Hair Test Comparison - Andy help!!!

[Guest guest]

Dear Andy and Listmates,

I have posted the hair results of my 20 month old son. The first

(April 2002) is his first baby hair. To me it shows mercury

toxicity by the counting rules. The second (October 2002) is six

months later, two months after we started treatment. We have not

chelated. He was started on massive quantities of vitamins,

minerals, Taurine, DMG, B12 injections, CLO, EPO, probiotics,

enzymes, and thyroid. If I wouldn't have cut the hair myself, I

would believe it was the same child. What's going on here? I'd

appreciate any feedback. We have recently started oral glutathion,

TTFD as well (but after the test).

DDI - April 25,2002 (4 mos before dx)

POTENTIALLY TOXIC ELEMENTS

element result ref range color

=============================================

aluminum 45 <8.0 red

antimony 0.39 <0.066 red

arsenic 0.041 <0.08 green

beryllium <0.01 <0.02 no line

bismuth 1.5 <0.13 red

cadmium 0.32 <0.15 yellow

lead 4.8 <1.0 red

mercury 1.1 <0.4 yellow

platinum <0.003 <0.005 no line

thallium <0.001 <0.01 no line

thorium <0.001 <0.005 no line

uranium 0.45 <0.06 red

nickel 1.1 <0.4 red

silver 0.7 <0.2 yellow

tin 1.7 <0.3 red

titanium 3.1 <1.0 red

ESSENTIAL AND OTHER ELEMENTS

element result ref range color under/over 50%

============================================================

Calcium 626 125-370 yellow over

Magnesium 66 12-30 yellow over

Sodium 49 12-90 green over

Potassium 78 12-40 yellow over

Copper 23 8-16 yellow over

Zinc 170 100-190 green over

Manganese 0.66 0.2-0.55 yellow over

Chromium 0.53 0.26-0.5 yellow over

Vanadium 0.33 0.03-0.1 red over

Molybdenum 0.2 0.05-0.13 yellow over

Boron 12 0.6-4.0 red over

Iodine 31 0.25-1.3 red over

Lithium 0.022 0.007-0.023 green over

Phosphorus 140 160-250 yellow under

Selenium 1.2 0.95-1.7 white middle

Strontium 5.7 0.16-1.0 red over

Sulfur 47300 45500-53000 green under

Barium 2.5 0.16-0.8 yellow over

Cobalt 0.058 0.013-0.035 yellow over

Iron 25 8.0-19 yellow over

Germanium 0.068 0.045-0.065 yellow over

Rubidium 0.085 0.016-0.018 green over

Zirconium 0.48 0.04-1.0 green over

To me, this seems to satisfy the counting rules.

October 10,2002 (two months after dx)

POTENTIALLY TOXIC ELEMENTS

element result ref range color

=============================================

aluminum 8.9 <8.0 yellow

antimony 0.04 <0.066 green

arsenic 0.12 <0.08 yellow

beryllium <0.01 <0.02 no line

bismuth 0.06 <0.13 green

cadmium 0.1 <0.15 green

lead 0.37 <1.0 green

mercury 0.43 <0.4 yellow

platinum <0.003 <0.005 no line

thallium <0.001 <0.01 no line

thorium <0.001 <0.005 no line

uranium 0.032 <0.06 green

nickel 0.16 <0.4 green

silver 0.05 <0.2 green

tin 0.97 <0.3 red

titanium 1.4 <1.0 yellow

ESSENTIAL AND OTHER ELEMENTS

element result ref range color under/over 50%

============================================================

Calcium 245 125-370 green over

Magnesium 17 12-30 green under

Sodium 430 12-90 red over

Potassium 160 12-40 yellow over

Copper 8.30 8.0-16.0 green under

Zinc 180 100-190 green over

Manganese 0.11 0.2-0.55 yellow under

Chromium 0.25 0.26-0.5 yellow under

Vanadium 0.039 0.03-0.1 green under

Molybdenum 0.18 0.05-0.13 yellow over

Boron 4.9 0.6-4.0 yellow over

Iodine 2.7 0.25-1.3 yellow over

Lithium 0.02 0.007-0.023 green over

Phosphorus 237 160-250 green over

Selenium 0.87 0.95-1.7 yellow under

Strontium 0.47 0.16-1.0 green over

Sulfur 45500 45500-53000 green under

Barium 0.33 0.16-0.8 white middle

Cobalt 0.014 0.013-0.035 green under

Iron 15 8.0-19 green over

Germanium 0.04 0.045-0.065 green under

Rubidium 0.18 0.016-0.18 green over

Zirconium 0.52 0.04-1.0 green over

This seems to not show mercury toxicity.

Question:

1) Does this mean he is naturally detoxifying with the help of the

improved nutrition, B12, etc?

2) Is there a place for chelation still?

3) Should we repeat the test and if so, when?

Thank you all very much. By the way, my son is now 20 mos. old and

is doing very well. (made huge leaps forward with vitamin A loading

and B12). Kim Drummond

[Guest guest]

See answer interspersed with long message.

> Dear Andy and Listmates,

>

> I have posted the hair results of my 20 month old son. The first

> (April 2002) is his first baby hair. To me it shows mercury

> toxicity by the counting rules. The second (October 2002) is six

> months later, two months after we started treatment. We have not

> chelated. He was started on massive quantities of vitamins,

> minerals, Taurine, DMG, B12 injections, CLO, EPO, probiotics,

> enzymes, and thyroid. If I wouldn't have cut the hair myself, I

> would believe it was the same child. What's going on here?

You did a good job of selecting the supplements to help him. They are

helping by making his metabolism more normal, which of course makes

his laboratory tests more normal. He is still toxic underneath it

all.

>I'd

> appreciate any feedback. We have recently started oral glutathion,

> TTFD as well (but after the test).

>

> DDI - April 25,2002 (4 mos before dx)

>

> POTENTIALLY TOXIC ELEMENTS

> element result ref range color

> =============================================

> aluminum 45 <8.0 red

> antimony 0.39 <0.066 red

> arsenic 0.041 <0.08 green

> beryllium <0.01 <0.02 no line

> bismuth 1.5 <0.13 red

> cadmium 0.32 <0.15 yellow

> lead 4.8 <1.0 red

> mercury 1.1 <0.4 yellow

> platinum <0.003 <0.005 no line

> thallium <0.001 <0.01 no line

> thorium <0.001 <0.005 no line

> uranium 0.45 <0.06 red

> nickel 1.1 <0.4 red

> silver 0.7 <0.2 yellow

> tin 1.7 <0.3 red

> titanium 3.1 <1.0 red

>

> ESSENTIAL AND OTHER ELEMENTS

> element result ref range color under/over 50%

> ============================================================

> Calcium 626 125-370 yellow over

> Magnesium 66 12-30 yellow over

> Sodium 49 12-90 green over

> Potassium 78 12-40 yellow over

> Copper 23 8-16 yellow over

> Zinc 170 100-190 green over

> Manganese 0.66 0.2-0.55 yellow over

> Chromium 0.53 0.26-0.5 yellow over

> Vanadium 0.33 0.03-0.1 red over

> Molybdenum 0.2 0.05-0.13 yellow over

> Boron 12 0.6-4.0 red over

> Iodine 31 0.25-1.3 red over

> Lithium 0.022 0.007-0.023 green over

> Phosphorus 140 160-250 yellow under

> Selenium 1.2 0.95-1.7 white middle

> Strontium 5.7 0.16-1.0 red over

> Sulfur 47300 45500-53000 green under

> Barium 2.5 0.16-0.8 yellow over

> Cobalt 0.058 0.013-0.035 yellow over

> Iron 25 8.0-19 yellow over

> Germanium 0.068 0.045-0.065 yellow over

> Rubidium 0.085 0.016-0.018 green over

> Zirconium 0.48 0.04-1.0 green over

>

> To me, this seems to satisfy the counting rules.

I agree. Real toxic.

>

> October 10,2002 (two months after dx)

>

> POTENTIALLY TOXIC ELEMENTS

> element result ref range color

> =============================================

> aluminum 8.9 <8.0 yellow

> antimony 0.04 <0.066 green

> arsenic 0.12 <0.08 yellow

> beryllium <0.01 <0.02 no line

> bismuth 0.06 <0.13 green

> cadmium 0.1 <0.15 green

> lead 0.37 <1.0 green

> mercury 0.43 <0.4 yellow

> platinum <0.003 <0.005 no line

> thallium <0.001 <0.01 no line

> thorium <0.001 <0.005 no line

> uranium 0.032 <0.06 green

> nickel 0.16 <0.4 green

> silver 0.05 <0.2 green

> tin 0.97 <0.3 red

> titanium 1.4 <1.0 yellow

>

> ESSENTIAL AND OTHER ELEMENTS

> element result ref range color under/over 50%

> ============================================================

> Calcium 245 125-370 green over

> Magnesium 17 12-30 green under

> Sodium 430 12-90 red over

> Potassium 160 12-40 yellow over

> Copper 8.30 8.0-16.0 green under

> Zinc 180 100-190 green over

> Manganese 0.11 0.2-0.55 yellow under

> Chromium 0.25 0.26-0.5 yellow under

> Vanadium 0.039 0.03-0.1 green under

> Molybdenum 0.18 0.05-0.13 yellow over

> Boron 4.9 0.6-4.0 yellow over

> Iodine 2.7 0.25-1.3 yellow over

> Lithium 0.02 0.007-0.023 green over

> Phosphorus 237 160-250 green over

> Selenium 0.87 0.95-1.7 yellow under

> Strontium 0.47 0.16-1.0 green over

> Sulfur 45500 45500-53000 green under

> Barium 0.33 0.16-0.8 white middle

> Cobalt 0.014 0.013-0.035 green under

> Iron 15 8.0-19 green over

> Germanium 0.04 0.045-0.065 green under

> Rubidium 0.18 0.016-0.18 green over

> Zirconium 0.52 0.04-1.0 green over

>

> This seems to not show mercury toxicity.

The supplements are masking it.

>

> Question:

>

> 1) Does this mean he is naturally detoxifying with the help of the

> improved nutrition, B12, etc?

No.

> 2) Is there a place for chelation still?

Yes. It is curative, it will improve him further than what you are

already doing, and it will let you eventually be able to cut the

vitamins back.

> 3) Should we repeat the test and if so, when?

No need to. The first one told you what you need to know. He has

mercury. So you chelate. No need even for the second one, though it

does clearly show the supplements are helping.

>

> Thank you all very much. By the way, my son is now 20 mos. old and

> is doing very well.

Glad to hear it!., .. . . .

>(made huge leaps forward with vitamin A loading

> and B12). Kim D

[Guest guest]

Hi,

Did you do much to get rid of exposure to the heavy metals?

Dagmar.

[ ] Hair Test Comparison - Andy help!!!

Dear Andy and Listmates,

I have posted the hair results of my 20 month old son. The first

(April 2002) is his first baby hair. To me it shows mercury

toxicity by the counting rules. The second (October 2002) is six

months later, two months after we started treatment. We have not

chelated. He was started on massive quantities of vitamins,

minerals, Taurine, DMG, B12 injections, CLO, EPO, probiotics,

enzymes, and thyroid. If I wouldn't have cut the hair myself, I

would believe it was the same child. What's going on here? I'd

appreciate any feedback. We have recently started oral glutathion,

TTFD as well (but after the test).

DDI - April 25,2002 (4 mos before dx)

POTENTIALLY TOXIC ELEMENTS

element result ref range color

=============================================

aluminum 45 <8.0 red

antimony 0.39 <0.066 red

arsenic 0.041 <0.08 green

beryllium <0.01 <0.02 no line

bismuth 1.5 <0.13 red

cadmium 0.32 <0.15 yellow

lead 4.8 <1.0 red

mercury 1.1 <0.4 yellow

platinum <0.003 <0.005 no line

thallium <0.001 <0.01 no line

thorium <0.001 <0.005 no line

uranium 0.45 <0.06 red

nickel 1.1 <0.4 red

silver 0.7 <0.2 yellow

tin 1.7 <0.3 red

titanium 3.1 <1.0 red

ESSENTIAL AND OTHER ELEMENTS

element result ref range color under/over 50%

============================================================

Calcium 626 125-370 yellow over

Magnesium 66 12-30 yellow over

Sodium 49 12-90 green over

Potassium 78 12-40 yellow over

Copper 23 8-16 yellow over

Zinc 170 100-190 green over

Manganese 0.66 0.2-0.55 yellow over

Chromium 0.53 0.26-0.5 yellow over

Vanadium 0.33 0.03-0.1 red over

Molybdenum 0.2 0.05-0.13 yellow over

Boron 12 0.6-4.0 red over

Iodine 31 0.25-1.3 red over

Lithium 0.022 0.007-0.023 green over

Phosphorus 140 160-250 yellow under

Selenium 1.2 0.95-1.7 white middle

Strontium 5.7 0.16-1.0 red over

Sulfur 47300 45500-53000 green under

Barium 2.5 0.16-0.8 yellow over

Cobalt 0.058 0.013-0.035 yellow over

Iron 25 8.0-19 yellow over

Germanium 0.068 0.045-0.065 yellow over

Rubidium 0.085 0.016-0.018 green over

Zirconium 0.48 0.04-1.0 green over

To me, this seems to satisfy the counting rules.

October 10,2002 (two months after dx)

POTENTIALLY TOXIC ELEMENTS

element result ref range color

=============================================

aluminum 8.9 <8.0 yellow

antimony 0.04 <0.066 green

arsenic 0.12 <0.08 yellow

beryllium <0.01 <0.02 no line

bismuth 0.06 <0.13 green

cadmium 0.1 <0.15 green

lead 0.37 <1.0 green

mercury 0.43 <0.4 yellow

platinum <0.003 <0.005 no line

thallium <0.001 <0.01 no line

thorium <0.001 <0.005 no line

uranium 0.032 <0.06 green

nickel 0.16 <0.4 green

silver 0.05 <0.2 green

tin 0.97 <0.3 red

titanium 1.4 <1.0 yellow

ESSENTIAL AND OTHER ELEMENTS

element result ref range color under/over 50%

============================================================

Calcium 245 125-370 green over

Magnesium 17 12-30 green under

Sodium 430 12-90 red over

Potassium 160 12-40 yellow over

Copper 8.30 8.0-16.0 green under

Zinc 180 100-190 green over

Manganese 0.11 0.2-0.55 yellow under

Chromium 0.25 0.26-0.5 yellow under

Vanadium 0.039 0.03-0.1 green under

Molybdenum 0.18 0.05-0.13 yellow over

Boron 4.9 0.6-4.0 yellow over

Iodine 2.7 0.25-1.3 yellow over

Lithium 0.02 0.007-0.023 green over

Phosphorus 237 160-250 green over

Selenium 0.87 0.95-1.7 yellow under

Strontium 0.47 0.16-1.0 green over

Sulfur 45500 45500-53000 green under

Barium 0.33 0.16-0.8 white middle

Cobalt 0.014 0.013-0.035 green under

Iron 15 8.0-19 green over

Germanium 0.04 0.045-0.065 green under

Rubidium 0.18 0.016-0.18 green over

Zirconium 0.52 0.04-1.0 green over

This seems to not show mercury toxicity.

Question:

1) Does this mean he is naturally detoxifying with the help of the

improved nutrition, B12, etc?

2) Is there a place for chelation still?

3) Should we repeat the test and if so, when?

Thank you all very much. By the way, my son is now 20 mos. old and

is doing very well. (made huge leaps forward with vitamin A loading

and B12). Kim Drummond

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Dagmar " <dagmarjahr@e...>

wrote:

> Hi,

>

> Did you do much to get rid of exposure to the heavy metals?

>

> Dagmar.

Nothing specific that I know of. I'd like Andy to comment on where

the other toxic metals went and what he thinks was the cause. I did

give Henry lots of vitamins (esp. C,A,and E) and lots of zinc and

other minerals. I also started him right off on B12 injections,

which I always felt were helping him greatly. He receives large

doses of cod liver oil and other essential fatty acids. We have also

treated several bacterial gut infections, yeast, and he is on

thyroid medication. We are now planning on chelating him as soon as

we can get his yeast under control again. I'd like to know myself

where all that lead went............Kim

[Guest guest]

Maybe all the supplements have slowed down absobtion of more heavy metals and

maybe the ones he has absorbed already just stay put, where ever they are and

don't go into his hair anymore.

Just an uneducated guess,

Dagmar.

[ ] Re: Hair Test Comparison - Andy help!!!

> Hi,

>

> Did you do much to get rid of exposure to the heavy metals?

>

> Dagmar.

Nothing specific that I know of. I'd like Andy to comment on where

the other toxic metals went and what he thinks was the cause. I did

give Henry lots of vitamins (esp. C,A,and E) and lots of zinc and

other minerals. I also started him right off on B12 injections,

which I always felt were helping him greatly. He receives large

doses of cod liver oil and other essential fatty acids. We have also

treated several bacterial gut infections, yeast, and he is on

thyroid medication. We are now planning on chelating him as soon as

we can get his yeast under control again. I'd like to know myself

where all that lead went............Kim

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 30/1/03 2:54:17 am, AndyCutler@... writes:

>

> The supplements are masking it.

>

Can you explain or give a reference for how supplements mask a heavy metal

toxicity?

Thank you for your time,

Marti

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 30/1/03 3:07:59 pm, val@... writes:

> I think Andy used the best word: " mask " , because that's exactly what's

> happening. The supplements give you the impression that you're healthy

> because

> they repair some of the damage. But the metals are still there, doing more

> damage.

>

Okay, but how do they alter the outcome of a test? That's what is hard to

understand. And if a negative hair test cannot be considered accurate, then

what might be a better test?

Marti

p.s. hi again!

[Guest guest]

I was talking about a hair test, yes. Did I read the original post wrong?

Was it a different test?

In any case, this second test did not show metals to be a problem. You

explained how sometimes supps can create outward signs of improvement. I am

wondering how supplements can alter the outcome of an actual heavy metals

toxicity test without actually doing something to the metals.

sorry i didn't make that clear -- long day....

Marti

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 30/1/03 5:53:54 pm, val@... writes:

> Are you actually asking the same question does? If supplements can

> chelate

> metals? or do some " natural detox " ?

>

>

Not exactly the same and, anyway, I read your response to her question. I'm

going to put the two together and see if I get it right. So, let's see if I

have the right idea now:

The hair test, as you and others are reading it, indicates how the metals

are being transported. That's the point of the " counting rules " . Post

supps, the child in question has been having normal metal transport.

However, in this case the 1st test is most accurate in terms of mercury

toxicity. It indicates a kind of history of the child's toxicity and

detoxification, and that history is one of unchelated mercury, still in the

brain. It would take too long for the mercury to naturally detox, despite

the supps doing a good job at dealing with current metal exposures, as

indicated by the second test.

Am I any closer?

Thanks! Marti

[Guest guest]

Lead typically goes into the bones and teeth. SFrom: henrysmom22002

[mailto: henrys.mom2@...] @...: Thu, 30

Jan 2003 06:38:00 -0000Subject: [ ] Re: Hair Test Comparison - Andy

help!!! & gt; Hi, & gt; & gt;

Did you do much to get rid of exposure to the heavy metals? & gt; & gt;

Dagmar.Nothing specific that I know of. I'd like Andy to comment on where the

other toxic metals went and what he thinks was the cause. I did give Henry lots

of vitamins (esp. C,A,and E) and lots of zinc and other minerals. I also

started him right off on B12 injections, which I always felt were helping him

greatly. He receives large doses of cod liver oil and other essential fatty

acids. We have also treated several bacterial gut infections, yeast, and he is

on thyroid medication. We are now planning on chelating him as soon as we can

get his yeast under control again. I'd like to know myself where all that lead

went............Kim

[Guest guest]

> > The supplements are masking it.

>

> Can you explain or give a reference for how supplements mask a heavy metal

> toxicity?

Simply put, what heavy metals do in your body is called " oxidative stress " .

They generate lots of free radicals that can damage (by oxidative stress)

molecules and cell structures that are part of your body. The worst of all (in

my view) is when the free radicals destroy the cells membranes and the cells

can't function properly anymore (now imagine this in a neuron).

The supplements help the body with this. They fix some of the damage the

oxidative stress does. They help the body replace the damaged molecules with

good ones.

I think Andy used the best word: " mask " , because that's exactly what's

happening. The supplements give you the impression that you're healthy because

they repair some of the damage. But the metals are still there, doing more

damage.

It is ok to have some oxidative stress in your body. Actually the body

produces some free radicals and uses them to fight bacteria and other things,

but the metals generate lost and lots and lots of free radicals and the body

doesn't have resources to fight it. The supplements help.

Valentina

[Guest guest]

> Okay, but how do they alter the outcome of a test?

What kind of test are you talking about? A hair test?

> And if a negative hair test cannot be considered accurate, then

> what might be a better test?

I don't understand what you mean by " a negative hair test " . You mean a hair test

that doesn't show the metals as being the problem?

Valentina

[Guest guest]

> In any case, this second test did not show metals to be a problem.

Did not show " impaired mineral transport " . Because the transport of the minerals

can be normalized with supplements. You can change the way the body does

" things "

by eating the right foods also (isn't this the meaning of all the diets?), if

your body is able to digest the food correctly and send it where it's needed.

But seeing the first test, you know the metals are there anyway.

> I am

> wondering how supplements can alter the outcome of an actual heavy metals

> toxicity test without actually doing something to the metals.

I am not sure I completely understand your question... It's just a hair test...

It shows the way the body excretes some elements/metals in hair...

I am sorry, I don't think I understand your question. If you're asking what I

think you do, then I think I already answered that, but if I didn't, then maybe

I

don't understand your question. Sorry...

Are you actually asking the same question does? If supplements can chelate

metals? or do some " natural detox " ?

Valentina

[Guest guest]

> Am I any closer?

I think you're right. And you said it better than I could

Valentina

[Guest guest]

> Okay, but how do they alter the outcome of a test? That's what is

hard to

> understand. And if a negative hair test cannot be considered

accurate, then

> what might be a better test?

>

> Marti

It is perplexing. There just is not a perfect test.

Another test you can consider is a fractionated urine porphyrins

test. There is a whole section about this in " ANDY_INDEX " . I

think it is the test he talked about or recommended prior to

the counting rules method.

Moria