Structured Water: Is it worth the hype? Part 2

Structured Water: Is it worth the hype? Part 2

A breakdown of the healthline.com article on Structured Water

By Jonathan Butts

Part 2

I love the fact that if you hang an adjective on water it can always also do the opposite. Kind of like people. It’s polarized. And it’s polarized within itself. So there are many poles. There is a pole to an electron, a proton, or a neutron. There’s another pole for oxygen and hydrogen. There is another pole between different groupings of water molecules within its own body. Everything expands and contracts, everything moves away or towards. Basic interactions taken for granted to help define things. Also a very big mistake.

On the subjective side, everyone who works with life knows there is an inexplicable aspect to everything, and in particular with water. Not only is it far from completely understood, it appears it has a repeatable interaction with consciousness itself. Like all things in my opinion. So in that view, why water?

If I know nothing and arrive on the scene for the first time, and want to know about life on earth, what is the first thing I notice and come to? I ask the question, “what is it primarily made of?” And that ….and that …..and that…..hmmm – all mostly water.

So I study water, simply for the purposes of respectfully integrating with the environment. Then I fully may realize a great portion of myself and others like myself. Something tells me that is the whole purpose. But I could be wrong.

First, before a critical review is conducted, I must dig into the “structured water community” and suggest that what you are seeing on the average is nothing but typical marketing which occurs in every industry. It is widely known that people are living in fear and behave accordingly. Whether against it or for it, or on the fence, human beings have an astounding instinct to survive on the material level. So does everything else living. So water is stuck in the sea of its own creation. Interesting.

The great debate: The debate for those who are not familiar with water: Can the substance with the same chemical compound constituents can be physically and behaviorally different from itself previously?

First we must ask ourselves if this can be observed anywhere else in the universe. The answer is an obvious yes. Carbon and Silicon Oxides, and many others.

The term allotrope: each of two or more different physical forms in which an element can exist. Graphite, charcoal, and diamond are all allotropes of carbon.

Technically water is not an element, its a compound, but I disagree. As far as matter goes, water is the element. In addition to air, earth, and fire. So here is where the language and opinions mix up in today’s ‘structured water’ world. The use of a ‘new phase of water’ is coming about. More marketing. I am voting to allow allotrope to be used for any common homogeneous substance, so we can leave phase alone. Here’s why:

I prefer a holistic simple view as mostly seen on Earth.

Here is a depiction of the four phases of matter as defined by science and human beings before they thought they knew:

Earth element – Solid

Air Element – Gas

Water Element – Liquid

Fire Element – Plasma

Plasma – We don’t know because it is in transition (Plasma is the word science sticks on everything when it can’t be defined) so everything should be plasma in my opinion.

Thank Universe for the waiver.

So the truth is: everything is always in transition including water, all phases.

Click Here to Become a Member and Learn More

Follow Us on Facebook  Or  LinkedIn  Or Instagram

You may also like:

Share This