Some archived posts of Brooks Bradley

Let me tell you about a guy I have an internet-crush on. That's the kind of crush where you just want to -- by analogy -- sit at someone's feet and have them tell you stories of their life or whatever they thought about today. He is like one of those men who has had this tremendous amount of life experience and just off the cuff will talk about something that happened before I was even born that is just damn interesting. I love people like that! His name is Dr. Brooks Bradley.

Here's a note about him from a guy who knows:

Brooks Bradley has been around a long time, but he is getting up in years, has suffered some personal tragedies and really is rarely very active anymore on the net.  He is from the Dallas/Fort Worth area and is retired as a Region Research Manager from Eli Lilly Company (1969-2005). He also worked a bit for the CVS Caremark Corp as a pharmacist, and does extraneous work as an independent Clinical Research Consultant. He knows the evil in the pharmaceutical business, knows a promising idea when he sees it, and wants to help people. Most of us on the net became familiar with him from his very valuable posts on the Colloidal Silver group, where he freely gave his time and suggestions to various health protocols that were cheap and DIY.

Two examples of why this guy cracks me up and is so much fun to read.

Responding to someone talking about research done with pyramidal shapes. {Note: I would sure like to do research comparing the primary platonic solids and possible effects of them. The pyramid is merely one of those shapes. - pjg}

Dear Marshall,

I was hesitant to make this reply, but some may find it of interest. In any event, confession is good for the soul.

Several years ago one of our technicians (in conjunction with my oldest son, an inveterate tinkerer) executed some loosely controlled anecdotal investigations involving pyramid structures possibly affecting the efficacy of some common pathogen control substances.

My primary interest being in CS, I suggested they include it in their investigation. Essentially, the methodology addressed utilizing substances exposed (at a position about 1/3 of the way up the inside height of the pyramid) to "whatever" energies might be present inside the enclosure for time periods varying between 2 and 12 hours.

The exposed colloidal silver was then used to treat 1/2 of a flock of chickens (young pullets) suffering from a known bacterial or viral insult. The first test involved Pullorum as the challenging agent. The remaining 1/2 flock was treated with part of the same parent CS batch, but unmodified in any way. Interestingly, both solutions effected efficient control, except the material exposed to the pyramid enclosure exhibited pathogenic control in approximately 1/2 the time required by the by the unmodified CS.

Additionally, tests involving potassium permanganate as a bactericide/bacteriostatic revealed that 1 normal solution strengths (after exposure inside the pyramid) displayed pathogenic control (when diluted to recommended strengths in drinking water) 2 to 3 times more rapidly than did the unexposed solution.

There were other chemical agents evaluated, but I do not recall their exact identity at this moment. Although not all exhibited such dramatic results, all were, somehow, measurably enhanced in their effectiveness when exposed to residence inside the little pyramid structure.

I must confess I was intrigued, but not overly so, at the time.

Both our technician and my son are contemporaries of Dr. Patrick Flanagan and of the 1960s philosophic genre, a circumstance which may have caused me to treat their efforts more abruptly than justified.

Sincerely,
Brooks Bradley.
Harborne Research Foundation

Funny huh. Yeah it was the 60s and he was a scientist so I can see he wasn't too open to it!

Here's a ref he put at the end of one email to a colloidal silver group. Everyone knows what it's like to write a long post and then have it eaten somehow before it gets posted...

p.s. I had, a few moments ago, just finished a much more extensive posting… I lost my entire post. The actual post you are receiving is the product of my existing dismay.

He just cracks me up without even trying.

So in the course of conversation on the CS group, BB would talk about things that the group of folks he experiments with has found, or stuff he'd done or experienced in the past. At one point, regarding the work with liposomal encapsulation of ascorbic that Thomas Levy had claimed was possible (prior to that idea you'd need an IV to get enough of it to be super useful for serious issues), he and his associates started studying that. He was really excited about it. He wrote:

We are Euphoric... almost... over our enthusiasm regarding a substance which became available about 24 months ago---and since subjected to a number of different evaluations.

While the actual materials are not (essentially) modified in chemical or biological essence... the FORM of delivery is GREATLY improved and we have enjoyed ASTONISHING results among all of our principal investigators evaluating these materials. These research evaluations revolved around substances yielded by a process called Liposomal Encapsulated Technology (LET). All of our evaluations involved either Liposomal Encapsulated GSH or Liposomal Encapsulated Vitamin C. A majority of our experimental cases involved LET-based Vitamin C.

About six months ago, inspired by the very recent (last 15 months) documented research of Dr. Thomas Levy, M.D., and associates, we endeavored to prosecute some evaluations of our own... which centered on vitamin C encapsulated by phospholipid liposomes. The actual material we utilized was obtained from representatives of a firm holding some exclusive procedural patents (Livon), but there are, probably, others now available... especially with the proclivities of firms for circumventing existing patents.

The material is called " Smart " Lyco-Spheric Nano-Spheres. The principal characteristic which enables the substance to yield such outstanding results, springs from its ability to present both in the blood stream and the inter-cellular environments----simultaneously. I could hardly believe Dr. Levy's original claims as to results they achieved.

To wit: that the oral ingestion of this " vitamin c on steroids " as the hype had pronounced it-----turned out (at least for us), to be ...exactly that. E.g. 5 Grams of the let-type vitamin c (taken orally) did, indeed, yield results comparable to 50 grams of iv administered vitamin c. We were, simply, astounded...by this result.

I will not attempt to elaborate on our specific experiments, but will state that our associates achieved some unbelievable results in very short time windows----and some involving stage iv carcinoma (which had proven unresponsive to all existing alleopathic protocols). The implications are simply staggering....for us.

The COST PROFILE simply COLLAPSES when considering such a simple---non-toxic----address to an amazing number of terminal-type insults. e.g. snakebite, botulinum, viral insults from across the entire spectrum, etc.

I must go now, but I encourage list members to conduct a web search on this manufacturing technology and the products available.....that actually exhibit the nano-encapsulation technology.

Do understand that some condition/circumstance may present itself, that could modify or, maybe, even negate our profound results... but I most SERIOUSLY DOUBT such will be the case. At present, we can hardly believe our results, but three other research groups (with whom we exchange information periodically... have effected results identical to ours.

People were interested, sure, but who has special patented material for phospholipids and paint-gun-style 1000-2000psi tools to make it? So with people talking about it, he and his associates started looking into what might be the options for making some version of this at home.

In our recent researches evaluating this technology and, consequently, in searching for possible "process" improvements/ modifications which might facilitate the " lay person " an opportunity for a DIY methodology achievable in a home environment---we did achieve some notable progress.

First, a brief summary of our exploratory activity. Our literature searches revealed several companies actively exhibiting valid capability in this area (LET). Typical, and demonstrably capable, is a company named MICROTEK. Microteklabs.com Helpful information is available here.

One fact became obvious, early on, to wit: The truly striking feature of LET was a NATURALLY-occurring characteristic...... and not a man-made process, that was driving this encapsulation process. That is, this process is a function of an automatic, "natural tendency" of certain substances (e.g. phospholipids in this case) to form tiny vacoules or bubbles---called liposomes----when in an aqueous solution under certain conditions.

The keystone activity is that these liposomes automatically fill themselves with whatever aqueous solution they were in----before they were formed. This type of bubble, called a membrane, forms a protective barrier around virtually every cell in the human body.

Livon Labs has perfected a process which employs a high-pressure (1700 p.s.i.) discharge system which directs a liquid stream against a forming plate. The high impact forces the phospholipids (soy lecithin in this case) to form liposomes----so small they require an electron microscope for viewing. This technology does not create the LET activity....it just enhances it. In our personal researches we have determined the key to exploiting the LET phenomenon appeared to be Livon's application of intense force in their mixing methodology.

Enter the " enlightening " moment. Searching for a method of achieving liposomal encapsulation, it occurred to us to explore ultrasonic stimulation as an option. It worked...maybe not quite as well as Livon's " high tech " brute force approach...but about 70% as well. Plenty efficient for our purposes.

Our vitamin " C " liposomal encapsulation protocol is as follows:

Using a small (2 cup) Ultrasonic cleaner, (Item #03305, obtainable from Harbor Freight), we performed the following:

1. Dissolved 3 level tablespoons of soy lecithin in 1 cup of water (preferably distilled).

2. Dissolved 1 level tablespoon of ascorbic acid powder (Vit. " C " ) in 1/2 cup of water.

3. Poured both solutions together in the ultrasonic cleaner bowl and turned the unit on. Using a plastic straw (leaving the top of the cleaner opened), gently, slowly, stirred the contents. Note: The cleaner will, automatically, self-stop about every 2 minutes. Just push ON button to continue. Repeat for a total of 3 series (6 minutes). By that time the entire solution should be blended into a cloudy, homogeneous, milk-like mixture. The LET solution is now formed.

4. This protocol furnishes about 12 grams (12000mg.) of vitamin C product. At 70% encapsulation efficiency, 8400 mg would be of the LET type. This solution will keep, acceptably, at room temperature for 3 to 4 days. Refrigerated, it will keep much longer. We use it so fast around our place...there isn't enough left to be concerned over storage.

The " homogenizing effect " is so powerful that after 3 days at room temperature, no precipitation or solution separation appears evident. This type of sequestered vitamin " C " has demonstrated to be, at least 5 times more effective (per volumetric measure) than any other form of orally-ingested vitamin " c "... that we have tested. Additionally, it appears to be even more rapid in tissue-bed availability----than IV applications. An astounding revelation... to us.

We estimate the DIY researcher can produce the active LET portion of this solution for 15 cents per gram... as against about $1.00 per gram from commercial sources.

It is my hope that this, limited, explanation of our activities in this area, is of some value to our do-it-yourself health-maintenance researchers. In any event, this protocol has demonstrated to be non-toxic and most helpful to our researches.

Sincerely, 

Brooks Bradley.

p.s. A larger, more powerful, ultrasonic cleaner is now available at Harbor Freight. Item number 91593. 2+ liter. Both units have performed quite well for us. Almost as well as our $500.00 lead zirconate titanate, research grade, unit.

So folks online went crazy trying it. Plenty who already took C, buffered C, could tell right off that they could take a lot more of it with less bowel-flush effects, so clearly something was going right.

It was known this would be "less" encapsulated than the lab version, but how much so?

BB came up on the fly with an idea that *might* work for very *roughly/loosely* estimating your encapsulation %. In other words, how much ascorbic acid was NOT inside liposomes but just floating around the liquid when you were done. This is the part that will affect bowel tolerance. Since ascorbic is an acid, and bicarbonate reacts with acid, he thought, well in theory if you mix them you're going to get the 'reaction.' You'd get more reaction with a greater degree of ascorbic.

Although not scientifically rigorous, I offer a simple test which will yield the DIY researcher some element of confidence that they do, in fact, have a useful measure of liposomal encapsulate.

First, pour about 4 ounces of your finished Vitamin C encapsulate into a cylindrical, 12 ounce water glass. Next, place 1/4 teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate into about 1 ounce of distilled water and stir for 3 to 5 seconds. Next, pour the sodium bicarbonate solution into the Vitamin C mixture and stir gently for several seconds.

Note: If the foam/bubble line which forms on top is 1/2 inch or less---in height---you have about a 50% encapsulation efficiency. If the foam/bubble line is 3/8 of one inch... or less, you have about a 60% efficiency. If the foam/bubble line is 1/8 inch or less, you have about 75% efficiency. If the foam/bubble line is just a trace... you should major in chemistry.

The percentages given above, represent the amount of the total Vitamin C component incorporated during the encapsulation process... that was actually encapsulated. The less encapsulation... the greater the foaming. What is, actually, occurring in this test is that the ascorbic acid fraction is being transformed into the sodium ascorbate form of vitamin C. This test does not negatively affect the usefulness of the solution you have tested... as the isolated Vitamin C component is not adversely affecting the encapsulate (which is being protected by the lecithin bubble-covering.) Actually, the sodium ascorbate form of vitamin C is greater than an order- of-magnitude more soluble for tissue incorporation... than is the ascorbic acid form.

In any event this simple test should serve to raise the level of confidence in the DIY researcher... that they do---in fact---have a useful measure of encapsulated vitamin C.

Sincerely,

Brooks Bradley

Meanwhile he addressed people who said they occasionally had a thin layer of brown (liquid lecithin) in their formula when done. (This just means you had more lecithin than water/ascorbic for it to encapsulate.)

My apologies; I neglected to outline the attendant, probable, variations in the protocol. What I SHOULD have said in my original post is "The visible, obviously homogenized, portion of the solution" , whenever I made the comment about the stability of the completed, resultant, material.

I believe you will gain a little better knowledge of the results you achieved, after reading my most recent comment on an inquiry by Sheila. Bottom line----your result was perfectly normal. Interestingly, the meniscus may present at the top... or the bottom... or not at all. Usually if the initial material combination has not run long enough to incorporate a majority of the lecithin (or there is simply too much lecithin for the available ascorbic acid fraction... the meniscus will form on the top of the sample... within a few minutes after stopping the US agitation.

If your procedure has run acceptably well and----long enough to homogenize well, any meniscus formation will, generally, present on the BOTTOM after overnight storage--- with or without refrigeration.

In any event, you are doing fine. If you do not want to consume the isolated lecithin fraction you are observing, just decant the homogenized liposome solution and dispose of the isolated lecithin fraction. I hope this information helps your dilemma.

Sincerely,

Brooks Bradley.

p.s. One just needs to continue to experiment "around-the-edges" of this protocol, in order to achieve optimum results. Do not be reluctant to do such... this IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE... just common sense.

Later, after someone pointed out that even the quantity/vigor of adding/stirring the acid/bicarbonate can cause variation in the ascorbic and bicarbonate reaction, he wrote a note apologizing for it not being a very good test as it turns out. My excerpted summary:

The ONLY truly reliable means of, accurately, knowing the degree of encapsulation is via Electron Microscopic observation. This entails preparation protocols/equipment beyond means of most persons----even most laboratories. ... In my enthusiasm to avail list members of a "simple" protocol, which had yielded results reliable enough to validate useful parameters... I outlined a test which is *not truly indicative* of the encapsulated Vitamin C content. ... Although some may be able to replicate my results, the protocol proper, is too unreliable for general application. We HAVE determined, via electron microscope examination by an associated laboratory... that almost any solution achieved using the simple procedures outlined in my original post for producing encapsulation... yields >50% encapsulation. One excellent indicator is the degree of "apparent homogenization". That is, the uniform, milky, appearance... and its "long-term" (days) retention.

P.S. I would be remiss if I failed to encourage ALL OF YOU to continue your researches addressing use of this most promising protocol for encapsulation. The majority of our investigations have yielded VERY powerful positive results.

Meanwhile, people on the net were trying to figure out ways to get more ascorbic into the water. If you could dissolve more ascorbic in the water, you could in theory encapsulate more ascorbic, and be able to take even more.

One approach used is magnets. Water exposed to powerful magnets (time required varies) will have the surface tension of the water molecules (increased? reduced? I don't know). This is like that stuff you put on your car windshield and then water runs right off it. Chemical soap is what we use to reduce surface tension in water like in laundry and dishes. Well magnets can affect surface tension in water also. It literally "makes water wetter" is how some people put it. It also allegedly allows a greater absorption/dissolution of water-soluble substances, including ascorbic acid.

I cannot find the page I had on it eons ago and I have not yet tried it, so I don't know. But, seems like a good idea. I just found a few of my magnets recently... dunno if they are strong enough. I haven't yet googled on how to MEASURE surface tension in water in some simple at-home way, if possible, in order for me to experiment and see whether or not I'm doing so.

*

From the vitamin C foundation forum a guy named Steve Brown said this which I found helpful:
I've calculated the exact amount of sodium bicarbonate required to neutralize ascorbic acid. It is 0.477 grams of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) for 1 gram of ascorbic acid (C6H8O6). That is the mass ratio, the amounts you would weigh on a scale.

If you don't have a scale and want to measure by volume, the ratio is different, because sodium bicarbonate is denser than ascorbic acid. The volume ratio is 0.358, so to neutralize 1 teaspoon of ascorbic acid, 0.358 teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate is required. Stated another way, the volume of sodium bicarbonate is 35.8% the volume of ascorbic acid it will neutralize.

When combining sodium bicarbonate with ascorbic acid, it is desirable for them to react chemically, converting the ascorbic acid to sodium ascorbate. That is best accomplished by first mixing the powders, then adding a small amount of warm water.

*

Another guy I once saw, raved about adding bicarbonate *before* making the formula. He said that this allowed a great deal more dissolution of C into the same amount of water. I am confused here because I saw in several places that you could not use mineral ascorbates for making lipo-C, the reason being that the mineral would cause it to "fall out of encapsulation" -- and many people trying this ended up with layers, it wouldn't even stay homogenized for long, and were told to use ascorbic instead. Or, that the vastly larger resulting molecule would not allow small enough liposomal spheres that the liver would send them out as-is. One goal here is to have them sent to body tissues, not broken down at the liver, which it will do if they're over ~200nm in size.

I saw another ref where someone said: "BTW, Brooks just came out and is now suggesting to use the baking soda before encapsulation with the lecithin in order to have sodium ascorbate, which is 3000% more assimilible that plain L-Ascorbic Acid."  But I am not sure Brooks said that, I mean said to do it before encapsulation instead of after; I am asking for a reference. He DID say "...the sodium ascorbate form of vitamin C is greater than an order-of-magnitude more soluble for tissue incorporation... than is the ascorbic acid form." That is a known. But that doesn't specify whether to use it before/after creating the encapsulation formula.

*

There are other posts of BB I saw, and he is charming and interesting but I feel like if I replicate most his posts, I'll be a stalker-fan (too late!), aside from which they technically belong to him and the group he sent them to. But his "recipe" and comments on DIY Liposomal Vitamin C are literally all over the internet -- I got the posts from somewhere totally unrelated to where they began! -- so I don't feel badly grabbing these as a) they are already everywhere and b) I think it's totally fair if you start an internet-wide health hobby, that your posts critical to that actually be replicated for people to hear the 'original' version and not just the 2.8 billion alternatives. It would seem injust both to him and to everyone trying out the DIY plan based on his original guidelines, if his stuff about it wasn't widely accessible.

PJ