CDL - Correction of the STR_F post on YouTube

Once again there was negative talk about dietary supplements in the mainstream media. This time it's about the product chlorine dioxide solution (CDL).

The YouTube channel “STR_F” published an incredibly one-sided report about the product (See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39-d2Uf1x2s ). And (intentionally) spread false facts. Since we sell CDL ourselves, we would like to comment on this and correct a few points.

Basically:

Chlorine dioxide, CDL and MMS are mentioned throughout the article. The same product for STR_F… But they are different products !

CDL or chlorine dioxide solution: Hydrochloric acid and sodium chlorite are reacted in a cannula. The resulting gases are introduced into water using a syringe. You can then drink the water that is enriched with chlorine dioxide gas.

This creates in the body: oxygen, water and table salt

Chlorine dioxide or MMS: Hydrochloric acid and sodium chlorite are reacted. The finished mixture is then diluted with water and drunk.

IMPORTANT: We advise against chlorine dioxide and MMS! This is the WRONG way of making it! We only recommend the product “Chlorine Dioxide Solution (CDL)”. See our product: https://www.hs-activa.com/products/cdl

Minute 4:14: Rainer T.'s talk clearly mentions “ chlorine dioxide solution ”. Why does STR_F still not differentiate between the individual products CDL, MMS and chlorine dioxide? For us, this is a deliberate deception of the user , as we will see later...

Minute 6:05: This explains how to produce chlorine dioxide or MMS. Afterwards they also say that you can buy ready-made solutions (CDL). So you know that there are different products. But for you it's all the same product. That is simply wrong ! Either poorly researched or deliberately deceived. For us, as we will see later…

Minute 6:50: It is said that there are people who do real business with this. What's so bad about being paid to heal people? The pharmaceutical industry definitely makes more money than alternative practitioners...

Minute 9:03: It can be seen that the difference between CDL and MMS is discussed in the lecture. We'll see why this is important in a moment...

Minute 11:28: This shows how you can make a chlorine dioxide solution. With cannula and syringe. At this point at the latest, the reporter should now know the difference between MMS and chlorine dioxide solution. Then why don't you differentiate between the individual products? As already said, for us this is a clear deception of the users!

Minute 12:48: The reporter complains that so much ignorance and untruths were spread in the seminar. Then why do you spread such untruths? Shouldn't you lead by example? As I read before, she knows exactly the difference between CDL and MMS!

Important

Minute 13:20: Application examples (probably from the seminar) can be seen. We are talking about MMS and CDL here. Of course, it may be that the seminar did not provide proper information. The reporter should still know the difference. If not, you shouldn't publish a post like this. However, we think she understood the difference!

Minute 14:21: MMS that the reporter made herself is being examined in the laboratory. As already mentioned, MMS can be harmful! However, in the seminar she learned how to make CDL (with a cannula and syringe). Why don't you get this checked out? For us, another deliberate deception

Minute 19:30: People talk about how dubious it is if you have to sign a liability waiver. Have you ever had an operation in the hospital? Don't you have to sign a liability waiver? Why isn't this mentioned in this context? Of course it doesn't fit into the story...

From minute 20:15: The visit to the doctor is played back as a memory protocol . The doctor there constantly talks about “chlorine dioxide”.

Our guess: The doctor means or also said “chlorine dioxide solution”. It's just misrepresented.

The reason for our assumption: The book “The CDL Manual” is shown, in which application examples are listed. There they also talk about CDL (chlorine dioxide solution, NOT MMS or chlorine dioxide)... The reporter also says “chlorine dioxide solution” at minute 21:58. In the next cut she talks about MMS again... Either she still doesn't know the difference between the individual products or she deliberately lumps everything together.

You, dear reader, should now decide for yourself...

Until the end, the reporter CANNOT distinguish between CDL (chlorine dioxide solution) and MMS/chlorine dioxide. We suspect that you deliberately want to deceive the users. Variant 2 is that she simply didn't understand the difference. Then you should n't make a report like that.

At school that would have been a topic off topic . Put, 6!

And where was the team that proofread the article before it was published? A script is being written! Clear consumer deception !

It's a shame that you can't report sensibly about a product like this... With our correction we would like to take away your uncertainty (fear) and do some educational work!

Starting water : 100ml distilled water pH value 5.7 with a PPM/TDS value 001

MMS/chlorine dioxide:

1 drop each of 10% hydrochloric acid and 22.4% sodium chlorite. 45 sec response time. Then diluted with 100ml distilled water. The MMS/chlorine dioxide resulted in a pH value of 3.7 with a PPM/TDS value of 125!

Chlorine dioxide solution:

1 drop each of 10% hydrochloric acid and 22.4% sodium chlorite. 120 sec reaction time in the syringe, then transferred to 100ml distilled water. The chlorine dioxide solution had a pH value of 5.91 with a PPM/TDS value of 109!

Summary:

• MMS is a strongly acidic solution with pH value 3.7 (see update at the bottom)
• CDL had a pH value of 5.91 in the test and therefore slightly increased pH

Update : We made a small mistake.

We have written:

• MMS / CDS is a strongly acidic solution with pH 3.7

Of course CDS is the same as CDL. CDS is just the English term for CDL.