Re: coconut oil vs. hydrogen peroxide and silver question

[Guest guest]

Oh my, are we confusing things again Duncan? I see nothing here which compares

the USE OF OIL PULLING with waterpik + CS and peroxide or ozone. As a reminder,

here is your statement that still requires proof.

" * waterpik with CS and peroxide or ozone; waterpik has better reach and much

stronger jet pressure than swishing oil in your mouth (some call it " oil

pulling " but it doesn't " pull " anything from the tissues); and kills viruses,

parasites and fungi THAT COCONUT OIL DOES NOT " .

And I'm curious as to your quoting Bruce Fife again when he very clearly says

that oil pulling most definitely kills viruses, bacteria, etc. He wrote the book

on it, remember? And adding CS, peroxide, or ozone to drinking water is hardly

the same thing as oil pulling. Furthermore, is there anything to indicate they

(CS, peroxide, ozone) pull anything from the tissues? If so I didn't see it. On

the other hand all of the testimonials for oil pulling leads one to conclude

that it does. Did you read any of those testimonials on the website I

referenced? If not, here is the first one:

" Testimony 1 For fifteen months I had been having pain in my liver. It seemed to

become more intense and frequent as the weeks went on. I had tried all the

different remedies I knew - special teas, vitamins. Swedish Bitters, ginger

compresses, and so on--but the pain did not go away. After I prayed to Mother

for help regarding this problem, a friend handed me a piece of paper

describing an oil therapy from Dr. F. Karach. I decided to try it since nothing

else had worked for me thus far. Each morning before breakfast, I took one

tablespoon of sunflower oil and slowly swished it in my mouth for fifteen to

twenty minutes. I repeated the procedure each night before going to bed. After

spitting out the oil, I found it helpful to use my Water Pik to thoroughly

cleanse the tongue and gums. Three days after I had started the treatment, the

pain disappeared completely! One week when I was extremely busy, I could only do

the treatment in the morning and not at night. During that time, I noticed the

recurrence of a slight pain in my liver, which disappeared again when I resumed

the practice twice a day. I have now been using the treatment regularly for 1

1/2 to 2 months. I am very grateful to Mother for making me aware of this

therapy and hope that it will be helpful to all of you in treating whatever

health problems you might have. "

And then of course there is my own testimony (which you chose to ignore) that

oil pulling reversed a life-long struggle with severe periodontal disease. I

guess what has really angered me is that you made the above statement in

question in direct response to my personal testimony. I really didn't tell my

story in order to start an argument but to add my own experience to the

discussion which - PRIOR to your know-it-all statement - was totally

non-confrontational.

And in response to your final remarks below - No, I wasn't asking you for

information Duncan, just proof of your (still) unsubstantiated declarations.

I'll give you an A for Arrogance though as you most certainly deserve that.

Dee

>

> Hydrogen peroxide and colloidal silver are more potent by a wide margin, with

references.

>snip

> snip

> snip

> There's your proof and you're welcome, Dee. I must say that you have an odd

way of asking for more information.

>

> all good,

>

> Duncan

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, a colloidal silver and peroxide solution " kills viruses, parasites and

fungi THAT COCONUT OIL DOES NOT " [emphasis yours], and that proof was given in

my last post.

I've seen no evidence that CS and peroxide pull anything from the tissues

either; to use Dr. Fife's words that would be impossible, just as it is for

coconut oil. You could swish with it, same as coconut oil, but that's not the

topic.

Everyone's dental situation is unique, and several preferred a waterpik over oil

swishing while you preferred swishing, but personal preference remains that and

is not the topic either.

Dr. Fife's book clearly says coconut oil kills " particularly " lipid enveloped

viruses and lipid enveloped bacteria for good reason. If you had paid particular

attention you'd see my post quoted him.

The lipid-cutting action of fatty acids applies to organisms with oily coatings.

Most viruses, many bacteria and most fungi and their spores, and some parasites

and their eggs are untouched by oil but are killed by peroxide or ozone and

silver.

That was what asked for and it was proven.

I think that because the CS and peroxide action has a much broader spectrum,

people may benefit by using it in their dental hygeine in addition to or instead

of swishing with coconut oil.

And it won't clog a water pik

all good,

Duncan

>

> Oh my, are we confusing things again Duncan? I see nothing here which compares

the USE OF OIL PULLING with waterpik + CS and peroxide or ozone. As a reminder,

here is your statement that still requires proof.

>

> " * waterpik with CS and peroxide or ozone; waterpik has better reach and much

> stronger jet pressure than swishing oil in your mouth (some call it " oil

> pulling " but it doesn't " pull " anything from the tissues); and kills viruses,

> parasites and fungi THAT COCONUT OIL DOES NOT " .

>

> And I'm curious as to your quoting Bruce Fife again when he very clearly says

that oil pulling most definitely kills viruses, bacteria, etc. He wrote the book

on it, remember?

....etc </end rant>

[Guest guest]

Greetings

Topic : coconut oil vs. hydrogen peroxide and

silver question

Of the saturated fatty acids, lauric acid has greater antiviral

activity than either caprylic acid (C-8), cacid (C-14) for these

viruses. The properties that determine the anti-infective action of

these lipids are related to their structure; e.g., monoglycerides,

free fatty acids. The monoglycerides are active, diglycerides and

triglycerides are inactive.

The lipid-rich cell wall is a defining feature of Mycobacterium

species. Individual cell wall components affect diverse mycobacterial

phenotypes including colony morphology, biofilm formation, antibiotic

resistance, and virulence.

The antiviral action attributed to monolaurin is that of

solubilizing the lipids and phospholipids in the envelope of the virus

causing the disintegration of the virus envelope. In effect, it is

reported that the fatty acids and monoglycerides produce their

killing/inactivating effect by lysing the (lipid bilayer) plasma

membrane.

<Coconut oil does not kill parasites, or viruses or bacteria that

have no lipid layer. >

Topic : hydrogen peroxide and silver question

Duncan Crow

Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 9:03 AM

However, there is evidence from some recent studies that one

antimicrobial effect of monolaurin is related to its interference with

signal transduction in cell replication.

http://www.cocoscience.com/pdf/lipid_coated_viruses_and_bacteria_photos.pdf

< Both ozone and CS kills more germs ..... and even biofilms are often

mentioned as the target. >

Comments:

Prior to the positing of Nanobacterial infection , there was

no valid medical or scientific explanation for pathological

calcification in humans and mammals.

What mainstream medicine considered as healed on the

radiological evidence of calcification of the TB tubercles in the lung

fields, seen as opacities is but an evasive and protective mechanism

evolved by the Tubercular Bacilli to escape chemical destruction and

immune surveillence. The normally innocuous bacteria undergo a

'phase-shift' that switches on both antibiotic resistance and an

enhanced ability to form biofilms .This protective phenomenon is

observed in the " putative nano-bacteria " which produce a similar

cellular calcium with a Biofilm coating which prevents the microbes

from destruction by the immune cells or antibiotics.

What is a biofilm ?

http://www.bionewsonline.com/n/what_is_biofilm.htm

A biofilm is a complex aggregation of microorganisms growing on

a solid substrate. Biofilms are characterized by structural

heterogeneity, genetic diversity, complex community interactions, and

an extracellular matrix of polymeric substances.

Microbial biofilms on surfaces cost the nation billions of

dollars yearly in equipment damage, product contamination, energy

losses and medical infections. Conventional methods of killing

bacteria (such as antibiotics, and disinfection) are often ineffective

with biofilm bacteria. The huge doses of antimicrobials required to

rid systems of biofilm bacteria are environmentally undesirable (and

perhaps not allowed by environmental regulations) and medically

impractical (since what it would take to kill the biofilm bacteria

would also kill the patient!). So new strategies based on a better

understanding of how bacteria attach, grow and detach are urgently

needed by many industries. Conversely, microbial processes at surfaces

also offer opportunities for positive industrial and environmental

effects, such as bioremediating hazardous waste sites, biofiltering

industrial water, and forming biobarriers to protect soil and

groundwater from contamination.

<Together, ozone and peroxide synergize for up to 1,000 times

the potency (sometimes written as 3 logs) to kill viruses and also

some parasites and even biofilms are often mentioned as the target. >

Topic : hydrogen peroxide and silver question

Duncan Crow

Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 9:03 AM

Biofilms are important survival mechanisms for bacterial cells.

According to in vitro studies, they can avoid attack by host defenses.

For example, it is difficult for phagocytic cells to engulf bacteria

in biofilms. Also, biofilms are much more resistant than planktonic

cells to antimicrobial agents. For example, chlorination of a biofilm

is usually unsuccessful because the biocide only kills the bacteria in

the outer layers of the biofilm. The bacteria within the biofilm

remain healthy, and the biofilm can regrow. Repeated use of

antimicrobial agents on biofilms can cause bacteria within the biofilm

to develop an increased resistance to biocides.

The bacterial cells on the surface of the biofilm are

different from the cells with the biofilm matrix. The embedded cells'

behavior can change as the thickness of the biofilm changes. The

surface cells, no matter how old the biofilm is, are likely to mimic

surface cells of young biofilms, which are metabolically active and

large. These surface cells divide and increase the thickness of the

biofilm. Little oxygen is available to the embedded cells, therefore

they are smaller and grow slower. The bacteria exist in a somewhat

dormant state, becoming active when cells in the outer layers are

killed.

You may not be familiar with the term " biofilm, " but you have

certainly encountered biofilm on a regular basis. The plaque that

forms on your teeth and causes tooth decay is a type of bacterial

biofilm. The " gunk " that clogs your drains is also biofilm. If you

have ever walked in a stream or river, you may have slipped on the

biofilm-coated rocks.

Biofilm forms when bacteria adhere to surfaces in aqueous

environments and begin to excrete a slimy, glue-like substance that

can anchor them to all kinds of material – such as metals, plastics,

soil particles, medical implant materials, and tissue. A biofilm can

be formed by a single bacterial species, but more often biofilms

consist of many species of bacteria, as well as fungi, algae,

protozoa, debris and corrosion products. Essentially, biofilm may form

on any surface exposed to bacteria and some amount of water. Once

anchored to a surface, biofilm microorganisms carry out a variety of

detrimental or beneficial reactions (by human standards), depending on

the surrounding environmental conditions.

Microbial infections can form on biomaterials that are totally

inside the human body or partially exposed to the outside. Escherichia

coli, staphylococci, and Pseudomonas species are among the most common

invading bacteria. After the biomaterial is implanted, either tissue

cells or microorganisms will begin to colonize it. If the tissue cells

colonize first, the implant will most likely be successful. If the

bacteria colonize first, many microorganisms can adhere to the surface

of the implant. These bacteria can colonize, leading to the formation

of a biofilm. Due to resistance to antimicrobial agents, biofilms

often cannot be removed from biomedical devices, leading to additional

operations. Biomedical components which are susceptible to biofilm

colonization include artificial hearts, joint replacements, contact

lenses, heart valves, vascular prostheses, dental implants, fabrics

and sutures, and intravascular catheters. With modern technology, many

humans will host a biomaterial, and will therefore be at risk of a

biofilm infection.Lots of bacteria are planktonic – they float around

in water; microbiologists since the time of Pasteur have conducted

most bacterial studies using suspended bacterial cultures

Environmental signals and regulatory pathways that influence

biofilm formation; Stanley NR et al.; In nature, bacteria often exist

as biofilms . Here, we discuss the environmental signals and

regulatory proteins that affect both the initiation of bacterial

biofilm formation and the nature of the mature biofilm structure .

Current research suggests that the environmental signals regulating

whether bacterial cells will initiate a biofilm differ from one

bacterial species to another . This may allow each bacterial species

to colonize its preferred environment efficiently . In contrast, some

of the environmental signals that have currently been identified to

regulate the structure of a mature biofilm are nutrient availability

and quorum sensing, and are not species specific . These environmental

signals evoke changes in the nature of the mature biofilm that may

ensure optimal nutrient acquisition . Nutrient availability regulates

the depth of the biofilm in such a way that the maximal number of

cells in a biofilm appears to occur at suboptimal nutrient

concentrations . At either extreme, nutrient-rich or very

nutrient-poor conditions, greater numbers of cells are in the

planktonic phase where they have greater access to the local nutrients

or can be distributed to a new environment . Similarly, quorum-sensing

control of the formation of channels and pillar-like structures may

ensure efficient nutrient delivery to cells in a biofilm.

http://www.bionewsonline.com/n/what_is_biofilm.htm

<...my own testimony ..that oil pulling reversed a life-long

struggle with severe periodontal disease.>

Topic : hydrogen peroxide and silver question

Dolores

Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Sir Osler was the first to refer to the mouth

as the " mirror " of the body. The peculiarities of the oral cavity are

unique. No other body cavity shares such a close relationship to the

external environment, represents as many varied and functional

anatomical entities, or contains bacterial flora in the amount or

variety encountered in the normal human mouth.The mechanical

irritation of smoking, eating, and drinking alters the " normal "

appearance of the oral cavity from one patient to another, and in many

instances in the same patient from week to week. The warm, moist

contents of the mouth harbor enormous bacterial populations that

immediately superimpose themselves on lesions, whether mechanical or

pathological, and frequendy distort the diagnostic picture by giving

the lesions the appearance of being bacterial in nature. Lesions of

the mouth cannot form " crusts " due to the dissolving effect of saliva;

wet-line lip lesions have different physical appearances than do

dry-line lip lesions. While many abnormalities of the oral cavity are

purely dental in origin and scope, many are not.

Early signs of many of the common degenerative

diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and disease of metabolism are seen

intraorally before they are physically apparent elsewhere. The enamel

and dentin are fixed records of the past history of the individual.

The alveolar bone, the gingiva, and the tongue are indicators of the

present systemic state of the individual. It has been reported in

elite journals that frequent gurgling has reduced a good percentage of

Upper Respiratory tract infection.

The rationale of Oil pulling is the lymphatic drainage : the

anatomical oro-nasal connection.

Olfaction in mainstream practice

http://forums.hpathy.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=12394 & title=olfaction-in-mainstream\

-practice

With regards

Lew

On 2/26/11, Duncan Crow <duncancrow@...> wrote:

> Yes, a colloidal silver and peroxide solution " kills viruses, parasites and

> fungi THAT COCONUT OIL DOES NOT " [emphasis yours], and that proof was given

> in my last post.

>

> I've seen no evidence that CS and peroxide pull anything from the tissues

> either; to use Dr. Fife's words that would be impossible, just as it is for

> coconut oil. You could swish with it, same as coconut oil, but that's not

> the topic.

>

> Everyone's dental situation is unique, and several preferred a waterpik over

> oil swishing while you preferred swishing, but personal preference remains

> that and is not the topic either.

>

> Dr. Fife's book clearly says coconut oil kills " particularly " lipid

> enveloped viruses and lipid enveloped bacteria for good reason. If you had

> paid particular attention you'd see my post quoted him.

>

> The lipid-cutting action of fatty acids applies to organisms with oily

> coatings. Most viruses, many bacteria and most fungi and their spores, and

> some parasites and their eggs are untouched by oil but are killed by

> peroxide or ozone and silver.

>

> That was what asked for and it was proven.

>

> I think that because the CS and peroxide action has a much broader spectrum,

> people may benefit by using it in their dental hygeine in addition to or

> instead of swishing with coconut oil.

>

> And it won't clog a water pik

>

> all good,

>

> Duncan

>

>

>

>

>>

>> Oh my, are we confusing things again Duncan? I see nothing here which

>> compares the USE OF OIL PULLING with waterpik + CS and peroxide or ozone.

>> As a reminder, here is your statement that still requires proof.

>>

>> " * waterpik with CS and peroxide or ozone; waterpik has better reach and

>> much

>> stronger jet pressure than swishing oil in your mouth (some call it " oil

>> pulling " but it doesn't " pull " anything from the tissues); and kills

>> viruses,

>> parasites and fungi THAT COCONUT OIL DOES NOT " .

>>

>> And I'm curious as to your quoting Bruce Fife again when he very clearly

>> says that oil pulling most definitely kills viruses, bacteria, etc. He

>> wrote the book on it, remember?

>

> ...etc </end rant>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Thank you Lew. I bow to your knowledge and wisdom and you have made my own reply

to Duncan unnecessary.

With Best Regards.

Dee

>

> Greetings

>

>

> Topic : coconut oil vs. hydrogen peroxide and

> silver question

>

> snip for brevity>

>

> <...my own testimony ..that oil pulling reversed a life-long

> struggle with severe periodontal disease.>

>

> Topic : hydrogen peroxide and silver question

>

> Dolores

> Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 12:37 PM

>

> Sir Osler was the first to refer to the mouth

> as the " mirror " of the body. The peculiarities of the oral cavity are

> unique. No other body cavity shares such a close relationship to the

> external environment, represents as many varied and functional

> anatomical entities, or contains bacterial flora in the amount or

> variety encountered in the normal human mouth.The mechanical

> irritation of smoking, eating, and drinking alters the " normal "

> appearance of the oral cavity from one patient to another, and in many

> instances in the same patient from week to week. The warm, moist

> contents of the mouth harbor enormous bacterial populations that

> immediately superimpose themselves on lesions, whether mechanical or

> pathological, and frequendy distort the diagnostic picture by giving

> the lesions the appearance of being bacterial in nature. Lesions of

> the mouth cannot form " crusts " due to the dissolving effect of saliva;

> wet-line lip lesions have different physical appearances than do

> dry-line lip lesions. While many abnormalities of the oral cavity are

> purely dental in origin and scope, many are not.

>

> Early signs of many of the common degenerative

> diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and disease of metabolism are seen

> intraorally before they are physically apparent elsewhere. The enamel

> and dentin are fixed records of the past history of the individual.

> The alveolar bone, the gingiva, and the tongue are indicators of the

> present systemic state of the individual. It has been reported in

> elite journals that frequent gurgling has reduced a good percentage of

> Upper Respiratory tract infection.

>

> The rationale of Oil pulling is the lymphatic drainage : the

> anatomical oro-nasal connection.

>

> Olfaction in mainstream practice

>

>

http://forums.hpathy.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=12394 & title=olfaction-in-mainstream\

-practice

>

>

> With regards

> Lew

[Guest guest]

Thank you ,Dee for the kind compliment. Considering all the

references Duncan has given us, he should be appreciated for his

research and his readiness to share . It is not arrogance, Dee.

It is his one -track mind to say his piece in the topic of his choice.

With regards

Lew

On 2/26/11, Dolores <dgk@...> wrote:

> Thank you Lew. I bow to your knowledge and wisdom and you have made my own

> reply to Duncan unnecessary.

>

> With Best Regards.

> Dee

>

>

>>

>> Greetings

>>

>>

>> Topic : coconut oil vs. hydrogen peroxide and

>> silver question

>>

>> snip for brevity>

>>

>> <...my own testimony ..that oil pulling reversed a life-long

>> struggle with severe periodontal disease.>

>>

>> Topic : hydrogen peroxide and silver

>> question

>>

>> Dolores

>> Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 12:37 PM

>>

>> Sir Osler was the first to refer to the mouth

>> as the " mirror " of the body. The peculiarities of the oral cavity are

>> unique. No other body cavity shares such a close relationship to the

>> external environment, represents as many varied and functional

>> anatomical entities, or contains bacterial flora in the amount or

>> variety encountered in the normal human mouth.The mechanical

>> irritation of smoking, eating, and drinking alters the " normal "

>> appearance of the oral cavity from one patient to another, and in many

>> instances in the same patient from week to week. The warm, moist

>> contents of the mouth harbor enormous bacterial populations that

>> immediately superimpose themselves on lesions, whether mechanical or

>> pathological, and frequendy distort the diagnostic picture by giving

>> the lesions the appearance of being bacterial in nature. Lesions of

>> the mouth cannot form " crusts " due to the dissolving effect of saliva;

>> wet-line lip lesions have different physical appearances than do

>> dry-line lip lesions. While many abnormalities of the oral cavity are

>> purely dental in origin and scope, many are not.

>>

>> Early signs of many of the common degenerative

>> diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and disease of metabolism are seen

>> intraorally before they are physically apparent elsewhere. The enamel

>> and dentin are fixed records of the past history of the individual.

>> The alveolar bone, the gingiva, and the tongue are indicators of the

>> present systemic state of the individual. It has been reported in

>> elite journals that frequent gurgling has reduced a good percentage of

>> Upper Respiratory tract infection.

>>

>> The rationale of Oil pulling is the lymphatic drainage : the

>> anatomical oro-nasal connection.

>>

>> Olfaction in mainstream practice

>>

>>

http://forums.hpathy.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=12394 & title=olfaction-in-mainstream\

-practice

>>

>>

>> With regards

>> Lew

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> It is not arrogance, Dee.

> It is his one -track mind to say his piece in the topic of his choice.

Ah, if only that were true Lew. Anyone can go on the internet and find research

that sounds impressive. Whether or not it actually substantiates their point is

another story. And someone who consistently distorts the facts and tells

untruths (ie: misquoting an expert by substituting the word 'blood' for

'tissues' even after being corrected) in order win an argument - well. . . . And

you will soon see that nearly every topic is his " choice " . At any rate, you have

only been here for a very short time and I look forward to your future

participation.

Best,

Dee

> >>

> >> Greetings

> >>

> >>

> >> Topic : coconut oil vs. hydrogen peroxide and

> >> silver question

> >>

> >> snip for brevity>

> >>

> >> <...my own testimony ..that oil pulling reversed a life-long

> >> struggle with severe periodontal disease.>

> >>

> >> Topic : hydrogen peroxide and silver

> >> question

> >>

> >> Dolores

> >> Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 12:37 PM

> >>

> >> Sir Osler was the first to refer to the mouth

> >> as the " mirror " of the body. The peculiarities of the oral cavity are

> >> unique. No other body cavity shares such a close relationship to the

> >> external environment, represents as many varied and functional

> >> anatomical entities, or contains bacterial flora in the amount or

> >> variety encountered in the normal human mouth.The mechanical

> >> irritation of smoking, eating, and drinking alters the " normal "

> >> appearance of the oral cavity from one patient to another, and in many

> >> instances in the same patient from week to week. The warm, moist

> >> contents of the mouth harbor enormous bacterial populations that

> >> immediately superimpose themselves on lesions, whether mechanical or

> >> pathological, and frequendy distort the diagnostic picture by giving

> >> the lesions the appearance of being bacterial in nature. Lesions of

> >> the mouth cannot form " crusts " due to the dissolving effect of saliva;

> >> wet-line lip lesions have different physical appearances than do

> >> dry-line lip lesions. While many abnormalities of the oral cavity are

> >> purely dental in origin and scope, many are not.

> >>

> >> Early signs of many of the common degenerative

> >> diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and disease of metabolism are seen

> >> intraorally before they are physically apparent elsewhere. The enamel

> >> and dentin are fixed records of the past history of the individual.

> >> The alveolar bone, the gingiva, and the tongue are indicators of the

> >> present systemic state of the individual. It has been reported in

> >> elite journals that frequent gurgling has reduced a good percentage of

> >> Upper Respiratory tract infection.

> >>

> >> The rationale of Oil pulling is the lymphatic drainage : the

> >> anatomical oro-nasal connection.

> >>

> >> Olfaction in mainstream practice

> >>

> >>

http://forums.hpathy.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=12394 & title=olfaction-in-mainstream\

-practice

> >>

> >>

> >> With regards

> >> Lew

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Long as you understand that oil swishing doesn't pull anything through the

buccal membrane as Fife has clarified a couple of times, you're good to go.

The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and attaching to

toxins in blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph.

Oil swishing thus only cleans the oral cavity and areas of void between teeth

and gums as Bruce has also said. No doubt I could have made the point clearer

'coz you didn't understand the implications of the protective membrane layer

mentioned in Bruce's book.

Although there is more manipulation of the surrounding tissues with mouth

movement than using a waterpik, with regard to the amount of pressure from oil

swishing the mouth can only exert about .3 to .5 of a pound pressure, while the

waterpik has an operating pressure of about 60-90 psi, so the waterpik has a

decided edge below the gumline in dental hygeine, as several members on this and

the electroherbalism list pointed out.

all good,

Duncan

> > >>

> > >> Greetings

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> Topic : coconut oil vs. hydrogen peroxide and

> > >> silver question

> > >>

> > >> snip for brevity>

> > >>

> > >> <...my own testimony ..that oil pulling reversed a life-long

> > >> struggle with severe periodontal disease.>

> > >>

> > >> Topic : hydrogen peroxide and silver

> > >> question

> > >>

> > >> Dolores

> > >> Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 12:37 PM

> > >>

> > >> Sir Osler was the first to refer to the mouth

> > >> as the " mirror " of the body. The peculiarities of the oral cavity are

> > >> unique. No other body cavity shares such a close relationship to the

> > >> external environment, represents as many varied and functional

> > >> anatomical entities, or contains bacterial flora in the amount or

> > >> variety encountered in the normal human mouth.The mechanical

> > >> irritation of smoking, eating, and drinking alters the " normal "

> > >> appearance of the oral cavity from one patient to another, and in many

> > >> instances in the same patient from week to week. The warm, moist

> > >> contents of the mouth harbor enormous bacterial populations that

> > >> immediately superimpose themselves on lesions, whether mechanical or

> > >> pathological, and frequendy distort the diagnostic picture by giving

> > >> the lesions the appearance of being bacterial in nature. Lesions of

> > >> the mouth cannot form " crusts " due to the dissolving effect of saliva;

> > >> wet-line lip lesions have different physical appearances than do

> > >> dry-line lip lesions. While many abnormalities of the oral cavity are

> > >> purely dental in origin and scope, many are not.

> > >>

> > >> Early signs of many of the common degenerative

> > >> diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and disease of metabolism are seen

> > >> intraorally before they are physically apparent elsewhere. The enamel

> > >> and dentin are fixed records of the past history of the individual.

> > >> The alveolar bone, the gingiva, and the tongue are indicators of the

> > >> present systemic state of the individual. It has been reported in

> > >> elite journals that frequent gurgling has reduced a good percentage of

> > >> Upper Respiratory tract infection.

> > >>

> > >> The rationale of Oil pulling is the lymphatic drainage : the

> > >> anatomical oro-nasal connection.

> > >>

> > >> Olfaction in mainstream practice

> > >>

> > >>

http://forums.hpathy.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=12394 & title=olfaction-in-mainstream\

-practice

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> With regards

> > >> Lew

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

>

> Long as you understand that oil swishing doesn't pull anything through the

buccal >membrane as Fife has clarified a couple of times, you're good to go.

You're granting me your permission? How magnanimous of you :-)

quoting Duncan:

> The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and attaching to

toxins in >blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph.

As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the cheeks and

the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa (the tongue and floor

of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and able to absorb bioavailables.

These, along with the nasal cavaties have a direct route to the lymph:

http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html

Didn't Lew just say that >> " The rationale of Oil pulling is the lymphatic

drainage : the

>> anatomical oro-nasal connection " ?

And here is a study regarding the difference in absorbability between the buccal

and sublingual mercosa:

http://curezone.com/forums/am.asp?i=986942

The sublingual route has received far more attention than has the buccal route.

The sublingual mucosa includes the membrane of the ventral surface of the tongue

and the floor of the mouth whereas the buccal mucosa constitutes the lining of

the cheek. The sublingual mucosa is relatively permeable, thus giving rapid

absorption and acceptable bioavailabilities of many drugs. Further, the

sublingual mucosa is convenient, accessible, and generally well accepted. This

route has been investigated clinically for the delivery of a substantial number

of drugs. It is the preferred route for administration of nitroglycerin and is

also used for buprenorphine and nifedipine. D. & J. , 81 J.

Pharmaceutical Sci. 1 (1992).

The buccal mucosa is less permeable than the sublingual mucosa. The rapid

absorption and high bioavailabilities seen with sublingual administration of

drugs is not generally provided to the same extent by the buccal mucosa. D.

& J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. (1992) at 2. The permeability of

the oral mucosae is probably related to the physical characteristics of the

tissues. The sublingual mucosa is thinner than the buccal mucosa, thus

permeability is greater for the sublingual tissue. The palatal mucosa is

intermediate in thickness, but is keratinized whereas the other two tissues are

not, thus lessening its permeability.

The ability of molecules to permeate through the oral mucosa appears to be

related to molecular size, lipid solubility, and ionization. Small molecules,

less than about 100 daltons, appear to cross the mucosa rapidly. As molecular

size increases, however, permeability decreases rapidly. Lipid-soluble compounds

are more permeable through the mucosa than are non-lipid-soluble molecules. . .

..

Substances that facilitate the transport of solutes across biological membranes,

penetration enhancers, are well known in the art for administering drugs. V. Lee

et al., 8 Critical Reviews in Therapeutic Drug r Systems 91 (1991)

[hereinafter " Critical Reviews " ]. Penetration enhancers may be categorized as

chelators (e.g., EDTA, citric acid, salicylates), surfactants (e.g., sodium

dodecyl sulfate (SDS)), non-surfactants (e.g., unsaturated cyclic ureas), bile

salts (e.g., sodium deoxycholate, sodium tauro-cholate), and FATTY ACIDS (e.g.,

oleic acid, acylcarnitines, mono- and diglycerides).

quoting Duncan:

> snip<

> > Although there is more manipulation of the surrounding tissues with mouth

than >using a waterpik, with regard to the amount of pressure from oil swishing

the mouth can >only exert about .3 to .5 of a pound pressure, while the waterpik

has an operating >pressure of about 60-90 psi, so the waterpik has a decided

edge below the gumline in >dental hygeine, as several members on this and the

electroherbalism list pointed out.

Duncan, I reviewed that thread and no one - except for you - said that the

waterpik worked better for them than oil pulling. In fact I don't think those

talking about the various water piks, flossing, and toothpaste had ever even

tried it. The one who had tried it recommended it to the one who asked about it.

And how do you account for those (myself included) who used a water pik but

received no reversal of a systemic problem until after starting oil pulling? If

there's a waterpik cure I haven't heard of it.

Did you miss this part of the testimonial I referenced? :

quote: " a friend handed me a piece of paper describing an oil therapy from Dr.

F. Karach. I decided to try it since nothing else had worked for me thus far.

Each morning before breakfast, I took one tablespoon of sunflower oil and slowly

swished it in my mouth for fifteen to twenty minutes. I repeated the procedure

each night before going to bed. After

spitting out the oil, I found it helpful to use my Water Pik to thoroughly

cleanse the tongue and gums. "

This was the person who had been having liver pains for 15 months. The pains

stopped after 3 days of oil pulling.

Yes, the waterpik is quite useful to remove the oil after oil pulling. And I'm

sure it's useful as a cleaning tool as well. However, I really haven't needed

mine since oil pulling. It has been sitting under my sink gathering dust for

years. Rinsing and brushing are all I need to remove the oil. Rinsing and

flossing are good too - after eating.

Dee

[Guest guest]

Duncan wrote:

< The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and

attaching to toxins in blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph. >

I have just referred a patient with complaints of

substernal pain with radiation to the inner side of the left upper

limb from the OUT-PATIENT clinic with a tablet of

GLyceryl Trinitrate tablet 500 micrograms under his tongue. . He

has a history of Ischaemic heart disease . Please enlighten me

Duncan :

What is the difference between the buccal mucous membrane and the

sublingual ( under the tonge ) mucous membrane ?

< No doubt I could have made the point clearer 'coz you didn't

understand the implications of the protective membrane layer mentioned

in Bruce's book. >

What implications of the protective membrane you

were referring to ? Please post your clarification.

With regards

Lew

On 2/27/11, Dolores <dgk@...> wrote:

>

>>

>> Long as you understand that oil swishing doesn't pull anything through the

>> buccal >membrane as Fife has clarified a couple of times, you're good to

>> go.

>

> You're granting me your permission? How magnanimous of you :-)

>

> quoting Duncan:

>> The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and attaching

>> to toxins in >blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph.

>

> As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the cheeks

> and the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa (the tongue and

> floor of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and able to absorb

> bioavailables. These, along with the nasal cavaties have a direct route to

> the lymph:

> http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html

>

> Didn't Lew just say that >> " The rationale of Oil pulling is the lymphatic

> drainage : the

>>> anatomical oro-nasal connection " ?

>

> And here is a study regarding the difference in absorbability between the

> buccal and sublingual mercosa:

> http://curezone.com/forums/am.asp?i=986942

>

> The sublingual route has received far more attention than has the buccal

> route. The sublingual mucosa includes the membrane of the ventral surface of

> the tongue and the floor of the mouth whereas the buccal mucosa constitutes

> the lining of the cheek. The sublingual mucosa is relatively permeable, thus

> giving rapid absorption and acceptable bioavailabilities of many drugs.

> Further, the sublingual mucosa is convenient, accessible, and generally well

> accepted. This route has been investigated clinically for the delivery of a

> substantial number of drugs. It is the preferred route for administration of

> nitroglycerin and is also used for buprenorphine and nifedipine. D. &

> J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. 1 (1992).

>

> The buccal mucosa is less permeable than the sublingual mucosa. The rapid

> absorption and high bioavailabilities seen with sublingual administration of

> drugs is not generally provided to the same extent by the buccal mucosa. D.

> & J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. (1992) at 2. The

> permeability of the oral mucosae is probably related to the physical

> characteristics of the tissues. The sublingual mucosa is thinner than the

> buccal mucosa, thus permeability is greater for the sublingual tissue. The

> palatal mucosa is intermediate in thickness, but is keratinized whereas the

> other two tissues are not, thus lessening its permeability.

>

> The ability of molecules to permeate through the oral mucosa appears to be

> related to molecular size, lipid solubility, and ionization. Small

> molecules, less than about 100 daltons, appear to cross the mucosa rapidly.

> As molecular size increases, however, permeability decreases rapidly.

> Lipid-soluble compounds are more permeable through the mucosa than are

> non-lipid-soluble molecules. . . .

>

> Substances that facilitate the transport of solutes across biological

> membranes, penetration enhancers, are well known in the art for

> administering drugs. V. Lee et al., 8 Critical Reviews in Therapeutic Drug

> r Systems 91 (1991) [hereinafter " Critical Reviews " ]. Penetration

> enhancers may be categorized as chelators (e.g., EDTA, citric acid,

> salicylates), surfactants (e.g., sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)),

> non-surfactants (e.g., unsaturated cyclic ureas), bile salts (e.g., sodium

> deoxycholate, sodium tauro-cholate), and FATTY ACIDS (e.g., oleic acid,

> acylcarnitines, mono- and diglycerides).

>

> quoting Duncan:

>> snip<

>> > Although there is more manipulation of the surrounding tissues with

>> > mouth than >using a waterpik, with regard to the amount of pressure from

>> > oil swishing the mouth can >only exert about .3 to .5 of a pound

>> > pressure, while the waterpik has an operating >pressure of about 60-90

>> > psi, so the waterpik has a decided edge below the gumline in >dental

>> > hygeine, as several members on this and the electroherbalism list

>> > pointed out.

>

> Duncan, I reviewed that thread and no one - except for you - said that the

> waterpik worked better for them than oil pulling. In fact I don't think

> those talking about the various water piks, flossing, and toothpaste had

> ever even tried it. The one who had tried it recommended it to the one who

> asked about it. And how do you account for those (myself included) who used

> a water pik but received no reversal of a systemic problem until after

> starting oil pulling? If there's a waterpik cure I haven't heard of it.

> Did you miss this part of the testimonial I referenced? :

>

> quote: " a friend handed me a piece of paper describing an oil therapy from

> Dr. F. Karach. I decided to try it since nothing else had worked for me

> thus far. Each morning before breakfast, I took one tablespoon of sunflower

> oil and slowly swished it in my mouth for fifteen to twenty minutes. I

> repeated the procedure each night before going to bed. After

> spitting out the oil, I found it helpful to use my Water Pik to thoroughly

> cleanse the tongue and gums. "

>

> This was the person who had been having liver pains for 15 months. The pains

> stopped after 3 days of oil pulling.

>

> Yes, the waterpik is quite useful to remove the oil after oil pulling. And

> I'm sure it's useful as a cleaning tool as well. However, I really haven't

> needed mine since oil pulling. It has been sitting under my sink gathering

> dust for years. Rinsing and brushing are all I need to remove the oil.

> Rinsing and flossing are good too - after eating.

>

> Dee

>

>

[Guest guest]

< As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the

cheeks and the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa

(the tongue and floor of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and

able to absorb bioavailables. These, along with the nasal cavaties

have a direct route to the lymph:

http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html >

A simple and elegant presentation of sublingual dosing.

Thank you, Dee.

With regards

Lew

On 2/27/11, Lew Fong How <drfhlew@...> wrote:

> Duncan wrote:

>

> < The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and

> attaching to toxins in blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph. >

>

> I have just referred a patient with complaints of

> substernal pain with radiation to the inner side of the left upper

> limb from the OUT-PATIENT clinic with a tablet of

> GLyceryl Trinitrate tablet 500 micrograms under his tongue. . He

> has a history of Ischaemic heart disease . Please enlighten me

> Duncan :

>

> What is the difference between the buccal mucous membrane and the

> sublingual ( under the tonge ) mucous membrane ?

>

> < No doubt I could have made the point clearer 'coz you didn't

> understand the implications of the protective membrane layer mentioned

> in Bruce's book. >

>

> What implications of the protective membrane you

> were referring to ? Please post your clarification.

>

> With regards

> Lew

>

> On 2/27/11, Dolores <dgk@...> wrote:

>>

>>>

>>> Long as you understand that oil swishing doesn't pull anything through

>>> the

>>> buccal >membrane as Fife has clarified a couple of times, you're good to

>>> go.

>>

>> You're granting me your permission? How magnanimous of you :-)

>>

>> quoting Duncan:

>>> The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and

>>> attaching

>>> to toxins in >blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph.

>>

>> As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the cheeks

>> and the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa (the tongue

>> and

>> floor of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and able to absorb

>> bioavailables. These, along with the nasal cavaties have a direct route

>> to

>> the lymph:

>> http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html

>>

>> Didn't Lew just say that >> " The rationale of Oil pulling is the

>> lymphatic

>> drainage : the

>>>> anatomical oro-nasal connection " ?

>>

>> And here is a study regarding the difference in absorbability between the

>> buccal and sublingual mercosa:

>> http://curezone.com/forums/am.asp?i=986942

>>

>> The sublingual route has received far more attention than has the buccal

>> route. The sublingual mucosa includes the membrane of the ventral surface

>> of

>> the tongue and the floor of the mouth whereas the buccal mucosa

>> constitutes

>> the lining of the cheek. The sublingual mucosa is relatively permeable,

>> thus

>> giving rapid absorption and acceptable bioavailabilities of many drugs.

>> Further, the sublingual mucosa is convenient, accessible, and generally

>> well

>> accepted. This route has been investigated clinically for the delivery of

>> a

>> substantial number of drugs. It is the preferred route for administration

>> of

>> nitroglycerin and is also used for buprenorphine and nifedipine. D.

>> &

>> J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. 1 (1992).

>>

>> The buccal mucosa is less permeable than the sublingual mucosa. The rapid

>> absorption and high bioavailabilities seen with sublingual administration

>> of

>> drugs is not generally provided to the same extent by the buccal mucosa.

>> D.

>> & J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. (1992) at 2. The

>> permeability of the oral mucosae is probably related to the physical

>> characteristics of the tissues. The sublingual mucosa is thinner than the

>> buccal mucosa, thus permeability is greater for the sublingual tissue.

>> The

>> palatal mucosa is intermediate in thickness, but is keratinized whereas

>> the

>> other two tissues are not, thus lessening its permeability.

>>

>> The ability of molecules to permeate through the oral mucosa appears to

>> be

>> related to molecular size, lipid solubility, and ionization. Small

>> molecules, less than about 100 daltons, appear to cross the mucosa

>> rapidly.

>> As molecular size increases, however, permeability decreases rapidly.

>> Lipid-soluble compounds are more permeable through the mucosa than are

>> non-lipid-soluble molecules. . . .

>>

>> Substances that facilitate the transport of solutes across biological

>> membranes, penetration enhancers, are well known in the art for

>> administering drugs. V. Lee et al., 8 Critical Reviews in Therapeutic

>> Drug

>> r Systems 91 (1991) [hereinafter " Critical Reviews " ]. Penetration

>> enhancers may be categorized as chelators (e.g., EDTA, citric acid,

>> salicylates), surfactants (e.g., sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)),

>> non-surfactants (e.g., unsaturated cyclic ureas), bile salts (e.g.,

>> sodium

>> deoxycholate, sodium tauro-cholate), and FATTY ACIDS (e.g., oleic acid,

>> acylcarnitines, mono- and diglycerides).

>>

>> quoting Duncan:

>>> snip<

>>> > Although there is more manipulation of the surrounding tissues with

>>> > mouth than >using a waterpik, with regard to the amount of pressure

>>> > from

>>> > oil swishing the mouth can >only exert about .3 to .5 of a pound

>>> > pressure, while the waterpik has an operating >pressure of about 60-90

>>> > psi, so the waterpik has a decided edge below the gumline in >dental

>>> > hygeine, as several members on this and the electroherbalism list

>>> > pointed out.

>>

>> Duncan, I reviewed that thread and no one - except for you - said that

>> the

>> waterpik worked better for them than oil pulling. In fact I don't think

>> those talking about the various water piks, flossing, and toothpaste had

>> ever even tried it. The one who had tried it recommended it to the one

>> who

>> asked about it. And how do you account for those (myself included) who

>> used

>> a water pik but received no reversal of a systemic problem until after

>> starting oil pulling? If there's a waterpik cure I haven't heard of it.

>> Did you miss this part of the testimonial I referenced? :

>>

>> quote: " a friend handed me a piece of paper describing an oil therapy

>> from

>> Dr. F. Karach. I decided to try it since nothing else had worked for me

>> thus far. Each morning before breakfast, I took one tablespoon of

>> sunflower

>> oil and slowly swished it in my mouth for fifteen to twenty minutes. I

>> repeated the procedure each night before going to bed. After

>> spitting out the oil, I found it helpful to use my Water Pik to

>> thoroughly

>> cleanse the tongue and gums. "

>>

>> This was the person who had been having liver pains for 15 months. The

>> pains

>> stopped after 3 days of oil pulling.

>>

>> Yes, the waterpik is quite useful to remove the oil after oil pulling.

>> And

>> I'm sure it's useful as a cleaning tool as well. However, I really

>> haven't

>> needed mine since oil pulling. It has been sitting under my sink

>> gathering

>> dust for years. Rinsing and brushing are all I need to remove the oil.

>> Rinsing and flossing are good too - after eating.

>>

>> Dee

>>

>>

>

[Guest guest]

Dee wrote:

< The ability of molecules to permeate through the oral mucosa appears

to be related to molecular size, lipid solubility, and ionization.

Small molecules, less than about 100 daltons, appear to cross the

mucosa rapidly. As molecular size increases, however, permeability

decreases rapidly. Lipid-soluble compounds are more permeable through

the mucosa than are non-lipid-soluble molecules. . . .

Substances that facilitate the transport of solutes across

biological membranes, penetration enhancers, are well known in the art

for administering drugs >

I brew microparticle colloidal silver from a micro-particle

colloidal silver generator I ordered from Silver Edge in the US. for

my cat, dogs, birds and monkey. And of course, I drink it my self.

Here is a write up on its

micro-particle size

Transmission Electron Microscope (TEM) image of

micro-particle colloidal silver

http://www.microparticlegenerator.com/micron_particle_size.htm

From my scrape book, I contrived to put up a

website to visualise my thoughts on Holistic Medidine in the free

20 MB webspace Tripod has alloted me.The website has not been

updated for the past few years. Luckily, the webpage

on

Clinical Practice in Holistic Med

http://lewfh.tripod.com/holisticmultimediasetup/

are still intact. On biological membranes I have worked on

Ozone inhalation through Olive Oil and ear and body insufflatiom. The

machines are all functional. Taking a hint from Duncan, I will try

ozonation of Coconut Oil..

With regards

Lew

On 2/27/11, Lew Fong How <drfhlew@...> wrote:

> < As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the

> cheeks and the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa

> (the tongue and floor of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and

> able to absorb bioavailables. These, along with the nasal cavaties

> have a direct route to the lymph:

> http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html >

>

> A simple and elegant presentation of sublingual dosing.

> Thank you, Dee.

>

> With regards

> Lew

>

> On 2/27/11, Lew Fong How <drfhlew@...> wrote:

>> Duncan wrote:

>>

>> < The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and

>> attaching to toxins in blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph. >

>>

>> I have just referred a patient with complaints of

>> substernal pain with radiation to the inner side of the left upper

>> limb from the OUT-PATIENT clinic with a tablet of

>> GLyceryl Trinitrate tablet 500 micrograms under his tongue. . He

>> has a history of Ischaemic heart disease . Please enlighten me

>> Duncan :

>>

>> What is the difference between the buccal mucous membrane and the

>> sublingual ( under the tonge ) mucous membrane ?

>>

>> < No doubt I could have made the point clearer 'coz you didn't

>> understand the implications of the protective membrane layer mentioned

>> in Bruce's book. >

>>

>> What implications of the protective membrane you

>> were referring to ? Please post your clarification.

>>

>> With regards

>> Lew

>>

>> On 2/27/11, Dolores <dgk@...> wrote:

>>>

>>>>

>>>> Long as you understand that oil swishing doesn't pull anything through

>>>> the

>>>> buccal >membrane as Fife has clarified a couple of times, you're good

>>>> to

>>>> go.

>>>

>>> You're granting me your permission? How magnanimous of you :-)

>>>

>>> quoting Duncan:

>>>> The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and

>>>> attaching

>>>> to toxins in >blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph.

>>>

>>> As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the

>>> cheeks

>>> and the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa (the tongue

>>> and

>>> floor of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and able to absorb

>>> bioavailables. These, along with the nasal cavaties have a direct route

>>> to

>>> the lymph:

>>> http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html

>>>

>>> Didn't Lew just say that >> " The rationale of Oil pulling is the

>>> lymphatic

>>> drainage : the

>>>>> anatomical oro-nasal connection " ?

>>>

>>> And here is a study regarding the difference in absorbability between

>>> the

>>> buccal and sublingual mercosa:

>>> http://curezone.com/forums/am.asp?i=986942

>>>

>>> The sublingual route has received far more attention than has the buccal

>>> route. The sublingual mucosa includes the membrane of the ventral

>>> surface

>>> of

>>> the tongue and the floor of the mouth whereas the buccal mucosa

>>> constitutes

>>> the lining of the cheek. The sublingual mucosa is relatively permeable,

>>> thus

>>> giving rapid absorption and acceptable bioavailabilities of many drugs.

>>> Further, the sublingual mucosa is convenient, accessible, and generally

>>> well

>>> accepted. This route has been investigated clinically for the delivery

>>> of

>>> a

>>> substantial number of drugs. It is the preferred route for

>>> administration

>>> of

>>> nitroglycerin and is also used for buprenorphine and nifedipine. D.

>>>

>>> &

>>> J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. 1 (1992).

>>>

>>> The buccal mucosa is less permeable than the sublingual mucosa. The

>>> rapid

>>> absorption and high bioavailabilities seen with sublingual

>>> administration

>>> of

>>> drugs is not generally provided to the same extent by the buccal mucosa.

>>> D.

>>> & J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. (1992) at 2. The

>>> permeability of the oral mucosae is probably related to the physical

>>> characteristics of the tissues. The sublingual mucosa is thinner than

>>> the

>>> buccal mucosa, thus permeability is greater for the sublingual tissue.

>>> The

>>> palatal mucosa is intermediate in thickness, but is keratinized whereas

>>> the

>>> other two tissues are not, thus lessening its permeability.

>>>

>>> The ability of molecules to permeate through the oral mucosa appears to

>>> be

>>> related to molecular size, lipid solubility, and ionization. Small

>>> molecules, less than about 100 daltons, appear to cross the mucosa

>>> rapidly.

>>> As molecular size increases, however, permeability decreases rapidly.

>>> Lipid-soluble compounds are more permeable through the mucosa than are

>>> non-lipid-soluble molecules. . . .

>>>

>>> Substances that facilitate the transport of solutes across biological

>>> membranes, penetration enhancers, are well known in the art for

>>> administering drugs. V. Lee et al., 8 Critical Reviews in Therapeutic

>>> Drug

>>> r Systems 91 (1991) [hereinafter " Critical Reviews " ]. Penetration

>>> enhancers may be categorized as chelators (e.g., EDTA, citric acid,

>>> salicylates), surfactants (e.g., sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)),

>>> non-surfactants (e.g., unsaturated cyclic ureas), bile salts (e.g.,

>>> sodium

>>> deoxycholate, sodium tauro-cholate), and FATTY ACIDS (e.g., oleic acid,

>>> acylcarnitines, mono- and diglycerides).

>>>

>>> quoting Duncan:

>>>> snip<

>>>> > Although there is more manipulation of the surrounding tissues with

>>>> > mouth than >using a waterpik, with regard to the amount of pressure

>>>> > from

>>>> > oil swishing the mouth can >only exert about .3 to .5 of a pound

>>>> > pressure, while the waterpik has an operating >pressure of about

>>>> > 60-90

>>>> > psi, so the waterpik has a decided edge below the gumline in >dental

>>>> > hygeine, as several members on this and the electroherbalism list

>>>> > pointed out.

>>>

>>> Duncan, I reviewed that thread and no one - except for you - said that

>>> the

>>> waterpik worked better for them than oil pulling. In fact I don't think

>>> those talking about the various water piks, flossing, and toothpaste had

>>> ever even tried it. The one who had tried it recommended it to the one

>>> who

>>> asked about it. And how do you account for those (myself included) who

>>> used

>>> a water pik but received no reversal of a systemic problem until after

>>> starting oil pulling? If there's a waterpik cure I haven't heard of it.

>>> Did you miss this part of the testimonial I referenced? :

>>>

>>> quote: " a friend handed me a piece of paper describing an oil therapy

>>> from

>>> Dr. F. Karach. I decided to try it since nothing else had worked for me

>>> thus far. Each morning before breakfast, I took one tablespoon of

>>> sunflower

>>> oil and slowly swished it in my mouth for fifteen to twenty minutes. I

>>> repeated the procedure each night before going to bed. After

>>> spitting out the oil, I found it helpful to use my Water Pik to

>>> thoroughly

>>> cleanse the tongue and gums. "

>>>

>>> This was the person who had been having liver pains for 15 months. The

>>> pains

>>> stopped after 3 days of oil pulling.

>>>

>>> Yes, the waterpik is quite useful to remove the oil after oil pulling.

>>> And

>>> I'm sure it's useful as a cleaning tool as well. However, I really

>>> haven't

>>> needed mine since oil pulling. It has been sitting under my sink

>>> gathering

>>> dust for years. Rinsing and brushing are all I need to remove the oil.

>>> Rinsing and flossing are good too - after eating.

>>>

>>> Dee

>>>

>>>

>>

>

[Guest guest]

Please continue )

With regards

Lew

On 2/27/11, Lew Fong How <drfhlew@...> wrote:

> Dee wrote:

>

> < The ability of molecules to permeate through the oral mucosa appears

> to be related to molecular size, lipid solubility, and ionization.

> Small molecules, less than about 100 daltons, appear to cross the

> mucosa rapidly. As molecular size increases, however, permeability

> decreases rapidly. Lipid-soluble compounds are more permeable through

> the mucosa than are non-lipid-soluble molecules. . . .

>

> Substances that facilitate the transport of solutes across

> biological membranes, penetration enhancers, are well known in the art

> for administering drugs >

>

>

> I brew microparticle colloidal silver from a micro-particle

> colloidal silver generator I ordered from Silver Edge in the US. for

> my cat, dogs, birds and monkey. And of course, I drink it my self.

>

>

> Here is a write up on its

> micro-particle size

>

> Transmission Electron Microscope (TEM) image of

> micro-particle colloidal silver

>

> http://www.microparticlegenerator.com/micron_particle_size.htm

>

>

> From my scrape book, I contrived to put up a

> website to visualise my thoughts on Holistic Medidine in the free

> 20 MB webspace Tripod has alloted me.The website has not been

> updated for the past few years. Luckily, the webpage

> on

> Clinical Practice in Holistic

> Med

>

> http://lewfh.tripod.com/holisticmultimediasetup/

>

> are still intact. On biological membranes I have worked on

> Ozone inhalation through Olive Oil and ear and body insufflatiom. The

> machines are all functional. Taking a hint from Duncan, I will try

> ozonation of Coconut Oil..

>

> With regards

> Lew

>

> On 2/27/11, Lew Fong How <drfhlew@...> wrote:

>> < As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the

>> cheeks and the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa

>> (the tongue and floor of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and

>> able to absorb bioavailables. These, along with the nasal cavaties

>> have a direct route to the lymph:

>> http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html >

>>

>> A simple and elegant presentation of sublingual

>> dosing.

>> Thank you, Dee.

>>

>> With regards

>> Lew

>>

>> On 2/27/11, Lew Fong How <drfhlew@...> wrote:

>>> Duncan wrote:

>>>

>>> < The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and

>>> attaching to toxins in blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph. >

>>>

>>> I have just referred a patient with complaints of

>>> substernal pain with radiation to the inner side of the left upper

>>> limb from the OUT-PATIENT clinic with a tablet of

>>> GLyceryl Trinitrate tablet 500 micrograms under his tongue. . He

>>> has a history of Ischaemic heart disease . Please enlighten me

>>> Duncan :

>>>

>>> What is the difference between the buccal mucous membrane and the

>>> sublingual ( under the tonge ) mucous membrane ?

>>>

>>> < No doubt I could have made the point clearer 'coz you didn't

>>> understand the implications of the protective membrane layer mentioned

>>> in Bruce's book. >

>>>

>>> What implications of the protective membrane you

>>> were referring to ? Please post your clarification.

>>>

>>> With regards

>>> Lew

>>>

>>> On 2/27/11, Dolores <dgk@...> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Long as you understand that oil swishing doesn't pull anything through

>>>>> the

>>>>> buccal >membrane as Fife has clarified a couple of times, you're good

>>>>> to

>>>>> go.

>>>>

>>>> You're granting me your permission? How magnanimous of you :-)

>>>>

>>>> quoting Duncan:

>>>>> The buccal membrane prevents the oil from going into tissues and

>>>>> attaching

>>>>> to toxins in >blood, AND/OR the tissues, AND/OR the lymph.

>>>>

>>>> As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the

>>>> cheeks

>>>> and the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa (the

>>>> tongue

>>>> and

>>>> floor of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and able to absorb

>>>> bioavailables. These, along with the nasal cavaties have a direct route

>>>> to

>>>> the lymph:

>>>> http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html

>>>>

>>>> Didn't Lew just say that >> " The rationale of Oil pulling is the

>>>> lymphatic

>>>> drainage : the

>>>>>> anatomical oro-nasal connection " ?

>>>>

>>>> And here is a study regarding the difference in absorbability between

>>>> the

>>>> buccal and sublingual mercosa:

>>>> http://curezone.com/forums/am.asp?i=986942

>>>>

>>>> The sublingual route has received far more attention than has the

>>>> buccal

>>>> route. The sublingual mucosa includes the membrane of the ventral

>>>> surface

>>>> of

>>>> the tongue and the floor of the mouth whereas the buccal mucosa

>>>> constitutes

>>>> the lining of the cheek. The sublingual mucosa is relatively permeable,

>>>> thus

>>>> giving rapid absorption and acceptable bioavailabilities of many drugs.

>>>> Further, the sublingual mucosa is convenient, accessible, and generally

>>>> well

>>>> accepted. This route has been investigated clinically for the delivery

>>>> of

>>>> a

>>>> substantial number of drugs. It is the preferred route for

>>>> administration

>>>> of

>>>> nitroglycerin and is also used for buprenorphine and nifedipine. D.

>>>>

>>>> &

>>>> J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. 1 (1992).

>>>>

>>>> The buccal mucosa is less permeable than the sublingual mucosa. The

>>>> rapid

>>>> absorption and high bioavailabilities seen with sublingual

>>>> administration

>>>> of

>>>> drugs is not generally provided to the same extent by the buccal

>>>> mucosa.

>>>> D.

>>>> & J. , 81 J. Pharmaceutical Sci. (1992) at 2. The

>>>> permeability of the oral mucosae is probably related to the physical

>>>> characteristics of the tissues. The sublingual mucosa is thinner than

>>>> the

>>>> buccal mucosa, thus permeability is greater for the sublingual tissue.

>>>> The

>>>> palatal mucosa is intermediate in thickness, but is keratinized whereas

>>>> the

>>>> other two tissues are not, thus lessening its permeability.

>>>>

>>>> The ability of molecules to permeate through the oral mucosa appears to

>>>> be

>>>> related to molecular size, lipid solubility, and ionization. Small

>>>> molecules, less than about 100 daltons, appear to cross the mucosa

>>>> rapidly.

>>>> As molecular size increases, however, permeability decreases rapidly.

>>>> Lipid-soluble compounds are more permeable through the mucosa than are

>>>> non-lipid-soluble molecules. . . .

>>>>

>>>> Substances that facilitate the transport of solutes across biological

>>>> membranes, penetration enhancers, are well known in the art for

>>>> administering drugs. V. Lee et al., 8 Critical Reviews in Therapeutic

>>>> Drug

>>>> r Systems 91 (1991) [hereinafter " Critical Reviews " ]. Penetration

>>>> enhancers may be categorized as chelators (e.g., EDTA, citric acid,

>>>> salicylates), surfactants (e.g., sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)),

>>>> non-surfactants (e.g., unsaturated cyclic ureas), bile salts (e.g.,

>>>> sodium

>>>> deoxycholate, sodium tauro-cholate), and FATTY ACIDS (e.g., oleic acid,

>>>> acylcarnitines, mono- and diglycerides).

>>>>

>>>> quoting Duncan:

>>>>> snip<

>>>>> > Although there is more manipulation of the surrounding tissues with

>>>>> > mouth than >using a waterpik, with regard to the amount of pressure

>>>>> > from

>>>>> > oil swishing the mouth can >only exert about .3 to .5 of a pound

>>>>> > pressure, while the waterpik has an operating >pressure of about

>>>>> > 60-90

>>>>> > psi, so the waterpik has a decided edge below the gumline in >dental

>>>>> > hygeine, as several members on this and the electroherbalism list

>>>>> > pointed out.

>>>>

>>>> Duncan, I reviewed that thread and no one - except for you - said that

>>>> the

>>>> waterpik worked better for them than oil pulling. In fact I don't think

>>>> those talking about the various water piks, flossing, and toothpaste

>>>> had

>>>> ever even tried it. The one who had tried it recommended it to the one

>>>> who

>>>> asked about it. And how do you account for those (myself included) who

>>>> used

>>>> a water pik but received no reversal of a systemic problem until after

>>>> starting oil pulling? If there's a waterpik cure I haven't heard of it.

>>>> Did you miss this part of the testimonial I referenced? :

>>>>

>>>> quote: " a friend handed me a piece of paper describing an oil therapy

>>>> from

>>>> Dr. F. Karach. I decided to try it since nothing else had worked for

>>>> me

>>>> thus far. Each morning before breakfast, I took one tablespoon of

>>>> sunflower

>>>> oil and slowly swished it in my mouth for fifteen to twenty minutes. I

>>>> repeated the procedure each night before going to bed. After

>>>> spitting out the oil, I found it helpful to use my Water Pik to

>>>> thoroughly

>>>> cleanse the tongue and gums. "

>>>>

>>>> This was the person who had been having liver pains for 15 months. The

>>>> pains

>>>> stopped after 3 days of oil pulling.

>>>>

>>>> Yes, the waterpik is quite useful to remove the oil after oil pulling.

>>>> And

>>>> I'm sure it's useful as a cleaning tool as well. However, I really

>>>> haven't

>>>> needed mine since oil pulling. It has been sitting under my sink

>>>> gathering

>>>> dust for years. Rinsing and brushing are all I need to remove the oil.

>>>> Rinsing and flossing are good too - after eating.

>>>>

>>>> Dee

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>

>

[Guest guest]

Hasn't everyone gotten all the information Dee and Duncan have provided on this

subject? MUST every issue bounce between one being snide and the other

repeating the problem . . . over and over and over, ad nauseum? How many times

do we have to request that you two give over and get back to coconut oil, and

STOP the nit-picking? Oy vay!

We've had new-comers leave this list recently solely because of your ridiculous

need to be THE ONLY EXPERT. Who cares? If I want the real skinny on a subject,

I research the subject myself, but I don't come back and rub everyones' noses in

yet another facet of the problem.

I, for one, am running out of patience with this. Enough, already! Please?

[Guest guest]

Lew, some people don't understand the biological role of membranes, and this

gives rise to myths such as the one we are exploring today.

The primary function of the various mouth and skin membranes is to resist

infiltration by food, bacteria, and toxins.

Bacteria and toxins don't get through the skin willy-nilly in either direction;

this contradicts the membrane's natural function and the outcome would be

undesireable, as a detrimental accumulation on the inside of the membrane enough

to kill cells would have to occur. So pulling through the skin is a hypothetical

scenario that has been pretty much ruled out by science.

True, if one sucks an open wound there will be issue, but an open wound isn't

contiguous membrane either.

Some nutrients are in a bioavailable and absorbable form that can start to

absorb when they hit the skin. This kind of food has never been a problem.

all good,

Duncan

>

> < As I understand it Duncan, the buccal murcosa is the lining of the

> cheeks and the back of the lips. But what of the sublingual murcosa

> (the tongue and floor of the mouth) which is relatively permeable and

> able to absorb bioavailables. These, along with the nasal cavaties

> have a direct route to the lymph:

> http://www.bartleby.com/107/177.html >

>

> A simple and elegant presentation of sublingual dosing.

> Thank you, Dee.

>

> With regards

> Lew

>

[Guest guest]

It's a discussion group

They're discussing...

Oil related...health related...

All Good....

Chuck

There are nearly two dozen anti-noise programs in effect across the

country. I called the Anti-Noise Commission to get more info, but all

they said to me was, " What? What? We can't hear you! "

On 2/27/2011 12:56:45 PM, thebrookela (thebrookela@...) wrote:

> Hasn't everyone gotten all the information Dee and Duncan have provided on

this subject? MUST every issue bounce between one being snide and the other

repeating the problem . . . over and over and over, ad nauseum? How many times

do we have to request that you two give over and get back to coconut oil, and

STOP the nit-picking? Oy vay!

>

> We've

> had new-comers leave this list recently solely because of your ridiculous

> need to be THE ONLY EXPERT. Who cares? If I want the real skinny on a

> subject, I research the subject myself, but I

> don't come back and rub everyones' noses in yet another facet of the

> problem.

>

> I, for one, am running out of patience with this. Enough, already!

> Please?

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Lew:

The basic principles of membrane and skin function are given in grade 12 and

first year university biology textbooks in Canada and probably the USA, and you

can also find much of the material online; Here's a pretty good Goodle search to

start you off; add or subtract keywords to your liking:

<http://tinyurl.com/membrane-permeability>

Here's a study that shows more permeability with age:

<http://tinyurl.com/membrane-age>

Ever notice that some drugs have to be swallowed while others are readily

absorbed sublingually? The principle of selective absorption is common in

biology; it is the reason you don't poison yourself every time you eat, it's how

bacteria are kept more or less " outside " . It's the reason you don't absorb all

that calcium when you eat a steak, why you don't absorb most of the toxins and

bacteria in your gut (which would kill you), and why the kids don't die of

toxicity when they siphon gas and get some gasoline in their mouth.

Selective absorption is pretty well known; it's the reason to develop drugs that

overcome mucosal impermeability. This is from an industry abstract: " In spite of

its giving the highest and fastest bioavailability, the parenteral route is not

a preferred option, due to its inconvenience and the noncompliance of patients.

Mucosal surfaces are the most common and convenient routes for delivering drugs

to the body. However, macromolecular drugs such as peptides and proteins are

unable to overcome the mucosal barriers and/or are degraded before reaching the

blood stream. "

Here's a quote from Merck: " Cell membranes are biologic barriers that

selectively inhibit passage of drug molecules. "

http://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/sec20/ch303/ch303b.html

The biologic barriers selectively inhibit food you eat and toxins as well.

Actually, besides oil not " pulling " any toxins through the membranes, oil isn't

even attracted to water-soluble toxins in the blood and lymph. Oil-soluble

toxins are safely stored away in fat cells and hard to get at from the

water-based blood flow around the oral cavity.

all good,

Duncan

>

> Good morning Duncan . I thank you for clarification and advice.

> My passion is Holistic Medicine and I am open to holistic concepts. I

> would be obliged if you could kindly give us some references to

> support your observations:

>

> * some people don't understand the biological role of membranes, and

> this gives rise to myths such as the one we are exploring today.

>

> * So pulling through the skin is a hypothetical scenario that has been

> pretty much ruled out by science.

>

> * The primary function of the various mouth and skin membranes is to

> resist infiltration by food, bacteria, and toxins.

>

>

> With regards

> Lew

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Duncan,

I thank you very much the URLs. You sound very

confident and knowledgeable.

You wrote:

< some people don't understand the biological role of membranes, ..>

Duncan , who are these " some people " ? I plea ignorance. Please

explain to me in your own words what is < the biological role of

membranes > . Sorry, I have no access to the Class Biology Books you

mentioned.

< ..... and this gives rise to myths such as the one we are

exploring today. >

What are the myths such as the one we are exploring to-day. ?

Do you have any comments on transdermal dosing

since you have broached on the functions of the skin. ?

With regards

Lew

On 2/28/11, Duncan Crow <duncancrow@...> wrote:

> Lew:

>

> The basic principles of membrane and skin function are given in grade 12 and

> first year university biology textbooks in Canada and probably the USA, and

> you can also find much of the material online; Here's a pretty good Goodle

> search to start you off; add or subtract keywords to your liking:

>

> <http://tinyurl.com/membrane-permeability>

>

> Here's a study that shows more permeability with age:

>

> <http://tinyurl.com/membrane-age>

>

> Ever notice that some drugs have to be swallowed while others are readily

> absorbed sublingually? The principle of selective absorption is common in

> biology; it is the reason you don't poison yourself every time you eat, it's

> how bacteria are kept more or less " outside " . It's the reason you don't

> absorb all that calcium when you eat a steak, why you don't absorb most of

> the toxins and bacteria in your gut (which would kill you), and why the kids

> don't die of toxicity when they siphon gas and get some gasoline in their

> mouth.

>

> Selective absorption is pretty well known; it's the reason to develop drugs

> that overcome mucosal impermeability. This is from an industry abstract: " In

> spite of its giving the highest and fastest bioavailability, the parenteral

> route is not a preferred option, due to its inconvenience and the

> noncompliance of patients. Mucosal surfaces are the most common and

> convenient routes for delivering drugs to the body. However, macromolecular

> drugs such as peptides and proteins are unable to overcome the mucosal

> barriers and/or are degraded before reaching the blood stream. "

>

> Here's a quote from Merck: " Cell membranes are biologic barriers that

> selectively inhibit passage of drug molecules. "

>

> http://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/sec20/ch303/ch303b.html

>

> The biologic barriers selectively inhibit food you eat and toxins as well.

> Actually, besides oil not " pulling " any toxins through the membranes, oil

> isn't even attracted to water-soluble toxins in the blood and lymph.

> Oil-soluble toxins are safely stored away in fat cells and hard to get at

> from the water-based blood flow around the oral cavity.

>

> all good,

>

> Duncan

>

>

>

>>

>> Good morning Duncan . I thank you for clarification and advice.

>> My passion is Holistic Medicine and I am open to holistic concepts. I

>> would be obliged if you could kindly give us some references to

>> support your observations:

>>

>> * some people don't understand the biological role of membranes, and

>> this gives rise to myths such as the one we are exploring today.

>>

>> * So pulling through the skin is a hypothetical scenario that has been

>> pretty much ruled out by science.

>>

>> * The primary function of the various mouth and skin membranes is to

>> resist infiltration by food, bacteria, and toxins.

>>

>>

>> With regards

>> Lew

>>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Lew,

Here's a Gooogle search using your keywords biological roles of membranes:

<http://www.google.com/search?client=aff-cs-worldbrowser & forid=1 & ie=utf-8 & oe=UTF\

-8 & q=biological+roles+of+membranes>

This WIKI on the first page will get you started:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_membrane

From further down the first page, this passage illustrates the selective nature

of the membrane; note osmotic balance and mechanical load (oil pulling?) are

mentioned:

http://foroff.phys.msu.ru/phys/med/engl_ver/evc_01me.pdf

Partitions dividing cells into compartments are built of a double layer of lipid

molecules (which is often called «bilayer») and are practically impermeable for

ions and polar water-soluble molecules. But this lipid bilayer includes numerous

built-in protein molecules and molecular complexes one of those have/possess the

properties of selective «channels» for ions and molecules, and others - those of

«pumps» capable to pump/transfer actively ions through membrane. The barrier

properties of membranes and working of membrane pumps cause

irregular/disbalanced distribution of ions between the cell and extracellular

medium, which lies in the basis of the processes of intracellular regulation and

signal transfer in the form of electrical impulse between cells. A second

function, common for all membranes, is the function of «mounting plate», or

matrix on which there are proteins and protein groups that are disposed in a

definite order and form/create systems of electron transfer, energy accumulation

in the form of ATP, regulation of intracellular processes by hormones coming in

from outside and intracellular mediations, recognizing of other cells and

foreign proteins, light reception, mechanical effects, etc. A flexible and

elastic film which lay in the basis of all membranes also plays a definite

mechanical function keeping the cell intact under mild mechanical loads and

disturbances in/upsets of osmotic balance between the cell and environment.

18 million hits is a bit much; you have the whole science there and then some

with the poorly-worded search, and when you start refining the answers you'll

see a lot of repetitition.

all good,

Duncan

> >>

> >> Good morning Duncan . I thank you for clarification and advice.

> >> My passion is Holistic Medicine and I am open to holistic concepts. I

> >> would be obliged if you could kindly give us some references to

> >> support your observations:

> >>

> >> * some people don't understand the biological role of membranes, and

> >> this gives rise to myths such as the one we are exploring today.

> >>

> >> * So pulling through the skin is a hypothetical scenario that has been

> >> pretty much ruled out by science.

> >>

> >> * The primary function of the various mouth and skin membranes is to

> >> resist infiltration by food, bacteria, and toxins.

> >>

> >>

> >> With regards

> >> Lew

> >>

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Thank you Duncan.

You wrote:

< Partitions dividing cells into compartments are built

of a double layer of lipid molecules (which is often called «bilayer»)

and are practically impermeable for ions and polar water-soluble

molecules. But this lipid bilayer includes numerous built-in protein

molecules and molecular complexes one of those have/possess the

properties of selective «channels» for ions and molecules, and others

- those of «pumps» capable to pump/transfer actively ions through

membrane.The barrier properties of membranes and working of membrane

pumps cause irregular/disbalanced distribution of ions between the

cell and extracellular medium, which lies in the basis of the

processes of intracellular regulation and signal transfer in the form

of electrical impulse between cells.

A second function, common for all membranes, is the

function of «mounting plate», or matrix on which there are proteins

and protein groups that are disposed in a definite order and

form/create systems of electron transfer, energy accumulation in the

form of ATP, regulation of intracellular processes by hormones coming

in from outside and intracellular mediations, recognizing of other

cells and foreign proteins, light reception, mechanical effects, etc.

A flexible and elastic film which lay in the basis of

all membranes also plays a definite mechanical function keeping the

cell intact under mild mechanical loads and disturbances in/upsets of

osmotic balance between the cell and environment.>

Mechanical Waves are waves which propagate through a

material medium (solid, liquid, or gas) at a wave speed which depends

on the elastic and inertial properties of that medium and are

readily observable and demonstrated in nature: the oral dynamics of

churning sloshing and swirling of Oil Pulling in the cellular

universe.

Demonstration of Oil Pulling

http://www.oilpulling.com/oilpullingvideos.htm

based on its rationale in Biochemistry , Physics

and Applied Anatomy : oro-nasal lymphatic drainage )

http://forums.hpathy.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=12394 & title=olfaction-in-mainstream\

-practice

Whirling Waters -Solitonic Vortices

, in 1834, while watching a boat being drawn

in a canal by a pair of horses, recalled seeing a hump-shaped

disturbance, ' rolled forward with great velocity assuming the form of

a large solitary elevation, a rounded smooth and well-defined heap of

water, which continued its course without change of form or diminution

of speed'.The giant wave was about thirty feet long and a

one-and-a-half feet high. , who was on horseback, rode down the

towpath following the wave until it eventually petered out a mile or

so further along the canal. called the hump-shaped disturbance

'' a great wave of translation'' but it soon became known as a

'solitary wave' or Soliton .

Solitons have important applications in chemistry. In

proteins, mechanical and quantum effects may interact to produce

elastic waves travelling along chains of peptides as solitons when the

elastic oscillations are in resonance with the propagation of photons

from one group of peptides to another. And electrical conduction along

polymer chains such as polyacetylene occurs by means of solitons,

which act as the carriers of electric charge. These polymer chains are

sometimes said to become 'molecular wires'. There is one

characteristic of solitons that has the deepest and most fundamental

significance in physics. Solitons behave like waves in some ways and

like particles in others. This is, of course, how quantum field

theories describe elementary particles. What is more, solitons travel

without change of structure. They are localised in time and space and

carry energy . When two solitons collide, each may emerge from their

interaction with the structure it had before the collision. In three

dimensions, the velocity of a soliton may be changed by a collision.

Solitons are topics of research . They are turning up in an enormous

variety of applications, ranging from sending signals along optical

fibres to understanding the motion of the Earth's continental plates.

But science often moves forward through a combination of chance

observation and theoretical insight. had the notion that

Rotation of Light could generate Vortex Motion.

Some claim that such a phenomenon has never been observed

in Nature . Any object within such vortex, including the liquid

molecules, spin themselves counter to the spin of the vortex, as their

outer orbital sped is slower than their inner speed relative to the

axis of the vortex. Unless other forces are present, any small vortice

within a major vortex counter spins. It is a readily observable

phenomenon on rivers. Any targer vortex in a cove of a river bend has

these counter spinning satellite vortices present.

The planetary movement also has a direct effect upon water

- of all types provided it is moving. The formative boundary surfaces

of water in flowing movement prove to be areas of sensitivity. They

respond to the slightest changes in their surroundings by expanding,

contracting or making rhythmical waves. Water creates an infinite

variety of these surfaces and is therefore not merely an inert mass,

as we usually think. It is interwoven with countless sensitive

membranes, which are prepared to perceive everything taking place in

the surroundings. Water is not enclosed within its inner surfaces but

open to its surroundings and to all the stimuli and formative impulses

from without. It is the impressionable medium par excellence. Water

shaken in a vessel can be caused to move in such a way that the inner

surfaces thus created all slide past each other in the moving liquid.

As soon as the movement ceases, the formation of inner surfaces, and

thus also the great impressionability, is arrested, and the " sense

organ " closes itself. The same is true of the natural movement of

water, in which also a great variety of movements combine. Not only

the shaking of a container but also other kinds of movement can open

up the water as a sense organ. Spitting a mouthful of water is like

funnelling that produces a vortex of swirling water as it empties. In

flowing streams, millions of vortexes form when water breaks past

stones, sticks and other obstructions. These vortex patterns act as

powerful resonant structures as well as energizers and electrifiers

for water and colloids.

These vortex flows are one of the secrets of the great

sensitivity of water to the forces of the universe. The speed of

movement of water in a vortex has a rhythm of its own, it extends and

contracts in a rhythmic pulsation. The vortex is really composed of a

series of flowing surfaces (like the ropes) all bound together as if

by an invisible hand.These flowing surfaces move at different speeds,

slow on the outside and fast on the inside. The speed of movement of

water in a vortex multiplied by the radius from the center is a

constant. This means that the velocity at the center of the vortex is

theoretically infinite and when it reaches the critical velocity it

serves as a natural carver. It actually cuts down through bed rocks

and stones. External to the center of the vortex , the water molecules

are moving slower than the vortex. These do not erode as fast..

Tsunamis ( Harbour Waves ) and the size of the vortex-carver are

probably set rolling by asteroid impact, earthquake or undersea

avalanche. The scenically sculpured and polished coastline rocks and

stones are the creative effects of Nature's vortex-chisels. The

devastating outcome of a tsunamic onslaught is due to the ONE-TWO

carving action of the " Translating Wave " of solitonic vortices

Carl Sagan ( Starstuff ) said: “We are a way for the

cosmos to know itself.” Neil deGrasse Tyson, another prominent

astronomer and Director of the Hayden Planetarium in Manhattan, has

said: “We are not simply in the universe. The universe is in us.” The

stuff that swirls around in gas clouds millions of light years away,

and that is being produced in nuclear engines 15 million degrees hot,

is the stuff that makes up you and I - THE 13 BILLION YEAR OLD

RECYCLED STARDUST , with signatory co-resonance. These are beautiful

truths that everyone should appreciate and reflect.

http://lewfh.tripod.com/introductiontonutritionalscience/

< So pulling through the skin is a hypothetical scenario

that has been pretty much ruled out by science. >

Transdermal Therapy

http://blog.imva.info/medicine/transdermal-magnesium-therapy

Transdermal Dosing (chronics)

http://forums.hpathy.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=11738 & title=transdermal-dosing-chro\

nics

As a child I was fed twice daily a table-spoonful of

Elmusion - Cod Liver Oil whenever available..The ritual of lip

smacking, tongue rolling and cheek sucking made with every spoonful of

the tasty Cod Liver Oil is a fond gustatory memory of my childhood.

Your Grandma was right!

Just a couple generations ago many of our grandparents took a

daily spoonful of Fish Oil as a natural vitamin supplement and as a

natural remedy or preventative of a wide variety of ailments -

arthritis, osteoporosis, severe tooth decay, conjunctivitis, ulcers,

etc. In recent years, new studies have shown just how smart our

ancestors were in their use of natural remedies.

Fish Oil is very high in Omega 3, which contains the essential

fatty acids DHA and EPA. Both DHA and EPA, which are found only in

fish, are natural supplements essential to fighting and preventing

many physical and mental diseases. Ironically, a high fish diet that

was once a source of great health is now often a gateway to mercury

poisoning. Because of environmental pollution many people are now

restricting their fish intake and ultimately becoming Vitamin D

deficient.The good news is that you can get the same natural health

benefits of a high fish diet without exposure to the heavy metal by

taking Cod Liver Oil as a healthy dietary supplement. Vitamin D is

also absorbed through the skin during exposure to sunshine. People who

don't get adequate sunshine are usually deficient in Vitamin D and

would benefit from Fish Oil year round.

The good news is that you can get the same natural health benefits of

a high fish diet without exposure to the heavy metal by taking Cod

Liver Oil as a healthy dietary supplement.Vitamin D is also absorbed

through the skin during exposure to sunshine. People who don't get

adequate sunshine are usually deficient in Vitamin D and would benefit

from Cod Liver Oil year round. By contrast, people who do get

adequate sun may not need Cod Liver Oil and could rely instead on Fish

Oil for their DHA and EPA requirements in the hot months. However, in

the winter even the summer sun seekers need to supplement with Cod

Liver Oil.

Cod Liver Oil is also a highly absorbable source for natural

Vitamin A which is helpful for vision problems, proper thyroid

function, healthy immune system, and resisting infections. The natural

Vitamin A in Cod Liver Oil does not promote Vitamin A toxicity as

synthetic Vitamin A does. The Cod Liver Oil offered by Healthy Life

and Times has not been highly purified without being chemically

modified or processed, and has no detectable levels of contaminants

such as mercury, lead, cadmium, and PCBs.

http://www.healthylifeandtimes.com/CodLiverOil.html

With regards

Lew

On 2/28/11, cking001@... <cking001@...> wrote:

> It's a discussion group

> They're discussing...

>

> Oil related...health related...

>

> All Good....

>

> Chuck

> There are nearly two dozen anti-noise programs in effect across the

> country. I called the Anti-Noise Commission to get more info, but all

> they said to me was, " What? What? We can't hear you! "

>

>

> On 2/27/2011 12:56:45 PM, thebrookela (thebrookela@...) wrote:

>> Hasn't everyone gotten all the information Dee and Duncan have provided on

>> this subject? MUST every issue bounce between one being snide and the

>> other repeating the problem . . . over and over and over, ad nauseum? How

>> many times do we have to request that you two give over and get back to

>> coconut oil, and STOP the nit-picking? Oy vay!

>>

>> We've

>> had new-comers leave this list recently solely because of your ridiculous

>> need to be THE ONLY EXPERT. Who cares? If I want the real skinny on a

>> subject, I research the subject myself, but I

>> don't come back and rub everyones' noses in yet another facet of the

>> problem.

>>

>> I, for one, am running out of patience with this. Enough, already!

>> Please?

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>

[Guest guest]

Only a few nutrients absorb through the mouth because membrane barriers evolved

to prevent the unsanitary scenario proposed by pulling toxins, bacteria and

bacteria-sized particles through the membranes.

Of something like 13 cell layers in two membranes, one membrane type prevents

water-based solutions and the other prevents oil-based solutions, with certain

preferred molecules excepted/accepted.

A mixing of food slurry with lymph and blood is of course undesireable, and the

membrane prevents mixing in both directions.

In medicine, permeability can be varied. Before taking membrane permeability

products or drugs, a clean mouth is a good idea. If one is taking buccal or

sublingual drugs, they should take them after oral drugs or the oral drugs may

be absorbed too quickly. Similarly, one should be clean and carefully choose

non-toxic products in combination or none at all when using DMSO, which

increases permeability.

all good,

Duncan

>

> < Partitions dividing cells into compartments are built

> of a double layer of lipid molecules (which is often called «bilayer»)

> and are practically impermeable for ions and polar water-soluble

> molecules. But this lipid bilayer includes numerous built-in protein

> molecules and molecular complexes one of those have/possess the

> properties of selective «channels» for ions and molecules, and others

> - those of «pumps» capable to pump/transfer actively ions through

> membrane.

[Guest guest]

Thank you , Duncan.

With regards

Lew

On 3/2/11, Duncan Crow <duncancrow@...> wrote:

> Only a few nutrients absorb through the mouth because membrane barriers

> evolved to prevent the unsanitary scenario proposed by pulling toxins,

> bacteria and bacteria-sized particles through the membranes.

>

> Of something like 13 cell layers in two membranes, one membrane type

> prevents water-based solutions and the other prevents oil-based solutions,

> with certain preferred molecules excepted/accepted.

>

> A mixing of food slurry with lymph and blood is of course undesireable, and

> the membrane prevents mixing in both directions.

>

> In medicine, permeability can be varied. Before taking membrane permeability

> products or drugs, a clean mouth is a good idea. If one is taking buccal or

> sublingual drugs, they should take them after oral drugs or the oral drugs

> may be absorbed too quickly. Similarly, one should be clean and carefully

> choose non-toxic products in combination or none at all when using DMSO,

> which increases permeability.

>

> all good,

>

> Duncan

>

>

>>

>> < Partitions dividing cells into compartments are built

>> of a double layer of lipid molecules (which is often called «bilayer»)

>> and are practically impermeable for ions and polar water-soluble

>> molecules. But this lipid bilayer includes numerous built-in protein

>> molecules and molecular complexes one of those have/possess the

>> properties of selective «channels» for ions and molecules, and others

>> - those of «pumps» capable to pump/transfer actively ions through

>> membrane.

>

>