Re: Jim Humbles reply to Dee

August 2, 2010

Hi Alvin, I am so grateful for you sending this and grateful to Jim Humble for

taking the time to write and put my mind at ease. I would be so glad if you

would thank him for me. regards, dee

On 1 Aug 2010, at 21:41, Alvin Rose wrote:

> measured

August 2, 2010

Hello Jim,

That is exactly my point. Taking too high a concentration causes distress. If

your protocol really only had 1 - 5 PPM chlorine dioxide in it, like you have

pointed out several times in your book and in various discussions, no one would

experience nausea, vomiting and diarrhea from it.

Unfortunately, you do not understand the chemicals, so you have no idea of how

strong a solution you are dealing with.

I am not surprised that you were able to vomit up a solution that still had some

chlorine dioxide in it. How many drops did you start with? The testing I was

referring to was done with African monkeys. They found that over 95% of the

chlorine dioxide was gone after 5 minutes. That still leaves 5%. Perhaps that

is what you measured. What concentration of chlorine dioxide did you end up

with? Also, saliva is mucous. The throat and stomach are lined with mucous.

Perhaps you have ingested so much MMS that you have less mucous than the average

person. Perhaps you can demonstrate this in your next training session. Have

everyone drink some MMS, wait 5 minutes, then vomit it back up. It would make

an impressive demonstration. However, be sure to have some excuse available

when almost all of the people have no chlorine dioxide left after the test. Are

you sure you didn't have some MMS2 left over in your stomach...

Also, what in saliva neutralizes chlorine dioxide. Where does saliva go after

it leaves the mouth...

The industrial ratio of activation has been well studied and works better than

the activation ratio proposed by you in the MMS protocol. I have run some rough

tests that have shown it to be as much as 30% more effective. I find it very

interesting that in all of your testing you never called any of the companies

that supply sodium chlorite to learn of this very effective ratio of activation.

It's not too late, just give them a call. You have already altered the

protocol, another alteration won't be any different than what you have already

done. You could claim that you had discovered through your testing that the

activation ratio should be changed to something more effective. This is the

same as initially claiming that everyone had to work up to 15 drops 3 times a

day and now changing that to much smaller doses more frequently.

There you go again Jim. Trying to use chlorine dioxide technology to defend

acidified sodium chlorite use. Lenntech is a great company and is referring to

water purification in the reference you mentioned. If you read on you would

find that the maximum dose they recommend is 2 PPM in order to keep the chlorite

concentration acceptable. Now why do you think they are concerned with the

chlorite concentration.

You will have to look up the EPA paper on chlorine dioxide and chlorite to find

that information. That involves people drinking purified water, and there is a

concern with chlorite. If you had stuck to your original idea of mixing a

solution that only had 1 - 5 PPM chlorine dioxide, we probably wouldn't be

having this discussion, and no one would have complained about nausea, vomiting,

and diarrhea. You will also find the reference where they traced radioactive

chlorite in rats and found that it had a half life of over 40 hours. The rats

were given chlorine dioxide that quickly broke down to chlorite. The chlorite

was observed in all organs including the brain, and was eliminated through the

urine. It is just that it took a long time to get rid of it. Remember that

half life means that only half of the chlorite was eliminated in the 40+ hours.

It takes a long time to get rid of all of it. And while you are looking at all

of this, check out what effects chlorite has on the body. Your MMS protocol may

not be nearly as safe as you claim it is.

As I pointed out to Dee, the reason your protocol is flawed is because you don't

understand the chemicals you are using or the chemistry behind the chemicals.

In water, chlorine dioxide behaves one way. In the body it does something

different. That is why the disinfection by products of chlorite are monitored

in water purification. Things may be different in Africa, but contact any water

purification plant in Europe, Asia, Australia, Russia, South America or the US

and ask them what they think of water purification following the MMS protocol.

They will tell you that it won't work. If you control the total amount used,

your activation process won't produce enough chlorine dioxide to be effective in

water purification. If you use your protocol to produce a high enough

concentration of chlorine dioxide, the by product of chlorite will be too high

for human consumption.

If you read on in that same article, you will find that chlorine dioxide in

water is effective for over 48 hours. Why don't you use that claim to state

that it is also effective in the body for 48 hours... That's easy. Water is

different from the body. Chlorine dioxide behaves differently in water than it

does inside the body. While chlorine dioxide can last in water for over 48

hours, it doesn't last in the body beyond a few seconds.

Once again you show that you don't understand how oxidation works. To kill

pathogens you need a certain concentration of the chemical in contact with the

pathogen for a certain amount of time. If you only have 25 marbles in the bath,

and the pathogen needs 2000 marbles to kill it, your bath will be ineffective.

You need to read up on CT values and gain an understanding on how oxidizers

actually work. You can look at ozone therapy to get an idea of this. There are

many published reports on what concentration of ozone is to be used and for how

much time in order to get a CT value that is effective.

You have proven nothing of the sort. You claim you have 1- 5 PPM chlorine

dioxide, and I have demonstrated that you really have 380 PPM. Just because

acidified sodium chlorite technology has a little chlorine dioxide involved with

it, does not make it chlorine dioxide technology.

Here is the difference. Take some sodium chlorite and reduce its PH to 2. Now

bubble some air through that solution and have the air go into a water bath.

Now you have chlorine dioxide in water. The PH of that solution will be 7.

That chlorine dioxide is pure and can be used for water purification as long as

you keep the dose under 2 PPM. This water has no taste and very little odor.

The MMS protocol involved adding an acid to the solution. You end up with

chlorous acid that has a PH of around 2.5 - 3. This solution also has a small

amount of free chlorine dioxide. It tastes like crap because of its high

concentration of acid and available chlorine dioxide.

With chlorine dioxide technology, the PH of the water is not changed. With

acidified sodium chlorite the solution turns to chlorous acid with a PH of

around 2.5 - 3. In one case your are drinking purified water, in the other case

you are drinking an acid.

Yes, both chlorine dioxide and acidified sodium chlorite are used all over the

world. Chlorine dioxide is used to purify water. Acidified sodium chlorite,

that is activated according to a 1:1 ratio using 10% citric acid, or a 1:5 ratio

when using 50% citric acid (that is 1 part 50% citric acid to 5 parts sodium

chlorite), is used in hospitals to stock yards. They don't use chlorine dioxide

in stock yards, and they don't use acidified sodium chlorite for water

purification. Taste your tap water. Does it taste like citric acid? No. Why?

Because they don't use acidified sodium chlorite to purify water.

Yes you are correct. People have been activating sodium chlorite with water for

a long time. I believe it was you that mentioned that you ran tests and

activated sodium chlorite does not strongly react with stomach acid. To

activate sodium chlorite you simply need to drop its PH. The PH of stabilized

oxygen is about 8.5. When you add some to a glass of water, the PH of the

solution ends up around 7. You have dropped the PH and the solution is

activated. Perhaps you could tell us how much additional activation the stomach

acid you test with resulted in. Did you ever run any tests with sodium chlorite

activated with water?

I am sorry Jim, your comments show your ignorance of the chemicals and

chemistry involved with MMS. You seem to be more interested in the numbers of

books and bottles of MMS that have been sold than in actually knowing what you

are talking about. If you had run any tests at all, you would have come up with

the same conclusions that I have. After all chemistry is chemistry. The

difference between you and me is that I took the time to contact all the

industry leaders in sodium chlorite, and then took that information to medical

professionals that understand how the body works. I listen to both sides of the

story and try to help people understand what is going on with these chemicals.

When someone brings up something contrary to what you think, you can't defend

yourself because you don't understand, and you have to go on the attack.

It is good that you are putting this information out where it can be reviewed by

others. You may then find someone you have more respect for pointing out the

same things and may have a chance to learn how this stuff actually works.

I would be happy to come to one of your seminars and take you through the tests

to demonstrate how sodium chlorite chemistry actually works. I will even bring

my own supplies. Would you mind if I also brought Dr. Hesselink along to

explain the medical side?

Not only is your protocol flawed, but so is your reasoning...

I am not the one that is after " recognition and attention. " That is what you

are after. I am just trying to keep your claims honest and based in facts.

I support your efforts, but your protocols and claims are flawed.

Tom

--- In , " Alvin Rose " <ajroseca@...>

wrote:

>

> Alvin

> I have made this write up for my " Answers to Critics " site and people like

Dee. Maybe you could forward this write up to Dee,

>

> Hello Dee,

>

> Alvin, I am answering these letters from various various critics to put on my

Web Site to Critics. If you get a chance you might send it to the lady by the

name of Dee.

>

> FROM JIM HUMBLE, SEE MY ANSWERS BELOW IN CAPITAL LETTERS TO SEPARATE THEM

FROM TOM'S. IN ATTEMPTING TO RUIN MY MMS REPUTATION TOM HAS STOPPED SOME PEOPLE

FROM USING MMS, THUS HE HAS CAUSED SOME PEOPLE TO GO ON SUFFERING WHEN THEY

COULD HAVE BEEN CURED.

>

> The flaws have to do with the claims Jim Humbles built the MMS protocol on...

>

> He thinks he is using a solution that only has 1 - 5 PPM chlorine dioxide in

it. Actually the concentrations are much higher than that. Drinking high

concentrations of chemicals can result in poisoning effects like diarrhea,

nausea, and vomiting. YES AND TAKING TOO MUCH SALT WATER CAN CAUSE DIARRHEA,

AND NAUSEA, AND VOMITING. AND OTHER CHEMICALS CAUSE THE SAME REACTION, BUT THAT

FACT DOESN'T PROVE ANY PARTICULAR DATA CONCERNING MMS.

>

> He thinks that chlorine dioxide can exist inside the body. Actual testing has

shown that it only lasts for seconds to a few minutes.

>

> NO ACTUAL TESTING HAS NOT PROVED THAT. TOM ONLY PUT SOME MMS IN HIS MOUTH AND

SWITCHED IT AROUND, SPIT IT OUT, AND THEN TESTED IT FOR CHLORINE DIOXIDE. HE

PROVED THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING IN THE SALIVA THAT KILLS CHLORINE DIXOIDE,

BUT WHEN A GLASS OF MMS IS INGESTED IT GOES DOWN THE THROAT WITH OUT MIXING WITH

THE SALIVA. I KNOW IT SOUNDS BAD, BUT I DRANK SOME MMS, GAVE IT 5 MINUTES IN MY

STOMACH, AND THEN VOMITED IT BACK UP USING THE OLD FINGER DOWN THE THROAT TRICK.

I THEN TESTED IT FOR CHLORINE DIOXIDE FOR THE NEXT HOUR WITH ALL THE STOMACH

SOLUTION AND UNDIGESTED FOOD IN IT. CHLORINE DIOXIDE STILL TESTED PRESENT FOR

MORE THAN AN HOUR. SORRY TOM.

>

> He thinks the proper activation using citric acid is 5:1 using 10% and 1:1

using 50% and allowing the activation to continue for 3 minutes. The people

using this product in industry have run extensive testing on this and they use

1:1 activating with 10% citric acid and 1:5 using 50% citric acid (that is 1

part 50% citric acid to 5 parts sodium chlorite). The most effective activation

time is 10 minutes. I ran some rough tests on this and came up with the

industrial activation having about 30% more oxidation potential than the MMS

activation.

>

> HE TRIES HARD YOU GOTTA ADMIT. WHETHER I USE THE SAME AS THE INDUSTRIAL

PEOPLE DO HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS THAT YOU

ALWAYS USE THE SAME AMOUNT SO THAT IT IS CONSISTANT, SO THAT A PERSON USING IT

THIS YEAR IS THE SAME AS A PERSON USING IT NEXT YEAR. TOM WOULD HAVE ME CHANGE

IT ACCORDING TO THE INDUSTRIAL PEOPLE AND THUS IT WOULD EFFECT THE PROTOCOL OF

HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD FOR NO GOOD REASON. WHY

SHOULD MY PEOPLE HAVE TO FOLLOW WHAT THE INDUSTRY HAS DONE.

>

> He thinks that chlorine dioxide quickly breaks down to chloride in the body,

and is quickly passed. Researchers studying chlorine dioxide for water

purification have found that chlorine dioxide almost immediately breaks down to

chlorite and chlorite has a half life of over 40 hours (in animals).

>

> I DON'T KNOW WHAT TOM IS TALKING ABOUT " 40 HOURS IN ANIMALS " BUT LET ME GIVE

YOU A COUPLE OF SENTENCES FROM ONE OF THE MOST QUOTED CHLORINE DIOXIDE TECHNICAL

ARTICLES IN THE WORLD PUT OUT BY LENNTECH.ORG .

>

> " First, chlorine dioxide takes up an electron and reduces to chlorite. The

chlorite ion is oxidized and becomes a chloride ion and that during this

reaction it accepts 5 electrons. " The chlorine atom remains, until stable

chloride is formed. " DO YOU SEE? THE CHLORINE ATOM REMAINS UNTIL STABLE

CHLORIDE IS FOMED. THAT HAS TO HAPPEN IN MILLISECONDS, NOT 40 HOURS. IF THE

CHLORINE DIOXIDE DOES NOT TURN TO A CHLORIDE (NOT A CHLORITE) WITHIN A COUPLE OF

MILLISECONDS IT IS NOT AND OXIDIZER AND IT CANNOT BE DOING ALL THOSE THINGS THAT

CIVILIZATION CLAIMS CHLORINE DIOXIDE DOES AS AN OXIDIZER. NOT BEING A CHEMIST,

TOM HAS TO INVENT CHEMISTRY IN ORDER TO PROVE ME WRONG AND IN DOING THAT HE

HURTS MANY PEOPLE.

>

> He claims that the amount of water added has no effect on the solution. You

use the same dose in the bath tub that you use to drink. Actually the

concentration of the chemical in the water is what counts. That is measured in

parts per million. To have an effective concentration in a large amount of

water, you have to add more chemicals.

>

> WELL, TO SOME EFFECT HE IS RIGHT, BUT NOT A LOT. IF YOU TAKE A BATH TUB WITH

4 INCHES OF WATER IN IT AND ADD 25 MARBLES TO IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MUCH

MORE WATER YOU HAVE IN THAT BATH TUB YOU WILL STILL HAVE 25 MARBLES. IF YOU

KEEP STIRING THAT WATER OVER A PERIOD OF ½ HOUR AND YOU ARE IN THAT BATH TUB

MOST OF THOSE MARBLES WILL HAVE CONTACTED YOUR SKIN. THE SAME IS TRUE ABOUT

CHLORINE DIOXIDE MOLECULES. IF YOU PUT 1000 MOLECULES IN THE WATER IN THE

BATH, THEY WILL ALL CONTACT YOUR SKIN IF YOU STIRR IT ENOUGH. THE ADVANTAGE OF

USING THE SAME AMOUNT OF MMS EACH TIME EVEN WHEN YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT SIZE TUB

OR DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF WATER IS THAT YOU WILL ALWAYS KNOW THAT A CERTAIN AMOUNT

OF MMS CONTACTED YOU SKIN.

>

> He claims that MMS = chlorine dioxide. Actually MMS = acidified sodium

chlorite, something much different.

>

> IN THIS SENTENCE TOM PROVES ONE THING, HE KNOWS VERY LITTLE ABOUT CHEMISTRY

AND NOTHING TO SPEAK OF ABOUT ACIDIFIED SODIUM CHLORITE. I HAVE PROVEN THAT

CHLORINE DIOXIDE EXISTS IN THE ACIDIFIED SODIUM CHLORITE AND EXACTLY HOW MANY

PARTS PER MILLION IS THERE. IT USED THROUGHOUT THE WORLD TODAY. THIS STATEMENT

THAT HE MAKES IS RIDICULOUS. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY USE TO GENERATE CHLORINE

DIOXIDE.

>

> He claims that MMS is safe because chlorine dioxide is used to treat water.

These are two very different technologies. Chlorine dioxide has been well

studied and tested, including testing on humans. Acidified sodium chlorite has

not been well tested nor has it been tested on humans. ASC is used in food

processing and keeps dead carcasses from rotting. Chlorine dioxide is used to

disinfect water for consumption.

>

> ONCE AGAIN TOM SHOWS HIS IGNORANCE. CHEMISTRY IS CHEMISTRY NO MATTER WHERE IT

IS USED. THE FACT IS THAT ACIDIFIED SODIUM CHLORITE, ACE AS HE LIKES TO CALL

IT, IS NOW USE ALL OVER THE WORLD FOR THOUSANDS OF DIFFERENT USES, FROM

HOSPITALS TO STOCK YARDS. FOR EIGHTY YEARS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS

HAVE DRANK SODIUM CHLORITE MANY ON A DAILY BASIS. IT IS SOLD IN HEALTH FOOD

STORES AND IT HAS BEEN CALLED STABILIZED OXYGEN. MANY OF THOSE DRANK IT WITH

THEIR MEAL. GUESS WHAT? THE STOMACH HAS A VERY POWERFUL HYDROCHLORIC ACID IN

IT AT MEAL TIME. AND HYDROCHLORIC ACID IS ONE OF THOSE ACIDS THAT THE

INDUSTRIAL PEOPLE USE THAT TOM WAS THINKING I SHOULD USE. AND NO REPORTS OF ANY

OF THOSE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HAVING ANY HEALTH PROBLEMS, ON THE

CONTRARY, MANY OF THEM REPORTED MUCH BENEFIT FROM DRINKING THIS SODIUM CHLORITE

THAT WAS THEN ACTIVATED WITH STOMACH HYDROCHLORIC ACID. SO ACIDIFIED SODIUM

CHLORITE (ASC) HAS ACTUALLY BEEN USED FOR 80 YEARS.

>

> The list goes on and on, but the point is that developing a protocol based

upon flawed assumptions and no testing results in a flawed protocol.

>

> YES, YES WE ALL SHOULD DROP EVERYTHING WE ARE DOING AND FOLLOW TOMS TOTALLY

INEXPERIENCE ADVICE. THAT MAKES REALLY A LOT OF SENSE.

>

> Keep in mind that in spite of the flaws, some people are reporting success

with the MMS protocol. Although, almost all of those successes have involved a

modification of the protocol, and the number of successes (outside of Africa)

are much lower than Jim Humbles claim of around 95% on every illness.

>

> AMAZING ISN'T IT. HE ADMITS THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME SUCCESS, BUT OBVIOUSLY

IT COULDN'T BE MY RESPONSIBILITY AS THE PROTOCOLS I DEVELOPED AREN'T BEING USED.

DOES ANYONE SEE A SLIGHT BIAS AGAINST JIM HERE?

>

> I think that in order to explore a protocol you need to understand the

chemistry behind it. Once that is understood, testing can be done to explore the

best way to use the chemicals. Jim Humble claims that testing involves millions

of dollars and too much of his time. Others are simply doing the testing, not

spending exorbitant amounts of time or money, and discovering the flaws in the

MMS protocol and Jim Humbles claims.

>

> HE DON'T KNOW OF ANYONE DOING TESTING. I'VE DONE MORE TESTING THAN ANYONE. I

JUST DO NOT DO CLINICAL TRIAL TESTING. THERE IS A REASON FOR THAT AND TOM

CLOSES HIS MIND TO THAT REASON.

> AMAZING, I CONTINUE TO REMAIN IN CONTACT WITH THOUANDS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE

WORLD, HAVING PERSONALLY ANSWERED MORE THAN 5000 EMAILS THIS LAST YEAR. LOTS

OF THEM SAYS MY PROTOCOLS ARE WORKING. THE THIRD MINISTER OF HEALTH COURSE

COMING UP ON THE 9TH OF AUGUST 2010 HAS MORE THAN 40 STUDENTS SLATED TO BE THERE

FROM AROUND THE WORLD, THERE HAVE BEEN A TOTAL OF 25 COUNTRIES REPRESENTED IN MY

SEMINARS HERE IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC. TOM SHOULD COME. HE CAN IF HE WANTS.

BUT HE WANTS THE RECOGNITION AND ATTENTION, NOT THE DATA OF MMS BECAUSE I HAVE

BEEN TEACHING IT TO HIM ALL THE WHILE HE HAS BEEN RIDICULING ME AND RUINING MANY

PEOPLE'S CHANCES OF OVERCOMING THEIR SUFFERING. OBVIOUSLY HIS RIDICULES CANNOT

HURT ME. I PROBABLY HAVE A MILLION PEOPLE ON MY SIDE AT THIS TIME IF NOT A LOT

MORE. BUT HIS RIDICULES DO HURT THOSE SUFFERING PEOPLE WHO WIND UP BELIEVING

HIM FOR SOME REASON OF THE OTHER.

>

> FINALLY LET ME SAY THIS: IN MALAWI IN AFRICA THIS YEAR I TREATED OVER 800

HIV/AIDS CASES USING MMS. AFTER HAVING SOME OF THEM REDO THE PROTOCOL MORE THAN

98% OF THEM SAID THAT THEY WERE WELL, AND THE LOCAL HOSPITAL AGREED THAT ALL

THEIR SYMPTOMS WERE GONE. DOESN'T PROVE THAT THE HIV OR AIDS WAS GONE. YOU

CAN'T PROVE THAT. BUT THEY WERE HAPPY AND BACK TO WORK AND WITH PLENTY OF

ENERGY.

>

> MORE THAN 5 MILLION PEOPLE HAVE DOWNLOADED THE FREE PORTION OF MY MMS BOOK.

HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD SELL MMS THAT THEY PRODUCE IN THEIR HOMES.

THOUSANDS OF BOTTLES ARE SOLD EACH MONTH. IT'S MORE THAN A YEAR THAT A DAY HAS

GONE BY THAT SOMEONE DIDN'T EMAIL ME OR PHONE ME SAYING THANKS FOR THEIR LIFE

BACK. MORE THAN 100 THOUSAND OF MY BOOKS HAVE SOLD IN GERMANY ALONE, AND A

SIMILAR NUMBER IN THE USA. MY BOOK HAS BEEN TRANSLATED INTO 15 LANGUAGES MORE

THAT 13 LANGUAGES OF EUROPE. IT IS ESTIMATED THAT MORE THAN 200 THOUSAND LIVES

HAVE BEEN SAVED SO FAR. AS I WRITE HOSPITALS ARE NOW BEING BUILT THAT WILL USE

MMS AS THEIR MAJOR TREATMENT. I HAVE PERSONALLY HANDED MORE THAN 5000 SICK

PEOPLE THEIR MMS DOSE. I DON'T THINK THAT TOM HAS EVER TREATED ANYONE AND I

WOULD NOT WRITE THIS LETTER IF I WERE NOT GOING TO PUT IT WHERE I WILL NEVER

NEED WRITE ANOTHER ONE.

>

> I MAKE NO MONEY FROM THE SALES OF MMS. WHY WOULD I DO THIS IF I WERE NOT

HELPING THE PEOPLE OF EARTH.

>

> THESE WRITE UPS EXPLAINING THE CRITICS I AM MAKING SO I CAN PUT THEM ALL ON

A SEPARATE INTERNET SITE, WHICH WILL BE ANSWERS TO CRITICS, AND THEN ANYONE WHO

WANTS TO READ THEM CAN DO SO. SO I ONLY HAVE TO DO THIS ONCE HOPEFULLY.

>

> Jim Humble

>

> As always with love

> Jim Humble

>

August 2, 2010

HelloImo, we should concentrate on this part (I'm interested in getting something safe and effective):"Here is the difference. Take some sodium chlorite and reduce its PH to 2. Now bubble some air through that solution and have the air go into a

water bath. Now you have chlorine dioxide in water. The PH of that solution will be 7. That chlorine dioxide is pure and can be used for water purification as long as you keep the dose under 2 PPM. This water

has no taste and very little odor."Can you go on with this Tom? Is it safe? Why? Can the same be done for drinking chlorine dioxide? Did you actually experience it?Now you go on with the PH thing (this looks like another confusing point); personally I can't remember reading through Jim papers that MMS is alkalin; I personally didn't measure what you end up it for the PH on the activated MMS (sodium chlorite); I assume you did hence your claims of a solution with a PH of 2; my question is so what? is acid but it's not worse than a can of Coke, right? where is the problem? while I understand why having a blanced PH of 7 is better, the body will raise that level back to 7.

"The MMS protocol involved adding an acid to the solution. You end up with chlorous acid that has a PH of around 2.5 - 3. This solution also has a small amount of free chlorine dioxide. It tastes like crap because of its high concentration of acid and available chlorine dioxide."Tom, can you explain this video please? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs751PHS4i4 & feature=relatedIt looks to me like this guy boils down some water (ends up with low PH) then let an MMS drop in there (not activated); that raises the level back to 7; so if that is true (the guy measures before and after the MMS drop), that looks good to me. Now I assume your claim of PH of 2 in case of activated MMS is because of the citric acid used for activation; is it worse than eating a lemon then? I read in a recent post of yours to dee (maybe I'm wrong) you said to taste 2 different citric acid in water to see the difference (the quality). Now why recommending something so bad? Because the way I read your post below and the way you show things it looks really scary to drink acidified sodium chlorite because of this PH of 2 but as I show above it's the citric acid producing that (eventually) and not the MMS (ie sodium chlorite)

which on contrary, it looks to help in balancing the PH to 7.Thanks for your time!

With chlorine dioxide technology, the PH of the water is not changed. With acidified sodium chlorite the solution turns to chlorous acid with a

PH of around 2.5 - 3. In one case your are drinking purified water, in

the other case you are drinking an acid.From: silverfox_science <poast@...>Subject: [ ] Re: Jim Humbles reply to Dee Date: Monday, August 2, 2010, 11:09 AM

Hello Jim,

That is exactly my point. Taking too high a concentration causes distress. If your protocol really only had 1 - 5 PPM chlorine dioxide in it, like you have pointed out several times in your book and in various discussions, no one would experience nausea, vomiting and diarrhea from it.

Unfortunately, you do not understand the chemicals, so you have no idea of how strong a solution you are dealing with.

I am not surprised that you were able to vomit up a solution that still had some chlorine dioxide in it. How many drops did you start with? The testing I was referring to was done with African monkeys. They found that over 95% of the chlorine dioxide was gone after 5 minutes. That still leaves 5%. Perhaps that is what you measured. What concentration of chlorine dioxide did you end up with? Also, saliva is mucous. The throat and stomach are lined with mucous. Perhaps you have ingested so much MMS that you have less mucous than the average person. Perhaps you can demonstrate this in your next training session. Have everyone drink some MMS, wait 5 minutes, then vomit it back up. It would make an impressive demonstration. However, be sure to have some excuse available when almost all of the people have no chlorine dioxide left after the test. Are you sure you didn't have some MMS2 left over in your stomach...

Also, what in saliva neutralizes chlorine dioxide. Where does saliva go after it leaves the mouth...

The industrial ratio of activation has been well studied and works better than the activation ratio proposed by you in the MMS protocol. I have run some rough tests that have shown it to be as much as 30% more effective. I find it very interesting that in all of your testing you never called any of the companies that supply sodium chlorite to learn of this very effective ratio of activation. It's not too late, just give them a call. You have already altered the protocol, another alteration won't be any different than what you have already done. You could claim that you had discovered through your testing that the activation ratio should be changed to something more effective. This is the same as initially claiming that everyone had to work up to 15 drops 3 times a day and now changing that to much smaller doses more frequently.

There you go again Jim. Trying to use chlorine dioxide technology to defend acidified sodium chlorite use. Lenntech is a great company and is referring to water purification in the reference you mentioned. If you read on you would find that the maximum dose they recommend is 2 PPM in order to keep the chlorite concentration acceptable. Now why do you think they are concerned with the chlorite concentration.

You will have to look up the EPA paper on chlorine dioxide and chlorite to find that information. That involves people drinking purified water, and there is a concern with chlorite. If you had stuck to your original idea of mixing a solution that only had 1 - 5 PPM chlorine dioxide, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion, and no one would have complained about nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. You will also find the reference where they traced radioactive chlorite in rats and found that it had a half life of over 40 hours. The rats were given chlorine dioxide that quickly broke down to chlorite. The chlorite was observed in all organs including the brain, and was eliminated through the urine. It is just that it took a long time to get rid of it. Remember that half life means that only half of the chlorite was eliminated in the 40+ hours. It takes a long time to get rid of all of it. And while you are looking at all of this, check out what

effects chlorite has on the body. Your MMS protocol may not be nearly as safe as you claim it is.

As I pointed out to Dee, the reason your protocol is flawed is because you don't understand the chemicals you are using or the chemistry behind the chemicals.

In water, chlorine dioxide behaves one way. In the body it does something different. That is why the disinfection by products of chlorite are monitored in water purification. Things may be different in Africa, but contact any water purification plant in Europe, Asia, Australia, Russia, South America or the US and ask them what they think of water purification following the MMS protocol. They will tell you that it won't work. If you control the total amount used, your activation process won't produce enough chlorine dioxide to be effective in water purification. If you use your protocol to produce a high enough concentration of chlorine dioxide, the by product of chlorite will be too high for human consumption.

If you read on in that same article, you will find that chlorine dioxide in water is effective for over 48 hours. Why don't you use that claim to state that it is also effective in the body for 48 hours... That's easy. Water is different from the body. Chlorine dioxide behaves differently in water than it does inside the body. While chlorine dioxide can last in water for over 48 hours, it doesn't last in the body beyond a few seconds.

Once again you show that you don't understand how oxidation works. To kill pathogens you need a certain concentration of the chemical in contact with the pathogen for a certain amount of time. If you only have 25 marbles in the bath, and the pathogen needs 2000 marbles to kill it, your bath will be ineffective. You need to read up on CT values and gain an understanding on how oxidizers actually work. You can look at ozone therapy to get an idea of this. There are many published reports on what concentration of ozone is to be used and for how much time in order to get a CT value that is effective.

You have proven nothing of the sort. You claim you have 1- 5 PPM chlorine dioxide, and I have demonstrated that you really have 380 PPM. Just because acidified sodium chlorite technology has a little chlorine dioxide involved with it, does not make it chlorine dioxide technology.

Here is the difference. Take some sodium chlorite and reduce its PH to 2. Now bubble some air through that solution and have the air go into a water bath. Now you have chlorine dioxide in water. The PH of that solution will be 7. That chlorine dioxide is pure and can be used for water purification as long as you keep the dose under 2 PPM. This water has no taste and very little odor.

The MMS protocol involved adding an acid to the solution. You end up with chlorous acid that has a PH of around 2.5 - 3. This solution also has a small amount of free chlorine dioxide. It tastes like crap because of its high concentration of acid and available chlorine dioxide.

With chlorine dioxide technology, the PH of the water is not changed. With acidified sodium chlorite the solution turns to chlorous acid with a PH of around 2.5 - 3. In one case your are drinking purified water, in the other case you are drinking an acid.

Yes, both chlorine dioxide and acidified sodium chlorite are used all over the world. Chlorine dioxide is used to purify water. Acidified sodium chlorite, that is activated according to a 1:1 ratio using 10% citric acid, or a 1:5 ratio when using 50% citric acid (that is 1 part 50% citric acid to 5 parts sodium chlorite), is used in hospitals to stock yards. They don't use chlorine dioxide in stock yards, and they don't use acidified sodium chlorite for water purification. Taste your tap water. Does it taste like citric acid? No. Why? Because they don't use acidified sodium chlorite to purify water.

Yes you are correct. People have been activating sodium chlorite with water for a long time. I believe it was you that mentioned that you ran tests and activated sodium chlorite does not strongly react with stomach acid. To activate sodium chlorite you simply need to drop its PH. The PH of stabilized oxygen is about 8.5. When you add some to a glass of water, the PH of the solution ends up around 7. You have dropped the PH and the solution is activated. Perhaps you could tell us how much additional activation the stomach acid you test with resulted in. Did you ever run any tests with sodium chlorite activated with water?

I am sorry Jim, your comments show your ignorance of the chemicals and chemistry involved with MMS. You seem to be more interested in the numbers of books and bottles of MMS that have been sold than in actually knowing what you are talking about. If you had run any tests at all, you would have come up with the same conclusions that I have. After all chemistry is chemistry. The difference between you and me is that I took the time to contact all the industry leaders in sodium chlorite, and then took that information to medical professionals that understand how the body works. I listen to both sides of the story and try to help people understand what is going on with these chemicals. When someone brings up something contrary to what you think, you can't defend yourself because you don't understand, and you have to go on the attack.

It is good that you are putting this information out where it can be reviewed by others. You may then find someone you have more respect for pointing out the same things and may have a chance to learn how this stuff actually works.

I would be happy to come to one of your seminars and take you through the tests to demonstrate how sodium chlorite chemistry actually works. I will even bring my own supplies. Would you mind if I also brought Dr. Hesselink along to explain the medical side?

Not only is your protocol flawed, but so is your reasoning...

I am not the one that is after "recognition and attention." That is what you are after. I am just trying to keep your claims honest and based in facts.

I support your efforts, but your protocols and claims are flawed.

Tom

>

> Alvin

> I have made this write up for my "Answers to Critics" site and people like Dee. Maybe you could forward this write up to Dee,

>

> Hello Dee,

>

> Alvin, I am answering these letters from various various critics to put on my Web Site to Critics. If you get a chance you might send it to the lady by the name of Dee.

>

> FROM JIM HUMBLE, SEE MY ANSWERS BELOW IN CAPITAL LETTERS TO SEPARATE THEM FROM TOM'S. IN ATTEMPTING TO RUIN MY MMS REPUTATION TOM HAS STOPPED SOME PEOPLE FROM USING MMS, THUS HE HAS CAUSED SOME PEOPLE TO GO ON SUFFERING WHEN THEY COULD HAVE BEEN CURED.

>

> The flaws have to do with the claims Jim Humbles built the MMS protocol on...

>

> He thinks he is using a solution that only has 1 - 5 PPM chlorine dioxide in it. Actually the concentrations are much higher than that. Drinking high concentrations of chemicals can result in poisoning effects like diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting. YES AND TAKING TOO MUCH SALT WATER CAN CAUSE DIARRHEA, AND NAUSEA, AND VOMITING. AND OTHER CHEMICALS CAUSE THE SAME REACTION, BUT THAT FACT DOESN'T PROVE ANY PARTICULAR DATA CONCERNING MMS.

>

> He thinks that chlorine dioxide can exist inside the body. Actual testing has shown that it only lasts for seconds to a few minutes.

>

> NO ACTUAL TESTING HAS NOT PROVED THAT. TOM ONLY PUT SOME MMS IN HIS MOUTH AND SWITCHED IT AROUND, SPIT IT OUT, AND THEN TESTED IT FOR CHLORINE DIOXIDE. HE PROVED THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING IN THE SALIVA THAT KILLS CHLORINE DIXOIDE, BUT WHEN A GLASS OF MMS IS INGESTED IT GOES DOWN THE THROAT WITH OUT MIXING WITH THE SALIVA. I KNOW IT SOUNDS BAD, BUT I DRANK SOME MMS, GAVE IT 5 MINUTES IN MY STOMACH, AND THEN VOMITED IT BACK UP USING THE OLD FINGER DOWN THE THROAT TRICK. I THEN TESTED IT FOR CHLORINE DIOXIDE FOR THE NEXT HOUR WITH ALL THE STOMACH SOLUTION AND UNDIGESTED FOOD IN IT. CHLORINE DIOXIDE STILL TESTED PRESENT FOR MORE THAN AN HOUR. SORRY TOM.

>

> He thinks the proper activation using citric acid is 5:1 using 10% and 1:1 using 50% and allowing the activation to continue for 3 minutes. The people using this product in industry have run extensive testing on this and they use 1:1 activating with 10% citric acid and 1:5 using 50% citric acid (that is 1 part 50% citric acid to 5 parts sodium chlorite). The most effective activation time is 10 minutes. I ran some rough tests on this and came up with the industrial activation having about 30% more oxidation potential than the MMS activation.

>

> HE TRIES HARD YOU GOTTA ADMIT. WHETHER I USE THE SAME AS THE INDUSTRIAL PEOPLE DO HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS THAT YOU ALWAYS USE THE SAME AMOUNT SO THAT IT IS CONSISTANT, SO THAT A PERSON USING IT THIS YEAR IS THE SAME AS A PERSON USING IT NEXT YEAR. TOM WOULD HAVE ME CHANGE IT ACCORDING TO THE INDUSTRIAL PEOPLE AND THUS IT WOULD EFFECT THE PROTOCOL OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD FOR NO GOOD REASON. WHY SHOULD MY PEOPLE HAVE TO FOLLOW WHAT THE INDUSTRY HAS DONE.

>

> He thinks that chlorine dioxide quickly breaks down to chloride in the body, and is quickly passed. Researchers studying chlorine dioxide for water purification have found that chlorine dioxide almost immediately breaks down to chlorite and chlorite has a half life of over 40 hours (in animals).

>

> I DON'T KNOW WHAT TOM IS TALKING ABOUT "40 HOURS IN ANIMALS" BUT LET ME GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF SENTENCES FROM ONE OF THE MOST QUOTED CHLORINE DIOXIDE TECHNICAL ARTICLES IN THE WORLD PUT OUT BY LENNTECH.ORG .

>

> "First, chlorine dioxide takes up an electron and reduces to chlorite. The chlorite ion is oxidized and becomes a chloride ion and that during this reaction it accepts 5 electrons. "The chlorine atom remains, until stable chloride is formed." DO YOU SEE? THE CHLORINE ATOM REMAINS UNTIL STABLE CHLORIDE IS FOMED. THAT HAS TO HAPPEN IN MILLISECONDS, NOT 40 HOURS. IF THE CHLORINE DIOXIDE DOES NOT TURN TO A CHLORIDE (NOT A CHLORITE) WITHIN A COUPLE OF MILLISECONDS IT IS NOT AND OXIDIZER AND IT CANNOT BE DOING ALL THOSE THINGS THAT CIVILIZATION CLAIMS CHLORINE DIOXIDE DOES AS AN OXIDIZER. NOT BEING A CHEMIST, TOM HAS TO INVENT CHEMISTRY IN ORDER TO PROVE ME WRONG AND IN DOING THAT HE HURTS MANY PEOPLE.

>

> He claims that the amount of water added has no effect on the solution. You use the same dose in the bath tub that you use to drink. Actually the concentration of the chemical in the water is what counts. That is measured in parts per million. To have an effective concentration in a large amount of water, you have to add more chemicals.

>

> WELL, TO SOME EFFECT HE IS RIGHT, BUT NOT A LOT. IF YOU TAKE A BATH TUB WITH 4 INCHES OF WATER IN IT AND ADD 25 MARBLES TO IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MUCH MORE WATER YOU HAVE IN THAT BATH TUB YOU WILL STILL HAVE 25 MARBLES. IF YOU KEEP STIRING THAT WATER OVER A PERIOD OF Â½ HOUR AND YOU ARE IN THAT BATH TUB MOST OF THOSE MARBLES WILL HAVE CONTACTED YOUR SKIN. THE SAME IS TRUE ABOUT CHLORINE DIOXIDE MOLECULES. IF YOU PUT 1000 MOLECULES IN THE WATER IN THE BATH, THEY WILL ALL CONTACT YOUR SKIN IF YOU STIRR IT ENOUGH. THE ADVANTAGE OF USING THE SAME AMOUNT OF MMS EACH TIME EVEN WHEN YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT SIZE TUB OR DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF WATER IS THAT YOU WILL ALWAYS KNOW THAT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MMS CONTACTED YOU SKIN.

>

> He claims that MMS = chlorine dioxide. Actually MMS = acidified sodium chlorite, something much different.

>

> IN THIS SENTENCE TOM PROVES ONE THING, HE KNOWS VERY LITTLE ABOUT CHEMISTRY AND NOTHING TO SPEAK OF ABOUT ACIDIFIED SODIUM CHLORITE. I HAVE PROVEN THAT CHLORINE DIOXIDE EXISTS IN THE ACIDIFIED SODIUM CHLORITE AND EXACTLY HOW MANY PARTS PER MILLION IS THERE. IT USED THROUGHOUT THE WORLD TODAY. THIS STATEMENT THAT HE MAKES IS RIDICULOUS. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY USE TO GENERATE CHLORINE DIOXIDE.

>

> He claims that MMS is safe because chlorine dioxide is used to treat water. These are two very different technologies. Chlorine dioxide has been well studied and tested, including testing on humans. Acidified sodium chlorite has not been well tested nor has it been tested on humans. ASC is used in food processing and keeps dead carcasses from rotting. Chlorine dioxide is used to disinfect water for consumption.

>

> ONCE AGAIN TOM SHOWS HIS IGNORANCE. CHEMISTRY IS CHEMISTRY NO MATTER WHERE IT IS USED. THE FACT IS THAT ACIDIFIED SODIUM CHLORITE, ACE AS HE LIKES TO CALL IT, IS NOW USE ALL OVER THE WORLD FOR THOUSANDS OF DIFFERENT USES, FROM HOSPITALS TO STOCK YARDS. FOR EIGHTY YEARS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS HAVE DRANK SODIUM CHLORITE MANY ON A DAILY BASIS. IT IS SOLD IN HEALTH FOOD STORES AND IT HAS BEEN CALLED STABILIZED OXYGEN. MANY OF THOSE DRANK IT WITH THEIR MEAL. GUESS WHAT? THE STOMACH HAS A VERY POWERFUL HYDROCHLORIC ACID IN IT AT MEAL TIME. AND HYDROCHLORIC ACID IS ONE OF THOSE ACIDS THAT THE INDUSTRIAL PEOPLE USE THAT TOM WAS THINKING I SHOULD USE. AND NO REPORTS OF ANY OF THOSE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HAVING ANY HEALTH PROBLEMS, ON THE CONTRARY, MANY OF THEM REPORTED MUCH BENEFIT FROM DRINKING THIS SODIUM CHLORITE THAT WAS THEN ACTIVATED WITH STOMACH HYDROCHLORIC ACID. SO ACIDIFIED SODIUM CHLORITE (ASC) HAS ACTUALLY BEEN

USED FOR 80 YEARS.

>

> The list goes on and on, but the point is that developing a protocol based upon flawed assumptions and no testing results in a flawed protocol.

>

> YES, YES WE ALL SHOULD DROP EVERYTHING WE ARE DOING AND FOLLOW TOMS TOTALLY INEXPERIENCE ADVICE. THAT MAKES REALLY A LOT OF SENSE.

>

> Keep in mind that in spite of the flaws, some people are reporting success with the MMS protocol. Although, almost all of those successes have involved a modification of the protocol, and the number of successes (outside of Africa) are much lower than Jim Humbles claim of around 95% on every illness.

>

> AMAZING ISN'T IT. HE ADMITS THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME SUCCESS, BUT OBVIOUSLY IT COULDN'T BE MY RESPONSIBILITY AS THE PROTOCOLS I DEVELOPED AREN'T BEING USED. DOES ANYONE SEE A SLIGHT BIAS AGAINST JIM HERE?

>

> I think that in order to explore a protocol you need to understand the chemistry behind it. Once that is understood, testing can be done to explore the best way to use the chemicals. Jim Humble claims that testing involves millions of dollars and too much of his time. Others are simply doing the testing, not spending exorbitant amounts of time or money, and discovering the flaws in the MMS protocol and Jim Humbles claims.

>

> HE DON'T KNOW OF ANYONE DOING TESTING. I'VE DONE MORE TESTING THAN ANYONE. I JUST DO NOT DO CLINICAL TRIAL TESTING. THERE IS A REASON FOR THAT AND TOM CLOSES HIS MIND TO THAT REASON.

> AMAZING, I CONTINUE TO REMAIN IN CONTACT WITH THOUANDS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD, HAVING PERSONALLY ANSWERED MORE THAN 5000 EMAILS THIS LAST YEAR. LOTS OF THEM SAYS MY PROTOCOLS ARE WORKING. THE THIRD MINISTER OF HEALTH COURSE COMING UP ON THE 9TH OF AUGUST 2010 HAS MORE THAN 40 STUDENTS SLATED TO BE THERE FROM AROUND THE WORLD, THERE HAVE BEEN A TOTAL OF 25 COUNTRIES REPRESENTED IN MY SEMINARS HERE IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC. TOM SHOULD COME. HE CAN IF HE WANTS. BUT HE WANTS THE RECOGNITION AND ATTENTION, NOT THE DATA OF MMS BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN TEACHING IT TO HIM ALL THE WHILE HE HAS BEEN RIDICULING ME AND RUINING MANY PEOPLE'S CHANCES OF OVERCOMING THEIR SUFFERING. OBVIOUSLY HIS RIDICULES CANNOT HURT ME. I PROBABLY HAVE A MILLION PEOPLE ON MY SIDE AT THIS TIME IF NOT A LOT MORE. BUT HIS RIDICULES DO HURT THOSE SUFFERING PEOPLE WHO WIND UP BELIEVING HIM FOR SOME REASON OF THE OTHER.

>

> FINALLY LET ME SAY THIS: IN MALAWI IN AFRICA THIS YEAR I TREATED OVER 800 HIV/AIDS CASES USING MMS. AFTER HAVING SOME OF THEM REDO THE PROTOCOL MORE THAN 98% OF THEM SAID THAT THEY WERE WELL, AND THE LOCAL HOSPITAL AGREED THAT ALL THEIR SYMPTOMS WERE GONE. DOESN'T PROVE THAT THE HIV OR AIDS WAS GONE. YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT. BUT THEY WERE HAPPY AND BACK TO WORK AND WITH PLENTY OF ENERGY.

>

> MORE THAN 5 MILLION PEOPLE HAVE DOWNLOADED THE FREE PORTION OF MY MMS BOOK. HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD SELL MMS THAT THEY PRODUCE IN THEIR HOMES. THOUSANDS OF BOTTLES ARE SOLD EACH MONTH. IT'S MORE THAN A YEAR THAT A DAY HAS GONE BY THAT SOMEONE DIDN'T EMAIL ME OR PHONE ME SAYING THANKS FOR THEIR LIFE BACK. MORE THAN 100 THOUSAND OF MY BOOKS HAVE SOLD IN GERMANY ALONE, AND A SIMILAR NUMBER IN THE USA. MY BOOK HAS BEEN TRANSLATED INTO 15 LANGUAGES MORE THAT 13 LANGUAGES OF EUROPE. IT IS ESTIMATED THAT MORE THAN 200 THOUSAND LIVES HAVE BEEN SAVED SO FAR. AS I WRITE HOSPITALS ARE NOW BEING BUILT THAT WILL USE MMS AS THEIR MAJOR TREATMENT. I HAVE PERSONALLY HANDED MORE THAN 5000 SICK PEOPLE THEIR MMS DOSE. I DON'T THINK THAT TOM HAS EVER TREATED ANYONE AND I WOULD NOT WRITE THIS LETTER IF I WERE NOT GOING TO PUT IT WHERE I WILL NEVER NEED WRITE ANOTHER ONE.

>

> I MAKE NO MONEY FROM THE SALES OF MMS. WHY WOULD I DO THIS IF I WERE NOT HELPING THE PEOPLE OF EARTH.

>

> THESE WRITE UPS EXPLAINING THE CRITICS I AM MAKING SO I CAN PUT THEM ALL ON A SEPARATE INTERNET SITE, WHICH WILL BE ANSWERS TO CRITICS, AND THEN ANYONE WHO WANTS TO READ THEM CAN DO SO. SO I ONLY HAVE TO DO THIS ONCE HOPEFULLY.

>

> Jim Humble

>

> As always with love

> Jim Humble

>

August 2, 2010

Same from me here! Best Regards,Remi From: Dorothy Fitzpatrick <dee@...> Sent: Mon, August 2, 2010 8:29:59 AMSubject: Re: [ ] Jim Humbles reply to

Dee

Hi Alvin, I am so grateful for you sending this and grateful to Jim Humble for taking the time to write and put my mind at ease. I would be so glad if you would thank him for me. regards, dee

On 1 Aug 2010, at 21:41, Alvin Rose wrote:

> measured

August 2, 2010

Hello Dacian,

I was helping Jim Humble to understand the difference between chlorine dioxide

technology and acidified sodium chlorite technology in a way that he could

duplicate and run his own tests to verify.

There are a number of studies and tests that have been done involving chlorine

dioxide technology. Jim Humble frequently points those out when talking about

the safety of following the MMS protocol. The problem is that chlorine dioxide

technology is different from acidified sodium chlorite technology.

I drink water purified with chlorine dioxide technology all the time. I take

care to limit the amount of chlorite by products formed during disinfection, and

it is perfectly safe to drink.

The PH measurement shows the difference between having chlorine dioxide in

water, and having chlorous acid.

Sodium chlorite has a high PH. When you reduce the PH, chlorine dioxide is

released. Chlorine dioxide technology is about using chlorine dioxide in water.

Acidified sodium chlorite is about using chlorous acid. Chlorine dioxide kills

pathogens. Chlorous acid keeps pathogens from continuing to form, and the small

amount of chlorine dioxide kill off a few pathogens. Chlorine dioxide is very

unstable and quickly forms chlorite. Chlorous acid is more stable, but it also

breaks down. Chlorite causes oxidative damage. That is why it is regulated in

water disinfection.

I agree with you. A single can of soft drink won't do much harm. Neither will

a single dose of MMS. The problem comes when you don't find relief with a

single MMS dose and decide to make it a part of your daily diet.

The video is interesting, but I would like to see it repeated using a calibrated

PH meter. I have been unable to duplicate that test, in spite of having run it

many times.

If you have some basic laboratory supplies you can duplicate this test and see

what you come up with. A PH meter needs to be calibrated, so you will need some

PH calibration solutions. I use a three point calibration with my meters, but

since we are working near a PH of 7, a single calibration solution of PH 7

should be OK. If you don't have a meter, pick up some certified PH solutions

and test your PH strips. This way you will know what the colors look like under

controlled testing.

Pick up a bottle of distilled water from the store and test its PH. Next add 3

drops of MMS to it, stir, and test the PH again. If you actually do this test,

report back with your results.

Sodium chlorite is also called stabilized chlorine dioxide. When you drop the

PH of sodium chlorite, you activate it. When you activate it, some of the

available chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide. The further

you drop the PH the more free chlorine dioxide is produced. Using a strong acid

you can drop the PH of sodium chlorite to about 2 and release all of the

available chlorine dioxide as free chlorine dioxide. If you then blow air

through the solution to remove the chlorine dioxide and have it go into solution

in another container with water in it, you have chlorine dioxide technology.

Use the concentrated solution to add small amounts to a working solution that

has the amount of chlorine dioxide needed to kill off the pathogens. Chlorine

dioxide is a gas. It does not change the PH of water.

If you use a weak acid, the PH of the sodium chlorite is only reduced to

something in the 2.5 - 3 range. In this case only about 10% of the available

chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide. The rest goes to form

chlorous acid.

Drinking high concentrations of chlorous acid is not the same as drinking water

that has been purified using chlorine dioxide. The studies showing the safety

of using low concentrations of chlorine dioxide to purify water do not apply to

drinking high concentrations of chlorous acid.

Following the MMS protocol does not appear to be lethal, so follow it for a day

or two and see what happens. If you are completely cured, move on and stay that

way. If you are not, then you will have to decide how far you want to push

things. Since ingesting acidified sodium chlorite has not been studied in

humans, you will have to set up your own test criteria.

Chlorine dioxide technology is safe to use at the concentrations used for water

purification. If you want to experiment with this, put 1 drop of MMS into a

glass and add 1 drop of 27% HCl. Add that to 4 liters of water and drink that.

Tom

>

> Hello

>

> Imo, we should concentrate on this part (I'm interested in getting something

safe and effective):

>

> " Here is the difference. Take some sodium chlorite and reduce its PH to

> 2. Now bubble some air through that solution and have the air go into a

> water bath. Now you have chlorine dioxide in water. The PH of that

> solution will be 7. That chlorine dioxide is pure and can be used for

> water purification as long as you keep the dose under 2 PPM. This water

> has no taste and very little odor. "

>

> Can you go on with this Tom? Is it safe? Why? Can the same be done for

drinking chlorine dioxide? Did you actually experience it?

>

> Now you go on with the PH thing (this looks like another confusing point);

personally I can't remember reading through Jim papers that MMS is alkalin; I

personally didn't measure what you end up it for the PH on the activated MMS

(sodium chlorite); I assume you did hence your claims of a solution with a PH of

2; my question is so what? is acid but it's not worse than a can of Coke, right?

where is the problem? while I understand why having a blanced PH of 7 is better,

the body will raise that level back to 7.

>

> " The MMS protocol involved adding an acid to the solution. You end up

> with chlorous acid that has a PH of around 2.5 - 3. This solution also

> has a small amount of free chlorine dioxide. It tastes like crap

> because of its high concentration of acid and available chlorine

> dioxide. "

>

> Tom, can you explain this video please?

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs751PHS4i4 & feature=related

>

> It looks to me like this guy boils down some water (ends up with low PH) then

let an MMS drop in there (not activated); that raises the level back to 7; so if

that is true (the guy measures before and after the MMS drop), that looks good

to me. Now I assume your claim of PH of 2 in case of activated MMS is because of

the citric acid used for activation; is it worse than eating a lemon then? I

read in a recent post of yours to dee (maybe I'm wrong) you said to taste 2

different citric acid in water to see the difference (the quality). Now why

recommending something so bad? Because the way I read your post below and the

way you show things it looks really scary to drink acidified sodium chlorite

because of this PH of 2 but as I show above it's the citric acid producing that

(eventually) and not the MMS (ie sodium chlorite) which on contrary, it looks to

help in balancing the PH to 7.

>

> Thanks for your time!

>

August 3, 2010

Hi Dorothy

I will send a copy of your email to jim..he will appreciate your reply.

Re: [ ] Jim Humbles reply to Dee

Hi Alvin, I am so grateful for you sending this and grateful to Jim Humble for taking the time to write and put my mind at ease. I would be so glad if you would thank him for me. regards, deeOn 1 Aug 2010, at 21:41, Alvin Rose wrote:> measured

August 3, 2010

Thanks TomA couple of comments if you pls. follow the discussion; all I want is to clarify on these damn confusions. Now everyone here I assume went through most of Jim Humble protocols and dosages and how to mix the stuff.Let's move on and understand your protocol proposals:"Sodium chlorite has a high PH. When you reduce the PH, chlorine dioxide is released."Correct; that is MMS activated with citric acid (or any other acid) like Jim recommends as well."Chlorine dioxide

technology is about using chlorine dioxide in water. Acidified sodium chlorite is about using chlorous acid. Chlorine dioxide kills pathogens. Chlorous acid

keeps pathogens from continuing to form, and the small amount of chlorine dioxide kill off a few pathogens. Chlorine dioxide is very unstable and quickly forms chlorite. Chlorous acid is more stable, but it also breaks down. Chlorite causes oxidative damage. That is why it is regulated in water disinfection."Ok, so basically what you're saying is chlorine dioxide technology is NOT what MMS stuff is about; MMS stuff is about acidified sodium chlorite which has some disatvantages (no study, oxidative stress) vs. pure chlorine dioxide technology.

"Sodium chlorite is also called stabilized chlorine dioxide."Yes; and I think that's why (maybe I'm wrong) these people selling MMS put sodium chlorite in the bottle; sodium chlorite, as far as I understand, it's just a way to transport chlorine dioxide; as chlorine dioxide is a gas, you cannot send it through FedEx (or can you?)."When you drop the PH of sodium chlorite, you activate it."This is what Jim's protocol does, but you diverge with him on ratios and the PH level to lower it, as you explain below."The further you drop the PH the more free chlorine dioxide is produced. Using a strong acid you can drop the PH of sodium chlorite to about 2 and release all of the available chlorine dioxide as

free chlorine dioxide.""If you use a weak acid, the PH of the sodium chlorite is only reduced to

something in the 2.5 - 3 range. In this case only about 10% of the available chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide. The rest goes to form chlorous acid."Ok, now this is important. If I understand correctly, you basically suggest that citric acid is a weak acid, which lowers the MMS to only 2.5. That will free only 10% of the chlorine dioxide from the MMS and the rest will go forming chlorous acid which is bad.

"Chlorine dioxide technology is safe to use at the concentrations used for water purification.

If you want to experiment with this, put 1 drop of MMS into a glass and add 1 drop of 27% HCl. Add that to 4 liters of water and drink that."First of all (sorry for my ignorance and lack of knoledge), we need to clarify what HCL is and how one can obtain that and also whether is safe. Wikipedia says HCL is a gas.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_chlorideFirst question is, how am I supposed to manipulate that gas at home?Second, it doesn't look like is very safe (from wikipedia)Hydrogen chloride forms corrosive hydrochloric acid on contact with water found in body tissue. Inhalation of the fumes can cause coughing, choking, inflammation of the nose, throat, and upper respiratory tract, and in severe cases, pulmonary edema, circulatory system failure, and death. Skin contact can cause redness, pain, and severe skin burns. Hydrogen chloride may cause severe burns to the eye and

permanent eye damage.Can you help here pls.? How am I supposed to use HCL?To conclude, this is you protocol:put 1 drop of MMS (ie 28% sodium chlorite) and 1 drop of hydrogen chloride (the gas above, ie HCL). You add the mix to 4 liters of water.A couple of questions:1. HCL is supposed to release chlorine dioxide from the sodium chlorite, do you confirm?2. How much do I have to wait for chlorine dioxide to be released before adding to 4 liters of water?3. For how long the chlorine dioxide is available in those 4 liters of water?4. You say you drink this stuff for some time now, right? Can you state some benefits you noticed?5. How much chlorine dioxide is released from sodium chlorite with this protocol? What about the rest?Thanks kindlyFrom: silverfox_science <poast@...>Subject: [ ] Re: Jim Humbles reply to Dee Date: Monday, August 2, 2010, 11:04 PM

Hello Dacian,

I was helping Jim Humble to understand the difference between chlorine dioxide technology and acidified sodium chlorite technology in a way that he could duplicate and run his own tests to verify.

There are a number of studies and tests that have been done involving chlorine dioxide technology. Jim Humble frequently points those out when talking about the safety of following the MMS protocol. The problem is that chlorine dioxide technology is different from acidified sodium chlorite technology.

I drink water purified with chlorine dioxide technology all the time. I take care to limit the amount of chlorite by products formed during disinfection, and it is perfectly safe to drink.

The PH measurement shows the difference between having chlorine dioxide in water, and having chlorous acid.

Sodium chlorite has a high PH. When you reduce the PH, chlorine dioxide is released. Chlorine dioxide technology is about using chlorine dioxide in water. Acidified sodium chlorite is about using chlorous acid. Chlorine dioxide kills pathogens. Chlorous acid keeps pathogens from continuing to form, and the small amount of chlorine dioxide kill off a few pathogens. Chlorine dioxide is very unstable and quickly forms chlorite. Chlorous acid is more stable, but it also breaks down. Chlorite causes oxidative damage. That is why it is regulated in water disinfection.

I agree with you. A single can of soft drink won't do much harm. Neither will a single dose of MMS. The problem comes when you don't find relief with a single MMS dose and decide to make it a part of your daily diet.

The video is interesting, but I would like to see it repeated using a calibrated PH meter. I have been unable to duplicate that test, in spite of having run it many times.

If you have some basic laboratory supplies you can duplicate this test and see what you come up with. A PH meter needs to be calibrated, so you will need some PH calibration solutions. I use a three point calibration with my meters, but since we are working near a PH of 7, a single calibration solution of PH 7 should be OK. If you don't have a meter, pick up some certified PH solutions and test your PH strips. This way you will know what the colors look like under controlled testing.

Pick up a bottle of distilled water from the store and test its PH. Next add 3 drops of MMS to it, stir, and test the PH again. If you actually do this test, report back with your results.

Sodium chlorite is also called stabilized chlorine dioxide. When you drop the PH of sodium chlorite, you activate it. When you activate it, some of the available chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide. The further you drop the PH the more free chlorine dioxide is produced. Using a strong acid you can drop the PH of sodium chlorite to about 2 and release all of the available chlorine dioxide as free chlorine dioxide. If you then blow air through the solution to remove the chlorine dioxide and have it go into solution in another container with water in it, you have chlorine dioxide technology. Use the concentrated solution to add small amounts to a working solution that has the amount of chlorine dioxide needed to kill off the pathogens. Chlorine dioxide is a gas. It does not change the PH of water.

If you use a weak acid, the PH of the sodium chlorite is only reduced to something in the 2.5 - 3 range. In this case only about 10% of the available chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide. The rest goes to form chlorous acid.

Drinking high concentrations of chlorous acid is not the same as drinking water that has been purified using chlorine dioxide. The studies showing the safety of using low concentrations of chlorine dioxide to purify water do not apply to drinking high concentrations of chlorous acid.

Following the MMS protocol does not appear to be lethal, so follow it for a day or two and see what happens. If you are completely cured, move on and stay that way. If you are not, then you will have to decide how far you want to push things. Since ingesting acidified sodium chlorite has not been studied in humans, you will have to set up your own test criteria.

Chlorine dioxide technology is safe to use at the concentrations used for water purification. If you want to experiment with this, put 1 drop of MMS into a glass and add 1 drop of 27% HCl. Add that to 4 liters of water and drink that.

Tom

>

> Hello

>

> Imo, we should concentrate on this part (I'm interested in getting something safe and effective):

>

> "Here is the difference. Take some sodium chlorite and reduce its PH to

> 2. Now bubble some air through that solution and have the air go into a

> water bath. Now you have chlorine dioxide in water. The PH of that

> solution will be 7. That chlorine dioxide is pure and can be used for

> water purification as long as you keep the dose under 2 PPM. This water

> has no taste and very little odor."

>

> Can you go on with this Tom? Is it safe? Why? Can the same be done for drinking chlorine dioxide? Did you actually experience it?

>

> Now you go on with the PH thing (this looks like another confusing point); personally I can't remember reading through Jim papers that MMS is alkalin; I personally didn't measure what you end up it for the PH on the activated MMS (sodium chlorite); I assume you did hence your claims of a solution with a PH of 2; my question is so what? is acid but it's not worse than a can of Coke, right? where is the problem? while I understand why having a blanced PH of 7 is better, the body will raise that level back to 7.

>

> "The MMS protocol involved adding an acid to the solution. You end up

> with chlorous acid that has a PH of around 2.5 - 3. This solution also

> has a small amount of free chlorine dioxide. It tastes like crap

> because of its high concentration of acid and available chlorine

> dioxide."

>

> Tom, can you explain this video please?

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs751PHS4i4 & feature=related

>

> It looks to me like this guy boils down some water (ends up with low PH) then let an MMS drop in there (not activated); that raises the level back to 7; so if that is true (the guy measures before and after the MMS drop), that looks good to me. Now I assume your claim of PH of 2 in case of activated MMS is because of the citric acid used for activation; is it worse than eating a lemon then? I read in a recent post of yours to dee (maybe I'm wrong) you said to taste 2 different citric acid in water to see the difference (the quality). Now why recommending something so bad? Because the way I read your post below and the way you show things it looks really scary to drink acidified sodium chlorite because of this PH of 2 but as I show above it's the citric acid producing that (eventually) and not the MMS (ie sodium chlorite) which on contrary, it looks to help in balancing the PH to 7.

>

> Thanks for your time!

>

August 3, 2010

On 2010-08-03 5:01 AM, fiordean dacian <dfiordean@...> wrote:

> A couple of comments if you pls. follow the discussion; all I want is to

> clarify on these damn confusions. Now everyone here I assume went

> through most of Jim Humble protocols and dosages and how to mix the stuff.

<snip>

> First of all (sorry for my ignorance and lack of knoledge), we need to

> clarify what HCL is and how one can obtain that and also whether is

> safe. Wikipedia says HCL is a gas.

HCl is hydrochloric acid.

Dacian, would you stop already? This is not only a waste of time, it is

only going to ADD to the confusion for people new here.

The main confusion stems from the fact that Jim relies on simple and

basic observations (ie, color changes, etc) to determine his protocols,

while Tom relies on the scientific method and what can be proven and or

reproduced.

August 3, 2010

Hello Dacian,

It is not about good or bad. Chlorine dioxide is an oxidizer and properly used

it is good. Chlorous acid is also an oxidizer and properly used it is good.

Since chlorine dioxide doesn't exist inside the body but for a very short time,

it may be the chlorous acid that is actually responsible for peoples success

using MMS.

If there is any " bad " it is that we don't know what is causing these chemicals

to work. If we can figure it out, a more effective way to use them can be

figured out. Right now Jim Humble is claiming that he is able to relieve the

symptoms of illness somewhere around 95% of the time with the people in Africa.

In the rest of the world with the claim of millions of people following the MMS

protocol the success seems to be under 5% and it may be much lower than that.

There are some spectacular testimonies, and that serves to keep people

interested, but there are a lot of people that find the MMS protocol flawed and

either don't have any success, or completely change the protocol or add

additional treatments to achieve some degree of success.

Oxidative therapies have been in use for a long time, and in many cases they can

be successful. I think that if it can be figured out exactly how MMS works, a

protocol that is safe and effective may be able to be discovered.

HCl is hydrochloric acid. It is a generally recognized as safe acid. At high

concentrations it is dangerous to handle, so proper precautions need to be

taken. It is sold in building supply stores where it is called muriatic acid.

The most common concentration is somewhere around 32% and you have to dilute it

down to the concentration you want to used. It is used to clean and etch rocks

and concrete. It is also used to adjust the PH of swimming pools and hot tubs.

I did not present a protocol. I was simply giving instructions to compare the

difference between the concentrations used in the MMS protocol and the

concentrations used for water purification. Once you do the comparison you will

realize that the claim that MMS is safe to use because it is widely used in

water purification is flawed.

Let's look at your questions...

1: Hydrochloric acid will reduce the PH of sodium chlorite and release chlorine

dioxide.

2: The reaction takes place in 10 - 20 seconds.

3: In covered containers stored in a cool area and stored out of UV light, the

chlorine dioxide will still be available after 8 weeks. It may be longer than

that, but that is what has been studied. Of course this depends upon the purity

of the water to start with. If the water has impurities in it, the chlorine

dioxide will be used up eliminating the impurities.

4: I remain healthy and don't get sick from drinking wilderness water. With

wilderness water, most of the chlorine dioxide is used up purifying it.

5: All of the available chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide.

The " rest " are the impurities in the sodium chlorite that you started with. To

remove the impurities you have to bubble air through the solution to capture the

chlorine dioxide and then bubble that stream into pure water. This is how water

purification is done using chlorine dioxide technology.

Tom

>

> Thanks Tom

>

> A couple of comments if you pls. follow the discussion; all I want is to

clarify on these damn confusions. Now everyone here I assume went through most

of Jim Humble protocols and dosages and how to mix the stuff.

>

> Let's move on and understand your protocol proposals:

>

> " Sodium chlorite has a high PH. When you reduce the PH, chlorine dioxide is

released. "

>

> Correct; that is MMS activated with citric acid (or any other acid) like Jim

recommends as well.

>

> " Chlorine dioxide

> technology is about using chlorine dioxide in water. Acidified sodium

> chlorite is about using chlorous acid. Chlorine dioxide kills

> pathogens. Chlorous acid

> keeps pathogens from continuing to form, and the small amount of

> chlorine dioxide kill off a few pathogens. Chlorine dioxide is very

> unstable and quickly forms chlorite. Chlorous acid is more stable, but

> it also breaks down. Chlorite causes oxidative damage. That is why it

> is regulated in water disinfection. "

>

> Ok, so basically what you're saying is chlorine dioxide technology is NOT what

MMS stuff is about; MMS stuff is about acidified sodium chlorite which has some

disatvantages (no study, oxidative stress) vs. pure chlorine dioxide technology.

>

> " Sodium chlorite is also called stabilized chlorine dioxide. "

>

> Yes; and I think that's why (maybe I'm wrong) these people selling MMS put

sodium chlorite in the bottle; sodium chlorite, as far as I understand, it's

just a way to transport chlorine dioxide; as chlorine dioxide is a gas, you

cannot send it through FedEx (or can you?).

>

> " When you drop the PH of sodium chlorite, you activate it. "

>

> This is what Jim's protocol does, but you diverge with him on ratios and the

PH level to lower it, as you explain below.

>

> " The further you drop the PH the more free chlorine

> dioxide is produced. Using a strong acid you can drop the PH of sodium

> chlorite to about 2 and release all of the available chlorine dioxide as

> free chlorine dioxide. "

>

> " If you use a weak acid, the PH of the sodium chlorite is only reduced to

> something in the 2.5 - 3 range. In this case only about 10% of the

> available chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide. The

> rest goes to form chlorous acid. "

>

> Ok, now this is important. If I understand correctly, you basically suggest

that citric acid is a weak acid, which lowers the MMS to only 2.5. That will

free only 10% of the chlorine dioxide from the MMS and the rest will go forming

chlorous acid which is bad.

>

> " Chlorine dioxide technology is safe to use at the concentrations used for

water purification.

> If you want to experiment with this, put 1 drop of MMS into a glass

> and add 1 drop of 27% HCl. Add that to 4 liters of water and drink

> that. "

>

> First of all (sorry for my ignorance and lack of knoledge), we need to clarify

what HCL is and how one can obtain that and also whether is safe. Wikipedia says

HCL is a gas.

>

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_chloride

>

> First question is, how am I supposed to manipulate that gas at home?

>

> Second, it doesn't look like is very safe (from wikipedia)

>

> Hydrogen chloride forms corrosive hydrochloric acid on contact with water

found in body tissue. Inhalation of the fumes can cause coughing, choking,

inflammation of the nose, throat, and upper respiratory tract, and in severe

cases, pulmonary edema, circulatory system failure, and death. Skin contact can

cause redness, pain, and severe skin burns. Hydrogen chloride may cause severe

burns to the eye and permanent eye damage.

>

> Can you help here pls.? How am I supposed to use HCL?

>

> To conclude, this is you protocol:

>

> put 1 drop of MMS (ie 28% sodium chlorite) and 1 drop of hydrogen chloride

(the gas above, ie HCL). You add the mix to 4 liters of water.

>

> A couple of questions:

>

> 1. HCL is supposed to release chlorine dioxide from the sodium chlorite, do

you confirm?

> 2. How much do I have to wait for chlorine dioxide to be released before

adding to 4 liters of water?

> 3. For how long the chlorine dioxide is available in those 4 liters of water?

> 4. You say you drink this stuff for some time now, right? Can you state some

benefits you noticed?

> 5. How much chlorine dioxide is released from sodium chlorite with this

protocol? What about the rest?

>

> Thanks kindly

>

August 4, 2010

If that adds to the confusion, I stop. I'm for one confused and try to ask questions to clarify these things.Tom keeps repeating acidified sodium chlorite is different than chlorine dioxide, Jim's protocol lowers the PH to 2 which is bad, it mentions oxidative stress but on the other hand it recommends industrial protocol: 1 part MMS 1 part 10% citric acid and let activate for 10 minutes instead of 3 (as per Jim's protocol); why do I need more oxidative power if oxidative stress is bad?Regarding HCL, did you read the wikipedia page? And why is confusing asking to clarify on this and also how one could obtaing the HCL?

> A couple of comments if you pls. follow the discussion; all I want is to

> clarify on these damn confusions. Now everyone here I assume went

> through most of Jim Humble protocols and dosages and how to mix the stuff.

<snip>

> First of all (sorry for my ignorance and lack of knoledge), we need to

> clarify what HCL is and how one can obtain that and also whether is

> safe. Wikipedia says HCL is a gas.

HCl is hydrochloric acid.

Dacian, would you stop already? This is not only a waste of time, it is

only going to ADD to the confusion for people new here.

The main confusion stems from the fact that Jim relies on simple and

basic observations (ie, color changes, etc) to determine his protocols,

while Tom relies on the scientific method and what can be proven and or

reproduced.

August 4, 2010

thanks tomFrom: silverfox_science <poast@...>Subject: [ ] Re: Jim Humbles reply to Dee Date: Tuesday, August 3, 2010, 9:14 PM

Hello Dacian,

It is not about good or bad. Chlorine dioxide is an oxidizer and properly used it is good. Chlorous acid is also an oxidizer and properly used it is good.

Since chlorine dioxide doesn't exist inside the body but for a very short time, it may be the chlorous acid that is actually responsible for peoples success using MMS.

If there is any "bad" it is that we don't know what is causing these chemicals to work. If we can figure it out, a more effective way to use them can be figured out. Right now Jim Humble is claiming that he is able to relieve the symptoms of illness somewhere around 95% of the time with the people in Africa. In the rest of the world with the claim of millions of people following the MMS protocol the success seems to be under 5% and it may be much lower than that. There are some spectacular testimonies, and that serves to keep people interested, but there are a lot of people that find the MMS protocol flawed and either don't have any success, or completely change the protocol or add additional treatments to achieve some degree of success.

Oxidative therapies have been in use for a long time, and in many cases they can be successful. I think that if it can be figured out exactly how MMS works, a protocol that is safe and effective may be able to be discovered.

HCl is hydrochloric acid. It is a generally recognized as safe acid. At high concentrations it is dangerous to handle, so proper precautions need to be taken. It is sold in building supply stores where it is called muriatic acid. The most common concentration is somewhere around 32% and you have to dilute it down to the concentration you want to used. It is used to clean and etch rocks and concrete. It is also used to adjust the PH of swimming pools and hot tubs.

I did not present a protocol. I was simply giving instructions to compare the difference between the concentrations used in the MMS protocol and the concentrations used for water purification. Once you do the comparison you will realize that the claim that MMS is safe to use because it is widely used in water purification is flawed.

Let's look at your questions...

1: Hydrochloric acid will reduce the PH of sodium chlorite and release chlorine dioxide.

2: The reaction takes place in 10 - 20 seconds.

3: In covered containers stored in a cool area and stored out of UV light, the chlorine dioxide will still be available after 8 weeks. It may be longer than that, but that is what has been studied. Of course this depends upon the purity of the water to start with. If the water has impurities in it, the chlorine dioxide will be used up eliminating the impurities.

4: I remain healthy and don't get sick from drinking wilderness water. With wilderness water, most of the chlorine dioxide is used up purifying it.

5: All of the available chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide. The "rest" are the impurities in the sodium chlorite that you started with. To remove the impurities you have to bubble air through the solution to capture the chlorine dioxide and then bubble that stream into pure water. This is how water purification is done using chlorine dioxide technology.

Tom

>

> Thanks Tom

>

> A couple of comments if you pls. follow the discussion; all I want is to clarify on these damn confusions. Now everyone here I assume went through most of Jim Humble protocols and dosages and how to mix the stuff.

>

> Let's move on and understand your protocol proposals:

>

> "Sodium chlorite has a high PH. When you reduce the PH, chlorine dioxide is released."

>

> Correct; that is MMS activated with citric acid (or any other acid) like Jim recommends as well.

>

> "Chlorine dioxide

> technology is about using chlorine dioxide in water. Acidified sodium

> chlorite is about using chlorous acid. Chlorine dioxide kills

> pathogens. Chlorous acid

> keeps pathogens from continuing to form, and the small amount of

> chlorine dioxide kill off a few pathogens. Chlorine dioxide is very

> unstable and quickly forms chlorite. Chlorous acid is more stable, but

> it also breaks down. Chlorite causes oxidative damage. That is why it

> is regulated in water disinfection."

>

> Ok, so basically what you're saying is chlorine dioxide technology is NOT what MMS stuff is about; MMS stuff is about acidified sodium chlorite which has some disatvantages (no study, oxidative stress) vs. pure chlorine dioxide technology.

>

> "Sodium chlorite is also called stabilized chlorine dioxide."

>

> Yes; and I think that's why (maybe I'm wrong) these people selling MMS put sodium chlorite in the bottle; sodium chlorite, as far as I understand, it's just a way to transport chlorine dioxide; as chlorine dioxide is a gas, you cannot send it through FedEx (or can you?).

>

> "When you drop the PH of sodium chlorite, you activate it."

>

> This is what Jim's protocol does, but you diverge with him on ratios and the PH level to lower it, as you explain below.

>

> "The further you drop the PH the more free chlorine

> dioxide is produced. Using a strong acid you can drop the PH of sodium

> chlorite to about 2 and release all of the available chlorine dioxide as

> free chlorine dioxide."

>

> "If you use a weak acid, the PH of the sodium chlorite is only reduced to

> something in the 2.5 - 3 range. In this case only about 10% of the

> available chlorine dioxide is released as free chlorine dioxide. The

> rest goes to form chlorous acid."

>

> Ok, now this is important. If I understand correctly, you basically suggest that citric acid is a weak acid, which lowers the MMS to only 2.5. That will free only 10% of the chlorine dioxide from the MMS and the rest will go forming chlorous acid which is bad.

>

> "Chlorine dioxide technology is safe to use at the concentrations used for water purification.

> If you want to experiment with this, put 1 drop of MMS into a glass

> and add 1 drop of 27% HCl. Add that to 4 liters of water and drink

> that."

>

> First of all (sorry for my ignorance and lack of knoledge), we need to clarify what HCL is and how one can obtain that and also whether is safe. Wikipedia says HCL is a gas.

>

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_chloride

>

> First question is, how am I supposed to manipulate that gas at home?

>

> Second, it doesn't look like is very safe (from wikipedia)

>

> Hydrogen chloride forms corrosive hydrochloric acid on contact with water found in body tissue. Inhalation of the fumes can cause coughing, choking, inflammation of the nose, throat, and upper respiratory tract, and in severe cases, pulmonary edema, circulatory system failure, and death. Skin contact can cause redness, pain, and severe skin burns. Hydrogen chloride may cause severe burns to the eye and permanent eye damage.

>

> Can you help here pls.? How am I supposed to use HCL?

>

> To conclude, this is you protocol:

>

> put 1 drop of MMS (ie 28% sodium chlorite) and 1 drop of hydrogen chloride (the gas above, ie HCL). You add the mix to 4 liters of water.

>

> A couple of questions:

>

> 1. HCL is supposed to release chlorine dioxide from the sodium chlorite, do you confirm?

> 2. How much do I have to wait for chlorine dioxide to be released before adding to 4 liters of water?

> 3. For how long the chlorine dioxide is available in those 4 liters of water?

> 4. You say you drink this stuff for some time now, right? Can you state some benefits you noticed?

> 5. How much chlorine dioxide is released from sodium chlorite with this protocol? What about the rest?

>

> Thanks kindly

>

August 4, 2010

On 2010-08-04 4:35 AM, fiordean dacian <dfiordean@...> wrote:

> If that adds to the confusion, I stop. I'm for one confused and try to

> ask questions to clarify these things.

>

> Tom keeps repeating acidified sodium chlorite is different than chlorine

> dioxide,

It is...

> Jim's protocol lowers the PH to 2 which is bad, it mentions

> oxidative stress but on the other hand it

'it' being Tom? That's kind of rude don't you think?

> recommends industrial protocol: 1 part MMS 1 part 10% citric acid and

> let activate for 10 minutes instead of 3 (as per Jim's protocol); why

> do I need more oxidative power if oxidative stress is bad?

Apparently Tom is claiming you get more chlorous acid - which produces

*less* oxidative 'stress' than chlorine dioxide - doing it this way, and

it is chlorous acid that he believes is responsible for the 'good' that

MMS does. Tom? Did I get that right?

> Regarding HCL, did you read the wikipedia page?

Why should I? The page you pointed at had nothing to do with HCl

(hydrochloric acid).

> And why is confusing asking to clarify on this and also how one could

> obtaing the HCL?

You didn't ask what HCl (aka hydrochloric acid) (note the lower case

'l') was, you ass-u-me-d that it was something it was not (HCL - aka

hydrogen chloride) (note the UPPER case 'L'), then proceeded to lambast

Tom about why he would recommend using it.

In chemistry, semantic precision is absolutely necessary, just as it is

in all forms of communication, otherwise all you have is a bunch of

gobbledygook being bantered back and forth - hence your confusion.

August 4, 2010

"it being Tom? That's kind of rude don't you think?"I sorry for that, I'm not native in english; hence when I type quickly I can make mistakes. I wasn't intended to be rude."You didn't ask what HCl (aka hydrochloric acid) (note the lower case

'l') was, you ass-u-me-d that it was something it was not (HCL - aka

hydrogen chloride) (note the UPPER case 'L'), then proceeded to lambast

Tom about why he would recommend using it.

In chemistry, semantic precision is absolutely necessary..."Ok, my fault. As specified I lack knowledge in chemistry that's why I asked for clarifications. That's an error I didn't pay attention to.As for this"ass-u-me-d"was it intended? If so, I think it's you who start being rude and chasing me here; Tom can respond for himself but I see you do it on his behalf (same person actually?)

> If that adds to the confusion, I stop. I'm for one confused and try to

> ask questions to clarify these things.

>

> Tom keeps repeating acidified sodium chlorite is different than chlorine

> dioxide,

It is...

> Jim's protocol lowers the PH to 2 which is bad, it mentions

> oxidative stress but on the other hand it

'it' being Tom? That's kind of rude don't you think?

> recommends industrial protocol: 1 part MMS 1 part 10% citric acid and

> let activate for 10 minutes instead of 3 (as per Jim's protocol); why

> do I need more oxidative power if oxidative stress is bad?

Apparently Tom is claiming you get more chlorous acid - which produces

*less* oxidative 'stress' than chlorine dioxide - doing it this way, and

it is chlorous acid that he believes is responsible for the 'good' that

MMS does. Tom? Did I get that right?

> Regarding HCL, did you read the wikipedia page?

Why should I? The page you pointed at had nothing to do with HCl

(hydrochloric acid).

> And why is confusing asking to clarify on this and also how one could

> obtaing the HCL?

You didn't ask what HCl (aka hydrochloric acid) (note the lower case

'l') was, you ass-u-me-d that it was something it was not (HCL - aka

hydrogen chloride) (note the UPPER case 'L'), then proceeded to lambast

Tom about why he would recommend using it.

In chemistry, semantic precision is absolutely necessary, just as it is

in all forms of communication, otherwise all you have is a bunch of

gobbledygook being bantered back and forth - hence your confusion.

August 4, 2010

On 2010-08-04 10:01 AM, fiordean dacian <dfiordean@...> wrote:

> As for this " ass-u-me-d " was it intended?

Yes... intended to make a point...

> If so, I think it's you who start being rude and chasing me here;

No - again, just making a point.

It is impossible to speak intelligently when you go around making

assumptions and engaging in gobbledy-speak (that form of speech one

achieves when not practicing semantic precision).

99.9% of all of the confusion and misunderstandings about MMS

(substitute pretty much anything else for 'MMS' and it is still true) is

directly attributable to a lack of adherence to semantic precision when

two or more people are trying to communicate.

> Tom can respond for himself but I see you do it on his behalf (same

> person actually?)

Rotflmao! No... Tom doesn't need anyone else to speak for him, he does a

fine job of that...

Sign In

Re: Jim Humbles reply to Dee

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Activity