Colloidal Silver Knowledge Base
SynerGenesis, Inc. Technology Division
Professional quality products at unbeatable prices for discerning people like you!
SynerGenesis, Inc. P. O. 211 Pengilly, MN 55775
Main Office - Customer Support & Orders: Tel. (218) 885-0049
Toll Free (800) 850-8998 Orders & messages only please.
Colloidal Silver a Fresh Look
An Insider's Analysis - Historical Expose and Technical Review
by Vincent Goetsch
© 2006 SynerGenesis, Inc. All Rights Reserved
You are here » Colloidal Silver Toxicology
One of the most highly-charged topics regarding colloidal silver is the issue of toxicity, and by extension benefit. This is a topic that should be given proper attention and a technically accurate treatment. To date this is an issue that has been largely clouded by error misinformation and has not been treated with the proper technical attention that it is due.
Based on material from the historic record, and analytical reasoning, if one takes into account the technical differences between the various forms of silver that have been in use and the amounts used, then it becomes clear that colloidal silver manufactured and used as it is currently sold as a dietary supplement, wound management material or burn treatment substance, then such use is extremely safe. When such materials are used within EPA and FDA and relevant governmental guidelines, that there is then minimal if any real risk involved with such use. This is further evidenced by various 3rd party, governmental and other relevant sources regarding this topic, which are linked below for your review and consideration.
Colloidal Silver Risk Without Benefit? Or, Benefit Without Risk?
We have been intimately involved in the development of colloids and colloidal silver for over ten years at the time of this writing. I was keenly aware of the FDA reviews and decisions in the late 1990s. I was aware of the material that was drawn upon to make the decision that was called the FDA's final ruling regarding colloidal silver at that time. There is still an ongoing debate with regard to the potential benefit of colloidal silver, but rather than merely stating our opinion we have included links throughout this material that address matters diversely so as to allow you to engage this topic in a manner that will allow you to draw your own conclusions, or at least provide a basis for further investigation.
It is clear to me that in 1999 the science involved had yet to fully emerge to the state that is has today, and that the data regarding toxicity and other data drawn upon by the FDA was primarily from the 1930s as is evidenced by the various public records involved. In short there may have been a final ruling with regard to certain issues, but that should hardly be taken as an end all in terms of future advances.
The designation "final ruling" reminds me of the head of the U.S. patent office, who in the early 1900s declared that no further significant patentable advances were possible because all truly original advances of technology had already been patented. His declaration and in-effect final ruling was short lived and short sighted, the analogy here should be rather obvious.
Colloidal technology has come a long way in the last 80 years and has made the most progress during the last few years. Measured in internet years the few years that have passed since the last FDA ruling on this topic, in terms of advancement is like several decades by previous measurements. Information access is driving research and spurring advances exponentially these days, in case you have not noticed, grin.
With regard to any given topic there are pros and cons, and there are people who are for and against whatever one may hold up ideologically, technologically or theoretically. This topic is no different, however we really do wish to cover all the bases, not just one narrow view as is often the case.
Unfortunately not everyone favors independent thought and investigation. Where colloidal silver is concerned, there is a small cadre of folks who have gained an upper hand in terms of shaping governmental and public opinion, who also believe that silver is a risk without benefit. Biased is an understatement, such folks are not content in holding their own beliefs but are compelled to legislate others beliefs in lockstep with theirs if necessary.
If you have read the preceding chapters it is difficult to imagine how only negatives and no benefit with regard to colloidal silver could be presented as the historical truth of this topic with a straight face. People who do cite only negatives usually do so armed with sparse outdated data that supposedly represents scientifically oriented authority as a public service. Some also provide a few examples of unscrupulous trade merchants as representative of the whole industry combined with unjustified fear mongering. As the old saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Alternately, the road to hell is also paved by bad intentions. What is the intention of people who via their bias would thwart a substance that past use and present research clearly illustrates has been and could be of tremendous value with regard to alleviating human suffering and improving the human condition, and when compared to virtually any other substance of similar effect is vastly more safe effective, beneficial and cost effective?
To attempt to freeze understanding of a topic to a past reference point and disregard subsequent advances, or to only focus on part of an equation to the exclusion of the whole is to ignore the whole truth. Is not the intentional withholding of information a form of manipulation and lying? We all make mistakes, but when our mistakes are pointed out, and no effort is made to correct such mistakes then those mistakes are transformed from mistakes or misguided good intent into lies and intentional deception.
Perspective
Statistically significant numbers of people have been using colloidal silver as a dietary supplement for many years at the time of this writing, no doubt measured in millions of users. Colloidal silver has also been in wide use for a very long period of time as the preferred treatment of serious burns, in all burn centers worldwide. Silver has also been in wide use for water purification purposes for an equally long period of time. In recent years silver is also taking on a significant role in the general treatment of wounds, particularly with regard to wounds involving MRSA and organisms that conventional treatments are becoming ineffective against.
An obvious question is, if there is significant risk involved with regard to silver preparations, then why aren't there many reported incidents of adverse effects, reactions or other problematic effects documented as resulting from such use? We find it very interesting that there has been a tendency among certain personalities to ignore the preponderance of data that illustrates the benefits of silver while pushing the envelope to attempt to find only fault. For instance there is a concern regarding the development of organisms that may develop a resistance to silver. But let's think this through. It is a known fact that silver is present in all water and soil, and although the amounts on average are very small, the effects of silver are also known to be active even in these small amounts. We must also consider that just because the average amounts of silver are small it is also known that there are plentiful instances where amounts are present in the environment that exceed what might be used for example in wound management for MRSA.
What is the point? Well the point is that virtually every microorganism that one could be concerned with is already being exposed to silver somewhere, and has been for a very long time, in fact longer than we humans have been around. If such exposure might possibly spawn a resistant strain of organism, then this is something that would occur regardless of human activity. The real point here is that silver and various organisms have been coming into contact with each other as long as they both have existed on the Earth, and if the issue of resistant strain development occurring due to such conditions were of paramount legitimate concern it would already be in evidence to have occurred naturally, but that is not the case. There have been organisms found that have adapted to silver and grow in close proximity to areas where there are high levels of silver, yet pathogens that are resistant to silver are virtually non-existent and as a rule-of-thumb do not occur unless unnatural modifications are introduced to artificially create silver-resistant organisms. To my way of thinking it appears as if silver, is, in a manner of speaking, a kind-of immune system of nature. Furthermore I am much more concerned about the threat of genetically designed pathogens making their way into the wild than I am from wild naturally occurring organisms becoming as great of a threat.
I am not saying there should not be a concern about legitimate issues, however lets get real here and give credit to facts and not blindly ignore benefits in favor of obsessions with finding potential fault rather than dealing with things as they actually exist in total.
What is the deal here anyway? Are the pharmaceutical companies the sole source of primary research funds? If so, are they handing out free stupid pills with research grant checks and instructions on how not to find anything good with regard to colloidal silver? Could it be that the lucrative pharmaceutical antibiotics industry is threatened by little ole colloidal silver and is behind the propagation of a bad attitude toward colloidal silver? The suppression efforts and disinformation efforts have been done with such outright stupidity and empty logic that even the terminally brainwashed are hard-pressed to find ways to continue to defend their negative position regarding this topic without jeopardizing what remains of their credibility. Well anyway, regardless of the intent, motives, spin, bad science, bad attitudes and negative opinions, such activities have failed miserably. Apparently too many people did not follow instructions and take their stupid pills and the truth regarding the past, present and potential benefits of nano and colloidal silver is emerging anyway.
For kicks here is a example of someone that sees things in a similar light:
Antibacterial silver products finally begin to emerge after years of FDA oppression
Link: http://www.newstarget.com/010761.html
Common Sense
In essence Logic dictates that if millions of people have used such preparations regularly since the very early 1900s and in earnest since the 1970s, then there should be adequate documentation of any adverse effects, concerns and potentially problematic issues. As it turns out there is a wealth of documentation and except for rare instances problems are nearly zilch. With the exception of argyria, and that seems most relevant to misuse of extremely large amounts of compounds such as silver nitrate, there are few to no known drawbacks. If one takes all factors into account, colloidal silver has a long record of known-proven and potential benefits, while at the same time lacks the adverse effects that are common place with virtually every pharmaceutical preparation available. Colloidal silver has a record which pharmaceuticals can only aspire to. So why aren't more professionals taking a public stand and casting colloidal silver in a positive light? Furthermore, why do large numbers of people use colloidal silver as a dietary supplement? Are we to believe that benefit that large numbers of people claim to derive is mass placebo effect or delusions? Are we to believe that ongoing increasing use by the general public, which obviously must be sustained by perceived benefit is a sustained delusion, or is it more likely that the few shrill detractors who see no benefit could be wrong?
What seems to have occurred as a rather simplistic analysis, is that formal medicine has largely opposed colloidal silver after the FDA ruling in 1999. Experts most often rely on other so-called experts in order to form an opinion, while the public has formed their own opinion via direct experience. Each side seems to have become suspicious of the opinion and position of the other. Meanwhile serious research and acceptance continues, driven by markets that care not for politics and other people's opinions, but results only. Ongoing research and developments are primarily driven by those who think outside of the box, mostly as a feature of independent research and individual and independent business industriousness. The tide of this topic is changing rapidly now because the truth is not something that can be stamped out or spirited away.
Note: I will use the term dispersions to indicate silver dispersed into a liquid for ease of conversation and to provide a term other than colloid which may or may not be accurate to describe the substance in question.
Common sense dictates that, proper research regarding toxicity as well as any serious research, should include documentation regarding the technical attributes of the substance involved. This is simply good science, and is common sense with regard to any form of scientific investigation, especially when the resulting data is to be publicly presented as fact and reputations are on the line. Comparisons and proper attribute descriptions should be carefully delineated, so as to establish differences between different forms of silver dispersions used in any testing, so that results regarding one form of dispersion are not confused with another principally and technically different form. Moreover such efforts also help to add clarity when reviewing past literature.
A form of silver that is bound with a protein (a mild silver protein) or is a compound, a powder, a gel etc. should be recognized as being different from other forms, such as colloidal-state silver water. Even silver in water should be recognized as being completely different from other silver in water dispersions. In particular the speciations must be properly differentiated by technically accurate means such as average particle size by volume, as well as total amount per liter (ppm/ppb) and ratio of colloidal and ionic particles. This is one issue that I personally have found to be particularly difficult for people in general to grasp. I guess it is because it is easy to assume that silver in water is simply silver in water. As it turns out, this is far from the case. As difficult as it may be to fathom at first, it is possible to have hundreds or even thousands of different types of colloidal silver, which is determined primarily by average particle size. Differences may be minimal or very pronounced depending on the intended use. There are issues involved that in my opinion are not yet fully understood. For example the state of the water itself is a factor, and this fellow researcher is one of the most astounding and fascinating factors as concerns colloids and life in general. I have little doubt that within a few generations people in this field of endeavor will look back and laugh at our inability to have seen what will then be seen as obvious.
Differences such as particle size and surface area are not minimal concerns, rather these issues are particularly important, especially as this particular topic is concerned. Anyone with valid scientific acumen will recognize these issues as being critical factors that cannot be overlooked, minimized and must be properly recorded, especially when such studies are presented as fact and influence large numbers of people or a whole field of endeavor.
As previously mentioned, the apparent reason that any and every liquid semi-liquid, gel or compound is called "Colloidal Silver" even if it is a misnomer, was most likely born of difficulties in dealing with the anomalous nature of the relevant substances. The term colloidal silver, is still commonly applied to all solutions, gels, compounds etc. that are in a liquid or semi liquid and even powdered state, simply because such substances contain some form of silver. However we are now to a point in time that we can no longer suffer these technical inaccuracies if we truly intend to be scientifically accurate.
It does not take a colloidal scientist to recognize that colloidal silver water would be expected to have attributes with regard to toxicity, that is quite different than other forms such as salts or compounds would have. Silver preparations that bind silver to another substance, such as a colloidal gel or protein, silver compounds or silver salts, should be properly identified and isolated with regard to statements made in documented research. This is very important as concerns researchers and industry as a whole. We need to avoid being further disadvantaged, discouraged or erroneously inhibited from conducting research and or developing technological advances due to confusion that results from the lack of such clarity and controls.
Argyria is a condition described as a gray discoloration of the skin. Instances of this condition historically are primarily caused by medical use of silver nitrate, compounds or protein mixtures. Nitrates, compounds and similar substances would be expected to cause such a condition. For example it is known that forms of silver nitrate will stain anything it comes into contact with, it would not be a surprise from a scientific perspective that such substances would cause argyria. What is hard to imagine is why such a substance would be used on people knowing in advance that it would likely cause such a condition?
Recommended daily allowances have been established for other minerals. For example, safe and effective amounts have been established for Iron. It is also known that although when used in recommended amounts it is safe. Exceeding the established safe amounts can not only be harmful but even fatal. For example; "Iron supplement poisoning is the leading cause of poisoning death among children under the age of 6" as stated here:
Link: http://jhhs.client.web-health.com/web- health/topics/ChildrensHealth/childrenshealth/iron.html
Even though such severe health risks are in evidence as fact regarding iron supplements, iron supplements are widely used and considered safe in recommended amounts. The average daily allowance for iron is 15 mg a day for females between the ages of 11 and 50. There is 10 mg of silver present in a 10 ppm solution of colloidal silver, one would have to consume 1.5 liters of a 10 ppm silver solution in order to ingest 15 mg. That may explain why research considerations regarding the ingestion of teaspoon size amounts of 10 ppm colloidal silver mineral water are commonly relegated to the field of homeopathy, since the total intake in such cases may amount to fractions of a mg. Furthermore silver is not attributed with causing death as common Iron supplements are, the primary issues is argyria. Even when taking into consideration that in order for argyria to occur that particle size is relevant, and that reported cases cite accumulation of 5 micron particles in tissue, and simply focus on total amount of silver accumulation attributed to this condition, which is measured in grams. Then attempt to make a correlation of needed consumption of 10 ppm colloidal silver to attain an intake of for instance one gram, that would be 1,000 milligrams. One liter of 10 ppm colloidal silver contains 10 milligrams of silver, therefore in order to consume one gram of silver in a single dose one would have to consume 100 liters of 10 ppm colloidal silver in order to ingest 1,000 milligrams.
To put this in further perspective, cases from the early 1900's that resulted in argyria, were due to the fact that doses exceeded grams over a short period of time, and that these gram size doses were often the very staining compound silver nitrate. Moreover particle size is the most relevant factor in determining the potential for accumulation in tissue, along with total amount of exposure. What is important to get across at this juncture is that current technology does not create micron sized particles, current technology now creates vastly smaller nanometer sized particles. Nanometer sized particles can be uniformly spread over a much wider area. Meaning that although the particle size and total amount used these new nano sized particles still cover a larger surface area. This is the reason why it is now possible to achieve results that exceed what was possible in the past, while using comparatively minute amounts relative to past colloidal preparations. It is also the primary explanation of why toxicity has diminished to the point of being nearly moot.
It should also be noted that use of silver nitrate is currently only applied in controlled settings by medical personnel and is not to my knowledge available to nor in use by the public. Most importantly is the difference between current colloidal preparations and those of the past. Today's colloidal silver, when properly made has a greatly reduced particle size, which in turn means that the amount needed to be not only as effective as in the past but even more effective. Which ultimately translates to particles and amounts that do not accumulate and cause argyria when used in accordance with established regulations. This is the reason that would explain why millions of people have been able to use colloidal silver dietary supplements regularly without ill effect. This also clarifies why some instances have occurred but only when extremely large particle size and extremely large amounts are abused/used. A Gump-ism is most fitting here, stupid is as stupid does. This may at first sound as if I am leaning too far in favor of lack of concern regarding risk, but you would be wrong. I am not disregarding risk, rather I am clarifying my view of this issue from a more inclusive of real-world perspective of actual conditions than I have seen presented by others elsewhere. Perhaps this will help some of you gain different perspectives as you form your own opinion.
Less is More
The world health organization has set a safe limit of 1 ppm of silver in all water drank during the course of a lifetime, estimated to be approximately 70 years. To achieve consumption of this amount of silver by consuming 10 ppm colloidal silver, as an example only. One would need to take into account total daily water intake. A common formula for daily water intake is 0.5 ounces x Body Weight in Pounds = Daily Fluid Requirement of water in ounces. For example a 200 lb person would consume 100 ounces of water daily. Adding a 10 ppm colloidal silver to all the water drank, assuming one is drinking distilled water so we know that no silver is already present. Then one would add approximately 10 ounces of 10 ppm colloidal silver to 90 ounces of distilled water, which would result in 100 ounces of water with about 1 ppm silver in the total amount of water drank daily. 10 ounces of 10 ppm colloidal silver is far more than the measly couple of teaspoons of colloidal silver consumed by those following the product label for suggested use of a common colloidal silver dietary supplement, yet this scenario does meet World Health Organization standards as well as most communities in the U.S.A. for acceptable silver levels of silver in drinking water during the course of a lifetime. Please do not construe this as encouragement or an avocation to do as is stated above, it is for illustration and example only.
The point is that even for already identified safe and effective minerals, there are some that also come with serious safety considerations, but under normal circumstances and current state of the art technology silver does not pose such problems. What is puzzling is that silver seems to be ostracized from consideration for an RDA, or even a correlation to benefit. Even though silver does not appear to be as serious a health risk as iron is, and in spite of the fact that perhaps millions of people seem to believe they derive benefit from its use, which is most commonly reported to me as a perceived enhanced immune function. Yet it seems that for reasons left to speculation, silver does not appear to be up for serious consideration of acknowledgement as a health benefit that warrants a daily requirement. If current trends regarding silver are used as a gauge I would not expect an RDA to be established any time soon, as even the mere mention of a correlation of low silver levels and human disease in product literature will surely invite a visit by armed individuals. Individuals who may then confiscate product, and cause one to be fined, imprisoned or both in addition to losing ones' business. But that does not mean that serious research that may prove a relation to proper immune function benefit is not being conducted by qualified entities, or that a change of heart will not come or be forced by material facts that counter present assumptions some time in the future.
There are those who claim that any amount of colloidal silver is risk without benefit. There are also those who believe that using any amount of colloidal silver provides benefit without risk. Common sense dictates that the truth is more likely to be found somewhere between these two diametrically opposed perspectives. Only proper research conducted by qualified entities, who address all issues concerned from the perspective of current technology without bias may the truths of the matter then be properly established.
The term Argyria, is identified as a condition of a bluish gray color of the skin, and Argyosis the bluing of the eye white. Such conditions are attributed to being caused by very heavy exposure to airborne silver dust, silver compounds and silver salts primarily, although colloidal silver is also cited as a potential cause. In our review of this issue it is our determination that the few instances of cases of argyria that are available for review and reportedly caused by use of colloidal silver are not if fact caused by a true colloidal silver that meets proper scientific classification as such. Instances where so-called silver substances have been blamed, after careful review it is clear to us that the type of silver and amounts that were involved would be hundreds or thousands of parts per million and particle sizes would be larger than one micron, or even larger. Substances that are larger than one micron are not accurately identified nor considered a true colloid with technical accuracy. Even when significant distinctions such as the substance involved is actually a staining silver compound such as silver nitrate, these distinctions and clarifications are usually remiss in such argyria accounts. It is only possible to uncover such facts via diligent detective work or gaining direct access to the case files.
For example, at the end of this section there is a link to a case of argyria that was reportedly caused by colloidal silver. Therein it is stated that the people thus effected had consumed 16 ounces three times daily of a 450 ppm silver fluid for ten months. There are 33.81 fluid ounces in a liter. At 450 ppm there is 450 milligrams per liter. By consuming 16 ounces of 450 ppm silver dispersed in water daily, this person was consuming approximately 675 milligrams of silver per day. Put another way 1.350 grams every 2 days. Given that the silver preparation was reportedly created by this person via instructions off of the internet, and recognizing as I do that the approach used most likely created a deep gray, what we call mud of large particle size. Then it becomes clear that such an occurrence of argyria would be expected to occur by anyone who has even a moderate understanding of making colloidal preparations and the thresholds of toxicity/accumulation. I am saddened to review this case for many reasons that should go without saying. Virtually any substance can be misused and abused.
While we are on the issue of exceeding the established Reference Dose for Chronic Oral Exposure (RfD) Silver (CASRN 7440-22-4) http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0099.htm
It should be noted that there are still a number of so-called colloidal silver products available that are stated to be hundreds or even thousands of parts per million. Without my specifying any one such source of a high ppm silver dispersion, and without reviewing what such suppliers are stating is a safe dose, I can say that, it is hard to feature how anyone marketing such products is able to recommend a dose that legally meets the above mentioned reference dose unless they are suggesting using just a few drops daily, and depending on the ppm perhaps just a few drops only occasionally. Just because a supplier has sold a high ppm product for some time and has not encountered problems in terms of having people come down with argyria, or encountering problems from a regulatory legal angle, that does not mean it will not at some point occur, if what they are promoting is out of line with regulatory requirements, and that is not simply my opinion. Non multa sed multum, (not quantity but quality).
There are some researchers who have indicated that the issue of risk regarding colloidal silver was not properly understood nor presented even before the 1999 ruling. Dr. M. Paul Farber contended that the issue of Argyria was misrepresented and misunderstood, as evidenced by this quote from the book "The Micro Silver bullet?" by Dr. M. Paul Farber 1996 page XII (ISBN 1-887742-00-X)
In reference to a "Journal of American Medical Association, article, October 18 1995, volume 274 # 15,"
"These Case history presentations represent biased and unprofessional writing. The author's apparent inability to understand the difference between a silver nitrate, sulfide, or other silver compound demonstrates their lack of understanding basic chemical properties. The matrix, substrate, and particle size are all critical to the varied functions and reactions with use of these products." (End quote)
(Further on the same page)
"That is why there has not been a single case of Argyria from a properly manufactured modern day colloidal silver product. The cases of Argyria reported in the 1920's and 1930's resulted because the technology of the day was unable to produce a colloidal silver product with a small enough particle size." (End Quote)
(additionally on the same page)
"The diameter of the capillary lumen is 4-9 microns. Therefore the body has no problem in excreting the silver particles." ( End quote)
Reference: "The Micro Silver bullet?" by Dr. M. Paul Farber 1996 page XII (ISBN 1-887742-00-X)
The reported cases of argyria usually referenced from the early 1900's that are commonly sited , generally involve extremely high and frequent doses of silver salts/compounds such as Silver sulfate, silver nitrate or silver chloride. Doses given in the early 1900s may have been hundreds or even thousands of times higher than the amounts consumed in current times, and in forms that would be expected to cause such problems. During that era, when argyria resulted these factors it is virtually certain that such an outcome could have been predicted by any competent party in advance. The attributes of older preparations were also quite different when compared to products produced using current technology. Therefore, it is important that these points are given proper consideration when doing a literary review of the subject of toxicity.
Summary
Concerns about silver preparations are not unfounded, however there needs to be a distinction between compounds and other forms of preparations that are not accurately and scientifically colloids. It is clear that due to the many reasons pointed out throughout this material that the primary issue of toxicity is due to the very distant past use of such preparations or with regard to a few current day incidents the severe misuse of preparations thought to be colloidal silver. I say thought to be colloidal silver because as will become evident as you read the remained of this information it becomes clear that proper scientific description has to be applied in order to be accurate.
It should not be assumed that people who have raised a concern regarding colloidal silver are simply mean-spirited or have an agenda. Because of the complications of understanding the material involved it is easy to see how people have adopted a position that from their level of understanding is in the public interest. That does not mean that past misunderstanding is justification to continue past misunderstandings or prejudices regarding this science.
Since the main concerns regarding colloidal silver has been associated with ingestion that is the focus of this commentary. That said you will also find info below that should cover most potential applications as well. Ultimately the amount of silver, the form of silver and the application it is to be used in will determine what if any concern there is. For example it should be noted that the last time I checked there are no warning labels on silver spoons or jewelry. Which illustrates common continuous exposure to silver. The point is that since there are many possible applications far beyond the focus of dietary or medical use. Although this is the case I will continue to address the issue as it has come to be most commonly associated.
Current technology applied to dispersing silver into water, ideally creates nano sized clusters of silver, a nano cluster is a group of atoms, much smaller than a micron, a micron is one-millionth of a meter. Nano means one billionth, a nanometer is one billionth of a meter. Not all processes are precise enough to maintain consistent nano-sized particles. Nano-size particles are able to effect an area magnitudes of orders larger than larger particles many times the total weight (dose) of past so-called colloidal silver. The new engineered nano particles are vastly different than preparations of the past. This fact is a primary reason that less silver is actually magnitudes of orders more effective than preparations of the past, and is also why the issue of toxicity can be minimized to the point of not overburdening the bodies ability to eliminate it, and thus not excessively accumulate.
The possibility to be exposed to excessive amounts of silver does exist via taking very large amounts of high ppm silver preparations in excess of regulatory guidelines. Generally available true colloidal silver dietary supplements in the 10 to 20 ppm range is what the vast majority of people in general have used as a dietary supplement without ill effect. The technical issues and concerns regarding this issue are further addressed via the links below.
There remains to be confusion regarding what colloidal silver actually is. In terms of available products that are available as a dietary supplement a rule of thumb is that a clear solution is actually ionic silver mineral water. On rare occasions a gold to tea colored true colloid is available which alternately can be accurately described as meso or nano particles. There are also products available that are combinations of colloidal and ionic particles. Not to add to the confusion, but it is true that it is possible to have many types of colloids, for instance a primary particle size of 1 nanometer, 3 nanometers, 4 nanometers etc. and to further complicate matters fractions such as 1.5 or 1.75 nanometers can be found to be noticeably different from speciations of nearly the same size. It is true that the smaller the particles, the larger the surface area. In short the smaller particles are able to spread out and effect a much larger area that larger heavier particles. In general particles 25 nanometers or less appear t
During the past several years different approaches to dispersing silver into a colloidal like state have been developed, we are among such developers. We have been testing these new forms of colloidal dispersions, to say that such tests have yielded very interesting results is an understatement.
How much is too much?
"Trace amounts of silver are in the bodies of all humans and animals. We normally take in between 70 and 88 micrograms of silver a day, half of that amount from our diet. Humans have evolved with efficient methods of dealing with that intake, however over 99 percent is readily excreted from the body."
"According to United States Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) "Silver levels of less than 0.000001 mg silver per cubic meter of air (mg/m³), 0.2-2.0 parts silver per billion parts water (ppb) in surface waters, such as lakes and rivers, and 0.20-0.30 parts silver per million parts soil (ppm) in soils are found from naturally occurring sources. Silver compounds are also found in groundwater and at hazardous waste sites throughout the United States. Drinking water supplies in the United States have been found to contain silver levels of up to 80 ppb. Surveys show that one-tenth to one third of samples taken from drinking water supplies (both groundwater and surface water) contain silver at levels greater than 30 ppb."
Ref http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/phs146.html
What are the government standards and guidelines on silver?
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends that the concentration of silver in public drinking water supplies not exceed one milligram per liter of water, i.e. one part per million (1 ppm).
Workers in the United States are protected from excess silver exposure through regulations set by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Silver in workplace air may not exceed .01 milligrams per cubic meter for an 8-hour workday and a 40-hour workweek. This is the same standard recommended by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).
Reference: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~toxmetal/TXQAag.shtml
Helpful links:
The EPA Reference Dose (RFD) for oral silver exposure is 5 micrograms/kg/d with a critical dose estimated at 14 micrograms/kg/d. This is used to calculate the dosage chart linked below. This is the amount that can be safely taken daily over a lifetime (70 years) without adverse affect.
Reference Dose for Chronic Oral Exposure (RfD)
Silver (CASRN 7440-22-4)
http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0099.htm
Relevant links:
-- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Public Health Statement for Silver
-- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) Short fact sheet for Silver
-- Silver Metal Material Safety Data Sheet (pdf format)
-- Chemistry: Web Elements Periodic Table: Silver
Chronic toxicity data by U.S. EPA.
The EPA regarding web site: "Reach for life colloidal silver information:
http://reach-for-life.com/prodinfo/colsil_iris.htm
Toxicity Summary for SILVER
Risk Assessment Information System (RAIS)
http://risk.lsd.ornl.gov/tox/profiles/silver_f_V1.shtml
Guidelines for drinking water quality
Extracted from: Guidelines for drinking-water quality, 2nd ed.
Vol. 2. Health criteria and other supporting information.
Geneva, World Health Organization, 1996. pp. 338-343.
http://who.int/water_sanitation_health/GDWQ/Chemicals/silverfull.htm
Conclusion
The bottom line from what we have gathered is that argyria is the primary issue as concerns colloidal silver with regard to human exposure as it relates to toxicity, and is limited to a cosmetic issue. Furthermore, the issue of argyria is very rare and primarily relevant to silver compounds and such industries as mining, or in rare instances extreme overuse of questionable forms of silver dispersions. Even though some uses of silver are increasing the idea that environmental exposure is new or not known is absurd, as evidenced by many locations monitoring and showing that decreased of the use of silver in photo-film preparation are now on the decrease. Keep in mind that the environmental exposure has a very long standing history as evidenced here.
There are other concerns such as the development of resistant organisms, which are of legitimate scientific concern, which is also addressed via various sources above, but to date has not been shown to be other than a potemkin (false front), presented by a few individuals tied to groups of an environmental nature, who spout-off many allegations and to date I have not seen validation of the concerns they claim as concerns. All it takes is throwing such groups some bad data and let them go nuts. Who would do that? People who share a vested interested in the projected multiple trillion dollar market this technology represents, and only with contrived or speculative concern that limits entry to the most valuable markets to those who have the millions required to meet EPA and FDA study requirements of newly established rulings that hinder small companies to the benefit of larger companies, or companies whose existing products are threatened. In effect a facade that paints the picture of protecting the public, when the real-world effect primarily excludes all but the mega-corporations from market participation.
The first big thrust of the ptomkin effort to thwart companies engaged in the manufacturing and marketing of silver since the FDA final ruling was around Thanksgiving 2006, as evidenced by the following article:
ENN FULL STORY
EPA to Regulate a Form of Nanotechnology for the First Time
Link: http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=11714
This article appears to sound as if nano and ionic silver are the only substances targeted by the EPA, and though that may be true in spirit, it has nothing to due with the language of the ruling and law, and everything to do with public perception.
The actual EPA ruling that the above article incorporates though by slight of hand, says nothing about silver. See the ruling here:
EPA Issues Final Rule on Aquatic Pesticide Applications
Release date: 11/21/2006
Snip
"The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires that pesticides be registered by EPA before they can be sold or distributed. Before they are registered, they must undergo extensive study and review to help ensure that, when properly used, they do not cause unreasonable adverse effects on human health and the environment. Pesticide labels contain application instructions. Applications of pesticides that violate the FIFRA labels are subject to enforcement.'
Source: EPA Issues Final Rule on Aquatic Pesticide Applications
What appears to have occurred is that a group called "nanotechproject.org" who has elicited the cooperation of an so-called environmental scientist that has/is been in the employ of the EPA to assist in influencing EPA regulations, with an eye toward lofty goals that places them in the drivers seat of a market that will soon be measured in Trillions, but under the auspices of a public service. However, as is usually the case, there is more to the story. Big Big money steers this machine in spite of the painted-on environmentalist persona and allegedly pubic concern. Who stands behind the group that wishes to be self-appointed to the lofty position of a private entity that establishes and guides the newly emerging nanotech industry?
The Pew Charitable Trusts involvement in influencing policy regarding nanotechnology.
http://www.nanotechproject.org/25
Involvement by "Liberal reform groups created a Potemkin movement,,,"?
http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110006449
Potemkin village \puh-TEM(P)-kin\, noun :
An impressive facade or display that hides an undesirable fact or state; a false front. Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/wordoftheday/archive/2004/06/17.html
The Pew Charitable Trusts, a major supported of the think tank involved in influencing nano technology as evidenced above, was established by the heirs of the Sun Oil (Sunoco) fortune.
Regarding nano particles. Ionic colloidal silver and colloidal silver in general are not newly created particles. Pure forms of silver either as ions or as particles ranging from sub nanometer ions or particles exist in nature and are not newly created. The EPA has standards for allowable amounts of silver in drinking water, as it is a material that is already acknowledged to be widely present in virtually all drinking water. Due to the technical nature of the science of colloidal chemistry and nano technology anticipate continued conflicts between nano silver manufacturers and those who are influencing policy and regulatory bodies in such a manner that places undue burden upon long standing established product categories such as colloidal silver, which has a history of use that exceeds 100 years to date.
In spite of these facts the materials involved are merely being treated as new substances due to fact that these long used and studied materials now match more current descriptions. Manufactures in this industry we have spoken with find it to be rather amazing that nano-silver is the target of concern, while actually new materials that have never existed before, and the safety and effects on people and the environment are not known.
Yet these materials are not the focus of alleged concern regarding the issue of nano-materials, instead nano-silver with a know and established history of use is, and as is evidenced by the EPA Issues Final Rule on Aquatic Pesticide Applications linked above which says the following: "Before they are registered, they must undergo extensive study and review to help ensure that, when properly used, they do not cause unreasonable adverse effects on human health and the environment." In effect the language used by the EPA means that any manufacturer will need to meet the criteria of "extensive study" which in various EPA material indicates 100 or more serious studies. Which means ultimately that this regulation, which is merely based on an allegedly concern will drive every small manufacturer who cannot afford to conduct testing that meets their criteria, and which can be expected to cost millions, will be driven out of these areas of commerce.
This scenario then leaves a market that is already projected to be measured in "trillions" of dollars of markets solely in the hands of only the large corporate conglomerates.
What should happen is that the EPA should bear the burden of producing 'probable cause', should take into account that they are negatively effecting the U.S. economy by disrupting a market acknowledge to be valued in billions, and should bear the cost of proving or disproving their environmental concerns to the advantage of all consumers and manufacturers.
Instead consumers will lose the balance of cost effectiveness now manifest, will lose access in whole or in part to such products as will be effected, and while this occurs will not be protected from potentially truly dangerous and unknown effects of products that will go unchecked. What this appears to be when all facets of this issue are considered, is yet another example of powerful interests contriving and conspiring with our governmental agencies to the benefit of big business and to the detriment of the public, while feigning or manipulated to believe they are acting in the public interest as a matter of serious public interest, in a manner that address the most pressing issues first and foremost.
Upon investigation of the matter as a whole, as we have done, it is clear that as concerns nano-technology in particular, true potential dangers are going undressed and small business is being destroyed to the benefit of big business by actions such as these. Keep in mind that colloidal silver and similar minerals in the 10 - 20 ppm range, and from 1-100 nanometers are nothing more that fancy forms of mineral water. Do you really feel that the EPA's energy is best spent protecting you from mineral water that has more than a 100 year history of use, and in essence is a part of natural water sources for millions or billions of years, or would you be more concerned about nano materials that have been very recently engineered/created?
We should also take note that these newly created materials are already being used in food and personal care items, materials that have never existed before, that have attributes that have never existed before and whose use, safety and effectiveness is measured in mere months or a few years. Yet these materials are low on the list of EPA concerns as compared to mineral water? Why, we think it is because as has been noted in the above links, that silver nano particles and ions are big business, and projected to be huge business, that big business wants to keep to itself by making it impossible for anyone but big business to participate in. Is it mere speculation that this industry has been targeted by contrived reasons, or is it easily deduced fact, look more deeply yourself and you be the judge.
For nano technology research information:
Barbara Karn, karn.barbara@epa.gov , 202-343-9704
Nora Savage, savage.nora@epa.gov , 202-343-9858
Related:
EPA uses nanotech regulation ploy to target colloidal silver while ignoring all other nanotech particles
Snip... " "Isn't it interesting that the EPA chooses to completely ignore the environmental safety of all the millions of tons of pharmaceuticals flushed down toilets every year while selectively targeting silver products?" he said. "Why isn't the EPA concerned about the environmental toxicity of pharmaceuticals?"...
Continued at Link: http://www.newstarget.com/021231.html
We are not as easily fooled as the out-of-the-loop general public, and to you whom it may concern, we will not be so easily discouraged by your slight-of-hand market control efforts, neither will others in this industry.
I am not the only one who has made these observations:
"Some of the R&D reports that cite all of the "BOO FACTORS" about nanotechnology are paid for by companies that are trying to dominate this science globally. Firms like Dow, DuPont, Halliburton, etc that have a game plan that they will dominate the next $1 to $2 trillion per year industry.
It will not happen for several reasons, first being the United States does not hold the patent on math, chemistry, physics, quantum mechanics, or nanotechnology. You have to consider the intellectual arrogance of a nation that would presume such, as if they alone had the right to music and art and quality of life.
It will not happen but that is what they are trying to do. They are trying to dissuade venture capitalists, major investors, and even start up companies like mine from coming into the market with better technology and taking considerable blocks of market share on scientific excellence alone. I do not have to write a diatribe to convince most Americans that Halliburton does not excel at anything but questionable business practices and unmitigated greed.
I can assertively state that they do not excel at nanotechnology."
Full article here: http://www.rense.com/general74/nanan.htm
A forum post:
"Apparently the growing awareness of the effectiveness of nanoparticle colloidal silver has prompted the pharmaceutical cartel to sic their watchdog lackeys at the EPA on everything containing this newest, most effective form of silver. It seems that the EPA main push will be to gag any remarks that nanoparticle silver kills germs, which in fact it does better than anything discovered to date... and is non-toxic. Their logic goes against everything so far published by the EPA. The EPA has approved nanoparticle silver products to kill germs on all hard surfaces in hospitals, clinics, offices and homes. It is in use today, with full blessings of the EPA, at numerous government funded Veterans Hospitals. It is the first non-toxic tool that they have found to effectively combat antibiotic resistant bacteria. The EPA approves silver for use in municipal water systems, in ionic nanoparticle size, to kill germs. Several studies in their possession completely refute the now posited theory that nanoparticle silver will kill probiotic bacteria in our rivers. Thousands of communities are using this electro-silver/copper filtration technology today, and have been for years, with no adverse effect on the environment. The EPA itself has done all of the studies that prove the nontoxicity of pure silver, especially in the homeopathic quantities found in modern colloidal silvers, and other products using this technology. It fact, it is probably responsible for eliminating many bacterial threats to the aquatic food chain. So, what have we here? A hit piece crowing about the new rules that subtly protect the huge pharma profit center, antibiotics. Note the completely false presumptions used to create the fear factor in the public. This is about as disingenuous as the EPA can get. The demonization of medical silver ramps up a notch."
Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com
Since silver containing products have been disallowed from use in medical treatment by the FDA in 1999, the acceptable use by the FDA of silver products in medicine has been primarily limited to wound and burn care by clinicians. However there is a growing interest by qualified professional clinicians and relevant parties to conduct additional research and are interested in the issue of toxicity. We have included more information on toxicity below for the more technically inclined. Those who are not interested in further data on this topic can go on to the next chapter now, or continue to the text below.
Next Chapter: Different Forms Of Colloidal Silver
A Discussion of Silver as an Antimicrobial Agent: Alleviating the Confusion
- David W. Brett, MS, BS
http://www.o-wm.com/article/5125
Wound Care
Excerpted with permission from WOUNDS. Demling RH, DeSanti L. Effects of silver on wound management. WOUNDS 2001;13(1 Suppl A):1–15. * * *
*Antimicrobial mechanisms of action of silver
"Despite its long use, the bactericidal mechanisms of action of silver are not fully understood. Russell and Hugo have provided a comprehensive review [2] . Referred to as a 'general protoplasmic poison', ionic silver will interact with multiple target sites within the cell (Figure 1) .
Most of the sensitive sites are likely to be proteinaceous in nature and their alterations will result in structural and metabolic cell disruption. In addition to its bactericidal activities, silver is also fungicidal and virucidal. Its molecular mechanisms of fungicidal action are similar to those against bacteria with protein damage through sulfydryl group interactions. Its virucidal mechanisms of action involve alteration of viral protein, but also damage to the viral nucleic acid [18] ."
Resistance mechanisms
"Recent studies have focused on the molecular mechanisms for resistance to silver. Three main mechanisms have been identified [26] :
-
decreasing intracellular accumulation
-
increasing the production of neutralizing compounds
-
reduction of the metal ions to a less toxic oxidation state.
Decreasing accumulation of silver has been well described and involves two main processes: the reduction of silver uptake and the efflux of ionic silver. Decreasing uptake, by affecting a non-specific transporter, has been described for other metallic salts where metal tolerance occurred [26] . Efflux pumps are increasingly associated with antimicrobial resistance and their involvement in silver resistance is no exception [24] . In addition, the chelation of silver by the sulfydryl groups of metal-binding proteins, resulting in the formation of an inactive, insoluble silver sulfide, has been described [27] . Furthermore, resistance to silver by P. aeruginosa has been linked to the reduction of silver ions to the metallic form. Compared with the implication of decreased accumulation in silver resistance, these mechanisms have not been well investigated."
Plasmid-mediated resistance
"The occurrence of plasmid-mediated resistance is a particular concern; this has been well documented in a number of Gram-negative bacteria, such as P. aeruginosa, P. stutzeri, Citrobacter spp., Serratia marcescens and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. Plasmid-mediated resistance has been associated with co-resistance to other biocides and antibiotics [22] [28] . This is a particularly worrying prospect because the emergence of multiresistant micro-organisms can be a serious threat to antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment. When faced with an outbreak of resistance, healthcare professionals should keep in mind the fact that some strains might also be resistant to topical antimicrobial agents. Furthermore, resistant clones might persist in the clinical setting [29] ."
Molecular basis for resistance to silver cations in Salmonella
Amit Gupta, Kazuaki Matsui, Jeng-Fan Lo & Simon SilverDepartment of Microbiology & Immunology, University of Illinois at Chicago, M/C 790, Room 703, 835 South Wolcott Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60612-7344, USA
Correspondence should be addressed to Amit Gupta agupta@uic.edu
http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v5/n2/abs/nm0299_183.html
Bacterial silver resistance: molecular biology and uses and misuses of silver compounds
FEMS Microbiology Reviews
Volume 27 Page 341 - June 2003
doi:10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00047-0
Interactions of Bacteria With Metals
"Silver compounds are used widely as effective antimicrobial agents to combat pathogens (bacteria, viruses and eukaryotic microorganisms) in the clinic and for public health hygiene. Silver cations (Ag+) are microcidal at low concentrations and used to treat burns, wounds and ulcers. Ag is used to coat catheters to retard microbial biofilm development. Ag is used in hygiene products including face creams, 'alternative medicine' health supplements, supermarket products for washing vegetables, and water filtration cartridges. Ag is generally without adverse effects for humans, and argyria (irreversible discoloration of the skin resulting from subepithelial silver deposits) is rare and mostly of cosmetic concern."
Link: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00047-0
Toxicological aspects of topical silver pharmaceuticals.
PubMed&list_uids=8726163&dopt=Citation
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
PMID: 8726163 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Note that the following case, in terms of the reference material used, relies on data primarily from the 1930s. This case provide one example of an instance of excessive use of a colloidal dispersion that resulted in argyria. The stated dose is 450 ppm 16 ounces three times daily for 10 months, this home-made dispersion was almost certainly not a true colloid. This case report does honestly convey that argyria is rare:
Systemic argyria associated with ingestion of colloidal silver
Akhil Wadhera MD and Max Fung MD
Dermatology Online Journal 11 (1): 12
Department of Dermatology, University of California Davis
http://dermatology.cdlib.org/111/case_reports/argyria/wadhera.html
Definition of Catalyst
Chemistry A substance, usually used in small amounts relative to the reactants, that modifies and increases the rate of a reaction without being consumed in the process.
Source: American Heritage® Dictionary: Description of catalyst
Catalysts are of critical importance in chemistry and biology.
All enzymes are catalysts that expedite the biochemical reactions necessary for life. The enzymes in saliva, for example, accelerate the conversion of starch to glucose , doing in minutes what would otherwise take weeks.
Although not usually thought of in this light RNA and DNA are now recognized for their role as Catalysts. Of particular interest to us is the realization that RNA-catalysed reactions require the presence of a divalent metal ion . See: RNA and DNA as Catalysts.
Jons Jakob Berzelius (1779-1848) a well known Swedish chemist, introduced the concept and coined the word "catalyst." He also established the atomic and molecular weights of thousands of substances, discovered several elements including selenium , first isolated silicon and titanium, and created the present system of writing chemical symbols and reactions.
Due to their high selectivity, precious metal catalysts are often the first choice as heterogeneous catalysts for a wide variety of reactions, including hydrogenation, hydrosilation, isomerization and carbonylation. The 10 ppm concentration can be applied to a broad range of applications, including organic synthesis in the pharmaceutical industry.
"Silver has an established history of preventing infection in burn wounds, and the development of novel silver-containing dressings has sparked a new interest in its use for wound management. Silver has many properties that make it suitable for this purpose. Combining silver with suitable dressings has been shown to decrease some of the unwanted effects associated with the broad-spectrum, non-specific antimicrobial properties of silver, such as toxicity and staining, while increasing the overall antimicrobial efficacy. The safe and effective use of silver dressings is critical to prevent the problem of emerging bacterial resistance, which arises when micro-organisms are in contact with a low (sub-inhibitory) concentration of silver. Most studies on the emergence of bacterial resistance to silver were not related to the use of silver in dressings. However, it could be important to survey silver resistance (or the lack of it) for such an application in situ , or to study the likelihood of the development of such resistance in vitro . The European Wound Management Association has developed practical advice on the use of topical antimicrobials [1] ."
http://www.worldwidewounds.com/2006/may/Maillard/Focus-On-Silver.html#anti-mech
Next » Different of Silver Preparations
Colloidal Silver's History – Medicinal-Roots to Present
Colloidal Silver Uses Research and Product Development
» top «
| Privacy and Site Notice | Contact | E-Newsletter | Home Page | Order Now | Affiliates |
(updated 10/07/2006)
We accept all major credit cards, PayPal, Google-Checkout and mail-orders.
