Talk:Nascent iodine (dietary supplement)

Other

Somebody should run through and find an online listing of Cayce readings, and rip some text from them to back this up. A good external link to the Cayce Readings archived somewhere would be great.

I'm pulling most of this out of my head in reference to bits and pieces of the Cayce readings that have been repeted to me. Please check my work.

Is this also tincture of iodine? Atomidine does have the connotation that it is prepared as cited by the Cayce readings; but tincture of iodine appears (aside from specifically being electrified) to be right on for this. Should these articles be merged; or should information about the Cayce readings stay here? --John Moser 22:13, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Man, this is a total sales pitch. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.99.237 (talk) 00:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Changes

I have attempted to give a brief but accurate history of atomidine and to explain the difference between Atomidine and other iodine products sold by "Cayce Suppliers".66.149.105.217 15:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Corrections

This is really some great work but several corrections needed. I will cite sources for corrections. Some of the mysteries I can not explain but there are things that are very clear. I am not unbiased I have a patent pending for a consumable form of nascent iodine manufactured according to Reading 358-1. It is truly as great an iodine as Cayce said as for as I can tell. The patent may not hold but the information will no longer be lost for 70 years as it has been.

Atomidine name came in 1926 by Bisey because it was iodine in the nascent state or atomic form of iodine. That is the diatomic molecule is broken through homolytic cleave, each atom keeps one of the bonding electrons. This nascent state is the same as the thyroid puts the iodine into to make T3 and T4 hormones and this is why the body loves it and recognizes it, I believe. Current day Atomidine is very different from 1935 when Bisey died. They according to records you could use 100 drops in a day safely. Now a few drops of iodine chloride causes heart paputations. There is a safey sheet that warns against the use of iodine trichloride or tells you to go to the emergency room if you ingest any.

The book The Popular Practice of Fraud states on page 191 that the American Dental Association found no nascent iodine in Atomidine of this day.

I don't know how to list my website ( magnascent.com )and so forth but I have had a lot of research done on nascent iodine, using it for malaria which is why Bisey used it in the first place. I can help MD's wishing to use it to understand how it works and why. I am not really skill as the one who did this so I wish he would use the additional information to redo the work. — John Brookshire 22 JULY (UTC) (76.187.124.61 21:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC))

Seeking manufacturing process information

Anyone knows nice resources where I can find the manufacturing process of atomidine? I have found a nice resource, but for some reason it was deleted along with my other links.Healthycare (talk) 10:02, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Seeking scholarly articles

Google(R)(TM) indicates scholarly articles by Vidma, Green and Pastirk. Mark Sircus Ac., OMD, (IMVA) Director International Medical Veritas Association, makes a critically relevant comparison between Nascent Iodine and Lugol's in his article, "Iodine. Bring Back The Universal Medicine." Today I am looking to unearth any scholarly articles written in Hungarian on Nascent Iodine or Atomidine. Should anyone locate anything, kindly post here or mail to me for posting. RichVadnay, <vadnay@hotmail.com>, Many thanks for the privilege of being included here. 17:54hrs, Sunday 30 October 2011, RV— Preceding unsigned comment added by RichVadnay (talk • contribs) 06:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Iodine Tri-chloride OR Nascent Iodine?

The Edgar Cayce website itself lists Atomidine as being Iodine Tri-chloride. So this backs up the comment by John Brookshire earlier (below). Surely this cannot be the same as Nascent Iodine?

I find great confusion on the internet as to what Atomidine and Nascent Iodine are. These terms seem to be used interchangeably?. e.g., "The iodine being in the atomic state was the reason it was called Atomidine, for Atomic Iodine ... Nascent Iodine is a complete atom, no extra electrons, none missing... Atomic or Nascent Iodine is not dissolved in water but in alcohol"

I believe there should be a separate article on Nascent Iodine as it seems to be a separate compound, and a simple google search will find many products purporting to sell "Nascent Iodine" but what is it? Where is a reliable source on this? Zarkme (talk) 01:36, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

References

Patents as sources

I note that there is virtually zero peer-reviewed quality research reported for "nascent iodine" in the scientific literature. Because of this, presumably, patents are used in this article to back up most of the assertions. Is this legitimate? From what I have read, there is controversy over the existence of "nascent iodine" and certainly there is controversy over the efficacy of supplemental I in subjects without a deficiency. Desoto10 (talk) 00:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Patents are not regarded as reliable sources in wikipedia. Patents are self-published primary sources (WP:SPS), they can not be used to support WP:FRINGE theories or medical claims in wikipedia. JimRenge (talk) 16:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

In the United States, at least, there is no requirement to produce a working model or process for a patent application. Just because a patent application was successful isn't proof that the invention was successful. Citing a patent document is good practice to support a statement in the article that a patent was issued to so-and-so for such-and-such, but that's as far as it goes. — JerrieAtrix (talk) 06:37, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Even the title misrepresents

Nascent iodine (dietary supplement) gives the topic too much credence. Perhaps it should be Nascent iodine (quackery) or Nascent iodine (myth).--Smokefoot (talk) 12:21, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that's necessary. However, I would guess that literature describing it as "pseudoscience" of "snake-oil" shouldn't be too hard to find, enabling a first-sentence description as such.--2601:444:380:8C00:8C5E:F5D9:9484:C81E (talk) 03:54, 16 June 2020 (UTC)