Hello John,

Let's take a little closer look at this.

Looking at #4 we see that in order for chlorite to be reduced to chloride you need both hydrogen and excess electrons in the right combination and at the right time. Under controlled conditions this is easy to do, but in nature it becomes more difficult. The testing suggests that it only occurs about 40% of the time.

#5 and 6 point out differences between water treatment pipelines and the human body.

In water distribution you start out with clean pipes and bacteria and toxins form a biofilm on the walls of the pipe. Chlorine dioxide reacts with this natural organic material, breaks down to chlorite, the chlorite penetrates the protective film of the biofilm, the chlorite encounters acids and re-forms chlorine dioxide. The chlorine dioxide kills off the biofilm.

In the body we are lined with biofilms. We call them mucous or saliva but if we eliminate them the body dies.

In water distribution most of the natural organic material has been filtered out. In the body natural organic material abounds.

One of the issues the people of Ohio had was that chlorine dioxide is not effective at reducing the toxins produced by the algae in the water supply. The problem is that the chlorine dioxide gets used up by the natural organic matter and the toxins don't get eliminated. Water treatment guidelines prevent simply increasing the amount of chlorine dioxide used because there are limits on the amount of chlorite allowed.

It is important to understand how chlorine dioxide works in mechanical systems, but it is also important to understand how the body differs from those systems.

Tom

Hello Scott,

Why not?

Chlorine dioxide is very volatile so there are issues using it in open spaces. Drinking water systems are typically closed systems. Water treatment involves filtering and purifying the raw water then disinfecting it.

How do they know the water is safe to drink?

They test it. One of the tests involves measuring the residual amount of disinfectant present after disinfection. If you start with 2 PPM and after disinfection have a residual of 0.8 PPM you know that the chlorine dioxide has reacted with whatever it can within the water and killed it. How much is used up also gives you an idea of the microbial load on the disinfectant.

The next step involves putting the water into the distribution system. Once again the points furthest away from the source are tested to see what the residual amount of disinfectant is. Typically there are several legs to distribution. Furthest from the source the residual may drop to 0.2 PPM but if a particular leg ends up a 0.0 PPM you know you have a problem in that leg.

Contrast this with the body.

When you drink a solution containing chlorine dioxide no effort is made to pre filter the fluids in the body to remove all the organic material that chlorine dioxide reacts with. In addition the body is coated with biofilm in the form of mucous. The chlorine dioxide quickly reacts with all of this and gets used up.

Here is a test you can do to observe this. Collect some saliva over a period of 15 - 20 minutes. Add an equal amount of whatever chlorine dioxide solution you are taking. Mix for 20 - 30 seconds then test for chlorine dioxide. If your original chlorine dioxide solution had a concentration of 100 PPM, you are adding an equal amount of saliva that contains 0 PPM so you should end up with 50 PPM unless the chlorine dioxide is reacting with the organic material in the saliva. When I do this I end up with a concentration of 0 PPM indicating that the volatile chlorine dioxide has all be used up.

Another way to observe this is by taking your chlorine dioxide solution and after an hour or so it should be into your system. Take a blood sample and measure it for chlorine dioxide. In this case you also end up with a concentration of 0 PPM and 0 PPB.

In both cases if you had the equipment to measure chlorite levels you would find chlorite present.

We agree that the reason of the failure to deal with malaria when using CDS was because the chemical exposure was too small. The problem is that chlorine dioxide is volatile and reacts with the organic material in the mucous of the body. I am not sure you could ingest enough CDS to get the chlorite levels up high enough to help. You may end up doing damage to the mouth and throat in the process.

Your idea of continuing activity in the stomach is flawed. This is an area that Jim Humble actually ran some tests on. I duplicated those tests and agree with his results. You can look up the strength of stomach acid and mix up a batch of HCl to a similar concentration. You can also look up the transition time that it takes fluids to pass through the stomach.

Next mix up your activated sodium chlorite solution and add some stomach acid to it. Measure the concentration of chlorine dioxide before and then again after an amount of time passes that simulates the transition time. You will find that there is a small amount of activation but it is minimal.

Does this make sense...? Let's look at it from a different perspective.

Remembering that the pH scale is a log scale it stands to reason that dropping the pH of sodium chlorite from 12 to 3 will result in a lot more chlorine dioxide being released than dropping an activated solution from a pH of 3 to 2.

Your math on your amounts of chlorine dioxide possible is a bit strange at best. Let's start at the beginning.

MMS is made from 80% pure sodium chlorite. By weight it is 28%. If we take the 28% and multiply it by the 80% you end up with 22.4% sodium chlorite.

22.4% sodium chlorite has the potential to produce 224000 PPM chlorine dioxide. Let's move this into something a little more practical.

If you put 1 ml of 22.4% sodium chlorite in 1 liter of water you have 224 PPM available chlorine dioxide. If you drank the whole liter of water you would have an exposure of 224 mg chlorite.

Measuring with drops is inaccurate and unrepeatable. I actually teach a course on drops. We get a group of people and provide them with standard droppers and a 10 ml graduated cylinder. Starting with water (specific gravity of 1) I instruct them to put 100 drops into the cylinder. Standard droppers will dispense 20 drops per ml. I am always amazed by the variability between people. Those that end up over 5 ml find that they add some squirts to the drops. Those that end up under 5 ml find that they shake the drop off rather than letting it fall naturally.

The number of drops per ml depends upon the specific gravity of the liquid. With water and a standard dropper you end up with 20. If your liquid has a higher specific gravity each drop end up being larger and you end up with fewer drops per ml. The opposite is true for liquids that have a specific gravity less than water. Since a 22.4% sodium chlorite solution has a specific gravity of around 1.2 you end up with 17 drops per ml using a standard dropper.

You are seeing 24 drops of 22.4% sodium chlorite per ml so if you measured the same dropper with water you should be at 29 drops of water per ml.

It usually takes a few hours of practice with different liquids before you become proficient at making drops. In the end you can make a reasonably accurate assessment of the specific gravity of the liquid you are dealing with by measuring how many drops per ml it takes.

At any rate... With your 24 drops per ml you would take the 224 mg of sodium chlorite and divide it by 24 giving you an exposure of 9.3 mg chlorite per drop for your particular dropper and your style of forming drops. I will add that 1 ml is 1 ml and if you are able to graduate to standard measurements you will enjoy less variability and more consistent results from your efforts.

When you ask Kerri Rivera what has been proven to have the biggest impact on the children with autism she will respond that the diet has made the biggest difference. Next in line, if the child has parasites, is parasite removal. She started out trying Miracle-Mineral-Supplement and saw something but went from there to exploring diet. Her efforts are wonderful but her results are less than spectacular. With somewhere in the neighborhood of 2000 - 4000 children trying her protocol, 140 have been cured. This is in the outliers area and could be the result of misdiagnosis.

But, and this is a very important but, almost all of children that try her diet show some signs of improvement. In addition they are measuring their progress using a system that is reasonably reliable. This tells me that she is onto something.

If you have a diet that specifically targets what chemical exposure takes out of your body, you can survive long term exposure to sodium chlorite.

Tom