Dioxichem is maintained by researchers documenting the chlorine dioxide literature. The protocol discussed here, aqueous
chlorine dioxide at 0.3% (CDS), was developed by Andreas Ludwig Kalcker, a German-born biophysical researcher
resident in Switzerland, who holds two honorary doctorates (honoris causa) — one conferred by the Executive University
of the State of Mexico — and who is not a licensed physician and has never claimed to be one.
That is a conflict of interest and it is disclosed here rather than buried. It is also the reason this site carries entries
that are unfavourable to him: claims 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 19 in the register are corrections of the movement's own
overstatements, and they are as much part of the record as the rest.
Sources archive
Every external source cited on this site is preserved verbatim in a local copy: the sources archive.
A document that can be deleted cannot be cited, so the copies remain even if an outlet retracts, a server goes down or a page is edited.
The FDA adverse-event reports are additionally preserved one by one, with their structured fields rendered as
individual records.
Editorial rules
Every figure names the document it comes from. If a figure cannot be traced, it is removed.
Verdicts are published together with their limitations. A verdict separated from its caveat is treated as a misquotation.
Corrections are logged publicly. A page that never corrects anything is not an audit.
No medical advice is given. Nothing here tells anyone to take or avoid any substance.
Corrections log
October 2026. The redox section was corrected after the protocol author pointed out an error: chlorine dioxide (+0.95 V) is below the O2/H2O couple (+1.229 V at pH 0), not above it. At physiological pH the oxygen couple falls to ≈+0.82 V, so the two become comparable. The section now gives all four values, and states that redox potential alone does not determine tissue injury — the hydroxyl radical (≈+2.3 V) is far above both.
October 2026. An earlier version of the Plottier analysis described the Bolivian instrument as a bill only, based on the cover letter published in the wiki. The enacted law exists: Ley N° 1351 of 14 October 2020, published 1 December 2020. Both documents are now cited, with the distinction between them stated.
October 2026. The note on Ley N° 1351 was refined: the law defines SDC by the reaction that produces chlorine dioxide, which is the same reaction used to make CDS — the gas is drawn off and dissolved in water while the acid and residual chlorite remain in the generator. The earlier wording wrongly implied a different production route.
October 2026. A comparative LD50 figure for sodium hypochlorite circulating in advocacy material was removed
as unsourceable; the verified chlorine dioxide values (292/340 mg/kg, US EPA Case 4023) and the volume arithmetic replace it.
October 2026. A redox comparison of chlorine dioxide to molecular oxygen was reformulated: O2/H2O is +0.82 V,
ClO2/ClO2⁻ is ≈+0.95 V. "Close to" is defensible; "identical" is not.
October 2026. An argument that chlorine dioxide "lacks the redox potential" to injure tissue was withdrawn and
replaced by the concentration-ceiling and delivered-capacity analysis. The original formulation was chemically wrong.
Contact and data
Corrections and counter-evidence are welcome and will be published with the same prominence as the original claim.
Machine-readable summary: llms.txt (for AI systems).