Hobo, in my opinion (based on all the posts I have read from
Arrowwind09) I do not believe he/she was "challenging" you with the intent of confronting you at all. Its just a way to state ones opinion. He was engaging you.
I feel no threats in that response.
Hobo, you are a valued person here and your posts are extremely informative and helpful. Please continue sharing your opinion.
My 2 cents.
Hobo, in my opinion (based on all the posts I have read from
Arrowwind09) I do not believe he/she was "challenging" you with the intent of confronting you at all. Its just a way to state ones opinion. He was engaging you.
I feel no threats in that response.
Hobo, you are a valued person here and your posts are extremely informative and helpful. Please continue sharing your opinion.
My 2 cents.
Asgardsurfer, I agree with you on both counts, I've been with the forum for a little over a year now and would also like to chime in.
Hobo, first and foremost, I'd like to express my appreciation that you're sharing your story and success with all of us here, there's many that will benefit from your personal experiences and advice.
I also didn't take Arrowwind's reply as showing you any disrespect or wanting to fight you in any way. When you add her words "I feel" the need to challenge, it really lessens any idea that she's doing anything offensive.
I don't claim to speak for anyone, just adding my perspective.
__________________ "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanual Kant~
Concerning the "higher doses" of MMS, It can become overpowering to the bodies mucosa linings if not managed correctly. And as far as some people taking very large doses of MMS and doing fine with it, I'd like to hear from anyone with an illness, who has taken large doses "several times a day" for a "long time" without developing problems from doing so. We are dealing with tissue, not cast iron pipes, and one should not be so foolish to assume that MMS can be taken in excessive doses without suffering mocosal lining disruptions or loss.
No one will suffer any difficulty if they take it according to instruction. If they are ramping up to high dosages and having problems it is because they should not be doing that and it is as simple as that. It only takes one and only one dose thats too high to know one went too high.
A break for a day or two and then resume at a dose that is appropriate is what is called for. So since one is advised not use high dosgaes if they are not tolerated well, repeatedly, by Jim Humble, one should not take excessive doses and therefor will not have problems with their intestinal mucosa or diarrhea. Unrelenting diarrhea for weeks may or may not cause mucosal damage, but such administrations of mms that would cause this is absolutely not advised. If the protocol is done correctly one should never have more than a few hours of diarrhea as the dose would be cut back immediately. I think a few hours of diarrhea will not cause mucosal damage.
Of course some people will never be able to take 6 drops, or 4 drops or 3 drops as the detox is too strong for them. But lets remember that Jim Humble, and certainly others by now, have been taking 6 drops a day for a few years, and I think with Jim it is at leat 4 years, maybe more. Not only that, he has instilled it in his veins with no detrimental effect.
I do think it is fair that there could be a risk for mucosal damage if MMS is administered incorrectly....but how anyone could possibly take that much for the length of time it would take to do that is beyond me.
Hobo, I do not mean to come off as attacking and I did say "challenge the concept" you were presenting, but I do feel that the concept put forth is in error and hence I chose the word challenge to dissect the concept.
I do appreciate that you post here and are forthright with your story of recovery. Please lets not let this get in the way of the work we are all trying to do.
__________________ "The nurse should be cheerful, orderly, punctual, patient, full of faith, - receptive to Truth and Love" Mary Baker Eddy
Visit www.HealthSalon.org
I am aware that many ozone practitioner find MMS of equal or superior value to ozone therapy in many cases.
Ozone can be dangerous if used incorrectly and I would assume that early exploration into its use resulted in some negative results. Very specific gamma dosages need to be applied for specific time periods. Yet it is reported that vaginal applications of ozone at about a 35 to 40 gamma can go on for several hours with no damage to the mucosa. There have been no reports of mucosal damage with gas instillations to the rectum when done per appropriate protocol. In general ozone promotes healing and stimulates positive immune response. Ozone is even applied directly to open wounds as in the case of open MRSA wounds and some doctors have used ozonated water solutions to flush abdominal cavities during surgery.
I see no reason to compare MMS to Ozone therapy aside from their effectiveness. They follow very different chemical pathways. Ozone therapy has documented effects from the pathways it follows. One should not assume you will get the same effects from MMS.
Any amount of 03 that may (or may not) come about through the chemical pathway of MMS would be negligible. It is theorized that even the human body produces some 03 in its metabolic pathways. This ozone has not been detected but is assumed to occur as it is the only possible result in some metabolic processes.
If you use too much ozone there can be damage and it is a known fact that too high dosages of ozone can be immunosuppressive. That is why so much work has been done to develop safe protocols and if people would pay attention to them they would not run into problems. If you eat too much steak for too long it will kill you. If you take too much antibiotic for too long it will kill you too. So can some vitamins and minerals if taken at to large a dosage for too long.
Why dwell on theorized mucosal damage from an inappropriate dosage of MMS that would have to be so significant that the user would have given up long before it could even happen from unmitiaged nausea, dizziness and diarrhea.
It has long been stated that such symptoms require a break from doage until you feel better then resume at a lower dose.
The detox reaction probably occurs frequently in some people because not from over dose but from not sufficiently killing the pathogen at a steady pace. Between dosages the pathogen builds up again and sets the stage for another herx reaction. The new protocol is suppose to reduce herx reaction.
I have been an ozone practitioner for about 5 years now. I have spent countless hours on Paul's site and I am certified by class and exam by Dr Shallenburger in Ozone Therapy.
I just don't get what you are driving at and no sufficient evidience has been provided to demonstrate that musosal damage is a significant concern when mms protocols are done properly.
The main reason that mms protocols have been changed to lower dosages are as follows per Jim Humbles website:
"Fundamental One:
Repeated small doses are more effective than large morning and evening doses. It has been demonstrated more than 1000 times that small doses administered often, up to once each hour, are more effective than large doses administered once or twice a day.
We now know that the chlorine dioxide chemical generated by MMS does not remain in the body more than one or two hours at most. The size of the dose does not seem to make a great deal of difference to the amount of time that MMS remains active in the body. That basically is because it doesn't matter if it is a large amount or small amount it still deteriorates into mostly just table salt in an hour or two.
So in reading the various methods of using MMS elsewhere on this web site, keep in mind - it is going to be much more effective to take MMS either each hour, or each two hours, and with smaller doses that will be equal to - or maybe larger than - one large dose.
If you are in the habit of taking larger MMS doses only in the morning and evening as was suggested in the past, MMS will still cleanse the body of microbes and pathogens. However, new research clearly reveals that a smaller-but-continuous circulation of ClO2 prevents regrouping and reproduction of pathogens, especially in situations where you are fighting a specific health issue - whether a cold or herpes or hepatitis. "
Note: Jim does not say not to do the larger doses but explains why smaller more frequent dosages may be more effective. It is clear science if you understand the life cycle of microbes and has been clearly evident in science that the medicine needs to cover the life cycle of the pathogen, and hence this is why many antibiotics are given every 4 hours, or 6 hours, or 8 hours, depending on how long they stay in the system. Since mms is in the system only 1 to 2 hours frequent repitiiton is indicated for best effect.
Over the course of several years, Jim Humble figured out that what made stabilized oxygen so effective in some malaria cases, was not the oxygen at all, but the trace amounts of chlorine dioxide. Further research led him to come up with a way to produce hundreds, if not thousands more units of chlorine dioxide than what is found in stabilized oxygen. This is through using a higher concentrate of sodium chlorite (28% � 22.4% effective sodium chlorite vs. 3% for stabilized oxygen), in conjunction with the activator. The proof of the efficacy of this simple protocol was in successfully helping over 75,000 people in several African nations � including Uganda and Malawi � rid themselves, primarily of malaria, but also hepatitis, cancer, and AIDS. I recently met a man in Sedona who contracted malaria on a recent trip to Africa. And what do you think helped him get over it quickly? You guessed it; MMS.
Where exactly is the mention of 03 in the above paragraph you posted? Perhaps it is in so secret code word or scientific term I don't know? Please point it out specifically to me as I think we may be having terms or language issue.
So far I do see an oxidation process but I do not see ozone, 03 involved.
Oxidation is merely the giving up of an electron from one compound to another, It does not specifically have anything to do with ozone. Many things oxidze and 03 is nowhere to be seen.
this graphic web page from Jims site demonstrates the difference between ozone (03) and chlorine dioxide. Both are oxidizers but chlorine dioxide does not involve any reaction where ozone is used or created or anything.
Linear Mode
