Asked 19th May, 2014

Is colloidal gold the same as monoatomic gold?

I was reading up on the significance of the substance, used a lot in the past for medicinal and spiritual purposes. I'm very interested in this substance, I hope someone can tell me more about it.

All Answers (1)

16th Dec, 2014
David Spector
Natural Stress Relief, Inc.
The obvious answer is that they are very different. In a colloid, there is no requirement that the dispersed gold be in the form of isolated atoms. Colloidal gold is in the form of nanoparticles, each having many atoms of gold (see
Note that gold is naturally monoatomic, and does not bind to itself chemically, unlike oxygen, which binds in pairs to achieve energetic stability.
1 Recommendation

Similar questions and discussions

What is your experience as reviewer of MDPI and Applied Sciences in particular?
6 replies
  • Pär JohanssonPär Johansson
Most of us are invited to review papers for various journals. Most often the deadline is quite reasonable for doing a proper review. This was not the case to review the revised version of a paper submitted to MDPI's Applied Sciences. What is your experience as reviewer of MDPI and Applied Sciences in particular?
I communicated with the Assistant Editor, that I found it insulting that he e-mail me on a Saturday with the request for review, then send me a reminder two days later (Monday) and another one the next day (Tuesday). The deadline for the review was in my opinion ridiculous. I was supposed to submit the review by Wednesday the same week, i.e. 3 working days after I got the invitation. After this communication I got a 2 days (!!!) extension. Honestly, if the average time for revised manuscript review is three days then I really question the quality of the review. If they consider themself to be a serious scientific journal they cannot have this review process.
I would say less than 14 days for a review is impossible for any academic researcher. Especially in this case were I recommended major review and large parts of the paper was rewritten.
This is not only disrespectful to the reviewer but also to the authors, who deserve a proper review of their work, and the whole research community, who rely on peer-review for quality of research and trust in the science. This is a dangerous path that their review process is leading to. What is your experience of this and other publishers?

Related Publications

With the application of ultrasonic energy a colloidal gold may be easily prepared with a particle diameter of less than 10 nm and suitable for use as an immunological marker for TEM-studies. This new approach replaces the use of phosphorus, traditionally used for producing gold sols of the smallest diameter.
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.