2

I have had multiple people recommend to me that I should use colloidal silver to treat not only treat active infections, but as a preventative measure against future disease. One person even claimed that it could be used to cure AIDS, Ebola (this was during the Ebola outbreak), and many other things.

The thinking goes (as far as I understand it), nano-particles of silver can be used as a disinfectant, and many hospitals use this as a coating on certain surfaces to keep them clean without the use of caustic cleaning chemicals, so if you ingest the nano-particles of silver instead, they would kill the bacteria and viruses in your body, curing you of whatever infections you may have.

Personally, I haven't been able to find evidence for any of these claims, but I was hoping for a more definitive source on the matter. I was actually kind of surprised this hasn't been asked here yet since I hear so many people promoting this product.

Kevin
  • 131
  • 6
  • These two answers to other questions touch on colloidal silver: http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/7236/19086, http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/22178/19086 – Dan Getz Feb 11 '16 at 01:14
  • 1
    I saw those, and they do touch on the subject, but I felt that they don't adequately cover the topic since the first one is about whether or not there are surface disinfectants that aren't useful in vivo (which silver may or may not be), and the other is about tetrasilver teroxide, which as far as I understand is not the same as colloidal silver – Kevin Feb 11 '16 at 01:32
  • *they would kill the bacteria and viruses in your body*. Good luck killing your gut microbes. –  Feb 11 '16 at 08:24
  • There are many different claims here, and each should be examined separately. Specify *what* is colloidal silver claimed to treat? – Sklivvz Feb 11 '16 at 15:17
  • 1
    @Sklivvz My question is whether or not it has been shown to be effective at treating anything. The idea was that we could put together a single answer that covers what it does and does not do. I can reword this question to be about it treating a specific ailment, but then I would have to ask a separate question about each claimed benefit, which seemed like the wrong way to go. – Kevin Feb 11 '16 at 16:15
  • @Sklivvz Also, [here is a question](http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/402/is-acupuncture-an-effective-treatment?rq=1) about acupuncture which is even more broad than my question, and it seems to have been received positively. Is this a case where older questions get more leeway than new questions because of historical importance? – Kevin Feb 11 '16 at 16:18
  • @KevinWells I understand, but your question would basically ask us to prove a negative (i.e. that there is no ailment it can cure). It seems obvious that we don't know that. For this reason we request all claims to be specific enough to be answerable. It doesn't necessarily mean that you need to ask one question per ailment (although it's generally preferable) -- it means that you need to be clear about which effects are claimed. – Sklivvz Feb 11 '16 at 16:18
  • The question you linked is an old question (maybe even private beta?) -- such super-broad questions are not allowed today. – Sklivvz Feb 11 '16 at 16:20
  • 1
    @Sklivvz Fair enough, later tonight I'll take the time to find a more specific claim to make this a better question – Kevin Feb 11 '16 at 16:21
  • I agree with @Sklivvz, that this is too broad, but I didn't choose to act because I thought someone would cite the FDA from [Vartec's answer here](http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/22175/does-tetrasilver-tetroxide-cure-aids/22178#22178): "there is a lack of adequate data to establish general recognition of the safety and effectiveness of colloidal silver ingredients or silver salts for OTC use in the treatment or prevention of any disease." – Oddthinking Feb 12 '16 at 02:17

0 Answers0