Re: WF10/MMS Silverfox Question

Hello Jon,

Keep in mind that when looking at a substance that is going to be used inside the body, not only do the immediate reactions need to be addressed, but also the breakdown reaction products.

For example: We are reviewing an activated sodium chlorite solution. Upon activation, the solution is changed from sodium chlorite and citric acid to a solution of chlorous acid with free ClO2 in it. We can initially take a look at what chlorous acid does when it enters the body, and also do the same for ClO2. However, we need to go further and look at what is produced when chlorous acid and ClO2 breakdown.

In this case, the byproduct that has the chance of being most harmful is chlorite. The toxicology report focuses on chlorite reactions inside the body because the experts that wrote it don't believe that ClO2 exists long enough inside the body to be studied. Also, in an aquious solution, the most harmful breakdown product of ClO2 is chlorite.

As a gas, ClO2 is very toxic. The only reason it does not create more problems with people following the Miracle-Mineral-Supplement protocol is that only a small amount of ClO2 is released during the activation. However, we have seen some issues develop as a result of taking doses with high concentrations of ClO2.

Chlorite, at high concentrations, is also toxic. We don't know how much chlorite is absorbed into the blood as a result of taking Miracle-Mineral-Supplement . The people studying WF10 and other related products may have a better feel for this. They may also be targeting the reactions on a compromised immune system. I would speculate that there may be a difference in response in someone that has a highly compromised immune system over someone that has only a moderately compromised immune system when they are administered an IV of a chlorite solution.

Another thing that I think we need to keep in mind while studying patents is what the intent is. If you owned a company and I came to you with the idea of getting a patent on adding a common acid to a common salt and buffering it with water, you would probably realize that would not be very profitable. On the other hand, if you "invented" a buffering solution and renamed a chemical to indicate a very dilute concentration of it, now we have a profit potential. If we patent the composition and the protocol, there is a greater profit potential.

Not only do we need to try and figure out how WF10 and other related products relate to an acified sodium chlorite solution, but we also need to take a look at the case studies to see how they think it works. Some people also take sodium chlorite unactivated, and it is possible that may be closer to WF10 than Miracle-Mineral-Supplement is.

Jim Humble seems to fall back to stabilized oxygen. His MMS is simply an improvement on stabilized oxygen. Perhaps he could team up with the companies producing WF10 for a joint study on how effective MMS is with malaria.

Tom Tweet