TOPIC:

Hi Scott:
I know that's too high a ppm close to unsafe dose; she wanted to get results as fast as possible so wanted the highest ppm despite being on the border line of safety. If I had to do it again I would not go that high ever again. 100ppm would be my maximum. So it was not done out of experience or knowledge, but out of craziness if you will. We decided to give the IV a rest and concentrate on the tumor. No action lately, we'll keep you updated.

gabyher wrote:

Hi Scott:
I know that's too high a ppm close to unsafe dose; she wanted to get results as fast as possible so wanted the highest ppm despite being on the border line of safety. If I had to do it again I would not go that high ever again. 100ppm would be my maximum. So it was not done out of experience or knowledge, but out of craziness if you will. We decided to give the IV a rest and concentrate on the tumor. No action lately, we'll keep you updated.

Thanks for clarifying that Gabyher. I wouldn't want people here thinking that those were normal or even suggested concentrations to use for IV injection. It's important that people realize that based on the studies that I will attach below, even CLO2 concentrations as low as 10 ppm will do the job in just 15 seconds to either kill or greatly reduce all bacteria and viruses. Unfortunately the studies don't then simply double the concentration to see what happens at 20 ppm, or go 5 times higher to 50 ppm. If they would have, I'm pretty sure they would have shown something similar to what happens at 100 ppm which was the next higher concentration they jumped to after 10 ppm. At 100 ppm CLO2 basically obliterates all bacteria and viruses. Of course we're talking about injecting into the blood stream though and the blood is going to have an extremely strong neutralizing effect on the CLO2 also, so that too must be taken into account and so that's why I feel for myself anyway, 50 to 100 ppm is as high as I would want to go. In my mind 50 ppm should be pretty mild to the veins (again, based on my experience in how it effects my mucus membrane when I brush my teeth at that concentration) and yet still effective at neutralizing or killing viruses and bacteria in the blood.

Last, I can always increase the amount of 50 to 100 ppm CLO2 that I do intravenously. I'm not limited to just doing 10 ml or even 100 ml. I could do a slow drip of 500 ml if I wanted to get a very large amount into my blood. To give an idea of how much more that is quantitatively, we can just multiply the parts per million by the number of ml going into our blood like this:

50 ppm X 10 ml = 500
50 ppm X 100 ml = 5000
50 ppm X 500 ml = 25,000
or
100 ppm X 10 ml = 1,000
100 ppm X 100 ml = 10,000
100 ppm X 500 ml = 50,000

At a slow drip and at these lower ppm, I believe I would do little to no harm to my veins.

I know of someone who did 325 ml of 122 ppm (122 ppm X 325 ml = 39,650) and this did lower his hemoglobin but not enough to be a danger. After this happens the body will quickly regenerate more hemoglobin and bring it back up to normal levels, so the way I see it, it's worth it to do this in order to fight a disease such as Ebola for example, or any life threatening blood infection.

Please click the attachment links below in the lower left to see the studies I mentioned above. For some browsers that's the only way the links will open.

Thanks again Gabyher.

May we all be well,
Scott McRae
PS. This forum is not allowing me to attach the studies on this post for some reason so I'll just put the links and names of the studies below and hopefully you can see them or search for them online and find them. Here are the names of the studies and their links:

Study Name:
Evaluation of the Antiviral Activity of Chlorine Dioxide and Sodium Hypochlorite against Feline Calicivirus, Human Influenza Virus, Measles Virus, Canine Distemper Virus, Human Herpesvirus, Human Adenovirus, Canine Adenovirus and Canine Parvovirus
Study Link:
www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bio/15/2/15_2_45/_pdf/-char/en

Study Name:
Chlorine dioxide is a superior disinfectant against multi-drug resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii
Study Link: www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/yoken/advpub/0/advpub_JJID.2014.294/_pdf/-char/en

Hi Scott:
Thanks for emphasizing the max concentration that one should not go beyond.

gabyher wrote:

Hi Scott:
Thanks for emphasizing the max concentration that one should not go beyond.

Gabyher to be perfectly honest I can't say what the max concentration is because I really don't know what it is myself for sure. I'm just making an educated guess about what I think it might be based on my own experience and some studies and patents. We do know too much of anything can be bad for us and that goes for CLO2 as well, so I do think we should error on the side of caution if possible. Wouldn't it be great if we had a team of ethical medical experts really trying to zero in on all of this so we knew for sure how much to use for this or that medical condition? Alas, it's just us though. So we take from our own experiences, studies, patents and other similar products like H2O2 and Ozone, to try to figure it all out. This is why I so appreciate your reporting very accurately what you've done so far. It's gold for the miners of this kind of information here.

Thanks again and looking forward to hearing your next report.
Scott McRae

UPDATE:
TUESDAY Oct 15
Before injecting I tried to feel the size of the lump. I would say 40% reduction; the depth is noticeably reduced.
She has been massaging the breast with the castor oil/DMSO solution and drinking 3 drops of unactivated MMS everyday.
Injection in breast: in 2 locations close to the 'eye' for a total of ~0.6ml. What surprised me today is that she suffered much less during injection and her recovery time was like 4/5 minutes compared to 10/15mnts last week.
The progress is encouraging.

Hi Gabyher - great news that the tumor has continued to shrink down to about 40% now!
3 quick questions; Since your last injection report was dated Tuesday, October 8th, did you take a break of a week or continue doing the injections daily as you had been doing? And regarding the 3 drops of unactivated MMS she's taking, is she putting the 3 drops in a liter of water and then drinking from that throughout the day and if so, is a liter of water all she drinks in a day?

Thanks,
Scott

Truthquester wrote:

Since your last injection report was dated Tuesday, October 8th, did you take a break of a week or continue doing the injections daily as you had been doing?

After Oct8, I did an update for Oct10 session (please see previous page post #61513)
The one after was Oct15. No action between the 10th and 15th.

Truthquester wrote:

And regarding the 3 drops of unactivated MMS she's taking, is she putting the 3 drops in a liter of water and then drinking from that throughout the day and if so, is a liter of water all she drinks in a day?

Yes, she is putting the 3drops in a litter and drinking it throughout the day. I am not sure if she drinks more water during the day, may be some tea..; I'll ask.

UPDATE: Oct 16
Injected in 3 locations close to the 'eye' for a total of ~0.8ml. The last one was really close to the eye and was very painful. She bounced back within 5/7 mnts.
Before we started all of this, the 'eye' was really close to the nipple, like 0.5/0.6cm from the nipple. Now it is like 1.5cm.
I don't know if it is appropriate to attach a pic of the breast here on the forum. We took a pic yesterday, but didn't think of taking one before starting this whole process to compare.

Hi Gabyher,

Thanks for the update and I know I read that one where you wrote there was at that time about a 40% reduction but must have missed it the last time I wrote and asked about updates. And then it looks as though you may have been writing another update while I was writing to ask my questions above.

Sounds like it's going very well and I would just continue as you are going. I was just thinking you possibly could hit it harder by injecting more times from different angles but then again you also shouldn't go too fast because you need to give the body time to deal with the waste which has to be eliminated. A friend of mine almost died and was in the ICU of a hospital here after his 20+ lymphoma tumors suddenly seemingly dissolved and dumped into his blood stream after doing a 15 ppm CLO2 IV of about 400 ml immediately followed by a treatment of chemotherapy. He literally said he saw and angle and then came back to us after they put him on a dialysis machine to clean his blood up. The free cancer hospital here in Jakarta withheld the dialysis machine for about 6 days while he got gradually worse to the point of having to be put in the ICU. I believe if they would have allowed the dialysis machine earlier, he would not have had to be put in the ICU and almost die to begin with, but then again they weren't expecting the 20+ tumors to suddenly dissolve as they did. After surviving and doing a PET scan, the doctor told him that amazingly, all the tumors were gone and they released him from the hospital. So the moral of that story for me is that fast is not necessarily a good thing when it comes to dissolving cancer tumors.

Regarding the amount of liquids she seems to be drinking daily, I think she really needs to increase her intake to at least 2 liters a day or close to that. If drinking a liter a day is her habit, then it might be part of the reason why she got cancer in the first place and falls in the line of the need to make lifestyle changes to create a better inner environment so the cancer cannot come back again after all this work you are doing and she is suffering through.

By the way, if she's not doing it already, she really should be on a strict ketogenic diet of no more than about 10 net carbs a day (this is what I would do anyway) in order to also starve the cancer of glucose.

Thanks again for all your great work and reporting here Gabyher. All the best to you and your wife and your friend.
Scott McRae