Three different things are routinely mixed in public argument: instruments that authorise use, proceedings against the protocol's author, and proceedings against third parties. They are separated here, each with its instrument number, date, status and source. Where no instrument was located, that is stated.
| Country | Instrument | Date | What it actually does |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bolivia | Ley N° 1351 — «Ley que regula la elaboración, comercialización, suministro y uso consentido de la solución de dióxido de cloro (SDC) como prevención y tratamiento ante la pandemia del coronavirus (COVID-19)» | 14 Oct 2020 publicada 1 Dic 2020, Gaceta Oficial ed. 1336NEC |
Enacted law, in force — no repeal located. Regulates exceptionally the preparation, sale, supply, administration and consented use of SDC. Art. 4 allows sale in licensed pharmacies without prescription with the buyer's consent; Art. 6 allows physicians to administer it under informed consent. Promulgated by President Luis Alberto Arce Catacora and published on 1 December 2020. How the law's definition relates to CDS: Art. 2 defines the SDC by its chemical origin — ClO2 obtained from sodium chlorite activated with hydrochloric acid, citric acid or electrolysis. That is precisely the reaction used to make CDS: the chlorine dioxide generated in the reaction vessel is drawn off as gas and dissolved in water, while the acid and the residual chlorite stay behind in the generator. What distinguishes a two-component "MMS" mix from CDS is therefore not the source chemistry but what is ingested: the reacting mixture, or only the gas transferred into water. |
|
Departmental law (La Paz): Ley Departamental N° 193 of 9 September 2020, which authorised production and use in the 87 municipalities of La Paz and, in Article 6, ordered a clinical study within 45 working days. How Ley 1351 came about, documented:
|
|||
| Madagascar | Ministry of Public Health letter N° 42-25-MSANP/SG/DGFS/DPLMT/SPMT, subject: application for marketing authorisation (AMM) of VANIALA's product «CDS SOLUTION» | 19 Feb 2025 | Favourable opinion, not a granted authorisation. The Traditional Pharmacopoeia Commission, meeting on 3 Feb 2025, gave a favourable opinion; the Ministry requests the final product sample and final packaging mockup. Signed by RANDRIAMANANA Maximine, Pharmacien Diplômé d'État. Status to be updated when the AMM is granted. |
| Venezuela | — | — | No instrument located. There are reports that the government incorporated chlorine dioxide into its COVID-19 treatment schemes, and public objections by the national academies. A lead under verification: a «Decreto 164» said to authorise the use of any substance under the health emergency — not located in the official repositories checked, and not specific to chlorine dioxide. No resolution or gazette citation was found. Until one is published, the claim that Venezuela authorised it is not established. |
| Honduras | — | — | No instrument located. The official decree set was checked (PCM-041-2021, PCM-144-2020, PCM-098-2021, Decreto 17-2021, Decreto 64-2021, Decreto 20-2021, Acuerdo 5063-2021): none mentions chlorine dioxide or chlorite. If an instrument exists, it has not been published where it can be cited. |
Sources: Gaceta Oficial del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia (norma 168340), the UDAPE official copy of Ley 1351, vLex Bolivia (publication record, ed. 1336NEC), the bill's cover letter (CITE ALP/CD/MMC N° 261/2019-2020), editorial reporting on the OPS warning, and Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal rulings SCP 0052/2022-S2 and SCP 0052/2023-S4; Madagascar Ministry letter as published by the author; Honduran decrees from tsc.gob.hn.
Criminal record: the Swiss Federal Office of Justice certified on 5 November 2021 that he is not registered in the Swiss criminal record — document and verification. Spain and Germany extracts pending.
| Jurisdiction | What happened | Status | Precision required |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spain, Granada | Criminal proceedings for an offence against public health; the judgment acquits Andreas Ludwig Kalcker and two co-defendants, declares costs ex officio, and notes appeal to the Audiencia Provincial de Granada. | Acquittal (operative part published) | Only the final page has been published so far: no court number, no case number, no date, no signatures. The complete text is needed before it can be cited in full. |
| Spain, Alicante | Complaint filed by Kalcker against the president of the Colegio de Médicos de Alicante over her public warnings. | Dismissed | Confirmed by the Audiencia Provincial de Alicante. This one is true and is not contested here. The admission order of 8 May 2019 is published with its transcription — the complaint was admitted for processing and the court ordered the Spanish medicines agency to report on the legality of MMS. |
| Spain, Ibiza | Detention on 24 October 2012 in connection with promoting a treatment in breach of public-health law. | Press-reported; outcome not published | An arrest is not a conviction. The resolution closing that proceeding has not been located; it is the document that would settle the matter. |
| Argentina | Denunciation by the federal environmental prosecutor's unit (UFIMA); searches on 2 September 2020; charges of illegal practice of medicine and selling fake medicines reported after a seven-month investigation. | Charged; no conviction located | The prosecutor's own communiqué is public. No judicial resolution closing the case has been located. A charge is not a conviction, and no outlet has produced one. |
| Argentina, Neuquén | Criminal case over the death of a five-year-old in Plottier (Aug 2020). Neither the author nor his protocol was charged; the parents were. | Closed without conviction | The judge dismissed the parents in Oct 2021 because the prosecution's proof of ingestion rested only on their own statements, which were inadmissible for that purpose. The forensic board had written «compatible» and noted that pathological and toxicological studies were still pending. Full case file. |
| Where | Case | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | Landgericht Hildesheim, 2017: prison sentence for two brothers for selling «MMS». | The defendants were sellers of an acidified sodium chlorite product. Not the protocol's author, and not a dilute chlorine dioxide solution. |
| United States | Department of Justice prosecutions of MMS sellers. | Again distributors of sodium chlorite products marketed as a cure. The DOJ releases describe sodium chlorite and water, not aqueous ClO2 at 0.3%. |
| Peru | Colegio Médico del Perú opened disciplinary proceedings against four physicians for recommending chlorine dioxide (2020); reporting in 2021 found more than a dozen promoters unsanctioned. | Professional-disciplinary, not criminal. Nothing connects these proceedings to the protocol's author. |
| Argentina | Defensoría del Público opened a file over a television host drinking chlorine dioxide on air («infodemia»). | An administrative media proceeding. Frequently cited as if it were a criminal case against the movement. |
| Colombia | INVIMA health alerts 081-2020 and later notices classifying stabilised CDS at 3,000 ppm as a fraudulent product. | A regulatory classification by a medicines agency, not a judicial finding of harm. |
Documents, implementation and press record: Bolivia — from bill to law, and what followed.
Ley N° 1351 permitted consented use at national scale from December 2020. That creates an observable population, and therefore a checkable question: were there severe poisonings or deaths attributed to CDS in Bolivia after that date?
What we searched, and when (20 October 2026): Spanish- and English-language news archives; PubMed; and Bolivian official sources (minsalud.gob.bo and AGEMED), using the terms dióxido de cloro with Bolivia, intoxicación, muerte and hospital.
What we found: no news report, no published case and no official bulletin attributing severe poisoning or death to CDS in Bolivia after December 2020. The Bolivian medicines agency's public warning on chlorine dioxide is dated 27 June 2020 — i.e. before the law, not after it.
What this does and does not prove: it is negative evidence, not proof of absence. A case may exist unpublished; pharmacovigilance reporting in the region is incomplete. The honest formulation is therefore: no such case has been published or reported, and the burden of production lies with whoever asserts one.
Standing invitation: if any documented case exists — a hospital record, a bulletin, a paper — it will be added to this page with its date, product, concentration and dose. Nothing here depends on such a case not existing.
For comparison, the published severe cases in the literature involve a 65-year-old chronic consumer with intestinal perforation (Arellano-Gutiérrez et al., 2021, PMID 34664196), a child who ingested a household cleaning product, and people who drank undiluted 28% sodium chlorite — none of them from the Bolivian authorised-use period.
Instruments and cases are different things. A law permitting consented use (Bolivia) does not establish efficacy. A favourable opinion on a marketing application (Madagascar) does not establish efficacy either. Conversely, a health alert (Colombia) or a disciplinary file (Peru) is not a finding that the substance caused harm at a given concentration.
The absence of an instrument is recorded as absence. For Venezuela and Honduras no citable instrument was found. If one is published, this page will carry it with its number and date.
No conviction concerning the author has been located. Charges, arrests and acquittals are listed separately on purpose, because collapsing them is how the record gets distorted in both directions.