Topic: 750ml Colloidal Silver - $29 (Read 26625 times)
Doh... Someone already beat me to Papa Smurf...
You claim I say people should use colloidal silver because there are no RCTs, rather my point has always been you are exactly as ignorant as you claim I am for making a conclusion without RCTs. Who is using a strawman? Also please stop using these fallacy arguments until you learn the definitions of them. Your lack of understanding of what they mean is blaring and getting pretty annoying. By the way the fact that he wasn't actually using colloidal silver, but silver salts is not a straw man. I didn't reply because your posts are the same refractory drivel as before.
I can say the same for you. Blah blah blah big phrama... ramble ramble RCTs.You may "say the same for" TECSHARE, but the difference is that he has facts and logic on his side, whereas you have neither.
Do you possess the rudimentary background in biology and basic analytical skills necessary to process this latest demonstration of silver's efficacy?
Quote
Silver makes antibiotics thousands of times more effective - http://www.nature.com/news/silver-makes-antibiotics-thousands-of-times-more-effective-1.13232
Collins and his team found that silver — in the form of dissolved ions — attacks bacterial cells in two main ways: it makes the cell membrane more permeable, and it interferes with the cell’s metabolism, leading to the overproduction of reactive, and often toxic, oxygen compounds. Both mechanisms could potentially be harnessed to make today’s antibiotics more effective against resistant bacteria, Collins says.
Many antibiotics are thought to kill their targets by producing reactive oxygen compounds, and Collins and his team showed that when boosted with a small amount of silver these drugs could kill between 10 and 1,000 times as many bacteria. The increased membrane permeability also allows more antibiotics to enter the bacterial cells, which may overwhelm the resistance mechanisms that rely on shuttling the drug back out.
That disruption to the cell membrane also increased the effectiveness of vancomycin, a large-molecule antibiotic, on Gram-negative bacteria — which have a protective outer coating. Gram-negative bacterial cells can often be impenetrable to antibiotics made of larger molecules.
“It’s not so much a silver bullet; more a silver spoon to help the Gram-negative bacteria take their medicine,” says Collins.
Collins and his team found that silver — in the form of dissolved ions — attacks bacterial cells in two main ways: it makes the cell membrane more permeable, and it interferes with the cell’s metabolism, leading to the overproduction of reactive, and often toxic, oxygen compounds. Both mechanisms could potentially be harnessed to make today’s antibiotics more effective against resistant bacteria, Collins says.
Many antibiotics are thought to kill their targets by producing reactive oxygen compounds, and Collins and his team showed that when boosted with a small amount of silver these drugs could kill between 10 and 1,000 times as many bacteria. The increased membrane permeability also allows more antibiotics to enter the bacterial cells, which may overwhelm the resistance mechanisms that rely on shuttling the drug back out.
That disruption to the cell membrane also increased the effectiveness of vancomycin, a large-molecule antibiotic, on Gram-negative bacteria — which have a protective outer coating. Gram-negative bacterial cells can often be impenetrable to antibiotics made of larger molecules.
“It’s not so much a silver bullet; more a silver spoon to help the Gram-negative bacteria take their medicine,” says Collins.
Quote
Silver Enhances Antibiotic Activity Against Gram-Negative Bacteria
Science Translational Medicine June 2013:Vol. 5, Issue 190
http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/5/190/190ra81
A declining pipeline of clinically useful antibiotics has made it imperative to develop more effective antimicrobial therapies, particularly against difficult-to-treat Gram-negative pathogens. Silver has been used as an antimicrobial since antiquity, yet its mechanism of action remains unclear. We show that silver disrupts multiple bacterial cellular processes, including disulfide bond formation, metabolism, and iron homeostasis. These changes lead to increased production of reactive oxygen species and increased membrane permeability of Gram-negative bacteria that can potentiate the activity of a broad range of antibiotics against Gram-negative bacteria in different metabolic states, as well as restore antibiotic susceptibility to a resistant bacterial strain.
We show both in vitro and in a mouse model of urinary tract infection that the ability of silver to induce oxidative stress can be harnessed to potentiate antibiotic activity. Additionally, we demonstrate in vitro and in two different mouse models of peritonitis that silver sensitizes Gram-negative bacteria to the Gram-positive–specific antibiotic vancomycin, thereby expanding the antibacterial spectrum of this drug. Finally, we used silver and antibiotic combinations in vitro to eradicate bacterial persister cells, and show both in vitro and in a mouse biofilm infection model that silver can enhance antibacterial action against bacteria that produce biofilms. This work shows that silver can be used to enhance the action of existing antibiotics against Gram-negative bacteria, thus strengthening the antibiotic arsenal for fighting bacterial infections.
Science Translational Medicine June 2013:Vol. 5, Issue 190
http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/5/190/190ra81
A declining pipeline of clinically useful antibiotics has made it imperative to develop more effective antimicrobial therapies, particularly against difficult-to-treat Gram-negative pathogens. Silver has been used as an antimicrobial since antiquity, yet its mechanism of action remains unclear. We show that silver disrupts multiple bacterial cellular processes, including disulfide bond formation, metabolism, and iron homeostasis. These changes lead to increased production of reactive oxygen species and increased membrane permeability of Gram-negative bacteria that can potentiate the activity of a broad range of antibiotics against Gram-negative bacteria in different metabolic states, as well as restore antibiotic susceptibility to a resistant bacterial strain.
We show both in vitro and in a mouse model of urinary tract infection that the ability of silver to induce oxidative stress can be harnessed to potentiate antibiotic activity. Additionally, we demonstrate in vitro and in two different mouse models of peritonitis that silver sensitizes Gram-negative bacteria to the Gram-positive–specific antibiotic vancomycin, thereby expanding the antibacterial spectrum of this drug. Finally, we used silver and antibiotic combinations in vitro to eradicate bacterial persister cells, and show both in vitro and in a mouse biofilm infection model that silver can enhance antibacterial action against bacteria that produce biofilms. This work shows that silver can be used to enhance the action of existing antibiotics against Gram-negative bacteria, thus strengthening the antibiotic arsenal for fighting bacterial infections.
FYI, a UTI is an internal application. In case you don't know where the urinary tract is located, and still feel like clinging to the "external use only" fallacy.
Thanks again for your interest in Sacred Silver, the only colloidal silver product produced exclusively for the Bitcoin community. Proving your objections have no basis in reality is important to us, and we look forward to further demonstrating/crushing/curing your embarrassing ignorance in the future.
You claim I say people should use colloidal silver because there are no RCTs, rather my point has always been you are exactly as ignorant as you claim I am for making a conclusion without RCTs. Who is using a strawman? Also please stop using these fallacy arguments until you learn the definitions of them. Your lack of understanding of what they mean is blaring and getting pretty annoying. By the way the fact that he wasn't actually using colloidal silver, but silver salts is not a straw man. I didn't reply because your posts are the same refractory drivel as before.
I can say the same for you. Blah blah blah big phrama... ramble ramble RCTs. 
This is the one and only argument that opponents of colloidal silver have. He drank a glass a day of improperly prepared "colloidal silver" (actually contained silver salts because he used tap water and sterling silver). A glass a day is hardly use in moderation, even if it was true colloidal silver.
You claim I say people should use colloidal silver because there are no RCTs, rather my point has always been you are exactly as ignorant as you claim I am for making a conclusion without RCTs. Who is using a strawman? Also please stop using these fallacy arguments until you learn the definitions of them. Your lack of understanding of what they mean is blaring and getting pretty annoying. By the way the fact that he wasn't actually using colloidal silver, but silver salts is not a straw man. I didn't reply because your posts are the same refractory drivel as before.
I'm strawmaning pretty hard
This is the one and only argument that opponents of colloidal silver have. He drank a glass a day of improperly prepared "colloidal silver" (actually contained silver salts because he used tap water and sterling silver). A glass a day is hardly use in moderation, even if it was true colloidal silver.
1. So instead of using another antibiotic that is proven to work, you're going to use something that hasn't been proven to work? I see nothing wrong with that logic. 
inb4 someone is allergic to all known antibiotics
2. that is, of course under the assumption that colloidal silver actually works
3. appeal to "muh freedums"
4. how is "cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness" related with FDA?
5. your argument is that "drugs that have undergone RCTs still harm people", therefore, RCT system is totally broken and we should never use it. RCTs are not prefect, but if you have something better, I'm all ears.
6. still ad hominem
7. see #4
also, my previous point still stands:
inb4 someone is allergic to all known antibiotics2. that is, of course under the assumption that colloidal silver actually works
3. appeal to "muh freedums"
4. how is "cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness" related with FDA?
5. your argument is that "drugs that have undergone RCTs still harm people", therefore, RCT system is totally broken and we should never use it. RCTs are not prefect, but if you have something better, I'm all ears.
6. still ad hominem
7. see #4
also, my previous point still stands:
So your logic is: there isn't evidence proving that colloidal silver isn't effective, therefore it's wrong for me to question the effectiveness of colloidal silver in preventing/curing/diagnosing any known disease.
Actually your previous point doesn't stand. You have been proven to rely upon assumptions for your arguments with ZERO scientific basis backing your claims.
1. As some one who doesn't have antibiotic allergies it is convenient for you to dismiss this since you pay no price for some one else's bad health.
2. And you of course ASSUME it doesn't without any evidence, only LACK of evidence.
3. If you like being a bootlicking slave that is your prerogative - You don't get to decide where other people's freedoms end no matter how much you would love that.
4. For about the hundredth time, try understanding the words you post... http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRsearch.cfm?fr=101.93
5. All that garbage you just spouted was your personal interpretation as an attempt at marginalization, NOT what I said. RCT's you hold so highly are proven to be flawed SCIENTIFICALLY, therefore not as completely safe and sound as you pretend it is. This is also evidence that profit motive trumps healthcare.
6. So the medical industry harming people for profit has absolutely no logical connection to the way drugs are approved and processed? Also, the medical industry is not a person, so I am not sure how it could be a personal attack. I didn't say the medical industry smelled funny, I said its primary motivation is MONEY, not healthcare - and that point is clearly tied logically to this discussion regardless of the fact that it goes against your argument.
7. Number 4 is FDA policy - try actually understanding your own words for once before you spew them all over like self affirming vomit.
You are one of the most willfully ignorant, intellectually lazy, and arrogant people I have ever had a "discussion" with (I don't think most of it counts as discussion, you are more like a Neanderthal smacking his own reflection in a pool over and over because he is afraid of the man in the water). You understand very little of the points you copy and paste from the internet, you rely completely upon 3rd parties to form your opinions for you, then you parrot them with zero critical thought or understanding. Why waste time learning or understanding things when correctness and win is just a Google search and a Wikipedia link away?
You lack understanding of even the most basic scientific concepts. The fact that you walk around pretending to have this knowledge and giving advice to people is not only repugnant, it is scarey that someone might believe you actually know what you are talking about. My opinion is you should go back to school to learn how science really works, then if you can manage, you can come back and try to have an actual debate.
When did the world lose its innocence for you?
This is the one and only argument that opponents of colloidal silver have. He drank a glass a day of improperly prepared "colloidal silver" (actually contained silver salts because he used tap water and sterling silver). A glass a day is hardly use in moderation, even if it was true colloidal silver.
1. So instead of using another antibiotic that is proven to work, you're going to use something that hasn't been proven to work? I see nothing wrong with that logic. inb4 someone is allergic to all known antibiotics
2. that is, of course under the assumption that colloidal silver actually works
3. appeal to "muh freedums"
4. how is "cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness" related with FDA?
5. your argument is that "drugs that have undergone RCTs still harm people", therefore, RCT system is totally broken and we should never use it. RCTs are not prefect, but if you have something better, I'm all ears.
6. still ad hominem
7. see #4
also, my previous point still stands:
inb4 someone is allergic to all known antibiotics2. that is, of course under the assumption that colloidal silver actually works
3. appeal to "muh freedums"
4. how is "cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness" related with FDA?
5. your argument is that "drugs that have undergone RCTs still harm people", therefore, RCT system is totally broken and we should never use it. RCTs are not prefect, but if you have something better, I'm all ears.
6. still ad hominem
7. see #4
also, my previous point still stands:
So your logic is: there isn't evidence proving that colloidal silver isn't effective, therefore it's wrong for me to question the effectiveness of colloidal silver in preventing/curing/diagnosing any known disease.
Actually your previous point doesn't stand. You have been proven to rely upon assumptions for your arguments with ZERO scientific basis backing your claims.
1. As some one who doesn't have antibiotic allergies it is convenient for you to dismiss this since you pay no price for some one else's bad health.
2. And you of course ASSUME it doesn't without any evidence, only LACK of evidence.
3. If you like being a bootlicking slave that is your prerogative - You don't get to decide where other people's freedoms end no matter how much you would love that.
4. For about the hundredth time, try understanding the words you post... http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRsearch.cfm?fr=101.93
5. All that garbage you just spouted was your personal interpretation as an attempt at marginalization, NOT what I said. RCT's you hold so highly are proven to be flawed SCIENTIFICALLY, therefore not as completely safe and sound as you pretend it is. This is also evidence that profit motive trumps healthcare.
6. So the medical industry harming people for profit has absolutely no logical connection to the way drugs are approved and processed? Also, the medical industry is not a person, so I am not sure how it could be a personal attack. I didn't say the medical industry smelled funny, I said its primary motivation is MONEY, not healthcare - and that point is clearly tied logically to this discussion regardless of the fact that it goes against your argument.
7. Number 4 is FDA policy - try actually understanding your own words for once before you spew them all over like self affirming vomit.
You are one of the most willfully ignorant, intellectually lazy, and arrogant people I have ever had a "discussion" with (I don't think most of it counts as discussion, you are more like a Neanderthal smacking his own reflection in a pool over and over because he is afraid of the man in the water). You understand very little of the points you copy and paste from the internet, you rely completely upon 3rd parties to form your opinions for you, then you parrot them with zero critical thought or understanding. Why waste time learning or understanding things when correctness and win is just a Google search and a Wikipedia link away?
You lack understanding of even the most basic scientific concepts. The fact that you walk around pretending to have this knowledge and giving advice to people is not only repugnant, it is scarey that someone might believe you actually know what you are talking about. My opinion is you should go back to school to learn how science really works, then if you can manage, you can come back and try to have an actual debate.
Your logic boils down to: There is weak evidence supporting colloidal silver's effectiveness in curing/preventing a disease. Since there isn't evidence against this, we should use colloidal silver to treat/prevent disease. Am I correct?2. And you of course ASSUME it doesn't without any evidence, only LACK of evidence.
3. If you like being a bootlicking slave that is your prerogative - You don't get to decide where other people's freedoms end no matter how much you would love that.
4. For about the hundredth time, try understanding the words you post... http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRsearch.cfm?fr=101.93
5. All that garbage you just spouted was your personal interpretation as an attempt at marginalization, NOT what I said. RCT's you hold so highly are proven to be flawed SCIENTIFICALLY, therefore not as completely safe and sound as you pretend it is. This is also evidence that profit motive trumps healthcare.
6. So the medical industry harming people for profit has absolutely no logical connection to the way drugs are approved and processed? Also, the medical industry is not a person, so I am not sure how it could be a personal attack. I didn't say the medical industry smelled funny, I said its primary motivation is MONEY, not healthcare - and that point is clearly tied logically to this discussion regardless of the fact that it goes against your argument.
7. Number 4 is FDA policy - try actually understanding your own words for once before you spew them all over like self affirming vomit.
You are one of the most willfully ignorant, intellectually lazy, and arrogant people I have ever had a "discussion" with (I don't think most of it counts as discussion, you are more like a Neanderthal smacking his own reflection in a pool over and over because he is afraid of the man in the water). You understand very little of the points you copy and paste from the internet, you rely completely upon 3rd parties to form your opinions for you, then you parrot them with zero critical thought or understanding. Why waste time learning or understanding things when correctness and win is just a Google search and a Wikipedia link away?
You lack understanding of even the most basic scientific concepts. The fact that you walk around pretending to have this knowledge and giving advice to people is not only repugnant, it is scarey that someone might believe you actually know what you are talking about. My opinion is you should go back to school to learn how science really works, then if you can manage, you can come back and try to have an actual debate.
Also,
#1: begging the question (already explained)
#4: Oh, just because FDA used that phrase suddenly means that I'm some sort of regulator? I chose that phrase because it accurately describes my argument. How about I drop the "diagnose" part because no one is claiming colloidal silver can detect a disease. Would that make you happy?
Oh right medical doctors, the ones who receive kickbacks and profit sharing of the drugs they prescribe. The ones who have their prescription pad in hand prior to even seeing you.
I am NOT saying I believe this whatsoever but I damn sure am not taking the word of medical doctors. If there was a natural healing method out there that did work they would be the last to know.
ad hominem. I am NOT saying I believe this whatsoever but I damn sure am not taking the word of medical doctors. If there was a natural healing method out there that did work they would be the last to know.
GUESS WHAT EVERYONE???
I DRANK ALMOST THE WHOLE BOTTLE AND DIDN'T DIE OR TURN BLUE!
It had a very electric taste to it and really hit the spot.
Thanks again iCEBREAKER
I DRANK ALMOST THE WHOLE BOTTLE AND DIDN'T DIE OR TURN BLUE!
It had a very electric taste to it and really hit the spot.
Thanks again iCEBREAKER
you are very welcome str4wm4n! I'm chuffed to hear from my first satisfied customer.
3 cheers for voluntary exchange facilitated by bitcoin!
1. So instead of using another antibiotic that is proven to work, you're going to use something that hasn't been proven to work? I see nothing wrong with that logic. inb4 someone is allergic to all known antibiotics
2. that is, of course under the assumption that colloidal silver actually works
3. appeal to "muh freedums"
4. how is "cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness" related with FDA?
5. your argument is that "drugs that have undergone RCTs still harm people", therefore, RCT system is totally broken and we should never use it. RCTs are not prefect, but if you have something better, I'm all ears.
6. still ad hominem
7. see #4
also, my previous point still stands:
inb4 someone is allergic to all known antibiotics2. that is, of course under the assumption that colloidal silver actually works
3. appeal to "muh freedums"
4. how is "cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness" related with FDA?
5. your argument is that "drugs that have undergone RCTs still harm people", therefore, RCT system is totally broken and we should never use it. RCTs are not prefect, but if you have something better, I'm all ears.
6. still ad hominem
7. see #4
also, my previous point still stands:
So your logic is: there isn't evidence proving that colloidal silver isn't effective, therefore it's wrong for me to question the effectiveness of colloidal silver in preventing/curing/diagnosing any known disease.
Actually your previous point doesn't stand. You have been proven to rely upon assumptions for your arguments with ZERO scientific basis backing your claims.
1. As some one who doesn't have antibiotic allergies it is convenient for you to dismiss this since you pay no price for some one else's bad health.
2. And you of course ASSUME it doesn't without any evidence, only LACK of evidence.
3. If you like being a bootlicking slave that is your prerogative - You don't get to decide where other people's freedoms end no matter how much you would love that.
4. For about the hundredth time, try understanding the words you post... http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRsearch.cfm?fr=101.93
5. All that garbage you just spouted was your personal interpretation as an attempt at marginalization, NOT what I said. RCT's you hold so highly are proven to be flawed SCIENTIFICALLY, therefore not as completely safe and sound as you pretend it is. This is also evidence that profit motive trumps healthcare.
6. So the medical industry harming people for profit has absolutely no logical connection to the way drugs are approved and processed? Also, the medical industry is not a person, so I am not sure how it could be a personal attack. I didn't say the medical industry smelled funny, I said its primary motivation is MONEY, not healthcare - and that point is clearly tied logically to this discussion regardless of the fact that it goes against your argument.
7. Number 4 is FDA policy - try actually understanding your own words for once before you spew them all over like self affirming vomit.
You are one of the most willfully ignorant, intellectually lazy, and arrogant people I have ever had a "discussion" with (I don't think most of it counts as discussion, you are more like a Neanderthal smacking his own reflection in a pool over and over because he is afraid of the man in the water). You understand very little of the points you copy and paste from the internet, you rely completely upon 3rd parties to form your opinions for you, then you parrot them with zero critical thought or understanding. Why waste time learning or understanding things when correctness and win is just a Google search and a Wikipedia link away?
You lack understanding of even the most basic scientific concepts. The fact that you walk around pretending to have this knowledge and giving advice to people is not only repugnant, it is scarey that someone might believe you actually know what you are talking about. My opinion is you should go back to school to learn how science really works, then if you can manage, you can come back and try to have an actual debate.
GUESS WHAT EVERYONE???
I DRANK ALMOST THE WHOLE BOTTLE AND DIDN'T DIE OR TURN BLUE!
It had a very electric taste to it and really hit the spot.
Thanks again iCEBREAKER
I DRANK ALMOST THE WHOLE BOTTLE AND DIDN'T DIE OR TURN BLUE!
It had a very electric taste to it and really hit the spot.
Thanks again iCEBREAKER
Do you speak from experience? If not then please keep your "knowledge" to yourself.
Show me a link to one peer reviewed study on the efficacy of Colloidal Silver (which is not debunking it). It's as useless as homeopathy.
Hmm, let's see how most reviews from medical doctors start:
Code:
Colloidal silver isn't considered safe or effective for any of the health claims manufacturers make. Silver has no known purpose in the body. Nor is it an essential mineral, as some sellers of silver products claim.
Oh right medical doctors, the ones who receive kickbacks and profit sharing of the drugs they prescribe. The ones who have their prescription pad in hand prior to even seeing you.
I am NOT saying I believe this whatsoever but I damn sure am not taking the word of medical doctors. If there was a natural healing method out there that did work they would be the last to know.
1. there are plenty of other antibiotics to use. bonus: they actually have rigorous evidence demonstrating their effectiveness.
2. that is not a valid concern when it comes to human use of antibiotics. antibiotic resistance is formed when there are left over bacteria from a antibiotic regiment. this usually occurs when the patient does not finish all their antibiotics, or the antibiotics are used in low dosages in a preventative manner (usually in farms).
3. homeopathy is probably safer than colloidal silver, so are you ok with that too? the problem isn't with colloidal silver's safety. the problem is people wasting time and money on treatments that have not been shown to do anything.
4. antiviral =/= cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
6. ad hominem: "you can't trust conventional medicine because they have profits in mind!"
7. how exactly am I acting bureaucratically? I never once asked for FDA or any regulatory approval.
2. that is not a valid concern when it comes to human use of antibiotics. antibiotic resistance is formed when there are left over bacteria from a antibiotic regiment. this usually occurs when the patient does not finish all their antibiotics, or the antibiotics are used in low dosages in a preventative manner (usually in farms).
3. homeopathy is probably safer than colloidal silver, so are you ok with that too? the problem isn't with colloidal silver's safety. the problem is people wasting time and money on treatments that have not been shown to do anything.
4. antiviral =/= cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
6. ad hominem: "you can't trust conventional medicine because they have profits in mind!"
7. how exactly am I acting bureaucratically? I never once asked for FDA or any regulatory approval.
1. As I said before individuals clearly do not have as many choices as you claim if they have problems with allergies. Just because they are ok for YOU doesn't mean everyone else can use them. Who are you without this issue to tell them otherwise? Seems like everyone else pays the cost having a product banned that you have no use for.
2. First of all how antibiotic resistant bacteria are created wasn't in question - it is a FACT they exist regardless of how it is created. That is not the primary mechanism creating resistant bacteria anyways. The primary mechanism is thru food produce production and overuse of antibiotics in animals which often live in unsanitary conditions basically creating a super bug breeding ground. Additionally excessive use of antibacterial soaps and scrubs, especially in hospitals creates especially resistant strains. These are both far larger problems than individuals misusing antibiotics.
3. If a consenting adult is willing to use their own hard earned money buying whatever they want I have no problem with it. It is the responsibility of the individual to make choices that effect them personally, and I reject your notion that a 3rd party is required for everyone like mommy and daddy giving you the ok rather than learning how to make choices for yourself. They make the choices and they pay the price if they are wrong (like adults do).
4. That is FDA regulation (read policy not law).
5. How is the fact that thousands of drugs pass thru FDA approval with RCTs, yet still end up killing or injuring thousands of people in addition to some times being ineffective, implausible? It is fact, there is no debating it. I think you don't really understand 90% of the Wikipedia posts you link, you just pick stuff out of a search engine, don't bother understanding it and mistake it for knowledge. (example: http://anh-europe.org/news/analysis-of-clinical-trials-reveals-that-placebo-content-is-rarely-described IE if you are testing a diabetes drug and the placebo is a sugar pill it could clearly effect the tests and make your "drug" appear more functional than it is.)
6. I fixed that for you: "You can't trust conventional medicine because they have profits in mind FIRST!"
7. See number 4.
inb4 someone is allergic to all known antibiotics2. that is, of course under the assumption that colloidal silver actually works
3. appeal to "muh freedums"
4. how is "cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness" related with FDA?
5. your argument is that "drugs that have undergone RCTs still harm people", therefore, RCT system is totally broken and we should never use it. RCTs are not prefect, but if you have something better, I'm all ears.
6. still ad hominem
7. see #4
also, my previous point still stands:
So your logic is: there isn't evidence proving that colloidal silver isn't effective, therefore it's wrong for me to question the effectiveness of colloidal silver in preventing/curing/diagnosing any known disease.
1. there are plenty of other antibiotics to use. bonus: they actually have rigorous evidence demonstrating their effectiveness.
2. that is not a valid concern when it comes to human use of antibiotics. antibiotic resistance is formed when there are left over bacteria from a antibiotic regiment. this usually occurs when the patient does not finish all their antibiotics, or the antibiotics are used in low dosages in a preventative manner (usually in farms).
3. homeopathy is probably safer than colloidal silver, so are you ok with that too? the problem isn't with colloidal silver's safety. the problem is people wasting time and money on treatments that have not been shown to do anything.
4. antiviral =/= cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
6. ad hominem: "you can't trust conventional medicine because they have profits in mind!"
7. how exactly am I acting bureaucratically? I never once asked for FDA or any regulatory approval.
2. that is not a valid concern when it comes to human use of antibiotics. antibiotic resistance is formed when there are left over bacteria from a antibiotic regiment. this usually occurs when the patient does not finish all their antibiotics, or the antibiotics are used in low dosages in a preventative manner (usually in farms).
3. homeopathy is probably safer than colloidal silver, so are you ok with that too? the problem isn't with colloidal silver's safety. the problem is people wasting time and money on treatments that have not been shown to do anything.
4. antiviral =/= cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
6. ad hominem: "you can't trust conventional medicine because they have profits in mind!"
7. how exactly am I acting bureaucratically? I never once asked for FDA or any regulatory approval.
1. As I said before individuals clearly do not have as many choices as you claim if they have problems with allergies. Just because they are ok for YOU doesn't mean everyone else can use them. Who are you without this issue to tell them otherwise? Seems like everyone else pays the cost having a product banned that you have no use for.
2. First of all how antibiotic resistant bacteria are created wasn't in question - it is a FACT they exist regardless of how it is created. That is not the primary mechanism creating resistant bacteria anyways. The primary mechanism is thru food produce production and overuse of antibiotics in animals which often live in unsanitary conditions basically creating a super bug breeding ground. Additionally excessive use of antibacterial soaps and scrubs, especially in hospitals creates especially resistant strains. These are both far larger problems than individuals misusing antibiotics.
3. If a consenting adult is willing to use their own hard earned money buying whatever they want I have no problem with it. It is the responsibility of the individual to make choices that effect them personally, and I reject your notion that a 3rd party is required for everyone like mommy and daddy giving you the ok rather than learning how to make choices for yourself. They make the choices and they pay the price if they are wrong (like adults do).
4. That is FDA regulation (read policy not law).
5. How is the fact that thousands of drugs pass thru FDA approval with RCTs, yet still end up killing or injuring thousands of people in addition to some times being ineffective, implausible? It is fact, there is no debating it. I think you don't really understand 90% of the Wikipedia posts you link, you just pick stuff out of a search engine, don't bother understanding it and mistake it for knowledge. (example: http://anh-europe.org/news/analysis-of-clinical-trials-reveals-that-placebo-content-is-rarely-described IE if you are testing a diabetes drug and the placebo is a sugar pill it could clearly effect the tests and make your "drug" appear more functional than it is.)
6. I fixed that for you: "You can't trust conventional medicine because they have profits in mind FIRST!"
7. See number 4.
Since you decided to edit your post I will reply again.
"Why anyone would use a product to treat/diagnose/prevent an illness, even though there is no rigorous evidence showing its effectiveness is beyond me."
Have you ever considered that no one needs you to make these conclusions for them? Have you ever considered that perhaps you may not know as much as you think you do, and you may in fact be inhibiting people from seeking cheap, safe and effective medical treatment? Do you ever think to yourself "Hey I spend an inordinate amount of time posting in marketplace threads acting like bored a 2bit ineffectual mall security guard."?
begging the question: that is the very thing we are disputing."Why anyone would use a product to treat/diagnose/prevent an illness, even though there is no rigorous evidence showing its effectiveness is beyond me."
Have you ever considered that no one needs you to make these conclusions for them? Have you ever considered that perhaps you may not know as much as you think you do, and you may in fact be inhibiting people from seeking cheap, safe and effective medical treatment? Do you ever think to yourself "Hey I spend an inordinate amount of time posting in marketplace threads acting like bored a 2bit ineffectual mall security guard."?
A few reasons why people might turn to using colloidal silver, without RCTs completed to your personal satisfaction:
1. Allergies - A lot of people are allergic to many types of antibiotics and have a very limited selection of antibiotics.
2. Antibiotic resistant bacteria - These kind of super bugs are increasingly common, and often 2nd or 3rd line antibiotics are being used ineffectively. Colloidal silver operates on a different principal of action that is very difficult for bacteria to mutate a resistance to.
3. It is safe - Regardless of your personal standards millions of people use colloidal silver regularly. If you disagree please provide me a single case of injury caused by colloidal silver which was properly prepared and used in moderation. (tip: blueman doesn't count. He admitted to drinking gallons a month in addition to using impure tap water and STERLING silver (includes toxic impurities like silver salts). Also this isn't an injury it is a cosmetic condition)
4. Viruses - Colloidal silver has been shown to be actively antiviral. There are a mere handful of antiviral drugs, and their efficacy and safety is questionable in many cases.
5. TONS of drugs that went thru endless RCTs were later shown to be unsafe, defective, or even lethal. How is that a pinnacle of scientific standards? The medical industry is increasingly showing itself to be more concerned with profits than healthcare and people are losing faith in this system and are forced to make these choices for themselves. Also I might add these RCT's that are used to approve drugs are funded by the company producing it. Conflict of interest much? Additionally who would fund the RCT for colloidal silver if it can't be owned under patent?
6. Not everyone can afford to spend hundreds of dollars to see a doctor so they can tell them what they already know every time they get a sore throat or a cold. Not everyone is insured. Not everyone can manage a day off of work or the STACK of costs associated with our medical system. The medical industry doesn't always have your best interests in mind, often all they have in mind is the bottom line.
7. Not everyone requires mommy and daddy to bureaucratically approve things that via ones own ability to learn and use critical thought can be discovered to be beneficial. Just because you haven't matured beyond the point that you require the state to make all of your choices for you does not mean the rest of us have to live under those same conditions. Humanity has made scientific discoveries before RCTs existed, and they will continue to do so with or without them. Additionally there are REAMS of studies on colloidal silver if you ever bother to read them. You attack these people because you yourself are not free, and real freedom threatens you because you are afraid of the responsibilities that come with it. Therefore you have to reassure your ego that your belief system is correct by going on the offensive on a subject which CLEARLY has no direct effect on you as some one who is not interested in purchasing this product.
1. there are plenty of other antibiotics to use. bonus: they actually have rigorous evidence demonstrating their effectiveness.1. Allergies - A lot of people are allergic to many types of antibiotics and have a very limited selection of antibiotics.
2. Antibiotic resistant bacteria - These kind of super bugs are increasingly common, and often 2nd or 3rd line antibiotics are being used ineffectively. Colloidal silver operates on a different principal of action that is very difficult for bacteria to mutate a resistance to.
3. It is safe - Regardless of your personal standards millions of people use colloidal silver regularly. If you disagree please provide me a single case of injury caused by colloidal silver which was properly prepared and used in moderation. (tip: blueman doesn't count. He admitted to drinking gallons a month in addition to using impure tap water and STERLING silver (includes toxic impurities like silver salts). Also this isn't an injury it is a cosmetic condition)
4. Viruses - Colloidal silver has been shown to be actively antiviral. There are a mere handful of antiviral drugs, and their efficacy and safety is questionable in many cases.
5. TONS of drugs that went thru endless RCTs were later shown to be unsafe, defective, or even lethal. How is that a pinnacle of scientific standards? The medical industry is increasingly showing itself to be more concerned with profits than healthcare and people are losing faith in this system and are forced to make these choices for themselves. Also I might add these RCT's that are used to approve drugs are funded by the company producing it. Conflict of interest much? Additionally who would fund the RCT for colloidal silver if it can't be owned under patent?
6. Not everyone can afford to spend hundreds of dollars to see a doctor so they can tell them what they already know every time they get a sore throat or a cold. Not everyone is insured. Not everyone can manage a day off of work or the STACK of costs associated with our medical system. The medical industry doesn't always have your best interests in mind, often all they have in mind is the bottom line.
7. Not everyone requires mommy and daddy to bureaucratically approve things that via ones own ability to learn and use critical thought can be discovered to be beneficial. Just because you haven't matured beyond the point that you require the state to make all of your choices for you does not mean the rest of us have to live under those same conditions. Humanity has made scientific discoveries before RCTs existed, and they will continue to do so with or without them. Additionally there are REAMS of studies on colloidal silver if you ever bother to read them. You attack these people because you yourself are not free, and real freedom threatens you because you are afraid of the responsibilities that come with it. Therefore you have to reassure your ego that your belief system is correct by going on the offensive on a subject which CLEARLY has no direct effect on you as some one who is not interested in purchasing this product.
2. that is not a valid concern when it comes to human use of antibiotics. antibiotic resistance is formed when there are left over bacteria from a antibiotic regiment. this usually occurs when the patient does not finish all their antibiotics, or the antibiotics are used in low dosages in a preventative manner (usually in farms).
3. homeopathy is probably safer than colloidal silver, so are you ok with that too? the problem isn't with colloidal silver's safety. the problem is people wasting time and money on treatments that have not been shown to do anything.
4. antiviral =/= cure/prevent/diagnose any known illness
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
6. ad hominem: "you can't trust conventional medicine because they have profits in mind!"
7. how exactly am I acting bureaucratically? I never once asked for FDA or any regulatory approval.
That is just a handful of reasons why some one might use colloidal silver regardless of lack of industry backing. There are a lot more but I don't have the time.
As far as your "null hypothesis" argument, you know how science works right? There are many different schools of thoughts, methods, specialties, and processes which can some times disagree with one another in theory until conclusive empirical data is produced. This means opposing theories exist until one, all, or none of them are proved to be correct.
[...]
It is basically a fancy way of saying an ASSUMPTION "model". You can't just pick any theory out of a hat and conclude it is standard industry practice applicable whenever convenient for your argument. That is not how science works, you don't just get to pick apart a tiny unrelated facet and ignore the whole. Frankly I think you have a serious lack of a scientific education. Empirical processes is pretty much day 1 stuff.
So your logic is: there isn't evidence proving that colloidal silver isn't effective, therefore it's wrong for me to question the effectiveness of colloidal silver in preventing/curing/diagnosing any known disease. As far as your "null hypothesis" argument, you know how science works right? There are many different schools of thoughts, methods, specialties, and processes which can some times disagree with one another in theory until conclusive empirical data is produced. This means opposing theories exist until one, all, or none of them are proved to be correct.
[...]
It is basically a fancy way of saying an ASSUMPTION "model". You can't just pick any theory out of a hat and conclude it is standard industry practice applicable whenever convenient for your argument. That is not how science works, you don't just get to pick apart a tiny unrelated facet and ignore the whole. Frankly I think you have a serious lack of a scientific education. Empirical processes is pretty much day 1 stuff.
Try reading your own wiki articles before you post them. Just because some one described this situation doesn't AGAIN mean you get to declare the substance in question ineffective. You don't practice science you practice selective learning. My point has been left unchallenged. You proclaim it is not scientific to make assumptions, and by your own standards (which you dutifully ignore for the sake of ego) your conclusions HAVE NO SCIENTIFIC BASIS.
Are you just circling back on yourself? I'll say it again: I never claimed that colloidal silver was ineffective. I am claiming that no one should take colloidal silver to treat/prevent/diagnose an illness because there is no evidence showing it does.Why anyone would use a product to treat/diagnose/prevent an illness, even though there is no rigorous evidence showing its effectiveness is beyond me.
"a null hypothesis is potentially rejected or disproved on the basis of data that is significantly under its assumption, but never accepted or proved. In the hypothesis testing approach of Jerzy Neyman and Egon Pearson, a null hypothesis is contrasted with an alternative hypothesis, and these are decided between on the basis of data, with certain error rates. These two approaches criticized each other, though today a hybrid approach is widely practiced and presented in textbooks."
and if you look one sentence after that...As far as the claim of ad hominem, it is in fact not a personal attack. Clearly this is an observation of your behavior I am noting over a period of years DIRECTLY RELATED to your activities here. If you would like to see real ad hominem attacks I would be glad to go back in your post history to find some examples for you.
that is the very definition of an ad hominem. you're referencing my post history, which has nothing to do with my arguments presented in this thread. At best that's a red herring.Since you decided to edit your post I will reply again.
"Why anyone would use a product to treat/diagnose/prevent an illness, even though there is no rigorous evidence showing its effectiveness is beyond me."
Have you ever considered that no one needs you to make these conclusions for them? Have you ever considered that perhaps you may not know as much as you think you do, and you may in fact be inhibiting people from seeking cheap, safe and effective medical treatment? Do you ever think to yourself "Hey I spend an inordinate amount of time posting in marketplace threads acting like bored a 2bit ineffectual mall security guard."?
A few reasons why people might turn to using colloidal silver, without RCTs completed to your personal satisfaction:
1. Allergies - A lot of people are allergic to many types of antibiotics and have a very limited selection of antibiotics.
2. Antibiotic resistant bacteria - These kind of super bugs are increasingly common, and often 2nd or 3rd line antibiotics are being used ineffectively. Colloidal silver operates on a different principal of action that is very difficult for bacteria to mutate a resistance to.
3. It is safe - Regardless of your personal standards millions of people use colloidal silver regularly. If you disagree please provide me a single case of injury caused by colloidal silver which was properly prepared and used in moderation. (tip: blueman doesn't count. He admitted to drinking gallons a month in addition to using impure tap water and STERLING silver (includes toxic impurities like silver salts). Also this isn't an injury it is a cosmetic condition)
4. Viruses - Colloidal silver has been shown to be actively antiviral. There are a mere handful of antiviral drugs, and their efficacy and safety is questionable in many cases.
5. TONS of drugs that went thru endless RCTs were later shown to be unsafe, defective, or even lethal. How is that a pinnacle of scientific standards? The medical industry is increasingly showing itself to be more concerned with profits than healthcare and people are losing faith in this system and are forced to make these choices for themselves. Also I might add these RCT's that are used to approve drugs are funded by the company producing it. Conflict of interest much? Additionally who would fund the RCT for colloidal silver if it can't be owned under patent?
6. Not everyone can afford to spend hundreds of dollars to see a doctor so they can tell them what they already know every time they get a sore throat or a cold. Not everyone is insured. Not everyone can manage a day off of work or the STACK of costs associated with our medical system. The medical industry doesn't always have your best interests in mind, often all they have in mind is the bottom line.
7. Not everyone requires mommy and daddy to bureaucratically approve things that via ones own ability to learn and use critical thought can be discovered to be beneficial. Just because you haven't matured beyond the point that you require the state to make all of your choices for you does not mean the rest of us have to live under those same conditions. Humanity has made scientific discoveries before RCTs existed, and they will continue to do so with or without them. Additionally there are REAMS of studies on colloidal silver if you ever bother to read them. You attack these people because you yourself are not free, and real freedom threatens you because you are afraid of the responsibilities that come with it. Therefore you have to reassure your ego that your belief system is correct by going on the offensive on a subject which CLEARLY has no direct effect on you as some one who is not interested in purchasing this product.
That is just a handful of reasons why some one might use colloidal silver regardless of lack of industry backing. There are a lot more but I don't have the time.
As far as your "null hypothesis" argument, you know how science works right? There are many different schools of thoughts, methods, specialties, and processes which can some times disagree with one another in theory until conclusive empirical data is produced. This means opposing theories exist until one, all, or none of them are proved to be correct.
Also do you know the definition of hypothesis?
"hy·poth·e·sis (h-pth-ss)
n. pl. hy·poth·e·ses (-sz)
1. A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.
2. Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption.
3. The antecedent of a conditional statement."
It is basically a fancy way of saying an ASSUMPTION "model". You can't just pick any theory out of a hat and conclude it is standard industry practice applicable whenever convenient for your argument. That is not how science works, you don't just get to pick apart a tiny unrelated facet and ignore the whole. Frankly I think you have a serious lack of a scientific education. Empirical processes is pretty much day 1 stuff.
Also it is not an ad hominem attack if it is a direct cause of your bias in presentation of your "points", it is in fact directly related to the discussion on a logical level, regardless of your personal sensitivity to it.
Why do I keep wasting my time with you? I am tired of watching willfully ignorant, obsessive, arrogant, pushy people overshadow beneficial discoveries with FUD for the sole reason that the government didn't give it a stamp. For you this has nothing to do with science or medicine and everything to do with your groveling statist ideals and fearfulness. Your statements not only clearly demonstrate your lack of understanding of your own words, but your obsessive fixation with bureaucratic approval.
Jump to: