What Proof Is There That Chelation Is Safe?

[Guest guest]

Check the footnotes on the DAN Mercury Chelation Protocol report. I'm pretty

sure they list a study that led those docs to believe that once bound, DMSA

will not let go of metals. Sorry, I've lent out that report so don't have

the copy handy but it's probably on www.autism.com/ari website.

They have done numerous studies on DMSA taking out lead which you could

access with a little searching. However, I don't really think there is any

way to be 100% certain that you won't redistribute some metals when

chelating. However, there's also no way to be certain that your own body

won't redistribute metals as it spontaneously releases them from cells

without a chelator so to me it makes sense to get as much out of the body as

possible with a chelator, yet do it slow and as safely as possible. For

those who say that metals are not released from the cells without a chelator,

I'd have to disagree. In my several years' of detoxing experience, I've had

several " healing crisis " rounds where my body released toxins with no

chelator or other thing to help it release. I'm finding that as my son and I

get healthier, our bodies are able to dump things by itself that it wasn't

able to before.

Gaylen

[Guest guest]

Sorry. I'm a new list member with very limited time to search your

message archives (which probably has the answer).

How do we know that DMSA doesn't, at times, accidentally " let go " of

the metals and allow them to redeposit in the body; perhaps in a more

damaging site (such as the brain)?

Thank you.

Bruce

[Guest guest]

>Sorry. I'm a new list member with very limited time to search your

>message archives (which probably has the answer).

>

>How do we know that DMSA doesn't, at times, accidentally " let go " of

>the metals and allow them to redeposit in the body; perhaps in a more

>damaging site (such as the brain)?

Hello Bruce, and welcome,

Yours is the sort of query that would take ENORMOUS amounts of

time to find the answer for in the archive. It is not clear

what one would search on -- and even then it is not unique enough.

It would take me days or weeks.....

Here are a few answers:

1. The file:

/files/ANDY_INDEX

contains lots of material on different chelators and how to use them.

It includes the following 2 links which I think may be a START on

an answer to your question about DMSA:

/message/1088 rebuttal to idea

that DMSA gets mercury out of brain

/message/2411 rebuttal of idea

that DMSA removes mercury from brain

I believe (did NOT just go check) that these include stuff like references

to studies and so on showing that DMSA does NOT cross the blood brain

barrier (and therefore does NOT have the ability to drop merc in brain).

This is obviously a point of some disagreement, or the above would

not be " rebuttals " .

2. The real answer (please take a deep breath, okay?) is that DMSA

*does* cause some mercury redistribution. As I understand it this is

also true of any other EFFECTIVE chelator. This is why we do cycles

with MANY doses in a row-- the continuous effect results in excretion

of mercury from the body. When we STOP a round, there is a certain

amount of mercury that is redistributed. This is my understanding,

anyway. So, the overall proportion is more excretion than redustribution.

The length of the chelation cycle will affect the proprtions.

(, are you listening??)

Whether this redistribution causes worse damage is a pretty complex

topic--- for the moment I'll stick with saying that the point is

to get MOST of the mercury out in each " round " of chelation, with

relatively little redistribution. You can see where repeating this

again and again will also get out the stuff that WAS redistributed.

I notice your subject line is " What Proof is there that chelation is

safe? " and your question is about DMSA/redistribuiton specifically.

If you have more questions, feel free.

The summary is: chelation is not completely safe. It has risks. You

could study them further. If I may assume for a moment that you or a

child who you care for currently has mercury stored in your/their body,

then you should also consider that mercury poisoning (leaving the

mercury there) has risks. I would also recommend that you look

into these risks. They are quite grave, in my opinion.

best,

Moria

[Guest guest]

>>Sorry. I'm a new list member with very limited time to search your

>>message archives (which probably has the answer).

>>

>>How do we know that DMSA doesn't, at times, accidentally " let go " of

>>the metals and allow them to redeposit in the body; perhaps in a more

>>damaging site (such as the brain)?

I'm just thinking about the answer I sent and want to add to it.

You asked about PROOF, and I therefore took a rather " narrow "

approach to the question. Another very valid approach would be

to point out that chelation (e.g. with DMSA) takes a VERY long

time, and one has time to SEE if there is damage or progress or

both. If your kid's brain appears to be " working better " this

might quell many fears.

Regarding what I said in the last note about redistribution, I would

like to add that there is NOT " agreement " on what I stated about

there being some redistribution expected with every round.

(As far as I can tell there is not general agreement about

ANYTHING <giggling>).

Here is a quote which adds flavor:

The DAN protocol says the following about their reasons for suggesting

use of DMSA/ALA every 8 hours: " Dr. Amy, Dr. El-Dahr and Dr. Bradstreet

are following the advice of a different chemist, Dr. Boyd Haley. Dr.

Haley says that DMSA forms a very stable bond with mercury, and none is

" dropped, " so it doesn't matter if you dose at 4 hours or 8. "

I don't recall exactly where I got that quote from.

best,

Moria

[Guest guest]

> Sorry. I'm a new list member with very limited time to search your

> message archives (which probably has the answer).

>

> How do we know that DMSA doesn't, at times, accidentally " let go " of

> the metals and allow them to redeposit in the body; perhaps in a

more

> damaging site (such as the brain)?

It actually does do this. The way to avoid this problem is to use a

proper chelation protocol where you take it every 4 hours in small

doses, instead of the DAN! protocol which makes this problem worse by

giving the chelator improperly.

Andy

>

> Thank you.

>

> Bruce

[Guest guest]

Hi Andy,

With reference to the above, could you tell me why yo think the DAN protocol

could make things worse (or unsafe) when adding ALA.

Thanks

Lee

[Guest guest]

>Hi Andy,

>With reference to the above, could you tell me why yo think the DAN protocol

>could make things worse (or unsafe) when adding ALA.

>Thanks

>Lee

Dear Lee,

Please excuse me for not being Andy. You can find large amounts of

Andy's writing on this subject here:

/files/ANDY_INDEX

Look in the sections with this heading:

KEEPING A STEADY LEVEL OF CHELATORS; " BAD " DOSE SCHEDULES

Oh--- and it is NOT just with ALA that Andy think Dan is less safe.

He thinks DAN's recommended timing for DMSA is also less safe (than

every 4 hours). Reference above will tell you all about it.

best,

Moria

[Guest guest]

> Hi Andy,

> With reference to the above, could you tell me why yo think the DAN

protocol

> could make things worse (or unsafe) when adding ALA.

Because it calls for administering DMSA too widely spaced out, every 8

hours instead of every 4, it calls for administering ALA every 8 or 12

instead of every 3-4, and it calls for wildly excessive dosages.

The result of this is to mobilize lots of mercury and concentrate it

into the most sensitive tissues instead of causing it's excretion.

Andy

> Thanks

> Lee