Friday, June 09, 2006

"You Can't Eat Gold!" ... Or can you?

So a few weeks ago a very random stream of thought popped into my mind... Why are precious metals so valuable? Sure, there is a very high demand for them in the jewelry industry, and also in the electronics industry (gold and silver are excellent conductors of electricity). But why are they revered by human beings in such a way? Do we really love the concept of money that much? Or do these substances have some intrinsic value?

This line of thought brought me to google, and various and sundry web searches about human ingestion of gold. I found a lot of junk, but there were a few things that I found that were quite interesting...

First, I found this interesting piece by Gary North entitled "You Can't Eat Gold!" It is an economic analysis, and it discusses the way in which slogans and propaganda are used in economic policy. Seems that around the time of the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1944, the slogan "You can't eat gold" was popularized in the efforts to convince people that the gold standard was obsolete.

1944 was also the time when Penicillin came into vogue as the new "miracle drug" that would wipe out viruses and make the population healthier and live longer. Well, as we now know (and likely many scientists did back then as well), over time viruses become resistant to antibiotics. Basically what antibiotics have done is to create stronger viruses that are harder to cure and kill people with greater frequency. Also of note is the term "The Golden Age of Antibiotics."

So how does this relate back to precious metals? Well... as is the case with most good propaganda, "You Can't Eat Gold!" is entirely false. No, I'm not going to give you a recipe for gold and silver chowder with fresh chives... But people have been ingesting colloidal metals for thousands of years. From the late 1800's to the 1930's, colloidal silver was used in America and Europe to treat cold and flu-like maladies. And colloidal gold is purported to have positive effects on the mind, the psyche, and the body.

I'm not a big believer in the Old Testament, but in Exodus 32:20 Moses, upon finding his people worshipping the Golden Calf, "took the calf which they had made, and burnt it with fire, ground it to powder, and scattered it on the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it."

Modern science has shown that indeed colloidal silver does kill most viruses and bacterium. Yes, this research was done by people who are selling the products, but if you examine their studies I think you'll find them to be sound. This fact must have created quite a problem for the powers that be in trying to implement the modern healthcare system dominated by big pharmaceutical companies and the all-powerful FDA. If people had easy access to colloidal metals (you can make them at home) the medical establishment would have no way to control the world health care system--and I think it is obvious that social control is their most important priority.

So "You Can't Eat Gold!" was a very effective slogan, and it served two purposes: it enabled the establishment to take control over our commodity money and institute a fiat currency system, and it enabled the establishment to take control over our healthcare and institute a system of medical social control.

I have done a good deal of research on colloidal metals, and I suspect they may hold the key to unlocking more of our potential to grow, learn, think, and communicate. I found this web site which claims to sell the purest of pure colloidal metal suspensions (not to be confused with ionic solutions and silver proteins). Their web site contains a lot of technical information, but no medical information. It is also a very overtly phony marketing mechanism, but I let that slide, knowing that the FDA has been persecuting the producers of colloidal metals for decades and they have been delegitimized not by the lack of merit of their product but by the healthcare industry itself... I was curious though as to why in all of the scientific studies, no in vivo studies had been published. I e-mailed them, and as they did not include a name in their response or ask me to keep it private, I have no qualms in sharing this very interesting correspondence with you.

My first e-mail to them:
Comments: Hi,

Have there been any peer-reviewed in vivo tests on the effectiveness of Colloidal Silver in humans? I can't seem to find any. I'm interested in trying out true colloidal silver but I'm hesitant to do > so without first seeing the results of an in vivo test.


Their reply:
We do not (sic) such studies. The cost to commission such studies would run to several million dollars.

We doubt that any company that produces dietary supplements will have what you seek. Such testing is typically done on drugs but not supplements due to the cost.

See the user reports on the here:

My reply:
Thank you for taking the time to write back to me.

Your web site makes specific claims that your products have X, Y, and Z desired effects on people. Is word-of-mouth the only way to demonstrate these effects? I've been to your discussion forum. Very few of the topics contain any discussion at all. Most of the posts in the hundred or so topics you've created and most were made by "guests" who posted only that one message... Almost everyone on the board signing their name, city, and state on every post... It seems to me like one person did most of it themselves.

I understand that the FDA currently makes it very expensive to play by their rules, but silver colloids have been sold for many many years. They were only forced by the FDA to start branding themselves as supplements rather than OTC drugs in 1999. Surely at some point in history there has been at least some sort of study of the effects of colloidal metals on actual human beings... No? I should think that in today's business climate, a product that is as amazing as you say it is would have no problem securing a few million in venture capital to obtain FDA approval...

I can only deduce that either metal colloids do not work as well as you say they do, or they are being suppressed by the drug industry for some reason [for the record, I believed it was the latter]...


Their reply to me:
The issue is not having money to do the studies. We have turned away dozens of offers for capital from investors.

Any supplement maker that performs those studies and publishes them would have their product declared by the FDA to be a drug. Then the FDA would take action against the company for selling unapproved drugs thus forcing the company out of business and putting the owners in prison.

The FDA has declared that any substance the cures a medical condition is a drug and can only be produced by a drug company. Our products are all elemental nanoparticles. The U.S. patent office will not permit a patent on an element, only a compound. For this reason, drug companies will only produce drugs that are compounds, never elemental nanoparticles. If a drug company will not make it, then it is not a drug and no claims can be made for it in the U.S.

The FDA and the U.S. government are the epitome of corruption beholden to the large pharmaceutical companies who pay huge bribes (contributions) to politicians to write laws that keep the drug companies protected in the market place. The purpose of doctors and drug companies to produce products to "treat" medical conditions, not cure the problem. A cured patient is not a returning customer. They want to treat you forever until you die or your medical insurance runs out, which ever comes first. Most drugs don't work. Most drugs treat symptoms, not the underlying cause. Health care in this country is second largest scam on earth and the politicians, doctors and big pharma want to keep it that way. Any product that cures a medical condition is a threat to their cash flow.

Any questions?

Nope... no questions here. It's all pretty clear to me...

Get unbiased information at They are not selling a product, just providing information.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for helping to clear up what most of us feel to be true!

12:47 PM  
Anonymous Daniel Haszard said...

I took zyprexa which was ineffective for my condition and gave me diabetes.

Zyprexa, which is used for the treatment of psychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, accounted for 32% of Eli Lilly's $14.6 billion revenue last year.

Zyprexa is the product name for Olanzapine,it is Lilly's top selling drug.It was approved by the FDA in 1996 ,an 'atypical' antipsychotic a newer class of drugs without the motor side effects of the older Thorazine.Zyprexa has been linked to causing diabetes and pancreatitis.

Did you know that Lilly made nearly $3 billion last year on diabetic meds, Actos,Humulin and Byetta?

Yes! They sell a drug that can cause diabetes and then turn a profit on the drugs that treat the condition that they may have caused in the first place!

I was prescribed Zyprexa from 1996 until 2000.
In early 2000 i was shocked to have an A1C test result of 13.9 (normal is 4-6) I have no history of diabetes in my family.
Daniel Haszard

3:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home