User talk:Baden8


 * }

MMS
Please stop making POV edits, like you did here. Arcandam (talk) 02:20, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Mentioning that it is FDA approved is WP:POV and WP:UNDUE and the idea that because the FDA approves it for usage as a antimicrobial agent to clean food and requires companies to clean the food very well afterwards or as a slimicide in process water during the manufacture of paper and paperboard intended to contact food does not mean it is safe to drink... Arcandam (talk) 02:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Arcandam for your feedback on my first post :) On reflection I agree that it was undue and clumsy. Although I'm unsure it represents a point of view when compared to the rest of the piece. Chemically every substance is toxic or harmless depending on dosage. Water is a widely used industrial solvent. Yet calling chlorine dioxide an industrial chemical lends a biased POV presuming it is toxic when highly diluted. Chlorine in our tap water is deemed safe, yet this is bleach and highly toxic in concentrated form, as are other municipal water additives. My initial clumsy edit was attempting to balance the bias I perceived in this article. I am heartened to hear from a vigilant editor, though our views may differ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baden8 (talk • contribs)


 * I am sorry to hear you feel the article is WP:POV. It is not. Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. Do you have any reliable sources that contradict the claims made in the article? Arcandam (talk) 18:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

May I qualify the claims by adding the EPA maximum concentration in drinking water? (page 23) Baden8 (talk) 02:20, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You do not need my permission, feel free to do whatever you want. I am just a random dude with an internet connection. Please be bold when editing. Arcandam (talk) 03:00, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I'm being too forward but MMS is a pet peeve of mine (a relative bought it and took 6 months of periodic diarrhea before she gave it up) and I have been extensively researching it for a couple of years now. One thing I'd like to point out which MMS supporters seem not to get is that there is NO official study (by anyone, including Jim) which shows precisely WHAT is in a dose of MMS. There are "guesses" (some more and some less educated) by people who claim there is some quantity of chlorine dioxide and some other by products, but I haven't found any actual valid source that analyses what is in it and at what concentration.


 * THE POINT: Jim Humble does also use the EPA "maximum concentration limit" for chlorine dioxide as support that MMS is "safe", just like you seem to be implying. However, MMS is obviously MANY times that concentration limit. For one, if MMS was the same concentration that was in tap water, why not just drink tap water instead? I have also read that the safe limit of 0.8 or 1mg/L is right around the "level of detection" for smell, i.e. if you can obviously SMELL the chlorine in water, it may be over the limit and therefore NOT be safe to drink. Can you smell the chlorine in a dose of MMS? Very much so. One experiment I would like to do, or get someone to do, is get a single "dose" of MMS and dilute it until you can barely smell the chlorine, you'd need to do this with unchlorinated / distilled water, THEN you have water which is safe to consume, I suspect you'd need a bucket of water per dose, I wouldn't be surprised if it was 2 buckets. Vespine (talk) 23:20, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't recommend drinking a whole bucket of water too quickly. Arcandam (talk) 23:32, 20 May 2012 (UTC)