TOPIC:

Andreas Kalcker explains that our cells support about 1.3 V, the oxygen voltage. Jim Humble mentioned 1.1 to 1.5 V in some videos. But Ozone has 2.04 V. So why do we support intravenous Ozone ? Shouldn't it destroy all of our cells ? Or does it just cause a tolerable level of damage ?

In regards to Chlorine Dioxide, the first oxidation reaction that will occur is:
Reaction 1) CLO2 + e¯ => CLO2¯ ( E ~0.95 V )

Moreover, the resulting chlorite molecule CLO2¯ may eventually release both of it's oxygen atoms and get reduced to the chloride molecule CL¯. The following reactions are simplified:

Reaction 2) CLO2¯ + 2e¯ => CLO¯ + O... ( E ~0.76 V )
Reaction 3) CLO¯ + 2e¯ => CL¯ + O... ( E ~0.90 V )

So the liquid form of CD has an maximum oxidation potential of 0.95 V, under normal conditions. However, in very acidic environment it rises up to 1.5 V, which is the same oxidation potential of CD in gas form. Right? Now, we have a very acid stomach and some small amount of CD will likely evaporate in our intestines. And we seem to handle that pretty well, so does that mean that our digestive tract supports 1.5 V ?

Going further, all above is about CD outside our cells. But it can penetrate cell walls too, right ? Especially when DMSO is added. That's when it works at mitochondrial level, right?

When it enters our cells, are our cell inner parts still having a 1.1 to 1.5 V resistance ? What about our cell nucleous, is it surviving to CD because our DNA is kept in a very compact form ?

"Andreas Kalcker explains that our cells support about 1.3 V, the oxygen voltage. Jim Humble mentioned 1.1 to 1.5 V in some videos."

The attached PDF file may be of interest to you. The PDF is at the very bottom of this post.

CLO2,

Thanks for the paper, which I also saw in other post too. It adds a important statement :

"In contrast to oxygen, therefore, chlorine dioxide can readily react with certain amino acids (e.g. cysteine, tryptophan and tyrosine), lipids, and other biological materials."

However, I can't find much information about the amount of volts a human cell can resist. The only text found about this subject is from a book, which only describes much lower standard reduction potentials for various biological components. For instance:

-0.5 V to -0.72 V for glucose.
-0.32 V for NADH <=> NAD+
+0.76 V for Iron oxidation Fe⁺² <=> Fe⁺³
+0.82 V for oxygen/water electron exchanging pair

source: book.bionumbers.org/what-is-the-redox-potential-of-a-cell/

So, I guess that the specifying that human cells can support a given amount of voltage is an oversimplified statement... ?

I'm curious to know if there has been any testing done of the claim stated in this document you link to CLO2?

"In contrast to oxygen, therefore, chlorine dioxide can readily react with certain amino acids (e.g. cysteine, tryptophan and tyrosine), lipids, and other biological materials."

This statement seems to suggest, that the oxidation potential that we should compare with, when comparing to oxygen, is not the 0.95v. which is always showed when comparing Chlorine Dioxide and Oxygen.

Also the brought statement that Chlorine Dioxide can readily react with lipids and other biological materials seems a lot more unspecific and untested than the statement that it can react with CERTAIN amino acids (which is also stated on various sites where they also say it does not react with RNA.)

Does this mean that Chlorine Dioxide will react with lipids (healthy fat tissue) and unspecified biological material?

Im guessing, since Jim Humble writes that Chlorine Dioxide does not react with healthy body tissue, he must have knowledge on this and done some testing on it?

Thank you for any knowledge you are able to share on this matter.

I found the following explanation in Andreas Kalcker’s book “Forbidden Health" on page 384.

“Chlorine dioxide is a selective oxidant, and unlike other substances, it doesn’t react to most living tissue components.
Chlorine dioxide does react quickly to the phenols and thiols, which are essential to bacterial life. With the phenols, the mechanism consists in attacking the ring of benzene, removing smell, taste and other intermediate compounds.[71]
Chlorine dioxide efficiently eliminates viruses and is ten times more efficient than sodium hypochlorite (bleach)[72], something proved in a comparative study.[73] It also proved high efficiency against small parasites like protozoa.[74]
Something of concern to medical professionals is how chlorine dioxide reacts with essential amino acids. In trials on chlorine dioxide’s reactivity to 21 essential amino acids, only cysteine[75], tryptophan[76], tyrosine[77], proline, and hydroxyproline[78] were reactive in a pH of around 6. These amino acids are relatively easy to replace.
Cysteine and methionine[79] are two aromatic amino acids that contain sulfur, tryptophan, and tyrosine and the two inorganic ions Fe2+ and Mn2+. Cysteine, as it belongs to the thiols groups, is an amino acid up to 50 times more reactive to all microbial systems that the other four essential amino acids, and therefore it is impossible for it to create resistance to chlorine dioxide.
Although it hasn’t been proved to date, pharmacodynamics usually presume that the cause of its antimicrobial effect is based on its reaction to the four amino acids mentioned earlier, or to the residues of proteins and peptides."


The references are linked here:

[71] Stevens, A.; Seeger, D.; Slocum, C., Products of Chlorine Dioxide Treatment
of Organic Materials in Water, Water Supply Research Div., U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency,Cincinnati, Ohio, 1977, 9


[72] Sanekata T, Fukuda T, Miura T, Morino H, Lee C et al. (2010) Evaluation
of the antiviral activity of chlorine dioxide and sodium hypochlorite against feline calicivirus, human influenza virus, measlesvirus, canine distemper virus, human herpesvirus, human adenovirus,canine adenovirus and canine 389 parvovirus. Biocontrol Sci 15/2: 45-49.doi:10.4265/bio.15.45. PubMed:
20616431.

[73]  Tanner R (1989) Comparative testing and evaluation of hard-surface disin- 
fectants. J Ind Microbiol 4: 145-154. doi:10.1007/BF01569799 


[74]  EPA Guidance Manual, Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants, 4.4.3.2 
Protozoa Inactivation. Available: www.epa.gov/ogwdw/mdbp/pdf/ 
alter/chapt_4.pdf 


[75]  Ison A, Odeh IN, Margerum DW (2006) Kinetics and mechanisms of 
chlorine dioxide and chlorite oxidations of cysteine and glutathione.Inorg 
Chem 45: 8768-8775. doi:10.1021/ic0609554. PubMed:17029389 


[76]  Stewart DJ, Napolitano MJ, Bakhmutova-Albert EV, Margerum DW (2008) Kinetics and mechanisms of chlorine dioxide oxidation of tryptophan. Inorg 
Chem 47: 1639-1647. doi:10.1021/ic701761p. PubMed: 18254588 


[77]  Napolitano MJ, Green BJ, Nicoson JS, Margerum DW (2005) Chlorine 
dioxide oxidations of tyrosine, N-acetyltyrosine, and Dopa. Chem Res 
Toxicol 18: 501-508. doi:10.1021/tx049697i. PubMed: 15777090 


[78]  Tan, H.K., Wheeler, W.B., Wei, C.I., Reaction of chlorine dioxide with 
amino acids and peptides, Mutation Research, 188: 259-266, 1987 


[79]  Loginova IV, Rubtsova SA, Kuchin AV (2008) Oxidation by chlorine dioxide 
of methionine and cysteine derivatives to sulfoxide. Chem Nat Compd 44: 
752-754. doi:10.1007/s10600-009-9182-8