If you have researched Brown’s Gas for any length of time, you have probably encountered several different explanations of what Brown’s Gas actually is.
At its simplest, Brown’s Gas—also commonly called oxyhydrogen—is a mixture of approximately two parts hydrogen (H₂) to one part oxygen (O₂). This is the natural ratio produced when water is electrolyzed.
But some people in the Brown’s Gas industry use a much narrower definition. They argue that “true Brown’s Gas” can only be produced when hydrogen and oxygen are generated together in a non-separating alkaline electrolyzer. They further propose that this process creates an additional component, sometimes called Electrically Expanded Water (ExW), that is responsible for properties beyond those of ordinary molecular hydrogen and oxygen.
I have been involved with hydrogen technology since 2007 and have known George Wiseman, one of the leading proponents of Brown’s Gas and ExW, for approximately 20 years. I have followed these theories for a long time.
After all those years, my position is fairly simple:
We should distinguish between what has been scientifically demonstrated and what remains theoretical.
What Do We Actually Know Is in Brown’s Gas?
Water is H₂O. During electrolysis, electrical energy separates water into hydrogen and oxygen.
The resulting gases are produced in approximately a 2:1 ratio:
2 parts hydrogen + 1 part oxygen
The scientific literature generally refers to this mixture as oxyhydrogen or hydrogen-oxygen mixed gas.
Hydrogen and oxygen are well-characterized molecules. We can identify them, measure their concentrations, measure their flow rates and study their biological effects.
There is now a substantial scientific literature investigating molecular hydrogen, including human clinical research. There are also published human studies in which subjects inhaled mixtures containing approximately 66.7% hydrogen and 33.3% oxygen.
The important point is that these studies involve measurable H₂ and O₂.
What Is ExW?
ExW, or Electrically Expanded Water, is a proposed additional component of Brown’s Gas.
George Wiseman has theorized that producing hydrogen and oxygen together in a non-separating alkaline electrolyzer creates an unusual water-derived substance with properties different from ordinary water vapor, hydrogen or oxygen.
According to this theory, ExW may be responsible for some of the unusual properties attributed to Brown’s Gas and may provide additional biological effects.
The problem is that there is currently no convincing scientific evidence establishing ExW as a distinct therapeutically active component of Brown’s Gas.
Even proponents of ExW acknowledge the lack of studies directly demonstrating it.
That doesn't prove that every aspect of the ExW hypothesis is impossible. Science should remain open to new discoveries.
But a hypothesis and an established scientific fact are two different things.
If ExW is claimed to make alkaline-generated Brown’s Gas therapeutically superior to an equivalent mixture of H₂ and O₂ produced separately and then recombined, that should be experimentally demonstrable.
We should be able to characterize ExW, measure it, compare gas containing it against gas without it, and demonstrate a reproducible biological difference.
To date, I have not seen convincing peer-reviewed evidence doing that.
Does Separating Hydrogen and Oxygen Change Their Therapeutic Properties?
This brings us to an important distinction between traditional alkaline Brown’s Gas generators and PEM/SPE hydrogen systems.
Traditional non-separating alkaline electrolyzers produce hydrogen and oxygen together.
PEM/SPE technology separates hydrogen and oxygen during electrolysis. The gases can then be used separately or recombined downstream in approximately the same 2:1 ratio.
Some proponents of ExW argue that these are not equivalent because separating the gases prevents ExW from being produced.
From the standpoint of established chemistry, however, we still have H₂ and O₂.
I have not found convincing clinical evidence demonstrating that a 2:1 H₂/O₂ mixture from a non-separating alkaline electrolyzer provides superior health effects to an equivalent H₂/O₂ mixture produced by PEM electrolysis and recombined.
Until such evidence exists, claims of therapeutic superiority should be identified as theoretical rather than established fact.
Why Hydrogen For Health Moved Toward PEM/SPE Technology
There is another part of this discussion that receives far less attention.
It concerns the actual engineering of a machine intended to produce gas that a person will breathe.
Traditional non-separating alkaline Brown’s Gas generators require an alkaline electrolyte, typically sodium hydroxide (NaOH) or potassium hydroxide (KOH), to increase the conductivity of the water.
Sodium hydroxide is commonly known as lye.
That isn't inherently a problem for an industrial electrolyzer when the system is properly engineered and maintained. Alkaline electrolysis has been used industrially for many years.
But when the gas is intended for direct human inhalation, I believe the design deserves additional scrutiny.
The fundamental question becomes:
What materials and chemicals are present between the water entering the machine and the gas entering someone's lungs?
That question is one of the reasons I prefer PEM/SPE technology.
The Electrolyte Carryover Problem
Gas leaving an alkaline electrolyzer can carry moisture or aerosol from the electrolyte with it.
This phenomenon is sometimes referred to as electrolyte drag or electrolyte carryover.
Consequently, alkaline Brown’s Gas systems intended for inhalation commonly incorporate bubblers, scrubbers and other components designed to prevent alkaline electrolyte from reaching the user.
This isn't merely theoretical.
A peer-reviewed 2020 study published in the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy constructed a low-power alkaline electrolyzer using a 5% sodium-hydroxide solution. The experimental system included a bubbler and dryer, and the researchers specifically stated that the gas should be bubbled through distilled water and passed through a desiccant to remove “electrolyte drag.”
For a system producing gas for inhalation, this is important.
The scrubbers and bubblers aren't simply accessories. They are part of the system intended to separate potentially undesirable material from the gas stream.
And that means proper maintenance matters.
Stainless Steel and Hexavalent Chromium
The same 2020 study raises another important issue regarding alkaline electrolysis.
Researchers compared stainless-steel electrodes with stainless-steel electrodes modified by nickel electrodeposition.
They explained that stainless steel contains chromium and that under certain alkaline electrolysis conditions the stainless-steel anode can undergo corrosion and electro-oxidation, producing hexavalent chromium, or Cr(VI).
After 70 hours of operation, the researchers measured Cr(VI) in both the electrolyte and the downstream bubbler water.
With the stainless-steel electrodes, they measured:
Electrolyzer/recirculator: 1.766 mg/L Cr(VI)
Bubbler water: 0.800 mg/L Cr(VI)
When nickel-electrodeposited electrodes were used, concentrations were substantially lower:
Electrolyzer/recirculator: 0.077 mg/L
Bubbler water: 0.019 mg/L.
The bubbler result is particularly noteworthy.
The chromium originated in the electrode/electrolyte system, yet measurable Cr(VI) was detected in water located downstream in the gas pathway.
The researchers ultimately concluded that Cr(VI) was detected in the electrolyte and bubbler water of the stainless-steel system and emphasized the importance of using stable, nonhazardous electrode materials in low-power alkaline electrolyzers.
An Important Qualification
This study did not test the Wiseman alkaline Brown’s Gas system or any other specific consumer Brown’s Gas inhalation machine.
Therefore, it would be inappropriate to claim that this research demonstrates that a particular commercial machine delivers hexavalent chromium to its user.
It does demonstrate something important, however:
Under the conditions tested, stainless-steel electrodes in an alkaline electrolyzer generated Cr(VI), and contamination was measurable downstream in the bubbler water.
For equipment intended to produce breathing gas, I believe that deserves serious consideration.
The Human Factor May Be Just as Important
There is another reason I prefer simpler PEM/SPE systems for consumer inhalation: the person operating the machine.
A properly designed alkaline Brown’s Gas machine can incorporate multiple safeguards. But those safeguards may depend upon the user correctly understanding and maintaining the system.
The Wiseman alkaline Brown’s Gas system is a good example of this complexity. Its operating and maintenance instructions cover numerous procedures and safety considerations that the owner needs to understand and follow.
Depending upon the design, an alkaline system owner may need to understand electrolyte preparation and concentration, safe handling of caustic chemicals, water levels, scrubber and bubbler maintenance, electrolyte carryover, gas pressure, ignition sources, static electricity and routine cleaning and maintenance.
A knowledgeable operator who carefully follows every instruction is one thing.
The average consumer is another.
Anyone who has sold consumer products for very long knows that many people do not read an entire technical manual before operating a product.
When forgetting maintenance merely reduces product performance, that is inconvenient.
When maintenance is part of a system designed to keep caustic electrolyte or other contaminants out of a breathing-gas stream, it becomes a much more important consideration.
This isn't an accusation that the Wiseman system, or every alkaline Brown’s Gas machine, is unsafe when properly operated and maintained.
It is a question of risk reduction through engineering.
If a potential hazard can be eliminated from the design rather than managed through instructions and maintenance, I generally prefer eliminating it.
Why I Prefer PEM/SPE for Inhalation
Modern PEM/SPE systems approach electrolysis differently.
The current Hydrogen For Health H2Life V7.0, HX450, HX900 and HX3000 systems use PEM/SPE technology.
They separate hydrogen and oxygen during electrolysis and provide separate hydrogen and oxygen outlets.
This provides several advantages.
A person who wants molecular hydrogen can use the hydrogen outlet by itself. Someone who wants an approximately 2:1 H₂/O₂ mixture can recombine the hydrogen and oxygen outputs.
Most importantly for this discussion, these systems do not require the consumer to mix and maintain a concentrated lye electrolyte.
That means there isn't a sodium-hydroxide electrolyte that must subsequently be prevented from entering the breathing-gas stream.
For me, that's an important engineering advantage.
Is Brown’s Gas Better Than Pure Hydrogen?
This is another area where marketing sometimes gets ahead of science.
There are human studies investigating H₂/O₂ mixed-gas inhalation, just as there are studies investigating molecular hydrogen alone.
But I have not seen convincing evidence demonstrating that oxygen causes hydrogen to remain in the bloodstream longer, penetrate cells more deeply or become more biologically active.
Molecular hydrogen is already an exceptionally small molecule that readily diffuses through biological tissues.
Oxygen obviously has its own physiological role, and supplemental oxygen may be appropriate in certain medical circumstances. But that is different from demonstrating that oxygen somehow enhances the biological properties of molecular hydrogen.
Likewise, I have not seen convincing evidence demonstrating that ExW makes an alkaline-generated H₂/O₂ mixture therapeutically superior to a comparable H₂/O₂ mixture produced using PEM technology.
Those are testable hypotheses.
Until they have been demonstrated experimentally, I believe they should be described that way.
Brown’s Gas Doesn't Have to Be a Debate
I have known George Wiseman for approximately 20 years. I respect the enormous amount of time and effort he has put into Brown’s Gas technology.
We simply disagree on some important points.
George believes ExW is an important component of what he considers true Brown’s Gas.
I haven't seen sufficient scientific evidence to reach that conclusion.
And after years of working with hydrogen equipment, I have become increasingly convinced that PEM/SPE technology is better suited to consumer inhalation equipment because it eliminates the need for a caustic electrolyte and simplifies several of the safety and maintenance issues inherent to traditional alkaline systems.
Ultimately, this shouldn't be about personalities or manufacturers.
It should be about evidence.
What can we measure?
What has been demonstrated?
What remains a hypothesis?
And perhaps most importantly when designing an inhalation device:
Can we accomplish the same objective while eliminating unnecessary potential hazards?
For Hydrogen For Health, those questions are why we have chosen PEM/SPE technology.
Hydrogen For Health does not make medical claims regarding hydrogen or hydrogen/oxygen inhalation. Our products are wellness products and are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent disease. Information in this article is provided for educational purposes and to explain hydrogen-generation technologies and published research.