The Battle to Save Colloidal Silver From Regulation By the EPA

I have some good news and some bad news regarding the petition by extremist environmentalists and other special interest groups to have silver nanoparticles (read: colloidal silver) regulated by the EPA as a "pesticide," which would ultimately result in a ban on the sale of colloidal silver products.

Back in December, several of the extremist environmental organizations sponsoring this petition -- including ICTA and Friends of the Earth -- had formally requested the EPA to extend the comments deadline, so they could buy more time to muster up additional aid and support from the membership rosters of other like-minded environmental groups.

Why Freedom of Consumer Choice Will Be a Distant Memory

Indeed, freedom of consumer choice will be all but a distant memory in regards to colloidal silver products. After all, once EPA begins regulating silver nanoparticles as a "pesticide," their next step will be to require colloidal silver manufacturers to prove that their product cannot harm “ecologically sensitive microbes” in the environment, as documented on this web page.

There are probably only a small handful of colloidal silver manufacturer on the face of the earth – if any – who can afford the millions of dollars in testing and environmental impact reports the EPA will require. So without a doubt, your favorite brand of colloidal silver will probably be gone forever if the EPA approves this petition and begins regulating silver nanoparticles as “pesticides.”

Here’s the key to understanding this whole scheme: If this petition is granted by the EPA, only the wealthiest corporate interests that are willing to kow-tow to EPA regulatory demands and spend millions of dollars on “environmental impact” reports will be able to sell products that contain silver nanoparticles.

Do you think these big corporate interests will sell colloidal silver? Not on your life. Once safe, natural and relatively inexpensive colloidal silver is taken off the market by the EPA, the big corporate interests will patent products containing engineered silver nanoparticles, and you will only be able to get therapeutic silver products by doctor’s prescription.

Exactly What The EPA Wants

This is exactly what the EPA wants, i.e., to transfer control of the sale of silver nanoparticles from the hundreds of colloidal silver vendors in existence today, to a small handful of big corporate interests.

And, of course, the EPA will become the sole arbitrator over who can sell products containing silver nanoparticles and who can't. Public access to safe, natural colloidal silver will be a thing of the past. It's that simple. That's their game-plan.

So What’s Happening Right Now?

Right now the extremist environmental and special interest groups like ICTA and Friends of the Earth are gearing up to have their like-minded environmental groups begin pouring their support behind the petition to have EPA regulate silver as an environmentally “dangerous pesticide.” They are claiming that if silver isn't immediately regulated by EPA as a "pesticide" the ecology and the environment as a whole will face irreparable and permanent damage.

That is of course a total crock. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that silver nanoparticles can’t harm the ecology when returned to the environment. Why? Because the tiny silver particles rapidly bond with other natural elements in the environment, such as minerals, mineral salts and other substances. This bonding, also known as “agglomeration,” destroys the nano-scale properties of the tiny silver particles and renders them essentially inert.

In other words, the silver simply returns to the environment it originally came from as another harmless mineral substance. The idea that it can somehow "harm the environment" or poses an “imminent threat to the environment” is ludicrous at face value. It is the worst kind of junk science imaginable. But like most junk science, it serves Big Corporate interests very well.

How to Help Us Continue Putting Pressure on the EPA to Reject the Petition

You can help us put additional pressure on the EPA to reject the petition by taking the following three simple but vital steps:

First, email EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson with your comments against the petition to have silver regulated as a “pesticide.” His email address is: johnson.stephen@epa.gov

If you have already emailed him in the recent past, please do so again. And tell all of your like-minded friends to do so, too. This is critical.

Secondly, fax your comments to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, at his Washington DC fax number: (202)-501-1450. Again, if you have already faxed him, do so again. And again. And again. We need a flood of emails and faxes going to this man, telling him politely but in no uncertain terms that he needs to reject the petition to regulate silver particles as “pesticides.”

Third, send a letter to the Washington DC office of EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson. His address is as follows:

Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P)

  • ATTN: Administrator Stephen Johnson
  • Environmental Protection Agency
  • 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
  • Washington, DC 20460-0001

Don’t Forget To Include the Following Vital Information:

All comments to the EPA – whether you make them by email, fax, snail mail or through the public comments section of their web site once it is restored -- must reference the “Petition for Rulemaking Requesting EPA Regulate Nanoscale Silver Products as Pesticides,” and must also reference Docket # EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0650.

Share/Save/Bookmark

author-picture

Steve Barwick is a respected natural health journalist with hundreds of articles to his credit.  He has been a freelance writer since 1974, focusing primarily on natural health and nutrition topics, as well as on finance and politics.

You can read more at www.thesilveredge.com.


Comments

Anonymous's picture
1

Anonymous

We’ve just heard from our good friend Ralph Fucetola, JD, also known as the Vitamin Lawyer, that EPA has put up a brand new page where you can register your comments regarding the petition to regulate silver nanoparticles (read: colloidal silver) as “pesticides.” They have also assigned a brand new docket number to the petition.

It is important to flood the EPA with comments, letting them know they need to keep their hands off colloidal silver.

The new public comments web page is located at this link:

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmsp...

The new docket number, which you must refer to in all correspondence with the EPA, is:

EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0650-0506

What to Do Now…

There are now four simple but absolutely vital steps you need to take to help win the battle to stop the EPA from regulating silver nanoparticles as “pesticides,” which would result in the removal of just about every brand of colloidal silver on the market today, and give a handful of big corporate interests the monopoly on the use of silver particles.

Step #1: Go to the brand new EPA public comments page at the link above and register your comments. Explain why you do not want the EPA to regulate silver nanoparticles as “pesticides.”

[If you need verbiage for your comments, just say something like, "Please reject the petition to regulate silver nanoparticles as "pesticides." This would ultimately result in a loss of health freedom for those who use colloidal silver. And since there is no documented real-life evidence whatsoever that silver nanoparticles have ever caused any harm to the environment, the proposed new regulations would also create another unnecessary and costly layer of bureaucracy that would be a waste of taxpayer money."]

Step #2: Email your comments opposing the petition to regulate silver nanoparticles as “pesticides” to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson. His email address is: johnson.stephen@epa.gov

Step #3: Fax your comments to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, at his Washington DC fax number: (202)-501-1450.

Step #4: Send a personal letter to the Washington DC office of EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson. His address is as follows:

Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P)
ATTN: Administrator Stephen Johnson
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20460-0001

Important Note: All comments to the EPA – whether you make them by email, fax, snail mail or through the public comments section of their web site -- must reference the “Petition for Rulemaking Requesting EPA Regulate Nanoscale Silver Products as Pesticides,” and must also reference the new Docket #: EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0650-0506

It is time to stop this new bureaucratic assault on colloidal silver dead in its tracks. The extremist environmentalist groups behind this petition are gearing up to submit a barrage of comments in favor of EPA regulation of silver particles as "pesticides." We must match their comments tit-for-tat with our own demanding that the FDA keep its hands off of colloidal silver.

Thanks!
Steve

Anonymous's picture
2

Anonymous

Although colloidal silver did not help me fight off the side effects of a step by step series of Statins, and Zetia for more than three years, which apparently continually reduced my absorption of the nutrients in the food, and the OTCs I had turned to - having the EPA regulate it via prescription, as they do the Statins would not have helped one bit.

Since going off of the above cholesterol drugs and staying on my CoQ10, I am very greatly improved more than 15 months later - although it took getting off of the Zetia to make any noticeable improvement (following previous months off of the last of the Statins, and Red Yeast Rice).

After finding nearly identical side effects in more than 100 others by discovering the "Ask a Patient" source devoted to just Zetia, Some very soon, and others after up the three years, that got me to 'wise up.'

Anonymous's picture
3

Anonymous

Your scientific basis for declaring silver nano-particles as not harmful lacks any kind of credibility. Show some sources and then maybe I'll believe it is safe.

Anonymous's picture
4

Anonymous

This man is completely biased, as he has a financial interest in silver nanoparticles not being regulated.

http://www.microparticlegenerato...

Anonymous's picture
5

Anonymous

Financial interest?

If I wholeheartedly believed in something, I'd invest in it and have a financial interest in it not being regulated also.

Does that make the product bad?

Does that make me bad?

The corporations invite regulation as it'll guarantee them a monopoly. Which corporation are you working for?

Anonymous's picture
6

Anonymous

There's much debate in the science community about nanoparticle toxicity, Anderson said. Some scientists believe that nanoparticles in nature will aggregate together or bind onto silt and/or other organic matter, greatly reducing their toxicity. "We don't know if that's true or not," she said. So other members of this Utah research group currently are investigating that aspect of the issue.

sciencedaily.com

Anonymous's picture
7

Anonymous

Here's a study:

http://www.purestcolloids.com/Si...

Careful though, like the people fighting to regulate, this man also has a financial interest.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <p> <strong> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <h2> <h3> <u> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 11 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

popitup