Guest guest Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Another interesting Pavelka paper is " Biological Half-life of Bromide in the Rat Depends Primarily on the Magnitude of Sodium Intake " , which shows that the role of salt in getting rid of bromide comes from sodium, not chloride. Fascinating! > > > > > > > > > Can someone refresh me on this.... > > > > > > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and > > > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body. > > > > > > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others > > > off as compared to the weakest? > > > > > > Thanks. > > > Ali > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Blasted prepositions! They're so ambiguous! > > > > > > > > Can someone refresh me on this.... > > > > > > > > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and > > > > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body. > > > > > > > > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking > > > > the others > > > > off as compared to the weakest? > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Ali > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 I've been following this discussion and have yet to see any response that substantiates the claim that iodine pushes out other halides despite its higher atomic weight and the fact that lower weight halides can displace higher weight ones but the inverse is not true. Is there any or is it simply hopeful speculation masquerading as fact? Pamela > > This must have been something revealed by Dr. Abraham's work? It would be great to have a document to refer to since the written information by Dr. Jarvis in 1957 is the most referred to at the moment and he definitively states that a reverse order is not possible as does the current chemistry references (in vitro). > > Did Dr. Abraham find a different result in vivo? Can you direct me to the document which provides explanation as to how large amounts of iodine can displace the other halides? > > Even after reading the Optimox documents I was under the impression that chloride (unrefined celtic sea salt in the protocol) is what displaces bromide (or at least it is more desirable to use than fluoride in vivo). > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 When my bromine tested sky high (78) in the 24-hour iodine loading test, Dr. Flechas told my doc that I should up my Iodoral to 50 mg per day and take 1 teaspoon of Celtic salt per day. As I understood it, the rationale was that the iodine would displace bromine from the tissues, and the chloride in the salt would drive the bromine from the bloodstream into the urine. I am awaiting results of my repeat test after three months of this. I will post them. I would also like to see more documentation supporting these ideas. Reading posts here, one gets the impression that few, if any, people actually succeed in reducing their bromide to " normal " levels, i.e. under 10. For now, I am relying primarily on the clinical experience of Dr. Flechas, Dr. Brownstein, etc. and my desire to do something about my alarmingly high bromine test result. Dr. Flechas told my doc I was lucky I wasn't experiencing schizophrenic symptoms at that level! > > > > > > > > > > > > Can someone refresh me on this.... > > > > > > > > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and > > > > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body. > > > > > > > > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others > > > > off as compared to the weakest? > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Ali > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Dr. Flechas told my doc that if I had a salt-sensitive blood pressure problem, I could take magnesium chloride instead of Celtic salt, since the chloride is what helps to clear the bromine. I think that's the conventional wisdom, but how well it's really been established I don't know. > > > > > > > > > > > > Can someone refresh me on this.... > > > > > > > > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and > > > > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body. > > > > > > > > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others > > > > off as compared to the weakest? > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Ali > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Did you run across this 2003 article by Dr. Abraham? : Iodine supplementation markedly increases urinary excretion of fluoride and bromide excerpt: " Is there a practical and simple way to lower the body's burden of fluoride and bromide? It has been known for sometime now that bromide competes with chloride in the extracellular space and that the total molar concentration of bromide plus chloride remains constant. (8) This concept has been used to decrease extracellular bromide levels by saline loading. However, the presence of bromide in the thyroid gland (9) and the central nervous system (10) suggests that there is another intracellular " pool " of bromide, not responding to chloride. In the thyroid gland, bromide competes with iodide for uptake, oxydation and organification. " Source: http://iodine4health.com/special/halogens/abraham_halogens.htm Perhaps this is one piece of the puzzle regarding the statement that made about iodine pushing the other halides off of the receptors at a large enough dose? > > > > > > > > > > > > Can someone refresh me on this.... > > > > > > > > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and > > > > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body. > > > > > > > > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others > > > > off as compared to the weakest? > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Ali > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Pamela, I have been thinking the same thing since day 1. Perhaps the reasoning about how it works is incorrect. If I had known I would have this nasty thyroid (and other) problem, I would have majored in biochemistry!!! Once Br and Cl and F are bound, I don't understand how iodine can displace them. Would it make sense to consider that if we flood the body with more than ample iodine, that as there is tissue turnover the odds of iodine being bound increases and the odds of dumping the Br, F (and uneeded Cl) increases? The 'power in numbers' theory rears its head again! Then, over time, you detox the bad guys and hang on to the good ones, assuming you reduce input of the bad of course. Is there evidence that tissues with a higher turnover rate are more quickly positively affected by iodine supplementation? Just my speculation as the result of the others not making sense to me. : ) > > > > This must have been something revealed by Dr. Abraham's work? It would be great to have a document to refer to since the written information by Dr. Jarvis in 1957 is the most referred to at the moment and he definitively states that a reverse order is not possible as does the current chemistry references (in vitro). > > > > Did Dr. Abraham find a different result in vivo? Can you direct me to the document which provides explanation as to how large amounts of iodine can displace the other halides? > > > > Even after reading the Optimox documents I was under the impression that chloride (unrefined celtic sea salt in the protocol) is what displaces bromide (or at least it is more desirable to use than fluoride in vivo). > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Hmmm, I wonder if they mean salt as in " sodium chloride " ? Have you seen the medical papers that reflect IV saline is the treatment for severe bromine toxicity? Read my post #68549 for a couple of links that may be of interest to you. An additional reference is to the Merck Veterinary Manual which states that " Bromide Intoxication should be treated with an IV infusion of normal saline to promote renal excretion. " http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/index.jsp?cfile=htm/bc/190702.htm You may also be interested in this link, an extensive article by Dr. Guy Abraham: http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-18/IOD_18.htm (Msg posted A.M. - 4/16/11 @ 11:04 EDT/10:04 CDT/8:04 PDT) > > > > > > > > > > > > Can someone refresh me on this.... > > > > > > > > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and > > > > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body. > > > > > > > > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others > > > > off as compared to the weakest? > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Ali > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 The article I referenced showed that sodium reduces bromide levels, not chloride. I realize salt is made up of both sodium and chloride; the experiment was to see which was more important. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can someone refresh me on this.... > > > > > > > > > > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and > > > > > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body. > > > > > > > > > > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others > > > > > off as compared to the weakest? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > Ali > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 I wonder if it might be that the receptors prefer iodine and will dump anything else so that iodine can take up the receptor?ArielOn Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:16 AM, agwinborne <awinborne@...> wrote: Â Pamela, I have been thinking the same thing since day 1. Perhaps the reasoning about how it works is incorrect. If I had known I would have this nasty thyroid (and other) problem, I would have majored in biochemistry!!! Once Br and Cl and F are bound, I don't understand how iodine can displace them. Would it make sense to consider that if we flood the body with more than ample iodine, that as there is tissue turnover the odds of iodine being bound increases and the odds of dumping the Br, F (and uneeded Cl) increases? The 'power in numbers' theory rears its head again! Then, over time, you detox the bad guys and hang on to the good ones, assuming you reduce input of the bad of course. Is there evidence that tissues with a higher turnover rate are more quickly positively affected by iodine supplementation? Just my speculation as the result of the others not making sense to me. : ) > > > > This must have been something revealed by Dr. Abraham's work? It would be great to have a document to refer to since the written information by Dr. Jarvis in 1957 is the most referred to at the moment and he definitively states that a reverse order is not possible as does the current chemistry references (in vitro). > > > > Did Dr. Abraham find a different result in vivo? Can you direct me to the document which provides explanation as to how large amounts of iodine can displace the other halides? > > > > Even after reading the Optimox documents I was under the impression that chloride (unrefined celtic sea salt in the protocol) is what displaces bromide (or at least it is more desirable to use than fluoride in vivo). > > > -- " Throughout much of the world, most people are busy being boring. " -Tom Donohue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Reading through the articles and books of Abraham, Brownstein and Flechas will provide answers. Flechas has done testing on over 4000 folks, last I read. I'm sure that number is much higher now. It takes large amounts of iodine to saturate the body and rid the bromide, etc. The halogens all have 7 electrons in their outer shells and based on their atomic weight fluorine, chlorine and bromine are able to displace iodine because they can attach to the same receptor sites. In high enough doses iodine will displace the toxic halogens. Most of us are iodine deficient and we consume large amounts of bromide, chlorine and fluoride which, put simply, take over when not enough iodine is present. Saturation is the key. Linn > > > > > > > > This must have been something revealed by Dr. Abraham's work? It would > > be great to have a document to refer to since the written information by Dr. > > Jarvis in 1957 is the most referred to at the moment and he definitively > > states that a reverse order is not possible as does the current chemistry > > references (in vitro). > > > > > > > > Did Dr. Abraham find a different result in vivo? Can you direct me to > > the document which provides explanation as to how large amounts of iodine > > can displace the other halides? > > > > > > > > Even after reading the Optimox documents I was under the impression > > that chloride (unrefined celtic sea salt in the protocol) is what displaces > > bromide (or at least it is more desirable to use than fluoride in vivo). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > * " Throughout much of the world, most people are busy being boring. " * > -*Tom Donohue* > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2011 Report Share Posted April 17, 2011 I'm curious: " In high enough doses iodine will displace the toxic halogens " , but how if it doesn't work in the inverse order, and iodine cannot displace the other halide from the receptor? At what point does the other halide 'loosen up' or lose its strength and the iodine can then take its rightful place on the receptor again? Is it a matter of the body regenerating or creating a new receptor (as another member queried), and with saturation, we have better odds at having iodine land in it? I haven't purchased any of the books; is the process explained in one of the books? I'd like to understand this process better. Singularly, iodine saturation wouldn't seem effective if the receptors are already occupied and can't be displaced with iodine. TIA, Sheila Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 I'd suggest reading Brownstein's books and Abraham and Flechas works and articles, which will give you much more in-depth information and testing. I don't know that one could give a specific time table, it would be dependent on dosing and health issues. Linn > > I'm curious: " In high enough doses iodine will displace the toxic halogens " , but how if it doesn't work in the inverse order, and iodine cannot displace the other halide from the receptor? > > At what point does the other halide 'loosen up' or lose its strength and the iodine can then take its rightful place on the receptor again? Is it a matter of the body regenerating or creating a new receptor (as another member queried), and with saturation, we have better odds at having iodine land in it? > > I haven't purchased any of the books; is the process explained in one of the books? > > I'd like to understand this process better. Singularly, iodine saturation wouldn't seem effective if the receptors are already occupied and can't be displaced with iodine. > > TIA, > > Sheila > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.