Beta (Finland) on 05/07/2020
a contribution to this discussion, would be great to hear your thoughts about this document. (I haven't been against or for silver inhalation, just interested if it is safe). I have been recommended it by a MD in the past.
This document, titled âEnvironmental and Human Health Risks ofAerosolized Silver Nanoparticlesâ, (accessible from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3155/1047-3289.60.7.770) says:
âOnce inhaled, particles may deposit along the air-ways, from nasal and oral cavities to alveoli of the lungs,by impaction, sedimentation, interception, Brownianmotion, or electrostatics. The efficiency of each mecha-nism depends strongly on size29.. (â¦) Thedeposition efficiency oflarger 10- to 20-nm particles in the nasopharyngeal-laryngeal and tracheobronchial regions is less than 20%(per region); these particles have the highest depositionefficiency (50%) of any size in the alveolar region. â
In my understanding this means that the nanoparticles could be deposited into the lungs â interested to hear your thoughts on this.
Also this document states that lungs and liver were the main organs for prolonged AgNP accumulation (rats. 90 days). (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317952618_The_silver_lining_Towards_the_responsible_and_limited_usage_of_silver)
Please let me know what you think. I am totally open and very interested in the possibilty of using nebulised silver, but wondering if these mean that it may indeed accumulate in the lungs.
Best for you all.
Replied By Freda (Canada ) on 05/08/2020
Hi Art, What is the recommended time for nebulizing CS?
Replied By Art (California) on 05/08/2020
Hi, Freda!I am not a doctor so I can not give advice on dosing, but I can describe what I do for myself.
I use a small room cool mist vaporizer and add approximately one ounce of 20 parts per million uncapped AgNPs (Colloidal Silver).
I run the machine for 7 to 10 minutes while inhaling directly from the output port of the machine. If I do 7 minutes, I will do this a total of 4 times per day.
If I do it for 10 minutes, I will do it 3 times per day.
After each use, I dump out what is left in the machine because the ultrasonic force of the vaporizer will cause some of the silver to be knocked out of suspension since it is not capped. These particles will start to join other particles and become so large as to fall out of suspension to the floor of the vaporizer. This is referred to as agglomeration and when you inspect your vaporizer closely, you will see actual silver particles on the floor of the vaporizer.
I clean the vaporizer after each use and always use new AgNps for each use. Although I add about an ounce of AgNPs at each use, I am only inhaling a small fraction of that ounce. It takes at least an ounce for my cool mist vaporizer to operate properly for about 10 minutes. For me, a larger unit will be more wasteful as it may take more than an ounce to operate properly.
Art
Replied By Art (California) on 05/08/2020
The links you posted don't seem to work.
Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) will accumulate, at least temporarily once inhaled which is pretty much what is wanted, for them to stay around long enough to kill whatever the target pathogen is. In many studies (animal) the exposure levels are ridiculously high and often times quite lengthy. Particle size is always a factor and going below 10 nm will always show more toxicity. Staying in the sweet spot of 12~20 nm will give maximum pathogen neutralization with minimum toxicity to normal cells as shown in previous studies. On the other hand, something like inhaled H2O2 will be neutralized fairly quickly by catalase into oxygen and water and will essentially be gone quickly.
In many animal studies, the AgNP exposure that the researchers start with is already known to be toxic and these type of studies are questionable at best. If you give rats aerosolized AgNPs at dosing that is already known to be toxic and then say the AgNPs were toxic to the rats, well, I'm not sure of the purpose of such a study. In one study I read, they exposed rats to aerosolized AgNPs for 6 hours everyday for 90 days and then said that there were signs of toxicity! For people that actually inhale AgNP in an attempt to destroy a pathogen, the actual amount of silver inhaled is going to be magnitudes less than such a rat study and length of exposure for such a course of AgNPs is going to be much much less. In the 90 day rat study, the rats were killed at various stages up to the 90 days of the study period and then examined for AgNP buildup in the lungs and other organs. Not surprisingly, there was measurable AgNPs present, exactly as there should have been under the test circumstances as the rats had no time after AgNP exposure to rid the body of the AgNPs as they normally would because they were sacrificed and examined before their bodies could rid itself of the AgNPs. These type of studies have little practical value other than to further solidify the idea that if you inhale toxic amounts of AgNPs, you are going to see toxic effects.
Here is a link to a fairly recent study abstract (March 2020) where they used rats and exposed them to relatively high doses of aerosolized AgNPs for 6 hours a day for 28 days. In this study they allowed time for clearance of the AgNPs and noted two probable avenues of clearance. To me, the importance of this study is that the animals were given time to excrete the AgNPs and clear them even at the highest dose and even with elevated inflammation at that dose, through the rat's own natural process.
Note how the elevated inflammatory markers also decreased as they should have. Neutralization of any pathogen can involve a certain amount of inflammation and oxidative stress as this is typical for the body, with or without AgNPs. Had they sacrificed these rats directly after the final AgNP exposure, of course it would have shown residual AgNPs in multiple locations, but in this case it showed that even the highest dose exposure of AgNPs had cleared from these rats.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32157349
Sometimes understanding what the researchers underlying intent is, is helpful in determining the value of any given study. If a research team is merely replicating a previous study that has already been proven 10 times over, then maybe those researchers are professional researchers who are more in the business of getting funding for further research rather than actually establishing new and useful data.
Art