On Friday my partner and I were both feeling unwell but my partner (70) was experiencing a Very sore throat and by the evening was almost unable to drink or swallow her food. She had also lost her sense of taste. She had a slight headache but interestingly at that point no rise in temperature. The temperature is always on the low side and this was reflected by the thermometer.  To be cautious she started protocol F every 15 minutes late in the evening and drank the entire solution by 2am. My own symptoms were much milder but I had no energy and had been sneezing during the day with occasional dry cough and only a small rise in temperature. I had already been taking the protocol c for a few days so switched to protocol F the same night. By the morning my partner's throat issue was all but gone, and she felt much better although her taste did take a couple of days to return. She has COPD and every infection she has had in the past has moved to her chest which always required antibiotics. So she is delighted that it seems to have been shown the door thanks to CDS. Thank you to all the people that keep flying the flag for chlorine dioxide in the face of terrible prejudice against the concept of "ingesting bleach"  I was concerned that the media has done a wonderful job of brainwashing the public into believing that anything bleach related must not only be bad but certainly does not belong in the body!  This was no better highlighted after on gogglebox last night they had a piece on Trump's careless remarks about injecting bleach. This resulted in ridicule and totally condemning comments born from the ignorance of chlorine dioxide along with the brilliant job the media has done to ensure we do not compromise the interests of the Big Pharmas!   I actually wrote to many of the google pages emails that all copy and paste the information from the FDA own web site about the alleged dangers of MMS and asked if they had looked at the latest science or actually tried or tested the product in their own trials. I got a reply from  Thank you for taking the time to reply and especially with the links which i have examined in detail. The first link was to a study of a person hospitalised after taking 10 times the recommended dose.  There are five prescription drugs which CAN cause many more deaths due to haemolyses and this man did not die despite the massive 10x overdose. So this shows that the tolerance level does allow for massive overdoses before a condition requires hospital treatment. That was quite a relief to read this. 2nd link was an article was related to Montelukast a steroid for shortness of breath not related to MMS 3rd link was FDA report that is backed by big pharma, has no science backed evidence to support the statements they make. They make references to bleach which is "chlorine" a completely different molecular structure to chlorine dioxide and is actually used in hospitals to purify blood bags. This is perhaps the biggest scare story of the lot as they do not demonstrate a single case study or scientific basis for the hypothesis of oral consumption being dangerous. When reviews such as this come from entities that at their core have the interests of Big Pharma at the fore,  we must look at the evidence to back up the claims. Which I have shown below in my previous email to be false from the scientific data studies already carried out. 4th food standard agency report is an accurate account of that written previously by FDA again no evidence of a scientific studies are supplied and these are also backed by Big Pharma. 5th  Canadian report (backed by Big Parma) says sodium chlorite is not regulated for ingestion.  This is not ingested as the new method taught by Andreas Kalcker advises gassing the mixture into water which means no sodium chlorite is consumed. Again no scientific evidence was shown. 6th New Zealand report (backed by big Pharma) concludes the same as others with no evidence or study shown to make the claims highlighted. 7th African document is clearly inaccurate as they have taken information that is not available in the MMS sales information. "No Herbs" are suggested or implied, and citric acid was last used in 2010. They are also backed by big pharma and like the others no evidence is sited relating to any danger. 8th link to Australia (backed by Big Pharma) was far more interesting as they say we have had "reports" of four people hospitalized, but do not give any link or information of these reports.  They also say it should say "poison" on the label, but fail to add that chlorine dioxide is in the water supply and used for food production. It is now also used to purify blood bags in hospitals to ensure no infection from the blood..... So it cannot be harming the blood?     However they do say at the end that ingestion "may have toxic effects" meaning there is no evidence that in the recommended doses it WILL have toxic effects. (Unlike aspirin) We can see how we can be easily swayed to think as a herd because we are told a narrative which has no scientific backing or clinical studies to back up the claim, and believe it to be true in the same way that some still believe the earth is flat! Meanwhile, thousands of people are dying from a disease that the medical community as you rightly say has no cure for. People are obviously looking at the evidence from such things as chlorine dioxide. They read hundreds of testimonials and the science behind it, and take a view that in small doses is worth the risk and then getting cured. While others will read the headlines like yours decide it is too risky and may die as a result. This is why we must all be responsible for the narrative we decide to run with. The consequences can be fatal on both sides of the argument. Your own report highlights the copied conclusions drawn from sources that have either flawed scientific basis as in the 10 x overdose study or big pharma backed establishments like FDA initiating a series of events worldwide which are duplicated as somehow true without showing a single piece of evidence to back up the hypothesis. I learnt some time ago as a journalist for a regional newspaper never to trust anything unless it was the "source"  and even then, the source must be verified as being reliable.  The scientific studies themselves often have conflicts of interest with funding by those whose interests clearly in conflict with a need a positive outcome to maximize the impact of such a study.  Thanks to your kind reply I have been able to confirm that unlike pharmaceutical products which according to WHO information are the 6th leading cause of death on the planet, by comparison not one single person has been shown to have died as a direct result of thousands of people using MMS (correctly) So far all I have read is heartfelt testimonials from hundreds that have actually used it to reverse a wide range of conditions that conventional medicine cannot (or at best manage with unwanted side effects) My wife took her dos last night as instructed every 15 minutes according to the protocol and happy to say no side effects so far and today her throat is better and her temperature is lower her taste though is still not normal and her breathing is still more difficult than usual, but no worse than yesterday. I started my dosing today (my symptoms were far less severe) and also feeling better in just 4 hours with a now normal temperature coughing is less prominent and I have no taste problems, but only a small throat discomfort compared to yesterday when swallowing was actually very difficult. These testimonials although anecdotal are highly compelling evidence in action that for covid 19 it works ...https://mmstestimonials.co/coronavirus In conclusion I really want to thank you for giving us the confidence to go ahead and use the product as the result so far has been outstanding in such a short amount of time to knock the virus into touch. I am so relieved that my background in journalism did not put me off using the product as advised after realizing from your links that there is no solid evidence that chlorine dioxide when ingested in the recommended amounts can cause permenant or life threatening harm. Please think about changing your own views about product in the light of the information you have forwarded. My own and my wifes experience (like so many other testimonials) confirms that this is simply Big Pharmas attempt to stop something that is cheap and available which could likely compromise their interests of their shareholders. I have the scientific studies here that show its efficacy so you can better understand that this product has its place in the fight against COVID 19 Please do not take this information as derogatory as I am convinced you have the nations health at the fore of your mind.  You would never do anything to prevent people from a life saving cure for Covid 19 This is proven by the trials as well as our own experience in just 12 hours and many others on this testimonial page  https://mmstestimonials.co In the light of this please help to save other lives and consider changing the rhetoric in your description for a more factual take on what may be the treatment for all kinds of disease in the future, with less toxicity than phama drugs, less expense and a huge cure rate.  Many thanks Andy  A human study was conducted and there was no toxic signs observed after oral intake of tap water containing 5 ppm of ClO2 (chlorine dioxide) for 12 weeks”. “Both the ClO2 solution and the low concentration of ClO2 gas which can be used effectively and safely will become an effective measure to prevent not only the current influenza infection but also the new emerging influenza viruses”.  This study was done in 2010! https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOANTIMJ/TOANTIMJ-2-71.pdf Another separate independent double blind peer reviewed study  Concluded….” We have shown that ClO2 denatures (abolishes the functions of) the HA and NA proteins on the envelope of the influenza virus (Table 5T5). As these proteins are indispensable for the infectivity of this virus, the fact that they were denatured by ClO2 could explain why infectivity of the virus decreased after treatment with ClO2”. https://www.microbiologyresearch.org/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/vir.0.83393-0 More detailed study of how this product kills the virus https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15847934 The irony is that it is that big Pharma have created the statistic of drug related deaths being responsible for the  6th highest cause of death on the planet. Link to this study is here at 47 minutes into this brilliant presentation by Dr M Greger who wrote the number 1 best selling book “How not to die” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30gEiweaAVQ  Watch all of it if you have time. The study finished just a month ago clearly shows no danger of ingestion in the recommended doses as suggested. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=coronavirus+and+chlorine+dioxide+consumption Protection of human tissues against the oxidative effect of ClO2 “Human cells also contain glutathione in mM concentrations, as well as other antioxidants like vitamin C and E, which work together with glutathione to reduce ClO2 [7]. As a human cell is much larger than a bacterium, consequently its glutathione reserve and glutathione production potential are also greater, so even an isolated human cell can survive much longer in a ClO2 environment than a planktonic bacterium. Considering that human cells are not isolated but form tissues, their glutathione stock may be many orders of magnitude greater than that of a planktonic bacterium. Additionally, in multicellular organisms circulation transports antioxidants continuously to the cells of the tissue affected by a ClO2 attack, helping them to survive. This strengthens the size-selectivity effect, and explains the surprising observation [15] that ClO2 solutions that are able to kill planktonic bacteria in a fraction of a second may be consumed, because they are safe for humans to drink in a small amount (e.g., drinking 1 L of 24 mg/L ClO2 solution in two portions on a single day caused no observable effects in humans [15])!” Efficacy and Safety Evaluation of a Chlorine Dioxide Solution   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5369164/   In this study, a chlorine dioxide solution (UC-1) composed of chlorine dioxide was produced using an electrolytic method and subsequently purified using a membrane. UC-1 was determined to contain 2000 ppm of gaseous chlorine dioxide in water. The efficacy and safety of UC-1 were evaluated. The antimicrobial activity was more than 98.2% reduction when UC-1 concentrations were 5 and 20 ppm for bacteria and fungi, respectively. The half maximal inhibitory concentrations (IC50) of H1N1, influenza virus B/TW/71718/04, and EV71 were 84.65 ± 0.64, 95.91 ± 11.61, and 46.39 ± 1.97 ppm, respectively. A 3-(4,5-Dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) test revealed that the cell viability of mouse lung fibroblast L929 cells was 93.7% at a 200 ppm UC-1 concentration that is over that anticipated in routine use. Moreover, 50 ppm UC-1 showed no significant symptoms in a rabbit ocular irritation test. In an inhalation toxicity test, treatment with 20 ppm UC-1 for 24 h showed no abnormality and no mortality in clinical symptoms and normal functioning of the lung and other organs. A ClO2 concentration of up to 40 ppm in drinking water did not show any toxicity in a subchronic oral toxicity test. Herein, UC-1 showed favorable disinfection activity and a higher safety profile tendency than in previous reports In addition https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04343742  clinical trials for covid under way in Columbia The World Health Organisation also has a study and part of this is here  https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/42274/WHO_EHC_216.pdf;jsessionid=8A7BD68254A08BF6838CB074CD5E7221?sequence=1 In a rising-dose protocol study, Bercz et al. (1982) evaluated the effects of chlorine dioxide on African green monkeys. These animals were provided chlorine dioxide in drinking-water at concentrations of 0, 30, 100 or 200 mg/litre, corresponding to doses of 0, 3.5, 9.5 or 11 mg/kg of body weight per day. Each dose was maintained for 30–60 days. Animals showed signs of dehydration at the highest dose (11 mg/kg of body weight per day), so exposure at that dose was discontinued. No effect was observed on any haematological parameter, including methaemoglobinaemia. Human trials   The effects of chlorine dioxide were assessed in a two-phase study in 10 healthy male volunteers. The first study was a rising-dose tolerance study (Lubbers & Bianchine, 1984) in which doses of chlorine dioxide were increased from 0.1 to 24 mg/litre, administered in two 500-ml portions. The maximum dose for a 70-kg person was 0.34 mg/kg of body weight. The details of this study were described in section 3.1.3. Some small changes in a variety of clinical chemistry parameters were observed, but none was found to be outside the accepted range of normal. The second phase of the experiment involved the daily administration of a 500-ml portion of a solution containing 5 mg/litre to 10 healthy volunteers for a period of 12 weeks (Lubbers et al., 1984a). Again, measurement of a large battery of clinical chemistry parameters and routine physical examination failed to identify any effects of chlorine dioxide that fell outside of the normal range. Do any research on “google scholar” as “Only credible, scholarly material is included in Google Scholar, according to the inclusion criteria: “content such as news or magazine articles, book reviews, and editorials is not appropriate for Google Scholar.” Technical reports, conference presentations, and journal articles are included”; These are facts not conjecture, and as long as they are not funded by the company wanting the preferred outcome should be trusted.