Guest guest Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Group: Is it true that Amy Holmes isn't chelating anymore because of the dangers chelating imposes on the liver and kidney function?!? I just got off the phone with a Doc (non-mainstream) who says that very thing. Anybody know the truth to that? The Doc says that chelating is VERY dangerous. Opinions? Thoughts? J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 Hallo J, Here are my thoughts: > Group: > Is it true that Amy Holmes isn't chelating anymore because of the dangers > chelating imposes on the liver and kidney function?!? Amy Holmes is no longer practicing medicine. Before she stopped seeing patients she was using " MT promoter " a lot. I heard this was " because " she was unhappy with the level of gut bugs and yeast with chelation. HOWEVER, this is 2nd or 3rd hand information, so please take it as " a rumor " you heard. Also, IMO, there are often many things going on at once, so it may or may not be accurate to say that one thing or another is THE reason Dr. Amy " isn't chelating " . I just got off the > phone with a Doc (non-mainstream) who says that very thing. Anybody know the > truth to that? I believe it is true that chelating is stressful to the liver and kidneys. I ***also*** believe it is true that being mercury toxic is stressful to the liver and kidneys. You get to pick: chelate and end this on-going stress, or don't chelate, and leave the situation in place, to continue the stress and damage. (Yes, that is a simplification, but hopefully makes the point.) > The Doc says that chelating is VERY dangerous. Opinions? In my opinion, Andy's timing & dose schedule are considerably less dangerous than other commonly used methods. Ask the doc for more information. Try to figure out what you think is REAL. Consider the dangers and the potential gains. My assessment says chelating (safest way available) is less risky than not chelating, but your mileage may vary. best, Moria Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 i personally don't agree with chelation and think minerals for metals transport enhancement, non-selenite selenium, zinc, magensium molybdenum, boron etc is a better way to go the remobilised mercury on the way out is very distructive of brain synaptic structures. i don't have a definitive opinion becuse i haven't tried chelation and am not game to, preferring selenium etc. to be fair if i was dying of mercury toxicty i would probably be looking differently and if you work through all the info that andy c gives on this board he does have a grip on minimsing the toxic effects of chelation........... the docotrs opinion was probaly from the nuclear fallout of when dans single dose ala was in vogue and it was literally a nuclear bomb on mercury toxic kids. the problem with chelation is i think people view it as a shortcut..... but you have to do the ground work for a broad based supplement regieme for it anyway....... and imo metals tranposrt enhancement offers feasible heavy metals reduction. > Group: > Is it true that Amy Holmes isn't chelating anymore because of the dangers > chelating imposes on the liver and kidney function?!? I just got off the > phone with a Doc (non-mainstream) who says that very thing. Anybody know the > truth to that? The Doc says that chelating is VERY dangerous. Opinions? > Thoughts? > J > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 In a message dated 28/2/03 10:49:53 pm, Jacquiec1@... writes: > Group: > Is it true that Amy Holmes isn't chelating anymore because of the dangers > chelating imposes on the liver and kidney function?!? I just got off the > phone with a Doc (non-mainstream) who says that very thing. Anybody know > the > truth to that? The Doc says that chelating is VERY dangerous. Opinions? > Thoughts? > J This is what I heard, too, then what I read while looking hard at DMSA and ALA. That's why I'm on about this IV glutathione fast push. I think we'll see a trend away from DMSA/ALA over long periods in years to come. I'm trying to find doctors in UK who use the IV GSH fast push, anyone know of one? marti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2003 Report Share Posted February 28, 2003 My son was a patient of Amy Holmes. Indeed, she insisted on using MT Promoter, but before she received my son's organic acid test indicating yeast and clostridia she did not object to chelation. I got a letter from her, saying that she stops her practice because of her own health problems. This is what I know from her, I think that any other ideas why she stopped her practice are somebody else's speculations and rumors. Margaret > Group: > Is it true that Amy Holmes isn't chelating anymore because of the dangers > chelating imposes on the liver and kidney function?!? I just got off the > phone with a Doc (non-mainstream) who says that very thing. Anybody know the > truth to that? The Doc says that chelating is VERY dangerous. Opinions? > Thoughts? > J > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2003 Report Share Posted March 1, 2003 > Is it true that Amy Holmes isn't chelating anymore because of the dangers > chelating imposes on the liver and kidney function?!? The stories people like to invent..... > The Doc says that chelating is VERY dangerous. Opinions? My opinion is that chelation was the best thing that happened to my son. Dangerous? Yes, chelation can definitely be very dangerous. IF you chelate with the wrong doctor and the wrong protocol. Valentina Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2003 Report Share Posted March 1, 2003 The doctor needs to check his facts. Dr. Holmes retired due to health reasons. Prior to retiring, she did move many of her patients off of DMSA to MT promoter but the reasons most of the patients gave for that was because those kids were having trouble with gut bugs. Chelation can stress the liver and kidneys so should be done carefully. But when a safe protocol is used and the person is monitored carefully, it is safe. Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2003 Report Share Posted March 1, 2003 In a message dated 2/28/03 5:08:38 PM Central Standard Time, moriam@... writes: > Before she stopped seeing patients she was using " MT promoter " > a lot. I heard this was " because " she was unhappy with the > level of gut bugs and yeast with chelation. That is what many of her patients reported. However, she was still using DMSA and ALA with some children I know, and had even started a friend of mine's child on DMSA after advocating MT promoter with many others, so had not stopped chelation drugs totally. Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2003 Report Share Posted March 1, 2003 I think it is interesting to note that Dr. Amy Holmes used chelation therapy in treating her own son. I don't know if he is recovered but I read her statement that her son greatly improved under chelation. As for kidney function ... another interesting thing - my son now stays dry approximately half the time at night. He is 7 yo and has been potty trained since 3yo. It took a year of chelation to acheive any sort of night time dryness. I am sure this is a benefit of chelation. As for avoiding yeast some are trying the SCD diet to control yeast and bad bacteria. There are a few and a web site www.scdiet.com :0) Maddie --- In , Valentina Scharpf <val@t...> wrote: > > Is it true that Amy Holmes isn't chelating anymore because of the dangers > > chelating imposes on the liver and kidney function?!? > > The stories people like to invent..... > > > > The Doc says that chelating is VERY dangerous. Opinions? > > My opinion is that chelation was the best thing that happened to my son. > Dangerous? Yes, chelation can definitely be very dangerous. IF you chelate with > the wrong doctor and the wrong protocol. > > > Valentina Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 > > i personally don't agree with chelation I see Osip can think somewhat more clearly than the doctor discussed above. He phrases this correctly as his personal opinion, based on belief, rather than blaming it on someone else. > and think minerals for metals transport enhancement, Such as? I have seen lots of hair tests over periods of 10 years where mineral transport did not improve despite taking tons of minerals. > non-selenite selenium, Good, if you are going to use selenium, which is quite helpful, do make sure it is not in the selenite form. > zinc, magensium > molybdenum, boron etc is a better way to go > > the remobilised mercury on the way out is very distructive of brain > synaptic structures. I would actually be interested in the details of why you say this Osip. If you'd like to provide them please use a relevant subject line. > > i don't have a definitive opinion becuse i haven't tried chelation > and am not game to, preferring selenium etc. > > to be fair if i was dying of mercury toxicty i would probably be > looking differently and if you work through all the info that andy c > gives on this board he does have a grip on minimsing the toxic > effects of chelation........... A reasonable position. Since you are in a stable life situation (whatever it is, you haven't discussed it on the list) you choose not to take any perceived risk. This is somewhat different from the autistic children whose parents perceive them as being in a rather horrible situation justifying some risk. > > the docotrs opinion was probaly from the nuclear fallout of when dans > single dose ala was in vogue and it was literally a nuclear bomb on > mercury toxic kids. Yup. Or his use of DMPS injections, or DMSA every other day. At least he noticed there was a problem, which is better than many who use those protocols for years on end. > > the problem with chelation is i think people view it as a > shortcut..... but you have to do the ground work for a broad based > supplement regieme for it anyway....... and imo metals tranposrt > enhancement offers feasible heavy metals reduction. Not for the brain, which is the important organ. And for the people who get impaired mineral transport it doesn't appear to work at all. It is simply palliative. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2003 Report Share Posted March 13, 2003 We took Elliot to see Dr. Holmes in August, and since her retirement in October, he has been under the care of Dr. Cave, who was Dr. Holmes' partner prior to her unexpected retirement. So our experience confirms what Andy said. We actually began chelating Elliot 2 1/2 years ago when Dr. Holmes faxed the then-protocol to our pediatrician. We changed protocols a couple of times early on, but eventually settled on every 3-4 hours around the clock almost every weekend. Although my son was not officially a patient of Dr. Holmes until last summer, I have never seen anything to suggest chelation is more dangerous than leaving heavy metals in my son's body. Lorilyn [ ] Re: Amy Holmes? > > > > > Group: > > > Is it true that Amy Holmes isn't chelating anymore because of the > > dangers > > > chelating imposes on the liver and kidney function?!? > > No. She isn't chelating any more because she has retired due to > health reasons. To the best of my knowledge her patients continued to > chelate under her supervision up until the day of her retirement. She > certainly did explore many possible types of therapies to help them. 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.