Jerry W. Decker wrote:
> Hi Folks!
>
> I am puzzled by the apparent conflict between the use of oxygen in the
> body and the claim that loose oxygen atoms will cause cellular damage
> and contribute to aging.
>
> Because of this purported cellular damage, the ingestion of
> anti-oxidizing compounds have become popular.
>
> Yet, if you look at major research efforts in the early and mid 1900s,
> particularly by Koch, Nieper and others, they all insist that the body
> actively uses oxygen to facilitate healing.
>
> This could refer to the ingestion of molecular oxygen (2 oxygen atoms)
> or ozone (3 or more oxygen atoms).
>
> In the body, I was under the impression that the molecular oxygen or
> ozone is broken apart and absorbed for various metabolic processes.
>
> I guess my question is, why would you use Anti-Oxidants if oxygen is
> good for the body. I have used ozone and hydrogen peroxide (h2o2) with
> good results and not obvious signs of aging or damage.
>
> The reports of oxygen enriched environments resulting in anti-aging
> effects and a sublimation of general meanness <g> seem to dispute the
> anti-oxidant contentions of aging....
>
> WHAT GIVES? Is this some kind of smoke screen or am I not comprehending
> what is being reported?
>
> It can't be both ways, one (anti-oxidants to remove free radical oxygen)
> claiming cellular damage and aging, the other (ozone and oxygen therapy)
> claiming healing and rejuvenation.
> --
> Jerry W. Decker / jdecker@keelynet.com
> http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science"
> Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501
> KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187