Rethinking MMS: A Cell’s-Eye View


I don’t take the things that you’re about to read lightly. I can’t even say that my understanding of this subject is full and complete, but it is changed enough that what I write from now on must reflect that change. It’s a view that makes better sense than the one I had.

I had chemistry in high school, many years ago. Didn’t do too bad. But it’s a distant memory, just like Latin, the only “foreign language” that I elected to take. While I never learned, or even needed to speak it, fluently or otherwise, my grasp of the etymology and meaning of words grew deeper. While there is much that I don’t understand about chemistry, I retained a fundamental comprehension that has served me enough to get to this point; which included an intrinsic appreciation for the authenticity of Jim Humble’s story about MMS, which was supported by the amazing results that he claimed.

This understanding was enough for me to write and publish over 100 articles about it on this blog, starting with “No Miracle, Just Wonderful Chemistry,” which has had over 140,000 direct page views alone. My audio conversations with Jim Humble were listened to by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people, and my documentary has been distributed on many continents and in several languages.

This effort hasn’t been “for hire” due to being on anyone’s payroll, where I needed to go through a process of someone approving what I had to say. As such, I make every effort to give my best understanding on the subject, realizing that understanding will never be static unless one closes the mind.

Now, after five years and roughly a month of intensive conversation with Grant Maanum (which now happens daily), my view of what MMS is, what you’re looking for when you use it, and how best to do so, has changed enough that this re-statement is warranted.


ClO2 : A Molecule with a Light and Dark Side

As it is in all of creation, a full spectrum of potential exists within the molecule known as ClO2. As chlorine dioxide (ClO2), it is highly reactive and unstable and its destructive potential is very high. However, in its ionic form as chlorite (ClO2-), it is chemically stable, and restorative, so much so as to be considered miraculous.

Given that ClO2 is a chemical phenomenon that doesn’t naturally occur in nature, the key to getting the miraculous, versus the destructive results rests in the ingredients used, and how they are prepared. Produce it one way, you’ll get the highly reactive and toxic chlorine dioxide (ClO2), used as a bleaching agent in paper manufacturing. This is produced using sodium chlorate, sulfuric acid, and electrolysis.

Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2)

  • Yang/Masculine
  • Extracellular Free radical
  • Unstable/Destructive
  • Avoid at all costs
  • Positive charge
  • Industrial
  • Toxic

In order to recover from chronic and degenerate diseases (yes, I know I used the word “degenerate” instead of degenerative – I’ll explain), it is necessary to nurture and restore the cell, which is capable of fighting its own battles when properly equipped.

One thing that cells need dearly on the inside, is the chloride ion (Cl-). Normal cellular “motor function,” where it produces the energy that runs the body, is outlined in the Krebs Cycle (see below). Mixing a particular strength of sodium chlorite (NaClO2) with a particular strength of light acid, releases the O2 from the bond detoxifying the compound. The success that so many people have experienced using the MMS product as first introduced by Jim Humble, means that while there may be discussion on what was actually happening, it was done right and well enough. That means by minimizing or avoiding the generation of chlorine dioxide to get the real prize, i.e., chlorite ions.

Chlorite Ion (ClO2-)

  • Yin/Feminine
  • Intracellular
  • Stabilized
  • Essential Element
  • Negative Ion
  • Therapeutic
  • Restorative

The Chlorite Ion (ClO2-) is what I will be referring to from now on when it comes to use of the product that has come to be known as “MMS,” or the “Miracle Mineral Supplement.”

A Big Industry for Chlorine Dioxide

A very large chlorine dioxide industry existed prior to my meeting Jim Humble or learning about MMS. Instead of small bottles with which to dispense miniscule amounts of the molecule in question, railroad cars like the one pictured below are typically used within the chlorine dioxide industry.

The largest application for chlorine dioxide is as a bleaching agent in the pulp and paper industry. Needless to say, a lot of it is used. If you’ve ever used white paper, you’ve supported the demand for, and use of toxic chlorine dioxide. Chemtrade, a company, based in Prince George, British Columbia, manufactures and ships sodium chlorate (NaClO3), the fundamental component for making chlorine dioxide, in 100 metric ton quantities, via rail cars like the one pictured above.

Chemtrade Logistics Inc. %E2%80%93 Sodium Chlorate - Mozilla Firefox 9252012 15246 PM[1]

This is the chlorine dioxide that the FDA’s Safety Alert (07/30/2010) and Consumer Update (10/01/2010) against MMS referred to in its characterization as a “potent bleach.” However, this has never been the product that was produced when MMS was (or is) properly prepared and taken as directed.

The chlorine dioxide (ClO2) generated for use in the pulp and paper industry is derived from a recipe that requires adding sodium chlorate (NaClO3) and sulfuric acid (H2SO4) together, plus an electric current (electrolysis).

According to Wikipedia, 95% of the ClO2 produced in the world is made using sodium chlorate. A large percentage of the remaining five percent, involves bleaching of flour, disinfection of meat and produce, and water treatment. ClO2– is such a different thing chemically from ClO2 that it is called by another name, i.e., “chlorite,” “ionic chlorite,” “the chlorite ion,” and “chlorine dioxide anion. “All of these terms refer to the molecule that is ClO2-.

It’s easy to dismiss the significance of that little “minus” sign when you don’t know the chemistry deeply enough and you see, by the results that you trust and the research that you’ve done, that claims of efficacy appear to be true. I found Jim Humble’s presentation of the chemistry credible, I also did my own research, which appeared to support and corroborate his claims, which was supported by the beneficial results that people were experiencing.

If I even noticed the minus sign, I surely ignored any meaning or role it may have played. Jim never mentioned it. Dr. Humiston didn’t mention it. Chlorine dioxide was presented as a milder oxidizer than ozone (O3) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). There didn’t appear to be anything else to think about. They didn’t mention the chlorite ion as being relevant, so I accepted their picture as the complete one.

When the critics arrived, full of righteous indignation and ridicule, I considered their arguments specious, figuring that MMS was working and harmless due to the very small concentrations of chlorine dioxide (ClO2) that were being generated compared to the amounts that are routinely produced for industrial applications. So I continued to explain and “defend” the idea of generating chlorine dioxide. I can’t say that any more.

Today I heartily recommend using MMS1 as much as ever, if not more so. I would recommend preparing it as it was originally conceived. However, the objective would be to detoxify the chlorine dioxide that presents itself for an instant, when prepared as directed, and using what remains, which is referred to as the chlorite matrix.

No “Froot” this Guy from Kamloops

It may be hard to take anyone who calls himself “frootloopsian” seriously at first glance, but you do so at your own peril with Grant. He knows chemistry, very deeply.

Of his own accord, he began addressing MMS attackers in the comments thread of one of my YouTube videos. He has saved his two dogs with MMS, as well as himself, oddly enough, after being exposed to chlorine dioxide poisoning.

I don’t always remember to monitor all the comment threads to the material that I have put out, so with gratitude and excitement I watched and read numerous comments and clarifications that he wrote, back and forth, over a period of months.

It was he who tracked down the WF10 information. He tracked down the “Sarin et al,” and the “Cornford, Frost, Herring, McDowell” research into the chlorite matrix. It was he who understood the efficacy of this work, chemically and metabolically, as well as how the chlorite matrix differs from chlorine dioxide.

Grant also understood what was not being said in many of the available documents. For example, the 190-page Toxicological Profile of Chlorine Dioxide and Chlorite (2004) published by the CDC makes no clear distinction in hazard potential between chlorine dioxide and the chlorite ion. It lists the chlorite ion as one of the “disinfection byproducts” of chlorine dioxide. Without saying anything about its toxicity. Fact is that chlorite is vital to health, especially its restoration.

Both chlorine dioxide and chlorite act quickly when they enter the body. Chlorine dioxide quickly changes to chlorite ions, which are broken down further into chloride ions.

It was Grant who began taking me deeper down the rabbit hole of cellular biochemistry, patiently introducing me to the subject of membrane potential, and the dance that occurs as chlorite ions are taken into the cell, and potassium ions are pumped out through ion channels. These ions can only be produced by combining a specific strength of sodium chlorite with one (or more) of five specific acids.


Introduction means just that; the beginning of my appreciation for the role and importance of the chlorite ion (ClO2-) in the cell’s ability to produce energy. When properly activated, MMS delivers massive amounts of chlorite ions that are vital to the inner workings of healthy cells, and their ability to self-repair and restore vitality. The proof of that restoration would be a return of energy (increased ATP production), and organ functionality.

In the audio clip below, Grant further explains the +’s and -‘s of membrane potential, and other points of interest.

Consider, on the other side of the equation, how standard medical practices such as chemotherapy and radiation in cancer treatment, decimate, if not obliterate the cell, and the disease gets blamed for it. Since we don’t acknowledge the damage that the treatment does, even after it kills (and the medical system robs) the patient, the practice continues unchanged. So who is to blame for that when we’re under no obligation to take the drugs?

Before this introduction to the inner state and workings of the cell, I paid no attention to its place in this matter. None of the reference material that I consulted mentioned it either, because it was not in the context of the application. Documents written about municipal disinfection were not going to be concerned about Krebs Cycle in a single individual.

I assumed that the health improvements that people reported were due to the net effects of viral and bacterial depopulation, as a state of balance within the ecosystem was being restored. But it appears that unless a cell is self-sufficient and able to produce energy, success isn’t assured. There wasn’t much “legitimate” scientific information available that we could call upon. But maybe we didn’t know where to look.

Grant may or may not have known either, but he didn’t stop looking until he found something that either scientifically confirmed or refuted the MMS claims. That was the work of Cornford, Frost, Herring, and McDowell (1971) of the University of British Columbia. Could it be mere coincidence that MMS formulation and dosing methods closely matched that of a long-forgotten analog, known as Dichloroacetate, or “DCA”, which was first synthesized in 1936? (See additional article.)

A large number of children and adults have been exposed to DCA over the past 40 years, including healthy volunteers and subjects with diverse disease states. Since its first description in 1969 (Stacpoole, 1969), DCA has been studied to alleviate the symptoms or the haemodynamic consequences of the lactic acidosis complicating severe malaria, sepsis, congestive heart failure, burns, cirrhosis, liver transplantation and congenital mitochondrial diseases.

Here’s another, published in the British Journal of Cancer (2010).

These articles are valuable in the following ways, showing:

  • the wide medical interest in, and potential of, a product that has many similarities to MMS.
  • that the claims made by people who have used MMS track with the results achieved by medical researchers.
  • long-term experience with the product.

According to Grant, the Cornford work was conducted due to knowledge that ClO2 was a carcinogen and mutagen that was classed as pervasive due to its 300,000 year longevity. They therefore looked only at the chemistry that could produce ClO2, with the intention to conclusively confirm the presence or absence of ClO2.

Here’s one site that suggests DCA is worse than MMS!

The importance of the Cornford work lies in its confirmation of the chlorite matrix (ClO2-) as the salient element in cell restoration. It delivers chloride ions (Cl-) into cells, restoring their viability and vitality, which is experienced as added energy and accelerated healing.

DCA Similarities to MMS

The Cornford tests with DCA were done using a 23% solution of pure sodium chlorite (NaClO2), activated with a 10% solution of acetic acid. Acetic acid is one of the five known mild acids proven to detoxify chlorine dioxide (ClO2).

The sodium chlorite used to produce MMS is generally 80%.  While pure is best, the 80% purity is not deemed to be a problem with MMS as long as there is no sodium chlorate (NaClO3) in the remaining 19%.

The potential problem is that some sources of 80% sodium chlorite have been found to contain small amounts of sodium chlorate. No amount is acceptable.

Trace amounts of sodium chlorate could cause adverse reactions, such as nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. It could be the body’s reaction to chlorine dioxide (ClO2) exposure.

This is not to say that some people wouldn’t experience some of the more extreme forms of detox reactions even if they had no chlorine dioxide exposure. The objective is to make sure they have no chance of such exposure through preventable and unwanted inadvertent reactions.

These potential facts made the FDA warning credible, even if it was disingenuous.

They don’t want people to use MMS for reasons other than any potential health danger, but I acknowledge the potential dangers that could occur if a different species of chlorine dioxide is produced due to the presence of sodium chlorate in the source material.

Evidence of this lies in the fact that when MMS is activated as recommended, chlorine dioxide ClO2, is detoxified by the acid. Chlorite matrix, (ClO2-) breaks down to salt (NaCl-), which has the proper “electrical credentials” to enter the cell.

WF10 is another analog to MMS

A bit more complicated, but no less important, is WF10, a product originally developed by the pharmaceutical firm Oxo Chemie, and is now owned by Nuvo Research, of Mississauga, ON. A patent was awarded to Dr. W.F. Kuehne for the formulation, which uses not one, but five 10% strength acids with the same 23% solution of sodium chlorite. Must be a reason, eh?

Researchers reported cellular repair in post radiation and chemotherapy treatments after WF10 treatments.

Oxo Chemie has completed a controlled randomized, crossover study in France in 1991 that examined the effects of 103 patients with acute radiation dermatitis and radiation- or chemotherapy-induced mucositis. Results demonstrated that WF 10 significantly improved lesions and accelerated recovery without side effects. – Drugs R.D. 2004

The five acids used in WF10 are:

  • lactic
  • acetic
  • ascorbic
  • citric
  • humic

Lenntech, a Dutch company that provides water treatment and disinfection solutions, has extensive information about chlorine dioxide, including its characteristics and uses, on their website. The closest application to MMS would be under the term, “stabilized chlorine dioxide.” However, they are mum with regard to how it is applied.

Where Lenntech does give specifics for generating chlorine dioxide ClO2, they speak of using sulfuric acid, for which the term “activator” is likely appropriate. I am now beginning to see that both the compound and the acid used, are critical. The chart below shows seven “species” of chlorine, along with their chemical formulas. Among them, only the chloride ion (Cl-), highlighted in yellow below is, by design, an integral part of the Krebs Cycle. Our preoccupation with chlorine dioxide has meant ignoring the cell, its power, and the effect of our actions upon the environment that it lives in, an environment that affects its health, or impairment.

The Cornford work confirmed, through emission spectroscopy, that the chemical emissions of chlorine dioxide species (ClO2), were not present after detoxification when the sodium chlorite was combined with acetic acid.

In a General Paper titled, Detoxification of chlorine dioxide (ClO2) by ascorbic acid in aqueous solutions: ESR studies, Ozawa and Kwan, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Teikyo University, independently confirmed the Cornford findings. Their paper, published in Volume 21, Issue 2 (Feb. 1987) of Water Research, concluded:

Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) which was easily prepared from dissolving sodium chlorite (NaClO2) in acidic aqueous solutions can oxidize l-ascorbic acid (AsA) to give the short-lived intermediate, ascorbic acid free radical (AFR). The detection of the ascorbate radical was made by using the electron spin resonance (ESR) spectroscopy coupled with a rapid-mixing flow technique which enabled us to detect radicals having a life-time of 5–100 ms at room temperature. This result indicates that the ascorbic acid becomes a suitable reagent for detoxification of the ClO2, which is remaining in drinking water, in the living body.

What does this all mean?

In order for MMS to be used effectively by people who have become aware enough of it to seek it out, they need to understand it sufficiently in order to assure that they get the best potential results possible.

The results obtained thus far with MMS have been great. Yet, evidence is that it can be better. However, MMS1 in its original form is the only method that is supported by legacy science that predates, by several decades, its introduction. The Cornford et. al. findings, which confirmed the harmlessness of DCA because NO chlorine dioxide species was present, have never been challenged or refuted.

Given the numerous conversations that I’ve had with Grant, most of which involve my simple willingness to listen and ask questions, to which I was shown answers, I now see areas of potential deviation from the original purpose and goal behind preparing and using the chlorite matrix.

Given that I have played a role in providing information to help people make their decision to use MMS, it is my responsibility to update my understanding if or when it comes. Now is such a time.

Whether the MMS community chooses to adopt any of the new guidelines that Grant or I will be proposing or not, is up to each. However, as we continue to rollout information on the HeLa cell, the importance of proper preparation of MMS (and DMSO) for effective elimination of HeLa cells will grow.


So are my suggestions on how to best prepare, purchase, and use the product known today as “MMS1.”

  • The product is best made with pure sodium chlorite. To my knowledge, that is never the case. If it is made with 80% grade sodium chlorite (NaClO2), then the product should contain no sodium chlorate (NaClO3) whatsoever amongst its residual byproducts (which sometimes include NaCl and other salts).
  • If you’re an MMS manufacturer or user, be aware that many distilled water producers add ozone (O3) during the production process. Please avoid using any water that contains ozone. If any bromide (Br) is chemically present in the body, potassium bromate (KBrO3) can be produced.
  • The purpose of adding citric acid is as a reagent to detoxify, and thereby eliminate chlorine dioxide (ClO2), leaving the chlorite matrix (ClO2-) that can be taken in to repair and restore the cells. This is a process of detoxifying chlorine dioxide, not activating it. Do not inhale the product as it is being detoxified. Done correctly, the FDA’s warnings, and the critics’ claims of snake oil, become especially specious, because chlorine dioxide (ClO2) production is no longer the goal.
  • Continue to use the guidelines for MMS1 use developed by Jim Humble ( No one has devoted more time and energy to inform and help people heal, as well as encourage and empower them take an active role in their own healing journey, or to help others. My interest here is to suggest a more precise and reliable way to get the results that the chlorite matrix can deliver, and reduce any adverse reactions.

Let me repeat here. From what we’ve been able to confirm through verified, independent clinical research (i.e., Cornford, et. al, Sarin, et. al, and Oxo Chemie, et. al.), the chlorite matrix (ClO2-), not chlorine dioxide (ClO2), is the actual item that chemically breaks down to a form that can be delivered to, and used by the cells to self-repair and restore Krebs Cycle function.

This is not a separation from, or rejection of what Jim Humble introduced to the world. The intention is to ensure that the actual results that he intended, actually be realized, and to expand the benefit.

The critics of MMS weren’t totally misinformed. Some of them understood the dangers of chlorine dioxide (ClO2).  Yet, most contented themselves with ignoring and/or dismissing the beneficial results that people reported, or turned their judgments toward Jim Humble.

I realize that some factions actually don’t want people who heal. Anyone who takes an objective look at standard medical practices these days can see that drugs are designed and approved to mitigate symptoms only, even while vaccines, thanks to the HeLa-laced cocktails that they push on us from cradle to grave, represent the seeds of future diseases that will become one’s medical cross to bear.

When you see how pervasive and coordinated these actions against humanity are – medicine, GMO’s, chemicals in products, toxic water and atmosphere, electromagnetic field toxicity, and government enforcement policies – it comes as no surprise to see modest changes instigated within MMS that could undermine its effectiveness, whether from outside, or from within.

I have put considerable thought into this communication, as it appears to deviate from established norms. However, the deviation, albeit well-intended, from the one formula that could help support MMS (via its own analogs) on a scientific foundation, started long ago. I felt it important to call attention to the needs and power of something that has been overlooked this entire time; the trillions upon trillions of very powerful cells. That is, if we give them what they need.

Please follow and like us:

Written by 

Related posts

67 Thoughts to “Rethinking MMS: A Cell’s-Eye View”

  1. The following specifications are taken from the vendor’s, Keavy’s Corner, website. It claims less than .02% Sodium Chlorate. Grant suggests that Keavy’s supplies MMS with zero Sodium Chlorate. Grant, do you believe that we can still confidently purchase from Keavy’s given the following specs?

    MMS Sodium Chlorite (NaClO2)………………22.4% Sodium Chloride (NaCl)…… ……………<2.5% Sodium Carbonate (Na2CO3)…………<1.8% Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH)………………<.02% Sodium Chlorate (NaClo3)………………..0.0% Sodium Sulfate (Na2SO4)……………….<1.1% Distilled Water (H20)…………………………Remainder CONTAINS NO LEAD, MERCURY , ARSENIC, OR OTHER HEAVY METALS
    ACTIVATOR ACS Hydrochloric Acid………………4.6% Distilled Water (H2O)…… ……………Remainder
    PACKAGING 4 fl oz HDPE Accudrop Bottles MANUFACTURED BY: Keavy's Corner

    1. shulic

      Consider this comment void. My apologies, I misread the specs in haste. It actually does read 0.0% on the next line.

    2. grant

      Ok, then. People, this misrepresentation of the Keavy’s Corner mms ingredients seems typical of most info presented in these blog/video sites as an attack upon me. While unfortunate, mistakes such as this speak LOUDLY to the long hours and intense research that I completed BEFORE writing a single sentence about MMS. Why? Simply stated, I can’t be wrong about something as important as this.

      To all you would-be naysayers out there interested in attacking me.

      Before I am completely prepared to present something/anything to the people, I consider EACH SENTENCE and the potential response that it may bring IF I WERE SPEAKING to a well-educated class. Will my work/research stand? Will it stand the scrutiny of truly SMART people willing to take the required time to do the research?

      Yes, it will.

      1. I’m afraid user grant may have genuinely mis-read my mis-reading of the ingredients. No attacks were intended. In fact, I recently purchased a year’s worth of solution from Keavy’s solely based on grant’s research. I ask that the Administrator remove my initial comment so as to not confuse future readers.

        The percentage concentration falls to the right of the ingredient name. I mistakenly took the reading on the left as the concentration. Honest mistake on my part. Hang in there grant. Your research carries solid substance to which I proudly subscribe.

  2. grant

    People. Imagine the birth of Pharma, and consider the goals with regard to the Business Model. It began with the 1724 ad idea of FORCING people to accept smallpox variolation FOR A FEE. Seeds of fear were planted, and soon massive profits were realized. That concept was carried forward by the European Royalty-financed cataloging of virus throughout Europe, India, China, and Africa. Little more profit was realized from variolation until the con artist Edward Jenner managed to steal the “smallpox vacca” idea from an English farmer. That “vaccination”, along with new ILLEGAL “laws” (laws that went against the Magna Carta and it’s Castle Laws) would bring BILLIONS of pounds-sterling to the coffers of the Royals. That went on for about 45 years, until the work of one Dr. Walter Creighton would force the Royals to honor the Common Law of the Magna Carta.

    Right around that time, pesticides were discovered. The push to create profitable highly efficient killing chemicals allowed the discovery of the chloroacetic, dichloroacitic, and trichloroacetic acids. The dichloroacetic acid was ignored because it could never be a pesticide. Moving forward to 1936, the medicinal properties of FURTHER ACIDIFIED dichloroacetic acid was discovered and Patented. This is the famous Dichloroacetic Acetate that cures mostly the mold-based cancers. This is also the base concept that led to the 1984 Sarin et al Chlorite Matrix Patent. That Chlorite Matrix is the PARENT of the Humble MMS. But, what are the REAL differences?

    The Sarin et al Chlorite Matrix was created via use of PURE PRODUCTS. That means, pure sodium chlorite, pure acetic acid, pure triple distilled NON OZONE TREATED water. This Sarin et al PURE PRODUCT was proven to be a cure for HIV AIDS, but because of it’s competing with the useless AZT, it was shelved.

    During Bill Clinton’s criminal occupation of the Governorship of Arkansas, he began forcing convicts to give blood. Of course, that blood was tainted with Hep A,B,C, and/or HIV AIDS. Clinton couldn’t SELL that blood, but he knew a COMMUNIST whom was then running the Canadian Red Cross. That COMMUNIST traded our clean canadian blood for Clinton’s TAINTED BLOOD. BOOM!!!! HIV AIDS and Hep A,B,C were being given to any Canadian accepting blood transfusions.

    The Krever Report arrived, and was based upon the Canadian Investigation of that COMMUNIST’S murdering of Canadians. Soon, questions were raised, and the Sarin et al Chlorite Matrix was once again “front and center” as a highly effective human blood, and human blood product cleanser.

    Yes, the PURE INGREDIENTS allowed the Chlorite Matrix to accomplish incredible things that hadn’t previously been thought possible.

    After Humble’s mms arrived, a Dr. Friedrich Kuhne rekindled interest in the Chlorite Matrix, and involved the Pharma giant OXO CHEMIE AG in the creation of a Sodium Chlorite based, multi-acidified (with sodium perborate added) molecule which they named WF10. The WF10 US Patent pays complete homage to Sarin et al with regard to the original Chlorite Matrix.

    WF10 was patented (US Patent 6086922) during 1999, and was quickly proven to be not only a cure for HIV AIDS, but also an INOCULATION against becoming infected by the AIDS virus. WF10 was further proven to cure various Cancers and neurological diseases.

    People, KNOW that these very successful products worked great, and KNOW that the purity of ingredients were of paramount importance.

    Humble’s MMS can be SO MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE if pure ingredients are used.

    Jim, we need to be talking these things through. We need to be working toward the “home production” of the pure ingredients required to create pure product. That is the path to follow.

  3. grant

    People, I have received a rather foolish request regarding a complete explanation of the Chlorite Matrix, AND how it interacts with the Krebs, or Citric Acid, cycle. Of course, that would involve thousands of words and other cited material such as Patents and Published Papers.

    Considering ONLY the Krebs Cycle, few people know WHAT it is, and even FEWER know how it actually works. So, where exactly would I begin? After all, I would be explaining the issue to someone having ZERO prior knowledge. The stupidity doesn’t end there.

    Back to the object of this comment.

    myturn2speak is the handle of the commenter. In spite of knowing nothing about the various forms of the Chlorite Matrix OR the Krebs Cycle/Citric Acid Cycle, this genius actually attempts teaching me the PROPER order of my clothes placement WHEN I’M DRESSING MYSELF.

    This asshat has to be planted troll.

  4. Grant,

    I seemed to have missed something here. Does your process make sodium chlorite from salt (sodium chloride)? If so and I can try it and make it work, I’ll definitely recommend it to the world. Sorry I missed that. If this is true, you have indeed solved a great problem. It is make sodium chlorite that is really greater than what we can buy then it is even greater, but right now I am really concerned with just being able to make MMS from salt. It may save some lives in the years to come as the governments will be into restricting the sodium chlorite. I’ll worry about the argument later as right now this is a more important matter. Jim Humble

    1. grant

      Forget the argument forever.

      What is important is developing abilities of ordinary people in ways that will allow them to create the required ingredients of the Chlorite Matrix, with regard to ALL of it’s forms. Pure ingredients are the goal, so the first goal should be locating or producing pure water.


      Much of the “natural source” water has impurities which can allow the inadvertent production of undesirable molecules. Such is the case regarding the presence of the potassium bromide ion interaction with with ozone. Therefore, the goal is to use pure water for the mms, and also for day to day use. Distilling the daily-required two liters of drinking water isn’t that difficult, and can be done even by using open fire. However, the water used to create PURE mms should be triple distilled, if a PERFECT product is the goal.

      Distillation DOES NOT remove the KBrO3(PB) molecule created by the interaction of Ozone and the Potassium Bromide ion from water. Chilling the suspect water to nearly freezing for 6? hours DOES cause the KBrO3 molecule to collect, in crystal form, at the bottom of the container, allowing you to pour off the NEARLY KBrO3(PB)-free top-water. People must not use Ozone-treated water FOR ANYTHING, especially not the watering of gardens. Ozone treated water forever changes the Plant DNA, causing the plant to stop it Potassium uptake. As for us, no Potassium in our food equals no Sodium-Potassium Pump action.


      Regarding the various versions of the Chlorite Matrix versions, they all begin with PURE Sodium Chlorite, and pure properly distilled water. The Sodium Chlorite itself is a molecule that can be correctly (for use in mms) produced only by using two stages of Electrolysis.

      The properly combined pure water and pure sodium chloride is placed into a glass container, and the processes involved are relatively simple. Better text on electrochemistry describe the two-stage processes which involve dissolving the pure sodium chloride in pure water that is heated (below boiling) long enough to suspend the majority of the pure sodium chloride.

      The electrochemistry portion involves two stages of low voltage (as is produced by 9 volt dry cell batteries) electrolysis involving first Carbon anode/cathode pairs, and then later, 24 carat Platinum anode/cathode pairs created of 3″ to 4″ long Platinum wires.

      Per the text, the first stage (using carbon) will require 16 hours, and will produce combined Sodium Chlorate (75%) and Sodium Chlorite (25%) in flake form. This must be separated, and the process involves first saving a liter of the spent saline solution for use with the second (Platinum anode/cathode) process. The remaining flake/solution mix has to be separated by pouring through a filter, leaving the flakes to dry.

      Once dry, the combined Sodium Chlorate/Sodium Chlorite flake are returned to a smaller portion of the saved SPENT saline solution placed in an appropriately-shaped glass container, and the electrochemistry is repeated using Platinum as BOTH cathode and anode, and a fresh power source. This second electrochemical process takes less time, and causes the vertical separation of the chlorate/chlorite.


      The importance of pure acids has never been mentioned. The Cornford et al work was accomplished using only Acetic Acid, but evidence form that work proved that several acids could be used at the same time. The WF10 work showed the absolute importance of using multiple acids, but not even the researchers could explain how, or why, it worked. If you want to know how these Chlorite Matrix work, review ” In His Own Words – The Chlorite Matrix” re-posted by Adam in this site. The simple “cartoon” showing the two-way action of the Sodium-Potassium Pump, along with the Ionic Charge State of the very small molecules entering or leaving the cell, will explain two important things. The first involves the similarity between the MMS molecule, and the ONLY molecule which is intentionally taken into the cell by the pump. The second, involves the SIZE of the molecule which CAN FIT through the Sodium Potassium Pump.

      (subsequently, the restoration of the Cell’s natural immune system occurs, and whatever issues are broken down and expelled from the Cell. that is why the Liver experiences short-term toxic overload)

      This causes me to believe that the WF10 is created (with regard to the Sodium Chlorite part) by pre-batching FIVE INDIVIDUAL Acid/Sodium Chlorite parts, and then combining them. That sort of process will keep the molecules small, and therefore useful. The WF10 has one more VERY IMPORTANT ingredient named sodium perborate, which is Nature’s completely non-toxic Mold killer. Sodium perborate is known to cure mold-based cancers.

      The acids used are Citric, Ascorbic, Acetic, Humic, and likely the most important of all, LACTIC. The Lactic Acid is of most importance when considering the development of the Infant Immune System.
      I believe that the development of simple processes which can be easily used to produce reasonably pure mild acids is important.

      OK, then. Let’s end the madness.

      Peace, from now on.

  5. Greetings Adam and Grant,
    Grant I have taken on board your position on this issue and the more I read your comments and responses to questions, I find a prevailing discord with your findings and Jim Humble’s MMS history. Sure, a lot of it shows a lot of effort and in-dept explanations. But this is it; your explanations seem at times to be confusing or contradictory. The chemicals focus upon here seems to be Ozone, Chlorine Dioxide CLO2, Sodium Chlorate, and Sodium Chlorite in particular.
    Ozone, Chlorine Dioxide, as well as Sodium Chlorate are well established as powerful oxidisers so you get no arguments there. But it is also shown that they might be providing a remarkably new and positive personality that are not fully understood when they encounter provided chemicals in the MMS matrix –mainly the chemicals that apply to MMS. It is this area that is posing an air of confusion and contradiction.
    You have made claimed the necessary type of conditions to look for when some of these chemicals mentioned are present/to be present. Yet some viewers have disclosed that the remaining of your proposed conditions persist; even when the targeted chemical has been removed. Your response to that was that they were other chemicals being involved. But you did not fully clarify who these hidden chemicals as such were. In another instance you have cautioned to having the presence of some of the above mentioned chemicals and to adopt a zero tolerance. Yet you refused to consider that in the combination that they are, that some remarkable cooperation, or checks and balances occurs that we are yet to fully understand.
    I have been drawn in this directional thinking when attempting to reconcile with yours. If nothing else you have got me THINKING.
    For those who are not aware of Jim Humble’s explanation for MMS. My extrapolation is that they are five charges made available on consumption of MMS which on contact with any acidic organisms in the body ie. Pathogens, Viruses, Moulds, Fungus etc –the bad guys -are immediately destroyed. Jim Humble contends that these bad guys possessed an opposite charge to MMS and expands further by saying that the scientific rule is that opposites attract and same repels. Therefore the cells which carry the similar charge as MMS are left alone -in other words the healthy cells. It is further given that the MMS can penetrate an invaded unhealthy cell and zap the bad guys –giving such a cell the opportunity to recover and ultimately the immune system.

    Grant et al, my understanding of your proposition is that on the consumption of MMS it goes into the cell and aids the functionality describe as the Krebs Cycle. You have further insisted that if the Krebs Cycle is disallowed then body recovery is impossible. You have further claimed that for this to occur effectively the presence of certain chemicals must be zero present when administering MMS –mainly Sodium Chlorate and Ozone.

    My stuck is that Jim Humble’s explanation however true or not true it might be -seems a very logical process and plausible possibility. Grant et al seems more complex and leaves gaps in the process –like an event being televised but only the middle or end is revealed.
    My other stuck is your repeated claim that Jim Humble’s MMS is somewhat potentially harmful –yet does not exist or reflected in its worldly results –so why not?
    In an attempt to reduce any vagueness so far –to reveal how I am thinking, consider the analogy of getting dressed for work. They will always be a methodology with few variations –mainly, you will put your socks on before you put your shoes on –you would put your underpants on before you put your trousers on. With the socks you would make sure that they are not on the wrong side when put on. You would tie your shoelace after you put on your shoes. And even then you would not put your left shoe on your right and visa versa. You would make sure that your underpants are not put on back to front and so on. This methodology is like a law and the further I deviate from it the less effective I would be at getting dress/to work. So in order to reach the end results there is a process that would be applied to all who get dress for work.

    Ok so let’s go back Grant et al to your proposition. My stuck is that the commonalities should ring through as a process in your proposition –I am failing to identify them. You have emphasised a great deal focus on the cell at the expense of what is suggested to be taking place in Jim Humble’s MMS. But the manner in which you propose is leading me to ask the following:

    NB: my animated writing is not to be construed as being flippant –but to invoke a cognitive assessment in laymen -of the information provided in your proposition.
    1. Before MMS entered a sick body the cells were ineffective at performing its duty –why?
    2. Those cells were once healthy –now they are not –what made them unhealthy? What hinders them returning to original health?
    3. We might even add that to take MMS out of the picture; the prospect of those cells having a positive conclusion was dim. Why?
    4. The conventional thinking has been that having Pathogens; Viruses, Parasites, Mould and Fungus etc –the bad guys -posed a direct negative impact on the body –surely this is still the case? If not, then why?
    5. Is having these bad guys; in your body irrelevant to the functionality of the cell?
    6. So does the MMS chemicals on entering the body -riddle with these bad guys -completely ignores these bad guys and head straight for the defective and deprived cell or healthy cells for that matter –then delivers some needed ammunition –then steps aside and allow the cells to go and vanquish the bad guys? Which before then they were incapable of doing so?

    My stuck is that when I apply these questions to Jim Humble’s explanation there is more clarity then when I apply them to yours.
    The problem too often is that there is always a push to direct an understanding –that must be one thing vs. the other without considering the eclectic possibilities that might be involved.

    I raise this thinking in the face of Jim Humbles MMS and have drawn certain aspects of thinking and deductive reasoning as follows:
    1. If these chemicals are volatile and aggressive as you say there are –on entering the body -then it should reflect in some percentage in the people who have faithfully taken Jim Humble’s MMS for all these years. Why hasn’t this been the case?
    2. or these chemicals are in no way present in Jim Humble’s MMS -therefore the jury of public opinion will have to return a verdict of not guilty –move along folks nothing to concern you self with here!
    3. or the amounts are relatively insignificant in the Jim Humble’s MMS Matrix to have any impact whatsoever in the health recovery – which would mean your precautionary principle is totally unjustified!
    3. or these chemicals do not perform or react in the way that conventional thinking suggested when they encounter each other. Which again would mean your precautionary principle is totally unjustified!
    4. or there has been a corrective process that renders any damage in a person who takes Jim Humble’s MMS as insignificant -to the measured gains that are constantly –constantly being reported -mainly the cause of the complaint has been completely removed and person’s life has returned to normality. Which again would mean your precautionary principle is totally unjustified!

    Something has got to give way here. Because in spite of the colourful insight into what is considered to be taking place in the cell and the modified terminologies given ie. Kreb cycle and Chlorite Matrix; in my humble opinion it does not add up when reflecting it upon Jim Humble’s MMS. Some people should have been seriously hurt by now -including you Grant and your dogs!
    I must add that all of this precautionary driven information is nothing more than a hypothesis at best and certainly not a theory. What is lacking is a correlation study of this new Rethinking and its implied improved benefits Vs correlation benefits of the Jim Humble’s MMS and its original thinking, which up to this day has shown to be exemplary at making unhealthy people healthy.


    1. It may well point out that there is no significant difference of benefit between the new Rethinking and the Common thinking of Jim Humble’s MMS.
    2. Or it may well show that the new Rethinking being a vast improvement to healing above the performance of Jim Humbles MMS.
    What you have placed before us so far is a BELIEF that you are right and inviting folks to contract with that belief by taking the actions you prescribe. in disregard of what Jim humble’s MMS has contributed so far without falter
    It must also be explained that why in the face of everything Grant et al have said; Why? Why? Why? No one has been discovered with any BIOLOGICAL OR PHYSICAL DAMAGE as a direct result of taking Jim Humble’s MMS!
    Take care of your self and each other!

    1. grant

      I have reviewed your completely disconnected, highly unorganized drivel, and although I can provide cited/proven answers to all of your PERTINENT questions, why would I?

      Basically, you are asking me to finish writing the book HERE ON THIS PAGE, AND GIVE IT YOU before it is released to the public. Do you actually believe me to be that simple?

      I began to produce SOME answers to your questions, but I decided to first read your complete posting. The review led me to type the first sentence of this comment.

      Perhaps we should skip the first 1000 words, and get right to reviewing and considering your third last sentence. You know, the one with the caps and exclamation marks. Within that sentence, one word in particular has caught my attention. Let’s consider your use of the word “honest”, and the not so subtle implication which you have intended it to bring. Are your attempting to lead the readers to believe that my previous statements ARE NOT HONEST?

      Buddy, that’s EXACTLY the kind of bullshit that made me lose interest in Jim Humble’s deal.

      For your PERSONAL information, NO PERSON OR AUTHORITY on the Planet can make me lie about anything. So, why would I lie to you? I don’t know you, I don’t WANT to know you, and I could care less of what your OPINION of me is. I don’t ANSWER to you, and I certainly don’t seek yours, OR ANYONE ELSE’S, approval or adoration or money.

      Sincerely, (that word shows that I TRULY MEAN what is written here) Grant.

  6. Adam Abraham was what I thought a super Guy. He wrote super articles about the establishment and dozens if not hundreds of other things telling both what was right and what was wrong. In my opinion he was mostly right. He wrote a number of good reports about MMS and Jim Humble. But now I am not so sure. You know the old story about the Trojan horse. It was a beautiful large statue of a horse left standing outside of a Greek City, on wheels even. The Greeks came out and rolled the horse inside closing the city door thinking they were safe. And then that night in the dark a door opened in the belly of the statue and the enemy came out. They opened the gates from the inside of the city which brought destruction to the city.

    Well that story has happened with MMS and it took me by surprise. Adam Abraham was I thought my friend. I paid his airplane ticket to Europe and several places and he made acceptable Vides about me and MMS and he sold those videos to the public although I don’t know how many, my group also bought them from him and sold them to the public.

    Then all of a sudden out of a clear blue sky comes various articles and I assume radio programs by Adam and his new friend, Grant, whom he believes to be a super non-degreed chemist. The articles explained how the theory of MMS is all wrong and thus MMS could even be harmful. There are no records anywhere of harm that MMS could have done, and with hundreds of pharmaceutical drugs causing hundreds of thousands of deaths each year they have decided it is their job to inform the public of the possible harm that MMS might do. Did you see the contrast there. Pharmaceutical drugs cause many deaths, including even aspirin caused more than 300 deaths last year, and MMS no death in 15 years and not even some sort of permanent damage, not one and these guys decide they must warn the public of a possible problem that MMS might cause.

    Of course there is the one death that occurred near an island near Australia that was in question for a while, but not now. The FDA and other involved evil groups were able to keep the autopsy held up for over a year from being released, because of course, the autopsy proved that the death could not be MMS caused. Meanwhile they got a year of mileage talking about it and saying it was MMS. Finally they had to quit saying it, but no one apologized for saying it.

    Then when I sent emails to, Adam and his friend Grant, saying that it seemed like that we should tell the people the facts, but we should tell them so they don’t get all upset and decide against using MMS. I offered to help them get the data to the public. You should understand that I am not now and was not then selling MMS. I make no money from it and never did. I just wanted to see people get well. What I explained to Adam was lets tell people the risk which I estimated to be one in one thousand at that time. Well they completely ignored me. I know that there were some who chose not to use MMS because of what Adam and his friend wrote, I know because those who suffered called me. So there were people who went on suffering because of Adam’s and his friend’s handling of the “Truth.” When I wrote an article about it Grant got mean about it and said I wasn’t the discoverer. Evidently according to him the fact I brought it to the public meant nothing. And I said in my book it was not my original discovery. But I have also said because I discovered it independently the world has it. I was the second discoverer. So what? The world has it now and didn’t have it before.

    Grant said why should he ask my permission to tell the truth. There is a point there. But all I was asking was let’s tell it so it doesn’t scare people away from MMS. After all even if the contention they expound is true it is still hundreds of times less likely to cause harm than Chemo therapy or radiation. But no, they decided to tell the truth regardless who it hurt. But I doubted what they were saying was the truth. I doubted that MMS could cause harm. So I asked Bishop Andreas Kalcker our research director in Spain to check it out. Well he doubted that their contention was right as well, but to be sure he run it by several other scientists in two universities, and guess what, Grant and Adam’s complex explanation doesn’t fly with Andreas and quite a number of other scientists who are now doing research on MMS.

    MMS, Chlorine Dioxide is one of the simplest formulas you have ever seen, ClO2. That’s it, just chlorine and oxygen, nothing more. But it is one of the hardest formulas to understand and any university will tell you that science still does not understand all of the chemistry of this formula. But the actual chemistry and truth of it is that thousands of lives have been save and tremendous suffering stopped. But do you see the Trojan Horse effect? Adam came in and said a lot of nice things about MMS and then when he had thousands of people’s attention and trust about MMS turned around said it might hurt them. He explained that he finally understands chlorine dioxide and that he realizes it might hurt them . In this case they brought the darkness to those who believed them. Why wouldn’t the people believe? They already trusted them.

    Basically the problem is this, Adam and Grant claim that the oxidation potential of the chlorine dioxide ion is too high and causes damage in the body. They claim that the 0.95 volts that we talk about is wrong. They claim that the actual oxidation potential of the active chlorine dioxide ion is 1.49 volts and thus does damage when released in the body. But not so, as you will see below. The potential is 0.95 volts in the Chlorine Dioxide formula and cannot be otherwise, unless you change the pH of the body. In order to have a 1.49 volt oxidation potential you must have a pH of 3 in the body.

    So about 6 months ago I sent Adam a reasoning letter attempting to show him some logic. Since one of Adam-Grant’s contentions is that it really isn’t the chlorine dioxide that is killing the pathogens, but rather the sodium chlorite, since according to their chemistry the chlorine dioxide turns back into sodium chlorite in the body and the chlorite runs through the body killing the pathogens. I pointed out that sodium chlorite had been on the health food store shelves for 80 years throughout the US and literally hundreds of thousands of people had taken it without the results we get from MMS. Sodium chlorite gets a little bit of results now and then, but never the result that MMS does. Adam was totally disinterested in anything I had to say and wouldn’t discuss it.

    Below is the truth of the formula as close as we can get by several scientists –true — degreed — scientists and it shouldn’t have to be proven as the formula required is a well-known chemical formula that can be easily proven and is given in 365,000 places on the internet. You see, chemistry is chemistry and certain formulas work for all chemicals, not just a select few.

    This is it from Dr.Andreas Kalcker:

    Yes there is a potential of 1.5Volt as they state but: only if you apply the Nernst equation p. e.

    [the Nernst equation is a known equation that relates the equilibrium reduction potential of a half-cell in an electrochemical cell (which is what the body is) ]

    The Nernst Equation:
    ClO2- + 2H2O + 4e-↔ Cl- + 4OH-Eº ≈ 1.409v

    that means simply ClO2 has 1.5V with ph 3. and 0.954 V with ph 7

    we do not have ph3 in the body ! period! in our body we have:
    ClO2 + 1e-↔ ClO2 – Eo = 0.954V.

    Any acidic pathogen receives even a higher discharge as 0.95V due to this condition!

    The problems that are true that they see are probably due to the Citric acid:

    1. 50% is too strong
    2. it has traces of aspergillus niger ( mold)
    3. it feeds Citrobacter

    Dr. Andreas Ludwig Kalcker (Ph.D)

    skype: andreaskalcker (Barcelona)
    Movil: +34675576938 ( 10:00>14:00 // 17:00 >19:00)

    That’s it, it’s really simple. Anyone can look up the entire formula and chemical reactions on the internet. Start at Wikipedia, check it carefully, take it to a chemisty professor at a University.

    The problem that Adam Abraham and Grant claim exists is really rather childish and would smack of someone being paid to throw confusion into the question. After all, every cancer patient they convince to not use MMS is worth 800,000 dollars to the medical industry. But the really crazy part is, hundreds of thousands of sufferers have benefitted and there are simply no recorded deaths or permanent damage claims made. If their story had of been the truth they wouldn’t have refused to discuss it with me.

    The opposite of where there is smoke there is fire is that where there is smoke there should be some sort of fire. The fire in this case would be people who have been damaged by the bad MMS. After all about 10 million people have tried MMS and thousands of success stories are around the internet. Your chances of being damaged by MMS are so remote as not to really be a problem even it it were true. Grant’s warnings only scare people but have saved no one.

    My decency suggestion is that if Grant really believes what he is saying he should start selling the really good stuff. Since it isn’t available anywhere else, it would only be decent when you scare someone away from a product that might save their lives, YOU AT LEAST PROVIDE A PLACE TO BUY THE ALTERNATE. Ever wonder why he doesn’t. He can’t say he doesn’t want to compete with me as I have never sold it. I’ve never made a cent from the sales of MMS. My money which is little comes from seminars and books. So I wouldn’t take the chance if there were bad things wrong with MMS as all I have ever wanted was to see people get well and overcome their suffering. For some years now I have had the backup of scientists and professors from several universities who do continuous research on the use of chlorine dioxide for the purpose of overcoming disease.

    I apologize for being overly irritated about scaring people away from MMS. I truly only expected that from FDA, pharmacies, and medial doctors. But I am still willing to discuss it with Grant. Maybe I am wrong about his actions.
    Archbishop Jim Humble

    Archbishop Jim Humble

    1. grant

      Yes, Jim. You are wrong about my actions and intent. Remember, I used YOUR VERSION of MMS to cure my lung damage which I received from local MONEY PIG-caused releases of both the BAD ClO2 and Ozone. It worked, and I told the world that it worked. That’s right. I used mms that obviously had Sodium ChlorATE included, and YES! It worked! WHY it worked was the question. Persistence led to my discovery of the local (BC) 1971 work of Cornford, Herring, Frost, McDowell that PROVED that the ClO2 produced was actually ClO2- AND also that the ClO2- was very temporary. That discovery took me deeply down the Rabbit Hole, and into the world of the Sarin et al Chlorite Matrix. Ingredients, methods, and resulting chemistry would further explain that Sodium Chlorite-based molecule.

      Soon, the ultimate question that brought us to this conflict. Why would you say that it didn’t matter if the MMS was fine containing both acidified Sodium Chlorate and acidified Sodium Chlorite? My EXTENSIVE research produced multiples of statements that PURE SODIUM CHLORITE must be used. ZERO SODIUM CHLORATE was to be present.

      In plain words, the PROPERLY produced Chlorite Matrix DOES NOT possess the highly toxic, long lived ClO2. Acidified Sodium Chlorite produces ClO2 lasting only a micro-second. Then it’s GONE FOREVER! This fact has been known AND PUBLISHED since 1971. If your Spain-based adviser doesn’t know this fact? Get a new adviser.

      Your concept of the MMS “blowing up the pathogen” is bs. If such destruction is taking place, it will be caused by either the inadvertently produced (by acidified Sodium Chlorate) BAD ClO2, or possibly even by the actual Chlorite Matrix (ClO2-) attack upon any HeLa present.

      The POINT which I have long made involves primarily the CORRECT ingredients and methods. This is true of both the mandatory Electrochemistry PROCESSES which must be followed in order to create SMALL AMOUNTS of pure Sodium Chlorite, AND the creation of MULTIPLE mild acids needed to create the ultimate version of the Chlorite Matrix. The Electrochemistry demands the use of carbon rods for the first phase, and then the use of 24k Platinum wire for the second phase.

      These are the truths that you and your followers should be teaching the people.

      1. James Humble


        I don’t know if you know it or not, but I am 80 years old. For at least 65 years I have been a teacher. I have taught nutrition and mining and gold chemistry and Scientology and healing and a dozen other things. So I have nothing against your going out and teaching what you think is the proper MMS. But do not scare people by talking about using the MMS as it is now produced.

        Although you may be correct, you have not been proven to be correct. The 1971 work of Cornford is also a scare tactic. Maybe it was not meant to be and maybe it was meant to be. Certainly nothing happened between 1971 and the time I got my hands on it.

        Electro chemistry was my specialty. I worked with it for 30 years. I made at leat 10 thousand electro aqua chemistry tests during that time. As a teacher I totally disagree with your last sentence, i.e. “These are the truths that you and your followers should be teaching the people.”

        Either you simply are not thinking or you are completely out of it. With the medical people killing more than 950 thousand people with drugs last year and I am supposed to start teaching my people and the world electro chemistry?

        Grant, stop and think for a minute. My job is curing the sick and treating the dying. I have a chemistry solution that does that. It has cured hundreds of thousands so far. People from around the world write me every day how they have used MMS to overcome sickness and suffering and enjoy life more. No one has been hurt with what you call the “highly toxic” CLO2. Maybe it is and maybe it isn’t, but no proof so far. Maybe Cornford’s job was to scare people away from it.

        Somehow I get the feeling that your intentions are pure. If so, then you must realize that it is not my job to teach my church and the public electro chemistry. My job is saving mankind. If the solution I use may hurt one person in a million, then so be it. All the other treatments of mankind are 10 to a million times worse. Last year more than 300 people died immediately after taking aspirin. Teaching what you consider the truth about MMS might just be your job, or the job of other people. If you feel that you should teach the “truth” please do so, but by doing it so you are not scaring people away from using MMS.

        IT IS NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAT WE TELL PEOPLE ABOUT THE TRUTH OF CHLORINE DIOXIDE THAN IT IS TO SAVE THEIR LIVES. Most people don’t give a damn about the chemical truth of MMS, they just want to get over their suffering. So there is no point in forcing a suffering person to listen to the “TRUTH” of the chemistry of MMS. So it is not my job to do that and it is not my job to furnish the world with a perfect MMS. Maybe it is your job. Then I hope you will do it. Meanwhile there are lives to be saved which we do most every day.

        So I hope you will help with this. Design some equipment that we can use to make your perfect sodium chlorite. The governments of the world will eventually restrict the availability of sodium chlorite. We need equipment that will produce it. Meanwhile until that gets done I will continue as we are going. We might even mention that equipment is being worked on.

        So we might work together on this, but you have to get around scaring people somehow. There are easy enough ways to do that, but I will continue to teach people around the world how to make MMS until we have the correct way engineered. I can’t get into this truth thing for now. It would be a totally impossible thing to be doing that. I won’t switch over if it causes a single person to suffer. We have more than 650 ministers of health that we would have to retrain. Providing what you say turns out to be true, we will eventually switch over, but it isn’t something that would have to be done immediately. There would be close to 6 months of just testing of the new soltuions. I and my ministers are not going to stop healing people. We would switch over without stopping. but it isn’t something to jump into until you have created a way to go that would be easy to switch over to.

        So you tell me I am wrong about your intentions. So prove it. Help.

        Archbishop Jim Humble Founder of the Genesis 2 Church of Health and Healing

      2. Grant,

        Sorry, but I don’t believe it and on top of that I believe you are doing you best to make it almost impossible for most of the people of the world to be able to have it and afford it. Maybe you do it on purpose and maybe not. No I don’t think I should listen to that stuff that you put out at all. In 100 years the only person to be hurt is someone who got caught in a Chlorine dioxide gas room. There have been no indications of those who were hurt by taking it nor has there been any records of death. You are screaming wolf when there is no wolf, and you want me to go out and cry wolf with you. You somehow think you know what my job is or what my job is supposed to be, but you aren’t even playing in the same ball field. Instead you are down the street in the local bar playing on the pin ball machine. My job is saving lives, and I have done all right. When you have something that can help let me know, but don’t use up my time with theories. Chlorine Dioxide by way of sodium chlorite is the safest medicine ever developed and leave it to someone to decide he has more knowledge and then go cry wolf.

        I’ll be interested when you have something that is at least as cheap and also works and is easy to get, or on the other hand, when you find a way to obtain sodium chlorite easily anywhere in the world. The governments will be restricting it more and more. Are you going to make the problem harder, or will you help. Right now you are not working towards helping. And your theory of a poisonous substance is obviously wrong or someone would have had poison problems. If the poison does exist, probably the body neutralizes it in some way. In any case no problems with poisons so far. Please find a real problem that really exist and work on solving that. And don’t tell me what I should be doing.

    2. grant

      Jim. You shouldn’t become the Faculty Prof whom turns the blinded eye upon any new works that outdate his published text. That sort of issue is the main reason for the Chemistry problems that plague the world today. EMBRACE the new. Simple publish amendments via the Internet.

      It should be known that the ORIGINAL publishing of the Cornford et al titled “The Photo-electron Spectrum of the Free Radical Chlorine Dioxide” work simply stated that there could be no ClO2 caused reason for alarm regarding the use of DCA or Sodium Chlorite based products. The original abstract (it has been reworded after I made that work famous) made such a very pointed statement. It also should be stated that I located Chlorite Matrix use as MEDICINE at Russia 1959/1960.

      Regarding your described background as a chem teacher, you should be able to easily locate the two stage electrolysis method used to first isolate combined Sodium Chlorate and Sodium Chlorite, then to separate the Sodium Chlorite from the Sodium Chlorate. This is where the low voltage with Carbon, and then the low voltage with 24K Platinum enters. The Carbon process takes 16 hours, the 24K Platinum process around 6 hrs.

      At this time, I wish to state that there are secondary issues here. These issues also involve the mixing/batching of the Chlorite Matrix. It is well known that pure, non-Ozone treated distilled water is a REQUIREMENT for the use of MMS, the Chlorite Matrix, Dichloroacetic Acid, and Phenylacetate. There is a reason for this. Ozone reacts with certain parts of natural water to cause formation of the very toxic KBrO3, which is a known carcinogen and neurotoxin. Even alone, the Ozone quickly attacks ALL LIVING CELLS, both healthy and unhealthy.

      1. Greetings Grant, of course I have never met you but as they have always said “First impressions always counts” I feel you are overlooking the experience of an old and wise man as Jim.
        There is an old saying that “Practice Makes Perfect” You are justifying to see to the perfection of such a wonderful solution such as MMS. But with all of the implied imperfections of MMS that you desire to focus upon -in its imperfect status which you have judged it to be; MMS has continually delivered to the sick and discarded and blatantly out performed the FDA perfectly judged approved drugs -which are transparently carcinogenic and toxic on consumption. The perspective clearly should be clearly that MMS is not Carcinogenic or toxic, yet you intentionally or inadvertently place Jim Humble’s MMS application and administering it in the same concerning and precautions. Jim humble’s MMS does not have or promote any carcinogenic or toxic use. Hence I believe this is Jim Humble’s appealing concern.
        The reasonability sought in this matter is this. Of course it is our duty to acknowledge any potential harm before the FDA et al. As well as prudently implement education and practices of avoidance. Yet the alarm and points you raised concerning harm has more relevance to the industrial users of these harsh chemicals then the significant different approach in health applications of MMS –it is continually distorted that MMS are these same chemical –in factually MMS is not! MMS Community does not care about bleaching textiles. No one uses MMS to bleach textiles so why the constant inferred association?
        Where in the Jim Humble’s MMS is the promotion of ozone or Sodium Chlorate or sodium Dioxide or Electricity or Nitrate Acid any other impurities for that matter? Ok reverse ogmosis seems a better water choice but where is that mentioned in any instance.
        Jim Humble’s MMS has been delivered to the needed masses as a simple equation to the layman; backed by Jim’s and now the world’s observation of sick people becoming well -with no damaged or fatal results: 28% Sodium Chlorite followed with 10% Acidic Acid added to water after activation and clear protocols.
        Ok, so there was a mix-focus on CLO2 and everyone is certainly happy to evolve their understanding towards CLO2- . As I have already stated somewhere Science/Scientific Studies are by nature adversarial. Yet this is the point –in knowing so, a wise duty is to always determine the relevance of the discovery.
        Judging from everything you’ve stated so far the conditions to create the risk of harm as you implied is not within Jim Humble’s MMS neither its protocols.
        For any one to deviate from the clear and simple instructions of Jim Humble’s MMS; the resulted outcome clearly lies with them not Jim Humble. In spite of the reference to the layman masses this does not negate the adult responsibility of sensible judgement. Furthermore, to promote association of CLO2; implying that MMS has a dark side, is irresponsibly unfair because as you have already admitted, it is not allowed presence in the body, whereby it is in fact CLO2- that prevails. So what is the fuss about? With respect and inviting perspective –this seemed to be nothing more then a “mountain over a mole hill”. CLO2 Rest In Peace, oh hail CLO2-. Ok a little fun humour but not in dismissal of the serious and sensitivity of this issue.
        Grant, if you did indeed ingest some Sodium Chlorate, as it is clearly understood -or ozone for that matter–you got rid of your health complaint –you’re here alive and well –with no permanent or irreversible damage –but ultimately you no longer have your ill complaint. I can not say the same for all the drugs that most people are taking on a daily basis. The consistent case is this; you go to many doctors with one complaint –you’re given prescription which seldom removes the first complaint but brings on another complaint –then given additional prescription for that new complaint –which brings on yet another new complaint –and on and on it goes until your beautifully engineered body says I cant take it anymore –then you die. These are the kind of issues that MMS has exposed and continues to address.
        Additionally, Zinc, copper, lead etc are all considered harmful in large dose yet our bodies requires them in adequate amounts for well being. The point is that this Sodium Chlorate that you claimed was present was not significant enough to present as i’ve already stated earlier, any indicating or long standing damage. Further still, the plausible evidence in observation; is that for such a condition to occur the amount to ingest is not clearly and justly given. So how much is too much? It is not fair to say that none is acceptable because here you’re alive and unharmed –Which implies that such an amount relevant to harm or irreversible damage is not -and has not been remotely demonstrated in the MMS protocols or using population –never! Otherwise in the lived period of MMS use we would have seen the damaged. You think someone would be damaged by MMS and not tell the world?
        As for the now distorted association with Sodium Chlorate in MMS giving diarrhoea and nausea –are we now saying there is no longer such a thing as die-off? Are we now dismissing that when the bad guys (pathogens etc) are zapped and ripped apart that the next step is for the body to expunge of the unavoidable waste and toxins that is resulted? Are we also dismissing that when the MMS does its job more diligently then the eliminating process –then the prudent course of action of the body is a rapid attempt to remove that waste and toxin at once –which is conducted in the form of nausea followed by diarrhoea? Are we? Yet Jim Humble has repeatedly instructed that when such a symptom occurs that the MMS user should immediately reduce the amount taken until symptoms passes. It has been often acknowledge of Jim Humble being repeatedly voicing against the distorted view that it has got to hurt to work -as apposed to the acceptance of chemo and side effect in the conventional administration of health intervention. As for the fuss about nausea and diarrhoea –as uncomfortable as it always is -Chemo not only causes the same but hair lost and many other factor –in some cases are life threatening. So please again lets have some perspective.
        Yet there is another old saying “If It Is Not Broken Then Leave It Alone”. In the context of saving lives -one less saved is one too many -I have to side with Jim Humble in stating that the method delivery of anything deemed to be truthful is without a doubt important and yet more so in this delicate arena of the sick and disheartened. To imply that there is something wrong with MMS in spite of the multiplicity of diseases and bazaar named pathogen and viruses being ridden from people’s lives 24/7, is a cognitive dissonant response.
        Leave MMS alone –there is no dark side –only a dark arrogance and duplicity of those who wish to complicate simplicity in the name of progress. A solution that creates a problem is no SOLUTION –think about that.
        Observably no one has asked any one not to tell the truth; but be mindful of the audience that will receive it -to of course present a balanced view. Sadly, evidently this was not done –in the context of avoiding creating undue alarm and misperceptions.
        Yet another old saying “Necessity Is The Mother Of All Inventions” It was a miracle for those men with malaria out in that Guyanese jungle that on that faithful day that Jim Humble was present with his cognitive ingenuity –it was a miracle that Jim Humble was in Africa to treat those people who had the incurable malaria. MMS is a Miracle and a wonderful chemistry –to suggest one is an alternative to the other is absurd.
        Looking for a danger of MMS processes is prudent. But to present this discovery without considering the distortions it may present is reckless. For the findings shown here should have also allowed the perspective, that the suspected potential harm of MMS if present at all, has not materialised in the field of all of its years of use. This is a variable of evidence that has not been allowed any impetus from Grant et al message.
        It is even further reasonable to expand that if this condition of harm they speak of does occur when sick people take MMS (because this is the only real issue here to divulge on) it is clearly cancelled out by the benefitting end results of people leaving their “sickbed” to a world of living again -because this has been the MMS history.
        Look, this is a war on sickness and dis-ease and in such there are known to be casualties. Yet the casualties in this case have been the bad guys –pathogens –lets not make it the misguided as well. We are constantly, though periodically reproducing cells -to stop doing so is to face death -we all know this. However, the clear and present danger is that most of us are not reproducing sufficient healthy cells for excellent health. It is my understanding that they are many factors that hinders healthy cells such as viruses, pathogens, parasites, mould fungus, diet, etc –the bad guys. Has this now changed? When someone demonstrates their recovery is it not under the reasonable assumption that the above hindering factors have been removed? And what has done that with clarity to date? Is it the drugs/big pharma? No! It is MMS for sure! Hence the cells are now delivered into recovery mode -with functionality as Grant et al puts it “ the crept cycle”. Surely the whole animation of Jim Humble suggesting of those blithers being ripped and blasted out of existence does not warrant the ridicule regardless to how exaggerated it may seem for some. Furthermore, when I have heard him done so; it has been after he stated that a thorough explanation was more complicated than that.
        Another old saying is “A House Against Itself Cannot Survive”. The point of all this; is when you examine Jim Humble’s record it is clear that his mindset is to reach ordinary folks and empower them to save and preserve their lives. Jim Humble has reserved the notion that you Grant maybe of the same purpose. I am not so sure. In this case you can only prove me right or wrong.
        This edification here is that Jim Humble’s MMS is safe -has continued to be safe -saving lives -The Truth of this evidence has spoken overwhelmingly loud enough -to those who would listen.
        Jim Humble is clearly the “Father Teresa” of today -A true Humanitarian
        I am not so bold to judge whether you Grant is a scientist -But you sir by your posture and conduct to date in this delicate and sensitive matter are no humanitarian! Yet there is always hope!

  7. grant

    People, as there are many questions regarding clean water, I should mention the magnesium oxide “Prill Beads”. They work, and cause the separation of pollutants from the water. There are articles about this, but learning the actual mechanisms involved will take serious research. The question is; Do Prill Beads separate ALL POLLUTANTS from tap or other water? Or, are Prill Beads selective?

    I have seen prill beads work, and will soon begin using them myself. Also, as research time becomes available, I will know the mechanism.

    Google… Prill Beads…

    1. Juan G

      Hello Grant, your comments have been very enlighting. I distribute mms in Venezuela, and my country is the only one with Haiti in Latin America where the cases of malaria are increasing. So this product is actually an amazing thing for rural areas. I am planning a trip to delta amacuro, a place plagued by malaria and other tropical diseases including chagas disease, etc. There is also a very rough problem with contaminated waters and the locals are getting all sorts of diseases for using this kind of waters. I dont have mms2 but I know where to get it very unexpensively in Colombia. I also wanted to know if 93% agricultural grade magnesium oxide is the same as the pril bead. I cant seem to find information on the concentration of the beads. I would love to get insight from ou about a strategy of what would be most effective for the treatment of tropical diseases and water cleansing. Thanks again for your previous comments and your current investigation.


      1. Greetings Juan, may I remind you that the vision of MMS came about from inception as Water Purification tablets -Do not be distracted. Boil the water and use MMS. It is my contention that if MMS helps the Krept cycle as implied it is in addition to it also distroying those prevailing markers of ill health -those pathogens and viruses.

    2. Grant,
      Well wouldn’t be too bad if you were telling all that much truth. But you still don’t have the facts. You are convinced that you are a chemist and maybe a little bit, just enough to get you into trouble, You chemistry is still screwed and your logic does nothing but make you a big man. No there is now law saying you have to get permission to tell what is the version that you think is correct. But that don’t prove it’s correct. No you don’t need permission to start saying things that will scaring people, not at all. Just integrity any kind of decent integrity would require it. No doubt to this time, since a number of people have called indicating a fear of using MMS, Your assumption would be that you don’t need to seek any kind of integrity. YES I stated in my book that i didn’t invent these things, but my rediscoveries did bring them to the public throughout the world. Why didn’t you do it if you didn’t need me and jumped right in there and let it all out with arrogance that matches Obama. The fact that I rediscovered it and brought it to the sick and dying doesn’t make my discovery any less important or any less anything. After I had generated a few million people who tried MMS then you decided that you should scare them a bit with what you called telling the truth. I would have helped you bring any truth to the public, but you wasn’t and still aren’t interested in the truth, you are interesting in Grant and being a great man and bringing his great truth to the world.. Well several universities in Spain and Andreas have worked out the data proving you are wrong. We will publish it soon.

      And by the way we have been making pure very yellow chlorine dioxide gas with no green in it at all for almost a year now. The fact is green is a contaminant. Just get the contaminants out. And please my material is copyrighted and it is so stated, so try to avoid copying it from place to place.

      So why should I mention the amount of sodium chlorate? There are a number of other chemicals that were not listed too. Sodium chlorate has been proven to be non toxic in amounts hundreds of times higher than that which is in the MMS. Amd it has been tested on long term human consumption tests.


      1. grant

        Funny stuff. Your opening bs states that I Lie? I sense your regret regarding editing/spamming my attempted email contact regarding your inclusion of the Sodium Chlorate in the mms batch. It doesn’t matter exactly whom claims that responsibility, as YOU are ultimately responsible for that issue. If not for your refusal of my email content, this deal would have been dealt with QUIETLY. You could have QUIETLY removed the Sodium Chlorate. You could have QUIETLY changed your position regarding the non-sodium chlorite highly toxic ClO2. In fact, you could have taken 100% of my research to help your cause. That was EXACTLY my intention regarding the failed Email contact.

        Now, your bs is growing exponentially as you try discredit my SOLID research regarding the hazards of acidified sodium chlorate. Also, it is very obvious that you seek to avoid the RESULTING CHEMISTRY of acidified Sodium Chlorate. So, why the sudden ASS-COVERING?

        Now, you intend to send your big brother (from Spain) to “set me straight”? More humor. Remember, these geniuses won’t be attacking ME personally. They’ll be trying to prove countless working groups of chemists, from 1936 to at least 2000, WRONG! Good luck with that.

        Ya’ll geniuses ought to quit before you all PROVE that you know very little about very little. You know, such as your mistaken grasp of Copyright Protection. As a WGA REGISTERED SCREENWRITER having multiple works COPYRIGHTED and held by the WGA, I could help you out with that. But if I email the details of LEGAL COPYRIGHT, how would I know that the effort wouldn’t be spammed? Will you please have someone else from Spain “set me straight” on Copyright? And, what about “Public Domain”?

        People. You can’t determine the “do’s and don’ts” of Chemistry by eyeballing the “color” of any part of the resulting material. That’s a FACT! There is great potential to make poor decisions that way. Emission Spectroscopy, as has been used by all teams investigating the Chlorite Matrix, is the only 100% certain method.

        People. You will do the right thing by accepting the PUBLISHED WORKS of professionals working on the Chlorite Matrix, with the most beneficial information coming from Sarin et al, Cornford-Frost-Herring-McDowell, Dr. Friedrich Kuhne, and the more recent works published within the Data Base titled “Water Research”. There are other sources equally important.

        You really don’t want to accept statements from someone whom doesn’t even know that the product he backs produces BOTH the harmless detoxified Chlorite Matrix AND the highly toxic ClO2 which is known to be a Carcinogen, a Mutagen, and is also classed as being Pervasive.

        People. You DON’T WANT acidified/activated Sodium Chlorate! And, you CERTAINLY DON’T WANT either Sodium Chlorate or Sodium Chlorite acidified/ activated using Sulfuric Acid. That would be STUPID!

      2. Grant,

        There is probably a point somewhere along the way that we could come to some sort of an agreement if you would like to think about it. Meanwhile this is my answer to your last writing.

        Funny stuff. Your opening bs states that I Lie? I sense your regret regarding editing/spamming my attempted email contact regarding your inclusion of the Sodium Chlorate in the mms batch. It doesn’t matter exactly whom claims that responsibility, as YOU are ultimately responsible for that issue. If not for your refusal of my email content, this deal would have been dealt with QUIETLY. You could have QUIETLY removed the Sodium Chlorate. You could have QUIETLY changed your position regarding the non-sodium chlorite highly toxic ClO2. In fact, you could have taken 100% of my research to help your cause. That was EXACTLY my intention regarding the failed Email contact.

        Writing one email to me that I didn’t get does not absolve you from being decent about contacting me.

        Now, your bs is growing exponentially as you try discredit my SOLID research regarding the hazards of acidified sodium chlorate. Also, it is very obvious that you seek to avoid the RESULTING CHEMISTRY of acidified Sodium Chlorate. So, why the sudden ASS-COVERING? I DON’T HAVE THE SLIGHTEST IDEA ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. WE STILL ADVOCATE MMS.

        Now, you intend to send your big brother (from Spain) to “set me straight”? More humor. Remember, these geniuses won’t be attacking ME personally. They’ll be trying to prove countless working groups of chemists, from 1936 to at least 2000, WRONG! Good luck with that. I DON’T THINK SO. THESE GUYS HAVE FOUND A LOT WRONG WITH MODERN CHEMISTRY. MY BIG BROTHER IS MY DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH. HE IS A PHD. WHY SHOULDN’T I USE HIM?

        Ya’ll geniuses ought to quit before you all PROVE that you know very little about very little. You know, such as your mistaken grasp of Copyright Protection. As a WGA REGISTERED SCREENWRITER having multiple works COPYRIGHTED and held by the WGA, I could help you out with that. But if I email the details of LEGAL COPYRIGHT, how would I know that the effort wouldn’t be spammed? Will you please have someone else from Spain “set me straight” on Copyright? And, what about “Public Domain”?

        People. You can’t determine the “do’s and don’ts” of Chemistry by eyeballing the “color” of any part of the resulting material. That’s a FACT! There is great potential to make poor decisions that way. Emission Spectroscopy, as has been used by all teams investigating the Chlorite Matrix, is the only 100% certain method.

        People. You will do the right thing by accepting the PUBLISHED WORKS of professionals working on the Chlorite Matrix, with the most beneficial information coming from Sarin et al, Cornford-Frost-Herring-McDowell, Dr. Friedrich Kuhne, and the more recent works published within the Data Base titled “Water Research”. There are other sources equally important.

        You really don’t want to accept statements from someone whom doesn’t even know that the product he backs produces BOTH the harmless detoxified Chlorite Matrix AND the highly toxic ClO2 which is known to be a Carcinogen, a Mutagen, and is also classed as being Pervasive. HERE YOU ARE STILL WORKING ON UNPROVEN. SORRY GUESS I AM GOING TO HAVE TO PUBLISH MY SIDE.

        People. You DON’T WANT acidified/activated Sodium Chlorate! And, you CERTAINLY DON’T WANT either Sodium Chlorate or Sodium Chlorite acidified/ activated using Sulfuric Acid. That would be STUPID! WHERE THE HELL YOU GETTING THIS FROM. WE HAVE NEVER USED SULFURIC ACID.


      3. grant

        1. Two failed Emails.

        2. It’s true that WE BOTH advocate the use of MMS. But we differ regarding Method and Ingredients. You will accept a certain amount of combined Sodium Chlorate. I won’t! Also, you wish to stay with one type of mild acid per batch. I advocate the creation of small batches using various mild acid, THEN combining ALL of the small batches creating a multiple acid-reacted Chlorite Matrix. Also, I insist on ZERO Sodium Chlorate.

        3. Your “ass covering”. It has become evident that you don’t wish to comment on your statements regarding your opinion about it not mattering if Sodium Chlorate is present in the MMS. I can assure you that it of MOST IMPORTANT that there is ZERO Sodium Chlorate present. You say that you have no idea of what I am writing about. Simply put, the issue is the highly toxic ClO2 (NOT ClO2-) that is produced from acidifying Sodium Chlorate.

        4. During this “Game of Thrones”, I refer continuously to the works of PhD’s and Md’s. My RESEARCH is simply a reproduction of other works. That research, once combined with personal knowledge, allows me to produce verifiable results which can then be used to support (in this case) the Chlorite Matrix. In other words, I use the work of the PhD’s and Md’s that were actually involved with the creation and support of the Chlorite Matrix. I have found NO PhD or Md whom has proven the works of these people to be wrong.

        5.So, you have PERSONALLY, SOLELY WRITTEN and copyrighted 137 or more separate works? I mean, YOU WROTE THE WORKS YOURSELF? Without help? No Chemists? No proof readers?

        6. Say “Sodium Chlorate”. Not “Chlorate”. It is true that Sodium Chlorate is only MILDLY toxic. The issue here involves the acidification of that Sodium Chlorate, and what that acidified Sodium Chlorate produces. You are wrong regarding your comment stating that I have never stated WHY the acidified Sodium Chlorate is dangerous. I have explained that chemistry several times. Unfortunately, that warning has fallen upon deaf ears. Or, possibly upon ears of a person not knowing the difference between ClO2- and ClO2. If you can’t figure this out, read Adam’s blog titled “In His Own Words, The Chlorite Matrix”. That clearly explains the differences between + and – ions with regard to the Krebs Cycle of the Cell.

        7. You can’t possibly be stating that the production of the TOXIC ClO2 isn’t known to be produced by acidifying Sodium Chlorate. Or are you?

        8. I didn’t write that YOU were using Sulfuric Acid. That had something to do with the “Spain” outfit. It is written somewhere. But, KNOW THIS! Sodium Chlorate combined with Sulfuric Acid is literally a DEATH SENTENCE to ALL LIVING ORGANISMS. The ClO2 produced is a Carcinogen, a Mutagen, and is classed as being Pervasive. That means that it CAN POSSIBLY remain in it’s highly toxic and hazardous state for more than 300,000 years.

        You have to return to the concept of “go/no go” regarding ClO2. If the Emission Spectroscopy shows an ongoing existence of ClO2, then that ClO2 is NOT ClO2-. Only the ClO2- is SAFE.

        Jim. We truly are the same on many levels. You would be surprised. From this point forward, don’t refer to me as being a liar, or being stupid. Then, we’ll get along fine.

  8. rodney

    helllo i want to know where to buy the right mms? and how am i sure that I am no taking Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2)
    sorry is ti no an easy topic to me

    1. Greetings Rodney, in point of fact you make your own MMS by applying the instructions of adding your aquired Acidic Acid to Sodium Chlorite in spicific ratios which is presented to you in two sepparate bottles. On doing so the chemical interaction is allowed for three minutes (which removes the Chlorine Dioxide CLO2 before specified amounts of water is added. You are now ready to consume your MMS. Without this process all you have before you are the raw materials Sodium Chlorite in bottle one, Acidic Acid in bottle two and water. There is no such thing as the wrong MMS, respectfully that would be an oxymoron.
      MMS in all of its splendor is unique -you either have it or you don’t. All MMS in existence have been healing and preserving life without weaver or damage of any kind long before Grant version of what MMS is. His so called concerns does not hold up in real world. In case and point no one would sell or give you Sulfuric acid to be used as part of MMS.
      Grant wants to be the new saviour of precausions of MMS as though the visionary iventors of it has just let it loose to the public without any study of its safety. MMS have been brought to the world with love and clear instructions and protocols and such confidence have been edified by it astounding results and success!
      To your impending great health!!

  9. Am I right to understand that there is 2 versions of chlorine dioxide, one being the chlorite ion ClO2- and the second being the chloryl cation ClO2+

    Quote wikipedia :
    “ClO2” redirects here. For the oxoanion with the formula ClO−
    2, see chlorite. For the oxycation with the formula ClO2+, see Chloryl.
    – Chlorite :
    – Chloryl :

    1. grant

      Jules, you would be right to avoid wikipedia during ANY RESEARCH on Chlorine Dioxide.

      1. Yep, thanks for the recall.
        ClO2+ exist, but seems quite elusive 🙂
        Quote : Experimentally, we confirm the existence of ClO(2+) using mass spectrometry. ClO(2+) could be produced by energetic, high-current oxygen ((16)O(-)) ion beam sputtering of PdCl(2) and NH(4)Cl powders and survived a flight time of ~9 μs.

    2. grant

      Jules, I have stated this before, and I’ll state this again. Wikipedia is no place to find information on complex topics. At best, IF you do go there, you should look at the cited works which are listed as contributing works.

      In them, you may or may not find the info that you require.

      Regarding the Chlorite Matrix, you need to look at PubMed, Water Research, NIOSH, pre 2002 Title 40 EPA, etc.

      If you wish to look at the FDA, there are several approved, listed areas of use of the Chlorite Matrix. Those listings are very likely the ONLY honest publications in the complete FDA data base.

      Overall, Wikipedia is for those willing to settle for less.

      Forget Wikipedia.

  10. grant

    Charlotte. Yes, I DO recommend that every person on this planet use sodium bicarbonate to brush their teeth. And, I also recommend that every person on this planet use distilled water that is produced from NON-OZONATED water. People, stay away from any ozone-treated water and/or any beverage which has been made with ozone-treated water.

    Trust me on this.

  11. Thls all is really crazy. More than ten million people have used MMS up to now and hundreds of thousands of lives have been saved. The amount of suffering that has been cancelled is not calculable. Over a ten year period thousands of lives have been snuffed out by aspirin and millions of lives by other medical drugs. Over all that time, while there are some lives the MMS failed to save, not one report of a single life that was killed by MMS. Oh there are a lot of critics that don’t mind lying about MMS deaths, but not one death verified by a medial doctor or any other scientist. AND NOW WE GOT TWO GUYS, ADAM AND GRANT OUT TRYING TO SCARE PEOPLE AND CHANGE THE WHOLE USE OF MMS. They are using the old scare tactics of proving it with science. All you have to do is simply refuse to look at the facts and then you can really prove it with the science.

    Fact one.thousands of people cured and no really bad results reported, at least not any permanent stuff.

    Fact two chlorine dioxide gas is a yellowish green or just yellow depending upon how it is produced. Chlorite is colorless. You don’t need a chlorine dioxide detector. IT’S THE ONLY THING WITH THAT COLOR OF GAS THAT SMELLS LIKE CHLORINE AND KILLS PATHOGENS AND MAKES PEOPLE HEALTHY.

    And of course there is the sodium chlorite that has been used in America for 80 years. It certainly doesn’t do any of those great things as a sodium chlorite.

    According to all the hoop la then only chlorine dioxide the poisonous stuff would be a bleach as the wonderful chlorite cannot breach things. BUT i HAVE USED MMS TO BREACH COTTON MANY TIMES. in other words the chlorite that they claim is doing all the pathogen killing I have used as a bleach many times IF WHAT THEY SAY IS REALLY TRUE. So we have a chlorite that bleaches cotton at a fairly weak solution. Seems to me they would be better off to just use chlorite for their bleach. We don’t even need chlorine dioxide as chlorite will do it all.

    But let me say this: Even if Adam and Grant were right they have gone about this all wrong. They have scared many people and that means there are some who will go on suffering because they have gone about it wrong. When people just go blabbing truth or not, they need to look at what their words will cause. There are plenty of ways to tell people without scaring them.

    but the chances of them being right is very little. The facts are not behind it. There are just thousands of happy people.

    I haven’t really got into their chemistry all that far yet, too many other things that are more important going on. But they haven’t shown how their theory gets past the color of chlorine dioxide gas being yellow or greenish yellow yet. I wrote to them about it two months ago, but they just ignored the email. Nor does their theory explain why I can use the relatively weak MMS to bleach cotton as their theory is that it isn’t chlorine dioxide but really chlorite that is killing the pathogens.

    I don’t care if they are right or wrong, their next step should be to undo the damage that they have done and then explain how to quit using MMS and use MMS2 instead. When you are talking about a thing that saves lives and stops suffering if you are any kind of a human being you don’t just get to start talking. You start thinking first.


    Well, anyway, you can probably see I am somewhat pissed at their methods. I deserved to know the data first. I spent 15 yeas working 18 hours a day on this one thing. I cannot see how there will not be a mess with this whether they are right or wrong. And when I say a mess I mean one person suffering more than they have to because they were scare by these two guys.

    Archbishop Jim Humble

    1. grant

      MISTER humble. Let me help you with a bit of TRUTH. You have stated that I have “ignored” your email. Not true. I didn’t KNOW that there was such an email. But…
      1. I DID try to email you. Way back when I read your bs about it not mattering if sodium chlorite OR sodium chlorate was used. I wanted to provide you with the EVIDENCE of why Sodium CHLORATE can’t be included in the mms. The Email came back as undeliverable. What do you think happened? Did some bloody idiot spam me?
      2. In the above drivel, you don’t mention the amount of SODIUM CHLORATE included in your product. Why is that? Could it be because of the inadvertent production of the OTHER ClO2?
      3. You may have possibly READ or LISTENED to my response regarding the CHLORITE MATRIX. I have been telling people THE TRUTH about sodium chlorite for more than 2 years. That TRUTH includes the safe ingredients and methods AS THAT INFORMATION IS PUBLISHED IN PEER REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS. Does that truth offend you? Or, should I have first begged your permission to tell the truth?
      4. You say that you “discovered” mms and mms2? Not hardly. You NAMED a previously known, well understood, well defined CHLORITE MATRIX which was quietly PATENTED as the Sarin et al Chlorite Matrix during 1984. When did you start with the mms? And, what about the Calcium Hypochlorite? Think you were first there? That molecule has been around since before the days of Emil Von Behring. The military of many countries have used it to purify water for decades. If you think that you discovered it, apply for a patent. That would be good for a laugh.

      MISTER humble. Why would any person have to beg your personal approval before telling the truth regarding ANYTHING?

      I certainly did enjoy the first paragraph of your email regarding Adam and myself. You know, the paragraph which infers that I’m a LIAR, and also infers that Adam is SIMPLE. Does that mean that you believe the scientist’s peer-reviewed works that I/we cite are also lies? Or, are the scientists themselves LIARS?

      Since when does a “bishop” brand HONEST MEN as liars? I thought that sort of bs ended with Stephen Langton.

      People, here we are once again. The self-righteous branding the honest men as liars and idiots. Don’t worry about me. I’ll get over it…

      Just get the damn sodium chlorate out of the MMS. Make it like it was PATENTED.

  12. grant

    Steve, the strips are showing varied results. I have read the Lamotte? strips are producing PPM numbers ranging from 0 PPM to 6000PPM with the CDS? water. The strips are producing completely different numbers because of turpidity, acid used, juice used, Chlorite/Chlorate combination ratios, presence of elemental Chlorine, etc. So, are the strips picking up the Potassium Bromate? Or Ozone? Some strips are picking the acids, so is it the Acids causing false readings?

    The strips, to put it BLUNTLY, are a piss-poor low quality devise intended to provide a generalization which MAY or MAY NOT be cased upon the targeted molecule. All “strips” include warning of potential inaccuracies.

    Consider the pregnancy test strips. The TWO things with give “Positive” readings are Pregnancy and Cancer. Women using the strips receiving false positives very likely have cancer, OR the beginnings of cancer. Men can use those same strips to check if they have cancer.

    Like I have stated, the strips are incredibly inaccurate, and produce a wide range of the “false positives”.

    If you all want the complete answer, you have to provide the complete information required to produce a correct answer.

    We KNOW that PURE sodium chlorite combined with acetic or ascorbic or citric or humic or lactic acid(s) produce VERY SHORT-LIVED ClO2-, because I have found six (so far) publications (which have gone through peer review) that clearly state that fact. ALL of the research teams involved have used Emission Spectroscopy to prove that fact, so I KNOW that there is no ClO2- after a Micro-Second. What is left, is the molecule which released that VERY TEMPORARY ClO2- species. It is therefore possible that the test strips are picking up on the Sodium Chlorite / Citric Acid molecule.

    I have stated very clearly, from the beginning, that the pure ingredients listed in the publications MUST BE USED in order to produce the same results as those achieved by the published works. It truly is that simple.

    Regarding the strips, I will need the patent numbers in order to research these things. Remember that ALL of the strips I have looked at were produced in countries which have no stringent production laws. Perhaps I will find the time later, but I don’t have extra time now.

    Steve, I will need to know the details of your MMS batch which you tested. Did you use NON OZONE-TREATED WATER? Remember, just cause “they” say there isn’t any Ozone, that doesn’t mean THERE ISN’T ANY OZONE. You should purchase a counter-top water distiller, and then re-do the test strip deal.


    Did you use NATURAL SOURCE CITRIC ACID? Was the batch EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT? Email me the details, then perhaps I can look at all other potential molecules produced.

    If you used Ozone-treated distilled water, remember that the Ozone reacts with the plastic jug.

    People, tighten up on your batching methods. Use what works, don’t deviate.

    1. Steve

      Ok, I’m not trying to be contrary here….

      But on a barrel of Aragonesas Sodium Chlorite 80% Technical Grade
      Cof A showing 0.0% Sodium Chlorate
      Label says : “For use as a precursor to the mechanical generation of Chlorine Dioxide, to be used as a disinfectant, sanitizer, and the control of micro-organisms”
      If the sole purpose of this material is to be used on food, surfaces, and in water, (this was never intended for use as pulp bleach), why remove the Chlorate at extra cost?
      I will absolutely concur that Sodium Chlorate is an undesirable ingredient, unless your sole purpose is geared towards gassing towers, and bleaching pulp….

      But I still find that I produce that green gas, and I’m 99.99% sure it’s Chlorine Dioxide.

      It acts like it, and smells like it. Unless ozone can make some sort of chlorine gas thats green, or USP Citric acid can make some chlorine gas that’s green….. I just don’t know what else could be producing it. Your science makes sense, as far as my understanding of it….I’m not arguing the performance of the matrix… I am no chemist, not by a long shot….
      I have stated before, that I think the hypochlorus acid, over acidification, and under activation has a lot to do with the results. These would be laymen terms, and quite generalized of course.
      The fact still remains however, that I DO produce a nice green gas, and it DOES have that distinctive odor. (I have also had the misfortune to gas myself pretty badly, not life threatening, but damned uncomfortable for a few days.)

      As far as CDS, I make it once a week… 2 gallons of saturated solution (My system, room temp, I can get about 8000 ppm) of what I assume to be Chlorine Dioxide.
      It goes past green to that amber sort of color and gets quite dark. Smells to high heaven of CLO2. 2 gallon of this in a 4400 gallon small pool gives me about 2 ppm. It clears the water very nicely. I also add a bit of sodium chlorite everyday to keep the pH up, and for a slow release. So what is doing the work, what’s killing the slime on the side of the pool, and clearing the water? Regardless of what the math says, I have seen the results of whatever this green gas we always assumed to be chlorine dioxide is, and it seems to work.

      Lots and lots of people have also produced this green gas, using different sources, different activators, and different strengths of Sodium Chlorite. I have water treatment companies, biocide companies, agricultural clients, and horticulture clients, who have used Sodium chlorite sans chlorate, to produce a green gas they also assume to be chlorine dioxide, and they also test theirs,some with way more sophisticated equipment than test strips. They purposely source for no chlorate, but their purpose is still to generate ClO2.

      If that’s not what it is, then what is it? WIll detoxified ClO2 ions also form a green gas?
      If so, then that would explain it.

      1. Steve

        And no Grant, believe me, my batches do not get exposed to sunlight… GLP and GMP all the way.
        A nice little dehumidified lab, and gloves, goggles, the whole 9 yards man.

        You will have a chance to test it yourself in a few days…. I just want to know what the green gas is.

    2. Based on my experience with them, I would have to agree with Grant’s statement, “The strips, to put it BLUNTLY, are a piss-poor low quality devise intended to provide a generalization which MAY or MAY NOT be cased upon the targeted molecule.” Same is true for a chlorine photometer I bought that is supposed to measure chlorine dioxide. The readings are reproducible (using the same materials and methods of production) but they do vary by 100% (at least) in either case depending on which range you dilute into for doing the measuring with the strips or device. I do think they react to other substances as well, other than chlorine dioxide.

      In my experience there is something beneficial in the product that Andreas Kalcker named CDS (chlorine dioxide solution). I know how much it helped me and others I’ve talked with. It appears to be some kind of yellow water soluble gas being produced because it dissipates upon expose to air. Maybe it is not the harmful chlorine dioxide but it is something that is beneficial at least some of the time for multiple different health problems.

      I thought that Adam said earlier that chlorine dioxide can readily break down into sodium chlorite matrix or ions, so maybe that is what happens in the CDS? And in that case it appears to act like a yellow/green water soluble gas?

      I have a certificate of analysis for some of my Oxychem sodium chlorite and it says there is .59% (less than 1%) sodium chlorate in it. Citric acid from citrus fruit is not easy to find. The vast majority of it being produced today is from microbial fermentation. The leading producer in the world and the top 4 producers in the EU all do it by fermentation with yeasts.

      Thanks very much Grant and Adam for your work on this and your utmost fidelity to pursuing the Truth and sharing it! I certainly appreciate your efforts even if I cannot yet fully reconcile it with my existing experience and knowledge.

  13. Quote: “grant
    October 2, 2012 at 3:31 pm
    If you are using the Sodium Chlorite- NO SODIUM CHLORATE INVOLVED -version of the mms, there is no ClO2- present AFTER THE MILD ACID SOLUTION REACTS/DETOXIFIES THE MMS. The ClO2 is GONZO pemanently. In other words, there is ZERO ClO2- in the CDS. If there is no ClO2, but you believe that SOMETHING is present, you’ll have to look at possible molecules produced by the other ingredients.”

    If this was the case, then what exactly is the greenish/yellow gas floating in the CDS, with a clear ClO2 identifiable smell AND detectable with ClO2 test strips?
    Would you care to explain/clarify?

    1. grant

      IF…there actually was ClO2 AS A GAS present AFTER the MMS was acidified, there is no doubt that sodium chlorate was involved. Many published papers which involved spectroscopy support my statement regarding the permanent breakdown of the acidified Sodium Chlorite-produced ClO2, therefore it is fact that IF ClO2 AS A GAS is present, Sodium Chlorate was also present.

      Stop using Sodium Chlorate.

      1. Steve

        Hi Grant,
        Nice talking with both you and Adam the other day…..
        Ok, so I have Sodium Chlorite with 0% Sodium Chlorate.
        This is determined through the C of A for the lot number.

        I can also make a nice bright green solution with that distinct odor.
        The Solution gets dark upon activation, and the smell is present there also.
        ClO2 strips also test positive.

        So, some sort of green gas with a distinct CLO2 smell is being produced. In spite of what the science of it is, it is still occurring……. and lots of people also make Chlorine Dioxide Hydrate with Keavy’s Corner MMS, and it turns green for them as well. SO if it isn’t ClO2, what is it?

    2. grant

      Karl. I’m looking at that now. I can state that the answer will involve what happens to the chlorite matrix AFTER the first detoxification occurs, with regard to the multiple reagent – multiple ionization potential.

      I now believe that there is a reagent which will successfully detoxify the Sodium Chlorate-based ClO2. I only have to find it.

  14. Gilgamesh

    If the citric acid kills the chlorine dioxide,what kills the pathogens ?
    How the water get detoxified, and purified?
    The chlorite ion is the pathogen killer, and detoxifier ?

    1. grant

      Gilgamesh. I have looked at this carefully.

      When you get sick, there has been a breakdown in the delivery of energy from the decay of the elements Potassium, Sodium, Calcium, or Chlorine. OR…there has been loss of one or more Amino Acids which the cell places at the openings of the Voltage Gated Ion Channels. Certain amino acids are ONLY from diet, and if there is poor food quality, there can be loss of supply of CRITICAL amino acids and/or CRITICAL Elements leading to the breakdown of the Krebs cycle. No Krebs Cycle, no immune system. Weakened immune system, and ANY bad disease can break out.

      What about Virus? Virus is just a smear which eventually matures to Virion. The Virion will penetrate the cell, then reproduce. The resulting virus will cover the Voltage gated Ion Channels, or the sodium potassium pump, or the Voltage-gated nano pores. Any of those get covered, there is no longer a “Target” for the electrical discharge to be attracted to. No electrical communication, no Krebs Cycle, no immune system.

      What about the HeLa Cell and the contagious Simian cancers it carries? The HeLa also carries two BAD numbers of herpes, and ALL of the FORTY SIMIAN VIRUS carried by the Vaccines. To make things WORSE, the HeLa Cell possesses a DNA-destroying process that we call Lateral Gene Transfer which places ALL OF THE ABOVE ISSUES directly into our DNA.

      According to the Retired/Expired Boss of Vaccines at Merck, Maurice Hilleman, that same Lateral Gene Transfer placed the SIV AIDS carried by the African Green Monkey into Human DNA.

      It is important to know that none of the above could have occurred IF THE IMMUNE SYSTEM WAS IN PEAK CONDITION at the time of disease development. That’s where the Chlorite Matrix enters.

      In the WF10 Patent, the absolutely DESTROYED immune systems of the four very advanced HIV AIDS-infected patients involved in the small trial, were returned to PEAK form with 63 days of Chlorite Matrix treatment. The cells returned to producing T cells, Hunter-Killer Cells, ATP, etc.

      The secret is the repair of the EXISTING Krebs Cycle. It truly is THAT SIMPLE.

      That is exactly what the Chlorite Matrix does.

    2. grant

      Oops, forgot the water. The water is purified because it is produced by distillation.

      1. Gilgamesh

        Hi Grant.
        If I use MMS to purify water,, there is no Krebs Cycle, and there is no
        Voltage gated Ion Channels in water.
        So it would be the Chlorite Ion that would kill the bacteria, pathogens, and virus in water., and would disinfect foods etc?

    3. grant

      Gilgamesh. If the goal is the purifying of water, use the MMS2 Calcium Hypochlorite. If you want to clean the water for use with the MMS molecule, don’t bother, You have to use non-ozone treated DISTILLED water.

      1. Gilgamesh

        HI Grant.
        I guess, What you are saying is that MMS is not an all purpose disinfectant, pathogen, and bacteria killer, as we believed it was?
        But we can buy MMS as a water purifier, they use it to disinfect meats vegetables, foods etc.

    4. grant

      Gilgamesh. That isn’t what I said, is it? What i did say is that mms2, as 65% calcium hypochlorite, has been used as a single-stage water treatment for years. The stuff works great, and has zero side effects, and is as simple to use as it gets.

      If you want to mix mms at the lake, knock yourself out. But, will you pack the distilled water? Remember the chemistry of the mms. The Calcium Hypochlorite is the simple, SAFE way to purify water.

      1. Gilgamesh

        Hi Grant.
        I was not asking you about MMS2.
        I just want to clarify, that MMS1 is a pathogen killer or not.
        If it is not an effective disinfectant, than why it is sold as a water purifier. and is used as food and vegetable disinfectant and why they use it to
        kill molds in houses, clean hospital rooms, etc.?

    5. grant

      Gilgamesh. YES! The Chlorite Matrix IS A PATHOGEN KILLER. But you already know that, don’t you? I have stated that fact countless times in the blogs, and even here. Remember that I stated that NIOSH has stated that the Chlorite Matrix using Sodium Chlorite with mild acid is the ONLY SAFE WAY to clean water out of ALL of the Chlorine/Chlorine Dioxide methods.

      1. Gilgamesh

        Hi Grant.
        Thank you for your reply.

  15. grant

    If you are using the Sodium Chlorite- NO SODIUM CHLORATE INVOLVED -version of the mms, there is no ClO2- present AFTER THE MILD ACID SOLUTION REACTS/DETOXIFIES THE MMS. The ClO2 is GONZO pemanently. In other words, there is ZERO ClO2- in the CDS. If there is no ClO2, but you believe that SOMETHING is present, you’ll have to look at possible molecules produced by the other ingredients.

    Charlotte. Ask yourself this question. If the single distillation process separates H2O from all other chemicals, pathogens, etc, Why the two processes? Why kill the pathogens before removing the water by distillation?

    Perhaps the answer involves the level of difficulty regarding removing the KBrO3(PB) from the water? KBrO3(PB) is nearly impossible to remove from water. Am I stating that the broken DNA caused by Potassium Bromate is desired? Well actually, yes I am.

    Charlotte, if you have a few bucks laying around, purchase a countertop water distiller. Good ones are around $180, Use it. Get used to it. Regarding the water, how can you possibly know what molecules are present in the Store-bought version?

    I began looking at the Aluminum in baking soda 15? months back. ALL baking soda had aluminum ADDED at that time. I emailed someone that “mattered” at Arm&Hammer about that, and the reply stated that 11 months prior, the Aluminum was removed. Do I believe that statement? Not Hardly, but I do still use the stuff on occasion. I brush my teeth with generic mouth wash most of the time, and use the baking soda only occasionally.

    People. If we can get away from the ClO2 producing Chlorite Matrix, there is no longer an issue from the FDA. Much documented work is out there in the various data bases which PROVES what I/we have been saying and/or writing.

    No more ClO2, No more problems.

    It’s that simple.

    1. Axe

      I just quit using Ozone (bottled) water after years of drinking it, So I switched to filtered water from the lake. Is it imperative that the water be distilled (no minerals)?

      1. Axe

        Also wanted to say thank you Adam and Grant!

      2. grant

        For making the mms, yes. Use GENUINE distilled water that is not Ozone-treated. So, why not make the distilled water yourself? Then you KNOW that there is no Ozone, AND that is REALLY is distilled water. As for drinking the lake water, you should be using the mms2 water purification capsules. The calcium hypochlorite safe, and is the real deal for water purification.

        Everyone should have an emergency “Go Bag” at each exit, and that “go bag” should have a package of 65% calcium hypochlorite “Pool Shock” in it, along with all of the other requirements needed to stay alive.

        Just saying…

      3. Joe

        I am going canoe camping in the morning to the Adirondack Mountains on a lake for four days. I was going to use my ebay purchased technical grade sodium chlorite for water purification (meaning I have no data sheet on it), but since you mentioned MMS2, now I think I may use that.
        Could you please tell me how much MMS2 (Calcium Hypochlorite) would treat a gallon of lake water?
        I can filter it through a coffee filter first. I am bringing a 1/8 teaspoon measuring spoon, so could you tell me in terms of using 1/8 measuring spoon?
        Could you also give an idea for how long to wait before using it?
        Thank you,

    2. I don’t think we can say there will be no problem with the FDA – because the FDA is there to protect existing big pharma – I think the issue with the FDA will continue as long as MMS is a competitor to the drugs they want to sell.

      1. grant

        Pam. You are right, but remember that the number one argument placed on behalf of Burzynski’s Antineoplaston Therapy involved it’s SAFETY.

        That should also be the number one argument placed on behalf of the MMS version of the Chlorite Matrix.

  16. Joe

    Is there an easy way to test my existing sodium chlorite for any sodium chlorate?
    Thank you,

    1. grant

      Nothing that is easy. It would be far simpler to begin from scratch with PURE sodium chloride in a brine. Two stages of electrolysis later, and you have pure sodium chlorite. Reduce that with GENUINE distilled water having ZERO OZONE TREATMENT to create either 23% or 28% sodium chlorite solution.

    2. grant

      About the water purification, the mms2 bottle has 60 400 mg capsules, Each capsule treats 50 liters of water. Us Gallon =3.79 liters. One 400 mg capsule will treat 13,19 US gallons OR 50 Liters. One US gallon requires 30.32 mg of 65% calcium hypochlorite.

      1. Joe

        Thanks! I’ll bring my envelope scale. I can measure 0.001 ounce.
        That is close enough for me.

    3. grant

      Joe, according to the directions on the bottle, wait one hour for the Calcium Hypochlorite to kill whatever in in the water. Remember what is used to bleach coffee filters. That is the BAD ClO2, and it is still there. That is why ClO2-bleached coffe filters, baby diapers, tampons, pads, etc etc are banned in the nordic countries.

  17. Diana Plumer

    Great Article. As I am not the sharpest tool in the box I always print off your pieces on MMS and read over several times. I don’t have a background in chemistry, and It takes me a while to understand them.
    Is the jury still out on adding Sodium Bicarbonate to MMS? I’m the person with CFS/MS that is unable to take the MMS, as it makes me vomit.
    Just a small criticism. This latest article took seventeen pages to print out as only half the page is used for text. [huge margins]. Diana.

    1. grant

      Diana, locate the sheet on your version. You have to know if there is Sodium CHLORATE present. If there is, that could be the issue. Find a version such as the Keavy’s Corner product which has zero Sodium Chlorate. Then there is no bad ClO2 species produced.

      It could be that simple, but if not, begin to look at all chemical exposure which may cause a secondary reaction.

      There are other possibilities of unwanted chemistry. Toothpaste is one, and if you use the stuff, stop.

      Another is the use of Ozone-treated distilled water. That water isn’t actually distilled, and there are going to be Bromide Ions present which will interact with the Ozone to produce Potassium Bromate. KBrO3(PB) is a carcinogen, a mutagen, and is more recently proven to be a NEUROTOXIN.

      Don’t use Ozone treated water for anything. Not even as Doggie water.

      The sodium bicarbonate, if added to the batch, can/will allow for the creation of MSG. You don’t want MSG if you have had flu shots or vaccines. Remember exactly what the HeLa cell really is, and KNOW that the MSG is the HeLa cell’s favorite food. Because you want the Chlorite Matrix molecule to remain small enough to be brought into the cells, you don’t want the Chlorite Matrix to attach to the super-sized Propane molecules which the Sodium Bicarbonate/Citric Acid produces.

      Remember, the presence of Sodium Chlorate causes the production of the BAD ClO2 gas which CAN’T BE DETOXIFIED by the mild acid. The Sodium CHLORITE does produce ClO2- gas, but the mild acid reaction causes that ClO2 to immediately break up and disappear.


      1. Charlotte

        Grant, I make & use MMS1 & CDS. Your information now requires additional caution in choosing NaCLO2 which does not contain sodium chlorate. Not being a chemist, I will have to take your word for which gas is being produced when making CDS.

        Regarding distilled water, I called the manufacturer, Mountain Mist, of the DW I purchase from a local supermarket. The label on the gallon jug says it is steam distilled. The customer service person on the telephone confirmed that it was and then I asked if the water was exposed to ozone. She answered that, yes, the first treatment of the spring water was to expose it to ozone, then the water is steam distilled. So, is that pre-treatment with ozone going to be a problem?

        By the way, do you recommend brushing teeth with baking soda?


    2. Ashley

      Try MMS enemas.

  18. Rondelle

    Fantastic piece of work. I have been learning so much from you guys!

Leave a Comment