Chlorine Dioxide is NOT a Supplement! - The UltimateFatBurner Blog

Chlorine Dioxide is NOT a Supplement!

In surfing through the news this morning, I came across the following news item:

The Food and Drug Adminstration is warning people not to use a supplement that claims to treat diseases ranging from HIV to acne, after receiving reports it is making consumers sick.  When used as directed,  the FDA says Miracle Mineral Solution (MMS) produces chlorine dioxide, a potent bleach often used in industrial water treatment and stripping textiles.  

The FDA has received numerous reports of serious side effects including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and life threatening low-blood pressure from dehydration.

According to the FDA:

The product instructs consumers to mix the 28 percent sodium chlorite solution with an acid such as citrus juice. This mixture produces chlorine dioxide, a potent bleach used for stripping textiles and industrial water treatment. High oral doses of this bleach, such as those recommended in the labeling, can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and symptoms of severe dehydration. 

MMS claims to treat multiple unrelated diseases, including HIV, hepatitis, the H1N1 flu virus, common colds, acne, cancer, and other conditions. The FDA is not aware of any research that MMS is effective in treating any of these conditions. MMS also poses a significant health risk to consumers who may choose to use this product for self-treatment instead of seeking FDA-approved treatments for these conditions. 

Twenty-eight percent? This is hardly dilute… by contrast, vinegar contains 4% – 8% acetic acid.

I had to see this stuff to believe it… and now that I’ve seen it, I’m amazed the FDA is even allowing these jokers to stay in business! The write up is outrageous:

The answer to AIDS, hepatitis A,B and C, malaria, herpes, TB, most cancer and many more of mankind’s worse diseases has been found. Many diseases are now easily controlled. More that 75,000 disease victims have been included in the field tests in Africa. Scientific clinical trials have been conducted in a prison in the country of Malawi, East Africa.

Separate tests conducted by the Malawi government produced identical 99% cure results. Over 60% of the AIDS victims that were treated in Uganda were well in 3 days, with 98% well within one month. More than 90% of the malaria victims were well in 4 to 8 hours. Dozens of other diseases were successfully treated and can be controlled with this new mineral supplement. It also works with colds, flu, pneumonia, sore throats, warts, mouth sores, and even abscessed teeth (it’s the only thing that controls and cures abscessed teeth).

So where are these “tests?”  Suffice it to say that these claims are supported by exactly ZERO credible evidence. If the government of Malawi performed tests that produced such miraculous results, you’d think this would be news worth reporting by the Ministry of Health or the National AIDS Commission. There’s nada, insofar as I can tell.

Are the people behind this crap simply evil or insane? “Obscene” is the word used by one pharmacologist, and I think it’s a good one.  Sure, very dilute amounts are likely to be harmless, but as my husband, a Senior Environmental Scientist with CH2M-HILL pointed out:

How toxic is chlorine dioxide? The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has studied the health risks fairly extensively, since chlorine dioxide is used in some areas for disinfecting drinking water. Short-term ingestion of water containing up to 24 parts per million (that 0.0024 percent in water) did not result in adverse health effects, in some studies. Laboratory studies have been reviewed by the EPA to determine how well people tolerate very low levels of chlorine dioxide residues that might remain in drinking water after disinfection.

The National Library of Medicine’s Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HDSB) provides a case report of a couple of adults each ingesting 250 milliliters (a pint) of water with 40 ppm chlorine dioxide, or ingestion of around 10 milligrams. They reportedly experienced sudden headaches, nausea, abdominal discomfort and light-headedness, which disappeared within minutes.

There are other indications that long-term exposure may pose some risks to developing fetuses and to individuals with blood cell disorders. EPA’s recommended level for protection of human health of 2 mg/day, over a lifetime, is based on prevention of these more sensitive effects.

So, there isn’t any real surprise that drinking a 28% solution of chlorine dioxide, even heavily diluted, would produce symptoms of gastrointestinal distress.

In other words, the EPA considers chlorine dioxide to be a human health hazard. And it’s nothing short of criminal to promise miracle cures to people suffering from serious diseases. Hopefully, if the FDA doesn’t act more decisively, the FTC will.

Update: This is seriously off-the-deep-end stuff from the “inventor” of MMS.

Author: elissa

Elissa is a former research associate with the University of California at Davis, and the author/co-author of over a dozen articles published in scientific journals. Currently a freelance writer and researcher, Elissa brings her multidisciplinary education and training to her writing on nutrition and supplements.

32 Comments

  1. After all that, they are still allowed to sell this stuff. How much more evidence does the FDA need to shut this down. Unbelievable and unethical and bordering on criminal.

    Post a Reply
  2. 28% reflects the sodium chlorite content, not the chlorine dioxide. When activated by an acid, the sodium chlorite will produce chlorine dioxide levels that generally do not exceed 3 ppm, well below the EPA’s 2mg/day (8 ppm) lifetime level. However, the EPA limits sodium chlorite itself to a maximum of 1 ppm in drinking water.

    There’s a sure paucity of scientific evidence for internal ingestion of chlorine dioxide as opposed to environmental, topical or oral. But if people want to be their own guinea pigs, that is their business, not the government’s.

    Post a Reply
    • Yup, he did a hasty reading, and misattributed the 28%… so noted.

      But no, your conclusion is faulty – people have a right to not be lied to. I have no problem with someone knowingly being a guinea pig; but that is clearly NOT the issue, here.

      Post a Reply
  3. People who get nausea, vomiting and dehydration from using MMS do now know how to use it. I’ve been using it for two years, succesfully keeping my Chronic Fatigue in check.

    You can die from drinking too much water also. You can set your house on fire with matches too. Why’s that not on the FDA list?

    It’s the same thing with MMS. It works, and is safe when used correctly.

    Remember, you can overdose on ANYTHING, even water. Just because a few misguided persons have complained to the FDA, it’s now being labeled as some crackpot concoction. Think people..think. And ask all the people which MMS has helped if it’s dangerous or not. Don’t just listen to those that didn’t know what they were doing.

    Post a Reply
  4. There are more pharmacologically and *iatrogenically related deaths in the US weekly than what will ever be attributable to the sensible use of MMS over the next 100 years.
    * refers to inadvertent adverse effects or complications caused by or resulting from medical treatment or advice …

    Post a Reply
  5. An argument against something isn’t an argument for an untested and unverified “alternative”… unless you’re a Creationist, that is. There’s precisely jack reputable science behind this stuff.

    Post a Reply
  6. Dupont sells this product to city governments around the country to purify drinking water. It’s also used in many commercial applications as a microbicide.

    If you’re really concerned about this, I suggest you look at all the other places sodium chlorite is being used with FULL FDA blessing. A little Googling will tell you all you need to know.

    My research shows that it HAS successfully treated malaria in Africa. It may have valid applications if used appropriately. Just saying.

    Post a Reply
    • Correct. However, this does NOT justify its use as a supplement, capable of treating serious disease when taken internally as directed… or undirected, at the whim of the user, for that matter. Another red herring… which is why the FDA is emphatically NOT giving its blessing to it… as noted above.

      The title of this post is “Chlorine Dioxide is NOT a Supplement.” This should not be difficult to understand. The fact that it has other applications is completely irrelevant.

      Your research has shown it has successfully treated Malaria in Africa? Great – where’s the peer-reviewed, published data? Is there a reason those silly scientists publishing in journals dedicated to studying Malaria (like these guys: http://www.malariajournal.com/content/pdf/1475-2875-9-227.pdf and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2916917/?tool=pubmed ) are still stubbornly searching for effective anti-malarial drugs, when a sure, inexpensive cure is hiding just under their noses?

      Just saying.

      Post a Reply
      • D
        You guys are idiots. The 28% solution is 6 drops in a cup of water. Read some before you comment. The fda also did human studies with twice the smouny and approved it with our drinking water. As a mstter of fact you probably have it in your tap water.

        Post a Reply
  7. The fact that it has other applications is completely relevant. They all prove it is effective. 100 years and the FDA has not allowed a single cure for a single disease to ever be approved. Don’t you ever wonder why? Are you one of those who would rather die than think, because that is what is happening. It cost 800 million dollars to get a single item that treats a disease approved at this time. That’s why I had to go this route. Lets look at something everyone agrees on at this time. That is, chlorine dioxide kills 95% of the pathogens known. Chemists agree, the FDA agrees that is true, those selling chlorine dioxide claim it. It is a well known fact. Check it out. So the only question left is, is it safe to take chlorine dioxide by mouth? The face is that in 1982 a full blown clinical test with double blind studies proved that there is no liability to taking MMS in the amounts we are talking about over extended periods of time. It was the national institute of Health in Wash DC. Here’s the link. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569027/pdf/envhper00463-0059.pdf And those silly scientists are like you sweetie, they have refused to even try it for 14 years. And yes it is under their noses. And yes, I was the one who took it to Africa and personally treated 2000 malaria cases successfully and thousands more since then. And yes 5 million people have now used it. And it is sold grass roots around the world because most normal people with you attitude would rather die of the various diseases than think.

    Post a Reply
    • ROFLMAO – you just discredited yourself with your own mouth (or keyboard, as the case may be). The FDA’s very existence – much less its current statutory authority – is considerably less than 100 years old (FYI, the FDA became the FDA in 1930; substantial drug safety regulation was established in 1938; prescription-only restrictions were set in 1951; and requirements to prove effectiveness were put into place in 1962). These are plain and simple facts – and easily obtained with just a few minutes of research. So before you start spewing “facts” at me, perhaps you should at least make some small effort to learn some. 100 years, my a**. In effect, you’re claiming that the FDA has yet to approve any useful drugs or treatments in its entire existence – which is just plain dumb.

      And no, the safety of chlorine dioxide taken internally is NOT the only question – not by a long shot. It’s obvious your reading comprehension is no better than your capacity to do minimal research. As noted in the original post “…very dilute amounts are likely to be harmless.” As the old maxim in toxicology states, “the dose makes the poison.”

      The important question is this: does taking it by mouth – in amounts that are not toxic – cure any sort of disease at all? You insist it does, but there is zero proof of this that any responsible, logical thinker would accept. Lysol kills pathogens too, but I don’t think I’d care to swallow the stuff. Lots of pathogens can be killed with ethanol, too – but swallowing it does zilch to treat infectious disease.

      Like it or no – there is a PROCESS for verifying things scientifically. And it is the best process known for establishing the truth of various claims – like yours. Until you participate in that process; and submit your claims to the scrutiny of knowledgeable people – they remain just that… empty claims. “Because I said so” isn’t a valid, scientific argument. Even if the evidence was inadequate to meet FDA approval for a drug, there would at least be some record that “silly scientists” like me could look at and make independent judgements about. This is NOT a process requiring 800 million dollars, either.

      BTW, exactly WTF is “silly” about demanding adequate proof for claims? Personally, I’m extremely well-equipped to commit health fraud. I have web skills, a full professional publishing software suite (Adobe Creative Suite), a professional research background, credentials and a ton of scientific jargon at my disposal. I could create all kinds of convincing-looking documents and convincing-sounding claims. If I can do it, anyone can… which is why there needs to be a strong standard of proof.

      You say you’ve treated “2000 malaria cases successfully.” WTF does that even mean? Where are the blood tests; patient records and/or published case reports in peer-reviewed journals? This is how you communicate with others to gain acceptance for your ideas… not by selling untested nostrums and starting goofy religions.

      As far as normal people with my attitude dying… LOL!!! “Normal people with my attitude” AREN’T dying – they’re living life to the fullest and certainly NOT suffering from chronic degenerative diseases.

      Post a Reply
  8. to Paul,

    I wasn’t worried about the particular date of inception of a government agency. I was talking about a particular attitude of which you demonstrated. Without any kind of proof except what you think you have in your head, you condem me and MMS, and consequently dozens or hundreds that believe you. You like all my other critics feel it is not necessary to check a thing out. You can just decide it don’t work. I went to Africa and treated a lot of people and saved a lot of lives and any scientific reasonable person would say, “Hay, this guy claims something. Maybe is is worth checking out.” You think you know it all. You don’t bother to check the chemistry to see if it might just work. You won’t bother to check single report of someone who claims to have been cured of which there are now thousands. Mr. who ever you are, I asked for money to prove this from many hundreds of sources, and there was nothing ever offered, so spending my own money I went and treated thousands and I didn’t have money for blood tests and reports, and all that other stuff that costs so much. But I did something, I proved that it did work, to thousands, and maybe not to people like you who set back on the their laurels and with their TV turned on and they can overcome their guilt for doing nothing by saying, “Show me the scientific reports.” Well, Mr. Paul, I discovered MMS. I vowed to bring it to the public, I spent 14 years doing that and now more than 5 million people have used MMS throughout the world. (by this time last year more than 5 million had downloaded my free book.) But even though I didn’t have the millions or even hundreds, I did something. And every time someone like you says, “Show me the proof.” People will die because people like you are willing to do nothing and to check nothing. I’ve did everything else, and now you want me to prove it to, while you sit home watching TV doing nothing but convincing yourself it doesn’t work. It’s not too bad if you sit in your home doing that, but you get out and tell thousands, without checking a single thing. Everytime you say the line, “Show me the proof, and you do nothing. You condem me and MMS without even a trial just with the data in your own mind. And you may be like you say, living life to the fullest. No doubt, but still you obviously would rather allow others to die than you think, because if you ever start thinking you are going to realize that you haven’t got a single thing in your head to prove me wrong except opinion. And if you are all that scientific you could check it out and you could convince others if you found I was right. I treated successfully 800 HIV cases and I still have 600 of the reports I made of each person. I have all of their phone numbers. You can come to my place and phone some of them in Africa, and I’ll pay the phone bill. No they cannot be proven to be free of HIV. There is no such test, but they are free of their diseases caused by the HIV including 40 cases of cancer, 50 cases of numb legs and feet, and 5 heart diseases, and many malaria cases that wouldn’t go away, and a couple of dozen other diseases were gone also as reported by the local hospital. I have never made a cent from the sale of MMS. But at least I didn’t stand around spouting my opinion as scientific facts. I proved it by doing it and I continue to do it. So you can set back on your self richous laurels and and tell me how stupid I am, but just remember, until you check the real chemistry of chlorine dioxide or check a few people who say they are well, or give some MMS to a sick dog or something, all you are doing is spouting scientific opinion which with a dollar now days can get you a cup of coffee.

    Post a Reply
    • The point I made about the FDA was not really concerned with (trivial) facts about dates. It was concerned with your basic disregard for easily checked facts… or – to put it another way – the truth. You cannot simultaneously insist on your credibility, while pulling “facts” out of your you-know-where to suit your rhetorical purposes. It speaks volumes about your objectivity and attachment to reality. The point of argumentation is to convince – not rant. You can bulls**t your disciples (or are they “parishioners” now?) – but that tactic won’t work here.

      And it is NOT up to me or Paul to prove you’re right. That is your responsibility… the burden of proof rests with those who make claims. As Carl Sagan once quipped – “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” You haven’t even come close to offering any.

      The fact that you’ve asked for money “from many hundreds of sources” and (apparently) received none also speaks volumes about your inability to think coherently. I’ve worked in research – and HIV research at that – for a major US university (University of California at Davis). To put it mildly, I have yet to meet the Principal Investigator who wouldn’t sell his or her soul for a chance to be The One Who Documented a Simple Cure for AIDS (or malaria, for that matter). Similarly, I cannot conceive of the physician in the US – or Africa, for that matter – who wouldn’t be deeply impressed at the rapid recovery of his or her patients from a debilitating, and typically fatal, disease, and who would not want to help others similarly afflicted. Either you didn’t ask the right people, or else they blew you off (and I can certainly imagine why, if your comments above accurately reflect your thinking and communication skills).

      In my post, I quoted YOU, and YOUR claims that the government of Malawi was involved in various clinical trials. One would think that – with a 99% cure rate – the Health Ministry would be throwing money at you with both hands and communicating with NGOs such as Médecins Sans Frontières (which is active in Malawi) as well as the World Health Organization. Yet there are no press releases, official government documents, or traces of this activity that can readily be found… and your words above certainly imply that no such documentation exists. Sorry, but this isn’t how rational people who are dedicated to public health and the eradication of serious diseases behave. It’s inconceivable that they’d be sitting on this information… rather, they’d be shouting it from the rooftops (so to speak).

      And contrary to your melodramatic pearl-clutching, neither Paul nor I have the power to save, nor “allow others to die,” of various infectious diseases. A statement like “show me the proof” is exactly that – and nothing more. This is a f**king blog run by a couple of private citizens, for heaven’s sake. We cannot physically or legally stop you… are you really so blindly irrational that you cannot grasp this? Even the FDA hasn’t officially crashed your pity party yet – so can the histrionics. Likewise, you can dispense with the “straw man” arguments. For the record, I don’t watch TV; have never told you how “stupid” you are; and have – in fact – checked the so-called “data” available on your web site, as noted in the original post above. Ultimately, this is about assuming responsibility for the sweeping claims you’re making – and you have ZERO right to project that responsibility on others.

      To repeat: if you want serious people to believe you, then it is up to you to make a serious argument. Right now, an argument that consists of little more than “come over to my house and call people in Africa; and you have blood on your hands if you don’t” is pretty laughable – I’d love to see you try that one on the FDA or the FTC.

      Post a Reply
  9. Dude, did you even READ a single word in the previous posts made by Elissa? You go on and on about the importance of “thinking”, while you show absolutely ZERO capability of doing any yourself and instead, berate us for demanding some sort of proof, when you’ve provided NOTHING that can be substantiated.

    Want to know what I’m THINKING when I read your nonsensical ramblings?

    1. Africa is a continent, not a country. It contains 54 different countries. So when you don’t actually identify the country you worked in, it makes me a little suspicious. Wouldn’t it be more natural to say, “I cured 2,000 people in Algeria” (or Botswana or Kenya, or wherever).

    2. Africa is a continent made up of sovereign nations – nations that probably wouldn’t look too kindly on some foreigner using their citizens as guinea pigs. So if this actually happened as described, you would have had to have had some sort of agreement with the appropriate ministry – which could be substantiated, of course, and confirm that this treatment protocol actually happened.

    3. Treating and following up on 2,000 people is a logistical nightmare. So there must a team of individuals somewhere, all of whom are equally amazed at the outcome of your treatments – maybe one those people can provide some real evidence?

    4. If you were working in a poverty and health stricken country in Africa, chances are you weren’t the only one there. So why aren’t we hearing about chlorine dioxide from the Red Cross, Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders and so on?

    5. You indicate consumption of chlorine dioxide is completely safe and even cite a study to prove it…

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569027/pdf/envhper00463-0059.pdf

    However, if you actually READ that study, you would find that is NOT what it says. Its conclusion is…

    “Unfortunately, the information available on the impact of chlorine dioxide, chlorite, and chlorate ingestion in man is severely limited. Epidemiological studies (19,20) have failed to conclusively identify any significant exposure related effects.”

    And, when you consider that the previous paragraph to this quoted one outlines the various health issues suffered by animals receiving chlorine dioxide, it is in my view, completely irresponsible to present it as “completely safe.”

    Or did you even read the document?

    6. Real scientists with credible arguments don’t expect “come over to my place and phone some people in Africa” to be a suitable alternative to controlled, published studies.

    7. Real scientists don’t say…

    “I’ve did everything else, and now you want me to prove it to, while you sit home watching TV doing nothing but convincing yourself it doesn’t work.”

    Instead, they compile their data and present it to their peers so their methodologies and conclusions can be challenged by their peers.

    8. Real scientists don`t attack the people who point out the large and GAPING holes in their arguments, especially when they are entirely logical, reasonable, and delivered without malice.

    So yeah dude, I did some thinking alright. Unfortunately it doesn`t bode too well for you.

    Sheesh.

    Post a Reply
  10. Well, I see very good arguments on here.. I also see major fear of the unknown.
    It takes LOTS of money to publish and produce test results in the way required by the FDA. It is unfortunate that those that actually have had positive – even ‘miraculous’ results cant simply come forward as proof.
    I ACTUALLY OWN MMS AND USE IT. I have not been sick – NOT EVEN A COLD- in over 2.5 years. Cant say its totally up to MMS, but its a dang interesting coincendence. (I can also detect that it has an alkalizing effect, which is good-becasue disease thrives in an acidic environment) though too alkaline is not good- I have never been too alkaline(I do strip tests).
    I agree that those that have gotten sick simply arent using it correctly, (or are way too sick and must ride it out). I also gave it to a woman that has HEP C. I called and spoke to those selling the product before I did and they stated–” It WILL make her nauseous- because it will begin to flush her body, as the body processes that level of toxin it will maker her feel sick. BUT IT DOES SUBSIDE and then STOP” So, if someone really sick used it- it likely did make them vomit, which prob caused the dehydration. (Its how the body purges)
    People just wanna take something and in large doses thinking it will work better if I take lots and often. These people are stupid. DID the FDA ask how often or in what quantity this was taken…they cert didn’t bother to divulge such facts.
    All I know is I have it, I take it..and I have no ailments I can speak of. I took it as an experiement before I would allow my mother to try it who has breast cancer (she never would take it- opted for CHEMO- which did NOTHING)
    Thats my experience.
    If anyone on here can relate theirs too….?

    Post a Reply
    • “Major fear of the unknown?” Hardly. As a former researcher, I confronted it every day in the laboratory. This is what science is about: making sense of what would otherwise be unknown. It’s imperfect, of course, but that’s as it should be: the hallmark of fruitful science is that it raises new questions, even as it works to answer existing ones.

      I for one, am not asking for the sort of test results required by the FDA. I am simply asking for what Mr. Humble ought to be well-suited to provide to support his claims. Since he claims that his miracle supp can cure malaria, then there should be blood test results – certified by local physicians, that a) the patients in question did indeed have malaria; b) chlorine dioxide was the only chemotherapy used; and c) treated patients were retested and found to be free from Plasmodium infection. Since he claims the government of Malawi ran clinical trials with a 99% cure rate, then there should be official government documents attesting to that fact.

      This isn’t rocket science.

      Hucksters and zealots abound in the field of health and fitness. And the results can be deadly when people blindly believe and forsake proper medical treatment in search of miracle cures. This is why proof of claims must ALWAYS be offered… and all the more so when the claims are extraordinary.

      It is not the FDA’s job to question whether the adverse event reports received were due to users not “using it correctly” – since, officially and scientifically, there is no such thing as “correct” medical use at this time. There are only claims – and some pretty wild-ass ones at that – which remain to be confirmed according to reasonable scientific standards (not to mention common sense).

      Post a Reply
  11. While Chlorine Dioxide has been labeled as a Carcinogen, a Mutagen, and is Pervasive, there is potential for it to act as a Vitamin C “carrier” and cellular level delivery system.

    More than one thing can be happening with that delivery. The Vitamin C, upon entering the cell, would begin immediate repair, and the repaired cell’s antibodies would attack and destroy the Chlorine Dioxide molecule. Of course, any other infection would receive the same attack.

    I happened upon this blog 1.5 hours ago, and did it ever get my attention. There may well be something to the treatment in question.

    Chlorine Dioxide, as used in the Pulping Process, is dangerous. Nothing good comes from it’s use. Perhaps it can be used for something?

    Thanks.

    Post a Reply
    • Let me put it this way, Grant… the “perhaps” is something that falls within the realm of scientific investigation. This is particularly true – and important – when you’re discussing therapeutic interventions. Simply put, there are tons of “alternative” treatments out there, that range from scams/hoaxes to placebos to potentially useful/healthful. How do we tell which from which… particularly when someone is critically ill and must choose between treatments?

      There is a tendency for the general public to believe that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” But as we’ve seen in our political discourse, often “smoke” is simply smoke. And so it is in science/health as well. When big claims are made, the burden of proof is always on the person/persons making them. Before we speculate on mechanisms, first we need to establish that there’s an actual phenomenon that needs to be explained. And simple anecdotes don’t cut it: you can’t swing a cat without hitting someone who’ll swear s/he was cured by some completely discredited and worthless treatment (homeopathy, urine therapy, reflexology, etc.).

      BTW, cells do not have their own “personal” antibodies; nor would antibodies be capable of binding to a chlorine dioxide molecule (it lacks the size/complexity to be an antigen), much less “destroy” it. That’s not how antibodies work.

      Post a Reply
  12. My response to this blog may have provided a somewhat misleading assumption. I don’t subscribe to “alternative” treatment. I don’t like the Drug Company driven medical system, or the pushing of “disclaimer included” FDA approved drugs upon any person. Even use of the Penicillin family bears a cost, in regard to the health of the human immune system.

    My research revolves totally around Chlorine, Ethanol, Chlorine Dioxide, Sulfuric Acid, Benzene, and all toxic discharge from the pulping process. You may, or may not know that the Weyerhaeuser Pulp Mill here at Kamloops dumped it’s UNTREATED pulping discharge into the Thompson River for several years. You may, or may not know that Weyerhaeuser was responsible for the EXTINCTION of the Kamloops Trout. You may, or may not know that during the late 1970’s, Kamloops set Canadian records for Dead Babies, and for Incidence of Cancer in Adults.

    Secondary to the above research, is further research regarding decades of toxic discharge for which the Oil Refinery was responsible for here at Kamloops. Specifically, the “open pit” dumping of Benzene as it had happened here for many years.

    As for the “Chlorine Dioxide/Vitamin C” delivery system, I would require a certain amount of free research time, in order to learn if it would be feasible. Be assured that someone, somewhere, at some time, has done the required lab work. Finding that work is the interesting part.

    Post a Reply
    • Grant – this blog is primarily concerned with supplements; and secondarily with nutrition and fitness. While I’m not uninterested in environmental pollution (my husband is an environmental scientist, after all), the extinction of the Kamloops trout is generally OT… it has nada to do with the subject of this thread.

      As for the “chlorine dioxide/vitamin C” delivery system, I feel quite confident in asserting that there is exactly zilch credible lab work done on it… it’s precisely the sort of thing that would cause legit researchers to look at you as if you had two heads, if not laugh out loud. If you don’t believe me, you could easily contact some to ask: most universities list faculty e-mail addresses/phone numbers, for example… just like here: http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/staff.html

      Post a Reply
  13. Confident in asserting…? Did you do any research?

    All food is contaminated in one way or another. Some foods are contaminated by several toxins. All supplements are contaminated either at the source, or by the processing. All supplements are contaminated by the packaging.

    In fact, you couldn’t “swing that poor cat” inside of any Health Food Store without hitting ALL of the items listed in my previous note.

    Even UDO’s Oil contains contaminants.

    During my existence, I have interacted with various Scientists, Physicists, and Mathematicians.

    No one laughs….

    Ps… Does Oregon actually have a University? I haven’t done the research, but I feel confident in asserting……

    Post a Reply
    • As a former university researcher myself, I feel quite confident in asserting such a thing, based on my day-to-day working interactions with a range of investigators and countless hours spent in delving into the medical literature on a wide range of topics. I’m pretty well-acquainted with academia, and how mainstream researchers think/work. However, if you like, I’ll be happy to contact some of my former colleagues and direct them to your chlorine dioxide/vitamin C hypothesis. If they should take it seriously, then I’ll abide by their judgements and modify my opinion accordingly.

      But I know them rather well… and yes, I think they will react as I previously indicated.

      As for “all food being contaminated” in some way – talk to the hand. My degrees are in Food Science. But you’re making a red herring argument at best – there has been nada raised in this thread about the range of trace contaminants/adulterants in food products or supplements. Please try to stay on the subject… which – as noted before – has nothing to do with the Kamloops trout or the pollution spewed by pulp mills. The subject at hand is whether chlorine dioxide is a viable therapeutic agent for treating infectious diseases when taken orally… or not.

      As far as your completely unsupported statement that there’s laboratory evidence that chlorine dioxide is a “feasible” “cellular level delivery system for vitamin C”… well, all I can say is: good luck with your “research” on that.

      PS – you might want to begin your search with molecular pharmacologist David Kroll’s ( http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?page_id=231 ) thoughts on your belief that “there may well be something to the treatment in question”:
      http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6430
      http://cenblog.org/terra-sigillata/2010/09/20/bleachgate-uk-and-kenyan-press-raising-awareness-of-miracle-mineral-solution/

      Post a Reply
  14. Elissa.

    I have read every line of the blog, and every line of the original links. At no time has Chlorine Dioxide been presented as a “supplement”. In fact, Chlorine Dioxide is never presented as a part of the “treatment” or “cure”. According to the FDA statement, a 28% Sodium Chlorite solution is combined with Citrus Juice.

    According to the FDA, that combination produces Chlorine Dioxide. Your statement “CHLORINE DIOXIDE IS NOT A SUPPLEMENT” is actually misleading.

    Let’s begin with this, and let’s not include Drama class.

    Sodium Chlorite occurs naturally. Citric acid occurs naturally. According to the FDA, this combination produces Chlorine Dioxide.

    I have yet to locate any genuine SCIENCE which proves that this occurs, but let’s say that it does.

    According to all Agencies involved with regulating Chlorine Dioxide’s use as a potable water purifier, Chlorine Dioxide dissipates

    “VERY RAPIDLY”.

    OK. We know that you guys can’t have it both ways. Either Chlorine Dioxide is REAL BAD, and you can’t use it to purify potable water, OR it’s NOT SO BAD… and can be used because the Chlorine Dioxide dissipates very rapidly.

    So, would the bad Chloride Dioxin dissipate during the “stirring” of the mixture? Or would the Chlorine Dioxide have completely dissipated before the glass hits the lips?

    And I would want to know exactly which Chlorine isotope is present?

    In light of the emotion demonstrated in yours, and Paul’s responses to contributor’s comments, I have decided to look past the blog. I have noted that no one offers any real science here. There are the links which enter the works of others, but exactly what are the capabilities of these people? And what are their interests? Above all, remember the new RIDICULOUS US copyright laws.

    I prefer do my own research, and I have all EPA, NIOSH, OSHI, etc. info. I have kept my Industrial Organic Chemistry texts, along with any other text which provides useful FACT.

    So, as my 66th Edition CRC states, Chlorine is relatively plentiful, and exists as isotopes 36 and 38. 36 lasts a long time, but 38 lasts only 37.2 minutes. If the sudden shedding of an electron does take place, the isotope in question is likely 38. Exposure limits are included.

    A serious researcher would first consider the “Primordial Sea”, and the consider the current state of both plentiful Chlorine isotopes as they exist in today’s oceans. Of course, that person would soon learn of current Chlorine 36 and 38 percentages, and of how percentages change as depth increases.

    That person would consider the Sodium atom, and it’s strengths. What happens to the Cl 38 atom as it attaches to the Sodium atom? What happens as that combination is exposed to blood? Or any other part the human body? Does blood/oxygen ratio change? Does blood salinity change? Does proper “dose” depend upon body weight/cell count of the “patient”?

    The fact is, most people writing sub-script after their name, are driven by greed. The Doctorate provides the cash, but only rarely is a decent IQ involved. Most people holding Chemistry Degrees work for the worst polluters, and most Molecular Pharmacologists work for the profit driven Drug Providers.

    Few are true “STARS”, excelling in their field. Even fewer “DO NO HARM”.

    Those are the facts, and here are two more.

    No one will profit from a Home Remedy which can be produced with a simple procedure.

    No genuine Scientist will use the F word in a blog response.

    You know, I believe that I can hear distant banjos playing when I open this blog.

    Post a Reply
    • Ummm… Grant? Perhaps you’ve never heard the toxicology dictum: “the dose makes the poison.” Something can be both “real bad” in a large amount, and “not so bad” in a lower amount. This goes for many common things we ingest, such as water or salt, as well as a whole range of OTC and prescription drugs. Hell, it even goes for industrial pollutants.

      D’Oh!

      But since you’ve completely gone off the rails, I’ll make one final attempt to pull you back on track. If you’ve read “every word” of this post, then you must have seen this sentence:

      “Sure, very dilute amounts are likely to be harmless…”

      So why get so exercised about MMS?

      1. Because some people taking the stuff have been experiencing adverse reactions – thus the FDA warning. Even if there’s no long-term threat to life or health, it’s still something worth serious attention.

      2. Because MMS is being promoted as a cure-all for serious diseases. Remember this point?

      “Simply put, there are tons of “alternative” treatments out there, that range from scams/hoaxes to placebos to potentially useful/healthful. How do we tell which from which… particularly when someone is critically ill and must choose between treatments?”

      The entire point of this post is that there is no genuine science behind the promotion of chlorine dioxide (which is what people are ingesting) as a treatment for disease.

      As far as the rest of your comments go… all I can say is, “WTF???” You obviously have NO comprehension of your textbooks; or of the points raised earlier. You’re simply spewing random “facts” and conjecture in an effort to impress.

      NOT. Your presentation of “facts” is missing a central element: a logical, coherent argument. And that’s your problem: you don’t have one. You’re simply arguing for the sake of arguing. You started with this (laughable) contention:

      “The Vitamin C, upon entering the cell, would begin immediate repair, and the repaired cell’s antibodies would attack and destroy the Chlorine Dioxide molecule. Of course, any other infection would receive the same attack.”

      and now you’re ranting about US copyright laws (what on earth do copyright laws – “ridiculous” or otherwise – have to do with the capabilities or interests of the individuals linked to???), chlorine isotopes, the “Primordial Sea” and pulling arbitrary “rules” for PhDs and “genuine scientists” out of your a**.

      At this point, I’m quite sure you’re hearing “distant banjos playing” – it’s obvious there are a whole lot of things going on in your head that have no basis in reality.

      At any rate, this exchange is at an end – no further comments of yours will be approved. Feel free to visit the molecular pharmacologist’s blog I linked to above, however… I’m sure Dr. Kroll would love to read your opinion of his IQ and motives.

      Post a Reply
  15. r u on facebook? if so I would like to friend you

    Post a Reply
  16. As she states quite clearly in the video, Kerri Rivera is not a doctor. She has no other training or credentials w/respect to diagnosing or recovering autistic children. Without independent, responsible verification of either the original diagnoses or the alleged recoveries, it is impossible to take her claims seriously.

    This is a long read, but a good one, by a doc who has long followed the fringes of the autism community: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/bleaching-away-what-ails-you/

    Post a Reply
  17. Wow. Everyone with all their degrees and all their wisdom, and yet you fall back to the level of a 5 year old with a large vocabulary.

    Elissa – The last sentence of the NCBI Chlorine Dioxide study reads:

    “However, within the limits of the study, the relative safety of oral ingestion of chlorine dioxide and its metabolites, chlorite and chlorate, was demonstrated by the absence of detrimental physiological response.”

    Within the same paragraph you will also read:

    “No definitive finding of detrimental physiological impact was made in any of the three phases of this human investigation of the relative safety and tolerance of oral chlorine disinfectant ingestion.”

    The title of their work is:

    “Controlled Clinical Evaluations of Chlorine Dioxide, Chlorite and Chlorate in Man”

    They referred to the findings of several other researchers who had gathered data from studies done on rats and green monkeys. It wasn’t meant to be a side-by-side comparison, but simply a reminder that data had previously been published using animals as the subject. It’s obvious that these studies were also using oral ingestion, but little more about methods can be derived from the said reference. It would be fair to say the inclusion here is misleading, especially as it appears within the final conclusion for research done years later with human subjects.

    Please enlighten your readers what the body does to eliminate toxins, and then also inform them what results when the paths used for this removal is overtaxed. Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. This in turn would result in dehydration.

    No one should be debating the safety of chlorine dioxide in humans for the amounts suggested. The clinical study already concluded that. What you should be discussing is what to expect when we administer it as a SUPPLEMENT (orally administered and diluted), but it’s the gas created that is what’s at work here, not the oral solution at all. A SUPPLEMENT since our bodies produce less naturally (like everything else) as we age.

    The amount used must be built up slowly, and used often to keep a constant level of chlorine dioxide available in the blood. The removal of toxins, and especially the inability of our bodies to quickly handle this removal is what is dangerous. Yet only when people take more than their system is capable of handling.

    This world would do better if people didn’t take things personally. It would certainly do better if individuals actually take the time to educate themselves before they take a stance, and not only empirical. We could all do better to understand what drives research and grants in this country; especially with anything medical. You might want to ask why chlorine dioxide has had FDA approval for use in water purification systems for decades now. The FDA recently approved its use with MRSA staff, and it’s about time since hospitals have been using it for disinfection on surfaces and floors for many years as well.

    Your readers don’t want to hear your egos here, they want to hear your wisdom and real experience with products that will never likely receive FDA approval outside of uses that don’t threaten the wheel that drives this great country of ours.

    Doesn’t it make more sense to help ourselves by acting in a manner that supports the greater good? Well, that involves becoming a participant in our own healthcare, because it’s a business mammoth that ensures that we treat ailments rather than cure them.

    Try something before you work so hard against it. Be a part of the solution and enlighten yourself and others. Rather than spout off what you’ve done why don’t you create a test harness that people like yourselves can get some real work done; It always starts with us.

    Post a Reply
    • “Everyone with all their degrees and all their wisdom, and yet you fall back to the level of a 5 year old with a large vocabulary.”

      “The FDA recently approved its use with MRSA staff”

      At least I have a large vocabulary: it’s “staph” – as in Staphylococcus. Before trying to read and interpret studies, try learning a little basic microbiology, first.

      As I responded in a comment above:

      “The important question is this: does taking it by mouth – in amounts that are not toxic – cure any sort of disease at all? You insist it does, but there is zero proof of this that any responsible, logical thinker would accept. Lysol kills pathogens too, but I don’t think I’d care to swallow the stuff. Lots of pathogens can be killed with ethanol, too – but swallowing it does zilch to treat infectious disease.”

      There is precisely zero evidence that consuming MMS as a supplement does anything for the “greater good.” Under the circumstances, promoting it as a miracle cure (see Orac’s discussion here: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/05/25/selling-bleach-as-a-cure-for-autism/ for a particularly cruel example) is disgusting.

      Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *