Discussion in 'Alternative Therapies' started by Shannon, Jan 11, 2013.
Excellent to hear something has helped you Wayne. Thanks for contributing your direct experience.
The question on this thread is 'Is MMS worth the risk'. One can comment on risk of a product without taking it. I don't see it as a requirement to take something to comment on it. This really doesn't work with things like botulinum toxins, arsenic, mercury and other poisonous substances. People can full well investigate these things without trying them to be able to comment on them. I investigate every supplement, vitamin etc that I put in my mouth. I weight the pros and cons. I investigated the claims years ago made by Jim Humble and one doesn't need to take MMS to understand that what Humble claimed is just not possible, it's dangerous in that it causes people to get very ill with slight overdoses, ... .
I guess I do not trust anyone claiming to be a health official, so if someone is using their claims to scare people into not trying something that might help, it aggrevates me.
Well Jim Humble claims to be a health official which he is not. He uses his claims to scare people into drinking his poison.
We are not just talking about a innocuous placebo here. We are talking about a substance that causes diarrhea, nausea, vomiting when taken in excess and excess is not that much. We are talking about the faulty application of chemistry and other science. We are talking about a man who has lied his way into selling his product. It is shameful what he has done. Why don't you investigate Jim Humble and MMS and then come and tell people that their opinions are not important. Have you ever tried MMS @Christopher.
No not yet. I may.
What would you be hoping to treat -- Cancer, Lyme, MS, AIDS, Autism, Alzheimers -- because MMS cures them all you know and magically. Humble says all diseases are caused by pathogens -- parasites, bacteria, viruses. Humble says MMS is able to selectively target pathogens in the human body and leave all the normal cells alone. Amazing that is. Even the best chemotherapeutic agents can't do that. There is a reason for that because researchers have not been able to invent something that can only have an effect on pathogens and leave cells intact. Do some homework and you might see the truth rather than just telling members to not discuss something they haven't tried.
So how would Sodium Chlorite aka industrial strength bleach treat CFS?
No idea lol I don't care how it does if it helps me live my life healthier.
How would that work? There are probably much better things to try than bleach.
Judging by what we now know about alcohol and tobacco tar I would be seriously worried that a chlorinating/oxidising agent of this power would cause mouth cancer - which is one of the most horrible ways to die. Nobody is likely to know whether it does or not because you need large surveys to pick things like that up and the effects can appear years down the line. The idea of taking this seems to me entirely crazy.
Oh I'm trying as much as I can but I'm not rejecting possible treatments because it may be risky. I have good instincts and I trust people that have tried it and have either good or bad reactions.
So are you saying that chlorine dioxide is more dangerous than a drug designed to disable a person's immune system?
Well then you should research MMS and read about people who have died from using it. It's not just risky. I don't think it's a very good instinct to drink industrial strength bleach or a good instinct to tell members to stop talking about it just because they haven't tried it.
No, I am saying it is a scam based on faulty science, lies and greed. Do your homework, come to your own decisions but at leave the rest of us to post our opinions, what we know about MMS etc without telling us our opinions aren't valuable. What's the point of shutting down a conversation. The best education comes from all points of view.
That depends on what you mean by a drug designed to disable a person's immune system and what sort of concentration is involved. Clearly we have no reliable data on sodium chlorite ingestion but mouth cancer would be something I would not be surprised to see. Certain drugs used to poison the immune system by damaging cells through simple chemical damage like alkylation can cause high rates of cancer. Prolonged oral use of cyclophosphamide produced about a 40% incidence of bladder cancer. Drugs that induce cell death without DNA damage tend to be far less toxic. Chlorite may kill cells by an effect on respiration without leaving much damaged DNA but the experience with alcohol suggests that almost any small reactive molecule may produce enough DNA damage over a period of time to produce tumours.
Just want to add that MMS has been helping me a lot. Since starting it a few weeks ago I have more energy, more stamina, better sleep and much better moods. I'm recovering from Lyme & co-infections, EBV and fibromylagia and am feeling better than I have in years. I'm very sensitive to chemicals but my body is loving MMS so far. I started with a very small dosage and built up slowly.
I've read lots of positive things. I started too fast and plan to slow down and give it a shot. I have what you have
Since you seem to be the "go to" person for MMS, can you comment on the FDA "Proposal to Debar"?
Are you familiar with Project Green Light? Are you still recommending that MMS be marketed and sold?
Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (NOOH) - Delong, Karis Copper 10/12/16
Department of Health and Human Services
Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration
Rockville, MD 20857
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Karis Copper Delong
PROPOSAL TO DEBAR
NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING
DOCKET No. FDA-2016-N-1677
Dear Mrs. Delong:
This letter is to inform you that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is proposing to issue an order debarring you for a period of sixteen years from providing services in any capacity to a person that has an approved or pending drug product application. FDA bases this proposal on a finding that you were convicted, as defined in section 306(l)(1)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act or the Act)(21 U.S.C. § 335a(1)(1)(B)) of four misdemeanor counts under Federal law for the introduction of a misbranded drug into interstate commerce and an Agency finding that the conduct underlying your conviction relates to the regulation of a drug product under the Act, and that the type of conduct that served as the basis for the conviction undermines the process for the regulation of drugs.
Conduct Related to Conviction
On June 9, 2015, you entered a plea of guilty to four counts of shipment of misbranded drugs in interstate commerce, in violation of sections 301(a) and 303(a)(1) of the Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 331(a) and 333(a)(1)) and judgment was entered against you in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. The underlying facts supporting this conviction are as follows.
Beginning as early as April 2008, you assisted Louis Daniel Smith and others in the operation of Project Green Life (“PGL”). PGL was a Nevada corporation with physical operations at various locations in Spokane, Washington. PGL marketed and sold various health-related products over the internet. PGL’s flagship product was the Miracle Mineral Solution (“MMS”), a mixture of sodium chlorite and water.
You were a managing member of PGL who frequently handled financial transactions for PGL. You also recruited family and friends to participate in PGL’s business.
Although you acted primarily at the direction of Louis Daniel Smith, you had access to PGL’s operations. On various occasions, you handled shipping for PGL, including the delivery of packages containing MMS for shipment in interstate commerce to PGL customers nationwide and internationally.
Although at times PGL marketed MMS as a water purification product, you and others employed by PGL knew that MMS was also used by consumers to treat disease. At times, PGL provided instructions to consumers which directed consumers to mix MMS with a citric acid solution and consume orally to treat various diseases. You knew that PGL provided such instructions to consumers.
At no time did you or anyone else employed by PGL register your MMS manufacturing facilities with FDA as required under section 510 of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 360). In addition, bottled MMS which you and others shipped to consumers did not bear labeling which bore the full place of business of the manufacturer.
On or about November 1, 2010, November 12, 2010, November 16, 2010, and June 30, 2011, you or another person involved with PGL, delivered for introduction into interstate commerce a number of packages containing bottled MMS. These packages contained MMS which you and others involved with PGL knew was primarily intended as a treatment for disease.
Section 306(b)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(b)(2)(B)(i)(I)) permits FDA to debar an individual if FDA finds that the individual has been convicted of a misdemeanor under Federal law for conduct relating to the regulation of drug products under the Act, and if FDA finds that the type of conduct that served as the basis for the conviction undermines the process for the regulation of drugs. You pleaded guilty to shipment of misbranded drugs in interstate commerce in violation of the Act by handling the delivery of packages containing MMS for shipment in interstate commerce nationwide and internationally. FDA finds that shipment of misbranded drugs, which served as a basis for your conviction, relates to the regulation of drug products under the Act and undermines the process for the regulation of drugs because the introduction and causing the introduction of a misbranded drug into interstate commerce are prohibited by the Act.
The maximum period of debarment for each offense under section 306(c)(2)(A)(iii) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(c)(2)(A)(iii)) is five years and the Agency may determine whether debarment periods should run concurrently or consecutively in the case of a person debarred for multiple offenses. Section 306(c)(3) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(c)(3)) provides six factors for consideration in determining the appropriateness and the period of a permissive debarment. The factors applicable here include: (1) the nature and seriousness of the offense involved; (2) the nature and extent of management participation in any offense involved; (3) the nature and extent of voluntary steps taken to mitigate the impact on the public of any offense involved; and (4) prior convictions involving matters within the jurisdiction of FDA.
1. Nature and seriousness of the offense.
FDA is responsible for protecting the health and safety of the American public by enforcing the FD&C Act. FDA’s responsibilities under the FD&C Act include regulating the manufacture, labeling, and distribution of all drugs shipped or received in interstate commerce.
FDA finds that your conduct created a risk of injury to consumers due to the shipment of a misbranded drug, and undermined the integrity of the Agency’s regulation of drug products. Accordingly, FDA considers the nature and seriousness of your conduct as an unfavorable factor.
2. Nature and extent of management participation.
In determining the appropriate period of debarment, FDA also considers the nature and extent of your management participation in the offense. You were a managing member of PGL who frequently handled financial transactions for PGL. You recruited family and friends to participate in PGL’s business. Although the record states that you were a managing member of PGL, it does not address the nature and extent of your management participation in the offenses. Accordingly, the Agency finds this factor not applicable here.
3. Nature and extent of voluntary steps to mitigate impact on the public
FDA will next consider the nature and extent of voluntary steps to mitigate the impact on the public of any offense involved, including among other things, full cooperation with any investigations (including extent of disclosure to appropriate authorities of all wrongdoing) and any other actions taken to substantially limit potential or actual adverse effects on the public health. Although you acted primarily at the direction of Louis Daniel Smith, you had access to aspects of PGL’s operations. The record does not indicate that you took any steps to mitigate the impact on the public of your actions or that you took any action to limit the potential or actual adverse effects of your conduct on the public health. The Agency will consider this as an unfavorable factor.
4. Prior convictions under this Act or under other Acts involving matters within the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration.
FDA is unaware of any prior convictions. The Agency will consider this as a favorable factor.
Weighing all factors, the Agency has determined that the unfavorable factors outweigh the favorable factors, and therefore warrant the imposition of a twelve year period of permissible debarment in this case.
You were a managing member of PGL. On or about November 1, 2010, November 12, 2010, November 16, 2010, and June 30, 2011, in the Eastern District of Washington, you introduced, delivered for introduction, and caused the introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce a drug. The drug was misbranded in that the label did not bear the name and place of business of the manufacturer and the drug was manufactured in an establishment which was not registered with FDA as required by law. These facts favor consecutive periods of debarment because [XXXXX].
Proposed Action and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing
Based on the findings discussed above, FDA proposes to issue an order under section 306(b)(2)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(b)(2)(B)) debarring you for a period of sixteen years from providing services in any capacity to a person having an approved or pending drug product application. You were convicted of four counts of shipping a misbranded drug, a Federal misdemeanor offense under the Act. FDA proposes that each offense be accorded a debarment period of three years. Under section 306(c)(2)(A) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(c)(2)(A)), in the case of a person debarred for multiple offenses, FDA shall determine whether the periods of debarment shall run concurrently or consecutively. Given the analysis above, FDA has concluded that the unfavorable factors outweigh the favorable factor and that the three- year period of debarment for each of the four offenses of conviction need to be served consecutively, resulting in a total debarment period of twelve years.
In accordance with section 306 of the Act and 21 CFR part 12, you are hereby given an opportunity to request a hearing to show why you should not be debarred as proposed in this letter.
If you decide to seek a hearing, you must file the following: (1) on or before 30 days from the date of receipt of this letter, a written notice of appearance and request for hearing; and (2) on or before 60 days from the date of receipt of this letter, the information on which you rely to justify a hearing.
The procedures and requirements governing this notice of opportunity for hearing, a notice of appearance and request for a hearing, information and analyses to justify a hearing, and a grant or denial of a hearing are contained in 21 CFR part 12 and section 306(i) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(i)).
Your failure to file a timely written notice of appearance and request for hearing constitutes an election by you not to use the opportunity for a hearing concerning your debarment and a waiver of any contentions concerning this action. If you do not request a hearing in the manner prescribed by the regulations, FDA will not hold a hearing and will issue a final debarment order as proposed in this letter.
A request for a hearing may not rest upon mere allegations or denials but must present specific facts showing that there is a genuine and substantial issue of fact that requires a hearing. A hearing will be denied if the data and information you submit, even if accurate, are insufficient to justify the factual determination urged. If it conclusively appears from the face of the information and factual analyses in your request for a hearing that there is no genuine and substantial issue of fact that precludes the order of debarment, the Commissioner of Food and Drugs will deny your request for a hearing and enter a final order of debarment.
You should understand that the facts underlying your conviction are not at issue in this proceeding. The only material issue is whether you were convicted as alleged in this notice and, if so, whether, as a matter of law, this conviction permits your debarment under section 306(b)(2)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(b)(2)(B)) as proposed in this letter.
Your request for a hearing, including any information or factual analyses relied on to justify a hearing, must be identified with Docket No. FDA-2016-N-1677 and sent to the Division of Dockets Management, Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. You must file four copies of all submissions pursuant to this notice of opportunity for hearing. The public availability of information in these submissions is governed by 21 CFR § 10.20(j). Publicly available submissions may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
You also may notify the Secretary that you acquiesce to this proposed debarment. If you decide to acquiesce, your debarment shall commence upon such notification to the Secretary in accordance with section 306(c)(2)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(c)(2)(B)).
This notice is issued under section 306 of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a) and under authority delegated to the Director, Office of Enforcement within the Food and Drug Administration.
Office of Enforcement & Import Operations
Office of Regulatory Affairs
I thought I would add another link, from the United States Department of Justice. Do you want to make any comments about your involvement in promoting MMS?
Edited to add more links:
(Scroll down to Delong, Karis Copper)
Karis Copper Delong debarred for 12 years:
One more link:
Here is a quote from the above link
U.S. Department of Justice Press Release
For Immediate Release
May 28, 2015
United States Department of Justice
WASHINGTON – A federal jury in the Eastern District of Washington returned a guilty verdict yesterday against a Spokane, Washington, man for selling industrial bleach as a miracle cure for numerous diseases and illnesses, including cancer, AIDS, malaria, hepatitis, lyme disease, asthma and the common cold, the Department of Justice announced.
Louis Daniel Smith, 45, was convicted following a seven-day trial of conspiracy, smuggling, selling misbranded drugs and defrauding the United States. Evidence at trial showed that Smith operated a business called “Project GreenLife” (PGL) from 2007 to 2011.PGL sold a product called “Miracle Mineral Supplement,” or MMS, over the Internet.MMS is a mixture of sodium chlorite and water.Sodium chlorite is an industrial chemical used as a pesticide and for hydraulic fracking and wastewater treatment.Sodium chlorite cannot be sold for human consumption and suppliers of the chemical include a warning sheet stating that it can cause potentially fatal side effects if swallowed.
“This verdict demonstrates that the Department of Justice will prosecute those who sell dangerous chemicals as miracle cures to sick people and their desperate loved ones,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer of the Justice Department’s Civil Division.“Consumers have the right to expect that the medicines that they purchase are safe and effective.”Mizer thanked the jury for its service and its careful consideration of the evidence.
The government presented evidence that Smith instructed consumers to combine MMS with citric acid to create chlorine dioxide, add water and drink the resulting mixture to cure numerous illnesses. Chlorine dioxide is a potent agent used to bleach textiles, among other industrial applications.Chlorine dioxide is a severe respiratory and eye irritant that can cause nausea, diarrhea and dehydration.According to the instructions for use that Smith provided with his product, nausea, diarrhea and vomiting were all signs that the miracle cure was working.The instructions also stated that despite a risk of possible brain damage, the product might still be appropriate for pregnant women or infants who were seriously ill."
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.