Guest guest Posted December 29, 2004 Report Share Posted December 29, 2004 This is a post on another board that has been discussing labs. I thought some of you might be interested. Coming into work with autistic children from the field of psychiatry, I was not prepared with a strong medical background as an internist/geneticist might have been. I learned working in a solo practice by testing hair, urine, feces, and blood in every way I could to try to find out how I could help these children, inspired by my desire to help my granddaughter Chelsey. I would never have had the audacity to start a child on prescription anti-fungals/bacterials and anti-virals “empirically” without lab evidence that those infestations were present as you might do. I eliminated many tests and labs in this learning process (especially Great Plains), staying with those that helped me get good results. Repeatedly, I found and moreso all the time find positive responses to my interventions based on this testing, until over the seven years I have been doing this I have worked out a protocol that is helping most of the children with whom I work as well as those I evaluate. My commitment to my parents is to keep searching and working with them until their child recovers, and the parents and their children are my greatest teachers other than Chelsey. My book has sold over 20,000 copies plus thousands I have given away, and has been translated into Indonesian and now is being translated into Chinese, and I don’t even count those copies sold, as I allowed them to sell it for about $5 in those countries. I receive hundreds of posts and letters yearly from parents all over the world thanking me for my book helping them find a way to start their children on the road to recovery, and had to stop accepting patients for ongoing care last year due to time constraints. I occasionally accept evaluations now that I have a list of doctors to refer to for ongoing care following my treatment plan from the evaluation, as I have been spending a great deal of my time teaching my protocol to other physicians in an 8-hour training course in eleven states in the last two years, and as of now over 250 doctors have taken this training. I have found Dr. Vojdani at Immunosciences to be an indefatiguable researcher, and believe he has about 200 papers published in professional journals by now. His willingness to provide testing at no cost to parents for dozens of my children trying to understand mechanisms operating in autism, with some of them showing nothing and teaching us to go further, has been very gratifying and has helped many kids all over the country. Yes, I eliminated many, many tests to use the ones that guide me in my most common treatment decisions, but those others would be available for challenging cases where there might be a need for more extensive investigation. I still need to do a viral panel before I would prescribe anti-virals to children – maybe that’s a limitation, but when I see a child with a high viral titer change within a few weeks toward rapid improvement, I have been validated repeatedly for doing this testing. And Dr. Lord at Metametrix has written and is now revising an excellent text that has guided me through understanding many of my kids lab reports, “Laboratory Evaluations in Molecular Medicine – Nutrients, Toxicants, and Cell Regulators”. Perhaps I have done so many of these tests that I now use them like psychics use their tea leaves or tarot cards, but my success in helping children with this process spurs me on, and many other doctors I am mentoring are having similar successes. It is extremely gratifying to have researchers like Deth and Jill come up with basic research that verifies what many of us were already doing with nutrients, and helping us add even more aspects to the nutritional program that are making it even more effective. Doctor’s Data provides toxicity reports that help me in my chelation efforts, and I respect Dr. Quig who knows a great deal about heavy metals and detoxification protocols. He as well as Dr. Vojdani and Dr. Lord are always available and will spend any time necessary to work out inconsistencies I might find in my clinical view and my testing results. Again, I made great effort to correlate lab results with what I see clinically to try to help the kids get better, and feel any success I have I owe to these three labs and their directors who provide endless helpful education and discussion and willingness to investigate questions I have clinically that don’t jibe with the reports. They are changing and growing all the time, just like all of us. Though I am in no position to judge lab work as some may be able to do, university labs mentioned (e,g, Mayo) do not do the kind of work I need for my task. Mayo reports come back invariably negative, as I do not run into many genetic defects that they check for, and they do not investigate the pathways in the same way that I think our kids need. This may be different for Down kids or CP kids or kids with genetic defects, and I would have no idea how to work with this population. However, to characterize the labs I use so beneficially as unacceptable makes me sad in light of the enormous help they have given me in my work, and I would invite any parent who feels they have been unjustly taken advantage of by the way I work and the labs I use to come forth if they choose to. I just needed to present my side of the picture, and maintain the utmost respect for others’ approaches and orientations as I do this. Jaquelyn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 29, 2004 Report Share Posted December 29, 2004 Dear Jaquleyn, There is not even an iota of doubt in the work you are doing in this area . Had it not been your expertise( thanks to that great book of yours) and sometimes very loving words in the email, people like us would have been in deep darkness without knowing what needs to be done. Therefore our family fully supports you in your endaveour. Keep marching ahead and we are with you. Hope one day there will be a magic cure ,as I am sure, that all these knowledge and research would not go waste. More dark the tunnel gets, we know that we are in the midway. Darkness cannot last long and we will soon see the end of the tunnel. best regards and merry belated christmas greetings to you. sunil sybuk On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:27:45 -0800, Jaquelyn McCandless wrote: > > This is a post on another board that has been discussing labs. I thought some of you might be interested. > > Coming into work with autistic children from the field of psychiatry, I was not prepared with a strong medical background as an internist/geneticist might have been. I learned working in a solo practice by testing hair, urine, feces, and blood in every way I could to try to find out how I could help these children, inspired by my desire to help my granddaughter Chelsey. I would never have had the audacity to start a child on prescription anti-fungals/bacterials and anti-virals " empirically " without lab evidence that those infestations were present as you might do. I eliminated many tests and labs in this learning process (especially Great Plains), staying with those that helped me get good results. Repeatedly, I found and moreso all the time find positive responses to my interventions based on this testing, until over the seven years I have been doing this I have worked out a protocol that is helping most of the children with whom I work as well as those I evaluate. My commitment to my parents is to keep searching and working with them until their child recovers, and the parents and their children are my greatest teachers other than Chelsey. My book has sold over 20,000 copies plus thousands I have given away, and has been translated into Indonesian and now is being translated into Chinese, and I don't even count those copies sold, as I allowed them to sell it for about $5 in those countries. I receive hundreds of posts and letters yearly from parents all over the world thanking me for my book helping them find a way to start their children on the road to recovery, and had to stop accepting patients for ongoing care last year due to time constraints. I occasionally accept evaluations now that I have a list of doctors to refer to for ongoing care following my treatment plan from the evaluation, as I have been spending a great deal of my time teaching my protocol to other physicians in an 8-hour training course in eleven states in the last two years, and as of now over 250 doctors have taken this training. > > I have found Dr. Vojdani at Immunosciences to be an indefatiguable researcher, and believe he has about 200 papers published in professional journals by now. His willingness to provide testing at no cost to parents for dozens of my children trying to understand mechanisms operating in autism, with some of them showing nothing and teaching us to go further, has been very gratifying and has helped many kids all over the country. Yes, I eliminated many, many tests to use the ones that guide me in my most common treatment decisions, but those others would be available for challenging cases where there might be a need for more extensive investigation. I still need to do a viral panel before I would prescribe anti-virals to children – maybe that's a limitation, but when I see a child with a high viral titer change within a few weeks toward rapid improvement, I have been validated repeatedly for doing this testing. > > And Dr. Lord at Metametrix has written and is now revising an excellent text that has guided me through understanding many of my kids lab reports, " Laboratory Evaluations in Molecular Medicine – Nutrients, Toxicants, and Cell Regulators " . Perhaps I have done so many of these tests that I now use them like psychics use their tea leaves or tarot cards, but my success in helping children with this process spurs me on, and many other doctors I am mentoring are having similar successes. It is extremely gratifying to have researchers like Deth and Jill come up with basic research that verifies what many of us were already doing with nutrients, and helping us add even more aspects to the nutritional program that are making it even more effective. > > Doctor's Data provides toxicity reports that help me in my chelation efforts, and I respect Dr. Quig who knows a great deal about heavy metals and detoxification protocols. He as well as Dr. Vojdani and Dr. Lord are always available and will spend any time necessary to work out inconsistencies I might find in my clinical view and my testing results. Again, I made great effort to correlate lab results with what I see clinically to try to help the kids get better, and feel any success I have I owe to these three labs and their directors who provide endless helpful education and discussion and willingness to investigate questions I have clinically that don't jibe with the reports. They are changing and growing all the time, just like all of us. Though I am in no position to judge lab work as some may be able to do, university labs mentioned (e,g, Mayo) do not do the kind of work I need for my task. Mayo reports come back invariably negative, as I do not run into many genetic defects that they check for, and they do not investigate the pathways in the same way that I think our kids need. This may be different for Down kids or CP kids or kids with genetic defects, and I would have no idea how to work with this population. However, to characterize the labs I use so beneficially as unacceptable makes me sad in light of the enormous help they have given me in my work, and I would invite any parent who feels they have been unjustly taken advantage of by the way I work and the labs I use to come forth if they choose to. I just needed to present my side of the picture, and maintain the utmost respect for others' approaches and orientations as I do this. Jaquelyn > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 29, 2004 Report Share Posted December 29, 2004 Dr. McCandless, Your perspective on laboratories somewhat relates to where I'm at with my son (age 5, dxed ADHD at 3.5) right now, and it is very helpful to know which labs you have most confidence in and how what you've gained in their use. I think what I need to figure out is what I can gain from their use as a parent. We recently received hair analysis results from Doctor's Data, and are awaiting follow-up test results (OAT-metametrix, stool-Great Smokies) after a cycle of diflucan to treat yeast. We have good dialogue with and complete confidence in our DAN! doc, but I am a vigorous researcher and contributor to the choices we make for him, which so far are completely in line with your book (my bible) and current DAN protocol. We have a great DAN, but never again will I make a medical decision for my son based solely on any doctor's advice (i.e. vaccinations, Ritalin, et al). With lab tests, though, I have no choice but to accept what I see, even if it's difficult to extract what the results are indicating. I've posted my son's recent hair test results below as an example to support this discussion. They perplex me. The " counting rules " don't clearly indicate a mercury issue. Presence of some toxic metals, none in dramatic measure. There seem to be some mineral absorption issues, none dramatic. Our DAN has indicated that chelation may still be beneficial, and I tend to agree based mostly on his behaviors. In two weeks at our next appt. we'll likely begin MB12 shots and more specific supplementation, and as the yeast is subdued we'll begin discussing TD-DMPS. But these lab results don't provide me with as much support for starting chelation as I'd hoped they would. Do you advise your patients/parents on how they should interpret lab results, and how much weight they should place on them? Bill The test results POTENTIALLY TOXIC ELEMENTS element result ref. range color aluminum 10 < 8.0 yellow antimony 0.055 <.066 green arsenic 0.11 <0.080 yellow beryllium <0.01 <0.020 no line bismuth 0.051 <0.13 green cadmium 0.13 <0.15 green lead 0.69 <1.0 green mercury 0.19 <0.40 green platinum <0.003 <0.005 no line thallium <0.001 <0.010 no line thorium <0.001 <0.005 no line uranium <0.044 <0.060 green nickel 0.12 <0.40 green silver 0.06 <0.20 green tin 0.42 <0.30 yellow titanium 0.49 <1.0 yellow ESSENTIAL AND OTHER ELEMENTS element result ref range color under/over 50% calcium 175 125-370 green under 50% magnesium 15 12-30 green under 50% sodium 16 12-90 green under 50% potassium 14 12-40 green under 50% copper 15 8.0-16 green over 50% zinc 150 100-190 green over 50% manganese 0.23 0.20-0.55 green under 50% chromium 0.33 0.26-0.50 green under 50% vanadium 0.046 0.030-0.10 green under 50% molybdenum 0.091 0.050-0.13 green over 50% boron 0.90 0.60-4.0 green under 50% iodine 0.36 0.25-1.3 green under 50% lithium <0.004 0.007-0.023 red under 50% phosphorus 222 160-250 green over 50% selenium 1.0 0.95-1.7 green under 50% strontium 0.40 0.16-1.0 white (at 50th percentile) sulfur 57400 45500-53000 yellow over 50% barium 0.37 0.16-0.80 white (at 50th percentile) cobalt 0.019 0.013-0.035 green under 50% iron 10 8.0-19 green under 50% germanium 0.047 0.045-0.065 green under 50% rubidium 0.020 0.016-0.18 green under 50% zirconium 0.33 0.040-1.0 white (at 50th percentile) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 Bill: I do not recommend parents' interpreting tests, though some get very knowledgeable and can do so to some extent. I think a DAN! doc who has seen hundreds of tests can put these results together with the clinical picture of your child and give you the best direction. Tests are only aids; the clinical condition of the child is by far the most important thing. If your child had Hep B vaccine in infancy, certainly before they finally lowered the Hg dose in 2002, I would definitely consider chelation no matter what any test says. Dr. JM Re: Labs etc > > > Dr. McCandless, > > Your perspective on laboratories somewhat relates to where I'm at > with my son (age 5, dxed ADHD at 3.5) right now, and it is very > helpful to know which labs you have most confidence in and how what > you've gained in their use. I think what I need to figure out is what > I can gain from their use as a parent. > > We recently received hair analysis results from Doctor's Data, and > are awaiting follow-up test results (OAT-metametrix, stool-Great > Smokies) after a cycle of diflucan to treat yeast. We have good > dialogue with and complete confidence in our DAN! doc, but I am a > vigorous researcher and contributor to the choices we make for him, > which so far are completely in line with your book (my bible) and > current DAN protocol. We have a great DAN, but never again will I > make a medical decision for my son based solely on any doctor's > advice (i.e. vaccinations, Ritalin, et al). > > With lab tests, though, I have no choice but to accept what I see, > even if it's difficult to extract what the results are indicating. > I've posted my son's recent hair test results below as an example to > support this discussion. They perplex me. The " counting rules " don't > clearly indicate a mercury issue. Presence of some toxic metals, none > in dramatic measure. There seem to be some mineral absorption issues, > none dramatic. Our DAN has indicated that chelation may still be > beneficial, and I tend to agree based mostly on his behaviors. In two > weeks at our next appt. we'll likely begin MB12 shots and more > specific supplementation, and as the yeast is subdued we'll begin > discussing TD-DMPS. But these lab results don't provide me with as > much support for starting chelation as I'd hoped they would. > > Do you advise your patients/parents on how they should interpret lab > results, and how much weight they should place on them? > > Bill > > The test results > > POTENTIALLY TOXIC ELEMENTS > element result ref. range color > aluminum 10 < 8.0 yellow > antimony 0.055 <.066 green > arsenic 0.11 <0.080 yellow > beryllium <0.01 <0.020 no line > bismuth 0.051 <0.13 green > cadmium 0.13 <0.15 green > lead 0.69 <1.0 green > mercury 0.19 <0.40 green > platinum <0.003 <0.005 no line > thallium <0.001 <0.010 no line > thorium <0.001 <0.005 no line > uranium <0.044 <0.060 green > nickel 0.12 <0.40 green > silver 0.06 <0.20 green > tin 0.42 <0.30 yellow > titanium 0.49 <1.0 yellow > > ESSENTIAL AND OTHER ELEMENTS > element result ref range color under/over 50% > calcium 175 125-370 green under 50% > magnesium 15 12-30 green under 50% > sodium 16 12-90 green under 50% > potassium 14 12-40 green under 50% > copper 15 8.0-16 green over 50% > zinc 150 100-190 green over 50% > manganese 0.23 0.20-0.55 green under 50% > chromium 0.33 0.26-0.50 green under 50% > vanadium 0.046 0.030-0.10 green under 50% > molybdenum 0.091 0.050-0.13 green over 50% > boron 0.90 0.60-4.0 green under 50% > iodine 0.36 0.25-1.3 green under 50% > lithium <0.004 0.007-0.023 red under 50% > phosphorus 222 160-250 green over 50% > selenium 1.0 0.95-1.7 green under 50% > strontium 0.40 0.16-1.0 white (at 50th percentile) > sulfur 57400 45500-53000 yellow over 50% > barium 0.37 0.16-0.80 white (at 50th percentile) > cobalt 0.019 0.013-0.035 green under 50% > iron 10 8.0-19 green under 50% > germanium 0.047 0.045-0.065 green under 50% > rubidium 0.020 0.016-0.18 green under 50% > zirconium 0.33 0.040-1.0 white (at 50th percentile) > > > > > > > > Many frequently asked questions and answers can be found at <http://forums.autism-rxguidebook.com/default.aspx> > > 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.