|
17 May 16 - 12:54 PM (#3790781) Subject: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Mrrzy O3 is so unstable that it breaks down instantly into, apparently, oxygen in a way that just destroys viruses and bacteria... can it be targeted to the bad ones is apparently, yes. See here for the NIH review of the idea and here for a general search on it, and also you can listen here to a podcast about it. |
|
17 May 16 - 12:56 PM (#3790782) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Mrrzy Oops "a href="https://www.bulletproofexec.com/dr-robert-rowen-treating-ebola-ozone-therapy-168>"here to a podcast about it. |
|
17 May 16 - 01:20 PM (#3790787) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Noreen Here's your link, Mrr: Dr. Robert Rowen: Treating Ebola & Ozone Therapy |
|
17 May 16 - 01:51 PM (#3790792) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Jack Campin It's a crank idea that gets dredged up by hucksters any time there's a new epidemic of anything. http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/oxygen.html |
|
18 May 16 - 11:20 AM (#3790939) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Mrrzy It's *not* a crank idea according to the NIH link, above. I'm not talking about cancer, mind you. |
|
18 May 16 - 10:04 PM (#3790998) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Rapparee Even so, the damage ozone can do to tissues makes it something to approach with caution. I'm not saying NO! but saying that it needs more study and will probably need to have very well trained people administering it. I could find no articles on its usefulness regarding viral infections (which only means I couldn't find any). |
|
19 May 16 - 07:22 AM (#3791040) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Jack Campin The first cited link is not an "NIH review". It's a flaky paper in a flaky journal with flaky references, most of them from the distant past and never replicated. |
|
19 May 16 - 09:48 AM (#3791062) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Mrrzy It's a paper in an NIH journal cited multiple times, sorry you don't agree with it. Meanwhile, if O3 can destroy viruses, is it the pharmaceutical industry who calls its researchers flakes? |
|
19 May 16 - 10:03 AM (#3791066) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Jack Campin It is archived by NIH but not published by them; they have nothing to do with assuring the quality of the articles in it. Journal of Natural Science, Biology and Medicine (J Nat Sc Biol Med) http://www.jnsbm.org [ISSN: Print -0976-9668, Online - 2229-7707] – An official publication of Phcog.Net –considers the following types of original contribution for peer review and publication: Research articles, Review articles, Letters to editor, Brief communications, Case reports, Book reviews, Technological reports, and Opinion articles. It is published Semiannual and serves the need of scientific and non-scientific personals involved/interested in Natural Science (Physics, Chemistry, Electronics, Mathematics, Astronomy, Oceanography, Engineering), Social Science, Economics, Biology and Medicine. Each issue covers topics, which are of broad readership interest to personals from general public, industry, clinicians, academia, and government. J Nat Sc Biol Med. is a must read Journal for every one with curiosity in science. There are Indian call centres with better standards of literacy. |
|
19 May 16 - 11:49 AM (#3791089) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Steve Shaw Any chance of our agreeing that the plural of virus is viruses? |
|
19 May 16 - 12:11 PM (#3791099) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Donuel Mrrzy, my wife has a key role in the progress of this research. Its abundant generation was made possible by my hero Nikola Tesla. Today we use potentially hazardous ultra violet light more for killing environmental virus than internal medicine. Gas is fine by me. Hydrogen peroxide (one less O and H) has many therapeutic uses also. Never at full strength but at 2% dilution. |
|
19 May 16 - 12:39 PM (#3791107) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Steve Shaw Do you mean one less O and an added H? |
|
19 May 16 - 12:39 PM (#3791108) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Steve Shaw Dammit, one less O and TWO added Hs? |
|
19 May 16 - 12:45 PM (#3791110) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Donuel peroxide has an H on each end and 2 O's in the middle. Ozone has one H and 3 O's. Compared to Cyanide I haven't a clue. |
|
19 May 16 - 12:48 PM (#3791111) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Steve Shaw Ozone hasn't got any Hs, Donuel. |
|
19 May 16 - 12:50 PM (#3791113) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Donuel Speaking of Ebola did you know the virus can hide in the testacies teeth and other places for six months or more? Ozone is hard on our lung lining. Delivery is obviously the key to therapy. |
|
19 May 16 - 12:53 PM (#3791115) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Donuel If John from Kansas were here he could have answered this threads title "Live and Learn, die and forget it all" My mom. |
|
19 May 16 - 02:43 PM (#3791140) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Steve Shaw I've always tried to hide from Mrs Steve the fact that my testicles have teeth... |
|
19 May 16 - 04:00 PM (#3791162) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Donuel Off the top of my head, ozone in our atmosphere can take on H or even Fluorine and release them in the presence of sunlight. Now I gotta ask the goo. |
|
19 May 16 - 04:56 PM (#3791174) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Dorothy Parshall I, very briefly, had a doctor who had an ozonator in his reception area the second time I visited. I said this was not good and was told it was very healthy. I was sick within minutes and waited for my appointment outside in the rain, having told the receptionist where I was going. A considerable time later, I went back in; I had waited quite long enough. "Oh!", exclaimed the receptionist, "We didn't know where you were!" The "nurse" did not know why I was there - with my chart in her hand. I blew a gasket, demanded the return of a study I had lent the doctor in hopes it would help. They refused but mailed it to me later. Next I heard, he was in jail for sexually assaulting female patients. Could all have been caused by the ozone???? However, I would not discount the fact that, used with appropriate care, it could be useful. Other poisons are. |
|
19 May 16 - 06:54 PM (#3791189) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Jack Campin Ozone is deadly for a lot of people with asthma or COPD. It's a common urban pollutant (produced from car fumes). Interesting study here: http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060023092 (i.e. yet another way America has been deliberately turned into a death camp for black people, with, as usual, the Koch brothers as its chief gauleiters). EPA says reducing ozone pollution to between 65 and 70 ppb would prevent between 750 and 4,300 premature deaths, between 1,400 and 4,300 asthma-related emergency room visits, and between 320,000 and 960,000 asthma attacks in children yearly by 2025. |
|
19 May 16 - 08:21 PM (#3791198) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Donuel Here is how it works in a nutshell. Corporations, especially drug companies will sell anything for a buck. Thanks to regulations drug companies have to submit their product and test trial findings. The only time NIH will do human or other animal trials is when private companies formally refuse to do so. An example of a trial only the government can do is an Ebola vaccine. There are times when a drug undergoes government testing and trials when a prior agreement exists guaranteeing the Government shares a percentage of future sales. When the NIH develops a medicine it is made available via a licensing agreement. Drug companies try to get government grant money but there are loyal government employees who separate the wheat from the chaff and the fraudulent via research and economic scrutiny. The FDA has no unfailing respect for the NIH and visa versa. The CDC however has the rapt attention of the NIH and the FDA. And I view certain Pharmaceutical giants as greedy motherfuckers that do things that Goldman Sachs employees only wish they could do. |
|
20 May 16 - 09:01 AM (#3791300) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Mr Red Doesn't Ozone make you more likely to be irritable &/or agressive? Alert certainly. As in bracing sea air. In the UK we have the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence - there's NICE. |
|
20 May 16 - 09:50 AM (#3791312) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Steve Shaw There's likely to be less ozone in sea air as the seaside air is likely to be less polluted. The bracing seaside smell is far more likely to be the sulphurous emanations from rotting seaweed. Ozone is a powerful oxidising agent and a serious pollutant at ground level. It is much more useful when it's a few miles up in the atmosphere. |
|
20 May 16 - 10:33 AM (#3791322) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Mrrzy I understand it's done with sub-cu injections... But viruses (viri is a funny) are everywhere, hard to target in the body, and I would think that anything that can destroy viri and bacteria can also destroy cells, so how does it not kill the host? Donuel, thanks for the details, and I adore Tesla also. |
|
20 May 16 - 11:28 AM (#3791333) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: leeneia Injections sound really dangerous, Mrrzy. Ozone is a gas. You can kill a person by injecting a syringe full of air into a blood vessel, so why wouldn't a syringe full of ozone kill someone? |
|
20 May 16 - 11:53 AM (#3791341) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Steve Shaw Ozone is reasonably soluble in water. You could inject a solution of it, theoretically. It is a powerful oxidising agent and rapidly damages tissues. I suppose you could kill all the viruses in your body by injecting cyanide. Yep, that would do the trick all right. |
|
20 May 16 - 01:01 PM (#3791346) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Jack Campin Despite what Mrzzy says, the NIH is not backing this fringe therapy. The paper he/she referred to is by Velio Bocci, an Italian who has been pushing this idea for decades, published in a fifth-rate Indian journal, presumably because no reputable one would take it. A page about ozone from an organization which is really part of the NIH: http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/ozone/ This is rather entertaining in a warped sort of way: http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2009/08/ozone-therapy-homeopath-and-savage.html Related scams: http://www.chem1.com/CQ/oxyscams.html |
|
20 May 16 - 03:37 PM (#3791368) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri?doe From: Donuel The other rare and important thing the NIH can do that the private sector does not do is pure research. Grants for such work is almost the exclusive domain of government. The NIH does not get the acclaim that it should. It was not the march of dimes or Jerrys kids who created the therapy for muscular dystrophy, it was the NIH. Crap, there goes another shooting near the White House. There goes the commute... |
|
20 May 16 - 08:58 PM (#3791388) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Mrrzy Leenia, sub-cu injections, not IV, which would indeed kill you. Air embolisms are bad, m'kay? I didn't say NIH backed it, only that it was a reputable source for the article. The NIH article 2 posts above is about it being a pollutant, which is not what I was asking about, of course it shouldn't be breathed or injected into veins. It doesn't address its antiviral properties. Ozone is a highly unstable molecule which breaks down easily into oxygen gas plus whatever (from that which broke it down) mixes with the third oxygen molecule, and who knows what that can form. |
|
20 May 16 - 11:05 PM (#3791396) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Rapparee In addition to subcutaneous injection, I've found that ozone therapy can/has been administered by: *rectal insufflation (blowing it up and into the rectum) *vaginal insufflation (ditto for the vagina) *withdrawing 6 to 12 oz. of blood, putting it into an ozone-containing container, shaking it to mix the ozone and the blood, and replacing the blood in the patient. I'm no physician but it seems to me that each of these methods has definite risks. Oh, yes -- ozone has been used "topically" on skin infections. This seems to me that, used with care, it might be safe. |
|
21 May 16 - 03:48 PM (#3791440) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Bonzo3legs It's quite commonly used in dentistry, our dentist always uses it when rebuilding teeth and for root canal treatment. |
|
22 May 16 - 02:21 PM (#3791555) Subject: RE: BS: Why aren't we using ozone against viri? From: Mrrzy Blowing it in your ear is all that's missing! Still, nice to know it isn't a pharmaconspiracy, it's just not a good solution. |