• Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
  • There are no markets
  • "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

The Art of making Colloidal Silver

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
Right-to-try’ bill rejected by House, in major blow to GOP efforts
GettyImages-491983100-1600x900.jpg

WASHINGTON — In a major blow to the effort to pass a federal “right-to-try” law, House Republicans failed to muster the votes to pass a key compromise measure Tuesday.
The legislation was rejected by a vote of 259-140. The bill needed two-thirds majority to pass under suspension of rules.
The vote was an embarrassing defeat not only for House Republicans but for President Trump, who had called on Congress to quickly pass right-to-try legislation, and Vice President Mike Pence, a longtime supporter of the effort. It was also a rare misstep from Speaker Paul Ryan, who like most congressional leaders almost never schedules votes on legislation without some certainty that the given measure has the support to pass.
The controversial “right-to-try” bill would offer a pathway for patients with a terminal disease to get around Food and Drug Administration rules to request an experimental treatment from a drug maker before the agency has approved it. Supporters of the legislation, including the libertarian Goldwater Institute that first conceived of the pathway, say it would offer a necessary respite from what they say are overly cumbersome FDA rules.
Critics, however, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California, pointed out that the FDA already has a program in place to offer access to terminal patients, and the agency grants some 99 percent of all the requests it receives, often within a short time frame. They also argued that without more FDA oversight of the use of experimental therapies, desperate patients could be vulnerable to bad actors or unsafe treatments.

Pelosi and Rep. Frank Pallone (N.J.), the ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, spent Tuesday urging their colleagues to oppose the bill. One key Democratic staffer even circulated an email highlighting the concerns that critics, including former FDA commissioners, had raised with the measure.
Thirty-two Democrats voted to support the bill; two Republicans opposed it.
“We are incredibly disappointed in our Democrat colleagues for not supporting this carefully crafted bill, delivering increased patient access to investigational drugs for those that have no other treatment options through the existing compassionate use program as well as a new alternative pathway,” said Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) and Health Subcommittee Chairman Michael C. Burgess, M.D. (R-Texas).
Asked by STAT why Republicans had brought the legislation under the “suspension of the rules” process, a Republican leadership aide said leaders had had no reason to believe Democrats would not support the measure.
It’s unclear what the next steps for the movement may be — if there are any. The House could take up the measure anew, or a similar one, under the normal rules of the House, which are slower but only require a simple majority. It is also possible Republican leadership could negotiate with their Democratic counterparts to include some or all of the bill’s provisions into an omnibus spending measure expected to be unveiled later this week.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California vowed in a statement after the vote that “the House will not let this be the end.”
“We will try again, pass legislation, and bring hope to those whose only desire is the right to try to live,” he said.
Though the Senate passed its own version of the legislation unanimously last year, it did so because Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) demanded the consideration as a condition of his vote on a separate measure.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
(The PEOPLE's PARTY) Democrats killed the bill and the people that may have had that one last chance for hope.

Democrats want you in the ground A.S.A.P. with no hope. "DIE and GET OUT of OUR TAX MONEY"
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Sorry abeland1, NO HOPE ALLOWED with .Gov Blessing.

llinois Rep. Greg Harris argues "right-to-try" legislation on the House floor at the Illinois State Capitol in 2014, the year the nationwide movement took off.
View attachment 97374
There are doctors out there with terminally ill patients that would like to try my 50 PPM ionic colloidal silver as produced by the ultra by IV. I would be glad to provide it free of charge. If the "right to try" Bill passes, I will offer it to any physician caring for such a patient.
https://www.statnews.com/2018/01/16...il&utm_term=0_8cab1d7961-6202b9d7e6-150077873
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
unnamed (1).jpg

Antibiotics, it’s widely known, can wipe out a person’s “good” microbes along with the bad — sometimes leading to nasty side effects like diarrhea or serious infections. But new research finds that antibiotics aren’t alone in their bacterial slaughter: Nearly 1 in 4 other prescription medications, from antipsychotics to antivirals, kill off gut microbes. That could mean old drugs could have new uses — or have hidden impacts on antibiotic resistance.Athanasios Typas, a researcher at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory, and his team tested more than 1,000 FDA-approved drugs from the Prestwick Chemical Library, often used as a screening library, against nearly 40 common microbial species, including Roseburia intestinalis, C. difficile, and two types of Bacteroides fragilis. They found that about 25 percent of drugs tested could reduce the growth of microbes frequently found in a human gut, including almost all antipsychotic medications they tested. “For us, that was much more than we expected,” Typas said. The results were published in Nature on Monday.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nat...1Be3xcMHHt&tracking_referrer=www.statnews.com
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Look everywhere in MAN-made products for a cure.
Ignore God-given silver and herbs and such. :secret:
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
4844-1600x900.jpg

This from:
Ashley Arabasadi is health security policy adviser at Management Sciences for Health, a nonprofit global health organization.
"The White House recently released a report outlining the progress and investments the U.S. has made to make the world safer from the threat of epidemics. But the key to epidemic preparedness and response is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, whose operations abroad will radically scale back due to looming funding cuts.
Every global health security expert warns us that it’s not a matter of whether the next deadly epidemic will happen, but when. Withdrawing global health funding now will virtually guarantee that any future outbreak will be far-reaching and economically disastrous; the World Bank estimates that an epidemic such as the 1918 Spanish Flu could cost as much as 5 percent of global GDP.
The CDC faces an 80 percent cut to global health security programs in 39 of the 49 countries in which the agency currently focuses, many considered hot spots for emerging infectious diseases. This could have a negative impact on the health, economy, and security of the U.S. The proposed cuts rightly drew an outcry from a number of health organizations and was thoroughly covered in the media.
In addition to stopping vital CDC programs, the funding cliff jeopardizes other U.S. investments in global health, such as those made through USAID. This money protects Americans at home and abroad, saves lives, strengthens fragile states, and promotes social and economic progress. Programs that invest in women and children, HIV, malaria, and other key areas create more resilient health systems that are the first line of defense against emerging disease threats.
As CDC Acting Director Anne Schuchat has said, “Here in the U.S., we rely on frontline health workers to detect and respond to health emergencies. But we can’t protect our citizens unless other countries can also protect theirs through strong investments in health systems.”
Health workers are indeed the frontline response mechanism for infectious disease outbreaks. And in many parts of the world, their work is supported by international donors, with the United States traditionally leading the pack.
Take Madagascar, which had a severe outbreak of plague last year. Thanks in part to a cadre of community health volunteers working with Madagascar’s authorities and, among other U.S. players, Management Sciences for Health — the nongovernmental organization where I work — a coordinated and swift local response quickly stopped the disease from spreading.
Past investments in HIV/AIDS have trained health workers and strengthened surveillance systems, laboratory networks, and biocontainment capabilities that helped to stop Ebola in its tracks in Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
At this point, there should be little resistance to the notion that it is in our country’s interest to fund programs that detect and contain diseases at their source. After all, a pathogen can travel around the globe in as long as it takes to fly a plane from Liberia to Dallas.
The proposed CDC cuts will cost the U.S. much more down the road. The economic burden of epidemics is well-documented: massive expenditures, disrupted global business and supply chains, costly trade implications, and more. Ebola cost U.S. taxpayers a total of $5.4 billion, and it put American lives at risk.
The 2002-2003 outbreak of SARS, or severe acute respiratory syndrome, cost the global economy an estimated $40 billion. According to the World Bank, the next severe pandemic could cost the world economy up to $6 trillion. Additionally, global health security, which relies on the capacity of all countries to detect and control health threats, is critical to the U.S. economy and jobs.
Strategic investments in public and animal health and pandemic preparedness need to be a national security priority of governments and a key commitment from multilateral agencies, development banks, NGOs, academia, and private sector stakeholders worldwide.
When calculated in terms of lives lost, economic meltdowns, and global instability, infectious disease outbreaks can cause catastrophic losses when not stopped at the source. Doing that requires investing in the CDC and USAID, and the programs and people watching and working in vulnerable countries. Now is not the time to scale back.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Reads like a sales-pitch.
Like the U.S. is the ONLY nation that could provide funds for health and disease control.
I see a whole lot of asses sitting in the U.N. meetings with Ambassador Haley.
The EU countries could pony up funds
Great Britain, France, and all of Western Europe has money or a tax base to milk.
Hey, Russia and China want to be considered Major World Stage players, time for them to step up.
Less We Forget
BIG PHARMA should be hit-up for Humanitarian Care Worldwide Meds and Money ( they soaked away from US consumers).

The US milk cow is dryin' up.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Ebola cost U.S. taxpayers a total of $5.4 billion, and it put American lives at risk.
That comes across as an attempt to extort.
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
Reads like a sales-pitch.
Like the U.S. is the ONLY nation that could provide funds for health and disease control.
I see a whole lot of asses sitting in the U.N. meetings with Ambassador Haley.
The EU countries could pony up funds
Great Britain, France, and all of Western Europe has money or a tax base to milk.
Hey, Russia and China want to be considered Major World Stage players, time for them to step up.
Less We Forget
BIG PHARMA should be hit-up for Humanitarian Care Worldwide Meds and Money ( they soaked away from US consumers).

The US milk cow is dryin' up.
That comes across as an attempt to extort.
GB: Reads like a sales-pitch.
AB: I guess that's what it is.
GB: Like the U.S. is the ONLY nation that could provide funds for health and disease control. I see a whole lot of asses sitting in the U.N. meetings with Ambassador Haley. The EU countries could pony up funds. Great Britain, France, and all of Western Europe has money or a tax base to milk. Great Britain, France, and all of Western Europe has money or a tax base to milk.
AB: I could not agree more. The EU has been laughing its ass off ever since the Marshall plan. The UN is the dumbest idea I've known of in my lifetime.
GB: Hey, Russia and China want to be considered Major World Stage players, time for them to step up.
AB: the rulers of those countries would simply isolate themselves from the general population and let an epidemic run its course. They would consider such an event an opportunity to consolidate their power.
GB: Less We Forget
BIG PHARMA should be hit-up for Humanitarian Care Worldwide Meds and Money ( they soaked away from US consumers).
The US milk cow is dryin' up.
AB: Please don't get me started on BIG PHARMA. They would see the event of a pandemic in the United States as an opportunity to market a 10% effective vaccine for 1000 bucks a pop.
Ashley Arabasadi, the author of the article, not abeland1, said:
"Ebola cost U.S. taxpayers a total of $5.4 billion, and it put American lives at risk."
GB: That comes across as an attempt to extort.
AB: I did a little research on the amount, and I found the source was the Boston Globe:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion...-strong-cdc/zwEqbwY2rVYNaJJh7VNb2L/story.html
It doesn't seem to be an unreasonable estimate. I also looked into the outfit who published the article:
https://www.msh.org/
They seem to be straight arrows.
 

chrisflhtc

Seeker
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
118
Likes
129

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
I find it interesting they would use a silver nitrate (Big Pharma) when the same protocol could be used with Electrically Isolated Silver / Colloidal Silver, be just as effective, and a much safer form being pure silver.
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
I find it interesting they would use a silver nitrate (Big Pharma) when the same protocol could be used with Electrically Isolated Silver / Colloidal Silver, be just as effective, and a much safer form being pure silver.

They find it much easier to buy a certain weight of silver nitrate. They can accurately weigh out a certain number of milligrams of silver nitrate which, when dissolved in water, will yield a certain number of silver ions. I doubt that they know as much as we do about making EIS. Also interesting to note that a silver nitrate solution is what Rosemary Jacobs used.
I think that their experiment is directed to the effort to make nanoparticles of silver as part of the overall interest in nanotechnology. Our efforts here at making EIS have little to do with nanotechnology, which has nothing to do with ions. That is why we should make every effort to start calling what we are trying to make EIS, not colloidal silver. The first time I recall seeing the term, EIS, was on post number seven of this thread. Was it you, GB, who came up with the term? If not, can you remember where you first saw it?
There are all kinds of silver compounds that can be suspended in water and legitimately called colloidal silver.
As I was looking into silver nitrate, I came across a very informative video made by the company that makes the Malvern particle size analyzer, the testing standard for the nanotechnology industry.
https://www.brainshark.com/malvern/vu?pi=560497681&b=1&tx=120486&c1=22
On slide six he discusses several early colloidal silver concoctions.
On slide 50, He states, in red:
The effectiveness of silver compounds as an antiseptic is based on the ability of the biologically active silver ion (Ag+) to irreversibly damage key enzyme systems in the cell membranes of pathogens.
It's always good to try to understand the history of the subject such as colloidal silver. When we understand the history, we can see how EIS has diverged from colloidal silver.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
...I recall seeing the term, EIS, was on post number seven of this thread. Was it you, GB, who came up with the term? If not, can you remember where you first saw it?...
10-15 Years ago while I was doing searches on making CS myself I came upon some writings from somebody in Australia / New Zealand. He was using both terms in his work intermittently.
I decided that since electrolysis was the working factor involved in what I ( and you) use ( CSG-1) that Electrically Isolated Silver was a far more accurate and more appropriate term to use.

I began using the "EIS/CS" term as "Colloidal Silver" was the common used search term worldwide, and to expose those interested in the subject another phrase to search through.

I find far more people have begun using the terms: EIS and Electrically Isolated Silver accurately and distancing away from the terms: CS and Colloidal Silver probably THANKS to Big Pharma.
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
The art of making colloidal silver has been made a "sticky", meaning that it will remain at the top of the list of posts. I am very pleased about this, not just with "myself" for starting it, but for everyone who has contributed to the effort. I don't think there is another source of information about how to make colloidal silver, or, as we prefer to call it, electrically isolated silver, EIS. There are people in the colloidal silver generator market who will tell you they know all about making colloidal silver because they "wrote a book about it". So what. A book is a static thing. This thread is dynamic. Anyone can contribute to it and the group itself can accept or ignore their contribution. Sometimes we learn more from the people who are wrong about something than we do from the righteous ones. I have certainly learned more about making EIS than I knew when I started this thread. Our discussion here about how to make EIS has taken us from the very basic principles of pure water, pure silver and a method of limiting current. to exploring advanced methods Some way of testing the purity of the water should also be used. That can be done by a person buying some silver wire (I hope they get a certificate of analysis with it), some batteries, distilled water, and a multimeter. The current limiting can be done with a simple resistor. How to calculate the value of the resistor is covered in the thread. Or they can purchase a device that accomplishes all this and is simple to use for as little as $50. When we think of the money we spend to ensure that we remain in good health on vitamins, antiseptics and what have you, this has to be the bargain of your life. The stories of people who are using EIS and claim to have not had a sick day in 20 or 30 years of use are too numerous to ignore.
I hope that those of you who are new to the thread will start at the very first post. It's not necessary to read every single post thoroughly. That's why this is better than any book. Just keep scrolling until something makes sense.
 
Last edited:

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
Could this be a window of opportunity to prove the efficacy of EIS? I have this idea to offer a supply of my 50 PPM product, produced by the Ultras, to anyone wishing to try it. If they are "circling the drain," why not? It's just distilled water with silver ions. They're probably on an IV drip anyway. Just add the 50 ppm and see what happens. If it did work to save lives, big Pharma would have a hard time suppressing the fact. People would stop worrying about turning blue. Or am I dreaming?

"WASHINGTON — Patients with life-threatening conditions could soon have a new way to ask drug makers for medicines the Food and Drug Administration hasn’t yet approved, after the House on Tuesday voted to approve a version of “right-to-try” legislation.
The House passed the legislation 250-169. Now, the measure awaits a signature from President Trump, who repeatedly and passionately supported the measure and is expected to sign the legislation into law. The Senate had already passed this version of the legislation last August.
The bill’s passage is a win for conservative and libertarian groups like the Koch-brothers-backed Americans for Prosperity and the Goldwater Institute. It is also the conclusion of a surprisingly and increasingly political saga that pitted those groups against many House Democrats, some drug makers, patient groups, and medical ethicists. Key House Republicans and former FDA commissioners have all raised concerns with the legislation, as has current FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, though he remains supportive of the bill.
“Today’s vote is a beacon of hope for the patients who are desperately seeking the ‘right to try’ investigational treatments and therapies,” said Reps. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) and Michael Burgess (R-Texas), who together chair the Energy and Commerce Committee and its health subcommittee, in a joint statement.
The legislation that passed the House would allow patients with life-threatening conditions ask drug makers to share treatments that haven’t yet been granted FDA approval, though the treatments must be in active clinical trials, and must have cleared initial preliminary testing. Patients who want to use the pathway must have exhausted all their other options, and must be unable to participate in a given clinical trial. The legislation doesn’t obligate drug makers to provide the treatments, and it doesn’t prevent them from charging patients for their associated costs if they do.
The legislation is a broader, earlier version of a policy that House Republicans spent weeks working to refine, with input from supporters, drug makers, and FDA staff. That version would have limited the pathway to patients who might “die within a matter of months.” It also would have given the FDA more insight into the use of the medicines under the new pathway.
Gottlieb acknowledged last week that the bill that passed Tuesday would make it harder for him to protect patients than the more refined version, saying “we’d have to do a little bit more … in guidance and perhaps in regulation.”
A key Republican who helped draft the more refined version, Rep. Greg Walden of Oregon, blamed Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York for blocking the Senate consideration of the more refined bill. Because the upper chamber wouldn’t pass that bill, the House decided to take up the Senate’s earlier version instead, in part because of pressure from the administration, several lawmakers and other sources said.
“This is something he’s worked very hard on,” House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California said before the vote Tuesday, referencing the president. “I know of many times the president’s been making phone calls, so this is actually a very big success.”
For the most part, supporters of the movement have backed both bills. They say the legislation is necessary to help patients who are running out of time sidestep the overly cumbersome FDA rules and the agency’s slow-moving timelines.
“The Administration believes that treatment decisions for those facing terminal illnesses are best made by the patients with the support and guidance of their treating physicians,” the White House said in its statement of support Monday.
Opponents, meanwhile, say the legislation will allow “snake oil salesmen” to take advantage of desperate patients and could ultimately weaken or undermine the FDA’s authority to regulate drugs. They point out, too, that the FDA already has a system in place for granting terminally ill patients access to experimental therapies, often within a tight timeframe. Though opponents said the more refined version of the legislation was an improvement, they said it still failed to address many of their concerns.
“The legislation would roll back essential patient safeguards and could result in patients being harmed by unproven, and potentially unsafe, therapies,” a coalition of patient groups, including the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Friends of Cancer Research, and the National Organization for Rare Disorders, wrote in a letter to lawmakers.. “Furthermore, the legislation would significantly restrict FDA’s ability to stop access to an experimental therapy and would remove expert consulting requirements on dosing and other important safety measures currently provided by FDA.”

PhRMA, the main trade group for drug makers, stayed neutral in its statement after the vote, as it has on previous versions of the federal legislation.
“We continue to believe that any legislation involving access to medicines that have not yet been approved must benefit and protect patients and not disrupt the future of clinical trials, U.S. Food and Drug Administration oversight and the research and approval of new medicines,” a spokesman said in a statement. "
About the Author
Erin Mershon
Senior Washington Correspondent
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
Senior Washington Correspondent[/QUOTE]
GettyImages-963724506-1600x900.jpg

WASHINGTON — With President Trump’s signature, a measure offering terminally ill patients expanded access to unapproved treatments became the law of the land on Wednesday, ending a protracted legislative debate over whether it would help eliminate bureaucratic hurdles or simply offer the desperate a sense of false hope.
Surrounded by patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families, Trump used the 30-minute signing ceremony to make lofty promises about how “tremendous” the new law would be. He promised it would help scores of people get faster “access to experimental treatments that could improve or even cure their conditions.”
“We will be saving — I don’t even want to say thousands because I think it’s going to be much more — thousands and thousands, hundreds of thousands, we’re going to be saving tremendous numbers of lives,” Trump said. “There were no options, and now you have hope.”
He reveled in the accomplishment, a rare delivery of one of the many health care promises he made on the campaign trail. He also spoke off the cuff about how much he loved the bill’s name, “right to try,” and gave repeated hugs to 9-year-old Jordan McLinn, an Indiana native with muscular dystrophy who has been an advocate of the law for years.
More than 100 others, including Vice President Mike Pence, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, and federal and state lawmakers who supported the bill, like Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) and Reps. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) and Brian Fitpatrick (R-Pa.), joined Trump a the basement auditorium in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building for the ceremony.
Opponents of the law say Trump’s promises to help thousands or even hundreds of thousands are grossly unrealistic. It isn’t clear that any patients have successfully utilized the dozens of state laws that attempt to give patients a similar pathway for expanded treatments.
The pomp and celebration of Wednesday’s signing ceremony — with its half-dozen standing ovations for Trump, Pence, and the families present — stands in contrast to the tumultuous, years-long journey the bill took to get to the White House. The legislation’s earliest champion, Johnson, has been pushing for its passage since his 2016 Senate campaign. He ultimately achieved his priority by threatening to derail a separate bipartisan law that renewed expiring funding for thousands of jobs at FDA.
The legislation languished until January, when Trump called for its passage in his State of the Union address. He and Pence, a longtime supporter of the movement, have been persistent advocates for quick action. Though key House Republicans and Gottlieb repeatedly and even recently expressed concerns with that legislation and worked to release an updated draft, the House eventually passed the Johnson bill when it became clear the new version would not make it through the Senate quickly. Cut Supporters say the new law gives dying patients an important reprieve from overly cumbersome FDA rules, and from what they call a slow-moving bureaucracy that can delay access to time-sensitive treatments. Correct Opponents have cautioned that the legislation will undermine FDA’s authority and open vulnerable, desperate patients up to “snake oil salesmen.” They point out, too, that the FDA already has a process in place for approving such requests and grants some 99 percent of them, often within a short time frame.
It is the FDA that will have to take the next steps to implement the legislation — and Trump on Wednesday didn’t miss the chance to press Gottlieb to move quickly.
“Scott, can you start immediately? We don’t want to start tomorrow,” he said to the FDA commissioner. “What time is it now? How about in 15 minutes?”
In a statement, Gottlieb said the agency stands ready to implement the new law “in a way that seeks to protect [patients’] autonomy, their safety, and the safety of others following in their paths.”
“We recognize the important balance between making sure patients have the assurances Congress intends, while enabling timely access to promising treatments in these devastating circumstances. And we’ll implement this new law consistent with these longstanding values,” he said.
About the Author

Erin Mershon
Senior Washington Correspondent
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
GettyImages-909744130-1600x900.jpg

It looks as though the FDA bureaucrats are not going to go down without a fight. Get ready for a massive propaganda campaign against alternative medicine of all kinds, including EIS.
WASHINGTON — Sen. Ron Johnson, the author of the federal “right-to-try” law signed by President Trump this week, wants to make one thing clear: His new law is meant to weaken the Food and Drug Administration.
“This law intends to diminish the FDA’s power over people’s lives, not increase it,” he wrote in a letter to Commissioner Scott Gottlieb Thursday.
The Wisconsin Republican wrote to Gottlieb to request a meeting about the implementation of the new law, which sets up a new pathway for patients with life-threatening illnesses to request access to experimental therapies the FDA has not approved.
Johnson’s comments give new credence to a longstanding criticism of the law from medical ethicists and several former FDA commissioners, who suggested that a separate pathway with less FDA oversight would undermine the agency’s ability to oversee product safety and efficacy. During the legislative process, supporters often said the legislation was about giving dying patients new hope, not about weakening any agency.
There were hints of that intent, however. The law’s main advocate was the libertarian think tank the Goldwater Institute, and Americans for Prosperity, a group backed by the conservative Koch brothers, also offered advertising and advocacy support.
In his letter, Johnson took particular issue with several comments Gottlieb made to STAT earlier this month, in which the commissioner suggested that the law would require further regulation and guidance to protect patients.
This law “is designed to work within existing FDA regulations, definitions and approval processes. It is not meant to grant FDA more power or enable the FDA to write new guidance, rules, or regulations that would limit the ability of an individual facing a life-threatening disease from accessing treatments,” Johnson wrote.
It is clear Gottlieb anticipated the FDA would have to take some action to implement the law, though it isn’t clear if the implementation process he referenced in a statement after the signing ceremony would require “guidance, rules, or regulation,” as Johnson described.
“At the FDA, we stand ready to implement this legislation in a way that achieves Congress’ intent to promote access and protect patients,” he said.
Even Trump, at the signing ceremony for the bill this week, suggested that Gottlieb should get to work implementing the law.
“Scott, can you start immediately? We don’t want to start tomorrow,” he said to the FDA commissioner. “What time is it now? How about in 15 minutes?” Okay good night
Erin Mershon
Senior Washington Correspondent
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
Bethea-Whats-Scary-About-Shutting-Down-the-CDC.jpg

This is why having a stock of 50 p.m. EIS is a very good idea.
This past Thursday, Dr. Tom Frieden, the recently departed director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, tweeted about the last shutdown of the United States government, which took place during Barack Obama’s second term. “The 2013 government shutdown was like a scene from a science fiction movie—empty labs and offices at CDC,” he wrote. “Shutdowns are not safe.” The C.D.C. serves as the country’s national reference laboratory, defining the extent and nature of disease outbreaks. During that shutdown, C.D.C. employees who tracked food-borne illness had to be brought back from furlough to belatedly contain a nationwide salmonella outbreak, which left seventy-six people hospitalized in eighteen states.
Since 2010, seasonal flu outbreaks alone have killed between twelve thousand and fifty-six thousand Americans annually, and the current flu outbreak is widely acknowledged as one of the worst in years. Reportedly, some two-thirds of the national public-health institute’s employees—approximately eight thousand people—will stay home until the government reopens. Last night, as the third day of the current government shutdown loomed, I spoke to a furloughed employee at the C.D.C, in Atlanta, who is familiar with the public-health institute’s influenza-related activities. This employee, who requested anonymity, explained what the C.D.C. can and can’t do during a shutdown, and what’s frightening about even a brief stoppage in its work. This account has been edited and condensed.
“During a bad influenza season, tens of thousands of Americans die from influenza, hundreds of thousands are hospitalized, and millions become ill. We’re having one of the worst flu seasons in recent years. And we’re right in the middle of it. It’s an H3N2 virus year, which tends to hit older people and younger children really hard. We tend to have a higher number of deaths and hospitalizations in H3N2 years. And we can’t communicate to clinicians, health departments, and the public in the way that we would like because of the shutdown. We can’t provide accurate information and the tools they need to prevent deaths from flu. When most of our workforce is sent home, we can’t do our jobs effectively. That’s scary.
“The day-to-day operations, in large part, ground to a halt during a shutdown. Particularly in the flu division. We have multiple surveillance systems that are gathering information from different sources. We have outpatient clinics reporting the proportion of influenza-like illness. We have state public-health labs reporting the kinds of flu that they’re tracking. Clinicians around the country use that information to know if flu is circulating locally. Some of those surveillance people were kept on during the last shutdown. But I think they stopped reporting weekly information.
“The last shutdown, it was in October, which wasn’t the height of flu season. But they were gearing up for people to get their flu vaccines. We’re farther in this time. The flu division, if the government were open, would be doing a lot of communications activities—talking to people who are at high risk for getting seriously ill from flu about going to their doctor promptly, outreach to clinicians to make sure they’re following guidelines about prescribing influenza antiviral drugs, and other public-health-outreach campaigns. These grind to a halt during a shutdown.
“The surveillance systems kind of keep going in a limited way, but there certainly isn’t the same amount of staff that usually work on them. And the information probably won’t be reported publicly this Friday, as it usually is.
“After the last shutdown, at a C.D.C. event, some employees did skits about what C.D.C. people did during the shutdown: bowling in the cubicles, things like that. It was pretty depressing.
“The big influenza labs at the C.D.C. aren’t just looking at the giant epidemic of seasonal flu. They’re also looking for novel influenza viruses, because there’s always a pandemic threat from an influenza virus out there that hasn’t yet been studied. Often these are zoonotic viruses, like avian flu or a swine flu, that can be transferred from animals to humans, who have no population immunity to it. Also, they look for unusual mutations or activity in certain states. Having less lab capacity may impact those critical activities. Pandemic preparedness and monitoring will still happen during a shutdown, but our capacity is very limited. That’s scary.“The everyday work the C.D.C. does saves lives, and when those activities are limited, we aren’t able to do that work. And I think having the government shut down—particularly during a bad flu season, in a setting of outbreaks—could very well cost American lives.
“If there’s any really unusual activity, the C.D.C. can mobilize people to come back. There’s a fair number of people—like everyone who’s in the U.S. Public Health Service—that are exempt from government shutdowns. So a fair number of people will be there this week. But, if anything major happened, they wouldn’t have the administrative support that they need to get people out in the field quickly, to do the general monitoring of things. Most of the lab people are furloughed, so the labs are being shut down and the normal testing we do for many different diseases—like, if the states get an unusual result or need further testing—we are the reference lab and that activity won’t happen. So things will be delayed or missed that are potentially really important.
“People are frustrated and nervous at the C.D.C. About the shutdown, of course. But also by the possibility of budget cuts and not even having a budget yet. There’s a clear feeling about blame, but I don’t want to say specifically. You can probably guess.
“It went on for a long time last time. The fact is, none of us know how long it will last this time. The uncertainty with the budget has been challenging, in general. But not knowing how long this will last is hard, too. It makes it very hard to plan. If the furlough goes on for a while, basic scientific evidence about what’s actually going on from a public-health point of view may not get out to Americans in a timely manner.”
Charles Bethea is a contributing writer for newyorker.com
 
Last edited:

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
ADC_BIT1.jpg

For those of you slightly confused, but otherwise happy, CSG ultra users, help is on its way. The ultra is actually two generators in one. The "right hand" mode enables a program that emulates the best of the automatic generators on the market, such as the "silverpuppy". The only difference being the capacity, it is a half gallon, not a pint. It yields a solid 10 to 15 ppm 90% ionic, clear and stable in five hours. This mode is the result of the switch at the back of the unit being pushed to the right (facing the unit).
Pushing the switch to the left (facing the unit), lets the ultra off its leash, so to speak. It is then able to make a 98% ionic colloidal silver (EIS) to a strength of 50 PPM, an ionic strength never before achieved. After the first-day PPM strength will be shown on the LCD and the users can stop the unit at any PPM strength they wish, up to 50 ppm, at which point the unit will stop automatically.
In actual use, people become confused about the right and left modes. You can't really see the switch when looking at the front of the unit. The switch is on the rear panel. If you read the instructions and you want the 50 ppm mode (left mode) and turn the unit around to look at the switch, you have created a mirror image. Left becomes right, right becomes left. I get confused, and I designed the thing. I get more confused than most people because when I picture the ultra, I have a picture in my mind of the components side of the circuit board. which is underneath, another mirror image.
Alvine has come up with a transparent sticker that she has printed out that will be on all the units from now on. Everyone who has an ultra will be receiving one of these stickers to attach to their units. Thank you for your patience.
 
Last edited:

Weatherman

In GIM since 2006
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
2,688
Likes
2,860
That is an improvement, but I would like to see a step beyond left or right. Instead of left or right labels, call one side 10 PPM and call the other side 50 PPM. Then newbies to EIS can easily select the 10 PPM side if they want only 10 PPM in a few hours. More experienced users would always keep the switch set to 50 PPM. Then they can stop the process after a day and get better quality 15 PPM EIS, or let the process continue toward the 50 PPM goal. The Ultra I bought for my relatives (post #291) worked great, even though they were absolutely newbie beginners with EIS. One of the joys of the Ultra is "set it and forget it" ultra (pardon the pun) simple operation that anyone can do without problems.

A note I think is worth sharing is that when I left my relatives to continue on my trip, I took a small jar of 15 PPM with me, just in case. A few days later, I tripped on a frosty sidewalk and smashed my face, arms, and hands so badly that there were patches of blood everywhere. I looked a lot like I imagine the child in #291 must have looked. After cleaning the wounds, my first aid was to apply my "just in case" EIS to every injured surface and I had no subsequent infections. I cannot be sure that my EIS prevented any skin problems, but I am certain that it did not hurt to apply EIS. I am grateful that I had it with me to use.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Uh, I guess if the sticker looks like it does in the photograph one COULD take a Sharpie and write "50" above the "LEFT" and "10" above the "RIGHT". It appears that would solve this crisis. Jus' Sayin'

Enjoy your ULTRA(s). I know I do. I just processed a half gal. 25ppm. :winks2:
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
IMG_37.jpg

Improved Sticker Above
Thank both of you for suggesting the printing of 50 ppm and 10 ppm with directional arrows on the stickers. I will now start a gentle but steady campaign for the complete elimination of the mention of right and left mode's in the instructions. This will probably take two more years to accomplish, but hey, it gives me something to look forward too. Responsibilities for product design here at Atlasnova are sharply defined.
When you think about it, now that we have a sticker indicating that there's a switch there at the back that can be moved in one direction or the other, there's really no need to mention left or right. It's either 10 ppm or 50 ppm.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Another crisis narrowly averted. 'WHEW"
 
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
2
Likes
2
View attachment 106001
Improved Sticker Above
Thank both of you for suggesting the printing of 50 ppm and 10 ppm with directional arrows on the stickers. I will now start a gentle but steady campaign for the complete elimination of the mention of right and left mode's in the instructions. This will probably take two more years to accomplish, but hey, it gives me something to look forward too. Responsibilities for product design here at Atlasnova are sharply defined.
When you think about it, now that we have a sticker indicating that there's a switch there at the back that can be moved in one direction or the other, there's really no need to mention left or right. It's either 10 ppm or 50 ppm.
Is there any disadvantage to putting a tablespoon of CS from a previous batch to speed up the time required to make a batch
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Is there any disadvantage to putting a tablespoon of CS from a previous batch to speed up the time required to make a batch
If you own an ULTRA the machine will test the distilled water (if adulterated) the reading will be to high and the machine's process will not begin. You've just wasted your distilled water or can use it with a C.S. generator that does not make its own readings for water purity.

You can make a perfectly effective half gallon of 10pp Colloidal Silver in approx 10 hours, Less than a day.
Just because you set the Ultra on 50ppm does not mean you have to wait until it has reached 50ppm.
I have made a few half gallons at 25ppm with the Ultra set at 50ppm.
I only hold out a half gallon of 50ppm once in awhile and those are usually close to Flu Season.
 
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
2
Likes
2
If you own an ULTRA the machine will test the distilled water (if adulterated) the reading will be to high and the machine's process will not begin. You've just wasted your distilled water or can use it with a C.S. generator that does not make its own readings for water purity.

You can make a perfectly effective half gallon of 10pp Colloidal Silver in approx 10 hours, Less than a day.
Just because you set the Ultra on 50ppm does not mean you have to wait until it has reached 50ppm.
I have made a few half gallons at 25ppm with the Ultra set at 50ppm.
I only hold out a half gallon of 50ppm once in awhile and those are usually close to Flu Season.

My question was whether starting with say a tablespoon in general would cause less ionic percent with a classical generator. Is there an advantage to starting with pure distilled water and a slower startup vs adding a bit from a previous batch. Not with the ultra but say the CSG1. Do you end up getting a worse batch is my question.
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
My question was whether starting with say a tablespoon in general would cause less ionic percent with a classical generator. Is there an advantage to starting with pure distilled water and a slower startup vs adding a bit from a previous batch. Not with the ultra but say the CSG1. Do you end up getting a worse batch is my question.
"My question was whether starting with say a tablespoon in general would cause less ionic percent with a classical generator."
Yes. Agglomeration is when particles stick together and form groups which are loosely attached. The degree to which the final result would be degraded would depend on "a tablespoon of what?" The higher percentage of particulate would provide more seeds for starting the agglomeration process, even seeding with 50 ppm from the ultra, which is 98% ionic, would degrade the process to some extent.
"Is there an advantage to starting with pure distilled water and a slower startup vs adding a bit from a previous batch. Not with the ultra but say the CSG1. Do you end up getting a worse batch is my question."
The CSG1s are more dependent on the quality of the distilled water than the ultra. With that said, it is still possible, with time and a bit of care and attention, to generate 20+ PPM ionic colloidal silver with these units. The solution should always be clear, indicating the absence of large particles.
 
Last edited:

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Not trying to be insulting I would suggest you read this entire thread from its beginning. A lot has been addressed and gone over through these pages. I think this thread is an excellent guide on how to introduce yourself to the world of Electrically Isolated Silver aka Colloidal Silver.

My first generator was the CSG-1. I've done it both ways. It depends on what you want. IMO.
Add previously made EIS/CS and you start making more particles quicker and less ions.
I preferred and still do the distilled water ONLY as I feel / felt that process allowed earlier ionic production as the electrolysis "connected" and got stronger.
Remember: The distilled water begins as an insulator that is eventually compromised to making Electrically Isolated Silver / Colloidal Silver.
So, Do you want MORE Buckshot (Particals) or MORE Birdshot (Ions) ? They both have their advantages.
FYI - "Birdshot" provides more surface mass in EIS.

With the CSG-1 your final results will give you varying percentages of both, as it depends on how long you let the process go on. With a CSG-1 or any other BRAND of Colloidal Silver Generator:
The clearer = more Ionic. The more "Color" (Yellows - Gray) = more Colloidal Silver.

DYODD, We are our own researchers ( WAOOR).

The Ultra makes very high quality IONIC EIS. And with the ULTRA the choice is already made for you.

Please Read Up. I think you'll find this thread very interesting and most here are happy to attempt to answer any questions that may arise.
REMEMBER: Nobody here is an expert but there is alot of experience here. And if we don't know and answer we may know where you should look for it.
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
https://www.businessinsider.com/maj...018-08-13+ARP&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Pew

The Largest pharmaceutical companies are giving up on funding research to combat emerging antibiotic-resistant superbugs. The following article implies that the reason for this is the lack of profit potential for a drug that will cure disease versus the drug to treat a "chronic" condition.
A likely conclusion in a world where all that matters is the money.
Could the real reason be the realization that the advent of the "superbug" is inevitable and we will always be playing catch-up? As long as we insist on pouring tons of antibiotics into humans and animals, the bugs will always outsmart us.
Learn how to make the best colloidal (electrically isolated) silver you can.
 

Weatherman

In GIM since 2006
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
2,688
Likes
2,860

G-khan

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
1,097
Likes
1,332
Here is how I make my SC
Items
I gallon pickle jar.
The clear disk you get from a pack of dvd or cd disks - I used a hot old butter knife to burn slits in it. Attached wires as shown in pics.
I took two Silver Maples .9999 sanded off the finish to remove protective chemicals. Then I had them cold rolled in a press. It gives me a lot of silver contact area to decrease the time it takes to make the SC. It takes about 8 hrs to make a gallon and tests out, if my memory is correct at 13 to 15 ppm.. I haven't tested it since when I first got it (I don't have a tester of my own)..

My point of posting to this thread is to show the large silver surface of using maples.. May give you some helpful tips/ideas to come up what will work for you.. Love my setup!

God Bless


I have the slots I burnt in the disk at 1 3/4" apart

20180813_133222.jpg
20180813_133445.jpg
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Whatever gets you to the party Bro. If you are good with it I'm good with it. Enjoy the journey.
Since I went DIY I use EIS/CS in about everything I do. From brushing my teeth to cleaning the counter tops where food lays, to washing clothes with a shot glass full in the tub water and detergent.

YMMV,
DYODD,
WAOOR,
 

abeland1

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
294
Here is how I make my SC
Items
I gallon pickle jar.
The clear disk you get from a pack of dvd or cd disks - I used a hot old butter knife to burn slits in it. Attached wires as shown in pics.
I took two Silver Maples .9999 sanded off the finish to remove protective chemicals. Then I had them cold rolled in a press. It gives me a lot of silver contact area to decrease the time it takes to make the SC. It takes about 8 hrs to make a gallon and tests out, if my memory is correct at 13 to 15 ppm.. I haven't tested it since when I first got it (I don't have a tester of my own)..

My point of posting to this thread is to show the large silver surface of using maples.. May give you some helpful tips/ideas to come up what will work for you.. Love my setup!

God Bless


I have the slots I burnt in the disk at 1 3/4" apart

View attachment 108492 View attachment 108493
Very ingenious method of overcoming the current limit caused by the Nernst diffusion area. Keeping the current low versus the surface area has been a theme of the thread from the very start. I show the results of my efforts using Maple leaves for an anode on post 134:
012rr.JPG

They became impossibly corroded very quickly due to the all the fine indentations on the coins. Your rolling mill would have taken care of that problem.
Does your final result stay crystal-clear? You need to buy one of the devices mentioned by weatherman, not just to measure the PPM but to check your water before you use it. If you have a laser pointer, you may find it interesting to shine it through your solution. See if the brightness varies at different points of your anode, indicating uneven current densities. One other thing, the further apart you can place your electrodes, the better your results will be. This Will allows a better chance of an ion entering the solution before arriving at the cathode.
Nice work!
 

utsteve

New Member
Seeker
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
15
Likes
25
Wow - Lots of information on this thread.
After spending time reading this entire thread I have a question.

I saw some mention of lyme disease. Does anyone have any information on how well CS does on killing Lyme and related co-infections?

TIA
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
7,252
Likes
7,685
Wow - Lots of information on this thread.
After spending time reading this entire thread I have a question.

I saw some mention of lyme disease. Does anyone have any information on how well CS does on killing Lyme and related co-infections?

TIA
You may want to check out the "Colloidal Silver / Electrically Isolated Silver Kills Over 650 Different Microbes" thread - POST #8.

https://goldismoney2.com/threads/co...lver-kills-over-650-different-microbes.57176/
and

Check Steve Barwick's site. I know for awhile he was watching these threads as some of our topics came up later over there. The guy gets alot of testimonials for his machine and how people use them.
I found this one for ya :
https://thesilveredge.com/colloidal-silver-and-lyme-disease/

DYODD,
WAOOR,
 
Last edited:

Weatherman

In GIM since 2006
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
2,688
Likes
2,860