Re: Question for the group/Andy

[Guest guest]

Yeah, I figured out what she is doing after asking that question. She told

me that she had stopped doing chelation but didn't mention why or what the

different protocol was.

While I haven't researched the MT promoter extensively yet, on the surface,

the concept looks extremely promising and if it actually works to straighten

out the metallothionein problems, the body would then chelate itself and

probably without the side effects of yeast and gut bugs that the chelation

with DMSA/ALA per DAN protocol is prone to.

My big concern around that change is I was hoping that her long term numbers

would show whether the older kids (and adults) were getting long term

results. I have only seen her 6 month evaluation which showed an extreme

skew towards younger children getting the most benefit. By changing her

protocol midway through the race, the data won't be available on the

efficacy of long term heavy metal chelation.

OTOH, if I, as a health care provider found something exponentially better,

I would have great ethical dilemma with staying with the old treatment

protocol.

So I guess my next step is to research this MT promoter stuff. Also, Andy,

do you know if Dr. Amy ever used your protocol for the chelation? See, there

is a fine example right there. I might well have started with the DAN

protocol and then run across yours. Yours makes more intuitive sense. I

suspect if someone were keeping track ( I really wish someone were) there

would be far more positive results yielded from yours. So I would likely

have switched mid stream from DAN to yours so I can see why she might have

moved if the MT promoter is so much better than chelation per DAN protocol.

So if MT promoter works better than chelation per DAN protocol and I suspect

it does because Dr. Amy doesn't strike me as flighty or the head of a cult

of personality, then one of my burning questions would be how does MT

promoter compare to Andy's protocol in efficacy?

BTW, folks, don't get me wrong. I think the DAN protocol has much to

recommend it, I just don't think they should be doing every 8 hour dosing.

It doesn't make sense given the drugs they are using. Unless there is a

sustained release formula for DMSA. Is there a sustained release formula?

Terri

Remember the movie, Wag The Dog?

Wake up folks, we're being wagged.

Terri (2002)

Re: [ ] Question for the group

> In a message dated 10/9/02 3:41:07 PM Central Daylight Time,

> tavalon@... writes:

>

>

> > What protocol is Amy Holmes using now. She mentioned that it doesn't

include

> > chelation but didn't give details about what it is or why the switch.

Does

> > anyone here have any info?

> >

>

> A friend of mine is still doing chelation for her daughter through Dr.

Holmes

> but is being pushed to look strongly at the MT promoter.

> Gaylen

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Yeah, I figured out what she is doing after asking that question.

She told

> me that she had stopped doing chelation but didn't mention why or

what the

> different protocol was.

>

> While I haven't researched the MT promoter extensively yet, on the

surface,

> the concept looks extremely promising

but doesn't hold up to more than a few minutes of reasoned analysis.

>and if it actually works to straighten

> out the metallothionein problems, the body would then chelate itself

Actually not. It is well established that mercury does not come out

of the brain on its own in reasonably normal healthy people who had

high occupational exposure to mercury. These people made lots of

metallothionein for years before autopsy showed that their brains were

still loaded with mercury.

> and

> probably without the side effects of yeast and gut bugs that the

chelation

> with DMSA/ALA per DAN protocol is prone to.

>

> My big concern around that change is I was hoping that her long term

numbers

> would show whether the older kids (and adults) were getting long

term

> results.

Actual course of events (as readily verified from this listserver's

archives as well as other sources):

First, Dr. Amy chelates children properly using every 4 hour protocol.

Results are dramatic. Dr. Amy talks about chelation curing children.

This motivates DAN! to have a protocol meeting composed of a lot of

people who never chelated a kid before, plus Dr. Amy.

Second, at protocol meeting, protocol is randomly changed to every 8

hour dosing, which is well known from earlier experience with adults

to be harmful.

Third, Dr. Amy and DAN! doctors chelate a lot of kids on every 8 hour

protocol. Mostly they get worse. Dr. Amy starts talking about how

some children get moderately better on chelation, but it is rough on

them.

Fourth, Dr. Amy starts using MT promoter and trying to switch people

over to it since it doens't hurt kids as much as chelation does. No

real reports of great progress with MT promoter, just a lot of

theoretical blather clearly inconsistent with the data presented by

Bill Walsh and the fact that the kids don't as a rule get worse

motivate Dr. Amy and apparently many other DAN! doctors to switch from

every 8 hour chelation to MT promoter.

To the best of my knowledge this is the current state of affairs. Not

much that passes for either reasoning or data analysis appears to have

occurred on the DAN! side of the equation, so as usual you parents are

left to sort it all out and decide what is best for your children.

>I have only seen her 6 month evaluation which showed an extreme

> skew towards younger children getting the most benefit. By changing

her

> protocol midway through the race, the data won't be available on the

> efficacy of long term heavy metal chelation.

They are already available. Go to the files section and read " love

letters. " Additionally there is adequate adult data to draw a lot of

conclusions.

>

> OTOH, if I, as a health care provider found something exponentially

better,

> I would have great ethical dilemma with staying with the old

treatment

> protocol.

>

> So I guess my next step is to research this MT promoter stuff. Also,

Andy,

> do you know if Dr. Amy ever used your protocol for the chelation?

Yes, early on. When she was getting good results and talking about

chelation curing kids.

>See, there

> is a fine example right there. I might well have started with the

DAN

> protocol and then run across yours. Yours makes more intuitive

sense. I

> suspect if someone were keeping track ( I really wish someone were)

there

> would be far more positive results yielded from yours.

See the " polls " section of this listserver and you will see that

indeed people DID keep track, and for those children chelated both

ways most people found the more frequent dosing to work better.

> I would likely

> have switched mid stream from DAN to yours so I can see why she

might have

> moved if the MT promoter is so much better than chelation per DAN

protocol.

You got it. DAN! protocol: harmful. MT prommoter: no more effective

than the general vitamins DAN!, myself, or many people suggest. MT

promoter beats DAN! protocol just like placebo beats cyanide.

>

> So if MT promoter works better than chelation per DAN protocol and I

suspect

> it does because Dr. Amy doesn't strike me as flighty or the head of

a cult

> of personality,

This does seem to be true. I have no idea if Dr. Amy actually wants

this to be so, encourages it, avoids it, or what. She is actually a

very nice and unassuming lady in person. I doubt the " cult " aspect of

things makes it any easier for her to sort out what is going on and

how to treat kids better.

> then one of my burning questions would be how does MT

> promoter compare to Andy's protocol in efficacy?

MT promoter does about half as much as the " support vitamins " I

recommend you get going before chelating your kid.

Bill Walsh likes to point out that there are 1,200 published journal

papers on metallothionein. Which is true. Can't say I read them all,

but I am familiar enough with it that my supplement protocol was

specificallly designed to boost MT production as much as possible.

>

> BTW, folks, don't get me wrong. I think the DAN protocol has much to

> recommend it,

Yes. About 90% of it is good. If you ignore what they say about

chelating and anything with a thiol group or thiol precursor in it,

the rest is great. Jack their vitamin A doses up to a reasonable

level and it would be wonderful.

>I just don't think they should be doing every 8 hour dosing.

> It doesn't make sense given the drugs they are using. Unless there

is a

> sustained release formula for DMSA. Is there a sustained release

formula?

Yes. It may or may not be adequate. Sustained release ALA does not

result in constant blood levels so it is NOT adequate. People forget

that the intestines don't absorb things uniformly along their length,

so just because something is sustained RELEASE is no guarantee that it

provides a constant blood level of what it is releasing. BTW, there

is also a poll on the su

[Guest guest]

So I get from this that by ignoring the love letters section (sorry Moria),

I've missed some good info. I'll go back and look at it. I don't spend much

time reading the anecdotals these days because I'm trying to spend the

somewhat limited time I have to figure out something of a big picture.

Terri

Remember the movie, Wag The Dog?

Wake up folks, we're being wagged.

Terri (2002)

[ ] Re: Question for the group/Andy

> > Yeah, I figured out what she is doing after asking that question.

> She told

> > me that she had stopped doing chelation but didn't mention why or

> what the

> > different protocol was.

> >

> > While I haven't researched the MT promoter extensively yet, on the

> surface,

> > the concept looks extremely promising

>

> but doesn't hold up to more than a few minutes of reasoned analysis.

>

> >and if it actually works to straighten

> > out the metallothionein problems, the body would then chelate itself

>

> Actually not. It is well established that mercury does not come out

> of the brain on its own in reasonably normal healthy people who had

> high occupational exposure to mercury. These people made lots of

> metallothionein for years before autopsy showed that their brains were

> still loaded with mercury.

[Guest guest]

> So I get from this that by ignoring the love letters section (sorry

Moria),

> I've missed some good info. I'll go back and look at it. I don't

spend much

> time reading the anecdotals these days because I'm trying to spend

the

> somewhat limited time I have to figure out something of a big

picture.

It is really hard to get the big picture without gathering up some of

that " anecdotal evidence " because so many people painting a " big

picture " are choosing to cover up the evidence that is inconvenient

for their position, or paint something they do a nicer color than it

is.

E. g. pediatricians and the FDA pretending they didn't have anything

to do with all your kids turning autistic.....

Andy .. . . . .

[Guest guest]

>

> It is really hard to get the big picture without gathering up some of

> that " anecdotal evidence " because so many people painting a " big

> picture " are choosing to cover up the evidence that is inconvenient

> for their position, or paint something they do a nicer color than it

> is.

>

> E. g. pediatricians and the FDA pretending they didn't have anything

> to do with all your kids turning autistic.....

>

> Andy .. . . . .

>

True enough. And I did look at a lot of that in the beginning when I was

just starting this fact finding mission. I am not a heartless one, really.

But I know how the game is played and what will be leveled at these fringe

groups (that's the mainstream point of view, not mine) and how to make the

best case, and sadly, it isn't the anecdotal information. It's the numbers.

I fully understand that each kid is individual with individual stories but

to get the medical community to stop lying to itself will require speaking

to them in their language. And continuing to bombard them with these

numbers until the denial is broken.

One of the reasons I got " kicked off " (translate - severely restricted) the

list was because I was asking questions and expecting references to

back up the answers. I got lots of anecdotal and little confirmation. It's

obvious that both of these areas (actually, all three because I also see

some validity with the GF/CF diet) help some kids. Now I want to know how

many, in what circumstances and how much?

I will continue my research. Tomorrow. I'm working tonight and the nuns

don't believe I'm professional enough to get internet access at work. Only

the doctors are privileged in that way. On a good day, their behavior amuses

me.

Terri

Remember the movie, Wag The Dog?

Wake up folks, we're being wagged.

Terri (2002)

[ ] Re: Question for the group/Andy

>

> > So I get from this that by ignoring the love letters section (sorry

> Moria),

> > I've missed some good info. I'll go back and look at it. I don't

> spend much

> > time reading the anecdotals these days because I'm trying to spend

> the

> > somewhat limited time I have to figure out something of a big

> picture.

>

>

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

>

[Guest guest]

It's

> obvious that both of these areas (actually, all three because I also

see

> some validity with the GF/CF diet) help some kids. Now I want to

know how

> many, in what circumstances and how much?

You are only counting THREE?

There are MANY more.

You will need fingers and toes AT LEAST!

chelation; anti-virals and anti-bacterials (which I think it

only PART of ); GFCF; supplements; sound therapies

(several flavors); digestive enzymes (several flavors);

supplements (endless flavors) and Rx drugs (many flavors);

cranial manipulation (2 or 3 flavors I know of); vision

therapies.....

I am sure that is only a START on a list.

And I think ALL of these can make a significant difference....

oh yeah: secretin; FGF (or however it is spelled!);

swimming with dolphins.....

best wishes,

Moria

[Guest guest]

Okay, okay. Point taken. Those are my top three though, and I know that the

chelation protocol include supplements and enzymes.

Terri

Remember the movie, Wag The Dog?

Wake up folks, we're being wagged.

Terri (2002)

[ ] Re: Question for the group/Andy

>

> It's

> > obvious that both of these areas (actually, all three because I also

> see

> > some validity with the GF/CF diet) help some kids. Now I want to

> know how

> > many, in what circumstances and how much?

>

> You are only counting THREE?

> There are MANY more.

> You will need fingers and toes AT LEAST!

> chelation; anti-virals and anti-bacterials (which I think it

> only PART of ); GFCF; supplements; sound therapies

> (several flavors); digestive enzymes (several flavors);

> supplements (endless flavors) and Rx drugs (many flavors);

> cranial manipulation (2 or 3 flavors I know of); vision

> therapies.....

>

> I am sure that is only a START on a list.

> And I think ALL of these can make a significant difference....

>

> oh yeah: secretin; FGF (or however it is spelled!);

> swimming with dolphins.....

>

> best wishes,

> Moria

>

>

>

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

>

[Guest guest]

> It's the numbers.

Which certainly aren't present in most mainstream research, and when

they are usually say something different than the words.

> to get the medical community to stop lying to itself will require

speaking

> to them in their language.

No. That won't work. The only thing that will work is punishment,

just like with any other criminal enterprise.

Luckily many individual physicians are decent and are quietly

abandoning the dogma of the mainstream, but viewing medicine as an

organized endeavor, it is not going to self correct. The correction

will need to be applied externally with adequate force that complying

with it isn't optional.

>And continuing to bombard them with these

> numbers until the denial is broken.

This will never happen. It already would have if it was possible.

> One of the reasons I got " kicked off " (translate - severely

restricted) the

> list was because I was asking questions and expecting

references to

> back up the answers. I got lots of anecdotal and little

confirmation. It's

> obvious that both of these areas (actually, all three because I also

see

> some validity with the GF/CF diet) help some kids. Now I want to

know how

> many, in what circumstances and how much?

Yes, me too. Specifically I need to know how much it helps and what

the indications are for trying it because that allows some trade off

analysis to be done as to which interventions it is rational for

someone to do given their limited time and resources and which are

best left for later. There are lots of management decisionmaking and

engineering economics tools to address these questions, but they

require some form of at least semiquantitative information about

probability of benefit, extent of benefit, etc. rather than the

current cult-like religious movements surrounding most interventions.

>

> I will continue my research. Tomorrow. I'm working tonight and the

nuns

> don't believe I'm professional enough to get internet access at

work. Only

> the doctors are privileged in that way.

HAhahahahhaha! I guess it is obvious who it is they think needs to

work hard and who it is that gets to goof off.

> On a good day, their behavior amuses me.

When it ceases being amusing, hook up with some doc's and start your

own detox clinic.

[Guest guest]

>

> When it ceases being amusing, hook up with some doc's and start your

> own detox clinic.

It ceased being amusing quite a while ago. I'm working that very direction.

Terri

[Guest guest]

> So I get from this that by ignoring the love letters section (sorry

Moria),

> I've missed some good info. I'll go back and look at it. I don't

spend much

> time reading the anecdotals these days because I'm trying to spend

the

> somewhat limited time I have to figure out something of a big

picture.

No -- you got it right. LOVE_LETTERS is ALL anecdotal.

It fits my general view of things too:

Take lots of DETAILED info, and generalize from it.

Do it by " feel " .

Start with stuff that still has some life in it.

{necessary in order to " do it by feel " .}

best wishes,

Moria