Update on my "anti-purinergic journey" & sharing my new therapy of negative voltage

[serg1942]

Very cool and all. I’ve been interested and waiting to hear how your antipurigenic therapy has worked.

To the extent you have done and are planning on going (CO, earthing,etc), I must ask, why don’t you just buy suramin and use the real thing?

This was not possible for many years. But there has been advancements among bio hackers/individuals in making contacts with China chemical/pharmaceutical manufacturers for chemical and custom synthesis, as well as testing labs for verification. Several have been “vetted” and have made custom syntheses for people on various forums and for some mecfs people we know. I’m sure a lab could be found to do sterile packing of the raw product too. It would not be prohibitively expensive.

In fact, synthesized suramin can now be found online for sale.

Hey @junkcrap50

Actually my purinergic combo has a profound antipurinergic effect, as I am measuring my IL-1beta levels after cultivating my PBMCs with LPS and ATP. Essentially I am inducing an "acute CDR" state, and the drugs in my blood impede this to some degree.

However I do have homeopathic suramin, and it's effect is SO STRONG that I am afraid of it. I will be doing a PBMCs culture soon adding homeopathic suramin, to confirm that the efect is indeed anti-purinergic. But all signs indicates that this is the case, because my reaction is the same as to the rest of anti-purinergics.

Anyhow, I also want to add homeopathic suramin to the combo (if confirmed), because it inhibits all the purinergic receptors, and I like the idea of the synergy with the pannexin-1 inhibitors that I am taking.

I'll keep you informed of my progress! I think I will still take months to really observe changes in energy (although the - 26 volts have given me good 5 days in a row after months of bad after bad days.., )

Take care!

 

[serg1942]

Thanks so much for a thorough reply! I only have voltmeter here, but I'll ask around about oscilloscope, it would be interesting to see the 'hairy' wave if that's the case here. There was a time when I wanted to buy filters but I found out that I had to buy a couple of them and that was too expensive.

I know that my router power supply probably creates dirty electricity. It is in another room but it is connected to my computer via ethernet cable, not sure if this is safe. I think I feel better when it's off, but it may be placebo.

Because I don't know if I have dirty electricity here, I guess from what you're saying it would be best to turn off what I can during grounding, right? I also live in a populated area so would it be safe to ground here at all, could I pick up dirty electricity this way as well?



I imagine that it should make us feel better, similar to walking barefoot. If it doesn't create that feeling then probably it's not working the same way, but of course there are many factors including the fact that being in nature already makes us feel better. Maybe a two plants test? One of them grounded this way all the time. If plants would be affected by it.

The electromagnet fields are dangerous, as many studies find. So, reducing the levels as much as your pocket allows will be a good idea.

For example I have ethernet cables connected to the PC, to the cell phone, etc. And I don't use the phone unless I need to. I can get whatsapp calls instead.

Also, you can measure the effect of the low voltage EMF on your body with a multimeter, and don't sleep near a switched lamp, or near electrical cables that make your body voltage respect to ground be too high. This can be easily done at home.

As whether grounding or not living in the city, I would ground. There's a study on grounded babies in the hospital, and the effect is huge, even having around all sorts of EMFs. I think they are protective to some degree.

Take care

 

[Wishful]

A non grounded body has a potential difference respect to earth of about 1 mV, and when grounded it goes down to around - 280 mV.

That doesn't make sense. If you connect one wire from your voltmeter to ground, the voltage of where the other wire is touching your body depends on where it's touching your body, and possibly what the electrodes are made of and the connection to ground. I just gave this a try, and the voltage wrt ground depended on where on my body the lead was touching. Measuring voltages in biological systems is tricky, and it's very easy to get misleading readings. I'm just guessing, from the tone of the abstract, that the experimenters simply didn't know how to measure voltage correctly in their setup. It is not simple to avoid unwanted voltage-generating effects.

"cathodic conditions yielded on average 23.7 ± 5 (n = 4) times more current consumption than production."

I wasn't sure what that actually means. Production and consumption aren't defined. If they mean that the number of electrons flowing into the cathode is greater than the number flowing out of the anode, there's a problem with the setup and/or measurements. I<in>=I<out> for current flow; that's basic physics. If I<in> does not equal I<out>, then you need to figure out where you went wrong. As I said earlier, I can't think of any chemical reaction where free electrons will take part in the reaction. Electrochemistry still follows I<in> = I<out>.

Does the organism have proper pathways for free electrons movement?

That's for electrons that are experiencing electrostatic force, meaning that there's a location with a different potential than another. A mitochondria somewhere in your body isn't providing a force for electrons on the skin to respond to. Electric potential is generated by nerves and other cells, and the tissue between two points acts as a resistive network, so yes, inner-body voltages can be measured through the skin. Electric eels are an obvious example of this.

For the theory that skin electrons can be utilized by mitochondria, that should show obvious differences in mitochondrial function at different ends of cellular voltage-generating chains. There are more electrons at one end than the other, so by that theory the mitochodrias at one end should be producing more ATP than at the other end. That should be relatively simple to verify (or not) experimentally.

The paper on grounding affecting RBCs isn't very convincing. Where are the replications? If grounding has such a significant effect, it should be easy to replicate, and be an automatic treatment for any diseases involving overly-viscous RBCs. If the experts aren't following up on this paper, maybe they recognize the weakness of it?

The effect that low and high EMF waves have on the body is well established.

I'd call it "highly controversial", unless you're talking about very high power levels.

The effects of grounding on the human physiology if profound.

Also "highly controversial". Actually, I regard them as pseudoscience, supported only by experiments with major flaws. For examples in physics, the Dean Drive and Cold Fusion are two good examples of apparently amazing results that proved to be due to flawed measuring techniques. Measuring small effects in complex environments or systems is tricky, and errors are common. Don't bet your life savings on one small unreplicated experiment, no matter how amazing the claimed results are.

 

[serg1942]

Ok, I think now both sides are clear. I have provided some literature that shows the profound effect of grounding. I encourag you read the rest of the papers. If I remember correctly, the RBCs paper has been replicated.

I have also provided some possible explanations for the mechanisms involved, but this is still open to debate.

Anyway, you can easily measure the effect of grounding on you body as I described. You'll see that the AC voltage goes down to cero, and the direct voltage gets negative.

Not only that, you can also measure your HRV and confirm that grounding improves this parameter. I did it, as I wrote time ago,.

As for EMF, I have read the hundreds of studies showing beyond doubt their detrimental effect. So much so that EMFs are classified as carcinogen type 2B by de WHO.

Best wishes,

 

[serg1942]

@Wishful, let me clarify that I ground myself with a TENS electrode, so perhaps just touching a metal grounded object won't show - 280 mV. But it will still show at least - 100 mV.

I always use my thumb to measure the voltage... Try and see if it works!

 

[Wishful]

I always use my thumb to measure the voltage... Try and see if it works!

Try measuring at different points on your body. The voltages should differ, due to the body not being a uniform conductor, but rather a network of voltage generation and resistances. So, what is actually being measured between two different points?

AC voltage shouldn't go down to zero, since your body does act as an antenna, which means it has different AC voltages induced across different points. Again, measuring voltage isn't simple; it depends on what points you're measuring between and what other factors (electrode materials, static field in the room, etc) might be involved.

I thought of one potential problem in the RBC experiment: they're not measuring RBC properties in-situ, they're measuring the properties of samples taken under different conditions. Just as one example, if the person taking the sample build up a strong static charge (walking on the carpet?), there could be a discharge through the sampling tube, altering the RBCs. The controls (walking on the same carpet) might have a similar charge, thus no discharge altering the sample.

A better experiment would be to measure blood velocity (doppler ultrasound?) in the subject. You could (double-blinded) alter the patient's voltage wrt ground during the experiment, and see whether blood viscosity varied. Taking blood samples and doing experiments on them just adds in opportunities for experimental error.

 

[serg1942]

Try measuring at different points on your body. The voltages should differ, due to the body not being a uniform conductor, but rather a network of voltage generation and resistances. So, what is actually being measured between two different points?

AC voltage shouldn't go down to zero, since your body does act as an antenna, which means it has different AC voltages induced across different points. Again, measuring voltage isn't simple; it depends on what points you're measuring between and what other factors (electrode materials, static field in the room, etc) might be involved.

I thought of one potential problem in the RBC experiment: they're not measuring RBC properties in-situ, they're measuring the properties of samples taken under different conditions. Just as one example, if the person taking the sample build up a strong static charge (walking on the carpet?), there could be a discharge through the sampling tube, altering the RBCs. The controls (walking on the same carpet) might have a similar charge, thus no discharge altering the sample.

A better experiment would be to measure blood velocity (doppler ultrasound?) in the subject. You could (double-blinded) alter the patient's voltage wrt ground during the experiment, and see whether blood viscosity varied. Taking blood samples and doing experiments on them just adds in opportunities for experimental error.

You are comparing your grounded to your ungrounded voltage. So you just pick a good conductive point, and you can do a proper comparison.

AC voltage always goes to cero, because you are inducing an AC current. Just try it and see it by yourself. This doesn't occur if you place a diode only letting the electrons flow
into your body but not the opposite. In this case you'll see that AC doesn't go down, and your direct voltage does increase a lot (up to - 6V if you touch the outside of a switch cable).

As for the RBCs study, I understand your point, and yes, they could have improved the methodology as you suggests. The could have measured the direct voltage between both groups. However, if someone would have charged positively by rubbing their feet on the carpet, as soon as the blood was drawn, the static electricity would have been transfered to the needle or to any other conductive material..., don't you think? Plus, I think they just stayed lied down on the gurney as shown in the picture...

 

[datadragon]

The results of this innovative study demonstrate that even one-hour contact with the Earth appears to promote significantly autonomic nervous system control of body fluids and peripheral blood flow that may improve blood circulation in the torso and face, facial tissue repair, skin health and vitality and optimize facial appearance(...)

https://www.scirp.org/html/14-8203393_58836.htm

As far as the basis for grounding. 10(Z)-hexadecenoic acid is found in Mycobacterium vaccae bacteria in soil and the natural environment which our ancestors would have had more interaction with than people today. Mycobacterium vaccae (NCTC 11659) is an environmental saprophytic bacterium with anti-inflammatory, immunoregulatory, and stress resilience properties. So even a different environment and interaction with the soil can contribute to our health. Recent studies also demonstrate that immunization with M. vaccae prevents stress-induced exaggeration of proinflammatory cytokine secretion from mesenteric lymph node cells stimulated ex vivo, prevents stress-induced exaggeration of chemically induced colitis in a model of inflammatory bowel disease, and prevents stress-induced anxiety-like defensive behavioral responses. Furthermore, immunization with M. vaccae induces anti-inflammatory responses in the brain and prevents stress-induced exaggeration of microglial priming. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31119329/

10(Z)-hexadecenoic acid activated PPARα signaling, but not PPARγ, PPARδ, or retinoic acid receptor (RAR) α signaling (showing PPAR-a is what is giving the effect). The effects of 10(Z)-hexadecenoic acid of LPS stimulated secretion of IL-6 were prevented by PPARα antagonists and absent in PPARα-deficient mice.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-019-05253-9

: For I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. And I'd like to say a few words... if you please. Way back in the days when the grass was still green and the pond was still wet and the clouds were still clean. And I first saw the trees! Miles after miles in the fresh morning breeze. From the rippulous pond, came the comfortable sound. Of clean water and fish that were splashing around. I felt a great leaping of joy in my heart. Others must know. So that was my start. .

Even living in a forest, The scents of trees such as cedar, pine, fir, and cypress contain the phytoncides such as alpha-pinene and beta-pinene which make up the essential oils of many plants and trees. These were found to decrease levels of the cortisol stress hormone reducing stress. http://survivingantidepressants.org...ing-reduces-cortisol-aids-mood-immune-system/

..All I had left after the world made this mess -- was just a small pile of rocks, with the one word ... "UNLESS." ---Whatever that meant, well, seems most couldn't guess. But now, now that your here, the word that I wrote I'll make perfectly clear. UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot. Nothings going to change. The fact, its just not

 

[Wishful]

AC voltage always goes to cero, because you are inducing an AC current.

The AC component crosses zero, but if the inducing field continues, so does the AC voltage. I'm picky about this because it's easy to develop misconceptions if you confuse AC and DC, and "voltage" with "DC voltage measured between these two points, and not some other points". There are countless examples of "Amazing Discoveries!" that were simply due to the experimenters not understanding proper measurement techniques.

You are comparing your grounded to your ungrounded voltage.

Your voltage between which two points? Your body doesn't have one single voltage wrt ground; it has different voltages at different points, some internally generated (nerves, muscles, ion concentrations) and some induced by EMFs. "Your body's voltage" makes as much sense as "the Earth's weather" (where on Earth, when?).

However, if someone would have charged positively by rubbing their feet on the carpet, as soon as the blood was drawn, the static electricity would have been transfered to the needle or to any other conductive material..., don't you think?

Not the full charge. A metal needle would be able to accept (or lose) a small number of electrons, balancing the total charge according to the capacitance ratio of the needle and the charged person. When the needle touched the patient, the total charge would redistribute itself between all the connected surfaces, and a current would flow through the blood being sampled, possibly changing its characteristics. That's why I say that sampling and processing a sample does not necessarily represent what the RBC's characteristics were in the patient's blood vessels. That study was interpolating the results of the experiments for what they theorized would be occurring in the patients. If you want to prove that grounding changes blood velocity in the patient's blood vessels, measure that directly.

 

[Wishful]

As for EMF, I have read the hundreds of studies showing beyond doubt their detrimental effect. So much so that EMFs are classified as carcinogen type 2B by de WHO.

Type 2B means "there's no conclusive evidence that it is carcinogenic, and no conclusive evidence that it isn't". That doesn't fit the definition of "beyond doubt". Furthermore, EMFs vary in effect for different frequencies and power levels. Ionizing an atom (part of a DNA molecule) requires a certain amount of energy, and photons below a certain frequency simply don't have that energy. Can cancer be caused by EMF effects below that frequency? That's still being studied.

We have evidence that UV and higher frequencies are carcinogenic. That doesn't mean that your local 540 kHz AM station signal is carcinogenic. Skin cancer from sunburns doesn't mean that 5 GHz wifi signals are carcinogenic. At this point there's no conclusive evidence to change the classification. Hundreds of studies from researchers who would benefit from publishing controversial findings isn't conclusive, since there are probably hundreds of other studies showing no detrimental effects (and some showing beneficial effects, such as IR heating).

 

[serg1942]

Type 2B means "there's no conclusive evidence that it is carcinogenic, and no conclusive evidence that it isn't". That doesn't fit the definition of "beyond doubt". Furthermore, EMFs vary in effect for different frequencies and power levels. Ionizing an atom (part of a DNA molecule) requires a certain amount of energy, and photons below a certain frequency simply don't have that energy. Can cancer be caused by EMF effects below that frequency? That's still being studied.

We have evidence that UV and higher frequencies are carcinogenic. That doesn't mean that your local 540 kHz AM station signal is carcinogenic. Skin cancer from sunburns doesn't mean that 5 GHz wifi signals are carcinogenic. At this point there's no conclusive evidence to change the classification. Hundreds of studies from researchers who would benefit from publishing controversial findings isn't conclusive, since there are probably hundreds of other studies showing no detrimental effects (and some showing beneficial effects, such as IR heating).

Ok, I guess our positions are clear now, and I'm sure those who read our previous messages will be able to form a proper opinion. I do appreciate the healthy debate!

 

[hapl808]

Type 2B means "there's no conclusive evidence that it is carcinogenic, and no conclusive evidence that it isn't". That doesn't fit the definition of "beyond doubt". Furthermore, EMFs vary in effect for different frequencies and power levels. Ionizing an atom (part of a DNA molecule) requires a certain amount of energy, and photons below a certain frequency simply don't have that energy. Can cancer be caused by EMF effects below that frequency? That's still being studied.

I have no knowledge of the grounding stuff, but with EMF there appears to be some evidence that the effects can be harmful. But a question is what power level is dangerous. Most countries and regions have cutoffs for cell phone emissions (Apple has a page on their site listed for each device).

Personally, I thought the EMF stuff was BS, even though one family member claims it gives them headaches. I tried briefly turning off wifi and noticed no difference. Recently, however, I tried turning off my wifi for days (I have a router next to my desk) and found that my headache frequency and intensity reduced. I turned it back on and the headaches worsened.

I find no wifi quite inconvenient. Maybe it's all placebo, but I definitely feel better with 'less' wifi (still getting the neighbor's signal, but inverse square should mean that it's much less than sitting six feet from a router).

There are literally billions of dollars at stake, so I don't expect to see a ton of research on wifi, cell phone emissions, etc. But there seems to be at least some evidence in either direction.

Wireless Phone Use and Glioma (shows evidence)
Cellular Use and Brain Tumors (shows no evidence)

I think people completely dismissing any potential harm from long term cellular use or excessive EMF exposure (like sitting right next to a router) is unfortunate. My 'guess' is that it's totally safe…assuming your blood brain barrier is intact and you're otherwise healthy. Like many things that affect us and don't affect healthy people (odors, harmless mold, cognitive exertion, physical exercise, etc).

 

[serg1942]

I don't think this is a controversial topic anymore. The literature is clear. I spent months reading most of the papers, and it is scary.

But science that "goes against the current" is tough. Scientists don't want to get into this topic, as you won't get grants, you can lose prestige, or much worse.

Here's a compilation of studies until 2018, most of them showing harm. I think there are about 700 of them:

https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp

Dr Martin Pall himself, one of the big scientists on ME/CFS and related diseases has published and talks about this subject extensively. His studies are rigorous and pretty convincing.

 

[Viala]

To people from the outside who never experienced this it sounds impossible, exactly the same as CFS, yet there are many who are affected by EMF, but just like with CFS they are usually not believed. There is of course huge money behind it, telecommunication corps will never allow any research to influence their profits, again, similar to CFS.

Research is there, but it is a matter of which studies authorities decide to be 'right' and push to the public opinion as credible. So people make fun of it and movies make fun of it, it is easier to control what society believes by using their emotions. A government scientist in my country said it is never neutral to our body and that the influence of our devices is most often detrimental to a varying degree, of course no one treats such people seriously because we've all been conditioned to brush such things off and that's all it takes.

 

[Wishful]

Recently, however, I tried turning off my wifi for days (I have a router next to my desk) and found that my headache frequency and intensity reduced.

Does having wifi off also reduce your screen time, or maybe which room you use for computer stuff?

Also, you can control which areas receive the wifi signal. If you only need the signal to go between the router and an upstairs office, for example, you could place aluminum foil around the router (and the upstairs unit) to block where you don't want it. There would be some leakage and reflections, but you can greatly reduce the signal even if you're sitting physically close to the router.

 

[tasha]

Hi everybody,

I just wanted to share this therapy that I have just incorporated to my anti-purinergic combo, in case you think it might be worth exploring:

Here is a case study of someone with arthritic pain who got rid of this symptom after a few weeks connected to the negative pole of a 24 V battery.

https://www.webmedcentral.com/article_view/5079pp

This is similar to grounding, as when the body is connected to ground, the direct voltage on your body gets negative (of around - 0.2 V).

There are some small but very interesting studies on grounding, showing the anti-inflammatory and the parasympathetic nervous system boosting effects, among others.

The theory behind this effect is that a negative voltage gives electrons to the body (this is just how electricity works), and that these electrons can be incorporated into the biological system, being able to quench free radicals and to increase the potential difference of the inside of the cell compared to the outside.

Time ago I found proof the we can, indeed, incorporate external electrons to the mitochondria of bacteria:

https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mbio.02203-17

Specifically, the electrons reduce NAD+ to NADH, the main energetic sensor of the cell. Remember that the reaction is: NAD+ + 2e- + H+ = NADH. These electrons might come from glucose or lipid oxidation or in this case from the battery.

So, here we are getting grounding to the extreme of giving many electrons to the body. But, if more electrons means less oxidative stress, could an excess of negative voltage cause reductive stress or even immune-suppression?

There is only one study that I know of, that finds that putting rats at negative voltages of 110 and even 280 V, protected the rats from radiation and made the rats live much longer with a much higher white blood cells counts:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4723094/

Following closely Dr. Naviaux's work, I wonder whether this electrons influx could help the mitochondria to complete (and get out of) the cell danger response (CDR) pathway. He explains how the very first signal that gets the CDR started is the lack of electrons in the cytoplasm (caused by infections, toxins, EMFs...) that lead to a low NADH/NAD+ ratio. Well, perhaps the extra electrons from the battery might help here.

I must warn you that this is not an easy therapy. I have been 2 years connected to earth for the most part of the day, and I initially suffered from a terrible herx-like reaction for about a month. After that, my circadian rhythm became completely normalized after 18 years of sleeping during the day and living at night. However I didn't experience improvement in my fatigue.

I have been taking a combo of anti-purinergic substances for the last 4 months, and the experience is being really hard (I know the treatment is being therapeutic because I am measuring my IL1beta, and it is decreasing). The immune system seems to get instantly reeved up with anti-purinergics and the herx-like reaction is quite intense. However my eccema and MCAS are gone, my stools are finally formed after 3 yeas of a 100% sluggish colon function, and I feel a deep sense of higher parasympathetic tone. Also, my sleep is incredibly deeper and I get up to urinate at night just once or twice (unheard of for me).

I think, after 20 years of severe disease, my immune system needs to fight chronic infections and my body needs to excrete the toxins that have been accumulated when the CDR state is established (as can be deduced from Naviaux's findings on how the cellular machinery switches to "monomeric" metabolism).

Here's one study showing how an anti-purinergic drug given to mice with tuberculosis does increase the efficiency of the immune system while decreasing tissue inflammation (Th1 response is increased), backing up my theory:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcimb.2021.672472/full

So I think that the negative voltage therapy could help dialing down the excessive "good" inflammation the anti-purinergic treatment is causing.

I started the -20 volts therapy 3 days ago, and I have been sleeping like 12 hours a day. It's still too soon to see any improvement, so let's see how my body responds to the treatment. I will also start inhalating carbon monoxide at a very non-toxic and therapeutic concentration soon, that has been shown to be anti-purinergic as well, and it shows a very strong, yet non-immune suppressive anti-inflammatory profile.

I know how unappealing my theory that we need to get worse during months or even years, in order to get better, might be disheartening, but this is not my first time. Both LDN and GcMAF, which gave me a huge improvement in the past, made me significantly worse during many months. Also, this phenomenon is observed when patients take olmesartan to activate the vitamin D receptor to improve the innate immune response. Patients following this treatment usually experience a "flare" reaction for up to 3-5 years before getting better. The same happens to patients treating Lyme or other tick-born-diseases.

I apologize for going on at length. I will update you on my journey when I think I have important things to share,

Take care!

Is there a reason that using 'grounding' products would not be helpful here? i love that this is DIYable but for ease I wonder why the grounding pads are not sufficient. Sorry if this is obvious, my background in this area is pretty non-existent.

 

[serg1942]

Is there a reason that using 'grounding' products would not be helpful here? i love that this is DIYable but for ease I wonder why the grounding pads are not sufficient. Sorry if this is obvious, my background in this area is pretty non-existent.

Hi tasha, what do you mean? Why I use a battery instead of just grounding? If this is what you are asking, well, the battery is more powerful. That's all

I am connected to - 100 V daily and I have been better than usual for the last months.