Clearwater Blue - Hot Tub Water Chemistry - Pool and Spa Forum

Jump to content


(July 17, 2014) POOLSPAFORUM.COM SITE UPGRADE!


Photo

Clearwater Blue


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 AAS

AAS

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 23 October 2005 - 04:47 PM

Has anyone heard of or used the cleanwater blue system?

#2 Roger

Roger

    Spa Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,096 posts

Posted 24 October 2005 - 02:00 AM

QUOTE(AAS @ Oct 23 2005, 07:47 PM) View Post

Has anyone heard of or used the cleanwater blue system?



Be carefull. In order to have clean sanitized water chlorine is a must. If your tub recieves light use these type of systems will help to maintain clean water. But as a stand alone system I would not want to take the chance.
Independent repair technician.
Part Time

#3 igneous

igneous

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts

Posted 24 October 2005 - 06:18 PM

It is just another snake oil product that chemical companies use to prey on the ignorant. Don't be deceived.
Read my post in the water chemistry forum.

#4 Andy

Andy

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 28 October 2005 - 08:40 PM

Please post or link to your scientific findings of fact on this or any other spa maintenance chemical you are calling "snake oil" to better inform us whom are so ignorant. Thank you.

#5 Roger

Roger

    Spa Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,096 posts

Posted 29 October 2005 - 02:11 AM

QUOTE(Andy @ Oct 28 2005, 11:40 PM) View Post

Please post or link to your scientific findings of fact on this or any other spa maintenance chemical you are calling "snake oil" to better inform us whom are so ignorant. Thank you.



That's the problem we can't find any scientific background. You go to the web site and you get the advertising and the product manufacturers claim, but my guess is they want to sell the product so of course to them it's great stuff. But there is no scienitific "Independent" 3rd party study saying the stuff is anything more than.........................snake oil.

Unless you can show me something other than whats on there product or web site? I mighta missed something.
Independent repair technician.
Part Time

#6 ski5844

ski5844

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 29 October 2005 - 05:43 AM

If you go to the link below it will give you a comparison of different sanitizers. It will give you the pro's and con's of each prodect. Just for you info.
http://www.spadepot....-comparison.htm


#7 Andy

Andy

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 29 October 2005 - 06:23 AM

Thank you for your research on the topic ski5844. It often seems that people who are uninformed about actual properties/benefits of these new water maintenance systems are too quick to jump to conclusions. Pacific Sands, the company who developed this product appears to be the leader in creating these new products and continuing research.


http://biz.yahoo.com...05702.html?.v=1

#8 tony

tony

    Spa Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts

Posted 29 October 2005 - 10:35 AM

QUOTE(Andy @ Oct 29 2005, 10:23 AM) View Post

Thank you for your research on the topic ski5844. It often seems that people who are uninformed about actual properties/benefits of these new water maintenance systems are too quick to jump to conclusions. Pacific Sands, the company who developed this product appears to be the leader in creating these new products and continuing research.
http://biz.yahoo.com...05702.html?.v=1


Still. None of these are sanitizers and don't claim to be. Or should I say can't claim to be. As bacteriacides they certainly help to keep spa water clean, but bacteria isn't the only bug lurking there. Copper, silver, enzymes all can reduce the amount of sanitizer needed, but not eliminate it...not if you want truely sanitized water.

#9 Roger

Roger

    Spa Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,096 posts

Posted 30 October 2005 - 03:25 AM

QUOTE(ski5844 @ Oct 29 2005, 08:43 AM) View Post

If you go to the link below it will give you a comparison of different sanitizers. It will give you the pro's and con's of each prodect. Just for you info.
http://www.spadepot....-comparison.htm



Again I musta missed something, I see a vendor that makes his best margins on a particular product listing it as the best. There is no 3rd party independent study showing the sanitizing ability of any of these socalled alternative products. N2 does reduce the amount of sanitizer required, E1 does reduce the amount of sanitizer required, and all the other products out there DO reduce the amount of sanitizer required, i'm not arguing that. But to use them as primary sanitizers is a mistake and you are kidding yourself. Secondary to a chlorine sanitizer will be how I always use any of these extra products, but the cot hardly seems worth it unless I am not using my tub, then they can clean my water while I am not using the tub. But when I use it every other day I want the chlorine to kill the stuff I leave in the water when I am done. Not the week after.
Independent repair technician.
Part Time

#10 ski5844

ski5844

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 30 October 2005 - 05:20 AM

The only reason I posted the link is so everyone can see what the different products are and how they work. I assumed that everyone would see that it is not a 3rd party comparison but just a list. Everyone will choice their own way of dealing with it. At least they can read how these product are suppose to work. I had a pool and when I first got it the dealer started me on Bacqucile (spelling?), it was suppose to be the greatest this since sliced cheese. Needless to say I had nothing but problems with it and changed over to chlorine. I used chlorine for 15 years until I got rid of the pool. Other people I know have had no problem with Bacqucile. So just use what works for you.

#11 tony

tony

    Spa Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts

Posted 30 October 2005 - 07:01 AM

QUOTE(ski5844 @ Oct 30 2005, 08:20 AM) View Post

The only reason I posted the link is so everyone can see what the different products are and how they work. I assumed that everyone would see that it is not a 3rd party comparison but just a list. Everyone will choice their own way of dealing with it. At least they can read how these product are suppose to work. I had a pool and when I first got it the dealer started me on Bacqucile (spelling?), it was suppose to be the greatest this since sliced cheese. Needless to say I had nothing but problems with it and changed over to chlorine. I used chlorine for 15 years until I got rid of the pool. Other people I know have had no problem with Bacqucile. So just use what works for you.


I will guarantee you that the markup on Cleanwater Blue, Clearwater Blue, Eco One, N2, Frog, etc, etc are much higher than dichlor or bromine.

#12 Dr. Spa

Dr. Spa

    Advanced Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,139 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 October 2005 - 04:51 PM

QUOTE(tony @ Oct 30 2005, 07:01 AM) View Post


I will guarantee you that the markup on Cleanwater Blue, Clearwater Blue, Eco One, N2, Frog, etc, etc are much higher than dichlor or bromine.


I'll call you on that guarantee. Every company I know, including me, has pretty much the exact same % mark up on all chemicals. No wait, we mark up Nature2 less than most of the other chemicals wink.gif


What the heck do I know, I only started in this industry in 1981, and retired from it after 33 years.
(from service tech to co-owner of Roberts Hot Tubs, manufacturer of traditional wooden hot tubs & spa covers)

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

If you can't sell it on ebay, it may not even qualify as landfill.

#13 tony

tony

    Spa Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts

Posted 31 October 2005 - 12:52 PM

QUOTE(Dr. Spa @ Oct 30 2005, 07:51 PM) View Post

I'll call you on that guarantee. Every company I know, including me, has pretty much the exact same % mark up on all chemicals. No wait, we mark up Nature2 less than most of the other chemicals wink.gif


I surrender! wacko.gif

#14 Scubasteve

Scubasteve

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 12 November 2005 - 11:58 AM

QUOTE(Roger @ Oct 29 2005, 04:11 AM) View Post

That's the problem we can't find any scientific background. You go to the web site and you get the advertising and the product manufacturers claim, but my guess is they want to sell the product so of course to them it's great stuff. But there is no scienitific "Independent" 3rd party study saying the stuff is anything more than.........................snake oil.

Unless you can show me something other than whats on there product or web site? I mighta missed something.


A constant residual of chlorine is not required with Rainforest Blue, only an occasional shock of chlorine and/or non chlorine shock is needed to keep organic waste from binding the copper

Chlorine has a similar trait when ammonia compounds, nitrogen related contaminants, etc bond with chlorine. This reaction leaves you with "combined chlorine", which is also coined chloramines. Combined chlorine is less effective then "free chlorine". Too much combined chlorine will leave you with eye/skin irritations and a strong smell. Even chlorine tubs can harbor bacteria growth when there is too much "combined" chlorine and not enough "'free" chlorine. The bacteria forms a biomass, which gives it immunity to the less effective combined chlorine. Users often think there is too much chlorine in the water, because of the smell and irritations, when in fact there is not enough.

To free the chlorine, you have to increase the amount in the water over the resistance threashhold. The dose should be roughly 10 times higher than the combined chlorine level on your test kit. This would be termed a "shock treatment".

MPS (Potassium Peroxymonosulfate) can be used to free combined chlorine as well. This is usually the recommended and preferred option to free combined chlorine and often the required methed for releasing combined bromine (bromamines).

Back to the Rainforest Blue......Since the copper does not gas out of the spa and it is not an ideal ozidizer at usage levels, shocking with Rainforest Blue isn't a good idea. You will still need to use chlorine and/or MPS as the "occasional" shock treatment to oxidize the organic waist. However, this does not mean a constant residual of chlorine is needed to do an effective job. This is why these alternative forms of treatment are growing rapidly. Too much negative press about chlorine/bromine and an increaseing demand on alternatives.

Here's a study that can be found on Google.



Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O EPA Registered Non-Chlorine, Non-Bromine Pool and Spa Bacteriacide and Algaecide.

Registration #70845 -1- 75033 Establishment #70745-FL-001

Report: University of Maryland Biotechnology
Test results show that Rainforest Blue/ ENVIRON 4H2O will kill bacteria and algae. Studies performed at the University of Maryland show the effects of Rainforest Blue/ ENVIRON 4H2O on the cholera bacteria strains Vibrio cholerae 01 and 0139 in aqueous systems.

The University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute, Center of Marine Biotechnology

"Effects of Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O, a Copper Sulfate Pentahydrate Solution, on the Ultra structure and Survival of Vibrio cholerae01 and 0139, 1994."

"Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O is a copper sulfate pentahydrate which is bound to a non-toxic carrier to keep the copper in solution. The effects of Rainforest Blue/ ENVIRON 4H2O on culturability of Vibrio cholerae 01 and 0139 were determined. The electron micrographs of the Vibrio cells before and after exposure demonstrated that Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O flocculated the bacterial cells. By conducting scanning electron microscopy, defect in the bacterial cell wall was observed."

"Copper is required for growth of bacteria at low concentrations but will cause a number of toxic cellular effects when intracellular levels reach certain limits (Cooksey, 1993). Copper is a component of certain proteins, notably those involved with respiration (Lontie, 1984). Copper becomes toxic within the cell due to its ability to catalyze adverse chemical side effects such as generation of free radicals (Simpson et. al., 1988).

These active compounds can damage intracellular proteins, lipids, and DNA. In addition, copper can directly bind to proteins, linking to sulhydryl groups on the protein molecules, and inhibit normal enzymatic metabolic functions. While copper is an essential element, it also can cause significant stress for the organism, causing injury and/or bactericidal activity (MacLeod, et. al., 1967; Domek, et. al., 1984)."

"Cupric sulfate is a widely used inorganic salt, long known to be an effective bactericide and algaecide and has been used as a feed additive and therapeutic agent for agricultural applications (Foye, 1977). Under normal environmental conditions, copper ions are bound and immobilized by many different organic and inorganic compounds making copper unavailable to inhibit microbial growth (Tubbing, et. al., 1994)."

"Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O is a suspension of copper sulfate complied to a carrier molecule that itself has several distinctive properties which aid in the bacteriacidal process. The proprietary carrier molecule is a more effective delivery system for copper sulfate and enhances its ability to control bacterial and algal growth by enhancing its stability in aqueous systems."

“Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O is a product designed to control pathogenic microorganisms in water."

"If the water to be treated is drinking water or natural water that is low in organic matter, pH neutral with a low buffer capacity, the amount of Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O employed can be minimal with a longer exposure time. If the water to be treated is polluted water, the amount used and exposure time should be large and long enough to destroy pathogenic organisms. This will depend on the degree of how polluted the water, probability of contamination with pathogenic bacteria, purpose for which the water will be used after treatment."

"For drinking water or natural water, 1.0 PPM of Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O and one hour exposure is sufficient to kill Vibrio cholerae 01 and 0139."

"For polluted water where high concentration of contamination is present and large numbers of bacteria are present, the recommended dose of ENVIRON 4H2O for Vibrio cholerae 01 and 0139 is 25-30 PPM for two hours or 1.0 PPM for more than 24 hours."

END OF REPORT
ENVIRON 4H2O is sold under the name "Rainforest Blue"

REFERENCES:
Cooksey, D. A. (1993). Copper uptake and resistance in bacteria. Mol. Microbiol. 7(1): 1-5

Domek, M.J., LeChavallier, M. W., Cameron, S.C., and McFeters, G. A. (1984). Evidence for the role of copper in the injury process of coliform bacteria in drinking water. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 48: 289-293.

Foye, W.O. (1977). Anti-microbial activities of mineral elements. In: Microorganisms and Minerals (Weinberg, E.D., Ed.) pp. 387-419. Marcel Dekker. New York, NY.

Lontie, R. (1984). Copper Proteins and Copper Enzymes. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

MacLeod, R.A., Kuo, S.C., and Gelinas, R. (1967) Metabolic injury to bacteria. Metabolic injury induced by distilled water or Cu2+ in the plating diluent. J. Bacteriol 93: 961-969.

Simpson, J.A., Cheeseman, K.H., Smith, S.E. and Dean, R.T. (1988). Free radical generation by copper ions and hydrogen peroxide. Biochem. J. 254: 519-523.

Tubbing. D.M.J., Admiroal, W., and Cleven, Rob F.M.J. (1994). The contribution of complexed copper to the metabolic inhibition of algae and bacteria in synthetic media and river water. Water Research. 28(1): 37-44

#15 AAS

AAS

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts

Posted 13 November 2005 - 11:39 AM

So you suggest using clearwater blue or rainforest blue and just adding chlorine too?

#16 Roger

Roger

    Spa Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,096 posts

Posted 15 November 2005 - 01:20 AM

QUOTE(AAS @ Nov 13 2005, 01:39 PM) View Post

So you suggest using clearwater blue or rainforest blue and just adding chlorine too?



Wait a minute isn't that what I said? Or wait I said use chlorine and go ahead and add any of these other products to reduce the amount of chlorine. I guess I would rather be safe than sorry.
Independent repair technician.
Part Time

#17 VTabone

VTabone

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 10 December 2005 - 06:57 AM

I used this when Spa Depot called it Rainwater Blue...While it wasn't completely useless, in the end I decided it was easier and more effective to simply use chlorine all the time. No blue, no MPS, just chlorine - inexpensive, highly effective, and very easy. Ozonators are nice, though.

#18 mjs

mjs

    Spa Savant

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 50 posts

Posted 10 December 2005 - 03:01 PM

I'm primarily a use of spas and spa chemicals, but I work as an engineer & chemist and often conduct independent evaluations of new products with great claims.

To me its a simple fact that there's always someone claiming to have a better mouse-trap, but they generally just don't work!

Will you ever find documented proof that these don't work (which Andy alluded to above) - NO; because to do so just gets you in court. I have written reports and evaluations of products, but the reports either (a) stay between me and my customer, or (cool.gif are copied to the manufacturer out of curtesy, or in some cases prior agreement. These reports are NEVER PUBLISHED, hence you should never find them on the open literature/internet.




#19 tony

tony

    Spa Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts

Posted 11 December 2005 - 06:30 AM

QUOTE(Scubasteve @ Nov 12 2005, 02:58 PM) View Post

A constant residual of chlorine is not required with Rainforest Blue, only an occasional shock of chlorine and/or non chlorine shock is needed to keep organic waste from binding the copper

Chlorine has a similar trait when ammonia compounds, nitrogen related contaminants, etc bond with chlorine. This reaction leaves you with "combined chlorine", which is also coined chloramines. Combined chlorine is less effective then "free chlorine". Too much combined chlorine will leave you with eye/skin irritations and a strong smell. Even chlorine tubs can harbor bacteria growth when there is too much "combined" chlorine and not enough "'free" chlorine. The bacteria forms a biomass, which gives it immunity to the less effective combined chlorine. Users often think there is too much chlorine in the water, because of the smell and irritations, when in fact there is not enough.

To free the chlorine, you have to increase the amount in the water over the resistance threashhold. The dose should be roughly 10 times higher than the combined chlorine level on your test kit. This would be termed a "shock treatment".

MPS (Potassium Peroxymonosulfate) can be used to free combined chlorine as well. This is usually the recommended and preferred option to free combined chlorine and often the required methed for releasing combined bromine (bromamines).

Back to the Rainforest Blue......Since the copper does not gas out of the spa and it is not an ideal ozidizer at usage levels, shocking with Rainforest Blue isn't a good idea. You will still need to use chlorine and/or MPS as the "occasional" shock treatment to oxidize the organic waist. However, this does not mean a constant residual of chlorine is needed to do an effective job. This is why these alternative forms of treatment are growing rapidly. Too much negative press about chlorine/bromine and an increaseing demand on alternatives.

Here's a study that can be found on Google.
Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O EPA Registered Non-Chlorine, Non-Bromine Pool and Spa Bacteriacide and Algaecide.

Registration #70845 -1- 75033 Establishment #70745-FL-001

Report: University of Maryland Biotechnology
Test results show that Rainforest Blue/ ENVIRON 4H2O will kill bacteria and algae. Studies performed at the University of Maryland show the effects of Rainforest Blue/ ENVIRON 4H2O on the cholera bacteria strains Vibrio cholerae 01 and 0139 in aqueous systems.

The University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute, Center of Marine Biotechnology

"Effects of Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O, a Copper Sulfate Pentahydrate Solution, on the Ultra structure and Survival of Vibrio cholerae01 and 0139, 1994."

"Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O is a copper sulfate pentahydrate which is bound to a non-toxic carrier to keep the copper in solution. The effects of Rainforest Blue/ ENVIRON 4H2O on culturability of Vibrio cholerae 01 and 0139 were determined. The electron micrographs of the Vibrio cells before and after exposure demonstrated that Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O flocculated the bacterial cells. By conducting scanning electron microscopy, defect in the bacterial cell wall was observed."

"Copper is required for growth of bacteria at low concentrations but will cause a number of toxic cellular effects when intracellular levels reach certain limits (Cooksey, 1993). Copper is a component of certain proteins, notably those involved with respiration (Lontie, 1984). Copper becomes toxic within the cell due to its ability to catalyze adverse chemical side effects such as generation of free radicals (Simpson et. al., 1988).

These active compounds can damage intracellular proteins, lipids, and DNA. In addition, copper can directly bind to proteins, linking to sulhydryl groups on the protein molecules, and inhibit normal enzymatic metabolic functions. While copper is an essential element, it also can cause significant stress for the organism, causing injury and/or bactericidal activity (MacLeod, et. al., 1967; Domek, et. al., 1984)."

"Cupric sulfate is a widely used inorganic salt, long known to be an effective bactericide and algaecide and has been used as a feed additive and therapeutic agent for agricultural applications (Foye, 1977). Under normal environmental conditions, copper ions are bound and immobilized by many different organic and inorganic compounds making copper unavailable to inhibit microbial growth (Tubbing, et. al., 1994)."

"Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O is a suspension of copper sulfate complied to a carrier molecule that itself has several distinctive properties which aid in the bacteriacidal process. The proprietary carrier molecule is a more effective delivery system for copper sulfate and enhances its ability to control bacterial and algal growth by enhancing its stability in aqueous systems."

“Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O is a product designed to control pathogenic microorganisms in water."

"If the water to be treated is drinking water or natural water that is low in organic matter, pH neutral with a low buffer capacity, the amount of Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O employed can be minimal with a longer exposure time. If the water to be treated is polluted water, the amount used and exposure time should be large and long enough to destroy pathogenic organisms. This will depend on the degree of how polluted the water, probability of contamination with pathogenic bacteria, purpose for which the water will be used after treatment."

"For drinking water or natural water, 1.0 PPM of Rainforest Blue/ENVIRON 4H2O and one hour exposure is sufficient to kill Vibrio cholerae 01 and 0139."

"For polluted water where high concentration of contamination is present and large numbers of bacteria are present, the recommended dose of ENVIRON 4H2O for Vibrio cholerae 01 and 0139 is 25-30 PPM for two hours or 1.0 PPM for more than 24 hours."

END OF REPORT
ENVIRON 4H2O is sold under the name "Rainforest Blue"

REFERENCES:
Cooksey, D. A. (1993). Copper uptake and resistance in bacteria. Mol. Microbiol. 7(1): 1-5

Domek, M.J., LeChavallier, M. W., Cameron, S.C., and McFeters, G. A. (1984). Evidence for the role of copper in the injury process of coliform bacteria in drinking water. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 48: 289-293.

Foye, W.O. (1977). Anti-microbial activities of mineral elements. In: Microorganisms and Minerals (Weinberg, E.D., Ed.) pp. 387-419. Marcel Dekker. New York, NY.

Lontie, R. (1984). Copper Proteins and Copper Enzymes. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

MacLeod, R.A., Kuo, S.C., and Gelinas, R. (1967) Metabolic injury to bacteria. Metabolic injury induced by distilled water or Cu2+ in the plating diluent. J. Bacteriol 93: 961-969.

Simpson, J.A., Cheeseman, K.H., Smith, S.E. and Dean, R.T. (1988). Free radical generation by copper ions and hydrogen peroxide. Biochem. J. 254: 519-523.

Tubbing. D.M.J., Admiroal, W., and Cleven, Rob F.M.J. (1994). The contribution of complexed copper to the metabolic inhibition of algae and bacteria in synthetic media and river water. Water Research. 28(1): 37-44


Just as I said. These are bacteriacides and algecides, not sanitizers. Although most of what we battle in water is bacteria, there are other non bacterial bugs that can be present. A lot of money spent to avoid a chemical (chlorine) that you don't have to soak in at all if used a certain way and will keep your water safer.


#20 chem geek

chem geek

    Wizard of Water

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,801 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 December 2010 - 08:03 PM

Just in case someone is searching on this forum and sees this thread, they should be made aware of what is not stated in the above references to sources. Many quotes or references about copper and silver used for sanitation are for 1) solid containers or nanoparticles or concentrations that far exceed the 1.3 mg/L (ppm) limit for copper ions or 40 µg/L (ppb) limit for silver ions as set by the EPA for drinking water and also limited in pools/spas or 2) do not emphasize the very long kill times that would not prevent person-to-person transmission of disease or 3) do not describe how at the low levels allowed in pools/spas copper ions are completely ineffective against fecal and blood-borne bacteria and are mostly ineffective against many viruses and protozoan oocysts.

The real data from a variety of peer-reviewed scientific sources in respected journals has been tabulated in this post. Copper ions, such as found in copper sulfate products such as Cleanwater Blue, Pristine Blue, Rain Forest Blue, etc., are completely ineffective against fecal bacteria including Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis and Staphylococcus aureus because such bacteria live in the gut (in lower controlled amounts relative to "good" bacteria such as Bifidobacterium bifidum and Lactobacillus sp.) where they must tolerate higher copper ion levels as typically found in blood serum at 0.7 to 1.5 mg/L (ppm).

The University of Maryland Biotechnology report appears to be made up or at least misinterpreted if it exists at all.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

website security