Kinda an old saw Griz: Lots of ideas and opinions which conflict. So ultimately your CS site may provoke a cutting thru the opinions with facts, cause you will have so many of both there. You've installed a lot of info for those looking to compare makers and know more about Silver and it's benefits, but:
I went to the Siverton site, read some of the information and was pretty surprized you would think that this is a reliable CS site. The author writes, not of one side of a differing opinion in CS's debatable topics, but an unresearched diatribe (or gathered from other same such lay sources) which is in disagreement with basic published research on CS. His claims sound more like excuses for his machines abilities then verified truth about which style CS is most efficacious.
As the Silverton site says, theres a lot of disinformation about CS on the internet, and from my perusal the Silverton site is full of it. Rebuttle to Silverton's statement that large (20nm) silver particles are safe and effective and smaller .8 nm sized silver particels are toxic, along with a short description of why small particled ionic silver safley bypass the gastric environment:
This link is full of pertinent important dissected information and an indictment of not only missleading and perverted (for who's benifit we ask) institutional research but also the main stream and alternative media's powerull and immediate role in influencing public opinion by promoting and propagandizing fallacies on sensitive to the powers at be subjects.
It may be insignificant in the real picture, so Ill wait to hear about your experiences with that maker's CS when you get it, and chalk up the rest to how different our motivated perceptions can be and how personal preferences and needs influence us to choose what it is we believe in.
PS It continues to suprize me how people acting as if experts in the Silver Water field erroneously use and mismatch meanings. Describing solution and molecular states counter to commonly held definitions about ions, coloids or solutions. Words that need not play into the charged atmosphere of the real debate on efficacy. So it seems that they are either uninformed or unresearched as to the definitions of the simple terms, or are copying someone else's writings wout any fact checking.