|
Juicers and Healing Products of Australia |
|
LB Healing Products
LB Healing Products
International: |
CHASING
THE HIGH ORP Adventures with Ionized
Water by Walter Last Ionized water has several health
promoting qualities. I have no doubt that the most important of these is the
strong antioxidant or reducing property of alkaline ionized water. This led me
to experiment with my Jupiter Masterpiece (equivalent to the Technos Ionizer in Here I want to
share some of my experiences in the hope of helping others to improve the
quality of their ionized water. I must confess that the task turned out to be
much more difficult and frustrating than expected but I am very pleased with the
final outcome. Lets start with some basics. In chemistry oxidation and
reduction are now commonly defined as gaining or losing electrons. Oxidation is
the loss of an electron from a substance, while in reduction an electron is gained. Oxidation
and reduction occur simultaneously in two substances. Oxygen is the most
familiar electron acceptor or oxidiser. Iron rusts by combining with oxygen.
Thereby the iron donates electrons and is oxidised while the oxygen gains electrons and
is reduced.
The antioxidant
activity can be measured as the Oxidation–Reduction Potential or O.R.P. For this
I used an ORP meter (Milwaukee SM 500), which indicates the presence of free or
loosely bound electrons as a negative ORP up to –1000 mV. An ORP of 0 is neutral
while an oxidizing potential can be measured up to +1000 mV. The ORP scale
officially extends from +1200 mV to – 1200 mV. However, with this method we
cannot measure purely organic antioxidants, such as vitamin E as their electrons
are much too tightly bound, although vitamin C is partly ionised and can be
measured to some degree. To confuse
things, a high negative ORP can also result from a high level of dissolved
hydrogen, and in this case it does not have any antioxidant property. Large
amounts of hydrogen are produced at slow flow rates when the water becomes
strongly alkaline with a pH over 10.0. The principle
of antioxidant activity is the availability of electrons to neutralize any
so-called free radicals with oxidizing qualities that may damage biological
systems. The electrons present in alkaline ionized water are highly reactive and
react much faster than organic antioxidants to neutralize free
radicals. Furthermore, as
we age our body structures lose elasticity; everything becomes more rigid. On a
biochemical level this increasing rigidity is due to cross-linking of structural
bio-chemicals, which in turn is due to a loss of electrons. Providing the body
with an abundance of highly reactive electrons can be expected to slow
cross-linking reactions and, with this, the aging process.
Finally, all
biochemical energy in our body is produced by transferring electrons from food
molecules onto inhaled oxygen. Having more available electrons may help us to
produce more energy. This may be the reason why some individuals feel more
energetic on ionized water. From this
outline you can see why I am so interested in a high negative ORP. The higher the ORP, the stronger the healing qualities.
However, this does not mean that it is advisable for beginners to start with a
high ORP. As with exposure to sunlight it is best to start with low doses and
increase gradually, and even that may from time to time produce some healing
reactions as with temporary inflammations, mucus discharge and skin rashes.
Additional
healing factors for most individuals are the alkalinity of the water and its low
surface tension. Most of us are overacid and benefit from our lymph fluid
becoming more neutral. However, this is only a minor factor in using ionized
water as we can alkalize more quickly and cheaply by taking sodium bicarbonate.
The lower surface tension, on the other hand, improves the absorption and use of
nutrients. My Observations
In my initial
experiments it appeared that the slower the flow rate the higher the negative
ORP. Therefore I tried to let the water run at the slowest possible rate, about
7 minutes per litre and at the highest ionising setting of 5. This usually gave
an ORP of up to –350 mV and a pH of about 10.7. A flow rate of 5 minutes per
liter tended to give somewhat lower ORPs and a pH of
about 10.0 to 10.5. However, a slow flow rate combined with a high pH eventually
caused problems with calcium precipitation. My bore water out of the tap has an
ORP of about +250 and a pH of 7.1. Then I obtained
a TDS meter, which measures total dissolved solids or ionic minerals in parts
per million or ppm. I found that my bore water has about 350 ppm. After some
good rain it would drop towards 300 ppm and also the ORPs were usually lower,
say about -250 mV and sometimes much less, even without any rain.
A friend used
town water supplied from river water, which in turn was rainwater with a low TDS
of about 150 ppm. Initially his ORP readings were only –60 to –120 mV. The
highest ORP was with a very slow flow rate that produced a pH of 11.7. I
suggested using a calcium insert to increase the mineral content of the water
and that increased the ORP to about –200 at a higher flow rate and lower pH.
After ionizing
the TDS value of the reduced water may be higher or lower than the original
water. At lower pH values up to about 9 or 9.5 the TDS tends to increase, either
because minerals are now more concentrated or just more strongly interacting
with the electrodes of the TDS meter. However, with higher pH values the TDS
becomes increasingly lower and continues to drop over time as large amounts of
calcium precipitate.
Coming back to
my experiments, I was surprised to notice that higher flow rates could often
generate higher ORPs with lower pH. With a flow rate of between 1 and 4 minutes
per litre I could sometimes obtain ORPs of over -600 mV at a pH of 8.5 to 9.5.
Once I even had an OPR of over -600 with a fast flow rate and a pH of 7.9. However, after
some time the ORPs dropped back to about –300 mV. (I know now that this was due
to calcification of the alkaline electrodes). Sometimes I had the highest ORP at a flow rate
of nearly
1 minute per
liter and sometimes at 4 minutes per liter but usually somewhere in-between and close to 3
minutes per liter. However, this may be different with different
ionizers and different water. Ionizers with more or stronger electrodes
obviously will have higher optimal flow rates, while water with lower mineral
content will probably need lower flow rates. The following table shows ‘typical’ differences in
ORPs at different flow rates in seconds per liter. These were measured simultaneously with three
different probes to show their varying sensitivities. The first line for each flow rate
shows the results
about 30 to 60 minutes after ionising and the second line in the same samples
the next day. Table
1 ORPs at different flow
rates FLOW
RATE pH PROBE 2 PROBE 3 PROBE 4 380 sec/ltr 10.3 -292 -340 -212 -314 -396 -247 290 sec/ltr 9.9 -284 -351 -201 -310 -383 -238 180 sec/ltr 9.5 -308 -361 -230 -335 -417 -259 110 sec/ltr 8.9 -304 -360 -230 -313 -399 -249 66 sec/ltr 8.1 -288 -346 -211 -288 -360 -222 Most values are higher the next day. To see how long
properly stored water keeps its charge I kept a sample for 10 days. I thought by
waiting for 10 days I could more easily calculate the daily rate of decline. To
my surprise it measured over –700 mV. This inspired
me to measure ORP values on consecutive days in the same batch of ionised water,
which I stored separately in several small bottles. The results are in the
following table: Table
2 Setting 5, flow rate 3
minutes per liter TIME PROBE
2 PROBE
3 PROBE
4 30
minutes -189 -260 -296 2
days -495 -555 -683 4
days -522 -675 -747 5
days -674 -704 -746 6
days -663 -736 -743 7
days -707 -732 -736 This means that
to obtain reliable measurements one should repeat the measurements for several
days. Depending on the sensitivity of the electrodes the highest value may be
reached somewhere between 3 and 7days. Most surprising to me was the close
agreement of all 3 probes on the seventh day. Sometimes a reading can be high to
start with but then it is not very stable and may for several days show strong
fluctuations. (However, see also below my more recent results with the Modified
Vinegar Cleanse). I assume that the
reason for this
unexpected behavior of the probes is the presence of oxygen and other
oxidizing species in the reduced
water. These gradually become extinct by reacting with the reducing chemicals.
Electrodes can then give a truer
picture of the number of reactive electrons in the water. While
the amount of oxidising ions can be expected to be very small as compared to the
reducing ions, they have a strong influence on the probes because of the
exponential nature of the electrode sensitivity. To illustrate
tis point, a certain number of reducing or oxidizing ions may give an ORP
reading of + or –100. A ten times greater amount may read + or –200 and a
hundred times greater number + or – 300. In this example only 1% of oxidizing
ions will reduce the ORP reading from –300 to –200. After several days almost
all of the oxidizing species will have been eliminated and the ORP measurement
is now close to –300. However, in
reality the exponential effect is even greater. Vinny
Pinto on his Negative Hydrogen site (www.negative-hydrogen-ion.org)
has
calculated that every increase in negative ORP by 59 mV means a tenfold increase
in the number of reactive electrons, while a 118 mV change in the ORP relates to
a hundredfold change in electrons. Extending these calculations somewhat further
we obtain a ten thousandfold and a millionfold change
in electron density when the ORP changes by 236 mV or 354
mV. To see how the
ORP changes in less strongly reduced water during storage I made two additional
tests. I produced one sample with a flow rate of 2 liters per minute on the highest ionizing setting of 5 and
another one at the same flow rate at the lowest ionizing setting of 1. The
results were as follows: Table
3 Setting 5, flow rate 2 liters/minute TIME PROBE
2 PROBE
3 PROBE
4 1
hour -151 -241 -274 1
day -138 -280 -298 2
days -141 -286 -285 3
days -090 -179 -171 Table
4 Setting 1, flow rate 2 liters/minute TIME PROBE
2 PROBE
3 PROBE
4 1
hour -031 -099 -115 1
day -004 -094 -110 2
days +042 +050 +085 If you
compare table 3 with table 2 you will notice that the first measurements from 30
to 60 minutes after ionizing are very similar. However, the maximum values
obtained after several days of storage show that the water in table 2 had about
50 million times more available electrons than the water in table 3, which was
produced at a six times faster flow rate. Even
more striking is the comparison with table 4. Here the number of electrons is so
low that the water cannot hold its charge for long. The reason why the
measurements of low-ORP water do not increase much during storage is the small
amount of infiltration of oxidizing species with fast flows. Therefore in this
case the initial measurements are a good indication of the true value, unlike
with slower flows that allow much greater mixing of ions.
Other factors
that may influence the ORP are the rate of flow between acid and alkaline water
outlets, the time since the electrodes were last cleaned with vinegar and
whether the water is collected at the beginning or near the end of an ionising
cycle. Generally readings may be somewhat higher soon after vinegar cleaning and
near the end of a cycle but this is not consistent.
In order to
slow down the flow-rate of the alkaline water I use a very thin 4 mm alkaline
outlet hose as used for oxygen masks. This then greatly increases the flow-rate
of the acid water. Once I used a wide 8 mm alkaline outlet hose, the same as for
the acid outlet, and the flow of the acid water became very slow. However, it
had a very strong ozone-like smell. Storing and
Using Ionized Water While most vitamins suffer losses during
cooking, the rate of degradation is much higher in alkaline than in neutral
conditions and even less with an acid pH. Therefore, habitually cooking with
alkaline water can lead to vitamin deficiencies. This was noticed especially in
some regions of Individuals with weak stomach acid commonly
suffer from mineral deficiencies and often have soft fingernails and poor hair
quality in addition to lack of energy and other problems. Also vitamin B1
requires gastric acid for its absorption. Commonly we produce less stomach acid
as we get older but even many young individuals, such as asthmatics, do not
produce enough stomach acid. Drinking alkaline water on its own does not
cause a problem because the stomach does not deliberately produce more acid to
neutralize it. Also the mineral density of ionized water is not very high and it
is easily neutralized. A glass of water (200 ml) at a pH of 10.0 changed to pH 6.9 with the addition of 16
drops of lemon juice. Alkaline water with a lower mineral content would
require even less acid to neutralize. An observed drop in ORP with the addition of organic
matter is not
necessarily a
disadvantage. I assume that the reacting electrons just are more tightly bound but will
still be available to us after absorption. It is different if a large amount of
strongly alkaline water is combined with food, either by cooking in it or when
drinking close to a meal. Then the stomach is required to produce acid to digest
the food but instead the acid is partly neutralized by the alkaline water. This
is not much of a problem at lower pH levels, perhaps up to a pH of 8.5 or for
individuals with strong gastric acid but it may be a disadvantage for others. A
safe interval between drinking strongly alkaline water and a meal is about 30
minutes before and 2 to 3 hours after the meal. The next question involves storing ionized
water to preserve its negative charge. Some of the influences on its stability
are as follows. A small amount of water exposed to air loses its charge much
faster than a larger volume. I measured, for instance, a charge of -328 in half
a glass of water go to +6 within 7 hours. In about one litre of water from the
same batch the charge was still Another influence is the temperature. When I
heated a cup of water to boiling temperature for a few minutes it had lost all
of its negative charge after cooling, while the unheated water was still about
-300. However, it is not the temperature as such that causes the fast discharge, but rather the strongly speeded-up reaction of the
negative charge with the oxygen in the air. In a laboratory experiment it
was found that autoclaved water only lost its charge if it was exposed to air,
without any air in the sample it did not discharge. Initially I believed that refrigerating or
even freezing the ionized water was required to preserve its charge for days or
weeks until I found that exposure to light discharged the water. Now I store the
water in brown glass bottles (200 to 750 ml) filled to the top but not touching
the top, and in addition I keep them in a closed cupboard. The bottle top needs
an airtight seal otherwise the water will discharge much more quickly. However,
the charge in an only partly filled bottle keeps longer under refrigeration and
very much longer in a frozen sample. As mentioned before, the negative charge of
water produced with a slow flow rate may still rise during storage. However,
this does not mean that it is more desirable to drink stored water rather than
immediately after producing it. Antioxidant properties do not increase during
storage, only active oxygen species are being eliminated and it may actually be
beneficial to ingest some of these. I also found that the steel outlet pipe of
the ionizer unit reduces the negative charge and even slightly lowers the pH.
The degree of deterioration depends on the strength of the water flow. With a
strong flow (1 minute per litre) the reduction in the charge by the steel pipe
was negligible as compared to a plastic hose. However, when I inserted a thin plastic hose
into the steel pipe and collected water simultaneously from both outlets at a
very low flow rate, there was a great difference. The water coming out of the
plastic hose had -278, while the ORP of the water running through the steel pipe
was only -170. This shows that we should not store charged water in contact with
blank metal as for instance with an unprotected metal bottle top.
Negative
Hydrogen Scientific articles tend to call ionized
water ‘Electrolyzed Reduced Water’ or ERW for short. The chemical reactions
during water ionization are not well understood. I believe the main reactions to
be as follows. The negative electrode or cathode donates
electrons while the positive electrode or anode accepts electrons out of the
solution. In the water flowing past the electrodes positive minerals or cations,
such as sodium and calcium, move towards the cathode while negative anions, such
as chloride and fluoride, migrate towards the anode. Electrons emitted by the
cathode are attracted by the positive charges of cations and react with them to
form neutral metal atoms such as sodium or calcium. These metal atoms are rather unstable and
highly reactive. They immediately react with water molecules to form hydroxides,
such as sodium hydroxide, while the surplus electron is transferred to the
hydrogen ion to produce a neutral hydrogen atom. Hydrogen atoms, in turn, are
also very unstable and react either with other hydrogen atoms to form hydrogen
molecules, or they may accept a second electron from the cathode to complete their electron
shell and become negative hydrogen ions. Expressed in simple chemical
equations,
using table salt as an example, this looks as
follows: Ionic aqueous
solution:
NaCl Þ Na+ + Cl- Sodium ion becomes a neutral atom by accepting
electron from cathode: Na+
+ e- Þ Na Sodium atom immediately reacts with water
to form sodium
hydroxide by
donating an electron to the hydrogen ion, which in turn becomes a
hydrogen atom: Na (Na+ + e-) +
H2O
Þ
Na+ Hydrogen atom either combines with another hydrogen atom to form a
hydrogen molecule or it accepts a second electron to form a negative hydrogen
ion: H
+ H Þ H2
or H + e- Þ H- Sodium hydroxide and other common hydroxides are highly soluble except for calcium
hydroxide, which starts precipitating out of calcium-rich
water when the pH goes above 10. Drinking water containing
hydroxide is not a problem, at least up to a pH of 10 or 11, because normally so little is present that a few drops of lemon
juice or gastric acid will neutralize it. Negative hydrogen ions are the basis for the negative
potential and antioxidant properties of reduced water. They can become
reasonably stable by attracting the positive hydrogen potentials of water
molecules. A water molecule is a weak dipole with a negative potential at its
oxygen and positive potentials at each of its hydrogen atoms. The negative
hydrogen ion is now in a protective cage surrounded by probably six water
molecules. I assume
that in this form it can pass the intestinal wall and reach the
bloodstream. Theoretically negative hydrogen ions may
also react with cations to form unstable hydrides, such as sodium hydride.
These, too, may be temporarily stabilised in protective water molecule
cages. Other possibilities are the
formation
of negatively charged hydrated cation
complexes and
colloids.
All of these are
very unstable and likely to react with any similar unstable oxidizing species present. This may account for the
initial strong fluctuations in
the ORP potential. Contrary to theoretical
expectations, measurements have shown that reduced water is higher in dissolved oxygen than the tap
water before
ionizing.
This model shows how important it is for
sufficient minerals to be present. Fewer minerals require a slower flow rate for
this process to work. However, at a slower flow rate more water molecules are
being split and more hydroxyl ions as well as hydrogen atoms are being formed.
This causes the reduced water to become more alkaline but does not lead to more
negative hydrogen being formed. The abundance of hydrogen atoms now leads mainly
to the formation of hydrogen molecules, which escape as gas bubbles.
A similar process near the anode leads to
the formation of neutral hydroxyl molecules. These react with each other to form
water and highly reactive oxygen atoms, which then combine to form stabl |