Gold leaf lady debunk?

[Unfortunately]

10 hours ago, Habitat said:

It is the ionic silver that causes the blue skin.

Incorrect. Please do more research prior to making such claims. 

"Chronic ingestion or inhalation of silver preparations (especially colloidal silver) can lead to deposition of silver metal/silver sulphide particles in the skin (argyria), eye (argyrosis) and other organs."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16766878/

[Nnicolette]

I agree that the gold would just pass through. Isnt anyone familiar with goldschalger, gold leaf cheese or $1000 chicken wings?

[+Not A Rockstar]

3 hours ago, the13bats said:

Thats called "chance" or "coincidence" you cant embrace your own experiences while dimissing those of others its self centered and unfair.

 

As far as simple slight of hand, no, its still not,

Sure a speck appears that very well could be a slight,  but the big sheets with fragile little bits flaking off, no, that wasnt done by slight, perhaps you are mistaken that im going in the directions of paranormal, wrong, just the opposite.

Despite the fact we seem to agree on many points, you decided to dismiss my post and me as well.  Strange.

I said that despite having experienced some physical manifestations, I am less believing of them. (i.e. I do not tend to buy into them). I said because I have been dead on in some things, then maybe she did identify the location of theft (did she also ID the thief?). No way to know if that claim is true or not. All anyone has to go on is their own experience when evaluating a claim such as this.

I am not a scientist nor a sceptic, so I evaluate differently than you seem to do. I am an occultist, into mysticism, esoteria, psychology and spirituality. I am also a retired cop, so know a bit about evidence and building a good case. This isn't one.

I did not see it firsthand, she is not here, I have nothing but pictures and words to judge by otherwise. How acknowledging that I have experienced some things makes me "embracing" them and dismissing others, I don't know. Just because I have does not then force me to approve of all other similar claims either. I do not accept all of my own experiences. I dismiss what makes no sense and serves no purpose. 

Typical of scams the witnesses SEEM reputable. They nearly always do.

Believers claim their side, the deniers claim theirs' and can reproduce it, so it comes down to personal opinion as to if it is fake or real.

I don't believe in it, because I do not buy into most of the physical phenomenon I have seen. The analysis of her gold comes back to the store bought foil. It can be wholly duplicated. Most damning of all is the films of the probable sleight examples and final product but not during the manifestation. This is my opinion but it is not a "debunk". 

My opinion PROVES nothing. There is no "debunk" possible under these conditions. But, IMO, there is nothing paranormal going on here. Probably, it is full scale fraud. But, it won't ever get to "trial" if this is all we have to work with.

[+Not A Rockstar]

2 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

In the video one of the men says the gold appears on the woman's skin, do they actually show this happening?

it seems to, and yet if you are looking for the possibility of sleight of hand, that is wide open possible for the transfer.

They never show the gold stuff actually oozing out or forming or whatever they want to portray causes all that mess.

[the13bats]

I have never understood why on many forums some folks feel the need to list what they feel are their "credentinals"  to somehow make their opinion of so much greater value than the next persons, i find the less i say about me the better, but my ego isnt involved, its not personal to me, i have zero to prove.

I dismiss all anecdotal claims in most cases, an exception was like today where i saw a member say taking silver helps his sickness, that i will take at face value, but he wasnt trying to sell me it will cure me of all affections.

On the other hand if he ssys he saw bigfoot, a ghost a ufo or predicted the future, i will say...prove it.

I can give 8 out of 10 people a cold reading that they will go off thinking i was dead on...i wasnt, if i write 100 predictions for the coming week some will happen its not magic but an artistry.

I cant subscribe to the idea that "im" this or that and "mine"is real or true but yours isnt.

 

Rlyeh,  short answer no, they never show this happen and her champion is vauge is saying he has even seen it right before his eyes,

this isnt a simple slight of passing a hand over and a big sheet with lacey edges is hanging there, more trickery is going on.

 

 

 

[the13bats]

 

 

Edited March 25, 2019 by the13bats
double post

[+Not A Rockstar]

1 hour ago, Not A Rockstar said:

it seems to, and yet if you are looking for the possibility of sleight of hand, that is wide open possible for the transfer.

They never show the gold stuff actually oozing out or forming or whatever they want to portray causes all that mess.

too late to edit, but wanted to add that it shows sparkles of gold as if it is just starting, which could be smeared by hand. It never shows the gold in bulk like the pictures, which seem whole sheets of gold frills. That process from sparkle on her skin to full blown sheets is never shown on film.

[Habitat]

2 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

Incorrect. Please do more research prior to making such claims. 

"Chronic ingestion or inhalation of silver preparations (especially colloidal silver) can lead to deposition of silver metal/silver sulphide particles in the skin (argyria), eye (argyrosis) and other organs."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16766878/

 

95% of what is sold as colloidal silver is ionic silver, and that is a risk for Argyria, but nanoparticle silver is not considered to be.

Human trials are not available and it is really not possible to prove a negative. However, a peer reviewed report from Professor Rustum Roy at Pennsylvanie State University (along with numerous other Professors) in 2007, published in Material Research Innovations Vol 11, No 1, concluded on page 4:

"We confine ourselves only to silver aquasols, i.e. suspensions of nominally metallic silver particles in essentially pure water….” and “In spite of this enormous range of data, it is extraordinary that no major effort has been made to confirm and expand on the role of metallic silver in human health - especially in light of its huge advantage in lack of side effects. (Ingestion of excessive amounts of ionic (soluble) silver, not metallic solid particles, is reported to have resulted in a very rare condition labeled argyria, an (irreversible?) darkening of the skin. No one has died of this condition. The safety of metallic silver sols is firmly established by the data cited above.)

[Habitat]

5 hours ago, Kenemet said:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3413009/

Gold doesn't form compounds, so it has no function in metabolism or anything else.

Let's not be too dogmatic about this, as the articles says early on......

"Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) are often used as vehicles to deliver drugs or biomolecules, due to their mild effect on cell survival and proliferation. However, little is known about their effect on cellular metabolism. "

[Habitat]

Silver coins were used to keep milk fresh, in the era of poor access to refrigeration. Not sure if anyone would have tried gold coins, the milk jug might have gone missing.

[Unfortunately]

34 minutes ago, Habitat said:

95% of what is sold as colloidal silver is ionic silver, and that is a risk for Argyria, but nanoparticle silver is not considered to be.

Human trials are not available and it is really not possible to prove a negative. However, a peer reviewed report from Professor Rustum Roy at Pennsylvanie State University (along with numerous other Professors) in 2007, published in Material Research Innovations Vol 11, No 1, concluded on page 4:

"We confine ourselves only to silver aquasols, i.e. suspensions of nominally metallic silver particles in essentially pure water….” and “In spite of this enormous range of data, it is extraordinary that no major effort has been made to confirm and expand on the role of metallic silver in human health - especially in light of its huge advantage in lack of side effects. (Ingestion of excessive amounts of ionic (soluble) silver, not metallic solid particles, is reported to have resulted in a very rare condition labeled argyria, an (irreversible?) darkening of the skin. No one has died of this condition. The safety of metallic silver sols is firmly established by the data cited above.)

The first sentence of that excerpt you posted makes the article redundant as we're specifically talking about the impact on human biology.

Edit: Without human trials or studies one cannot claim that nano particles affect the body differently.

Edited March 25, 2019 by Unfortunately

[Habitat]

6 minutes ago, Unfortunately said:

The first sentence of that excerpt you posted makes the article redundant as we're specifically talking about the impact on human biology.

Edit: Without human trials or studies one cannot claim that nano particles affect the body differently.

Matey, you sound like a dupe of the pharmaceutical industry, worrying about silver, if you have evidence that it causes harm, give it, so far all I have heard  about is Argyria, and that is not considered a risk with particulate metallic silver. Which is one reason not to use ionic silver, and a better one, is that it has far less useful effect. You'd be better off going on a real witch-hunt against, say, prescription opioids, which have literally killed hundreds of thousands. How did the "human trials" go with that one ? "unfortunately" you appear to want to win some technical point, but you are not even doing that. And you better stop using the silver teaspoon to stir your coffee ! If I though silver was a risk, I would not be using it, anything is toxic is you ingest too much of it, but the quantities involved are very tiny. 

[Kenemet]

1 hour ago, Habitat said:

Let's not be too dogmatic about this, as the articles says early on......

"Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) are often used as vehicles to deliver drugs or biomolecules, due to their mild effect on cell survival and proliferation. However, little is known about their effect on cellular metabolism. "

The nanoparticles, yes.  But gold compounds do not play any part in human metabolism.  That's one reason that gold was used in dentistry... it doesn't dissolve in saliva or other fluids and it doesn't actually interact with tissues.

[Piney]

3 hours ago, Habitat said:

Silver coins were used to keep milk fresh, in the era of poor access to refrigeration. Not sure if anyone would have tried gold coins, the milk jug might have gone missing.

The zinc content in coins. Then zinc plated cans. 

[Unfortunately]

4 hours ago, Habitat said:

Matey, you sound like a dupe of the pharmaceutical industry, worrying about silver, if you have evidence that it causes harm, give it, so far all I have heard  about is Argyria, and that is not considered a risk with particulate metallic silver. Which is one reason not to use ionic silver, and a better one, is that it has far less useful effect. You'd be better off going on a real witch-hunt against, say, prescription opioids, which have literally killed hundreds of thousands. How did the "human trials" go with that one ? "unfortunately" you appear to want to win some technical point, but you are not even doing that. And you better stop using the silver teaspoon to stir your coffee ! If I though silver was a risk, I would not be using it, anything is toxic is you ingest too much of it, but the quantities involved are very tiny. 

You've entirely missed my point. In none of my posts have I stated that silver is toxic or harmful.

What I have been doing is providing evidence against the claim that there are health benefits. This is entirely different from claiming that silver is harmful. I'm not sure how you construed this as a 'witch-hunt'.

Point of fact, the person who makes the claim insights a burden of proof. There is no scientific evidence supporting the claim that silver has health benefits when ingested, therefore silver cannot be officially accepted as being beneficial to human biology. 

Please make sure to read posts carefully before replying as I've never stated silver was harmful, which was the assumption your last 'passionate' post focused on. 

Edited March 26, 2019 by Unfortunately

[Habitat]

18 minutes ago, Unfortunately said:

You've entirely missed my point. In none of my posts have I stated that silver is toxic or harmful.

What I have been doing is providing evidence against the claim that there are health benefits. This is entirely different from claiming that silver is harmful. I'm not sure how you construed this as a 'witch-hunt'.

Point of fact, the person who makes the claim insights a burden of proof. There is no scientific evidence supporting the claim that silver has health benefits when ingested, therefore silver cannot be officially accepted as being beneficial to human biology. 

Please make sure to read posts carefully before replying as I've never stated silver was harmful, which was the assumption your last 'passionate' post focused on. 

You made a point of claiming that nanoparticle silver causes argyria, there is no evidence for that claim, so yes, you do claim it is harmful; I am not worried about any toxicity from silver, it is probably safer than a lot of food additives. I am only interested in results, and it has worked for me, to a worthwhile degree,I sometimes think if I could get on a drip-feed of it around the clock, I would get rid of the complaint, but that is easier said than done. I am not interested in theories about how it should not be any help, only in results.

[Unfortunately]

6 minutes ago, Habitat said:

You made a point of claiming that nanoparticle silver causes argyria, there is no evidence for that claim, so yes, you do claim it is harmful; I am not worried about any toxicity from silver, it is probably safer than a lot of food additives. I am only interested in results, and it has worked for me, to a worthwhile degree,I sometimes think if I could get on a drip-feed of it around the clock, I would get rid of the complaint, but that is easier said than done. I am not interested in theories about how it should not be any help, only in results.

Argyria is not harmful, it's just biologically abnormal. So no, I have not (at any point) stated silver was harmful. It's been confirmed that silver causes argyria with extended use, colloidal silver in particular. No one can (as of yet) claim that nano particles are inherently different or less likely to cause argyria as there haven't been any studies done on it in reference to human biology.

It's safer to assume that any form of colloidal silver will produce the same results as the other forms until such a time as proven otherwise.

I'm not saying don't take it, especially if it's helping, I'm just saying you shouldn't be looking at taking it for an extended period of time unless you're 100% alright with the possibility of argyria (as the condition isn't reversible). If you're fine with the idea of argyria in comparison to the relief the colloidal silver gives you from your condition then you can entirely disregard what I've said. Never assume that something is safe because of rumours and unfounded claims.

In essence I'm just saying be careful, the prospect of argyria is something I would personally be opposed to. I don't have experience with Lyme's disease, I hope it isn't too debilitating for you.

[Habitat]

Just now, Unfortunately said:

Argyria is not harmful, 

 

1 minute ago, Unfortunately said:

I'm just saying you shouldn't be looking at taking it for an extended period of time unless you're 100% alright with the possibility of argyria

Argyria is a beat-up, rare as hen's teeth, but certainly harmful to end up with it ! 

[Unfortunately]

12 minutes ago, Habitat said:

 

Argyria is a beat-up, rare as hen's teeth, but certainly harmful to end up with it ! 

How can it be classified as harmful if there are no symptoms aside from turning blue-ish? (If this is incorrect, my bad, I can't find any symptoms regarding physical harm, if you can link me to somewhere stating otherwise that'd be great).

[Habitat]

7 minutes ago, Unfortunately said:

How can it be classified as harmful if there are no symptoms aside from turning blue-ish? (If this is incorrect, my bad, I can't find any symptoms regarding physical harm, if you can link me to somewhere stating otherwise that'd be great).

Don't be silly, turning blue would be a seriously negative outcome. It would certainly "harm" your appearance, and ability to live a normal life.

Does MesoSilver cause Argyria?

No, MesoSilver does not cause Argyria. Argyria is a discoloration of the skin wherein the skin turns a blue-grey color as a result of over exposure to certain forms of silver. Argyria is known to be caused by ingesting; 1) silver salts (compounds) such as silver nitrate, 2) high concentrations of ionic silver, 3) protein based silver products aka "silver protein" or "mild silver protein", 4) Inhalation of high concentrations of silver dust as found in silver mines and silver refining operations. While some so-called "experts" claim that all forms of silver can cause argyria, that statement is not true. Argyria is not caused by true silver colloids which consist of nanometer sized particles of silver in pure water.

[Unfortunately]

7 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Don't be silly, turning blue would be a seriously negative outcome. It would certainly "harm" your appearance, and ability to live a normal life.

Does MesoSilver cause Argyria?

No, MesoSilver does not cause Argyria. Argyria is a discoloration of the skin wherein the skin turns a blue-grey color as a result of over exposure to certain forms of silver. Argyria is known to be caused by ingesting; 1) silver salts (compounds) such as silver nitrate, 2) high concentrations of ionic silver, 3) protein based silver products aka "silver protein" or "mild silver protein", 4) Inhalation of high concentrations of silver dust as found in silver mines and silver refining operations. While some so-called "experts" claim that all forms of silver can cause argyria, that statement is not true. Argyria is not caused by true silver colloids which consist of nanometer sized particles of silver in pure water.

The mental issues are circumstantial, as some wouldn't be bothered by a discolouration of their body and some would. Just like any other visible disease really, it entirely depends on the person's mental state and isn't a direct symptom.

Can you link me to the studies done on mesosilver that confirm the claim in the excerpt you posted? Until it's confirmed it's still just an assumption and needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

[Habitat]

13 minutes ago, Unfortunately said:

The mental issues are circumstantial, as some wouldn't be bothered by a discolouration of their body and some would. Just like any other visible disease really, it entirely depends on the person's mental state and isn't a direct symptom.

Can you link me to the studies done on mesosilver that confirm the claim in the excerpt you posted? Until it's confirmed it's still just an assumption and needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

At the common sense level, I very much doubt they'd make that claim, if it was false, they'd leave themselves wide open. If you don't consider turning blue "harm", there is not much more I can say on that front. As for studies, I take many of them with a "grain of salt", commercial interests are notorious for commissioning multiple studies of products, and either cherry-picking the ones that suits their narrative, or not publishing any, if none do. That is the real world.

Incidentally, I was told by someone who owns a health food store that he has a regular customer for an ionic silver product, and had been buying if for several years, no sign of turning blue. But I would not take the risk, and the ionic product has very limited efficacy, anyway. 

Edited March 26, 2019 by Habitat

[Unfortunately]

1 hour ago, Habitat said:

At the common sense level, I very much doubt they'd make that claim, if it was false, they'd leave themselves wide open. If you don't consider turning blue "harm", there is not much more I can say on that front. As for studies, I take many of them with a "grain of salt", commercial interests are notorious for commissioning multiple studies of products, and either cherry-picking the ones that suits their narrative, or not publishing any, if none do. That is the real world.

Incidentally, I was told by someone who owns a health food store that he has a regular customer for an ionic silver product, and had been buying if for several years, no sign of turning blue. But I would not take the risk, and the ionic product has very limited efficacy, anyway. 

They're basing it on the assumption that nano particles won't build up in the body over time like other forms of silver. Still just an assumption, albeit somewhat reasonable in the scheme of things.

Well, I do hope that the claim is proven correct when they eventually decide to do proper testing. Honestly can't imagine the discomfort your condition gives you without it, so I hope somehow things clear up for you so that you don't require alternative treatments that haven't been tested thoroughly. I guess I'm just overcautious about unproven methods when it comes to medicine, but that's due to my own personal experiences and mindset. 

[Rlyeh]

9 hours ago, Not A Rockstar said:

too late to edit, but wanted to add that it shows sparkles of gold as if it is just starting, which could be smeared by hand. It never shows the gold in bulk like the pictures, which seem whole sheets of gold frills. That process from sparkle on her skin to full blown sheets is never shown on film.

You'd think if they wanted to support the claim it forms on her skin they'd try and show it happening in action.

[Habitat]

42 minutes ago, Unfortunately said:

They're basing it on the assumption that nano particles won't build up in the body over time like other forms of silver. Still just an assumption, albeit somewhat reasonable in the scheme of things.

Well, I do hope that the claim is proven correct when they eventually decide to do proper testing. Honestly can't imagine the discomfort your condition gives you without it, so I hope somehow things clear up for you so that you don't require alternative treatments that haven't been tested thoroughly. I guess I'm just overcautious about unproven methods when it comes to medicine, but that's due to my own personal experiences and mindset. 

My advice from the fellow who is the only Australian supplier of "true" silver colloid, is that it is rapidly excreted via the kidneys, in fact too rapidly to be ideal for treatment. His advice was smaller doses, more often. He also tells me he has customers with emphysema who have been using it via nebulizer to the lungs, for years, to ward off chest infections that might finish them off. It may work better for them, with that direct delivery method, than for people like me.