CDS (CLO2)Successful
treatment against COVID-19 (Sars-Cov 2)
Only 2 months later in early November after the wide scale application where, according to the imported data, more than 2500
cubic meters of chlorine dioxide have been produced, a reduction in the
mortality rate is observed in the zero range and a clear reduction of the
infection curve placing
Bolivia in a unique place since neighboring countries continue to have
incremental curves.
The new national law allows
universities to certify and produce chlorine dioxide as CDS for therapeutic
use.
The implementation has been possible thanks to the
efforts of several medical groups, especially the COMUSAV carried in Bolivia by Dr. P. Callisperis & Dr. Suxo in Bolivia.
COMUSAV(World Health and Life Coalition) brings together more
than 3000
Doctors in 24 countries that are using CDS with a resounding success in terms
of its efficacy and lack of harmful effects at the doses employed.
https://mega.nz/folder/QJhjzBIB#X7oroB6I69wOppf4a0uMHA
Chlorine dioxide for
Coronavirus: a revolutionary, simple and effective approach.
March 2020 DOI: 10.13140 / RG.2.2.23856.71680
License CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Project: Toxicity study of chlorine
dioxide in solution (CDS) taken orally Andreas Ludwig Kalcker and Helena
Valladares.
Co.:
Liechtensteiner Verein für Wissenschaft und Gesundheit LI-9491 Ruggel
www.lvwg.org
E-mail alk@lvwg.org
Oxygen
theory with selective oxidation of pathogens through ClO2.
For the
last 100 years the pharmaceutical industry has focused primarily on the
conception and use of toxic substances to create drugs for specific receptors,
without ever looking at the target.
natural
process of the body what is the oxidation of pathogens, as it can be observed
in the macrophages of the immune system.
The new
selective oxidation therapy, which at the same time provides molecular oxygen
in the form of O2, opens up endless possibilities and a new technology that may
be essential for the human future.
-
Chlorine
dioxide (ClO2) has been used for more than 100 years to fight all kinds of
bacteria, viruses and fungi. It acts as a disinfectant, since in its mode of
action it turns out to be an oxidant.
[1 # BiologicalEfficacyList]
It is very
similar to the way in which our own body acts, for example in phagocytosis,
where an oxidation process is used to eliminate all kinds of pathogens.
Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) is a yellowish gas that, to date, is not covered by the
conventional pharmacopoeia as an active ingredient, although it is used in a
mandatory way to disinfect and preserve donated blood bags for
transfusions.
[2 # Alcide studies on blood
disinfection]
It is also
used in most of the bottled waters suitable for consumption, since it does not
leave toxic residues; In addition to being a gas that is very soluble in water
and evaporates from 11ºC.
The recent
Covid-19 coronavirus pandemic calls for urgent solutions with alternative
approaches. Therefore, chlorine dioxide (ClO 2) in aqueous solution at low
doses promises to be an ideal, fast and effective solution for the elimination
of this virus.
Too many
times it happens that the solution is found in the simplest way.
The
approach is as follows: on the one hand we know that viruses are absolutely
sensitive to oxidation and on the other, if it works in human blood bags
against viruses such as HIV and other pathogens, it can logically work in this
case too.
The
SARS-COV-2 virus that causes the COVID-19 disease has generated a dramatic
change in global activity since the end of 2019. This new disease reminds us of
the ravages suffered by the pandemics experienced during the bubonic plague,
cholera and called influenza or Spanish flu. Until July 03, 2020, the virus has
generated 10.710,005 cases and 517,877 confirmed deaths in the world.
Of the
microorganisms of this genus of the Coronaviridae family, seven species are
known that can infect humans and possess a single-stranded RNA genome with a
length of between 26 and 32 kilo bases. SARS-CoV-2 emerged at the end of 2019
in the city of Wuhan in China and from there it spread to most countries in the
world causing the first great pandemic of the XNUMXst century. Initially it was
considered a respiratory infection, which evolves into serious respiratory and
systemic complications that can cause the death of patients.
After six
months of evolution, it is known that the main complication is pneumonitis with
the consequent syndrome of respiratory distress, endothelial damage, cytokine
storm, disseminated intravascular coagulation, severe multisystem failure, and
finally death.
It is
assumed that it is transmitted mainly through the airway penetrating the
mucosa, when the saliva particles are projected out through coughing and
sneezing. In recent months, research carried out in Italy has shown that its
aerial spread is much greater than what was initially thought (Setti, Leonardo
et al, Universitá di Bologna, 2020).
Current
medicine does not have a really effective treatment or primary prevention to
contain covid19. The proposed measures attempt to reduce transmission with
social distancing, frequent hand washing, and isolation at home, which reduces
the speed of infection, although not actually the number of
infected.
This causes a strong social, health and economic impact on a global
level.
DECLARATION OF
THE HELSINKI WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Section 37
Every Physician is Authorized to use new or new
preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic procedures not checked according DECLARATION OF THE HELSINKI WORLD
MEDICAL ASSOCIATION- Section 37 (This would also apply to
chlorine dioxide).
According
to the statement, only the doctor has the decision to apply the treatment and
if the patient requests it, he is authorized to use chlorine dioxide, whose use
is already official in Bolivia against covid-19.
According
to the human rights commission, any administration that prohibits it is responsible
and any unsigned Warning does not have any legality under the law.
* In any case, the respective national legislation
and, in particular, its provisions for use in case of national emergencies must
be observed.
COVID-19 REFERENCES (Shared Google Drive):
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/11uTuYeqP3M-w1dhqea5rcRsJVaxQckC3
Research
In this section you can view and download our publications or also
relevant publications on the topic of Chlorine Dioxide and coronavirus. If you
have relevant information on the subject, do not hesitate to contact us to
publish it here as well.
New solutions to end the COVID-19 pandemic
You now have the opportunity to read
the first multicenter clinical study carried out in several Latin American
countries that clearly demonstrates that chlorine dioxide is a fully effective
treatment against COVID-19.
The highly satisfactory results of the first
multicenter clinical study in humans, on the effectiveness of chlorine dioxide
(ClO2) as CDS in the treatment of COVID-19, were successfully published in the
scientific journal Journal of Molecular and Genetic Medicine (ISSN: 1747-0862).
The study was registered and accepted in
clinicaltrials.gov on April 7, 2020 (NCT 04343742) and falls within the studies
categorized as ECE (quasi-experimental studies) by the NCBI (National Center
for Biotechnology Information).
This is the first clinical studywith chlorine
dioxide for therapeutic use in humans, demonstrating with scientific evidence its
effectiveness and safety in the treatment for COVID-19. The research focused on studying the
effectiveness of the use of ClO2 in patients with SARS-CoV-2, measuring before and after
treatment, the clinical symptoms present and laboratory variables based on
standardized and accepted scales in research (VAS and Likert) of an
experimental group, compared to a control group.
A hope to end the COVID-19 pandemic
The clinical study showed that chlorine dioxide
is effective in patients treated with oral ClO2 and that its use in the
COVID-19 pandemic becomes and positions itself as a great hope to control it,
based on the scientific foundations revealed in previous research .
Chlorine dioxide was shown to be beneficial in
the treatment of COVID-19, making negative RT-PCR at 7 days in one hundred
percent of the patients who took it during the clinical study, rapidly
mitigating their symptoms associated with this disease, and significantly
reducing the laboratory parameters to normal in a space of 14 to 21 days.
In addition, the researchers observed that
patients who consumed chlorine dioxide as a treatment for COVID-19 also
substantially reduced post-illness symptoms, compared to patients not treated
with ClO2.
We are facing a solution that can end the
pandemic, now scientifically proven: CDS works and saves lives!
Following this clinical study, physicians
around the world now have the right to legally use chlorine dioxide in
accordance with the paragraph 37 of the Declaration of Helsinki *. The therapeutic use of chlorine dioxide
gives new hope to end the COVID-19 pandemic and save millions of lives.
The Declaration of Helsinki has been
promulgated by the World Medical Association as a body of ethical principles
that should guide the medical community, and paragraph 37 states the
following:
“When proven interventions do not exist in the
care of a patient or other known interventions have been ineffective, the
physician, after seeking expert advice, with the informed consent of the
patient or an authorized legal representative, may be allowed to use unproven
interventions , if, in his opinion, this gives some hope of saving life,
restoring health or alleviating suffering. Such interventions should be further
investigated in order to assess their safety and efficacy. In all cases, this
new information must be recorded and, when appropriate, made available to the
public. "
Chlorine dioxide is approved by law in Bolivia
In Bolivia, Law No. 1351 of 2020 was approved
that authorized the preparation, commercialization, supply and use under
consent of the CDS chlorine dioxide solution, as prevention and treatment in
the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. An ethics committee was legally constituted
endorsed by the Bolivian Ministry of Health, which approved this multicenter,
retrospective, international research protocol, made up of five universities
(Technical University of Oruro, Public University of El Alto, Greater
University of San Simón , Universidad Autónoma Gabriel René Moreno and the
Technical Institute of Yacuiba "Gran Chaco") which in turn, through
their clinical, scientific and ethical research committees, are conducting
their own research on chlorine dioxide for use in different Applications.
Statistics from Bolivia show a marked reduction
in cases and deaths in that country. For example, from a peak of 2031 daily
cases on August 20, 2020, cases dropped to 147 daily cases on October 21, 2020,
representing a 93% decrease.
While in other countries the increase in
mortality was maintained, in Bolivia it fell, attributing this decrease to the
consumption of chlorine dioxide as a possible explanation.
In other Latin American countries, chlorine
dioxide is also beginning to be used with great success to combat COVID-19, as,
for example, do the doctors who make up the COMUSAV, World Health and Life Coalition (www.comusav.com) who apply it to their patients
with excellent results.
Therapeutic action of chlorine dioxide
The therapeutic action of chlorine dioxide against COVID-19 is given by
its selectivity for pH and viral size. This means that the ClO2 it dissociates and releases
oxygen when it comes into contact with the virus. When it dissociates, it
oxidizes the present spikes of acidic pH and becomes sodium chloride (common
salt) and at the same time releases molecular oxygen O2, which in turn helps local cell
recovery. Therefore, when chlorine dioxide dissociates, it releases oxygen just
like erythrocytes (red blood cells) through the same principle, which is to be
selective for acidity (Bohr effect). Chlorine dioxide releases molecular oxygen
when it encounters an acidic environment, either through histamine or the
acidity of the virus itself. The ClO2 is an antimicrobial agent
whose action is selective by size and therefore It does not affect human cells due
to its large size compared to the virus and it is extremely effective on all
types of viruses including COVID-19 with all its variants and strains.
Multicellular tissue has the ability to
dissipate this charge and is therefore not affected. A great advantage of the
therapeutic use of ClO2, is the impossibility of a viral resistance.
The cause of the
antiviral effect of chlorine dioxide in SARS-CoV-2 can be explained by
its actions on the amino acids of the virus (cysteine, tryptophan,
tyrosine, proline, hydroxyproline).
It is the first scientific study in humans with chlorine dioxide for
therapeutic use that indicates
clear efficacy that
must be investigated without fail, with larger studies to save many thousands
of lives.
This
exceptional study has been registered and accepted in clinicaltrials.gov on
April 7, 2020 (NCT 04343742) and falls within the studies categorized as ECE
(quasi-experimental pilot studies) by the NCBI (National Center for
Biotechnology Information).
If you
want to access this pioneering study and expand your knowledge about it, you
can download it from the following link.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AX2IOOP2CnOEFE9mfcspV_Mf96Ra76pU/view or
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AX2IOOP2CnOEFE9mfcspV_Mf96Ra76pU/view?usp=sharing
https://mega.nz/file/8ERXRQoK#9p5QakhwBaqsjZj46cb8WJ1-yAYxh2dWT45FLpCIIj8
https://andreaskalcker.com/en/coronavirus/protocols.html
Summary
of the intervention protocol
COVID19 with ClO2 in aqueous solution
Precautions
and Contraindications:
1. Being an oxidizing agent, the effectiveness of
chlorine dioxide with
vitamin C and other antioxidants in the elimination of
pathogens is not recommended
2. Space 1 hour of medications and ½ Hour of Meals.
3. CDS concentrate should be stored refrigerated,
below 11ºC. and protected from UV Light.
4. It is an oxidizing agent slightly corrosive to
metals, take it into account when storing and washing materials.
5. Concentrated CDS in contact with the mucose areas
can be a bit too aggressive, it should be diluted to 50 mg / l (0,005%) with a
physiological saline solution.
6. CDS in concentrated form fades tinted tissues
because it is an oxidizing agent.
7. Must NOT be inhaled in concentrated doses (because
of its pulmonary toxicity).
8. In cases of patients on a Warfarin drug treatment,
they should constantly check the values to avoid overdose, as chlorine
dioxide has been shown to improve blood flow just like Warfarin.
The following sub-protocols should be
applied according to pertinent application:
1. Disinfection of hands and surfaces: Protocol D
(with> 1000 ppm ClO2)
2. Prevention (health workers + asymptomatic
patients): Protocol C. 10 takes.
3. Avoiding contagion between patients and healthcare
personnel: Protocol H
4. Acute contagion: protocol F + C
5. Severe cases: Y + C protocol (2h spacing)
Protocol C = CDS
This protocol is used as a preventive measure,
both for healthcare personnel and for asymptomatic patients.
1. Dilute 10 ml of CDS concentrate to 3000 ppm,
in 1 liter of water.
2. Take 10 takes, approximately one every hour
until the bottle is finished.
3. In case of serious illness or danger to
life, the dose could be increased, making a slow upwards progression until
reaching 30 ml of CDS per liter of water.
Protocol D = dermatological
This protocol is used to disinfect both the
skin and objects with risk of contagion.
It consists of the use of a spray nozzle, which
I fill with concentrated CDS, from 1000 to 2000 ppm (this means between 0,1 and
0,2% ClO2)
- Apply the spray directly on the desired area
and rub gently, it is used as if it were a hydroalcoholic gel.
For sensitive areas (such as eyes and mucous
membranes) it is necessary to lower the concentration with water or
physiological saline solution to a concentration of about 50ppm (it is more
than enough to deactivate the pathogens).
Protocol F = Frequent
This protocol is used to combat acute viral and
bacterial infections:
1. 1 ml of CDS 15 minutes, for 1 hour and 45
minutes in eight doses = 8 ml of CDS. We dissolve the takes of 1ml of CDS
(0.3%) in 100ml of water.
2. You can add 8 ml of CDS concentrate (0.3%)
to a one liter bottle of water and divide the bottle into 8 equal parts,
marking these with felt tip pen lines, and drink one mark down every fifteen
minutes.
3. Depending on the severity, we can do
protocol F once or twice a day:
○ In case of doing it 2 times: we do it morning and afternoon (spaced at
least 2h)
○ If we do it once, we continue with protocol C
the rest of the day.
Protocol H = Room
10 ml of 0,3% concentrated CDS is placed in a
dry glass beaker and placed between the patients in the beds. The gas
evaporates due to the temperature of the room and disinfects the environment
avoiding contagion between patients in the same room and health personnel.
Saturated chlorine dioxide has a yellowish
color that is lost as the gas evaporates and once the liquid in the glass has
become transparent it is replaced with the same amount and concentration of
chlorine dioxide concentrate.
According to the calculations, a room of about 12 square meters can be
saturated with a maximum quantity of 1 ppm that is within the international
safety and toxicology regulations and approved for use.
Protocol Y = Abbreviated
Injection (for physicians only)
1. Protocol C is generally performed at least
once before starting parenterally.
2. Perform a venous blood gasometry in order to
determine the patient's status
3. Preparation: 1-2 ml of CDS (0,3%) is added
for every 100 ml of 0,9% NACL physiological saline. Isotonic.
4. Typical adult dose 5ml CDS (0,3%) in 500 ml
0,9% NaCl IV [Equivalent to 45 mg (= 0,0045%)] (if necessary, the dose can be
doubled).
5. Measure the pH with a calibrated digital pH
meter, which must be between pH 7,4- pH 7,8. to avoid phlebitis.
6. If it is lower, buffer with sodium
bicarbonate.
7. IV drip rate = slow: between 4 and 8h with
500ml.
8. Another venous blood gas to determine post
IV status
9. It is advisable to use different routes in
different extremities each day.
10.Typical duration 4 consecutive days.
11. After two hours, the patient can continue
with protocol C until recovered.
From: Liechtensteiner Verein für Wissenschaft und
Gesundheit
Author:
Andreas Ludwig Kalcker, Alejandro Merino, Yohany Andrade MD Eduardo insignares
MD, Blanca Bolaños email: info @ .lvwg.org
CLINICAL STUDY WITH CHLORINE DIOXIDE
AGAINST COVID-19
·
HOME
·
ABOUT ME
·
CORONAVIRUS
·
VIDEOS
·
TRAINING / BOOKS
·
HEALTH
·
CDS (Clo2)
·
MEMBERS
Chlorine
dioxide: A safe and
potentially effective solution to overcome Covid-19
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
1.2. A brief overview of chlorine
dioxide
1.3. Key Points for
consideration
1.4.What is Chlorine Dioxide
Solution (CDS) and what are the differences with Miracle Mineral Solution
(MMS)?
The unnecessary controversy and
its consequences
2. EFFECTIVENESS, SAFETY
AND TOXICITY OF CHLORINE DIOXIDE
2.1. Action against viruses
2.2. Pre-clinical studies
2.3. Clinical studies
2.4. Toxicity
3. RECOMMENDATIONS,
PRECAUTIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS FOLLOWING MEDICAL EXPERIENCES
4. LEGAL FACTS AND
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS
5. FINAL
CONSIDERATIONS
6.REFERENCES
7.ANNEXES Experience report: the case of
Bolivia
|
AEMEMI
|
Ecuadorian Association
of Expert Physicians in Integrative Medicine
|
|
CDS
|
Chlorine dioxide solution
|
|
Cl
|
Chlorine
|
|
Clo2
|
Chlorine dioxide
|
|
COMUSAV
|
Global Health and Life
Coalition
|
|
COVID-19:
|
From the
English, Corona virus disease -2019%
|
|
SHE
|
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
|
|
FDA
|
From the
English, Food and DPlease Aadministration
|
|
H2O
|
Water
|
|
HCl
|
Hydrochloric acid
|
|
mL
|
milliliter
|
|
MMS
|
Of
English: Mineral Miracle Substance
|
|
NaCl
|
Sodium chloride (common salt)
|
|
NaClO
|
Sodium hypochlorite (bleach)
|
|
NaClO2
|
Sodium chlorite
|
|
NaClO3
|
Sodium chlorate
|
|
NaClO4
|
Sodium perchlorate
|
|
NaOH
|
Sodium hydroxide
|
|
O2
|
Oxygen
|
|
WTO
|
World Trade Organization
|
|
PAHO / WHO / WHO
|
From
Spanish, Oorganization Mundial da Savalanche.
From
Spanish, Oorganization Pan-American
of the Savalanche.
From the
English, World Health Organization
|
|
pH
|
Hydrogen potential
|
|
ppm
|
Part per million
|
|
RNA
|
Ribonucleic acid
|
|
COVID-2
|
Acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2
|
|
TCLI
|
Free and Informed
Consent Term
|
|
HIV
|
HIV
|
1. Introduction
1.1
Background
The recent Covid-19 pandemic shocked the
world and has claimed thousands of lives, and as one of the equally complicated
consequences, the global economy was compromised. Undoubtedly, this is a
problem that requires an urgent solution and the commitment of everyone, especially
the health personnel, to find a prompt solution.
In
order to identify a solution to this problem and also based on the scientific
evidence already published and clinical experiences of the use of chlorine
dioxide (ClO2) by Doctors and Researchers, we made an assessment of
the main information to support our proposal for the use of chlorine dioxide
solution (CDS), following the standardized protocol by Andreas Ludwig Kalcker
as a safe and effective alternative to combat SARS infection -COV2.
From January to July 2020, a review
survey was carried out on the use of chlorine dioxide in the indexed
international literature and as an example, if we only analyze the PubMed
website (National Library of Medicine 2020),
We observe that only using the descriptor
"chlorine dioxide", we have available a total of 1.372 documents
dating from 1933 to the research date, 2020 (Figure 1).
Figure
1 - Number of documents found with the descriptor "chlorine dioxide"
in the PubMed scientific database. The first red arrow indicates the descriptor
used for the search and the second the number of published documents.Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=chlorine+dioxide&sort=pubdate.
Access
date: 24/07/2020.
Another important source was the PubChem
database (Figure 2), in which it is also possible to identify biochemical and
toxicological information, among others, and registered patents (which can also
be found in Google Patents), among which the following stand out:
1) The patent on the disinfection of
blood bags (Kross & Scheer, 1991);
2) The patent on HIV (Kuhne 1993);
3) The patent for the treatment of
neurodegenerative diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS),
Alzheimer's disease and multiple sclerosis (McGrath MS 2011);
4) the Taiko Pharmaceutical patent
(2008) for human coronavirus;
5) the patent on a method and
composition “for treating cancerous tumors” to treat cancerous tumors (Alliger
2018);
6) the patent for a pharmaceutical
composition for the treatment of internal inflammation. (Kalcker LA, 2017);
7) the patent on the pharmaceutical
composition for the treatment of acute poisoning (Kalcker LA, 2017) and;
8) the patent of a pharmaceutical
compound for the treatment of infectious diseases (Kalcker LA, 2017);
9) the patent on the use of CDS for coronavirus type 2
(Kalcker LA, 2020 - still pending publication:
/11136-CH_Antrag_auf_Patenterteilung.pdf).
Figure
2 - Number of documents found with the descriptor "chlorine dioxide"
in the PubChem scientific database. The first red arrow indicates the
descriptor used for the search and the second the number of published
documents.Source: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=chlorine%20dioxide
Access
date: 24/07/2020.
Therefore,
only with these initial data, we find that the research on ClO2 It
is not a novelty, it is a chemical molecule that has been known for more than
200 years and has been marketed for 70 years with various uses, namely: the
treatment of water for human consumption, the treatment of contaminated water,
for biofilm control in cooling towers and in food and vegetable disinfection
processing. In addition, there are preclinical and clinical studies carried
out, as well as studies that allow us to understand its toxicological and
safety characteristics, especially for use by humans (Lubbers et al 1984, Ma et
al 2017).
1.2. A brief overview of chlorine
dioxide
The
chemical formula for chlorine dioxide is ClO2 and
according to registry in Chemical Abstracts Services (CAS) from Chemical
American Society its CAS number is 10049-04-4. In this formula, it is clear
that there is one chlorine atom (Cl) and two oxygen atoms (O2) in a
molecule of chlorine dioxide. These 3 atoms are held together by electrons to
form the ClO molecule2. It can be used as a saturated gas in distilled water
and therefore can be drunk or applied directly to the skin and mucosa, with the
appropriate dilutions. Andreas Ludwig Kalcker, Biophysicist and Researcher,
standardized a gas saturation in distilled water called chlorine dioxide
solution or CDS (for its acronym in English, CDS: chlorine dioxide solution) (National Library
of Medicine 2020).
The discovery of the ClO molecule2 in
1814, it is attributed to scientist Sir Humphrey Davy. The ClO2 It
is different from the element chlorine (Cl), both in its chemical and molecular
structure and in its behavior. The ClO2As has
already been widely reported, it can have toxic effects if the necessary care
for its various uses is not observed and the appropriate recommendations for
human consumption are respected. It is more than known that ClO gas2 it
is toxic to humans if inhaled neat and / or ingested in amounts greater than
those recommended (Lenntech 2020, IFA 2020).
The ClO2 it
is one of the most effective biocides against pathogens, such as bacteria,
fungi, viruses, biofilms and other species of microorganisms that can cause
disease. It works by interrupting the synthesis of the pathogen's cell wall
proteins. As it is a selective oxidant, its mode of action is very similar to
phagocytosis, in which a mild oxidation process is used to eliminate all types
of pathogens (Noszticzius et al 2013, Lenntech 2020). It is worth saying that
the ClO2, generated by sodium chlorite (NaClO2), is
approved by the Environmental Protection Agency in the United States (EPA 2002)
and by the World Health Organization for use in water suitable for human
consumption, since it does not leave toxic residues (EPA 2000, WHO 2002) .
When
applied in the appropriate concentrations, ClO2 does
not form any halogenated product and its by-products ClO2 Residuals
are normally within the limits recommended by the EPA (2000, 2004) and WHO (2000,
2002). Unlike chlorine gas, it does not hydrolyze easily, remaining in water as
a dissolved gas. Also in contrast to chlorine, ClO2 it
remains in molecular form in the pH ranges commonly found in natural waters
(EPA 2000, WHO 2002). WHO and EPA include ClO2 in
Group D (substances not classifiable in terms of human carcinogenesis) (IARC
2001, EPA 2009). According to the United States Department of Health and Human
Services 2004, the FDA recommends that the use of ClO2 is
allowed as a permitted additive in food and as an antimicrobial agent
(disinfectant).
Many
continue to confuse ClO2 with sodium hypochlorite (NaClO - Bleach) and
the latter with sodium chlorite (NaClO2), in
addition to other chemical compounds, causing frequent inappropriate comments
both in the media and among professionals due to a lack of knowledge of
elemental chemistry. NaClO (bleach), for example, is a powerful corrosive agent
and the danger due to chronic and massive NaClO exposure is well known. It is
believed that asthma symptoms developed by professionals who work in contact
with this substance may be due to continuous exposure to bleach and other
irritants.
In contact with fats, sodium hydroxide
(NaOH) breaks down fatty acids in glycerol and soaps (fatty acid salts), which
reduces the surface tension of the remaining fat-solution interface. NaClO is
responsible for dissolving organic tissue. Thus, it is observed that the main
toxicity of the substances generated from the chemical reactions of sodium
hypochlorite is the appearance of a hydroxyl NAOH radical, in the various
reactions with secretions and the chemical structure of human tissues (Daniel
et al 1990, Racioppi et al 1994; Estrela et al 2002, Medina-Ramon et al 2005,
Fukuzaki 2006, Mohammadi 2008, Peck B et al 2011).
Based on this brief review of what
chlorine dioxide is and its biocidal capacity, the results obtained by the
doctors of the Ecuadorian Association of Integral Medicine Specialists (AEMEMI)
are not surprising: who affirm the administration of the CDS in dilutions
appropriate and safe is an effective and low-cost alternative that can rapidly
contribute to the restoration of the health of the individual infected by human
coronavirus type 2, and it is assumed that it can promote the reduction of
morbidity and mortality, hospitalizations due to COVID -19 mostly, up to 4 days
(AEMEMI 2020).
Through
the evidence of available scientific publications demonstrating the efficacy of
ClO2 to eliminate different pathogens (Kullai-Kály et
al 2020), including SARS-CoV (Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4; Taiko Pharmaceutical patent
2008), as well as work confirming the safety of the use of chlorine dioxide for
water purification and, more recently, the aforementioned work of the AEMEMI,
we evaluate positively and with great biocidal potential the use of the aqueous
solution of ClO2 (CDS) to combat coronaviruses (AEMEMI 2020, EPA
2000, WHO 2005, WHO 2002).
In this
context, we are surprised that the mentions that official bodies such as the
Ministries of Health, PAHO / WHO, and regulatory agencies and / or health
entities do not recommend the use of ClO2 and
all, instead of recommending, call attention to its toxicity and danger, but,
in their speeches, they do not clearly indicate in what form and by which route
of administration ClO2 it is really toxic. However, everything leads us
to understand that they refer to the pure and concentrated form of this gas and
not to the standardized formula by Kalcker: the aqueous solution of chlorine
dioxide (CDS), at 3.000 ppm.
In this way, to help clarify the
concepts, we invite all official bodies to learn about Andreas Kalcker's work
with the aqueous solution containing chlorine dioxide gas (CDS). Certainly,
after having this knowledge, we believe that definitely, these Organisms, who
appreciate health, will naturally understand the potential of this solution for
human use and from then on, they will be able to review their documents that
may be in disagreement with published scientific reality and current medical
experiences and perhaps they can offer this information more clearly and
assertively in their articles published on official websites or even in their
documents.
1.3. Key Points for consideration
Faced with the serious scenario to which
the whole world is exposed with the coronavirus pandemic, we turn to the
authorities and institutions responsible for human health that run the main
institutions to ask them the following questions:
- What can be the objective / impact of revealing a document with
information that can be misinterpreted?
- Is there a purpose to hide and / or translate scientific knowledge
in a way that causes doubts or harm to the health of thousands of people,
and prevent them from benefiting from something that can really save
lives?
- What's the purpose for not using the so-called "unconventional"
but potentially promising options with clinician-proven clinical evidence
on the front lines of COVID-19?
With the legally established purpose of
saving lives, it is not logical, nor healthy, and even less humanitarian and
compassionate action, in the face of a global public emergency situation, that
misunderstandings in the translation of scientific knowledge occur for any
purpose other than the preservation of life. We consider that these concepts
that generate misunderstandings may be caused due to the lack of knowledge of
the existing literature (even though it is open to public consultation).
Remembering: in the PubMed database alone, there are more than 1.300 documents
published using only the descriptor "chlorine dioxide".
Assuming
the case that the team in charge of drafting the official documents, articles,
and reports published on the websites of official organizations such as PAHO /
WHO of the member countries, the Ministries of Health and the health regulatory
bodies, did not have knowledge of the articles and patents (which does not
exempt them from legal responsibility) where they prove the non-toxicity in
these doses and the possible benefits of chlorine dioxide for human health and
that, therefore, these teams in charge do not yet consider the ClO potential2 For
the fight against type 2 coronavirus, as has been done by AEMEMI and the team
of Doctors and Researchers who sign this dossier, we invite you to reflect on
the following:
- There are many scientific bases for public
access, with many articles available for free, which contain the
information necessary for the production of a document that supports a
decision in public management, why were these bases not consulted or were
they badly analyzed or simply not considered? For what reason? After all,
it is an important decision to use or ban a substance for human health, in
a context of a global public emergency to overcome COVID-19.
- How is it possible that the legally responsible
official health organizations made such an important decision without a
thorough analysis of the effects that a ban on a substance would generate
that could simply put an end to the pandemic quickly, safely and
effectively?
- The fact is that any neophyte in the matter who
reads the different official publications coming from some health
organizations about ClO2, will naturally be afraid of consuming this
product because they think that it is toxic and harmful to health, and
that it could endanger their lifetime. Likewise, a healthcare professional
would also fear to use it in their therapeutic practice, since the
ultimate goal of any healthcare professional is to preserve life and could
not offer the patient something that would put life in danger.
Based
on the dissonant and incoherent information when compared with what is really
known about the CDS and its potential, it is that we, health professionals in
the intention of respectfully giving our contribution so that the health
governing institutions review their documentation and officially published
guidelines to promote the clearest and most accurate information on the use,
efficacy and safety of ClO2 for oral human consumption (CDS), as
standardized by Kalcker (2020 - About evaluation:
/11136-CH_Antrag_auf_Patenterteilung.pdf),
We
share below a summary of key scientific facts and evidence that CDS is
effective against several pathogens, including human coronavirus type 2, the
etiologic agent of SARS-CoV2. Unfortunately, the way information about ClO is
spread2 it generates doubts and above all it reveals to
those who understand the subject under scientific aspects, that the
misinformation generated is somewhat surprising.
1.4.What is Chlorine Dioxide
Solution (CDS) and what are the differences with Miracle Mineral Solution
(MMS)?
More
than 13 years ago, Andreas Ludwig Kalcker started scientific investigations to
study the applicability of ClO2 and its dilutions, so that it can be used safely
for human consumption. On these studies, it has developed 4 patents, of which 3
are published and one is pending approval. These studies are based on the safe
toxicity levels established by the German Gestis toxicology database (IFA
2020), and take into account other reference studies already developed, for
example, by the WHO (2000, 2005) and the EPA (2000).
These studies confirm the non-toxicity
of this gas in aqueous solution for human consumption and establish, for
example, that the safe dose is 0,3 mg / L to be used for the potability of the
water. The Kalcker studies and the clinical experiences of Physicians recommend
using 10 mL of this concentrated solution, diluted in 1000 mL of water as one
of the protocols to combat SARS-VOC 2. In this specific recommendation, it is
allowed at the end, the consumption of 30 mg / day, divided into 10 doses of
100mL, which is safe and non-toxic based on recognized scientific references
(Lubbers & Bianchine 1984; Ma et al 2017).
The unnecessary controversy and its consequences
Contextualizing the origin of the
mistaken controversy that has arisen on the subject of "chlorine
dioxide", it is important to clarify:
Historically, a product called
"miracle mineral solution" (MMS) has been the subject of much
controversy in the media around the world because it is sold as
"medicine."
We often see news on the Internet that
confuse the "miracle mineral solution" (MMS = citric acid + sodium
chlorite + water) with the "chlorine dioxide solution" (CDS =
hydrochloric acid + sodium chlorite + water) and the latter with sodium
hypochlorite (bleach). The main differences between the MMS and the CDS can be
conferred in table 1:
|
General characteristics
|
MMS
|
CDS
|
|
ClO2 concentration (part per million - ppm)
|
Not known
|
3.000 ppm
|
|
Ph
|
Acid
|
Neutral (7)
|
|
Waste
|
Chlorates, chloride
|
Without residues
|
Table 1 - General characteristics that
differentiate the miracle mineral solution (MMS) from the chlorine dioxide
solution (CDS).
The consequences and impact of these
failures in the translation of scientific knowledge are worrying at a time of
global public health emergency, when the lives of many people are in
danger.
Therefore, it is urgent that all
institutions are alert through the prior qualification of the information that
is published so that there are no failures in the translation of scientific
knowledge, thus generating room for doubts and misinterpretations through the
media. communication, with serious consequences and negatively influencing the
decision-making of managers.
If we used sodium hypochlorite (NaClO)
with hydrochloric acid in the water, the solution would contain Cl2 +
NaCl + H2O. The Cl2 It
is a toxic gas that reacts with organic substances, mainly in aqueous media
where it can form toxic acids.
Although we are clear about the very
well established biochemical differences, many continue to confuse some
chemicals with ClO2 (Table 2):
Source: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=chlorine%20dioxide.
Access date: 24/07/2020.
2. Effectiveness, safety and toxicity of Chlorine Dioxide
2.1.
Action against viruses
Most viruses behave similarly because,
once they infect the cell, the nucleic acid of the virus takes over the
synthesis of the cell's proteins.
Certain segments of the nucleic acid of
the virus are responsible for the replication of the genetic material of the
capsid, a structure whose function is to protect the
viral genome during its transfer from
one cell to another and assist in its transfer between host cells.
When
the ClO2 encounters an infected cell, a denaturation
process occurs very similar to phagocytosis because it is a selective oxidant
(Noszticzius et al 2013).
2.2. Pre-clinical studies
Pre-clinical
studies exploring the toxicity of ClO2 They
do not usually find adverse effects when animals are exposed to different
concentrations of this biocide. We are going here to reference some of the most
important ones. Ogata (2007) exposed 15 rats to 0,03 ppm of ClO2 gaseous
for 21 days.
Microscopic
examination of histopathological samples from the lungs of these rats showed
that their lungs were "completely normal". In another preclinical
study, Ogata et al. (2008) exposed rats to 1 ppm of ClO2 soda
for 5 hours a day, 5 days a week for a period of 10 weeks. No adverse effects
were observed. They concluded that the "no observed adverse effect level"
(NOAEL) for chlorine dioxide gas is 1 ppm, a level that is believed to be
non-toxic to humans and exceeds the reported concentration of 0,03 ppm to
protect against influenza virus infection.
In studies on rats, Haller and
Northgraves (1955) found that long-term exposure (2 years) to 10 ppm of
chlorine dioxide does not produce adverse effects. However, rats exposed to 100
ppm showed an increased mortality rate.
Musil
et al (2004) reported that high doses (200-300 mg / kg) of sodium chlorite
caused the oxidation of hemoglobin to methemoglobin. However, when the rats
drank water for 40 days with varying levels of chlorine dioxide (ranging from
0,175 to 5 ppm), no changes in hematological parameters were observed. In
another study, chickens and rats that drank chlorine dioxide in drinking water
daily in concentrations as high as 1000 ppm for 2 months did not produce
methemoglobin. Richardson (2004) reported that high doses of oral sodium
chlorate (NaClO3) (which is not the same as sodium chlorite - NaClO2) produced
methemoglobinemia and nephritis (US Department of health and human service,
2004).
Fridliand
& Kagan (1971) reported that rats orally consumed 10 ppm of ClO solution2 for
6 months they had no adverse health effects. When the exposure was increased to
100 ppm, the only difference between the treatment group and the control group
was a slower weight gain in the treatment group. In an effort to simulate the
conventional human lifestyle, Akamatsu et al (2012) exposed rats to chlorine
dioxide gas at a concentration of 0,05 - 0,1 ppm, 24 hours a day and 7 days. of
the week for a period of 6 months. They concluded that whole-body exposure to
chlorine dioxide gas of up to 0,1 ppm over a 6-month period is non-toxic for
rats.
Higher
doses of ClO solution2 (for example, 50-1000 ppm) can produce
hematological changes in animals, including decreased red blood cell count,
methemoglobinemia, and hemolytic anemia. Reduced serum thyroxine levels were
also observed in monkeys exposed to 100 ppm in drinking water and in rat pups
exposed to concentrations up to 100 ppm through the gavage or indirectly
through the drinking water of their prey (US Department of health and human
service, 2004).
Moore
& Calabrese (1982) studied the toxicological effects of ClO2 in
rats and observed that when the rats were exposed to a maximum level of 100 ppm
by drinking water and neither the A / J nor C57L / J rats showed any
hematological change. It was also found that rats exposed to up to 100 ppm of
sodium chlorite (NaCIO2) in their drinking water for up to 120 days could not
demonstrate any histopathological change in the structure of the kidneys.
Shi and
Xie (1999) indicated that an acute oral LD50 value (expected to result in the
death of 50% of the dosed animals) for stable chlorine dioxide was> 10.000
mg / kg in mice. In rats, the acute oral LD50 values for sodium chlorite
(NaClO2) ranged from 105 to 177 mg / kg (equivalent to 79-133
mg chlorite / kg) (Musil et al 1964, Seta et al 1991. No exposure-related
deaths were observed in rats that received chlorine dioxide in water drinking
for 90 days at concentrations that resulted in doses up to approximately 11,5
mg / kg / day in men and 14,9 mg / kg / day in women (Daniel et al 1990).
2.3. Clinical studies
According
to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the short-term
toxicity of ClO2 it was evaluated in human studies by Lubbers et
al (1981, 1982, 1984a and Lubbers & Bianchine 1984c). In the first study
(Lubbers et al 1981, also published as Lubbers et al. 1982), a group of 10
healthy adult men drank 1.000 mL (divided into two 500 mL servings, 4 hours
apart) of a solution of 0 or 24 mg / L chlorine dioxide (0,34 mg / kg, assuming
a reference body weight of 70 kg). In the second study (Lubbers et al 1984a),
groups of 10 adult men received 500 mL of distilled water containing 0 or 5 mg
/ L ClO2 (0,04 mg / kg day assuming a reference body
weight of 70 kg) for 12 weeks.
No study found physiologically relevant
changes in general health (observations and physical examination), vital signs
(blood pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, and body temperature), serum
clinical chemical parameters (including glucose levels, urea nitrogen and
phosphorus), alkaline phosphatase and aspartate and alanine aminotransferase),
serum triiodothyronine (T3) and thyroxine (T4), nor hematological parameters
(EPA, 2004).
Michael
et al (1981), Tuthill et al (1982) and Kanitz et al (1996) examined the effects
of drinking water disinfected with ClO2.
Michael et al (1987) found no significant abnormalities in hematological
parameters or serum chemistry. Tuthill and colleagues (1982) retrospectively
compared data on morbidity and mortality of newborns in two communities: one
using chlorine and one using ClO2 to purify the water. In reviewing this study,
EPA found no differences between these communities (US Department of Health and
Human Service, 2004).
Kanitz
et al (1996) studied births in two Italian hospitals where the water was
purified with chlorine or ClO2. Although the authors concluded that babies born to
mothers who consumed drinking water treated with ClO2 during
pregnancy they were at increased risk of neonatal jaundice, a reduction in head
circumference and body length, the EPA wrote that confusing variables prevented
the possibility of drawing conclusions from this study (US Department of Health
and Human Service, 2004 ).
Survival was not significantly decreased
in groups of rats exposed to chlorite (such as sodium chlorite) in drinking
water for two years at concentrations that resulted in estimated chlorite doses
of up to 81 mg / kg / day.
In another study, Kurokawa et al. (1986)
found that survival was not adversely affected in rats receiving sodium
chlorite in drinking water at concentrations that
they resulted in estimated chlorite doses
of up to 32,1 mg / kg / day in males and 40,9 mg / kg / day in females ”.
Exposure of rats to sodium chlorite for
up to 85 weeks at concentrations resulting in estimated doses of chlorite up to
90 mg / kg / day has not affected survival (Kurokawa et al. 1986).
According to Lubbers et al 1981, there
were no signs of adverse liver effects (evaluated in serum chemistry tests) in
adult men who consumed ClO2 in aqueous solution, resulting in a dose of
approximately 0,34 mg / kg or in other men adults consuming approximately 0,04
mg / kg / day for 12 weeks. The same researchers administered chlorite to
healthy adult men and found no evidence of adverse liver effects after each
individual consumed a total of 1.000 mL of a solution containing 2,4 mg / L of
chlorite (approximately 0,068 mg / kg) in two doses (4 hours apart), or in
other normal or G6PD-deficient men who consumed approximately 0,04 mg / kg /
day for 12 weeks (Lubbers et al 1984a, 1984b).
No
signs of ClO-induced impairment of liver function were observed.2 or
chlorite among rural village dwellers who were exposed for 12 weeks through ClO2 in
drinking water at weekly concentrations measured from 0,25 to 1,11 mg / L
(ClO2) or 3,19 to 6,96 mg / L (chlorite) (Michael et al 1981). In this
epidemiological study, the levels of ClO2 in
drinking water before and after the treatment period they were <0,05 mg / L.
Chlorite level in drinking water was 0,32 mg / L before treatment with ClO2. One
week and two weeks after stopping treatment, chlorite levels fell to 1,4 and
0,5 mg / L, respectively.
In its
official document entitled "Laboratory biosafety manual" (page 93),
WHO (2005) talks about ClO2:
"Chlorine dioxide (ClO2)
is a powerful, fast-acting germicide, disinfectant, and oxidant that tends to
be active in concentrations lower than those required for chlorine bleach. The
gaseous form is unstable and decomposes into chlorine gas (Cl2)
and oxygen gas (O2), producing heat. However, the ClO2 It
is soluble in water and stable in aqueous solution.
It can
be obtained in two ways:
1) By generation in situ, mixing two
different components, hydrochloric acid (HCl) and sodium chlorite (NaClO2),
Or
2) ordering the stabilized form, which
is activated in the laboratory when necessary.
ClO2 is
the most selective of the oxidizing biocides. Ozone and chlorine are much more
reactive than ClO2 and they are consumed by most organic
compounds.
In
contrast, ClO2 It only reacts with reduced sulfur compounds,
secondary and tertiary amines, and other highly reduced and reactive organic
compounds.
Therefore,
with the ClO2 a more stable residue can be obtained at much
lower doses than when using chlorine or ozone. If generated correctly, the ClO2Due
to its selectivity, it can be used more effectively than ozone or chlorine in
cases of higher organic matter load ”.
Based
on the WHO Strategy on Traditional Medicine 2014-2023 (WHO 2013), which
recognizes practices related to traditional, complementary and integrative or
"unconventional" medicine as an important part of health services, a
In order to continuously integrate them with the various member countries that
are signatories of this initiative, we put here the potential of the aqueous
solution of ClO2 (Kalcker 2017) as a potent biocide and therefore
a safe supplement alternative to combat SARS-CoV2. The ClO2 It
can fight viruses through the selective oxidation process through denaturation
of capsid proteins and subsequent oxidation of the virus's genetic material,
rendering it inactive. As there is no possible adaptation of the virus to the
oxidation process, it is impossible for it to develop resistance to ClO2, it
becomes a promising treatment for any strain of virus.
There
is scientific evidence that ClO2 It is effective against the SARS-CoV-2
coronavirus and others:
- Wang et al. (2005) will study the persistence
conditions of SARS-CoV-2 in different environments and its complete
deactivation by the effect of oxidants such as ClO2;
- The Department of Microbiology and Medicine at
the University of New England investigated the inactivation of human and
simian rotavirus (SA-11) by ClO2. The experiments were
carried out at 4 ° C in a standard phosphate-carbonate buffer. Both
viruses were rapidly inactivated in just 20 seconds under alkaline
conditions, with concentrations of ClO2 ranging from 0,05 to
0,2 mg / L (Chen & Vaughn 1990);
- The Japanese University of Tottori evaluated the
antiviral activity of ClO2 in aqueous solution and sodium hypochlorite
against human influenza virus, measles, canine dystemperosis virus, human
herpesvirus, human adenovirus, canine adenovirus, feline calicivirus and
canine parvovirus;
- The ClO2 At concentrations
ranging from 1 to 100 ppm, it produced powerful antiviral activity,
inactivating> or = 99,9% of the viruses in just 15 seconds of
treatment. The antiviral activity of ClO2 it was approximately
10 times that of NaClO (Sanekata et al 2010).
- The Italian University of Parma has carried out
studies on the deactivation of viruses resistant to oxidizing agents, such
as Coxsackie virus, hepatitis A virus (HAV) and feline calicivirus: the
data obtained from the studies shows the following: complete inactivation
of HAV and Feline calicivirus, concentrations> or = 0.6 mg / L are
required. Similar tests for Coxsackie B5 gave the same results. However,
for feline calicivirus and HAV, at low concentrations of disinfectant, it
takes approximately 20 minutes to obtain a 99,99% reduction in viral load
(Zoni et al 2007);
- The Institute of Public Health and Environmental
Medicine in Tainjin, China, conducted a study to elucidate the mechanisms
of inactivation of the hepatitis A virus (HAV) through the use of ClO2,
observing the complete destruction of antigenicity after 10 minutes of
exposure with 7,5 mg of ClO2 per liter (Li et al 2004);
- The Department of Biology of the State University
of New Mexico (USA) conducted a study on the inactivation of poliovirus
with ClO2 and iodine. It concluded that the ClO2 inactivated
poliovirus by reacting with viral RNA and affecting the ability of the
viral genome to act as a model for RNA synthesis (Alvarez ME & O'Brien
RT 1982)
- Taiko Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Seikacho, Kyoto,
Japan demonstrates in this study that ClO gas2 in extremely low
concentrations, without any harmful effect on human health, it produces a
strong deactivating effect on bacteria and viruses, significantly reducing
the number of viable microbes in the air in a hospital surgical center
(Taiko Pharmaceutical 2016).
2.4. Toxicity
The
LD50 toxicity (acute toxicity index) established by the German GESTIS
toxicology database for ClO2 is 292 mg per kilogram for 14 days, when the
equivalent in a 50 kg adult would be 15.000 mg for 14 days (IFA 2020).
According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the ClO2 it
acts quickly when it enters the human body. The ClO2 it
rapidly converts to chloride ions, which in turn decompose to chloride ions.
The body uses these ions for many normal purposes. These chloride ions leave
the body within hours to days, primarily through urine (EPA 1999).
The
short-term toxicity of ClO2 It has been evaluated in human studies by the
research groups of Lubbers et al:
In the
first study (Lubbers et al 1981; also published as Lubbers et al 1982), a group
of 10 healthy adult men drank 1.000 mL (divided into two 500 mL servings, 4
hours apart) of a solution of ClO2 24 mg / L (0,34 mg / kg, assuming a reference
body weight of 70 kg). In the second study (Lubbers et al 1984a), groups of 10
adult men received 500 mL of distilled water containing 0 or 5 mg / kg-day of
ClO2 (0,04 mg / kg-day assuming a reference body
weight of 70 kg) for 12 weeks. No study found physiologically relevant changes
in general health (observations and physical examination), vital signs (blood
pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, and body temperature), serum clinical
chemical parameters (including glucose levels, urea nitrogen and phosphorus),
alkaline phosphatase and aspartate and alanine aminotransferase), serum
triiodothyronine (T3) and thyroxine (T4), nor hematological parameters (EPA
2000).
Ma et
al (2017) evaluated the efficacy and safety of an aqueous solution of ClO2 containing
2.000 ppm. Antimicrobial activity was 98,2% at concentrations between 5 and 20
ppm for fungal bacteria and H1N1 viruses. In an inhalation toxicity test, 20
ppm ClO2 During 24h, he did not show any mortality or
abnormality in clinical symptoms and / or in the functioning of the lungs and
other organs. A concentration of CLO2 up
to 40 ppm in drinking water did not show any subchronic oral toxicity.
Taylor and Pfohl, 1985; Toth et al.
1990), Orme et al. 1985; Taylor and Pfohl, 1985; Mobley et al., 1990) studied
the toxicity of chlorine dioxide, in various organs of the body, at different
stages of development of the animal specimens studied, and reported a Minimum
Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) for these effects of 14 mg kg -1 day-1 of
chlorine dioxide.
While Orme, et al. (1985) identified a
No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) of 3 mg kg-1 day-1. The clinical
experience of Latin American physicians, during the last six months, suggests
that the ingestion of 30 mg day-1 of chlorine dioxide dissolved in one liter of
water and drunk during ten events throughout the day as a successful treatment
for COVID-19, which is 6 times below the NOAEL dose.
Therefore, the literature review
confirms that the use of chlorine dioxide ingested at a dose of 0,50 mg kg-1
day-1 does not represent a risk of toxicity to human health by ingestion and
does represent a very effective treatment. plausible for COVID-19.3
3. Recommendations,
precautions and contraindications following medical experiences
Following medical experiences, we have
made the following recommendations:
- It is recommended to generate chlorine dioxide
the mixture between sodium chlorite (NaClO2) and an activator
(hydrochloric acid) or in its electrolytic form (the ideal one). What is
used to make CDS is saturated chlorine dioxide gas in water with neutral
pH;
- We do not recommend that anyone ingest sodium
hypochlorite (NaClO) or any other chemical substance;
- Do not inhale chlorine dioxide gas massively, for
a long time, as it can cause throat irritation and breathing difficulties.
In small amounts for a short time it is safe, as shown by the studies of
Dr. Norio Ogata;
- Preferably, do not mix CDS with: coffee, alcohol,
bicarbonate, vitamin C, ascorbic acid, orange juice, preservatives or
supplements (antioxidants). Although they do not usually interact, they
can neutralize the effectiveness of chlorine dioxide;
- We recommend taking care of food in content and
quantity;
- The first recommendation should be: Chlorine
Dioxide (ClO2) must be administered by prescription and
medical follow-up, self-treatment is not promoted..
4.
International legal facts and human rights
Scientific advances and discoveries are
constant, and in the field of health, prompt access to them by healthcare
personnel and patients becomes essential and urgent, being logical and
obligatory, out of a pure humanitarian sense and in accordance with scientific
rigor, testing with substances such as Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2) for which there
is proven evidence of its efficacy and usefulness. In the history of medicine,
the supremacy of the criterion of the "compassionate appeal" has been
constant over the criterion of the "perfectly contrasted appeal."
The
articles 32 and 37 of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1964 thus allow it in the
case of "Unproven Intervention»(INC),"When proven
interventions do not exist in the care of a patient or other known
interventions have been ineffective, the physician, after seeking expert advice,
with the informed consent of the patient or an authorized legal representative,
may be allowed to use unproven interventions , if, in his opinion, this gives
some hope of saving life, restoring health or alleviating suffering ".
Doctors, in accordance with the 1948
Geneva Declaration, before patients whose health and life are in danger, have
the obligation to use all the means and products at their disposal, which offer
indications of effectiveness and, to a greater extent, in a medical emergency,
Since in accordance with the duty of fraternity and humanitarian aid, the use
of Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2) cannot be limited or denied, whose non-toxicity has
been documented and whose efficacy and safety has been demonstrated in studies
and practices carried out in different countries. .
To the same extent, States, Institutions
and Organizations cannot restrict or prevent its use in the face of existing
clinical evidence, otherwise they would fail to comply with the obligations
assumed in international and national texts, incurring in the violation of
fundamental rights such as the right to life and health as well as the
patient's right to self-determination and professional autonomy and clinical
independence.
In accordance with the above, the
exercise of the medical profession implies a vocation of service to humanity,
with the health and life of the patient being its greatest concern, having to
ensure the benefit of the interests of citizens, making medical knowledge
available to them. within the framework of professional autonomy and clinical
independence. In the currently existing, fully applicable and enforceable legal
framework, the medical profession must have professional freedom without
interference in the care and treatment of patients, by having the privilege of
using their professional judgment and discretion to make the necessary clinical
and ethical decisions .
Physicians are legally conferred a high
degree of professional autonomy and clinical independence, so they can make
recommendations based on their knowledge and experience, clinical evidence, and
holistic understanding of patients, including what is best for them without
undue or inappropriate external influence , and take appropriate measures to
ensure that effective systems are in place.
Every patient has the right to be cared
for by a doctor who he knows is free to give a clinical and ethical opinion,
without any outside interference. The patient has the right to
self-determination and to make decisions freely in relation to his person.
Patients in the free exercise of their right to autonomy have the right to
dispose of their body, their decisions must be respected, being fully protected
to prevent third parties from intervening in their body without their consent,
and must be adequately informed about the purpose of the intervention, nature,
its risks and consequences.
The right to health requires that
governments comply with the obligations they have assumed in the aforementioned
agreements, so that health goods and services are available in sufficient
quantity, with public access, and of good quality, in accordance with the
provisions of the General Comment 14 of the Committee of the Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
All this covered in the provisions that
are related and whose essential contents are extracted below;
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of
December 10, 1948.
- American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of
Man, Bogotá, 1948.
- American Convention on Human Rights, San José
(Costa Rica), from November 7 to 22, 1969.
- International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights of December 16, 1966.
- The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms Rome of November 4, 1950.
- International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights of December 16, 1966.
- Convention for the protection of human rights and
the dignity of the human being with respect to the applications of Biology
and Medicine of April 4, 1997, Oviedo Convention.
- Nuremberg Code of Ethics of August 19, 1947.
- Geneva
Declaration of 1948.
- International Code of Medical Ethics of October
1949.
- Declaration of Helsinki adopted by the 18th World
Medical Assembly, 1964.
- Belmont Report
of April 18, 1979.
- 1981 WMA Declaration of Lisbon on the Rights of
the Patient.
- Declaration of the WMA on the Independence and
Professional Freedom of the Physician of 1986.
- Madrid Declaration of the AMM on Professional
Autonomy and Self-Regulation of 1987.
- WMA Seoul Declaration on Professional Autonomy
and Clinical Independence 2008.
- Madrid Declaration of the AMM on Professional
Regulation of 2009.
- WMA Declaration on the Relationship between Law
and Ethics 2003.
- UNESCO Universal
Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights of 2005.
- International
Health Regulations 2005.
The
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of December 16,
1966, signed by Ecuador on June 24, 9 and ratified on June 1968, 11, recognizes
the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest possible level of health.
physical and mental; artº2010 "1.
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to
the enjoyment of the highest possible standard of physical and mental health.
"and the duty to protect this right by the state through a
global health care system, which is available to all, without discrimination
and economically accessible, article 2:
1."Each of the States Parties to
the present Covenant undertakes to adopt measures, both separately and through
international assistance and cooperation, especially economic and technical, to
the maximum of the resources available to it, to progressively achieve, by all
the appropriate means, including in particular the adoption of legislative
measures, the full realization of the rights recognized herein. "
The International Code of Medical Ethics
of October 1949, so that articles 36 and 59 of the aforementioned text, among
others, become effective;
Article 36 of Chapter VII regarding
medical care at the end of life.
"1. The doctor has the duty to try to
cure or improve the patient, whenever possible. When it is no longer so, the
obligation to apply the appropriate measures to achieve their well-being
remains, even when this may lead to a shortening of life.
2. The
doctor must not undertake or continue diagnostic or therapeutic actions harmful
to the patient, without hope of benefits, useless or obstinate.
Should withdraw, adjust or not initiate treatment when the limited
prognosis so advises. The diagnostic tests and the therapeutic and support
measures must be adapted to the clinical situation of the patient. You must
avoid futility, both quantitative and qualitative.
3. The
doctor, after adequate information to the patient, must take into account his
willingness to reject any procedure, including treatments aimed at prolonging
life.
4. When
the patient's condition does not allow him to make decisions, the doctor must
take into consideration, in order of preference, the indications previously
made by the patient, the previous instructions and the opinion of the patient
in the voice of their representatives. It is the doctor's duty to collaborate
with the people who have the mission of guaranteeing compliance with the
patient's wishes "
- Article 59 of Chapter XIV relative to
medical research;
"1.Medical
research is necessary for the advancement of medicine, being a social good that
must be fostered and encouraged. Research with human beings must be carried out
when scientific progress is not possible by alternative means of comparable
efficacy or in those phases of research in which it is essential.
2.-The
investigating physician must adopt all possible precautions to preserve the
physical and mental integrity of the research subjects. You must take special
care in protecting individuals belonging to vulnerable groups. The good of the
human being who participates in biomedical research must prevail over the
interests of society and science.
3.- Respect for the research subject is
the guiding principle of the same. Your explicit consent must always be
obtained. The information must contain, at least: the nature and purpose of the
research, the objectives, the methods, the expected benefits, as well as the
potential risks and discomforts that its participation may cause. You must also
be informed of your right not to participate
or to withdraw freely at any time during
the investigation, without being harmed by it.
4.- The medical researcher has the duty
to publish the results of his research through the normal channels of
scientific dissemination, whether they are favorable or not. It is unethical to
manipulate or conceal data, whether for personal or group gain, or for
ideological reasons. "
La WMA
Declaration of Lisbon on the Rights of the Patient de 1981,"Every
patient has the right to be treated by a doctor who he knows is free to give a
clinical and ethical opinion, without any outside interference.
The
patient has the right to self-determination and to make decisions freely in
relation to his person. The doctor will inform the patient of the consequences
of his decision.
The
mentally competent adult patient has the right to give or deny consent for any
examination, diagnosis, or therapy. The patient has the right to the
information necessary to make his decisions. The patient must clearly
understand what the purpose of any examination or treatment is and what are the
consequences of not giving consent "
The Declaration of the AMM on the
Independence and Professional Freedom of the Physician of 1986, according to
which; "Doctors must enjoy a professional freedom that allows them to care
for their patients without interference.
The privilege of the physician to use
his professional judgment and discretion to make the clinical and ethical
decisions necessary for the care and treatment of his patients must be
maintained and defended. By ensuring the independence and professional freedom
for the physician to practice medicine, the community ensures the best medical
care for its citizens, which in turn contributes to a strong and safe society.
"
The
2009 WMA Madrid Declaration on Professional Regulation reaffirms the Seoul
Declaration on the professional autonomy and clinical independence of
physicians by providing"Physicians
are given a high degree of professional autonomy and clinical independence, so
they can make recommendations based on their knowledge and experience, clinical
evidence and holistic understanding of patients, including what is best for
them without undue or inappropriate external influence . "
The
universal principles that permeate all regulations must comply with respect for
humanitarian laws innate in the collective unconscious, as stated in the maxim
of the Hippocratic Oath "MAINTAIN
the greatest respect for human life from the beginning, even under threats, and
do not use medical knowledge against the laws of humanity."
Ethical
values have primacy over limiting legal provisions, as is well recognized in
the WMA Declaration on the relationship between law and ethics of 2003, which
provides "When
legislation and medical ethics are in conflict, physicians should try to change
the legislation. If this conflict occurs, ethical responsibilities prevail over
legal obligations."
When a
patient in the face of a disease seeks relief or to save his life and requests
to try a therapeutic option of which there are indications of usefulness, such
as Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2), it is the doctor's duty to support the patient,
acquire knowledge, do studies , and disseminate it in accordance with article
27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, so that everyone
benefits from scientific progress, information must be freely shared so that it
is disseminated in all countries without restrictions, "Everyone has the right to freely take
part in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to
participate in scientific progress and the benefits that result from it. "5.
5. Final considerations
In view of the historical moment that
all humanity faces with the Coronavirus pandemic and the urgent need to save
lives, the recent events related to the treatment of COVID-19 in both the
medical and academic fields, and especially the object of this document, which
is to provide authorities with correct information on chlorine dioxide for
correct and safe human use, some fundamental questions related to human rights
and medical practice are worth considering for reflection:
- Adherence to any treatment depends on the
agreement and tacit collaboration between the parties: the doctor and the
patient (or their guardian when they are in special conditions that do not
allow a conscious choice of medical intervention, for example, memory loss
situations , induced or trauma unconsciousness, in boys / girls). This agreement
is freely and spontaneously agreed upon;
- Based on his clinical experience, the doctor is
free to prescribe what he considers appropriate for the patient, always
communicating the correct way to use a medicine, the possible benefits and
risks of a therapeutic intervention. On the other hand, the patient, based
on the explanations given, personal beliefs and complementary information,
also has the freedom to accept or not any form of indicated treatment;
- Medical practice should always be based, whenever
possible, on scientific data that support the diagnostic and therapeutic
behaviors used. However, in situations where scientific evidence is not
available, or is not reliable, it is up to the Doctor to use his
knowledge, previous experience, and common sense to conduct the clinical
situation in the way that seems most appropriate. In this case, it is
important that the doctor ask the patient to sign a Term of Free and
Informed Consent (TCLI). For this conduct, the Doctor relies on the
Declaration of Helsinki (Article 37) which tells us: "In the treatment of an
individual patient, when it is established that there have been no
interventions or other interventions known to have been ineffective, the
physician, after seeking expert advice, with the informed consent of the
patient or an authorized representative, may use an unproven intervention
if, in the judgment of the clinician, it offers hope of saving lives,
restoring health, or alleviating suffering. This intervention should be
investigated to assess its safety and efficacy. In all cases, new
information should register and, where appropriate, be made available to
the public ”;
- Respecting the aforementioned aspects, we cannot underestimate the
fact that there is not enough evidence in the scientific literature that
indicates the use of SCDs for the prophylaxis or etiological treatment of
COVID-19 cases of any severity, when we observe, for example , the
technical report of AEMEMI doctors on the 97% efficacy of the treatment of
patients with COVID-19 in 4 days in Guayaquil / Ecuador (AEMEMI 2020). It
is worth mentioning that so far the only research group in the world that
intends to carry out an international multicenter epidemiological study is
registered with the number NCT043742 in the United States National Library
of Medicine / National Institute of Health, in Dr. Eduardo Insignares
Carrione (Fundación Génesis) and entitled "Determination of the
Efficacy of Oral Chlorine Dioxide in the Treatment of COVID-19" (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04343742) and so far it cannot begin its work because the
regulatory institutions are making this confusion in the translation of
knowledge, thinking that chlorine dioxide is toxic;
- In the specific case of ClO2, currently available
information and clinical tests point to the efficacy of this substance
against coronavirus (AEMEMI 2020).
In
summary:
In view of the above, on the basis of
the evidence presented here with evident experience on the part of Scientists
and Health Professionals, as well as already well demonstrated in scientific
articles already published, we recommend the use of chlorine dioxide solution
(CDS ), according to the standardized by Andreas Ludwig Kalcker (2017), duly
diluted and therefore, respecting the safe doses from what is already known
from toxicity studies, which according to reports from doctors from several
countries has proven to be safe for human consumption and also effective
against COVID-19 when consumed correctly in internationally standardized
protocols.
As an
example of the conscious and compassionate use of chlorine dioxide (ClO2), we
can cite the Plurinational State of Bolivia, after a prolonged process of
debate and resolution within the framework of the exercise of Human Rights and
within the framework of the Law of Participation and Social Control, the
population has sued through its assembly representatives departmental and
national law that allows the authorization of the production, distribution with
quality control and compassionate use of Chlorine Dioxide.
To date (Sep. 13, 2020), 4 departmental
laws and 1 national laws are in process; In La Paz, the government
headquarters, the Law was promulgated on September 9, 2020.
6 References
1. AEMEMI - Ecuadorian Association of Expert Physicians
in Integrative Medicine.Dioxide chlorine,
una therapia effective for him treatment SARS-COV2
(COVID-19). May, 2020
2.
Akamatsu
et al.Six-month low
level chlorine dioxide gas inhalation toxicity study with two-week recovery
period in rats.J Occup Med Toxicol. 2012; 7: 2.
3. Alvarez ME & O'Brien RT.Mechanisms of Inactivation of
Poliovirus by Chlorine Dioxide and Iodine. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology: Vol. 44, p. 1064-1071, 1982.Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC242149/pdf/aem00180-0060.pdf.
4.
World
Medical Association.Declaration
of Helsinki. 64th General Assembly, 2013.
5.
Brosz
M, Kuhne FW, Blaszkiewitz K, Isensee T.Patent
on or use of various substances including sodium chlorite for the treatment of
allergic asthma, allergic rhinitis and atopic dermatitis. US
Patent 8435568 B2 Data: 7/5/2013. Direct link for Google Patents: http://goo.gl/AEBndF.
Accessed on 20.05.2020.
6.
Chen YS
& Vaughn JM.Inactivation
of Human and Simian Rotaviruses by Chlorine Dioxide. Applied
and Environmental Microbiology, May 1990, p. 1363-1366.
7.
Daniel
et al.Comparative
subchronic toxicity studies of three disinfectants. J. Am.
Water Works Assn. 1990; 82: 61–69.
8.
Estrela
C et al.Mechanism of
action of sodium hypochlorite. Brazilian dental
journal, 13 (2), 113-117, 2002.
9.
Food
and Drug Administration.FDA
release - Coronavirus (COVID-19) update: FDA warns company that markets
dangerous chlorine dioxide products that claim to treat or prevent COVID-19.
Available in: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/actualizacion-del-coronavirus-covid-19-la-fda-advierte-empresa-que-comercializa-productos-peligrosos. Accessed on: 24.07.2020.
10.
Fridliand
AS & Kagan GZ.Experimental
Data for Substantiating Residual Concentrations of Chlorine Dioxide in Drinking
Water. Gig Sanit: Nov; 36 (11): 18-21, 1971.
11.
Fukuzaki
S.Mechanisms of actions
of sodium hypochlorite in cleaning and disinfection processes. Biocontrol
Science, 11 (4), 147-157, 2006.
12.
Haag
HB.The effect on rats of
chronic administration of sodium chlorite and chlorine dioxide in the drinking
water. Report to the Mathieson Alkali Works from HB Haag of the
Medical College of Virginia, 1949.Available at:http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0496.htm>. Accessed on: 06.06.2020.
13.
Haller
JF & Northgraves WW.Chlorine
dioxide and safety. TAPPI 38: 199-202, 1955.
14.
Howard
A.Patent on a method of
compositions for treatment of cancerous tumors. Available in: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/81/c6/fb/1bd9842e82e566/US10463690.pdf. Accessed on 20.05.2020.
15.
Institute
for occupational safety and health of Gernn Social Accident Insurance (IFA).GESTIS Substance database: chlorine
dioxide solution. Available in:http://gestis.itrust.de/nxt/gateway.dll/gestis_en/000000.xml?f=templates&fn=default.htm&vid=gestiseng: sdbeng>. Accessed on: 15.07.2020
16.
Jui-Wen
Ma & Bin-Syuan Huang.Efficacy
and safety evaluation of a chlorine dioxide solution. Int J
Environ Res Public Health 2017 Marc 22; 14 (3): 329. DOI: 10.3390 /
ijerph14030329.
17.
Kalcker
AL & Valladares H.Chlorine
Dioxide for Coronavirus: a revolutionary, simple and effective approach.
DOI: 10.13140 / RG.2.2.23856.71680 License CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 Project: Toxicity
study of chlorine dioxide in solution (CDS) ingested orally. Make it available:http://mkilani.com/files/chlorine-dioxide-for-coronavirus-1.pdf.> Accessed on: 27.05.2020.
18.
Kalcker
AL.Pharmaceutical composition
for treating acute intoxication. 2018a ISBN: 9789088791567,
number: WO2018185348A1. Available in: https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2018185348A1/en?inventor=kalcker&oq=kalcker>. Accessed on 20.05.2020.
19.
Kalcker
AL.Pharmaceutical
composition for treating infectious diseases. 2018b ISBN:
9789088791567, number: WO2018185346A1. Available in: https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2018185346A1/en?inventor=kalcker&oq=kalcker>. Accessed on 20.05.2020.
20.
Kalcker
AL.Pharmaceutical
composition for treating internal inflamtions. 2018c ISBN:
9789088791567, number: WO2018185347A1. Available in: https://www.solumium.com/solumium/?lang=enhttps://patents.google.com/patent/WO2018185347A1/en?inventor=kalcker&oq=kalcker>. Accessed on 20.05.2020.
21.
Kalcker
AL.Report of Series of
experiments: applications of Chlorine Dioxide as an Active Pharmaceutical
Ingredient. Personal documents, 2018.
22.
Kalcker
AL.Results of tests with
CDS.Available on: //lbry.tv/@Kalcker:7/100-Covid-19-Recuperados-Con-Cds--Aememi-1: 1 ">https://lbry.tv/@Kalcker: 7/100-Covid-19-Recovered-With-Cds -
Aememi-1: 1. Accessed on: 27.05.2020.
23.
Kalcker
LA, 2017.Patent on
Pharmaceutical Composition for Acute Poisoning Treatment. ISBN:
9789088791567, number: WO2018185348A1. Available
in: https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2018185348A1/en?inventor=kalcker&oq=kalcker>. Accessed on 20.05.2020.
24.
Kalcker
LA, 2017.Patent on a
Pharmaceutical Composition for the Treatment of Infectious Diseases.
ISBN: 9789088791567, number: WO2018185346A1. Available in: https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2018185346A1/en?inventor=kalcker&oq=kalcker>. Accessed on 20.05.2020.
25.
Kanitz
S et al.Association
between drinking water disinfection and somatic parameters at birth.
Environ Health Perspectt 104 (5): 516-520, 1996.
26.
Krogulec
T.Patent on a stabilized
solution of chlorine dioxide for use as a universal biocide: chemical
substances intended to destroy, neutralize, prevent the action of any organism
considered harmful to man. US Patent 26 20120225135 A1 Data:
6/9/2012. Direct link for Google Patents: http://goo.gl/RAUFWe.
Accessed on 20.05.2020.
27.
Kross
RD & Scheer DI.Patent
on the use of chlorine dioxide for the disinfection or sterilization of
essentially blood components (blood cells, blood proteins, etc.). The
composition is formed by the addition of a compound that releases chlorine
dioxide as a weak organic acid. US Patent 5019402 A, Data:
28/05/1991. Direct link for Google Patents: . Accessed on 20.05.2020.
28.
Kross
RD, 1995.Patent dealing
with the use of chlorine dioxide for the control of a wide range of infectious
diseases in aquaculture, including the treatment of aquatic animals infected
with pathogens associated with infectious diseases. Aquatic animals infected
with a pathogen being treated by contact with an effective therapeutic amount
of chlorine dioxide. Patent WO 1995018534 A1 Data:
01/05/1995. Direct link for Google Patents: http://goo.gl/ RyszsQ.
29.
Kross
RD.Patent on the use of
chlorine dioxide for the prevention and treatment of bacterial infections,
including mastitis, in the udder of mammals. The compositions
include chlorine dioxide in an amount ranging from 5 ppm to 1000 ppm. US Patent
5252343 A Date: 12/10/1992. Direct link for Google Patents: http://goo.gl/emKbrx.
Accessed on 20.05.2020.
30.
Kuehne
FW.Patent that deals
with the use of isoton chlorite matrix solution for the treatment of tumors. Direct
link for Google Patents: https://patents.google.com/patent/DE3515748A1/en. Accessed on 20.05.2020.
31.
Kuehne
FW.Patent dealing with a
method of promoting cell marrow regeneration. Direct link for
Google Patents: https://patents.google.com/patent/US4851222A/en. Accessed on 20.05.2020.
32.
Kuhne
FW.Patent on the use of
chlorine dioxide for the parenteral (intravenous) treatment of HIV infections.
The aim of the present treatment is to provide an agent that inactivates the
HIV virus in the blood without having a harmful influence on the patient's
body. US Patent 6086922 A Data: 19/03/1993. Direct link for Google Patents:http://goo.gl/LJTbo8>.
Accessed on 20.05.2020.
33.
Kullai-Kály
K et al.Can chlorine
dioxide prevent the spreading of coronavirus or other viral infections? Medical
hypotheses. Physiology International, 2020, DOI: 10.1556 /
2060.2020.00015.
34.
Kurokawa
Y et al.Long-term in
vivo carcinogenicity tests of potassium bromate, sodium hypochlorite, and
sodium chlorite conducted in Japan. Environ
Health Perspect 69: 221, 1986.
35.
Laso F.Patent that deals with a method to
combat amoebiasis in humans.United States Patent No. 4.296.102,
Oct. 1981. Available at: https://andreaskalcker.com/pt-br/documentos-cientificos/. Accessed on 01.07.2020.
36.
Laso F.Patent dealing with a preparation and
method for treating burns. United States Patent No.
4.317.814, Mar. 1982. Available at: https://andreaskalcker.com/pt-br/documentos-cientificos/Accessed on 01.07.2020.
37.
Li JW et al.Mechanisms
of inactivation of hepatitis A virus in water by chlorine dioxide.Water Res; Mar 38 (6): 1514-9, 2004.Available at:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15016528>. Accessed on 20.04.2020.
38.
Lubbers
JR & Bianchine JR.Effects
of the acute rising dose administration of chlorine dioxide, chlorate and
chlorite to normal healthy adult male volunteers. J
Environ Pathol Toxicol 5 (4-5): 215-228, 1984c.
39.
Lubbers
JR et al.Controlled
clinical evaluations of chlorine dioxide, chlorite and chlorate in man. Environmental
Health Perspectives. Vol. 46, pp. 57-62, 1982.
40.
Lubbers
JR et al.The effects of
chronic administration of chlorine dioxide, chlorite and chlorate to normal
healthy adult male volunteers. J Environ Pathol Toxicol
Oncol 54 (5): 229-238, 1984a.
41.
Lubbers
JR et al.The effects of
chronic administration of chlorite to glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase
deficient healthy adult male volunteers. J
Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol 5-4 (5): 239-242, 1984b.
42.
McGrath
MS.Patent dealing with
del use del s chloriteogave for el treatment of
dolenceneurodegenerative s such as sclerosis amyotrophic lateral
(ALS), disease Alzheimer's (AD) or sclerosismultiple (IN).
US Patent 8029826 B2 Data: 04/10/2011. Patent supported by the US government,
where the government itself can have rights over it. Direct link for the Google
Patent: http://goo.gl/HCPxC7 27.
43.
Medina-Ramon
M et al.Asthma, chronic
bronchitis, and exposure to irritant agents in occupational domestic cleaning:
a nested case-control study. Occupational and
environmental medicine, 62 (9), 598-606, 2005.
44.
Michael
GE et al.Chlorine
dioxide water disinfection: a prospective epidemiology study.
Arch Environ Health 36: 20-27, 1981.
45.
Mohammadi
Z.Sodium hypochlorite in
endodontics: an update review. International Dental
Journal, 58 (6), 329-341, 2008.
46.
Noszticzius Z et al.Chlorine
Dioxide Is a Size-Selective Antimicrobial Agent. PLoSONE 8
(11): e79157. doi: 10.1371 / journal.pone.0079157. 2013.Available at:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3818415/pdf/pone.0079157.pdf>.
Accessed on 21.04.2020.
47.
Noszticzius
Z et al.Demonstrating
that chlorine dioxide is a size-selective antimicrobial agent and high purity
ClO2 can be used as a local antiseptic. This
work was supported by OTKA Grant 77908.
48.
Ogata N
& Shibata T.Protective
effect of low-concentration chlorine dioxide gas against influenza A virus
infection. Journal of General Virology: 89, 60–67,
2008.
49.
Ogata N.
& Taketa-shi O.Chlorine
dioxide gas for use in treating respiratory virus infection.
Patent EP1955719B1. This procedure patented by Taiko Pharmaceutical is used to
eliminate coronaviruses and other viruses, this process also serves to cure
coronavirus infections in people, in addition to eliminating viruses from
hospital environments or rooms flooded with chlorine dioxide, all this also
applicable non-toxic. Direct link for the patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/EP1955719B1/en.
50.
Ogata
N.Denaturation of
protein by chlorine dioxide: oxidative modification of tryptophan and tyrosine
residues. Biochemistry 46, 4898-4911, 2007.
51.
World
Health Organization.Laboratory
Biosafety Manual. 3rd edition, 2005.
52.
World
Health Organization. WHO
Strategy on Traditional Medicine 2014-2023, 2013.Available at:https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/95008>. Accessed on 27.07.2020.
53.
Peck B
et al.Spectrum of sodium
hypochlorite toxicity in man - also a concern for nephrologists.
NDT plus, 4 (4), 231-235, 2011.
54.
Racioppi
F et al.Household
bleaches based on sodium hypochlorite: review of acute toxicology and poison
control center experience. Food and chemical toxicology,
32 (9), 845-861, 1994.
55.
Ratcliff
PA.Patent on a method of
treating the epithelium of body orifices with chlorine dioxide and a phosphate
compound. Available in:https://mega.nz/fm>. Accessed on 01.07.2020.
56.
Sanekata
T et al.Evaluation of
the antiviral activity of chlorine dioxide and sodium hypochlorite against
feline calicivirus, human influenza virus, measlesvirus, canine distemper
virus, human herpesvirus, human adenovirus, canine adenovirus and canine parvovirus.
Biocontrol Sci 15/2: 45-49, 2010. DOI: 10.4265 / bio.15.45.
57.
Tuthill
RW et al.Health effects
among newborns after prenatal exposure to ClO2-disinfected drinking
water. Environ Health Perspect 46: 39-45, 1982.
58.
United
Department of Health and Human services. Public Health Service. Agency for
toxic substances and disease registry.Toxicological
Profile for chlorine dioxide and chlorite 2004.
59.
United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Guidance Manual Alternative
disinfectants and Oxidants.Chlorine
dioxide.EPA Registration. 1999.
60.
Wang XW et al.Study
on the resistance of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus.J
Virol Methods: 126 (1-2): 171-7, 2005.
61.
World
Health Organization.Guidelines
for Drinking-water quality. Second edition, Addendum -
microbiological agents in drinking water, 2002.Available at:https://books.google.com.br/books?hl=pt-BR&lr=&id=tDLdvJQAgmAC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=Guidelines+for+Drinking-water+Quality,+World+Health+Organization,+pg+140&ots=f_Q436_I3F&sig=HescVi5DXcwfNJTZMECPTVaUoWA#v=onepage&q&f=false>
Accedido en: 28/05/2020.
62.
Zoni R et al. Investigation
on virucidal activity of chlorine dioxide: experimental data on feline
calicivirus, HAV and Coxsackie B5.J
Prev Med Hyg.: 48(3):91-5, 2007.
Special thanks:
Andreas Ludwig Kalcker and Helena Valladares from the
Liechtenstein Association for Science and Health, Geneva / Switzerland for
sharing the scientific technical data necessary to compose this dossier.
Physicians and researchers who contribute to the
writing of this document.
7. Annexes: Experience report, the case
of Bolivia
Background
The Epidemiological Surveillance
activated in the country for COVID-19, determines the intervention of the
health system in suspected and confirmed cases; The attitude of the population
is generally to go to a health facility at a late stage with little chance of
recovery, considering that we have a cycle of disease and transmissibility of
around 14 days, it does it more or less 4 days after the appearance of
symptoms; In addition to this responsibility, the lack of installed means of
diagnosis and treatment for the initial phases of the disease, the lack of
laboratory tests, added to the difficulties of geographical access have
determined the few or null probabilities of primary, secondary and secondary
preventive care. consistent treatment, with early detection and adequate
containment.
This
epidemiological antecedent has allowed a group of independent health
professionals to become aware of and effectively contribute to attenuate the
transmissibility of SARS-CoV2, adapting to the capacities of the context, and
rescuing the experiences of medical professionals with the use of Chlorine
Dioxide that go back more than 10 years throughout the country facing acute and
chronic pathologies; These professionals are provided with the CDS solution and
after informing about the properties and benefits, they have the informed
consent of the affected persons so that they voluntarily agree to the
administration of this alternative not contemplated in the baggage of medicines
suggested by the Ministry of Health, whose same governing body refers, “....
The
therapeutic indication must consider, at all times, the risk / benefit of the
prescription of the aforementioned drugs. The possible pharmacological
strategies proposed to date are based on studies with low level of evidence, where trust in him expected effect is limited, so the true effect may be far from expected, which
generates a weak
recommendation grade (expert recommendations). " (Page 52, MINISTRY OF HEALTH, PLURINATIONAL STATE
OF BOLIVIA, GUIDE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF COVID-19, MAY 2020). With this
certainty, the administration of Chlorine Dioxide in suspected and confirmed
COVID-19 patients begins legally.
Two scenarios are contemplated for
detection and containment in the Plurinational State of Bolivia: house-to-house
raking to listen, inform and sensitize people about the importance of blocking
the transmissibility of the disease in
the family and in the community, where
there are no conditions for confirming care and diagnosis, and even less basic
conditions to follow recommended actions of hand washing and use of a chinstrap
/ mask (real precariousness in remote places of the country), although the
attitude of the population in complying with these coexistence regulations is
evident.
The
other scenario where it was possible to have the possibilities of documenting
the treatment with Chlorine Dioxide had the support of services (Laboratory and
TAC) for diagnosis and treatment. In both scenarios, the information and
voluntary decision to sign the Informed Consent have been complied with. (ANNEX No. 37: INFORMED CONSENT FOR THE
DRUG TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH COVID-19 (CORONAVIRUS), MINISTRY
OF HEALTH, PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA, GUIDE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF
COVID-19, MAY 2020).
Key
results
Given
the premise of acting with the raking strategy, we have the number of cured
cases and the testimonies NOT considered probably as SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE,
but yes like LIVING
EVIDENCE, those affected, are cured and it contributes to the blocking
of transmissibility at least at the family level and consequently for the
community.
There are 30 cases that have been
documented at the moment, in the hospitalization modality and around 35 in
outpatient care, these cases are being documented, collected and systematized
by the Bioethical requirements and Scientific Studies respecting the structures
and procedures for the respective guarantee. As a country, we bet that these
processes and procedures of an eminently administrative nature will adjust to
the innovative requirements and demands for timely responses to the ruthless
Pandemic.
Of the 30 documented patients who were
hospitalized, with an average age of 51 years (31-68); 22 men and 8 women; 100%
have the PCR-RT and / or Elisa Laboratory exam,
Clinical Laboratory, blood gas and
others; Imaging studies, 22 patients have a Lung Tomography compatible with
COVID-19, "ground glass pattern in both hemithorax"; Chlorine Dioxide
has been administered orally and intravenously, according to established
protocols. The mean hospital stay was a mean of 8 days (Range 1 - 31).
The origin of patients (3 men and 3
women), has foreseen the adequacy of the protocol in the dosage for intravenous
administration (from 10 cc to 40 cc / 1l of Ringer Lactate to be administered
in 12 hrs. These patients came from a center miner (Height 4.266 meters above
sea level), population with a diverse degree of Pneumoconiosis due to the same
with a decreased oxygen saturation among other aspects; There is a documented
case directed to clinical discussion due to the importance of a slow recovery
after being treated in The Intensive Care Unit, this together with a control
case that they decided to take with conventional treatment, will be attached to
the publication of the conclusions to share the experience.
Conclusions
The responsibility and powers assumed by
each of the actors in the country have led to acting in the most effective way
in the face of the pandemic, health personnel within the framework of Ethics
and Medical Deontology, assume the responsibility of joining the care of the
needs and demands of the population, in this particular case the population has
demanded the use of Chlorine Dioxide as a preventive and curative
treatment.
Faced with a lack of control of the pandemic,
the representatives of the population (Neighborhood Councils, Civics,
grassroots organizations, associations, Central Obrera Boliviana,
Federation of Miners of Bolivia,
Departmental and National Assemblies) the latter have directed to elaborate,
treat and enact the Law of Production, Use and Distribution of Chlorine
Dioxide.
Finally, we appeal to scientific
societies, bioethics, academic training institutions to join this advance in
the exercise of human rights before the decision of the population to choose
autonomously and in justice, solutions to face the pandemic.
