Minerade® sparkling ceramic | to increase the pH and reduce the ORP value

€37.00 *

Prices incl. VAT plus shipping costs

Ready to ship today,
Delivery time appr. 1-3 workdays

  • For the production of alkaline water with raising of the pH value to pH 9.5 and raising of the ORP (redox potential) to over -500mV!
  • Increase of the conductivity (salinity) by approx. 20-30 ppm (parts/ions per million H2O molecule parts)
  • Needs several hours to mineralize the water
  • Dimensions Minerade stone: diameter 50mm, height 15mm
  • Dimensions of packaging: 54 x 54 x 19mm
Volume prices instead Network-Marketing (MLM)


Add to shopping cart
  • NE-minerade
  Minerade® sparkling ceramic | Mineralizing stone for water made of sintered mineral...
Read More
Product information "Minerade® sparkling ceramic | to increase the pH and reduce the ORP value"

Minerade® sparkling ceramic | Mineralizing stone for water made of sintered mineral ceramics to increase the pH and reduce the ORP value

The Minerade® ceramic stone is stored in a water carafe or the lower jug of the jug filter and enriches up to 100 liters of water with magnesium ions.

At the same time, it increases the pH value and reduces the redox potential by up to 500 millivolts, creating the alkaline character and antioxidant properties of Minerade® water, which are accompanied by a pleasant soft taste.

Also ideal for water from reverse osmosis systems or distillation units.

Simply pour into an almost water carafe and leave to soak for 3 to 12 hours. The longer, the more alkaline and antioxidant the water will be. Enjoy within a maximum of 30 minutes.

Please do not use in closed vessels, it builds up the pressure!






Related links to "Minerade® sparkling ceramic | to increase the pH and reduce the ORP value"

Opposed views alkaline water
Posted by Karl Heinz Asenbaum on Friday, 4. March 2016

In an article by Mrs Jan Roberts, in the Nexus Magazine, issue 19, it is claimed that drinking alkaline water causes health problems. Is this true?

  • The quoted article from the Australian pharmacist Jan Roberts, from 2008, is titled: Is alkaline water healthy? It appeared before in English in the magazine Informed Voice and quite surprised the water ionizing branch, since this was the first big attack on this technology from a pharmaceutical perspective. It was investigated and it became clear that Mrs Roberts was employed for a filter company and therefore must have seen a rival product in alkaline water, an interest that she had kept secret. It is still worth it to deal with her arguments seriously, since you can reflect on what the manufacturers and distributors of water ionizers have placed and are placing thoughtlessly into the world. Historically seen, the article of Mrs Roberts has contributed to a conceptual clarification and education in Germany of the nowadays established definition “alkaline activated water”. I would like to go through the article point for point, even if my reasoning should repeat itself or overlap. I will cross reference where useful.
  • Mrs Roberts begins with a criticism of the inaccurate definition “alkaline water”, which back then was dominant. Since the English speaking world was in tune with the Japanese inventors and researchers about “alkaline water”, many sales representatives had ignored a quickly growing market, everything that can make water alkaline. Even though this all depends on its composition, most think only about minerals. Gases do influence the pH value in liquids much more. The solubility of these gases depend on the temperature. Acidic carbon dioxide has practically disappeared from the water when at more or less 60 degrees, so that a hot bath is mostly alkaline, an “alkaline bath salt additive” is not needed. Most of these additives don’t make water alkaline at all, yet rather acidic.
  • To professionally measure the pH value of water, it should be, as a rule, degassed beforehand. This does not happen when reviewing water ionizers, so you don’t have an absolutely correct pH value. This criticism is objectively correct, yet, as a result, doesn’t change much, since tap water, which is used as a measurement comparison, is also not degassed previously. Furthermore, consumers usually don’t degas drinks beforehand. Acidic gases do not play a role when assessing drinks.
  • Moreover Mrs Roberts makes a reference, that a pH value is a relative value between acids and bases, so a relative strength of two counterparts, yet says nothing about their individual endurance, which is called buffering capacity. Without a buffering capacity a pH value in water means nothing. This is correct, as well as completely trivial. Mrs Roberts calls the buffering capacity of alkaline water low, as opposed to a strongly buffered hydrochloric acid. This is also correct and with regard to alkaline activated water was already analysed scientifically in the 90’s. An alkaline activated water practically does not sink the pH value of an active stomach. But Mrs Roberts neglects to ask the question, where does the buffering capacity really lie with alkaline water. This also depends on the grade of mineralisation, for there is very soft alkaline activated water and very hard alkaline activated water, which features a higher buffer. It also depends on which type of minerals are ionized together with the activated water.
  • Yet Mrs Roberts simply wrote the unevaluated sentence, which has been heard countless times from advocates of reverse osmosis, in which she untruthfully claims: “The mineral content of common tap water is negligible. The alkalinity effect is too small, to be measurable.” (Page 13). It really seems to be like that in Mrs Roberts Australian home land, for there one is mainly instructed to use rain water cisterns or one uses desalinated sea water. It seems though, that Mrs Roberts has never grappled with the facts of European drinking water analysis.
  • Lets take the water of the three biggest cities in Germany and observe the 4 most important buffering relevant minerals:
  • It is quite obvious that from drinking 2 litres daily of common tap water in the 3 biggest cities of Germany you have an intake in quantities of alkaline generating minerals, which with calcium are one seventh to one fifth of the daily recommended allowance. Mrs Roberts considers this not measurable and negligible. Nevertheless you reach a noteworthy calcium gain, without biting into a calorie rich, fat cheese!

FAQ Mineral content 5 German cities

  • We still have not talked about alkaline activated water, who’s mineral content during the procedure of electrolysis at the cost of the acidic water gets compressed. A controlled measurement in Munich with freshly produced alkaline activated water pH 9,5 from tap water has a gain of 30 mg calcium and 10 mg magnesium!
  • One entry from one of Mrs Roberts quoted keywords “Gesundheit” and “Basisches Wasser” (health and alkaline water) in Google gave on the 23rd July 2013 around 9000 results. The entry of the same keywords in English “health” and “alkaline water” lead to 1,51 million results. One has to ask how long did Mrs Roberts research for her article. Thereby the term “alkaline water” due to its inaccuracy is not the term one should be looking for. If you type in today’s standard terms in quotation marks, you obtain following results:
  • Even the term “activated water” delivers before the release of this book 5500 extraordinarily interesting hits.
  • Yet Mrs Roberts asks on page 14 of her article the rhetorical question: “Is there scientific evidence?” Yet she doesn’t engage herself with the 117.000 results, which Google, on the 16.9.2013, shows under the search terms “alkaline water”, “studies”, “scientific”. Alone in the year 2013 there were already 258 results in Google from the term “scholar”. Mrs Roberts ignores those plain and simple and talks about the “statement of the manufacturers”.

FAQ Search results Jan Roberts

  • The same ignorance is illustrated by the quoted American bestseller author Andrew Weil on page 15, who is mistaken or is consciously lying when he says in 1999: “This mindset is not supported by any kind of scientific analysis”. Even the many studies from many Russian water researchers through Prilutzky and Bakhir with 165 scientific sources; these statements were published 2 years before Mr Weil’s testimony in English. —> Russian research. Also the Japanese and Korean research was known in the USA since 1990 from the book “Reverse Aging”, by S. Whang, which today is still a bestseller in many countries. Also the German electrolyte water therapy – since 1938 registered in Germany as a specialty medicine – was already published in English in an article by Albert A. Riedel. Mr Weil had only to read the sources. For some time we haven’t heard anything from him about this topic, yet his statements from 1999 are still eagerly quoted by opponents of water ionizing.
  • A further authority is quoted on page 14 by Mrs Roberts, the “Health Department of the University of Columbia, USA”. This claim could not have done without a certain amount of boldness. Should one research the given source (http://tinyurl.com/6x82j5), then you do not stumble on to an official statement, but rather on to a blog of a certain “Alice” from 9.6.2006, who describes the whole procedure of acid/base balance with school textbook level to a healthy person and doesn’t even go into activated alkaline water or chronic hyperacidity

Excerpt from the book “Karl Heinz Asenbaum: Electrically activated water – An invention with extraordinary potential.”
Copyright 2016 

Link to this post | Is alkaline water healthy?

Posted by Karl Heinz Asenbaum on Friday, 4. March 2016

Andrea G.: Yesterday a representative was at my house and measured the water of my water ionizer. It definitely has more ppm than tap water! I thought the filter removes all contaminants! Now the man says it could be more and he recommends a reverse osmosis system.

  • PPM means Parts Per Million. With a conductivity metre you can measure the number of all dissolved particles. Often the conductance is also shown in microsiemens. He says something about the amount, not the quality of the water components. 5 ppm lead, quicksilver, uranium or cadmium can be catastrophic, 1000 ppm calcium in comparison is perfect! Whoever wants to judge the quality of water with a measurement of conductance, is either completely uninformed or purposefully does not tell the truth, for to advertise —> reverse osmosis, I refer to this in another section.
  • Where does the increase in ppm come from, even though the water before electrolysis is filtered and like that the contaminants are removed? In the cathode chamber minerals build up from 2 litres of water in 1 litre alkaline activated water. Aside from some filters also adding —> calcium, because it is good for us and for the buffering of activated water. That is why it has mostly more ppm, yet fewer contaminants, which can be measured in alkaline activated water.
  • Last but not least I have to point out that with the conductance solely electrolyte, hence ions can be measured in the water, electrically neutral atoms cannot.
  • Furthermore you should consider, that the very bad contaminants like lead, quicksilver or uranium, also hormones and antibiotics in minimal amounts are very harmful. Heavy metals are measured in micrograms, whilst the good metals like calcium, magnesium or potassium are measured in milligrams, so the order of magnitude is a thousandth bigger. If a filter can remove ppm from the water, it does not mean by a long way that the “evil” ones were removed.

Excerpt from the book “Karl Heinz Asenbaum: Electrically activated water – An invention with extraordinary potential.”
Copyright 2016 

Link to this post | Parts Per Million

Posted by Karl Heinz Asenbaum on Wednesday, 4. May 2016

Hendrik L.: My medical practitioner says that as soon as alkaline activated water comes into contact with the stomach acid, it is immediately neutralized and is ineffective and that due to alkaline water the stomach acidifies even more and as a result the entire intestine becomes over-acidified as well. Please shed some light on these statements.


Gastric acid

Some naturopaths read the magazine “Nexus” and in this regard are unsettled by an article by the Australian pharmacist Jan Roberts, who has made these claims. Please read more in detail under this link.

The fact is that neither the gastric pH is significantly reduced by drinking alkaline activated water in the recommended pH 9.5 range nor is the pH window for the effectiveness of digestive enzymes out of range.

Also contrary to Sang Whangs allegations, no additional acid production is boosted. The latter can, however, occur at pH values above 10.5, which Sang Whang has inexplicably recommended. This is completely contrary to alkaline activated water and is outside natural pH ranges, as is reflected by the drinking water regulations.

A so-called acid rebound, a provocation of gastric acid, on the other hand happens very quickly in case of prolonged ingestion of mineral-based alkali powders.

When alkaline water enters an empty stomach, it virtually doesn’t react. Instead the water glides away over the so-called gastric canal – quickly through the pylorus into the duodenum, where it largely arrives unmixed with the gastric juice.

Only a part of the negative redox potential is transmitted to the gastric juice.


Excerpt from the book “Karl Heinz Asenbaum: Electrically activated water – An invention with extraordinary potential.”
Copyright 2016 

Link to this post | Gastric acid 
Posted by Karl Heinz Asenbaum on Wednesday, 27. April 2016

Hiltrut G.: When staying many years ago in Bad Fussing I learned at a lecture by Dr. Walter Irlacher about alkaline activated water and acquired a water ionizer. I drink alkaline water regularly ever since and have also recommended this water to others and even given it away. Now my son in law came across an article on the Internet: “Alkaline water – a business idea with harmful consequences” published on 09.11.2013 by VISION AQUA by Hans-Peter Bartos, in which alkaline water is depicted as unhealthy and harmful. We are now totally confused whether we can continue to drink alkaline water.


On the mentioned website that you visited, Best-Water distribution, I was not able to find this article. Such sniper actions against activated water by advocates of reverse osmosis and swirlers have a certain tendency to migrate, since they could also be prosecuted under competition law because of their false allegations.

Nevertheless, I know this article, because it was also repeatedly sent to me with a similar request. I have already gone into detail with the core arguments in the articles: Tödt, Roberts, Mister Water,Twister, and reverse osmosis. I now will certainly only grapple with new arguments presented by German Engineer Hans-Peter Bartos.

I can’t blame Mr. Bartos that he deals critically with “alkaline water”, since newly so many inflationary terms have flooded the market terminology. He says in his article quite rightly, that everyone could produce such a water without expensive electrolyzers very cheaply even by admixing pure water with a few crumbs of caustic soda or caustic potash.

But the alkalinity is just the saturation side dish of electrochemically activated water and certainly not what is on the main menu. Also a lye, like the one Mr. Bartos wants to make with caustic soda, one could refer to as “alkaline water”. But there is something missing in this equation: Activated Water. This arises solely from electrolysis.

Bartos continues: “Tap water contains naturally, depending on the area, other substances such as calcium sulphate (gypsum), which is then decomposed by electrolysis into calcium hydroxide (slaked lime) and sulphuric acid.”

Here Bartos overlooks that gypsum and hydrated lime are solids, while calcium cations and sulphate anions are a completely normal part in an aqueous solution in many German mineral, medicinal or tap waters. You can find this on practically every bottle of mineral water when you look up anions and cations in the content.

Yet this has nothing to do with water ionizers! The ions are only the means to an end, to produce a very high surplus of electrons, an ORP in the water which is therefore called activated water, or “electrochemically activated water” (ECA).

Bartos does not recognise what is involved with activated water when he writes: “It is even argued that a liter of treated “alkaline water” has the antioxidant power of ten lemons, even though lemon juice is not at all alkaline, on the contrary extremely acidic (pH 2,4). Such a comparison is not convincing but rather proves the opposite.”

Bartos has indeed understood that a lemon is not alkaline (alkaline acting foods). But because lemons contain citric and ascorbic acid (vitamin C), they are very rich in antioxidants, although not nearly as rich as alkaline activated water.

But he has confused sour lemons with rusty screws. Because the antioxidant power of alkaline activated water is in a class of its own that is completely independent of the alkaline character of water. Using electrolysis you can even produce an acidic or neutral water with antioxidant properties . So Bartos has not understood at all the basic idea of alkaline activated water, that it can be alkaline and antioxidant simultaneously.

The core of Bartos’ thesis structure lies in his following statement: “Why “alkaline water” is not healthy.” An alkaline effect would not even go beyond the stomach, because the digestive juice of the stomach is highly acidic and would neutralize the alkaline water immediately. Rather this would weaken the gastric acid and the body would have to respond by producing more stomach acid.


To this end, I wish to highlight: Our stomach, when it is not busy digesting a meal, has a pH value of 4 which is less acidic than a glass of orange juice. Only the gastric juice, which is injected into the stomach only during food intake, has a pH of about 1,5. It is therefore about 10 x more acidic than a soda with a pH of 2,5. However, this gastric juice has a high acidic buffer so it is hardly changed by neither neutral tap water nor alkaline activated water.

This has been thoroughly researched in Russia in 1997 and confirmed scientifically. (FAQ: Russian research, stomach acid). Blocked protein digestion, pepsin inactivity, parasite promotion – everything Bartos lists, according to current scientific knowledge, has been proven wrong.

Alkaline activated water for drinking has mostly a pH of  9,5 , which the German Drinking Water Ordinance permits even for tap water. Natural waters, for example long mountain rivers such as the Inn, are often very alkaline. Water with this pH can not remotely disturb the production of gastric acid, unlike certain agents such as Alka-Seltzer or proton pump inhibitors do.

It is important that our drinking water is preferably alkaline and that we can replace the many harmful acidic drinks. This is an important, constant step towards beating hyperacidity.

Precisely for this reason are electrolysis cells in a water ionizer for drinking purposes designed, so that they produce an antioxidant alkaline water. You could also create an antioxidant neutral or acidic water, but the experience, the physiology and the flavour speak for alkaline water. But primarily with alkaline activated water its about the energy wealth in the form of a negative ORP.

If Bartos writes about the redox potential, it shows his whole misunderstanding of the relationships. The core concept of relaxation time is not even familiar to him. That alkaline activated water does not have a permanent antioxidant effect he considers a disadvantage. But precisely this is its attribute, because a fresh apple is also healthier than an old one. So its redox potential also has a relaxation time, albeit longer. Just like us when we age. With alkaline activated water we can evidently extend this process of ageing.

About the erroneously illustrated relationship by Bartos, in the context of minerals in the water and risk of heart attack, as well as the WHO assessment, please read further details under the headings: risk of heart attacks and stomach acid.


Excerpt from the book “Karl Heinz Asenbaum: Electrically activated water – An invention with extraordinary potential.”
Copyright 2016 

Posted by Karl Heinz Asenbaum on Friday, 4. March 2016

Yesim D.: I am irritated, if I am drinking the right water, your statements are different to that of the manufacturer’s.

  • Where you start doesn’t depend on the chosen levels but rather on your taste. The level is also never the gauge, unless a competent expert has set the water ionizer according to the water flow correctly for your water.
  • To illustrate the point here you have an example: If you set your device in Aachen, Germany, to level 3 with a water flow of 2 litres/minute, you will obtain alkaline water with a pH value of 10. If you do the same in Würzburg, Germany, you will obtain a value of pH 8,5. The result always depends on the water source, the water flow rate and the chosen level.
  • For this reason some manufacturers have placed symbols next to the operating buttons, like cooking pots, a drinking glass, pastry bowls, etc. Very misleading, since the exactly desired pH value gives the information of the water its purpose. Since most manufacturers are not bothered with the European market, these annoying pictures, which are tuned to Japanese and Korean soft water levels, are a nuisance and dum down the consumers.
  • To really know what comes out of an ionizer, the delivered indicator drops for —>pH measurement is a very important utensil after the first assembly. You can ascertain how your water reacts to the device with the different levels and the different flow rate.
  • For the preparation of activated alkaline drinking water a general value of pH 8,5 and 9,5 is recommended. Normal drinking water is usually at ca. pH 7,5. If you raise it to pH 8,5 it is 10 times more alkaline (10 x more OH ions), at pH 9,5 it is 100 times more alkaline. Sometimes tap water only has a pH of 6,5 or already pH 8,5. That exists in certain areas everywhere.
  • Therefore you should simultaneously always measure your tap water with the drops and compare it to the ionized water. 90 % of people are enthusiastic if already at the beginning they drink 2 colour levels above the usual water. 10 % are more sensitive and prefer to drink 1 colour level higher. Let your sense of taste decide in the beginning, when you start. Yet never drink activated water above pH 9,5 without a doctor’s recommendation, for this is not suitable as drinking water.

FAQ pH value drinking recommendation


Excerpt from the book “Karl Heinz Asenbaum: Electrically activated water – An invention with extraordinary potential.”
Copyright 2016 

Link to this post | Am I drinking the right water?

Read, write and discuss reviews...
Read More
Customer evaluation for "Minerade® sparkling ceramic | to increase the pH and reduce the ORP value"
Write an evaluation
Evaluations will be activated after verification.

The fields marked with * are required.

I have read the privacy policy
Orgone BioMat 7000mx Orgone BioMat 7000mx
From €1,990.00 *
Aquaphor® Mono Filter head Aquaphor® Mono Filter head
€77.00 * €97.00 *

Do you have any questions about hydrogen, water ionizers, reverse osmosis systems or water filters?

  • England (UK): +44 20 331 835 68
  • WhatsApp: +49 179 21 66 231
  • Germany: +49 89 416117990
  • Switzerland: +41 315 28 10 86
  • Turkey: Ali Product +90 553 808 87 97
  • fragen@aquacentrum.de
  • service@aquacentrum.de
  • Skype: aquacentre
  • Fax : +49 89 416117991

> Product consulting: Yasin Akgün, Dipl.-Ing. TU Munich
> FAQ's: Karl Heinz Asenbaum, Author & Researcher




Action: 10% discount for social welfare recipients by proof before or after ordering by E-mail with this voucher: 10% social welfare discount