I will research with interest!

post #48 of 339

 

Quote:

I don't really know anything about MMS, but how is this issue different from the dozens of moms on MDC who claim that eating placenta is the best thing ever 

 

Because it is not going to hurt them either way. Whether it helps or not-meh I don't care because it won't hurt them.

 

But the most important distinction-it is not being sold as a cure to desperate and very sick people. That is dispicable. It is being peddled as a miracle drug and it isn't-it is simply a way for disreputable people to make money off of very sick people.

 

Edited to remove my beliefs about intentions...


Edited by oaktreemama - 4/26/11 at 1:26pm
post #49 of 339

Calm, a few years ago you and I had a discussion in TAO over "causation" of HIV/AIDs. Can you please clarify your feelings on the point? Do you believe that HIV/AIDS is caused by a virus, or caused by overuse of poppers, or something else? How about malaria? Do you believe in plasmodium causing malaria?

 

Mods, thank you for separating out this discussion!

 

 

 

 

 

post #50 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

This is all very interesting - (the topic - not the insults hurled by certain members - totally unneccessary IMO). I know zero about MMS. I look forward to looking into the topic. From a logical standpoint - ingesting bleach seems dangerous and counterintuitive but I will research with interest!



just a caution marnica if you google mms or even mms fraud or something most of the results will be various jim humble websites...you have to dig kinda deep to get past them...

post #51 of 339
Personally, I am not opposed to supplements - I actually do use supplements for certain things. But just like any other treatment, I look to see what published evidence is available in scientific journals regarding both safety and efficacy. I just don't think you can be too safe & I do think it's important to make informed treatment decisions.

When I look quickly, all I see about chlorine dioxide pertains to antimocrobial uses in things like water treatment, medical waste, surface disinfection of medical & kitchen equipment & topical applications. I also see toxicity studies. I tend to feel that there is a lack of safety data as well as data on ingestion as a treatment - I mean, just because it kills microbes in vitro does not necessarily mean it will act as a systemic antimicrobial on ingestion, KWIM? Or at least not at non-toxic concentrations. It also concerns me that the FDA issued a consumer warning last year:
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm220747.htm

I'm certainly open to the idea that perhaps it could at some time be used as a treatment in some way. But in order to feel comfortable using it in any way, I would need to see some published data. Maybe it's out there somewhere & I'm just not seeing it.
post #52 of 339
Thread Starter 

 

 

Quote:
 
Calm, if I sound hostile to you here, it's because I am.  Your claims are well beyond the realm of reason.  I don't believe that you have "healed" anyone of anything.  In my most charitable moments, I think you are grandiose and easily misled by people who make you feel important.  In other moments, I think you know you're lying.  

Feel better now?  Cos like, ouch, mate.  Do I know you, have we even met?  You must be a real party favourite.  

 

 

Quote:
 
I don't believe Calm has good intentions in this. 

 

This is why I didn't want to do this thread, because shots like these are unnecessarily personal and assumptions based on nothing but opinion.  I'm obviously not making money on this, no one is, and I don't sell it... so I must just be some whacked out psycho who wants to hurt people, who has bad intentions?  Is it that hard to stick to the topic?  I'm never in any doubt I'm not on a science forum here, due to the lack of evidence to back opinions and also it is almost guaranteed some won't keep their emotions at the door - then when their emotions get the better of them, they need a place to direct it.  Must people make it about me?  It only weakens your position.  People aren't idiots, and unless you're a celeb, your opinion alone won't stand for much, regardless how much venom and sarcasm you try to arm it with.  People want to know why you feel that way.  So produce evidence for them or a personal anecdote.  You all seem to be making all the claims.  So... back yer sh!t up, yo.  Toxic, is it?  Show people why you say that.  Where are your clinical trials?  Where is your evidence?  Is it the big scary FDA warning against nausea and dehydration?  Then say so, then LINK it... blow me away with your science.  

 

Shall I list the side effects of tylenol, something most mothers give their babies?  More on comparisons later...

 

I happen to believe that the reason it becomes personal is because you have absolutely nothing to base your claims on.  All the chemistry supports the fact that chlorine dioxide is safe, and in my next post, I will be linking them but in the mean time, I wanted to point that out.  People keep using the word "bleach" as though that explains everything.  It's such a great visual, someone sucking down a bottle of chlorox... so instead of using science, hey, use fear... it works for the FDA.  

 

Things like the bleach mantra scream, "knows nothing about chemistry... alert alert... this person is subject to media propaganda..."  Chlorine dioxide is as much chlorine as table salt is (sodium chloride)... both contain chlorine, both are completely different... and both are completely different to sodium hypoclorite (bleach, clorox).  That an oxidiser "bleaches" is not new science, only to the easily led layperson does that even mean anything.  The body produces stronger bleaches in the form of oxides ... such as peroxide and the much stronger ones, superoxides.  Your own immune system makes stronger "bleaches", you could turn your hair Nordic with one application.  So what?  Unless you know the chemistry of oxidation, calling something "bleach" is inconsequential and is regurgitating someone else's critic work because you have nothing to create your own with.

 

Show me evidence of harm and I'll show you inhalation or mega dose.  To save you further trouble, no one recommends inhalation or mega dose.  As vaccinators love to remind us, the dose makes the poison.  Suck down formaldehyde and mercury as long as it is in small enough quantities to do no harm, even jab it straight into a muscle if you must.  Everything has an LD50, even lettuce, ie, everything has a lethal dose.  To ignore the thousands of testimonies and hundreds of thousands of international success stories or put them down as some mass delusion or mass intention to deceive to make... uh, 20 bucks a bottle for a year's supply... is irrational.  I'm too busy to be a crack pot, though it does look like fun.  My plans for world domination will just have to wait.  In the meantime, I have some information to share, and as odd as it may sound to the average jaded American, I am gaining nothing from this except the messages I get when someone has a health success.  And yeah, that's pretty addictive... I enjoy it.  Selfish reason perhaps. 

 

If you look through other forums, you'll see I go on rants about gentle parenting, saving penises, saving Iraqis... things I'm passionate about... I guess all those rants are also because I "don't have good intentions".  

 

FTR, I have not healed anyone of anything and do not claim to.  Three clients I had took MMS and they reported back to me their results.  I have a list of testimonies from friend's travels and my own, but I make no claims, if for no other reason than it is illegal.  The FDA has effectively made free speech a memory, if it even really ever existed in our culture.  I simply state what has been told to me, what I have experienced, the science and research papers.  Make of that what you will.  I also do not recommend taking MMS.  I would not, and I cannot.  This is educational purposes only, and remember, always seek your doctor's opinion before doing anything at all.  Heck knows we can't be trusted to think for ourselves.

post #53 of 339

...


Edited by Ldavis24 - 4/26/11 at 2:48pm
post #54 of 339
Thread Starter 

 

 

 

 

I thought an FAQ would be a good way to approach this massive subject. It is made easier since the same questions and assumptions are brought up over and over.

 

FAQ

 

1) Didn't someone die from taking MMS?

 

No deaths have been proven caused by MMS.  There was one death where a woman was very ill and her husband gave her mms but she died anyway.  As much as they tried to find a link, they could not.  There was a death in decades past where a man fell into a vat of chlorine dioxide.  He died from a massive inhalation.  No one has died from oral use of MMS, not at any dose let alone the tiny recommended dose.  

 

2) Isn't chlorine dioxide bleach?

 

This is addressed in the above post, repeated here:

 

 

This word is used by critics as a scary visual... before this word was used, "chlorine dioxide" was not known as anything, so the people had to discover how it worked and research themselves.  The word "bleach" was tagged to it, and that has allowed people to think they know what it is, and they equate it to household chlorox... which makes drinking it seem ridiculous.  And that is the entire point of calling it bleach.

 

 

Chlorine dioxide is as much chlorine as table salt is (sodium chloride)... both contain chlorine, both are completely different... and both are completely different to sodium hypoclorite (bleach, clorox).  That an oxidiser "bleaches" is not new science, only to the easily led layperson does that even mean anything.  The body produces stronger bleaches in the form of oxides ... such as peroxide and the much stronger ones, superoxides.  Your own immune system makes stronger "bleaches", you could turn your hair Nordic with one application.  Sulfur dioxide is a well known preservative, but it also bleaches.  Lemons bleach.  So does turmeric.  

 

Unless you know the chemistry of oxidation, calling something "bleach" is inconsequential.  

 

MMS does not work by chlorination, it is an oxidiser.

 

Chlorine dioxide reaction chemistry.

 

The chlorine has been shown in studies to not have any part to play whatsoever in the anti-pathogenic effect. (Source)  Only the oxygen (the O2 part of the molecule ClO2) works on them, the Cl part binds to sodium and is excreted as salt in the urine. Bleach works as chlorination, combining with molecules creating new ones that are largely toxic. Drinking sodium hypochlorite is dangerous, and one would not use it on one's person at all. Personally, I warn against having it in one's home as it pollutes our waterways and general environment, not just our immediate environment. Oxidisers can “bleach”, and this is simply a redox reaction.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

3) Isn't it that we can't find anyone who can be proven as harmed by MMS simply because so few people have used MMS?

 

I cringe at answering this particular notion as it is so obviously flawed, but I have heard it more than once so I'll address it, under protest.  

 

Millions of bottles have been sold online. Hundreds of thousands have been treated in other countries such as those in Africa. Thousands of testimonies can be found online. Those facts alone debunk that as the reason no one has been harmed.  Even if only 100 people had ever used it, ever, surely statistically there would have been something to chew on since it is touted as being so dangerous and ridiculous to contemplate using?  But thousands passed, then millions... and still nothing.  I don't know what to tell someone who discounts that as incredible evidence of safety.  Most clinical trials have tens or hundreds of participants before a substance is ruled as safe.  In fact, much more than "one death" is required before the FDA removes a product from the shelf.  Hundreds of thousands of people die every year in the US alone from pharmaceuticals but they remain "safe".  

 

You can scurry around googling like a mad person looking for something, anything, but in the end, really, look at yourself... it is a sad state we are in when we don't fear the actual products causing great harm, we accept them as "collateral damage" because others are helped by those products... but a substance with barely a stomach ache as a side effect is considered ridiculous, dangerous; and those spreading education on it are crazy, dangerous, quacks.... and no one sees the glaring irony in that. 

 

It isn't fulfilling the fearful prophecies.  It just isn't.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

4) Hasn't it been proven to be toxic?

 

Actually, all the research proves it is safe. There is absolutely no data to support the argument it is toxic.  The history was that for many years, the critics insisted it couldn't work, but that wasn't scaring people from trying it and it totally backfired.  The "toxic" debate only started when the word "bleach" started being connected with it.  Some clever little bunny had an aha moment about that word knowing how gullible the ignorant can be.  

 

It has little evidence for oral toxicity at large doses, and no evidence for oral toxicity at the recommended dose.  This is usually the most surprising fact to people, demonstrating the power of the media to persuade.

 

Sodium chlorite is technically MMS.  That has some toxicity proven connected to it.  Minimal (compared to tylenol, for instance), but it does exist.  However, when mixed with citric acid, sodium chlorite becomes chlorine dioxide, the active substance.  Chlorine dioxide is not sodium chlorite, and it is sodium chlorite that has been dragged through the mud because that is what MMS technically is.  A man in China tried to suicide with sodium chlorite and failed. (source)

 

The LD50 (lethal dose) is greater than 10000mg/kg of body weight. (source)

 

For perspective, table salt has an LD50 of 3000 mg/kg, aspirin 200mg/kg LD, acetaminophen 1944mg/kg. (source)

 

In the following study, not only did ClO2 show no harm, it protected the mice from the flu. 70% of the mice on placebo died, 100% of the mice survived with ClO2 treatment.

Protective Effect of Low-Concentration Chlorine dioxide Gas against influenza A virus Infection

 

Safety of ingested ClO2 demonstrated

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6961033

 

Chronic Administration to healthy adult males

 

 

UPDATE: WF10, Immunokine, Macrokine and Dioxychlor are all chlorine dioxide under another name, patented drugs.  They are used for the same diseases the testimonies have all claimed crude chlorine dioxide use at home has worked against.  This thread starts to look into these products from this post onwards.

 

 

5) What is the evidence it works on pathogens, inside or out of the body, especially against viruses?

 

UPDATE: see FAQ number 4 re WF10

 

 

 

 

Oxidation is a very effective method for pathogen eradication because pathogens cannot build resistance to oxidation like they can toxins produced by other organisms (which we harness in antibiotics such as the toxin produced by a fungus to produce penicillin). 

 

There is plenty of evidence it works against all tested pathogens including viruses, aside from that link in number 4:

 

Antiviral Effect of Chlorine Dioxide against Influenza Virus and Its

Application for Infection Control

 

Effect of Chlorine Dioxide Gas at Extremely low concentration on absenteeism of school children

 

How it works

 

How it works against malaria specifically, via oral administration - very interesting and important work, with extensive references.

 

Gloves designed for hospitals using embedded ClO2

 

There is extensive research on use as a mouth rinse.  This is just one of them.  Would you rinse your mouth with "bleach"? 

 

Inactivation of Hepatitis A 

 

poliovirus

 

No need to evacuate

 

There are more.  But you get the gist.

 

 

6) We know of evidence it works against pathogens, but what about the claims it pulls out heavy metals and toxic substances from the body?

 

Chlorine Dioxide Reaction Chemistry

 

Hair analysis has shown before and after treatment that metals are removed.  Chemistry shown it oxidises heavy metals, which is different to chelation.  It does not bind to toxic substances.  More can be found here on my friend Adam's blog: Chicken Little Revisited, "MMS is Falling!"  Adam traveled with Jim to Haiti and the DR.  He is a film maker and made some films about it.  He has seen it work up close and personal with desperate people.  I don't know Jim, but I trust Adam, he isn't lying.  Jim is apparently very stubborn and has some flighty ideas but he did stumble on something massive.   

 

 

7)  Any evidence all this African travel even happened... is it still happening?

 

This is a child being treated by Jim working with a doctor.    (they were called mercy drops back then)

 

Jim did 6 months last year in Malawi, as the gov't allowed him to conduct clinical trials.  Jim oversaw hundreds of malaria cases previous to that, very unofficially.  Then the 2010 trials, in which files were confiscated in customs.  I'm still learning more about that data.  

 

There are several missionary organisations using it currently.  This is the Malaria Initiative.  They use MMS, and the site has some data on it.  Here is a video from their site (the first half are the people re mms, the second half is the religious stuff).

 

Perhaps a few of you would like to call those missionaries and insult them and all they do?  It might go down really nicely if you tell them they just are a pack of Jesus lovin' liars.  

 

 

8) Videos?

 

Interview with a doctor (by Adam smile.gif)

 

Andreas Kalcker

 

Adam addresses the FDA "warning"

 

 

9)  Why are there no trials being done to show conclusively what all these things total?

 

UPDATE: Trials have been done since the 1980's and continue to be done on the various chlorine dioxide and chlorite containing IV drugs.  

 

Trials cost millions of dollars.  The "backyard genius" has no hope in today's red tape ruled science world.  No one connected to MMS has any money. They've contacted Bill Gates, Oprah, many people.  No one wants to invest in it, as there is no profit.  Investors are exactly that: investors.  There must be a return because it is not charity.  For further info and frustration as to why it is so difficult to get a clinical trial, watch the movie Extraordinary Measures.

 

 

10) Why isn't this all over the news?  

 

Good question.  Why don't you contact the NY Times and find out.

 

 

11)  Why aren't doctors clamouring to deal with this?

 

Ask Wildkingdom, a poster on this thread and apparently a doctor.  Whatever answer she gives you, that is the answer to this question.

 

 

I've no doubt some of my links are messed up or I've made errors of some sort, it is late and I'm tired.  Just let me know and I'll tidy it up.  I have other links but I had to draw the line, my husband is tapping his foot here.  

 

I request that a serious effort is made to understand all that chemistry and information before rubbishing something that is currently in operation for needy families in Africa and Asia, right now, while you sit there and say it isn't happening.  

 

Think.  Before you step into territory you know little about... every substance in history went through this phase.  The phase of disbelief and ridicule.  

 

It's not a nice feeling when instead of thanks when those field workers in Africa get home, they get the kind of hate I see on here.  Baseless, unwarranted, hate and anger.  Just stop it!  Grow up.  Look at this rationally, look at the science.  There's little money in it.  They aren't crazy.  They aren't lying.  Sooo, what is it?   Could it be perhaps that it WORKS?   

 

 

 

 


Edited by Calm - 5/7/11 at 2:50pm
post #55 of 339

none of what you posted is evidence of a cure of anything.

 


Edited by Ldavis24 - 4/26/11 at 2:54pm
post #56 of 339
Thread Starter 

Ah, LDavis, ya just couldn't wait.  I did say my next post was addressing it, and now they aren't in order.  lol  

 

There are those of you I know will not change their positions, so it is esp funny when posts keep saying "well now I'm REALLY sure it's all a scam" when face it... you thought that all along, and nothing and no one except the president will change your mind.  At least now you have some actual science to ridicule it with, instead of whatever the hell you first ridiculed it for.  

 

 

post #57 of 339

...


Edited by Ldavis24 - 4/26/11 at 2:49pm
post #58 of 339
Thread Starter 

I'm glad you posted so fast.  You've made discrediting you so much easier.  You did not read more than one link on there.  That's rather deceitful.  You didn't see the video of the missionaries actually using it.  You didn't check the chemistry, and certainly not the malaria chem because that is a long one.  I only just pressed the post button ten minutes ago.  You should have waited longer before posting, because you've just outed yourself as a naysayer who has no reason.

 

As I said, go and call those missionaries.  Call them, and tell them what you're telling me.  Do you seriously think they packed up and moved to africa to use MMS cos they had nothing better to do?

 

I'm glad you're sick of this argument, because you've got no science, nothing but sarcasm.  Come back when you have something.    


Edited by Calm - 4/26/11 at 3:00pm
post #59 of 339

...

 


Edited by Ldavis24 - 4/26/11 at 2:49pm
post #60 of 339
Thread Starter 

Having fun?  


Edited by Calm - 4/26/11 at 3:00pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Women's Health
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Women's Health  › Spin-off discussion about Chlorine Dioxide/MMS and the eradication of disease