Re: Volumes and weights

[Guest guest]

Perhaps you will have more luck approaching Mr Jim Humble.

Phil

[ ] Volumes and weights

I'm wondering about the instructions for activating MMS.Just as the instructions for the ratio of drops does not clarify the size of drops (although the 1:5 ratio is the constant from which one can make ones own calculations), so are the instructions for activators extremely ambiguous.For a start, the instructions for making a 10% solution of citric acid enjoin one to add 9 spoonfuls of water to 1 spoonful of citric acid powder.This is not what pharmacists would call a 10% solution, as ratios of chemicals are generally expressed in weight, not volume. In the case of citric acid, this could be important, inasmuch as it can be purchased either as relatively coarse crystals (like refined sugar) or as a finer powder (like confectioner's sugar). Spoonfuls of these two would have different masses, and chances are that neither of them is equal in mass to a spoonful of water.Equally slapdash are the recommendations for lime,lemon juice and vinegar, all of which are available in widely varying concentrations of acid content.Is there anyone else who feels that some standardisation and precision might be a good idea?Among the answers you needn't bother to send are:1. Dr. Humble didn't indicate that it matters, so it doesn't2. Go find out for yourself...somewhere else.3. The way I'm already doing it works for me, and that's all that matters.4. Just try to err on the side of too much acid, and all will be well.

[Guest guest]

If you want to be super precise, go right ahead and figure out something for yourself. The 10% solution, though, is standard for many things, herbal tinctures and essential oil infusions included. The dropper size IS quite clear in the book, if you have read it. He talks about the difference between the lid cap and the standard eye dropper. Apparently what he has experimented with, size wise, renders the drops close enough to be effective. There was a BIG discussion the other list about dropper size because droppers themselves do vary so much, and other "precise" people went on about surface tension effecting size, how the dropper was held (vertically rather than horizontally)--therefore it would be hard to say more than Jim already does. The very best bet if you wish to be ultra precise, is to count how many drops of MMS it takes to fill a quarter teaspoon, a half teaspoon and a full teaspoon. Dump that MMS back into the bottle. Take your acid dropper and count how many drops it takes to fill the quarter, half and full teaspoon. This will give you an idea if you need the 5 to 1, the 7 to 1 or the 8 to one equation. Or, better yet, buy 2 bottles of MMS, dump the contents of one into a dark jar, seal it and set it out of any light, and then fill the empty bottle with the acid of your choice. Now you will have exactly the 5 to 1 ratio, no figuring needed. Then when the first bottle of MMS runs out, you just refill from the dark jar, as the MMS will keep for 2 to 4 years (yes--gasp! There's that much imprecise variation you'll have to deal with).

The acid content is going to be relatively the same--he does say it must be a 5% solution for vinegar, which probably means that most of the citric fruits are going to be in the same range. Naturally that acidity would vary from fruit to fruit, but apparently they will be close enough to that 5% to activate the MMS. I KNOW the 3 minute time frame is crucial. When I first started taking AMMS I guessed at the time frame. Being an impatient person I was way off in guessing how long it actually takes for 3 minutes to pass, and was drinking the AMMS after only a minute and a half or so. One day I decided to actually time it. When it sat for the full 3 minutes it was MUCH stronger. So strong in fact, that I became nauseated and had diarrhea from it, whereas taking the same amount for 4 days prior didn't do a thing.

So--if you want to be super precise, and think it's important for Jim to be more precise than he is, perhaps you should send him your recommendations and see what he says. If you figure a way for this to be easier for everyone that would be great.

Samala,

So--apparently Jim has experimented enough to know that his given methods--though perhaps not up to your precise standards--work.

-------Original Message-------

Among the answers you needn't bother to send are:1. Dr. Humble didn't indicate that it matters, so it doesn't2. Go find out for yourself...somewhere else.3. The way I'm already doing it works for me, and that's all that matters.4. Just try to err on the side of too much acid, and all will be well.

[Guest guest]

Phil and Carol Conway wrote:

Perhaps you will have more luck

approaching Mr Jim Humble.

Previous attempts suggest that I'd be lucky to get an answer.

I get the distinct impression he doesn't want to be considered on call

for every question from god knows who. If he wants to become anoymous

and disappear into Salinger/Pynchon/Lawrence of Arabia -land after

having made his contribution, I'll respect any distance at which he

puts himself from the clamoring hordes.

Rather than in disturbing him, therefore, I think energy would be

better spent instigating third party elements such as corroboration,

elaboration, quantification, etc. Moreover, if we settle for a "Just

ask Jim, he's the one who knows" attitude, we don't add to the

credibility of the whole thing.

[Guest guest]

wrote:

If you want to

be super precise, go right ahead and figure out something for

yourself. The 10% solution, though, is standard for many things,

herbal tinctures and essential oil infusions included. The dropper

size IS quite clear in the book, if you have read it. He talks about

the difference between the lid cap and the standard eye dropper.

Apparently what he has experimented with, size wise, renders the drops

close enough to be effective. There was a BIG discussion the other

list about dropper size because droppers themselves do vary so much,

and other "precise" people went on about surface tension effecting

size, how the dropper was held (vertically rather than

horizontally)--therefore it would be hard to say more than Jim already

does. The very best bet if you wish to be ultra precise, is to count

how many drops of MMS it takes to fill a quarter teaspoon, a half

teaspoon and a f ull teaspoon. Dump that MMS back into the bottle.

Take your acid dropper and count how many drops it takes to fill the

quarter, half and full teaspoon. This will give you an idea if you

need the 5 to 1, the 7 to 1 or the 8 to one equation. Or, better yet,

buy 2 bottles of MMS, dump the contents of one into a dark jar, seal it

and set it out of any light, and then fill the empty bottle with the

acid of your choice. Now you will have exactly the 5 to 1 ratio, no

figuring needed. Then when the first bottle of MMS runs out, you just

refill from the dark jar, as the MMS will keep for 2 to 4 years

(yes--gasp! There's that much imprecise variation you'll have to deal

with).

You seem to have missed where I said that the 5:1 ratio is all you need

to know.

The acid

content is going to be relatively the same--he does say it must be a 5%

solution for vinegar, which probably means that most of the citric

fruits are going to be in the same range.

You must know about some law of implication of which I am unaware.

Naturally

that acidity would vary from fruit to fruit, but apparently they will

be close enough to that 5% to activate the MMS.

This is apparent because......if it weren't, there'd be some ambiguity?

I KNOW the 3

minute time frame is crucial. When I first started taking AMMS I

guessed at the time frame. Being an impatient person I was way off in

guessing how long it actually takes for 3 minutes to pass, and was

drinking the AMMS after only a minute and a half or so. One day I

decided to actually time it. When it sat for the full 3 minutes it was

MUCH stronger. So strong in fact, that I became nauseated and had

diarrhea from it, whereas taking the same amount for 4 days prior

didn't do a thing.

So--if you want

to be super precise, and think it's important for Jim to be more

precise than he is, perhaps you should send him your recommendations

and see what he says. If you figure a way for this to be easier for

everyone that would be great.

I can't help wondering why you thought it important to offer this

backhanded encouragement...

Samala,

So--apparently

Jim has experimented enough to know that his given methods--though

perhaps not up to your precise standards--work.

If it is knowledge of something more than that the vinegar, lime and

lemon juice in his experience or kitchen seemed to work about the

same, then it will have been arrived at by some process of reasoning

or measurement, so could really add to the persuasiveness of any

introduction of MMS to new people.

-------Original

Message-------

Among the answers you needn't

bother to send are:

1. Dr. Humble didn't indicate that it matters, so it doesn't

2. Go find out for yourself...somewhere else.

3. The way I'm already doing it works for me, and that's all that

matters.

4. Just try to err on the side of too much acid, and all will be well.

__.

That's pretty good --- you managed to send three out of the four in one

message!

..

[Guest guest]

Case wrote:

I think you are being a little to "cerebral" on the mixing

instruction . Apply the K.I.SS. principle and you will find out it

works just as well as Jim Humble outlined in his book

Graham

I'm wondering about the

instructions for activating MMS.

Just as the instructions for the ratio of drops does not clarify the

size of drops (although the 1:5 ratio is the constant from which one

can make ones own calculations), so are the instructions for

activators extremely ambiguous.

For a start, the instructions for making a 10% solution of citric acid

enjoin one to add 9 spoonfuls of water to 1 spoonful of citric acid

powder.

This is not what pharmacists would call a 10% solution, as ratios of

chemicals are generally expressed in weight, not volume. In the case

of citric acid, this could be important, inasmuch as it can be

purchased either as relatively coarse crystals (like refined sugar) or

as a finer powder (like confectioner's sugar). Spoonfuls of these

two

would have different masses, and chances are that neither of them is

equal in mass to a spoonful of water.

Equally slapdash are the recommendations for lime,lemon juice and

vinegar, all of which are available in widely varying concentrations

of acid content.

Is there anyone else who feels that some standardisation and precision

might be a good idea?

Among the answers you needn't bother to send are:

1. Dr. Humble didn't indicate that it matters, so it doesn't

2. Go find out for yourself...somewhere else.

3. The way I'm already doing it works for me, and that's all that

matters.

4. Just try to err on the side of too much acid, and all will be well.

[Guest guest]

Graham T. Dilks wrote:

Case wrote:

I think you are being a little to "cerebral" on the mixing

instruction . Apply the K.I.SS. principle and you will find out it

works just as well as Jim Humble outlined in his book

Thanks anyway. I'm looking for data that will help introducing MMS to

people. I certainly won't be quoting you on this, as few people are

persuaded by patronising. dismissal of their requests for accuracy.

Hint: finding out for myself is not the issue; I wouldn't have

ordered 6 kits if it were. It's worth trying to put together a

written protocol that can withstand critical scrutiny greater than any

of us who have experienced MMS benefits insist on bringing to bear.

[Guest guest]

it is a volume equation not a mass equation and apparently it

works. The chemical composition of each must be close enough so as

to elicit the correct reaction to an acceptable degree. I am afraid

that if there was anymore of a standardisation that it would become

to complicated for most of us to use.

S

>

> I'm wondering about the instructions for activating MMS.

>

> Just as the instructions for the ratio of drops does not clarify

the

> size of drops (although the 1:5 ratio is the constant from which

one can

> make ones own calculations), so are the instructions for

activators

> extremely ambiguous.

>

> For a start, the instructions for making a 10% solution of citric

acid

> enjoin one to add 9 spoonfuls of water to 1 spoonful of citric acid

powder.

>

> This is not what pharmacists would call a 10% solution, as ratios

of

> chemicals are generally expressed in weight, not volume. In the

case of

> citric acid, this could be important, inasmuch as it can be

purchased

> either as relatively coarse crystals (like refined sugar) or as a

finer

> powder (like confectioner's sugar). Spoonfuls of these two would

have

> different masses, and chances are that neither of them is equal

in

> mass to a spoonful of water.

>

> Equally slapdash are the recommendations for lime,lemon juice and

> vinegar, all of which are available in widely varying

concentrations of

> acid content.

>

> Is there anyone else who feels that some standardisation and

precision

> might be a good idea?

>

> Among the answers you needn't bother to send are:

>

> 1. Dr. Humble didn't indicate that it matters, so it doesn't

> 2. Go find out for yourself...somewhere else.

> 3. The way I'm already doing it works for me, and that's all that

matters.

> 4. Just try to err on the side of too much acid, and all will be

well.

>

[Guest guest]

Well yes, Chris.

I have felt that Jim's release of the information took the protocol to a new group of people. A group where people might have somewhat different problems that they hope to help, than those folk who Jim had been helping.

Maybe to people who had spent longer consuming processed foods for example and having more toxins etc accumulated. Also there maybe many who have become affected by too little alkaline foods, allowing acidosis and osteoporosis to develop.

I'm one of the latter for I am 77 and have had too much acid type foods. I have improved my diet now. While I am having MMS presently, I do not see myself having MMS at high dose rates for week after week for long - for I expect them to harmful to me. I am most concerned about the amount of acid that needs to be used to activate the MMS. It could be a trade-off, between getting most pathogens and toxins out and not affecting my skeletal structure too much. I wonder if some people, in a worse condition than I, might need to be even more cautious.

Good luck.

Phil

Re: [ ] Volumes and weights

Phil and Carol Conway wrote:

Perhaps you will have more luck approaching Mr Jim Humble.Previous attempts suggest that I'd be lucky to get an answer.I get the distinct impression he doesn't want to be considered on call for every question from god knows who. If he wants to become anoymous and disappear into Salinger/Pynchon/Lawrence of Arabia -land after having made his contribution, I'll respect any distance at which he puts himself from the clamoring hordes.Rather than in disturbing him, therefore, I think energy would be better spent instigating third party elements such as corroboration, elaboration, quantification, etc. Moreover, if we settle for a "Just ask Jim, he's the one who knows" attitude, we don't add to the credibility of the whole thing.

[Guest guest]

-------Original Message-------

>>You seem to have missed where I said that the 5:1 ratio is all you need to know.

Well then, what were you asking? Dropper size? How to get them exactly the same? Using the same cap ought to do it, as I pointed out. Someone else on the MDI list (Wayne I think) suggested syringes. Marshall suggested weighing. How precise do you need/want to get? And why? It should be simple enough for anyone to use. Not everyone will have a scale to weight their drops, Not everyone will have a syringe and will have to go and get one. Not everyone will want to buy an extra bottle just to have the same cap size. So--unless you figure out something that can be done, simply, by everyone--why not just use what Jim recommends? Why do you want to be more precise that that, if the system is working as is?

>>

>>You must know about some law of implication of which I am unaware.

No, just thinking that Jim probably tested these already and found them close enough to the 5% to work. He did test the amount of chemical changes for the different acids, apparently, to come up with the ppm of chlorine dioxide he states in his books that AMMS releases into the body. Unless you don't think his numbers are correct.

>>I can't help wondering why you thought it important to offer this backhanded encouragement...

I didn't think it "important". I meant it WOULD be a good idea if you came up with something more precise, that would simplify the process. No one else has found it necessary to try to come up with something as precise as you are asking about. You are not offering solutions--yet?--but asking others for their input. But if you think all this is necessary to the process of taking MMS, and you actually do come up with something better, more precise, and just as simple, then it would be a good thing. I have had to explain some of the points in the protocol to a German friend because she couldn't understand what Jim was trying to say. I was the one that offered to the groups to call what we take AMMS for activated MMS to differentiate from the bottled MMS, simply because my German friend was so confused about Jim using MMS for both liquids. So--it wasn't backhanded encouragement at all. There is much to be desired in Jim's explanations. I personally don't feel it is necessary to be as precise as you seem to want to be, but anything that makes it easier for people to understand, and get the protocol correct, is a good thing.

..

>>If it is knowledge of something more than that the vinegar, lime and lemon juice in his experience or kitchen seemed to work about the same, then it will have been arrived at by some process of reasoning or measurement, so could really add to the persuasiveness of any introduction of MMS to new people.

I'm not sure what you are talking/asking about here. Jim did test to come up with the ppm of chlorine dioxide, or perhaps it was a mathematical equation on his part. Why would people need to be persuaded by measurements rather than personal experience and testimonials?

>>That's pretty good --- you managed to send three out of the four in one message!

Only because you were asking questions and then stated that you didn't want any answers. Why bother asking at all then, if you already knew the answers you'd get? I assumed we were playing some kind of game.

samala,

[Guest guest]

what are you using MMS for, and what has been your experience.

S

> > it is a volume equation not a mass equation and apparently

it

> > works. The chemical composition of each must be close enough so as

> > to elicit the correct reaction to an acceptable degree. I am afraid

> > that if there was anymore of a standardisation that it would become

> > to complicated for most of us to use.

> >

> Right: if it were any clearer, it would be hard to comprehend. Maybe

> it's a guy thing. Women seem to insist on fuzzy logic more often.

>

[Guest guest]

lisastoken wrote:

>

>

> what are you using MMS for, and what has been your experience.`

>

My main interest has been in its potential to deal with the coming Avian

flu pandemic.

I also had hopes lifted by a few testimonials about it helping people

with emphysema, but I've come to wonder how it could help with that,

since it's not primarily caused by pathogens. I am more optimistic about

the emphysema being helped by the Ormus I am taking (and making), since

that seems to revivify actual DNA, promoting DNA repair of damaged tissue.

I started taking MMS about a month ago. I got up to 15 drops, with only

one day of mild diarrhea, and about 15 minutes of mild nausea. Currently

I can discern no effect, but am continuing at 15 for the time being.

Until some consensus emerges which can add to the MMS protocol specific

recommendations for replacing lost beneficial bacteria and minerals, I

am not sure that I will go on with a daily 6 drop maintenance dose after

I'm sure I've got rid of existing pathogens.

[Guest guest]

It is completely childish to think that you can question us but no

one can question you. It seems also that you think that if someone

else has reasoning that differs from yours they must be wrong. You

resort to bullying and snide remarks when they do, and I am tired of

listening to you doing that. If having a desire to use manners is an

indication of " me trying to look superior " as you say, then I

certainly cannot help that. I want to have dynamic conversation while

being treated in a polite way.

Your right about one thing though, I don't have to read your

threads.

S

> > Pardon me miss moderator but I am getting tired of it. Please

feel

> > free to moderate my comments as they are not kind but I feel I

must.

> >

> >

> > chris, It seems to me that you dont like any body here and I cant

> > remember anyone that you have agreed with or said anything kind

to.

> > when they return an answer to you you pick apart even the most

> > ridiculous of things. You always have a flip comment, or are down

> > right rude. You bring me down dude.

> >

> Considering that just about every response to me from you, Kathy and

> has been rude, condescending and dismissive, I don't find it

> surprising that you should find my reaction not to your liking. If

it

> brings you down to the point where you drop your superior

attitudes, so

> much the better. All three of you seem to have a real hangup about

the

> idea of precision, and to try to terminate threads that question the

> accuracy or completeness of Jim Humble's latest draft. I can see

that

> you are annoyed when your attempts to have the last dismissive word

> don't just put an end to upstart questions. Your carping has an

> excessively territorial quality to it....

>

> Why don't you just ignore threads that are dealing with questions of

> quantification and verification and just focus on the anecdotal and

> personal, if that's all that's real or important to you? Well,

obviously

> to some extent you do, as you cannot remember the dialogues I 've

had

> with people who don't get all in a tizzy when one speaks of the

value of

> assembling data which will not be poohpoohed by those who who will

pick

> apart anything amateur-sounding a lot faster than I. If you'd ever

> engaged in a process of trying to get something up to professional

> standards, you wouldn't regard the finding of flaws in terminology

or

> method as something to bring to as quick and end as possible so that

> nobody's feelings are hurt.

>

[Guest guest]

Please do not respond to this message let this thread die.Case <chris@...> wrote: Wilkins

http//:www.juiceplus.com/+lw55887

The Children's Research Foundation Children 6-15 FREE for 3 years

Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.