Did you see this?
http://www.chem1.com/CQ/clusqk.html

Here is a link that might be useful: structured water - fact or fiction?

Beyond the above, I like to add 'site:edu' (but no quotes) to my searches to obtain info from educational sites.

Using the search phrase 'structured water site:edu' -- again, without quotes -- brings up lots of info

Here is a link that might be useful: info from educational sites

This post was edited by jean001a on Tue, Dec 10, 13 at 0:26

It depends what you mean by structured water. If you consider structured water to be natural moving water(river,spring,etc), then yes.. In today's time and world, I worry more about pollutants in the water than the "structure".. I would rather have "unstructured" pure water coming from the tap, than "structured water" coming from a polluted river.. Even better, unpolluted river water.

Perhaps, his "structured water" was coming from a river that did not contain chlorine and his control was coming from chlorinated tap water.. In that case, of course unchlorinated water is better than chlorinated for plants..

There have been a number of water "treatments" appear over the years that were found to be about as useful in reality as Lydia Pinkham's Magic Elixir. Unless water can be "structured" quite cheaply it will be of little use for the average gardener.

As jean0001a above suggests, if you really want to learn about something include site:.edu in your searches.

Just today on an agriculture site structured water came up. I am enclosing a link to a product to show about what is out there...with testimonials. I kinda doubt the 'science'.

Then there is making the water wetter...supposedly detergent does that to make the detergent able to penetrate the water and clothes better. Maybe there is something there.

Here is a link that might be useful: Structured Water

Thanks for your above comments. Every time one of these expensive miracle water products is presented we are always told of health benefits plus how it prevents pipe corrosion. Same old, same old. Only this time we have an expensive 'scientific' book titled The Fourth Phase of Water by Gerald H. Pollack to back up and convince the reader that this is the best thing since sliced bread. Dig around this on the search engines and your eyes will begin to cross. It appears that this "structured water" concept is being sold and advertised through the agricultural community. Just a suggestion to use caution.

"It appears that this "structured water" concept is being sold and advertised through the agricultural community. Just a suggestion to use caution."

It's pretty big in the health industry as well.. What can you say, if people are going to swallow it, we surely will find a way to supply it. Just like all these pharmaceuticals..they want you to: Close your eyes, listen to your doctor, swallow the pill and believe it's curing your "disease"..

...except pharmaceutical companies do many years of research and pass their product through regulatory agencies rather than making a product off the cuff in a factory that bid the lowest price and charging you $250 for something that swirls water in a vortex while claiming to do whatever it is you want to hear.

"Structured water" is some strange "woo." It ranks up there with the acid/alkaline and ionized water movement.

They need to do much better research then.. Killing cancer with chemo, radiation? War on cancer.. Millions of people die annually because of pharmaceuticals. Again, they are taking the wrong approach.. No, we don't need more poisons/pollutants on the market, we need to adapt a more natural approach.. We need to look at nature for answers not science.. Science was created by man, science is only as good as man.

"Science has tried to assume a monopoly, or rather, a tyranny over our understanding of the world around us.. We are only now beginning to understand the disastrous results of this outlook". -Prince Charles

Chemo and radiation did an awesome job on my cancer...over 2 years free without going the Steve Jobs route of pseudo-science for a treatable disease followed by death.

The scans before/after my radiation showed noticeable shrinkage...not incidental or coincidental. I don't know what the chemo did, but 2 years out and I'm still clean.

So yeah, I'm glad I did that...and I bet Steve Jobs's family wishes he would have.

"We need to look at nature for answers not science.. Science was created by man, science is only as good as man."

"Science" created this thing you typed that out on. "Science" carried the message over wires to share it with everyone. Nature created man. Woah. No one should be punished for using their brain or having an education...much less belittled or dismissed for doing so by a blanket statement that they're inherently wrong for bettering themselves or society.

"Chemo and radiation did an awesome job on my cancer...over 2 years free without going the Steve Jobs route of pseudo-science for a treatable disease followed by death."

I am sincerely sorry to hear that.. I'm glad your doing OK now! You have a wealth of information to pass along, i don't know what we would do without people like you.. Helping and educating others, answering the same redundant questions over and over.. Really, i appreciate all you do for this forum.

"So yeah, I'm glad I did that...and I bet Steve Jobs's family wishes he would have."

Very bold statement..

"Science" created this thing you typed that out on. "Science" carried the message over wires to share it with everyone. Nature created man. Woah. No one should be punished for using their brain or having an education...much less belittled or dismissed for doing so by a blanket statement that they're inherently wrong for bettering themselves or society."

That's right science did create it, for the better or worse.. Im not saying science is bad or you shouldn't get a education. But sometimes you have to drop that kind of thinking and think common sense, nothings more common than nature..

I mean, does it make sense to not consume poisons?

Does it make sense to use caution with dangerous chemicals that were never introduced to humans until a few years ago?

Does it make sense to inject chemo, a pH of something similar to battery acid into the body?

Does it make sense to radiate the body?

Does it make sense not to damage the cells in the body when you have damaged cells in the first place?

Forget all that.. They researched it before hand, studies conclude that it cures cancer. No worries.. I mean.. Does anyone see this insanity?

Nc, if i may ask, did you switch your diet, etc when you were diagnosed? Sorry, i understand it could be a touchy subject..

"Nc, if i may ask, did you switch your diet, etc when you were diagnosed? Sorry, i understand it could be a touchy subject."

If i throw it out there, especially while criticizing someone else, it's for public consumption. Thanks for the kind words and kind treatment of the subject, though.

I did not change my diet, but I did quit smoking. My cancer was Stage 2 colon cancer (close to stage 3, but it did not spread into lymph nodes).

I can't speak on what the chemo did or didn't do because I neither understand it beyond what I was told, nor do I have anything to compare it to...only that I'm over 2 years out without any re-occurrence. I can say it did what they said it would do, but I'm not trained in the field and pretty much took their word for it.

That said, the size of the tumor after radiation treatment was extremely noticeable. It had shrunk to half it's size and enabled the surgery of it's removal to have less body mass removed while arresting it's growth and development.

I feel quite thankful for both the radiation and chemo. Advances in the chemo research allowed me to take a less body-heavy, yet targeted treatment (Xeloda) that didn't involve filling me full of heavy metal (platinum-based) chemo treatments popular years ago that are hell on the body.

"If i throw it out there, especially while criticizing someone else, it's for public consumption. Thanks for the kind words and kind treatment of the subject, though."

I didn't ask to criticize your, or out rule the chemo/radiation because you were eating healthy.. I was just curious. You seem like a smart man, i cant believe you went into treatment so blindfolded like that.. I completely understand though.. I mean, what can one do when your diagnosed with cancer? There's only one legal treatment.. And the rest is dismissed as quackery, or just not supported in general..

Nc, i would try and help you and relate you to a doctor who has helped me dramatically.. But he also believes in the acid/alkaline, cleaning of the lymphatic system. So your going to dismiss him as a complete quack.. He basically puts his patients on raw fruit and herbs..

The use of the vortex effect is discussed in several papers that can be accessed using the link below:

http://viesh.ru/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Research-in-Agricultural-Electric-Engineering-2_2_2013.pdf#page=30

-------------------------------------------
The following link is to a 2013 research paper that utilized vortex mixing.

"The model analysis also suggests the existence of structured water molecules at around a radius of 2.4 nm from the p-SWNT core. This new insight of interaction forces between functionalized SWNTs may provide key information for designing new advanced functional materials using SWNTs."

http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/11/10.1063/1.4793763
----------------------------------
"All these results pointed to a more organized state of water in the unheated samples, more pronounced in histamine solutions than in solvents, dependent on the level of dilution. It was suggested that stable supramolecular structures, involving nanobubbles of atmospheric gases and highly ordered water around them, were generated during the vigorous mechanical agitation step of the preparation, and destroyed after heating. Histamine molecules might act as nucleation centres, amplifying the phenomenon which was thus detected at high dilution levels."

H.Kuska comment. Please note: "It was suggested that stable supramolecular structures, involving nanobubbles of atmospheric gases and highly ordered water around them, were generated during the vigorous mechanical agitation step of the preparation,"

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167732208001724

Here is a link that might be useful: Several vortex applications

Steve Jobs actually had two surgeries related to his cancer and lived something like 7 years after being diagnosed.

Jobs waited 9+ months after his diagnosis before entering conventional treatment and his 1st surgery hoping a special diet would cure it.

It didn't. He had a very treatable for of pancreatic cancer that advanced stages while he seeked alternative therapy.

"Today I met a former retired USDA scientist who now has become an ardent organic farmer"

What were they thinking?

Keep in mind that the FDA and USDA do very little regulating of any kind. They rely mostly on the manufacturers of products to tell them whether something is okay or not and then wait until people die from using those products before taking action.

It seems that there is no end to strange phenomena to divert thinking away from sensible gardening/agriculture.

I can imagine ice having structure and surface tension lessened, but 'researching' structured water is like 'researching' the benefits of calling Batman as opposed to calling the Green Hornet for help. :)

A snip from someone up-thread reads " ... stable supramolecular structures, involving nanobubbles of atmospheric gases and highly ordered water around them, were generated during the vigorous mechanical agitation ... " I wonder if anyone has considered this to account for the benefits we perceive after rainfall?

NN I think you're confused about what makes something toxic. Often it comes down to dosage whether something is damaging or beneficial. Water is a chemical too, and after all you can die from drinking too much water.

I also think you're confused about what science means. It seems you equate science with synthetic compounds vs ones occuring naturally. Whether a plant produces a compound or it is synthesized in lab doesn't make much difference. A lot of the drugs available are based on naturally occuring substances. Science is what allows you to understand how and why they work.

Systematically "looking at nature for answers" is the definition of science.

This post was edited by orangehero on Wed, Jan 1, 14 at 14:43