I've been trying to find out what is the story behind this video. I think the makers of the video somehow managed to mislead the Ugandan Red Cross Society and got their approval for doing this 'trial'. It now dissociates itself completely from the video, but no explanation for the events we see in the video has been given. See my blog for more on this: http://www.pepijnvanerp.nl/2013/05/fake-and-unethical-trial-video-claims-miracle-mineral-solution-cures-malaria/
I would be very interested to see the data on Chlorine Dioxide and Plasmodium spp.. Could you please forward me the papers as I had some difficulty in finding any in the Pubmed database. I did find a lot of patients with better oral hygiene... but I doubt it was due to the killing of malaria parasites lodged in their mouths being killed by their Chloride dioxide-containing mouth-wash.
I was also interested in your argument in favour of Chloride Dioxide, based on two separate and disconnected observations without scientific validity and human safety trials, and thought of two others you might like to endorse:
Bleach kills parasites - check. Bleach is a water disinfectant- check. Could this be the answer?
Extreme heat kills parasites - check. Extreme heat is a water disinfectant - check. Fire, anyone?
any ideas on how patients would react to this logic of yours?
That is a good point Michael. Is MMS that important that we should spend time and money disproving it? I think that people like Ben Goldacre that spend their careers trying to disprove charlatans like these would certainly agree that yes, we should do it. I think that if this so called trial was ever conducted (there is no proof that it ever was and anyone can edit a video that makes it look like it was) then yes, it is important enough for us to discredit it. If it wasn't done, then maybe it is better to leave it alone and not give it too much publicity. In the end people believe in very weird things without any fact or evidence to support it and even against all the evidence to discredit it... so...
The Anopheline IRR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.30–4.23, P = 0.005). At the lower end of the CI, 30% reduction isn't massive, but good to see some solid evidence.
I've been trying to find out what is the story behind this video. I think the makers of the video somehow managed to mislead the Ugandan Red Cross Society and got their approval for doing this 'trial'. It now dissociates itself completely from the video, but no explanation for the events we see in the video has been given. See my blog for more on this: http://www.pepijnvanerp.nl/2013/05/fake-and-unethical-trial-video-claims-miracle-mineral-solution-cures-malaria/
Pepijn van Erp
I would be very interested to see the data on Chlorine Dioxide and Plasmodium spp.. Could you please forward me the papers as I had some difficulty in finding any in the Pubmed database. I did find a lot of patients with better oral hygiene... but I doubt it was due to the killing of malaria parasites lodged in their mouths being killed by their Chloride dioxide-containing mouth-wash.
I was also interested in your argument in favour of Chloride Dioxide, based on two separate and disconnected observations without scientific validity and human safety trials, and thought of two others you might like to endorse:
Bleach kills parasites - check. Bleach is a water disinfectant- check. Could this be the answer?
Extreme heat kills parasites - check. Extreme heat is a water disinfectant - check. Fire, anyone?
any ideas on how patients would react to this logic of yours?
Chlorine Dioxide works to kill parasites in vitro - check. Chlorine Dioxide has proven safety as water purification treatment - check.
... just maybe it works?
That is a good point Michael. Is MMS that important that we should spend time and money disproving it? I think that people like Ben Goldacre that spend their careers trying to disprove charlatans like these would certainly agree that yes, we should do it. I think that if this so called trial was ever conducted (there is no proof that it ever was and anyone can edit a video that makes it look like it was) then yes, it is important enough for us to discredit it. If it wasn't done, then maybe it is better to leave it alone and not give it too much publicity. In the end people believe in very weird things without any fact or evidence to support it and even against all the evidence to discredit it... so...
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0062769;jsessionid=F285E38650220D1946DFA16C996E6108
The Anopheline IRR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.30–4.23, P = 0.005). At the lower end of the CI, 30% reduction isn't massive, but good to see some solid evidence.