Re: 6.000 times the limit - Context and no diversion

Tom,
Oh my, you're doing it again. You know, changing the subject, trying to put the onus on someone else. You should know by now, I don't do homework assigned by you.

Yes, not only have I read many studies, read all kinds of industrial material about ClO2, read Humble's nonsense, done all kinds of research on the whole humble past and present including the many disease sites out there, you know, like mdjuction or Rosner's site. I also understand what I read and I understand what you write - your glorious attempts to change the subject and never answer the the more difficult questions. It's easy for you to provide those numbers concerning how many ppm, the "conversion" from one medium to another and other such things. Why not answer the safety question.

I have seen no research that would indicate that there is any information out there that explains what happens when ClO2 is ingested in the manner humble suggests. You haven't either or you would have written about it. So, why would a man of science, such as yourself, suggest that through ingestion, mms might help and probably won't hurt. You don't know that.

That seems irresponsible and dangerous to me, because, let's face it Tom, you've managed to set yourself up here as some sort of expert and there might be a few poor souls out there who would actually take your advice. Many people are uncomfortable with Science and are unable to tell when there's a bridge on the block. Wasn't losing your friend enough?

p.s. I'll let you play with the numbers. Your tests don't indicate what is safe, only that you can manipulate the solution with different activators and different concentrations. Unless any of that can prove the SAFETY OF INGESTION, it's interesting, but doesn't contribute anything to the issue of safety. But you already knew that.

btw, what are your credentials aside from testing air quality in factories?