Re: I found cheaper EFA's (MORE INFO)

[Guest guest]

I called the company and got this info:

Thank you for your interest in our products. Here is the information

you requested.

NBTY, Inc. Consumer Affairs January, 2004

The quality and safety of all NBTY, Inc. manufactured nutritional

supplements and the health of our customers is of the utmost

importance to us.

We obtain our fish oils from a variety of suppliers who use different

source fish, including anchovies, herring, menhaden, salmon, sardines

and sprat.

· Over 90% of the oils we use in our many fish oil products are from

wild sources.

· The oil that comes from wild fish is from a combination of

anchovies, menhaden, Atlantic wild salmon and sardines.

· The oil that comes from farmed fish is from a combination of

anchovies, herring, salmon, sardines and sprat.

· Our pure salmon oil comes from a combination of farmed and wild

salmon.

· Although a larger percent of our pure salmon oil is sourced from

farmed than wild salmon, the Norwegian fish farms currently use crude

soybeans to enrich their fish feed, rather than fish meal. The oils

are then fortified with additional omega 3 fatty acids to maintain

the fatty acid profile we promise on our labels.

All shipments of fish oil must meet or exceed our stringent quality

guidelines, including strict upper limits for PCBs and heavy metals.

· All of our fish oils test well below the 2.0 pg/kg maximum level

set by the EU Regulation (EC/2375/2001) found at

http://europa.eu.int/eur-

lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_321/l_32120011206en00010005.pdf.

· In addition, each lot must be accompanied with the supplier

statement testifying that the product supplied meets California’s

Proposition 65 for PCBs, lead and other toxins or the product is not

released for manufacture.

Let me know what you guys think, Thanks, .

[Guest guest]

Don't buy it. Stick to the deep, cold water fish like Norwegian

Cod. Much less likely to be contaminated. Also, farmed fish is

icky (using my technical language). So many sources of fish from so

many different suppliers! Do you recall reading the articles

recently about farmed salmon? Not good news.

Just my opinion. I would just pay a little extra to get what you

KNOW is quality. If it were for YOU, I might say " go for it " ... but

this is for your child (who has no say in the matter).

Pam

> I called the company and got this info:

>

> Thank you for your interest in our products. Here is the

information

> you requested.

>

>

> NBTY, Inc. Consumer Affairs January, 2004

> The quality and safety of all NBTY, Inc. manufactured nutritional

> supplements and the health of our customers is of the utmost

> importance to us.

>

> We obtain our fish oils from a variety of suppliers who use

different

> source fish, including anchovies, herring, menhaden, salmon,

sardines

> and sprat.

>

> · Over 90% of the oils we use in our many fish oil products are

from

> wild sources.

> · The oil that comes from wild fish is from a combination of

> anchovies, menhaden, Atlantic wild salmon and sardines.

> · The oil that comes from farmed fish is from a combination of

> anchovies, herring, salmon, sardines and sprat.

> · Our pure salmon oil comes from a combination of farmed and wild

> salmon.

> · Although a larger percent of our pure salmon oil is sourced

from

> farmed than wild salmon, the Norwegian fish farms currently use

crude

> soybeans to enrich their fish feed, rather than fish meal. The

oils

> are then fortified with additional omega 3 fatty acids to maintain

> the fatty acid profile we promise on our labels.

>

> All shipments of fish oil must meet or exceed our stringent

quality

> guidelines, including strict upper limits for PCBs and heavy

metals.

> · All of our fish oils test well below the 2.0 pg/kg maximum

level

> set by the EU Regulation (EC/2375/2001) found at

> http://europa.eu.int/eur-

> lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_321/l_32120011206en00010005.pdf.

> · In addition, each lot must be accompanied with the supplier

> statement testifying that the product supplied meets

California’s

> Proposition 65 for PCBs, lead and other toxins or the product is

not

> released for manufacture.

>

>

> Let me know what you guys think, Thanks, .

[Guest guest]

,

After reading NBTY response I wouldn’t touch that stuff with a 10’ pole.

1. They are not using a independent third party to do QC (quality

control).

2. They admit to using farmed fish, then don’t state the percentage!

(Warning Will , warning!)J

3. I don’t believe #1, because it conflicts with #5 below and because

#2 is an outright lie. It is common knowledge in the fish business that

“Atlantic” is farmed raised and “Alaskan” is real wild salmon.

In their second paragraph they say it passes “their” own QC. Ghee!, well

that’s good to know. I wouldn’t want them to put themselves out of business

and lastly the last point, the California Prop 65 level is a joke.

I found a product made by Green People’s and am ordering it and going to try

to compare it to Carlson’s. How? Don’t know that part yetJ

The link is

http://www.greenpeople-organic-health.co.uk/Product_Search.asp?Sp=A

<http://www.greenpeople-organic-health.co.uk/Product_Search.asp?Sp=A & Sl=grou

p & St=all & cc=A> & Sl=group & St=all & cc=A

I also like UDO’s Ultimate Omega Blend, highest number I seen. Not saying

that is better, but do believe in going over the RDA, I think it is to low.

Ron

[ ] Re: I found cheaper EFA's (MORE INFO)

I called the company and got this info:

Thank you for your interest in our products. Here is the information

you requested.

NBTY, Inc. Consumer Affairs January, 2004

The quality and safety of all NBTY, Inc. manufactured nutritional

supplements and the health of our customers is of the utmost

importance to us.

We obtain our fish oils from a variety of suppliers who use different

source fish, including anchovies, herring, menhaden, salmon, sardines

and sprat.

1· Over 90% of the oils we use in our many fish oil products are from

wild sources.

2· The oil that comes from wild fish is from a combination of

anchovies, menhaden, Atlantic wild salmon and sardines.

3· The oil that comes from farmed fish is from a combination of

anchovies, herring, salmon, sardines and sprat.

4· Our pure salmon oil comes from a combination of farmed and wild

salmon.

5· Although a larger percent of our pure salmon oil is sourced from

farmed than wild salmon, the Norwegian fish farms currently use crude

soybeans to enrich their fish feed, rather than fish meal. The oils

are then fortified with additional omega 3 fatty acids to maintain

the fatty acid profile we promise on our labels.

All shipments of fish oil must meet or exceed our stringent quality

guidelines, including strict upper limits for PCBs and heavy metals.

1· All of our fish oils test well below the 2.0 pg/kg maximum level

set by the EU Regulation (EC/2375/2001) found at

http://europa.eu.int/eur-

lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_321/l_32120011206en00010005.pdf.

2· In addition, each lot must be accompanied with the supplier

statement testifying that the product supplied meets California’s

Proposition 65 for PCBs, lead and other toxins or the product is not

released for manufacture.

Let me know what you guys think, Thanks, .

_____

[Guest guest]

I'm so glad that I posted the information. I didn't notice the

conflicts. Thanks for your help!

> ,

>

> After reading NBTY response I wouldn't touch that stuff with a 10'

pole.

[Guest guest]

Ron how do you know reason 2 is a lie and the " common knowledge in

the fish business that " Atlantic " is farmed raised and " Alaskan " is

real wild salmon " I'm not doubting you are correct -just curious.

Also is it possible that number 1 isn't a lie, but instead that 90%

of the oils are from anchovies or one of the other fish they mention

and only a small percentage is from salmon? (# 5)

In searching NBTY on the other hand,

http://www.careerbuilder.com/JobSeeker/Companies/BBPlusDetails.asp?hhname=nbtyin\

c they do market more that 1,200 products under

several brand names, including Sundown fish oil which was recalled

because " Product labeled as Fish Oil Capsules consists in whole or

in part of Vitamin E capsules. "

http://www.safetyalerts.com/recall/f/02.2/f0002962.htm

For the oils that you are looking into, am I mistaken or are you

looking for the vegetarian formulas of Omega 3,6? Is your child

allergic to fish?

I read that Green People's oil is " ORGANIC FLAX, SESAME, PUMPKIN &

BORAGE SEED OILS " and that UDO's Ultimate Omega Blend is made

from " fresh, certified organic flax, sesame and sunflower seeds,

medium chain triglycerides (MCTs) from coconut oil, evening primrose

oil (13 mg GLA/15ml), soy lecithin (GMO-free), rice bran and rice

germ oils, oat bran and oat germ oils, rosemary extract

(antioxidant), and tocotrienol. "

That's fine if you are exploring a vegetarian source of Omega 3. 6,

but as a group we have found the that Omega 9 isn't that important

and the hands down greatest success from fish oils -and the higher

EPA fish oils are even better. Here is an archive on this:

" Most of our experience is with one, 1.0 gram capsule of ProEFA

(Complete

Omega) that contains 144 mg EPA, 99 mg DHA and 40 mg of GLA. We

know that

this combination appeared to work well. There were some other

supplements

used but we could not conclude anything about them. I can only say

that both

EPA and DHA are important and GLA appears to have an additional

positive

effect on speech.

ALA, linoleic and oleic acids in " The Total Omega " contribute very

little to

the EPA, DHA, and GLA effect.

I see at least 2 possibilities that you could use if you decide to

make the

transition from short-chain omega-3s in plants (flax seed oil

containing

alpha-linolenic acid or ALA, C18:2n-3) to the long-chain mixture of

EPA (C20:5n-3) and DHA (C22:6n-3). These are DHA Jr. (30 mg DHA

and 20 mg EPA in a serving unit) and Coromega (350 mg EPA and

230 mg DHA). Both of these have been anecdotally successful in the

past.

Coromega can be divided in two and taken one half in the morning the

other in the evening. If you choose this mode you will provide your

son

with the equivalent EPA+DHA of 2 ProEFA capsules per day without

the GLA.

Flax seed oil or freshly ground flax seeds are an excellent source

of

the essential omega-3 alpha-linolenic acid (ALA or LNA) which is the

quintessential parent member of the omega-3 family of essential

fatty

acids (EFAs). The body transforms it into EPA and the EPA into

DHA.

This transformation is very inefficient (the yield is about 10%) and

is

further inhibited by over consumption of omega-6 fatty acids from

most

vegetable oils or certain disease states. Therefore, it is

advisable to

independently consume also ready made EPA and DHA from good

quality fish of from high quality fish oil supplements. Some

recommended

intakes are listed on the Introductory lecture on EFAs that I gave

at the

First Conference on Therapy of Verbal Apraxia, July 23-24, 2001,

town, NJ. (http://www.cherab.org/news/scientific.html )

The CHERAB Foundation's positive research results on potential

improvement in speech following EFA supplementation are based

on the use of ProEFA (Complete Omega) and that contains also

another essential fatty acid, GLA which is an omega-6 fatty acid.

The latter appears to be beneficial to children with apraxia. It is

not present in flax seed/flaxseed oil.

None of these materials present with any known side effects or

known toxicity in an otherwise healthy person. Nevertheless, we

advise

every user of supplements to use them under medical supervision.

We don't know your child and we cannot provide you with medical

advice.

Sincerely,

Katz, Ph.D. "

=====

[Guest guest]

Though I don't eat fish EVER, I also know from having worked in the

culinary industry that Ron is 99% correct about the Alaskan vs.

Atlantic differentiation. That is to say (at least when I was

working in it) that ALL Alaskan salmon was wild and 99% of the

Atlantic salmon was farm raised. Now they don't even call it

Alaskan, but can identify the river from which it was caught.

Finally, Ron must have a future in quality control (or consumer

advocacy?) because he's right - without 3rd party testing, they can

make up their own standards and then say that they " meet " them.

Until it is clarified WHAT their standards are and WHO is guarding

that the standards are met, it's also a no-go in my book. I suppose

you could always request additional clarification, but I'd be

surprised if they gave it.

Marina

> Ron how do you know reason 2 is a lie and the " common knowledge in

> the fish business that " Atlantic " is farmed raised and " Alaskan " is

> real wild salmon " I'm not doubting you are correct -just

curious.

> Also is it possible that number 1 isn't a lie, but instead that 90%

> of the oils are from anchovies or one of the other fish they

mention

> and only a small percentage is from salmon? (# 5)

>

> In searching NBTY on the other hand,

> http://www.careerbuilder.com/JobSeeker/Companies/BBPlusDetails.asp?

hhname=nbtyinc they do market more that 1,200 products under

> several brand names, including Sundown fish oil which was recalled

> because " Product labeled as Fish Oil Capsules consists in whole or

> in part of Vitamin E capsules. "

> http://www.safetyalerts.com/recall/f/02.2/f0002962.htm

>

> For the oils that you are looking into, am I mistaken or are you

> looking for the vegetarian formulas of Omega 3,6? Is your child

> allergic to fish?

>

> I read that Green People's oil is " ORGANIC FLAX, SESAME, PUMPKIN &

> BORAGE SEED OILS " and that UDO's Ultimate Omega Blend is made

> from " fresh, certified organic flax, sesame and sunflower seeds,

> medium chain triglycerides (MCTs) from coconut oil, evening

primrose

> oil (13 mg GLA/15ml), soy lecithin (GMO-free), rice bran and rice

> germ oils, oat bran and oat germ oils, rosemary extract

> (antioxidant), and tocotrienol. "

>

> That's fine if you are exploring a vegetarian source of Omega 3. 6,

> but as a group we have found the that Omega 9 isn't that important

> and the hands down greatest success from fish oils -and the higher

> EPA fish oils are even better. Here is an archive on this:

>

> " Most of our experience is with one, 1.0 gram capsule of ProEFA

> (Complete

> Omega) that contains 144 mg EPA, 99 mg DHA and 40 mg of GLA. We

> know that

> this combination appeared to work well. There were some other

> supplements

> used but we could not conclude anything about them. I can only say

> that both

> EPA and DHA are important and GLA appears to have an additional

> positive

> effect on speech.

>

> ALA, linoleic and oleic acids in " The Total Omega " contribute very

> little to

> the EPA, DHA, and GLA effect.

>

> I see at least 2 possibilities that you could use if you decide to

> make the

> transition from short-chain omega-3s in plants (flax seed oil

> containing

> alpha-linolenic acid or ALA, C18:2n-3) to the long-chain mixture of

> EPA (C20:5n-3) and DHA (C22:6n-3). These are DHA Jr. (30 mg DHA

> and 20 mg EPA in a serving unit) and Coromega (350 mg EPA and

> 230 mg DHA). Both of these have been anecdotally successful in the

> past.

>

> Coromega can be divided in two and taken one half in the morning

the

> other in the evening. If you choose this mode you will provide

your

> son

> with the equivalent EPA+DHA of 2 ProEFA capsules per day without

> the GLA.

>

> Flax seed oil or freshly ground flax seeds are an excellent source

> of

> the essential omega-3 alpha-linolenic acid (ALA or LNA) which is

the

> quintessential parent member of the omega-3 family of essential

> fatty

> acids (EFAs). The body transforms it into EPA and the EPA into

> DHA.

> This transformation is very inefficient (the yield is about 10%)

and

> is

> further inhibited by over consumption of omega-6 fatty acids from

> most

> vegetable oils or certain disease states. Therefore, it is

> advisable to

> independently consume also ready made EPA and DHA from good

> quality fish of from high quality fish oil supplements. Some

> recommended

> intakes are listed on the Introductory lecture on EFAs that I gave

> at the

> First Conference on Therapy of Verbal Apraxia, July 23-24, 2001,

> town, NJ. (http://www.cherab.org/news/scientific.html )

>

> The CHERAB Foundation's positive research results on potential

> improvement in speech following EFA supplementation are based

> on the use of ProEFA (Complete Omega) and that contains also

> another essential fatty acid, GLA which is an omega-6 fatty acid.

> The latter appears to be beneficial to children with apraxia. It

is

> not present in flax seed/flaxseed oil.

>

> None of these materials present with any known side effects or

> known toxicity in an otherwise healthy person. Nevertheless, we

> advise

> every user of supplements to use them under medical supervision.

> We don't know your child and we cannot provide you with medical

> advice.

>

> Sincerely,

>

> Katz, Ph.D. "

>

> =====

>

[Guest guest]

Marina while you never eat fish, this is a subject I want to know

about for sure because my whole family eats fish often -and takes

fish oil daily -and there are reasons why we do. In addition to all

the health reasons that are researched, Tanner became Tanner again

on fish oil almost overnight, and fish oils also changed our son

Dakota. But formulas do matter -not all Omega 3,6 formulas are the

same. Tanner regressed when we gave him formulas that were pure

Omega 3 formulas -or those that were flax and/or other vegetarian

oils ...even when mixed with the right fish oil formula in Omega 3,

6 oils! Why? Don't know and nobody can say for sure. Tanner

requires the right formula of EFAs each day -which for him means

fish oil with a small amount of GLA. As I posted more recently

Tanner even regressed with the Benefiber (high fiber) I gave him for

constipation for some reason. (Dr. said it's possible that

the high fiber short chained the long chain fatty acids in the gut

in theory) Thank goodness we now know about the nectars and

MOM.

Again I'm not doubting Ron who I don't know passed us correct

information and has knowledge in this area, I'm also not doubting

some areas of the world are better than others for where to harvest

oils from. However having a background in the toy industry myself -

I'm not privy to all the information, including the eluded

confidential governmental information you can read about below, on

fish oil origins -so I just want to know how he (and you) know for

99 or 100% sure.

The NBTY company stated in writing as posted here:

" 1· Over 90% of the oils we use in our many fish oil products are

from

wild sources.

2· The oil that comes from wild fish is from a combination of

anchovies, menhaden, Atlantic wild salmon and sardines.

3· The oil that comes from farmed fish is from a combination of

anchovies, herring, salmon, sardines and sprat.

4· Our pure salmon oil comes from a combination of farmed and wild

salmon.

5· Although a larger percent of our pure salmon oil is sourced from

farmed than wild salmon, the Norwegian fish farms currently use crude

soybeans to enrich their fish feed, rather than fish meal. The oils

are then fortified with additional omega 3 fatty acids to maintain

the fatty acid profile we promise on our labels. "

And I questioned how do we know that the 90% they state in number

one isn't 89.9% anchovies which would mean that number 5 isn't a

contradiction? And how do we know for sure that number 2 is an

outright lie since it may be .1% in the mixture?

I'm sure from what I've read that Atlantic wild salmon should not be

used, and that the wild Atlantic salmon are endangered and protected

nationally even though not always internationally, and that of

course in most cases outside of reasons of pollution wild would be

better than farmed -but how do we know one is lying in stating in

writing wild Atlantic salmon is what they are using?

And what about the problem of farmed fish mixing with wild fish?

Farmed Salmon Escapes Threaten Survival of Wild Atlantic Salmon

Populations, Says New Study

http://www.seaweb.org/resources/73update/73update.html

And for all -commercial fish gurus and not -here is more information

on the farmed fish report "

Articles such as the following show I'm not the only one with

questions:

" Adrift in a sea of conflicting data from fish industry and

environmental groups, the consumer is often left foundering, trying

to sort the facts from the flotsam "

" At the end of the 20th century, fish farming developed into a big

business, with varying results. " For me, the quest is to get as much

of the wild product as possible. The farmed product takes some of

the pressure off the wild, and allows it to come back, " said

Berkowitz, president and CEO of Legal Sea Foods Inc., in Boston,

which operates 28 seafood restaurants in eight states, including New

Jersey.

" We've gotten to the point as an industry that we know we have to

preserve all the fishing grounds. Before, it was a free-for-all, "

said smith, president of Scandia Seafood New York Inc.,

in Secaucus, a seafood importer and distributor to restaurants,

hotels and country clubs in New Jersey and Manhattan. The bulk of

consumed fish, he said, will be farmed, with wild fish supplementing

or filling in any gaps in the supply...

In light of practically nonexistent guidance from regulatory

agencies on the safety of the seafood at market, consumers should

ask about a fish's origin and breeding before buying. If the seller

seems knowledgeable and willing to answer customers' questions,

that's their most reasonable assurance of quality. Otherwise, they

should probably fish for another store.

With studies that see-saw back and forth over what is safe and

advisable to eat, there still is no clear-cut answer regarding how

much salmon is safe to consume.

http://www.nj.com/living/ledger/index.ssf?/base/living-0/107406206431851.xml

And the most recent on the reports on farmed fish? Here is

the " Statement Addressing Misinformation About Our Salmon Study "

clip:

" We describe in the study how the levels of contaminants found fall

well below U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory levels

set in 1984 while at the same time triggering strict consumption

advice guidelines set in 1999 by the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA). To help the public understand what this seemingly

contradictory information means, we explain in the study that FDA's

regulatory levels must, by law, consider commercial impacts on food

producers and the food supply. The UK Food Standards Agency (FSA)

takes an approach similar to the U.S. FDA's. That means that

protection of health is not the only criterion they consider. "

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=115722

And one other thing to keep in mind for those like me who do eat

both fish and take fish oil, there are toxins in the fish you eat

that won't be in the oil For example while mercury etc. binds to

the protein (muscle of the fish) so it's not in the oil of the

fish. From what I've read -the largest problem with fish oil itself

is rancidity. Oxygen and fish oil doesn't mix well.

Consumer Reports had this to say (most likely because toxins in

many cases bind to the protein and most oils are not tested for

rancidity)

" Consumer Reports tested 16 top-selling fish-oil pills which, like

other supplements, aren't closely regulated by the FDA.

Consumer Reports' Metcalf says the test results are

reassuring, " We found that all 16 brands that we tested had the

amount of Omega-3s that they said they did, which is good news. And,

we don't always find that with supplements. "

Since fish can contain toxins, Metcalf says Consumer Reports also

checked the supplements for purity, " We tested for three kinds of

toxins that often appear in fish — mercury, dioxin, and PCBs. "

Testers didn't find significant levels of toxins in any of the pills

tested, so you don't have to worry about contaminants.

But, Consumer Reports found there is a big difference when it comes

to price. Metcalf says some brands cost ten times as much as

others, " Since they're all equally pure and have the right amount of

Omega-3s in it, there's no reason you can't buy the least expensive

brand that you can find. "

(ha ha and to add to this confusion - this same 7/3/03

segment/article states " Fish that are high in the heart-healthy oil

and don't have dangerous levels of toxins include salmon " )

http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/features/consumerwatch/consumer_070303_omega3.html

So when the company stated they test for purity themselves or third

person tested for mercury 'may' be Advertising hype. It 'may' be

like when Crisco's advertising first came out saying that their

vegetable oil is " cholesterol free "

http://www.crisco.com/about/prod_info.asp which implied the other

vegetable oils had cholesterol.

All vegetable oils are cholesterol free since it's found only in all

animal products such as meat, poultry, eggs, milk, and cheese.

Plant food sources do not contain cholesterol. I know for sure we

need the oils tested for rancidity.

As always -I just like to know why when things are stated -and some

things nobody has all the answers to yet -and believe me I ask.

(and yes I was the child that always asked " why? " even after other

kids dropped it -and drove everyone nuts)

=====

[Guest guest]

Just thought I'd add this too to clarify my statement on formula

http://www.cherab.org/information/historyEFA.html

(never thought I'd ever have a 'fish oil' history!)

~

[Guest guest]

Kiddie,

As Marina has stated it is common knowledge in the F & B (food and beverage)

business, also you can ask the " meat clerk " at your local grocery or more

likely HFS clerk and they will confirm as well. I'm not in F & B any more,

now a parent fighting for my child.

In regards to the second part of your post: You are an optimist aren't you!?

(kidding aside) Mathematically it could be feasible, but not financially.

At the least they are intentionally confusing, which to me is a red flag.

I am familiar with the Dr. Katz's article and if they had used Carlson's or

UDO's we might all be saying, " No no only Udo's, because it was in the

report " . Please note second to last sentence of the article.

None of these materials present with any known side effects or known

toxicity in an otherwise healthy person.

Key words being " otherwise healthy person " . I don't know about your child,

but expressive and receptive delays are not the only thing wrong. I also

have GI issues, (upper and lower), Liver issues(phase 1 & 2) Citric Acid Cycle

(Kerb's) as I believe most ASD do as a result of the " Heavy Metal " toxic

load they are carrying.

I am a believer in Omega 3 & 6 yes, but only straight from the source, not

thru animals.

Ron

[Guest guest]

Marina,

I looking to hire a PR person, you available :-)!

Ron

[Guest guest]

, I answered in between the lines. You sure gave me enough links to

chase down and I did every last one.

Ron

[ ] Re: I found cheaper EFA's (MORE INFO)

Marina while you never eat fish, this is a subject I want to know

about for sure because my whole family eats fish often -and takes

fish oil daily -and there are reasons why we do.

*****

I don't want to get off topic here, so I'll just say my peace here and not

bring it up again. I think the toxins in our fish supply out weigh the

benefits they provide, that is why I don't eat fish either. Has everyone

or anyone done a DDI hair analysis on themselves or their child? Have you

done one each year? Our water ways are quite polluted.

******

In addition to all

the health reasons that are researched, Tanner became Tanner again

on fish oil almost overnight, and fish oils also changed our son

Dakota.

******

Here is one of my issues. I know this parent (no it is not me) who gives

their child ProEFA religiously and every 4 or 5 bottles or so takes a break.

The child always regresses, slurred/sloppy pronunciation speech, etc. She

puts him back on and he's back. To me this is not an answer. Don't get me

wrong, I'm not saying don't take it. I'm just saying that there is

something else that has to be done. There is something else at play here

and no, I don't have any suggestions. EFA supplementation for life just

isn't the answer I'm looking for.

******

But formulas do matter -not all Omega 3,6 formulas are the

same. Tanner regressed when we gave him formulas that were pure

Omega 3 formulas -or those that were flax and/or other vegetarian

oils ...even when mixed with the right fish oil formula in Omega 3,

6 oils! Why? Don't know and nobody can say for sure. Tanner

requires the right formula of EFAs each day -which for him means

fish oil with a small amount of GLA. As I posted more recently

Tanner even regressed with the Benefiber (high fiber) I gave him for

constipation for some reason. (Dr. said it's possible that

the high fiber short chained the long chain fatty acids in the gut

in theory) Thank goodness we now know about the nectars and

MOM.

Again I'm not doubting Ron who I don't know passed us correct

information and has knowledge in this area, I'm also not doubting

some areas of the world are better than others for where to harvest

oils from. However having a background in the toy industry myself -

I'm not privy to all the information, including the eluded

confidential governmental information

*****

What are you trying to say here

, I'm not trying to be argumentative or deceptive here. You and any of

your group can go to your local WO, WF, HFS, TJ and ask the meat clerk guy.

Which is the farm raised salmon, the Atlantic or Alaskan? He should say

Atlantic.

****

you can read about below, on

fish oil origins -so I just want to know how he (and you) know for

99 or 100% sure.

The NBTY company stated in writing as posted here:

" 1. Over 90% of the oils we use in our many fish oil products are

from wild sources.

****

For this to mean anything they must include a definition of what they

consider " wild " . If all they mean is the fish once lived in water, than

that's not saying much. It also begs the question, where is the other 10%

coming from? Soy, vegetable, Saudi Arabia?

****

2. The oil that comes from wild fish is from a combination of

anchovies, menhaden, Atlantic wild salmon and sardines.

3. The oil that comes from farmed fish is from a combination of

anchovies, herring, salmon, sardines and sprat.

4. Our pure salmon oil comes from a combination of farmed and wild

salmon.

*****

Number 5 says it all. They admit to using a larger percentage of farmed

fish. Maybe this is only clear to me because I know and have seen the

difference between the two and just assumed everyone else can see too.

When it is Salmon season go to your local market, this will be the only time

you can buy fresh Wild Alaskan Salmon and the only time you can side by side

compare the two. The wild salmon will be a bright pink with thin white

lines (fat-these guys are in shape) the Atlantic will be gray and the white

lines will be noticibly wider. Farmed raised live in tanks, huge tanks mind

you, the size of football fields and literally lay on top of one another

they are so packed in. They eat and breath each others waste are feed

garabge. I don't care what kind of " high quality fish meal " they say they

feed them it is not a diet the fish would eat if it were wild.

It is full of antibiotics and they are constantly subjected to insecticides

and pesticides, for the farms are usually in agriculture land were other

farming is.

******

5. Although a larger percent of our pure salmon oil is sourced from

farmed than wild salmon, the Norwegian fish farms currently use crude

soybeans to enrich their fish feed, rather than fish meal. The oils

are then fortified with additional omega 3 fatty acids to maintain

the fatty acid profile we promise on our labels. "

And I questioned how do we know that the 90% they state in number

one isn't 89.9% anchovies which would mean that number 5 isn't a

contradiction?

*****

Again they are intentionally unclear and to me this is a red flag. Why

doesn't someone ask them to clarify and I will put my money with Marina that

they either. 1 Avoid the answer or 2 don't answer.

******

And how do we know for sure that number 2 is an

outright lie since it may be .1% in the mixture?

*****

It is an outright lie because there is no such thing as " Wild Atlantic "

salmon. It is an oxymoron like " Holy War "

*****

I'm sure from what I've read that Atlantic wild salmon should not be

used, and that the wild Atlantic salmon are endangered and protected

nationally even though not always internationally, and that of

course in most cases outside of reasons of pollution wild would be

better than farmed -but how do we know one is lying in stating in

writing wild Atlantic salmon is what they are using?

**********

are you intentionally trying to start an argument or was your use of

" Atlantic Wild Salmon " above a slip. I didn't make up these terms, the

industry did. If we are going to talk about this, we need to compare apples

to apples.

Atlantic salmon are not endangered or protected, they are raised on purpose

because there aren't enough wild Alaskan salmon to fill the need.

*********

And what about the problem of farmed fish mixing with wild fish?

Farmed Salmon Escapes Threaten Survival of Wild Atlantic Salmon

Populations, Says New Study

http://www.seaweb.org/resources/73update/73update.html

*********

This article said the fish farmers accidentally let approx. 2 million, which

is 50% of the " wild " population escape. This is bad news for the wild

salmon and us. Fortuneatly though the weaker farmed salmon die off.

Survival of the fittest you know, especially out in the wild.

*********

And for all -commercial fish gurus and not -here is more information

on the farmed fish report "

Articles such as the following show I'm not the only one with

questions:

" Adrift in a sea of conflicting data from fish industry and

environmental groups, the consumer is often left foundering, trying

to sort the facts from the flotsam "

" At the end of the 20th century, fish farming developed into a big

business, with varying results. " For me, the quest is to get as much

of the wild product as possible. The farmed product takes some of

the pressure off the wild, and allows it to come back, " said

Berkowitz, president and CEO of Legal Sea Foods Inc., in Boston,

which operates 28 seafood restaurants in eight states, including New

Jersey.

************

we need to remember to 1. " Consider the source " . 2. Read between the

lines "

The above quote form , only exemplifies the once big business is

involved QC/ethics usually goes out the window and most certainly consumer

health. What I read is " wild is best " , " but farmed is necessary in order to

turn a profit " . If they were looking out for us they would be helping the

wild salmon flourish, not the bandaid they currently have in place.

*********

" We've gotten to the point as an industry that we know we have to

preserve all the fishing grounds. Before, it was a free-for-all, "

said smith, president of Scandia Seafood New York Inc.,

in Secaucus, a seafood importer and distributor to restaurants,

hotels and country clubs in New Jersey and Manhattan. The bulk of

consumed fish, he said, will be farmed, with wild fish supplementing

or filling in any gaps in the supply...

***********

This only reconfirms my point that big business doesn't care about the

health of the consumer only their profit.

by the way is known is a " fish monger " , a term used for the bigger

wheels in the seafood import/export business.

*******

In light of practically nonexistent guidance from regulatory

agencies on the safety of the seafood at market, consumers should

ask about a fish's origin and breeding before buying. If the seller

seems knowledgeable and willing to answer customers' questions,

that's their most reasonable assurance of quality. Otherwise, they

should probably fish for another store.

*********

Very good advice.

**********

With studies that see-saw back and forth over what is safe and

advisable to eat, there still is no clear-cut answer regarding how

much salmon is safe to consume.

http://www.nj.com/living/ledger/index.ssf?/base/living-0/107406206431851.xml

***************

How much salmon is safe? As soon as you can figure out how many unnecessary

toxics you want to take in, you can answer that question.

, Why didn't you cut n paste this part out of the above link?

..snip.

A study by the Environmental Working Group of Washington, D.C., a nonprofit

public interest watchdog, reported last summer that farmed salmon were the

most likely PCB-contaminated protein source in the national food supply,

with a PCB content 16 times higher than that found in wild salmon and four

times higher than the levels in beef. Industry groups criticized the

findings, which were based on a sample of 10 store-bought fish in

Washington, D.C., San Francisco, and Portland, Ore. Last week, a study of

700 salmon found that the level of PCBs in fillets taken from farmed salmon

were seven times as high as levels in fillets taken from wild salmon.

In the wild, salmon get their unique flesh color from the shrimp and krill

that make up a good portion of their diet, explained Candler. Canthaxanthin

and astaxanthin are synthetically produced carotenoid pigments that

typically are added to the feed of farm-raised salmon to help them achieve

the color most consumers recognize as salmon pink.

According to Candler, the government requires that farm-raised salmon that

have been fed coloring agents be so labeled -- but only if they're sold in

large chain supermarkets, not small fish stores.

Candler, vice president of communications with the National Fisheries

Institute, a nonprofit trade organization representing the seafood industry,

in Arlington, Va., said PCB levels in farmed and wild salmon " are comparable

at about 100 times below the FDA limit, so they're perfectly safe. "

According to the EWG, however, the FDA's standard is out of date and doesn't

reflect the latest scientific research. " When the FDA's standard was

developed, salmon was something of a rarity in the U.S. diet, " notes the EWG

on its Web site (www.ewg.org).

..snip.

*************

And the most recent on the reports on farmed fish? Here is

the " Statement Addressing Misinformation About Our Salmon Study "

clip:

" We describe in the study how the levels of contaminants found fall

well below U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory levels

set in 1984 while at the same time triggering strict consumption

advice guidelines set in 1999 by the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA). To help the public understand what this seemingly

contradictory information means, we explain in the study that FDA's

regulatory levels must, by law, consider commercial impacts on food

producers and the food supply. The UK Food Standards Agency (FSA)

takes an approach similar to the U.S. FDA's. That means that

protection of health is not the only criterion they consider. "

***********

I disagree I think its main duty is for the protection of peoples health,

not to make sure it isn't a burden to big business.

*************

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=5722

<http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=%115722>

And one other thing to keep in mind for those like me who do eat

both fish and take fish oil, there are toxins in the fish you eat

that won't be in the oil For example while mercury etc. binds to

the protein (muscle of the fish) so it's not in the oil of the

fish.

*********

, I do not know who told you this incorrect information, but Mercury

specifically has an affinity for fatty tissue. That's why it is in all our

kids heads and causing " Neurological " disorders. There is a whole

group dedicated to it, not to mention numerous studies. May I suggest

/ I know some of you

say you kids don't have Autism, but they do have a neurological disorder, so

lets forget about labels and agree that they have a problem and that heavy

metal toxins may have been the cause.

*********

From what I've read -the largest problem with fish oil itself

is rancidity. Oxygen and fish oil doesn't mix well.

*********

I still feel it is purity. Rancidity is easily avoided by modern

manufacturing practices.

*********

Consumer Reports had this to say (most likely because toxins in

many cases bind to the protein and most oils are not tested for

rancidity)

*********

I disagree. Also I used to be a subscriber to Consumer Reports " On Health "

Until I realized about three years ago their strings were being controlled

by another, when it came to their " Health " reports.

*********

" Consumer Reports tested 16 top-selling fish-oil pills which, like

other supplements, aren't closely regulated by the FDA.

Consumer Reports' Metcalf says the test results are

reassuring, " We found that all 16 brands that we tested had the

amount of Omega-3s that they said they did, which is good news. And,

we don't always find that with supplements. "

Since fish can contain toxins, Metcalf says Consumer Reports also

checked the supplements for purity, " We tested for three kinds of

toxins that often appear in fish - mercury, dioxin, and PCBs. "

Testers didn't find significant levels of toxins in any of the pills

tested, so you don't have to worry about contaminants.

***********

According to outdated and unrealistic standards set over 20 years. ago.

*************

But, Consumer Reports found there is a big difference when it comes

to price. Metcalf says some brands cost ten times as much as

others, " Since they're all equally pure and have the right amount of

Omega-3s in it, there's no reason you can't buy the least expensive

brand that you can find. "

*********

This sentence is thrown for appearances, in order to win your confidence. A

company wouldn't put in 10x the amount necessary if they were competing in

the same market. You get what you pay for, there are no free lunches.

***********

(ha ha and to add to this confusion - this same 7/3/03

segment/article states " Fish that are high in the heart-healthy oil

and don't have dangerous levels of toxins include salmon " )

http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/features/consumerwatch/consumer_070303_omega3.ht

ml

**********

Rule #1 " Consider the source " . I don't even have to check this link. I can

see it is from ABC, the news is the most manipulated service running. Give

them some advertising dollars and they will say/print whatever you like.

, why did you not include this cut n paste from the same ABC news story,

( I decided to check it after all)

Consumer Reports says if you choose to get your fish oil from eating fish,

be aware that not all kinds are high in Omega-3 fatty acids. And, some fish

can contain toxins that should be avoided by young children and women who

are pregnant or nursing.

**************

So when the company stated they test for purity themselves or third

person tested for mercury 'may' be Advertising hype. It 'may' be

like when Crisco's advertising first came out saying that their

vegetable oil is " cholesterol free "

http://www.crisco.com/about/prod_info.asp which implied the other

vegetable oils had cholesterol.

All vegetable oils are cholesterol free since it's found only in all

animal products such as meat, poultry, eggs, milk, and cheese.

Plant food sources do not contain cholesterol. I know for sure we

need the oils tested for rancidity.

As always -I just like to know why when things are stated -and some

things nobody has all the answers to yet -and believe me I ask.

***********

Which is good practice, I commend you. It never hurts to ask.

Ron

/

abmd/

Autism_in_Girls/

CasiClubhouse/

/

RecoveredKids/

sulfurstories/

NeuroTherapy/

autisminterventionsocal/

(and yes I was the child that always asked " why? " even after other

kids dropped it -and drove everyone nuts)

=========

[Guest guest]

-

It just IS common knowledge - the same way we know the difference

between roaster and fryer chickens, porterhouse and T-bone, etc..

Besides, I'm certainly not the expert whom you should be asking

because you obviously need to speak to an expert. Please go to your

local fish monger and ask him/her about the terminology, AND from

where your fish comes! Because fish is now such a prominent source

of PCBs and other contaminents, I think it's VERY important to know

from where the fish comes for any type of consumption. If you want

more information about this, listen to the NPR program on Factory

Farming Neal Cohan did a week or so ago. You can probably also get

the transcript. Check out NPR's site at NPR.org. It has some pretty

interesting information about farmed fish, imports from Scandanavian

countries and their extremely high levels of PCBs, etc. which I had

not heard before. On a different note, I personally don't eat or

serve fish because of my extreme distaste for it. I do not live near

a coast and I do not have a good source for fish which I trust.

I have to agree with Ron on always questioning the source of

information. Some experts have vested interests in putting forth

information. I think Ron makes a good point in that there is quite a

bit of potential variability in the ingredient list from the other

EFA source simply from a logical point. You could absolutely be

correct that most of the oil comes from anchovies not salmon,

but (and the PR-Marina is emerging here) when there is too much

information given when a simple answer could more easily answer the

question, often the simple answer isn't pleasing to the audience!

You've heard politicians do this - replies that are way too long,

drag in extraneous information and refer to WAY too many outside

sources. Rather than further debate this on the list, which is

really moot, perhaps a simple phone call to this company w/could

clarify this?

Simply, my answer is to go to the sources - real experts whose

answers you DO trust - to answer both your questions.

Marina

> Marina while you never eat fish, this is a subject I want to know

> about for sure because my whole family eats fish often -and takes

> fish oil daily -and there are reasons why we do. In addition to

all

> the health reasons that are researched, Tanner became Tanner again

> on fish oil almost overnight, and fish oils also changed our son

> Dakota. But formulas do matter -not all Omega 3,6 formulas are the

> same. Tanner regressed when we gave him formulas that were pure

> Omega 3 formulas -or those that were flax and/or other vegetarian

> oils ...even when mixed with the right fish oil formula in Omega 3,

> 6 oils! Why? Don't know and nobody can say for sure. Tanner

> requires the right formula of EFAs each day -which for him means

> fish oil with a small amount of GLA. As I posted more recently

> Tanner even regressed with the Benefiber (high fiber) I gave him

for

> constipation for some reason. (Dr. said it's possible that

> the high fiber short chained the long chain fatty acids in the gut

> in theory) Thank goodness we now know about the nectars and

> MOM.

>

> Again I'm not doubting Ron who I don't know passed us correct

> information and has knowledge in this area, I'm also not doubting

> some areas of the world are better than others for where to harvest

> oils from. However having a background in the toy industry myself -

> I'm not privy to all the information, including the eluded

> confidential governmental information you can read about below, on

> fish oil origins -so I just want to know how he (and you) know for

> 99 or 100% sure.

[Guest guest]

Thanks for your answers so far. Yes Ron I am an optimist! )

Apparently however not as much of an optimist as Marina who posted all this fish

oil information is common knowledge just like " roaster and fryer chickens " The

tiny pessimist I didn't know was in me believes the majority of the population

(like I was a few years ago) doesn't even know what EFA stands for no less where

it comes from.

So even though this is all common knowledge for some of you -I'm only asking how

you know since unlike you guys I am one that doesn't just know these things.

Then again I guess I should also admit that I was never much of a Suzie

Homemaker and don't know much about roaster vs. fryer chickens either -but that

may be outside the point even though just brought up they could be toxic

too.

Ron, you obviously are not the average Joe -but doesn't most of the public

trust Consumer Reports or ABC reports? (does this include 20/20 too? or perhaps

I shouldn't go off on this tangent?) About Wild Atlantic Salmon, Ron you wrote

" > are you intentionally trying to start an argument or was your use of

> " Atlantic Wild Salmon " above a slip. I didn't make up these terms, the

> industry did. If we are going to talk about this, we need to compare apples

> to apples.

>

> Atlantic salmon are not endangered or protected, they are raised on purpose

> because there aren't enough wild Alaskan salmon to fill the need. "

No Ron -I'm not trying to start an argument since you asked me -I'm just asking

why is just saying Wild Atlantic Salmon like saying " Holy War " (I know we need

research -but this isn't a Kennedy experiment is it?) My apologies for

not getting it -you sound like an intelligent person and I know you can answer

these questions I dare ask without upsetting you and/or others for asking again

about this easy stuff others get so easily. What is the Atlantic Salmon

Federation and why are they protecting what they call the Wild Atlantic Salmon

http://www.asf.ca/Overall/lifecycle.html ? And if Wild Atlantic Salmon, do not

exist -and are not endangered -then why is the World Wildlife Association tying

to help them (a charity I supported way back from when I went to School of

Visual Arts where I never dreamed one day I would be debating the existence of

one of the species they are claiming to protect)

http://www.wwf.org.uk/News/n_0000000293.asp

http://www.panda.org/downloads/marine/osloresprogfinal3.pdf

And in your opinion should NOAA be trusted?

http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases2000/nov00/noaanfws1113.html

or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? or the National Marine Fisheries

Service? Why do all these places list the species of Wild Atlantic Salmon as

endangered under the Endangered Species Act?

http://endangered.fws.gov/i/E51.html

And in recent news why are there all these articles about Wild Atlantic Salmon

like this one in the headlines

http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hsfish143625426jan14,0,4080390.story?coll=\

ny-health-headlines

Did I miss the point and you just mean that there is no such thing as Wild

Atlantic Salmon being used commercially?

I agree with you of course that mercury is a problem -and I think that other

toxins in our life now are to blame too -even those most don't talk about like

phenol when mixed with other toxins. Did you read this page which I wrote all

about the toxins and our children?

http://www.cherab.org/news/Save.html

Of course I know about and support those behind the autism mercury boards -did

you read this?

http://www.cherab.org/news/JointStatement.html

Fish oil is under more scrutiny than french fry and doughnut oil and in my

opinion there are many other things to be afraid of our there that most don't

even look at. Kim just posted -even when seeing great results in her son on

EFAs, and regressions when taken off, like even you report from someone you know

-Kim is afraid of higher EPA (Omega 3) for some reason. Not talking about Kim

-but most people will sit at their computer reading warnings about making sure

fish oil is pure while their child is popping potato chips in their mouth. They

should check oil purity, we all should -but does anyone, ever, question the

purity of pizza oil? And for fish oil -I also don't believe in just one brand

even though I stand behind a few that come up here often which are ProEFA,

Efalex and EyeQ. All that matters are formula, dosage, and quality of the oil

(I agree quality matters!)

Most of the members here know that my family used to use Efalex and had great

results (which are written about under apraxia in The LCP Solution book by

Malcolm Nicholl and Dr. Stordy http://www.drstory.com/stories.html My family

has for years now however used the ProEFA brand instead due to parent and them

professionals anecdotal feedbacks

http://www.cherab.org/information/historyEFA.html which inspired The First

Apraxia Conference (where you will see Dr Katz's involvement which is not with

any company) http://www.cherab.org/news/scientific.html

which is all written about in a book called The Late Talker

http://www.speech-express.com/late.talker.html I co authored with

neurodevelopmental pediatrician Marilyn Agin MD and (yes the same) Malcolm

Nicholl.

Plant sources, as well as pure fish oil, didn't 'work' for my son Tanner who

needs the O3 O6 formulas. You must be newer but I always say as a parent we

need to observe what works for each child as an individual and follow that.

Fish oil with the small amount of primrose or borage oil will not work for all

children -we found anecdotally however that it works for just about all late

talker children ranging from those with simple delays to those with multifaceted

communication impairments. One day this will be researched and we will all know

why. Until then -if you are giving your child a plant source and they don't

respond, or don't have a dramatic surge -try the fish and small amount of GLA

(from primrose or borage seed) formula that worked for most of us and let us

know what you see if a day to three weeks.

I have found the Nordic Naturals products to be the most palatable, probably

because they are tested to be one of the lowest peroxide levels of all the fish

oil brands out there. (again we do need to make sure fish oils are tested for

rancidity) There may lie the difference between the cheap and more expensive

fish oils -the rancidity of the product.

I stand behind the ProEFA and no other as strong as I do them because in this

group in support meetings, MD and SLP office reports, and online reports -they

work for the majority in the lowest dosage reported (most start their child on

one capsule a day for the first 3-6 months which is around 100 DHA, 150 EPA and

50 GLA) with no reported side effects in the past number of years. I also stand

behind Efalex and EyeQ for similar reasons, even though EyeQ is newer. Most of

these other companies that are being brought up recently have not been mentioned

before or enough to know -so the jury is out still. I posted what I did because

I don't feel comfortable with companies or individuals being attacked unless

what is stated is true -and backed with facts.

I called this company NBTY and spoke with various individuals from marketing,

research and development, soft gels, and am awaiting a call from a director

there on the exact percentage of each of the types of oils as well as why they

stated what they did. I found so far they are not the warm fuzzy company that

Nordic Naturals is when I call -but was so far told that I was correct about the

anchovy oil being the primary oil used as I suspected. I wrote what I did

because I was once told years ago that companies don't publicize as much the use

of anchovy oil as much as they do because it doesn't sound as good to say to

most of the uninformed public. Anchovies are low on the food chain, so like

sardines -safer fish to eat if you are going to eat the fish. Fish oils as I

stated as well - 'may' not be a problem with toxins anyway. I know you don't

agree Ron -but if they were adding to the problem, for those of us giving our

children higher dosages -in addition to what I was told by 2 NIH doctors at this

point in writing -why all the constant surges and improvements on the EFAs from

fish oil? In addition to what I was told in writing by the MDs from the NIH

which I'll find both if you want to read them, and what I posted here about the

Consumer Reports testing 16 brands of oil including the store brands and found

OK levels of mercury, PCBs or dioxin in all of them, since I know you don't

trust Consumer Reports, Any thoughts on this?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_uids=1\

4632570 & dopt=Abstract

Large companies like NBTY private label to places like Wal-Mart or CVS

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m3374/4_25/99309282/p1/article.jhtml where

the average person will pick up bottles of fish oil to " try " Sadly some may

have no other option due to financial reasons. There are parents in the group,

and I know some personally, who can only afford to use less expensive oils...or

the " cheap ProEFA " -which is how this thread started to begin with. Some of

these parents are just searching on " what " to use to help their child -which is

why I say all that matters is formula, dosage and quality of the oils. In your

opinion -what is the harm in trying them? In my opinion fish oils 'may' be the

only way to ingest the huge amount of benefits of the EFAs found in the fish

without the toxins -and they may be helping our children's brains to rewire.

There are some who don't have to take them after years. I know you don't believe

that the fish is better than the plant source, and perhaps you are right in

theory -but in reality the plant source alone doesn't work for my son -nor most

in our group.

So plant sources aside for a moment (if they don't work for your child like they

didn't mine) if you want a high quality fish oil, and can afford to pay for it

like most of us are fortunate enough to be able to do -then try the more

expensive oils and compare yourself. As parents most of us do try other brands

-and the changes are typically pretty quick I found. Fish oil for life? Guess

there are worse things -like not being able to be understood when you talk. And

I agree with you that I wish there was a way to just cure it even though we

don't have that answer yet.

My son is never off his ProEFA more than a day, and when he is he does regress.

Tanner has been on EFAs for years. He only regresses when off ProEFA for even a

day -or on or off carn-aware or carnosine for too long Tanner surges when

taken off carnosine -and then surges again when put back on. That is the only

supplement we seem to need to give him on an on and off schedule. (for him a few

weeks on and a few weeks off)

I've said to a number of researchers, and posted here in the archives years ago

now -if it's in the water, why is nobody testing the soil and the plants?

Plants contain lead when lead is in the soil -so plants 'may' be no better, and

could be worse. There needs to be more studies.

We need to find out how to best live (and eat) healthy in a toxic world -which

means working with what we've got. (and apparently at times, given the subject

title, this means financially too)

=====

[Guest guest]

You know what Lise? What you just posted, left me speechless...The only word

that I can say is BRAVO!!! I must admit that I have missed most of this

thread, But I do appreciate your opinion and knowledge you offer to this

list.

[ ] Re: I found cheaper EFA's (MORE INFO)

> Thanks for your answers so far. Yes Ron I am an optimist! )

>

> Apparently however not as much of an optimist as Marina who posted all

this fish oil information is common knowledge just like " roaster and fryer

chickens " The tiny pessimist I didn't know was in me believes the majority

of the population (like I was a few years ago) doesn't even know what EFA

stands for no less where it comes from.

>

> So even though this is all common knowledge for some of you -I'm only

asking how you know since unlike you guys I am one that doesn't just know

these things. Then again I guess I should also admit that I was never much

of a Suzie Homemaker and don't know much about roaster vs. fryer chickens

either -but that may be outside the point even though just brought up

they could be toxic too.

>

> Ron, you obviously are not the average Joe -but doesn't most of the

public trust Consumer Reports or ABC reports? (does this include 20/20 too?

or perhaps I shouldn't go off on this tangent?) About Wild Atlantic Salmon,

Ron you wrote

> " > are you intentionally trying to start an argument or was your use

of

> > " Atlantic Wild Salmon " above a slip. I didn't make up these terms, the

> > industry did. If we are going to talk about this, we need to compare

apples

> > to apples.

> >

> > Atlantic salmon are not endangered or protected, they are raised on

purpose

> > because there aren't enough wild Alaskan salmon to fill the need. "

>

> No Ron -I'm not trying to start an argument since you asked me -I'm just

asking why is just saying Wild Atlantic Salmon like saying " Holy War " (I

know we need research -but this isn't a Kennedy experiment is it?) My

apologies for not getting it -you sound like an intelligent person and I

know you can answer these questions I dare ask without upsetting you and/or

others for asking again about this easy stuff others get so easily. What is

the Atlantic Salmon Federation and why are they protecting what they call

the Wild Atlantic Salmon http://www.asf.ca/Overall/lifecycle.html ? And if

Wild Atlantic Salmon, do not exist -and are not endangered -then why is the

World Wildlife Association tying to help them (a charity I supported way

back from when I went to School of Visual Arts where I never dreamed one day

I would be debating the existence of one of the species they are claiming to

protect)

> http://www.wwf.org.uk/News/n_0000000293.asp

> http://www.panda.org/downloads/marine/osloresprogfinal3.pdf

> And in your opinion should NOAA be trusted?

> http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases2000/nov00/noaanfws1113.html

> or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? or the National Marine Fisheries

Service? Why do all these places list the species of Wild Atlantic Salmon

as endangered under the Endangered Species Act?

> http://endangered.fws.gov/i/E51.html

> And in recent news why are there all these articles about Wild Atlantic

Salmon like this one in the headlines

>

http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hsfish143625426jan14,0,4080390.story?c

oll=ny-health-headlines

>

> Did I miss the point and you just mean that there is no such thing as Wild

Atlantic Salmon being used commercially?

>

> I agree with you of course that mercury is a problem -and I think that

other toxins in our life now are to blame too -even those most don't talk

about like phenol when mixed with other toxins. Did you read this page

which I wrote all about the toxins and our children?

> http://www.cherab.org/news/Save.html

>

> Of course I know about and support those behind the autism mercury

boards -did you read this?

> http://www.cherab.org/news/JointStatement.html

>

> Fish oil is under more scrutiny than french fry and doughnut oil and in my

opinion there are many other things to be afraid of our there that most

don't even look at. Kim just posted -even when seeing great results in her

son on EFAs, and regressions when taken off, like even you report from

someone you know -Kim is afraid of higher EPA (Omega 3) for some reason.

Not talking about Kim -but most people will sit at their computer reading

warnings about making sure fish oil is pure while their child is popping

potato chips in their mouth. They should check oil purity, we all

should -but does anyone, ever, question the purity of pizza oil? And for

fish oil -I also don't believe in just one brand even though I stand behind

a few that come up here often which are ProEFA, Efalex and EyeQ. All that

matters are formula, dosage, and quality of the oil (I agree quality

matters!)

>

> Most of the members here know that my family used to use Efalex and had

great results (which are written about under apraxia in The LCP Solution

book by Malcolm Nicholl and Dr. Stordy http://www.drstory.com/stories.html

My family has for years now however used the ProEFA brand instead due to

parent and them professionals anecdotal feedbacks

http://www.cherab.org/information/historyEFA.html which inspired The First

Apraxia Conference (where you will see Dr Katz's involvement which is not

with any company) http://www.cherab.org/news/scientific.html

> which is all written about in a book called The Late Talker

http://www.speech-express.com/late.talker.html I co authored with

neurodevelopmental pediatrician Marilyn Agin MD and (yes the same) Malcolm

Nicholl.

>

> Plant sources, as well as pure fish oil, didn't 'work' for my son Tanner

who needs the O3 O6 formulas. You must be newer but I always say as a

parent we need to observe what works for each child as an individual and

follow that. Fish oil with the small amount of primrose or borage oil will

not work for all children -we found anecdotally however that it works for

just about all late talker children ranging from those with simple delays to

those with multifaceted communication impairments. One day this will be

researched and we will all know why. Until then -if you are giving your

child a plant source and they don't respond, or don't have a dramatic

surge -try the fish and small amount of GLA (from primrose or borage seed)

formula that worked for most of us and let us know what you see if a day to

three weeks.

>

> I have found the Nordic Naturals products to be the most palatable,

probably because they are tested to be one of the lowest peroxide levels of

all the fish oil brands out there. (again we do need to make sure fish oils

are tested for rancidity) There may lie the difference between the cheap

and more expensive fish oils -the rancidity of the product.

>

> I stand behind the ProEFA and no other as strong as I do them because in

this group in support meetings, MD and SLP office reports, and online

reports -they work for the majority in the lowest dosage reported (most

start their child on one capsule a day for the first 3-6 months which is

around 100 DHA, 150 EPA and 50 GLA) with no reported side effects in the

past number of years. I also stand behind Efalex and EyeQ for similar

reasons, even though EyeQ is newer. Most of these other companies that are

being brought up recently have not been mentioned before or enough to

know -so the jury is out still. I posted what I did because I don't feel

comfortable with companies or individuals being attacked unless what is

stated is true -and backed with facts.

>

> I called this company NBTY and spoke with various individuals from

marketing, research and development, soft gels, and am awaiting a call from

a director there on the exact percentage of each of the types of oils as

well as why they stated what they did. I found so far they are not the warm

fuzzy company that Nordic Naturals is when I call -but was so far told that

I was correct about the anchovy oil being the primary oil used as I

suspected. I wrote what I did because I was once told years ago that

companies don't publicize as much the use of anchovy oil as much as they do

because it doesn't sound as good to say to most of the uninformed public.

Anchovies are low on the food chain, so like sardines -safer fish to eat if

you are going to eat the fish. Fish oils as I stated as well - 'may' not be

a problem with toxins anyway. I know you don't agree Ron -but if they were

adding to the problem, for those of us giving our children higher

dosages -in addition to what I was told by 2 NIH doctors at this point in

writing -why all the constant surges and improvements on the EFAs from fish

oil? In addition to what I was told in writing by the MDs from the NIH

which I'll find both if you want to read them, and what I posted here about

the Consumer Reports testing 16 brands of oil including the store brands

and found OK levels of mercury, PCBs or dioxin in all of them, since I know

you don't trust Consumer Reports, Any thoughts on this?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_ui

ds=14632570 & dopt=Abstract

>

> Large companies like NBTY private label to places like Wal-Mart or CVS

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m3374/4_25/99309282/p1/article.jhtml

where the average person will pick up bottles of fish oil to " try " Sadly

some may have no other option due to financial reasons. There are parents

in the group, and I know some personally, who can only afford to use less

expensive oils...or the " cheap ProEFA " -which is how this thread started to

begin with. Some of these parents are just searching on " what " to use to

help their child -which is why I say all that matters is formula, dosage and

quality of the oils. In your opinion -what is the harm in trying them? In

my opinion fish oils 'may' be the only way to ingest the huge amount of

benefits of the EFAs found in the fish without the toxins -and they may be

helping our children's brains to rewire. There are some who don't have to

take them after years. I know you don't believe that the fish is better than

the plant source, and perhaps you are right in theory -but in reality the

plant source alone doesn't work for my son -nor most in our group.

>

> So plant sources aside for a moment (if they don't work for your child

like they didn't mine) if you want a high quality fish oil, and can afford

to pay for it like most of us are fortunate enough to be able to do -then

try the more expensive oils and compare yourself. As parents most of us do

try other brands -and the changes are typically pretty quick I found. Fish

oil for life? Guess there are worse things -like not being able to be

understood when you talk. And I agree with you that I wish there was a way

to just cure it even though we don't have that answer yet.

>

> My son is never off his ProEFA more than a day, and when he is he does

regress. Tanner has been on EFAs for years. He only regresses when off

ProEFA for even a day -or on or off carn-aware or carnosine for too long

Tanner surges when taken off carnosine -and then surges again when put back

on. That is the only supplement we seem to need to give him on an on and

off schedule. (for him a few weeks on and a few weeks off)

>

> I've said to a number of researchers, and posted here in the archives

years ago now -if it's in the water, why is nobody testing the soil and the

plants? Plants contain lead when lead is in the soil -so plants 'may' be

no better, and could be worse. There needs to be more studies.

>

> We need to find out how to best live (and eat) healthy in a toxic

world -which means working with what we've got. (and apparently at times,

given the subject title, this means financially too)

>

>

> =====

>

[Guest guest]

,

Okay, I REALLY needed to laugh today, and the " roaster vs. fryer " thing had me

LOL at 1AM by myself at the computer. dh is starting to think I'm losing it:-)

I don't know if it is a funny to those who aren't as sleep deprived, but I thank

you for a much needed smile.

Although I am an intelligent person, and consider myself more informed than

the *general* population about health, food, and nutrition, (at least in the

NJ/eastern PA area) I too, definitely do not know all of this stuff, although I

am trying desperately to learn everything that I possibly can about it. I would

venture to guess there are many others out there who learned something out of

the thread, I appreciated the discussion you, Marina, and Ron were having and

was following it with much interest. Yes, I knew not to touch farm raised fish,

but I had no idea about the *alleged* Atlantic wild salmon, and was happy to

learn more about it all. ( I also am not exactly sure about the exact

differences of roaster vs. a fryer either... and to think, they said I was a

genius..how did I make it through college? ) I do agree with you too, that most

of the general population is not aware of EFA's, including many OTs, SLPs, etc.,

as has been posted here many times. I know that I am

continuously explaining and referring people to books on the subject.

I have to say that after reading the 280 messages last night in my mail box, I

felt a bit overwhelmed about WHAT I could feed my kids! I am trying to avoid

trans fats, artificial flavors/colors, MSG in all of its incredibly cloaked

forms, pesticides, herbicides, insecticides. My 6yr old now asks me if his

cereals/crackers have " brain damage " in them before he eats, and calls his dad's

cocoa puffs " brain damage cereal " . (We had a big discussion about BHA,BHT, and

MSG). I am considering putting my oldest on a diet for his attentional issues,

and CJ is a carb addict, His staple food is low fat cheeses, and NOW I read

that supermarket cheese is incredibly bad for us. Well, I don't think cj can

give up cheese it is a staple food for him, and I cannot afford the grass fed

cows cheese, so I am waiting for all of my new books from amazon to figure out

what to do with that. dh says pretty soon there will be nothing left for us to

eat. He isn't exactly on board with this, as you may

have deduced from the coca puffs, but he does follow it with the kids. All

that I read & have been researching, coupled with the fact that I grew up in NJ

and now live just outside of it in eastern PA (apraxia, autism, PDD, cancer,

you name it, we've got it) made me want to gather up my family, sell my house,

and go live off of the land somewhere. Of course, not knowing the difference

between a roaster and a fryer, I guess I wouldn't be very good at that. I'd just

have to move to Florida instead!

I love this group for all of the many approaches and the incredible array of

expertise that is represented here. I appreciate all who post info, ask, and

answer questions.

You know what our mothers used to say about the only stupid question being the

one that was unasked...

in PA

kiddietalk <kiddietalk@...> wrote:

Thanks for your answers so far. Yes Ron I am an optimist! )

Apparently however not as much of an optimist as Marina who posted all this fish

oil information is common knowledge just like " roaster and fryer chickens " The

tiny pessimist I didn't know was in me believes the majority of the population

(like I was a few years ago) doesn't even know what EFA stands for no less where

it comes from.

So even though this is all common knowledge for some of you -I'm only asking how

you know since unlike you guys I am one that doesn't just know these things.

Then again I guess I should also admit that I was never much of a Suzie

Homemaker and don't know much about roaster vs. fryer chickens either -but that

may be outside the point even though just brought up they could be toxic

too.

Ron, you obviously are not the average Joe -but doesn't most of the public

trust Consumer Reports or ABC reports? (does this include 20/20 too? or perhaps

I shouldn't go off on this tangent?) About Wild Atlantic Salmon, Ron you wrote

" > are you intentionally trying to start an argument or was your use of

> " Atlantic Wild Salmon " above a slip. I didn't make up these terms, the

> industry did. If we are going to talk about this, we need to compare apples

> to apples.

>

> Atlantic salmon are not endangered or protected, they are raised on purpose

> because there aren't enough wild Alaskan salmon to fill the need. "

No Ron -I'm not trying to start an argument since you asked me -I'm just asking

why is just saying Wild Atlantic Salmon like saying " Holy War " (I know we need

research -but this isn't a Kennedy experiment is it?) My apologies for

not getting it -you sound like an intelligent person and I know you can answer

these questions I dare ask without upsetting you and/or others for asking again

about this easy stuff others get so easily. What is the Atlantic Salmon

Federation and why are they protecting what they call the Wild Atlantic Salmon

http://www.asf.ca/Overall/lifecycle.html ? And if Wild Atlantic Salmon, do not

exist -and are not endangered -then why is the World Wildlife Association tying

to help them (a charity I supported way back from when I went to School of

Visual Arts where I never dreamed one day I would be debating the existence of

one of the species they are claiming to protect)

http://www.wwf.org.uk/News/n_0000000293.asp

http://www.panda.org/downloads/marine/osloresprogfinal3.pdf

And in your opinion should NOAA be trusted?

http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases2000/nov00/noaanfws1113.html

or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? or the National Marine Fisheries

Service? Why do all these places list the species of Wild Atlantic Salmon as

endangered under the Endangered Species Act?

http://endangered.fws.gov/i/E51.html

And in recent news why are there all these articles about Wild Atlantic Salmon

like this one in the headlines

http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hsfish143625426jan14,0,4080390.story?coll=\

ny-health-headlines

Did I miss the point and you just mean that there is no such thing as Wild

Atlantic Salmon being used commercially?

I agree with you of course that mercury is a problem -and I think that other

toxins in our life now are to blame too -even those most don't talk about like

phenol when mixed with other toxins. Did you read this page which I wrote all

about the toxins and our children?

http://www.cherab.org/news/Save.html

Of course I know about and support those behind the autism mercury boards -did

you read this?

http://www.cherab.org/news/JointStatement.html

Fish oil is under more scrutiny than french fry and doughnut oil and in my

opinion there are many other things to be afraid of our there that most don't

even look at. Kim just posted -even when seeing great results in her son on

EFAs, and regressions when taken off, like even you report from someone you know

-Kim is afraid of higher EPA (Omega 3) for some reason. Not talking about Kim

-but most people will sit at their computer reading warnings about making sure

fish oil is pure while their child is popping potato chips in their mouth. They

should check oil purity, we all should -but does anyone, ever, question the

purity of pizza oil? And for fish oil -I also don't believe in just one brand

even though I stand behind a few that come up here often which are ProEFA,

Efalex and EyeQ. All that matters are formula, dosage, and quality of the oil

(I agree quality matters!)

Most of the members here know that my family used to use Efalex and had great

results (which are written about under apraxia in The LCP Solution book by

Malcolm Nicholl and Dr. Stordy http://www.drstory.com/stories.html My family

has for years now however used the ProEFA brand instead due to parent and them

professionals anecdotal feedbacks

http://www.cherab.org/information/historyEFA.html which inspired The First

Apraxia Conference (where you will see Dr Katz's involvement which is not with

any company) http://www.cherab.org/news/scientific.html

which is all written about in a book called The Late Talker

http://www.speech-express.com/late.talker.html I co authored with

neurodevelopmental pediatrician Marilyn Agin MD and (yes the same) Malcolm

Nicholl.

Plant sources, as well as pure fish oil, didn't 'work' for my son Tanner who

needs the O3 O6 formulas. You must be newer but I always say as a parent we

need to observe what works for each child as an individual and follow that.

Fish oil with the small amount of primrose or borage oil will not work for all

children -we found anecdotally however that it works for just about all late

talker children ranging from those with simple delays to those with multifaceted

communication impairments. One day this will be researched and we will all know

why. Until then -if you are giving your child a plant source and they don't

respond, or don't have a dramatic surge -try the fish and small amount of GLA

(from primrose or borage seed) formula that worked for most of us and let us

know what you see if a day to three weeks.

I have found the Nordic Naturals products to be the most palatable, probably

because they are tested to be one of the lowest peroxide levels of all the fish

oil brands out there. (again we do need to make sure fish oils are tested for

rancidity) There may lie the difference between the cheap and more expensive

fish oils -the rancidity of the product.

I stand behind the ProEFA and no other as strong as I do them because in this

group in support meetings, MD and SLP office reports, and online reports -they

work for the majority in the lowest dosage reported (most start their child on

one capsule a day for the first 3-6 months which is around 100 DHA, 150 EPA and

50 GLA) with no reported side effects in the past number of years. I also stand

behind Efalex and EyeQ for similar reasons, even though EyeQ is newer. Most of

these other companies that are being brought up recently have not been mentioned

before or enough to know -so the jury is out still. I posted what I did because

I don't feel comfortable with companies or individuals being attacked unless

what is stated is true -and backed with facts.

I called this company NBTY and spoke with various individuals from marketing,

research and development, soft gels, and am awaiting a call from a director

there on the exact percentage of each of the types of oils as well as why they

stated what they did. I found so far they are not the warm fuzzy company that

Nordic Naturals is when I call -but was so far told that I was correct about the

anchovy oil being the primary oil used as I suspected. I wrote what I did

because I was once told years ago that companies don't publicize as much the use

of anchovy oil as much as they do because it doesn't sound as good to say to

most of the uninformed public. Anchovies are low on the food chain, so like

sardines -safer fish to eat if you are going to eat the fish. Fish oils as I

stated as well - 'may' not be a problem with toxins anyway. I know you don't

agree Ron -but if they were adding to the problem, for those of us giving our

children higher dosages -in addition to what I was told by 2

NIH doctors at this point in writing -why all the constant surges and

improvements on the EFAs from fish oil? In addition to what I was told in

writing by the MDs from the NIH which I'll find both if you want to read them,

and what I posted here about the Consumer Reports testing 16 brands of oil

including the store brands and found OK levels of mercury, PCBs or dioxin in

all of them, since I know you don't trust Consumer Reports, Any thoughts on

this?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_uids=1\

4632570 & dopt=Abstract

Large companies like NBTY private label to places like Wal-Mart or CVS

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m3374/4_25/99309282/p1/article.jhtml where

the average person will pick up bottles of fish oil to " try " Sadly some may

have no other option due to financial reasons. There are parents in the group,

and I know some personally, who can only afford to use less expensive oils...or

the " cheap ProEFA " -which is how this thread started to begin with. Some of

these parents are just searching on " what " to use to help their child -which is

why I say all that matters is formula, dosage and quality of the oils. In your

opinion -what is the harm in trying them? In my opinion fish oils 'may' be the

only way to ingest the huge amount of benefits of the EFAs found in the fish

without the toxins -and they may be helping our children's brains to rewire.

There are some who don't have to take them after years. I know you don't believe

that the fish is better than the plant source, and

perhaps you are right in theory -but in reality the plant source alone doesn't

work for my son -nor most in our group.

So plant sources aside for a moment (if they don't work for your child like they

didn't mine) if you want a high quality fish oil, and can afford to pay for it

like most of us are fortunate enough to be able to do -then try the more

expensive oils and compare yourself. As parents most of us do try other brands

-and the changes are typically pretty quick I found. Fish oil for life? Guess

there are worse things -like not being able to be understood when you talk. And

I agree with you that I wish there was a way to just cure it even though we

don't have that answer yet.

My son is never off his ProEFA more than a day, and when he is he does regress.

Tanner has been on EFAs for years. He only regresses when off ProEFA for even a

day -or on or off carn-aware or carnosine for too long Tanner surges when

taken off carnosine -and then surges again when put back on. That is the only

supplement we seem to need to give him on an on and off schedule. (for him a few

weeks on and a few weeks off)

I've said to a number of researchers, and posted here in the archives years ago

now -if it's in the water, why is nobody testing the soil and the plants?

Plants contain lead when lead is in the soil -so plants 'may' be no better, and

could be worse. There needs to be more studies.

We need to find out how to best live (and eat) healthy in a toxic world -which

means working with what we've got. (and apparently at times, given the subject

title, this means financially too)

=====

[Guest guest]

The difference between a roaster and a fryer chicken is based on

weight and age - Roasters are between 2.5-8 mos old and generally

weigh in the 4-6# range and friers are up to 2.5 mos old and

generally weigh 3.5#. Consider yourself educated. This kind of

thing IS common knowledge in the culinary industry, and I wouldn't

expect your average " suzie homemaker " to know - which is why I

orginally posted to back up Ron. Without giving you my entire

culinary background, I learned this working 12 hour shifts in a 90

degree kitchen in a family-run bistro in NYS. The information was

then reinforced when I worked under a particular chef in MA who could

fillet a salmon in about 2 seconds. The information I got from these

sources was that GENERALLY the atlantic vs alaskan thing is true but

to ASK YOUR FISH MONGER.

The culinary industry happens to be something in which I am

interested and in which I have worked. Because you didn't trust

either Ron's opinion or mine, though we both stated that we knew the

industry and I believe I stated that I had worked in it, I suggested

you go to someone whom you TRUST, and I'll do it again now.

No where in my posts did I suggest stopping taking EFAs - I suggested

we know from whence ANYTHING we put in our bodies comes - and 's

post about chicken backed that up. Be picky.

Ok, well, THIS Suzie Homemaker (which I consider a pretty offensive

term having been raised a feminist) is going to defrost a chicken - a

roaster, to be exact.

Marina

[Guest guest]

Marina wow -you have an amazing past! Based on what you said,

if you get a break in your busy day -you will love in

the movie Mona Smile (or just rent it!) I loved the message in

the movie that what we see today as normal, or accept as fact, may be laughed

at 50 years down the road (which is the way I live my life too)

Probably why I'm always searching for the naked emperors to point

out that most don't notice until you say " look! " . I don't believe

this relates to just things like Suzie Homemaker either. (cof EFA

cof-cof)

=====

[Guest guest]

Sorry for the delay. Plumbing issues and Birthday planning.

I answered within.

[ ] Re: I found cheaper EFA's (MORE INFO)

Thanks for your answers so far. Yes Ron I am an optimist! )

Apparently however not as much of an optimist as Marina who posted all this

fish oil information is common knowledge just like " roaster and fryer

chickens " The tiny pessimist I didn't know was in me believes the majority

of the population (like I was a few years ago) doesn't even know what EFA

stands for no less where it comes from.

I saw today a commercial on CBS, for Nestle baby formula and it was pushing

EFA's. I guess the word is getting out.

So even though this is all common knowledge for some of you -I'm only asking

how you know since unlike you guys I am one that doesn't just know these

things.

I answered this in previous post.

Then again I guess I should also admit that I was never much of a Suzie

Homemaker and don't know much about roaster vs. fryer chickens either -but

that may be outside the point even though just brought up they could be

toxic too.

Ron, you obviously are not the average Joe -but doesn't most of the public

trust Consumer Reports or ABC reports?

I think they (public) do, doesn't mean they (CR) are. I think most of the

public is mislead intentionally and is too busy trying to earn a living to

notice. They are to busy to do their own research and want to be spoon fed

and have come to rely on it. I am of course not speaking of anyone on this

list as you are all obviously not too busy to learn more for your children's

sake.

(does this include 20/20 too? or perhaps I shouldn't go off on this

tangent?) About Wild Atlantic Salmon, Ron you wrote

" > are you intentionally trying to start an argument or was your use of

> " Atlantic Wild Salmon " above a slip. I didn't make up these terms, the

> industry did. If we are going to talk about this, we need to compare

apples

> to apples.

>

> Atlantic salmon are not endangered or protected, they are raised on

purpose

> because there aren't enough wild Alaskan salmon to fill the need. "

No Ron -I'm not trying to start an argument since you asked me -I'm just

asking why is just saying Wild Atlantic Salmon like saying " Holy War " (I

know we need research -but this isn't a Kennedy experiment is it?) My

apologies for not getting it -you sound like an intelligent person and I

know you can answer these questions I dare ask without upsetting you and/or

others for asking again about this easy stuff others get so easily. What is

the Atlantic Salmon Federation and why are they protecting what they call

the Wild Atlantic Salmon http://www.asf.ca/Overall/lifecycle.html ? And if

Wild Atlantic Salmon, do not exist -and are not endangered -then why is the

World Wildlife Association tying to help them (a charity I supported way

back from when I went to School of Visual Arts where I never dreamed one day

I would be debating the existence of one of the species they are claiming to

p! rotect)

http://www.wwf.org.uk/News/n_0000000293.asp

http://www.panda.org/downloads/marine/osloresprogfinal3.pdf

And in your opinion should NOAA be trusted?

http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases2000/nov00/noaanfws1113.html

or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? or the National Marine Fisheries

Service? Why do all these places list the species of Wild Atlantic Salmon

as endangered under the Endangered Species Act?

http://endangered.fws.gov/i/E51.html

And in recent news why are there all these articles about Wild Atlantic

Salmon like this one in the headlines

http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hsfish143625426jan14,0,4080390.story?c

oll=ny-health-headlines

Did I miss the point and you just mean that there is no such thing as Wild

Atlantic Salmon being used commercially?

Yes, you missed the point. There is no patent on using the word " wild " ,

anyone can use it anyway they please. The " grocery store fish " lingo, which

is where this discussion of ours started, always uses " Atlantic and farmed "

synonymously and " Alaskan and wild " as well. That's why I said if we are

going to talk about this we need to speak " apples to apples " . What you have

accidentally done is take an environmental group or some other organizations

terming of the word " wild " and trying to plug it in. The Atlantic salmon

are for all intense purposes " fished-out " . The organizations above are

either trying to stop fishing or illegal fishing in those areas or are

supporters of " farming " .

I agree with you of course that mercury is a problem -and I think that other

toxins in our life now are to blame too -even those most don't talk about

like phenol when mixed with other toxins. Did you read this page which I

wrote all about the toxins and our children?

http://www.cherab.org/news/Save.html

Of course I know about and support those behind the autism mercury boards

-did you read this?

http://www.cherab.org/news/JointStatement.html

I didn't see A-M mentioned.

Fish oil is under more scrutiny than french fry and doughnut oil and in my

opinion there are many other things to be afraid of our there that most

don't even look at. Kim just posted -even when seeing great results in her

son on EFAs, and regressions when taken off, like even you report from

someone you know -Kim is afraid of higher EPA (Omega 3) for some reason.

Not talking about Kim -but most people will sit at their computer reading

warnings about making sure fish oil is pure while their child is popping

potato chips in their mouth. They should check oil purity, we all should

-but does anyone, ever, question the purity of pizza oil? And for fish oil

-I also don't believe in just one brand even though I stand behind a few

that come up here often which are ProEFA, Efalex and EyeQ. All that matters

are formula, dosage, and quality of the oil (I agree quality matters!)

Most of the members here know that my family used to use Efalex and had

great results (which are written about under apraxia in The LCP Solution

book by Malcolm Nicholl and Dr. Stordy http://www.drstory.com/stories.html

My family has for years now however used the ProEFA brand instead due to

parent and them professionals anecdotal feedbacks

http://www.cherab.org/information/historyEFA.html which inspired The First

Apraxia Conference (where you will see Dr Katz's involvement which is not

with any company) http://www.cherab.org/news/scientific.html

which is all written about in a book called The Late Talker

http://www.speech-express.com/late.talker.html I co authored with

neurodevelopmental pediatrician Marilyn Agin MD and (yes the same) Malcolm

Nicholl.

Plant sources, as well as pure fish oil, didn't 'work' for my son Tanner who

needs the O3 O6 formulas. You must be newer but I always say as a parent we

need to observe what works for each child as an individual and follow that.

Fish oil with the small amount of primrose or borage oil will not work for

all children -we found anecdotally however that it works for just about all

late talker children ranging from those with simple delays to those with

multifaceted communication impairments. One day this will be researched and

we will all know why. Until then -if you are giving your child a plant

source and they don't respond, or don't have a dramatic surge -try the fish

and small amount of GLA (from primrose or borage seed) formula that worked

for most of us and let us know what you see if a day to three weeks.

I have found the Nordic Naturals products to be the most palatable, probably

because they are tested to be one of the lowest peroxide levels of all the

fish oil brands out there. (again we do need to make sure fish oils are

tested for rancidity) There may lie the difference between the cheap and

more expensive fish oils -the rancidity of the product.

I stand behind the ProEFA and no other as strong as I do them because in

this group in support meetings, MD and SLP office reports, and online

reports -they work for the majority in the lowest dosage reported (most

start their child on one capsule a day for the first 3-6 months which is

around 100 DHA, 150 EPA and 50 GLA) with no reported side effects in the

past number of years. I also stand behind Efalex and EyeQ for similar

reasons, even though EyeQ is newer. Most of these other companies that are

being brought up recently have not been mentioned before or enough to know

-so the jury is out still. I posted what I did because I don't feel

comfortable with companies or individuals being attacked unless what is

stated is true -and backed with facts.

Please clarify last two sentences above. (which companies? Attack? True?

I called this company NBTY and spoke with various individuals from

marketing, research and development, soft gels, and am awaiting a call from

a director there on the exact percentage of each of the types of oils as

well as why they stated what they did. I found so far they are not the warm

fuzzy company that Nordic Naturals is when I call -but was so far told that

I was correct about the anchovy oil being the primary oil used as I

suspected. I wrote what I did because I was once told years ago that

companies don't publicize as much the use of anchovy oil as much as they do

because it doesn't sound as good to say to most of the uninformed public.

Anchovies are low on the food chain, so like sardines -safer fish to eat if

you are going to eat the fish.

Fish oils as I stated as well - 'may' not be a problem with toxins anyway.

How do you justify that statement?

I know you don't agree Ron -but if they were adding to the problem,

I'm sorry, where did I say they were adding to the problem? Are you taking

my " I like plant based EFA's " statement as " I think fish EFA's are so full

of toxins that I feel they are more detrimental " ?

for those of us giving our children higher dosag! es -in addition to what I

was told by 2 NIH doctors at this point in writing -why all the constant

surges and improvements on the EFAs from fish oil?

Perhaps because " fish oil " EFA's are recommended so much. Like I stated

before, you stated in one of your articles that you went looking for a

company to, (for lack of better words, " to do a study with " , you contacted a

few and found Nordic Naturals easiest to talk and work with, so their

supplement was used and is now used predominantly. So of course ProEFA is

going to have more positive feedback, plus you normally don't here of the

negative or neutral feedback. If you had chosen a different company,

perhaps things would be different.

That is a simplistic view, if you don't mind me saying. If the body is very

depleted of EFA's, even EFA's with toxins will show improvement. Second,

just because a Dr. says something or puts it in writing carries no weight

for me.

In addition to what I was told in writing by the MDs from the NIH which

I'll find both if you want to read them, and what I posted here about the

Consumer Reports testing 16 brands of oil including the store brands and

found OK levels of mercury, PCBs or dioxin in all of them,

There is no OK level of Mercury, PCBs or dioxin. The next time your in your

Dr. office just tell him/her you want the " EPA, FDA recommended safe level

of Mercury injected into your little " , then tell me how much is OK.

since I know you don't trust Consumer Reports, Any thoughts on this?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_u

ids=14632570 & dopt=Abstract> & db=PubMed & list_uids=14632570 & dopt=Abstract

A pub-med link! Please! I have this island in the middle of OHIO for sale.

:-)

Large companies like NBTY private label to places like Wal-Mart or CVS

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m3374/4_25/99309282/p1/article.jhtml

where the average person will pick up bottles of fish oil to " try " Sadly

some may have no other option due to financial reasons. There are parents

in the group, and I know some personally, who can only afford to use less

expensive oils...or the " cheap ProEFA " -which is how this thread started to

begin with. Some of these parents are just searching on " what " to use to

help their child -which is why I say all that matters is formula, dosage and

quality of the oils. In your opinion -what is the harm in trying them?

Generally you get what you pay for. I haven't checked but would imagine the

ProEFA is not outrageously priced compared to a " bargain " brand. So for a

few dollars difference you should give your child a decent chance before

writing off EFA as a possible beneficial piece to the puzzle. Would hate to

see a parent give up on ProEFA because they tried " generic brand A " , saw no

difference and moved on. Had they spend the extra couple of dollars and saw

an improvement with ProEFA you can bet your last dollar they would get a

second job and having garage sales every Saturday.

In my opinion fish oils 'may' be the only way to ingest the huge amount of

benefits of the EFAs found in the fish without the toxins -and they may be

helping our ch! ildren's brains to rewire. There are some who don't have to

take them after years. I know you don't believe that the fish is better than

the plant source, and perhaps you are right in theory -but in reality the

plant source alone doesn't work for my son -nor most in our group.

I don't think most of your group has tried " plant-based " . I could be wrong,

create a poll, it would be good for all to know in the future as well.

Suggested polls.

" If you have tried EFA " fish oil based " supplementation did you:

A) Have a positive improvement Have a negative result. C) no

difference.

" If you have tried EFA " plant based " supplementation did you:

A) Have a positive improvement Have a negative result C) no

difference.

All these polls will confirm is what has been the predominant " tried " EFA.

Not until you have an equal number of respondents in each poll will you be

able to see anything.

So plant sources aside for a moment (if they don't work for your child like

they didn't mine) if you want a high quality fish oil, and can afford to pay

for it like most of us are fortunate enough to be able to do

First the average person is poor, now you all have money, which is it. :-)

You seem to tailor your writing to the point your about to make.

-then try the more expensive oils and compare yourself. As parents most of

us do try other brands -and the changes are typically pretty quick I found.

Fish oil for life? Guess there are worse things -like not being able to be

understood when you talk. And I agree with you that I wish there was a way

to just cure it even though we don't have that answer yet.

My son is never off his ProEFA more than a day, and when he is he does

regress. Tanner has been on EFAs for years. He only regresses when off

ProEFA for even a day -or on or off carn-aware or carnosine for too long

Tanner surges when taken off carnosine -and then surges again when put back

on. That is the only supplement we seem to need to give him on an on and

off schedule. (for him a few weeks on and a few weeks off)

This only says to me that his body can't regulate itself.

I've said to a number of researchers, and posted here in the archives years

ago now -if it's in the water, why is nobody testing the soil and the

plants?

If what is in the water?

Plants contain lead when lead is in the soil -so plants 'may' be no

better, and could be worse. There needs to be more studies.

A common misconception and half truth, I'll assume this too is by accident.

Toxins like " lead " that make their way to the soil are in a inorganic state,

when they come in contact with a plant through the root system, they are

changed to an organic state and consequently much more easily handled for

elimination by the body.

We need to find out how to best live (and eat) healthy in a toxic world

Eat organic as possible, drink only filtered water, eat mainly fruits and

veggies, exercise more, do not eat refined sugar, no Trans fatty fats or

hydrogenated fats for starters..

-which means working with what we've got. (and apparently at times, given

the subject title, this means financially too)

=====

[Guest guest]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for all the answers. There have been a few online polls -Liz

from Georgia who started the site Kids Talk Back

http://www.debtsmart.com/talk/halley.html did one but I can't seem

to find it on her site anymore and it's too late to call her to find

out where it is. (I did however find a cute picture of Liz and

Halley with a Martian from her trip to NY when we were on CN8!

http://kidstalkback.tripod.com/kidstalkback/id19.html )

About vegetable sources. When Tanner was first diagnosed with

apraxia in 1997 -online I found most tried flax seed oil and results were

varied, subtle. Using flax seed oil was talked about with as much

enthusiasm at the time as putting magnets in your child's pillow

while they slept (for real) There were however about 4 parents that

I have in my files that talked about Efalex -and their reports were

so dramatic that's what I tried. I just posted an archive from

Suzanne Smolyar. Her 5 year old daughter was on cod liver

oil and flax seed oil from infancy. In addition, Suzanne took cod

liver oil capsules and used lots of flax before and while pregnant

too. (Suzanne's Russian and she told me this is common in her

family) remained completely nonverbal until a few weeks

later when the Omega 3 and Omega 6 formulas were started. Nobody

can explain why.

And yes I agree -a study comparing the oils would be great.

About my comments about not being comfortable with individuals or

companies being attacked, and backing up what you say with facts.

You brought up yet another you don't seem to trust. What's wrong

with PubMed? Dare I mention that I have friends who are respected

MDs that have sent me links from PubMed? Since you apparently know

something that many of us don't -can you please send us a link

letting us know why we can't trust PubMed either since I think you

covered why you don't trust ABC and Consumer Reports. (I guess I

shouldn't throw in the joke -they have medications for this)

It would be easier to know if you could separate your answers from

mine -the posts are getting so long and mixing together and it's

very hard to follow -especially for anyone else trying to follow.

About the wealth of this group, I wouldn't know that -nobody would.

I do know that most in this group in the US use ProEFA, and overall

most use ProEFA, Efalex or EyeQ and can afford to buy better quality

fish oil Overall as you may know however -fish oil is considered to

be an inexpensive intervention -but that's all relevant. Not posted

here often -but we have some who can't afford the oils. My son

Tanner's EI therapist Zimet CCC SLP would like to do research

to prove the effectiveness of the fish oils for children with

communication impairments so that parents can purchase them with

food stamps, because she works with low income families in Georgia

now. To me one child who can't get the help he or she needs is too

many. And for that -I'm sure we agree!

=====

[Guest guest]

Ron and all -thought I'd throw in the PubMed article that was written on the

" island in

Ohio " at Massachusetts General Hospital and

Harvard Medical School

Measurement of mercury levels in concentrated over-the-counter fish

oil preparations: is fish oil healthier than fish?

Foran SE, Flood JG, Lewandrowski KB.

Division of Laboratory Medicine, Department of Pathology,

Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston,

Mass 02114, USA.

CONTEXT: Fish consumption has been associated with a decreased risk

of coronary artery disease. Recent studies have illustrated that the

high mercury content in cold-water fish may negate the

cardiovascular benefits of fish meals. Fish oils have similar

antiatherogenic properties to fish, and similar studies should be

performed to determine the level of mercury in fish oils. OBJECTIVE:

To determine the concentration of mercury in 5 over-the-counter

brands of fish oil. RESULTS: The levels of mercury in the 5

different brands of fish oil ranged from nondetectable (<6 microg/L)

to negligible (10-12 microg/L). The mercury content of fish oil was

similar to the basal concentration normally found in human blood.

CONCLUSIONS: Fish are rich in omega-3 fatty acids, and their

consumption is recommended to decrease the risk of coronary artery

disease. However, fish such as swordfish and shark are also a source

of exposure to the heavy metal toxin, mercury. The fish oil brands

examined in this manuscript have negligible amounts of mercury and

may provide a safer alternative to fish consumption.

PMID: 14632570 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_uids=1\

4632570 & dopt=Abstract

=====

[Guest guest]

Sorry I put a year typo last night -meant to say when Tanner was first

diagnosed with apraxia in '1999' not '1997' (I wish he was diagnosed in 1997 -

that's the year he first regressed)

Anyway -the following email shows how a few tried to encourage me to

try flax when I was reporting the dramatic results on the

Efalex -even though flax results at that time were not typically dramatic.

Subject: Efalex update

Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1999 00:10:09 -0400

From: & Glenn <shop-in-service@...>

" APRAXIA-KIDS@... " <APRAXIA-KIDS@...>

Hi All and Happy Holidays!

Many of you may have read that Tanner, who is 2.9 years old and has

verbal apraxia, has been taking the liquid Efalex for the past 2 and

a half weeks. Other than an expressive language delay, Tanner has no

other issues. A month ago Tanner was evaluated twice to have the

expressive language ability of a 12 month old both by his therapist,

and Early Intervention, who just accepted him in.

Could there be a deficiency in children with apraxia? In layman's

terms, could Efalex to an apraxic child be similar to Vitamin C to

someone with Scurvy? Of course there may not be such a thing as a

" miracle " pill, but we are so convinced that the changes are from the

Efalex, that Glenn and I don't want to try the Flax Seed Oil just

yet, even though we've heard from so many of you how wonderful it is.

Tanner has been in speech therapy twice a week for the past 5

months, and both Glenn and I work with him consistently at home.

However, within the past 2 weeks we have seen such dramatic changes

that we both believe it to be as a result of the Efalex. We don't

know if anyone else experienced the changes as soon as we did with

Tanner. Within 2 weeks he attempted to say I love you, " I, ahh, ooo "

(Before then, most of the time Tanner would say, " mmmm " in the right

tones and point, he didn't attempt speech even with prompting. This

is a child that was saying little more than " Ma Ma " three weeks ago,

and wasn't even able to put the sound " ch " together with the

sound " oo " He wasn't even saying " Da Da " !) The other day, Tanner

pointed to the color yellow without any prompting and

said, " lellow " . Tanner is now saying quite a few more words, and he

is being consistent with what words he learns! He's trying to talk

all the time now, something he wasn't doing at all before. As a

matter of fact, before 3 weeks ago most of the time if

you tried to get Tanner to say a word, he would stamp his foot and

say, " mmm " in the tone of NO! Now, he loves pointing to, and saying

colors. (Purple! Blue! etc.) His therapist is thrilled with his

progress in the past week, it's really been a remarkable improvement!

Coincidence? Maybe, but we are hoping to see more improvements just

as rapidly. (Putting 2 words together, etc.)

Right now, Tanner still is unable to lift his tongue from the bottom

of his mouth except by accident. One thing we try is putting peanut

butter on the on the outside of his mouth on top of his lip and make

a game of it that he has to lick it off. He tries to use his bottom

lip to push his tongue up, but he still can't raise it enough to

lick it off. We are curious to see if that changes soon too. It's

only been two and a half weeks for us, but we have not seen any

negative side effects from giving Tanner the Efalex other than he

still hates the taste. We have found cooking it in his eggs or

letting it soak into his cereal or pancakes is the only way we can

give it to him without any problems. Does anyone know about cooking

with Efalex? Any suggestion on how to have him swallow the pills if

we buy them next?

Just one other note for those of you who asked how to respond to

people that say, " Oh, he'll be talking soon " (We ran into that lots

this weekend with the Holiday, especially because Tanner is starting

to " talk! " ) Maybe it's us, but Glenn and I never get mad at people

for saying this. We feel it's coming from love, not maliciousness. We

usually say, " We really hope that happens, but we are doing whatever

therapy we can just in case. " They usually then say, " Oh, of

course...So what is this called again that he has? " We then give

them a brief description of what Apraxia is and how well Tanner is

doing with therapy.

Anyway, for anyone who cares to know, we give Efalex two thumbs up.

We'll keep you updated with what happens in the weeks ahead!

and Glenn, Parents to Dakota, 4.8 and Tanner 2.9 (apraxia)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

( " Keep you updated in the weeks ahead " Ha Ha -well I tried for

another few weeks on that grouplist. Because of my " updates " others

got excited about it and tried it, and we started " talking about

this too much " the listowner there wrote -and then in bold letters [OFF TOPIC]

(remember that whomever was around then?!) appeared in the subject

of our emails (we were then asked to put it there if we talked about

Efalex because it was then and there considered " off topic " if you can believe

that. Remember what I just said the other day how some of what we

accept today as fact we'll laugh at 50 years later -try less then

five years for this one) We were then asked to " take it elsewhere "

if we wanted to keep talking about this off topic subject. Hence

if any of you wondered why there is a Speech Diet list, now you

know. But I didn't want to talk about just speech diet -hence CHERAB. I

wanted to talk about EFAs, neurodevelopmental MDs, and schools for

the hearing impaired, and everything and anything that others found

for their communication impaired child that may help. I also

learned what it was like to be attacked for your views, and laughed

at -and thank goodness for many of you -I didn't just go away like

many would when that happens (and I don't care if it still does. I

wish it wasn't fish oil I had to stand behind -believe me I would

have chosen chocolate if I had a choice)

I like when lists are warm and people feel safe posting their views

and thoughts and references. (not that one would believe that any

one person here would have to stand up for referencing sites that I

still consider reputable such as " PubMed, a service of the National

Library of Medicine, includes over 14 million citations for

biomedical articles back to the 1950's.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/ " )

=====

[Guest guest]

,

You obviously have a lot of time to reply to messages. I can no longer

maintain my other lists commitments and keep up with your list, as we don't

seem to be making any progress. All you seem to do is repeat your mantra

that Fish oil EFA's are the way to go and all I have been trying to say is,

(as stated by you, that a majority of the kids seem to regress when taken

off their EFA supps) that there is something happening metabolically that is

effecting the EFA Cycle, so don't stop at EFA supps. Just like the Citrus

Acid or Kreb's Cycle you don't take one supp to counter/alter/correct it,

the body completes nearly 5K to 10K chemical reactions per second, it is

naive to think we can figure it out.

In an effort to keep us from repeating previous posts, I am not saying;

Don't take EFA's or

Take only Plant EFA's either.

I repeat I am saying if your child regresses when taken off EFA's than it is

not the answer. Yes keep giving it so he/she is more cooperative, but keep

doing lab work and trying whatever supps the labs indicate as possibly

helpful. A really good test for this is called the CELLMATE from

www.carbonbased.com <http://www.carbonbased.com/> , I don't have any

affiliation in any way with this company other than I use the test to help

my daughter.

The rest of my current protocol includes:

Organic vegan diet- there are just to many PCB's pesticides, insecticides,

antibiotics, nitrates and nitrites, GMO (genetic modified organisms), MSG,

growth hormones, just to name a few. Meat is no the best source of protein,

green foods are. How do you think a gorilla, cow, elephant, can support

those muscles on green foods alone. (A simplistic explanation perhaps, but I

don't have the time for the whole shpeel) Search on the web what is good and

bad about veganism and see who is saying the bad stuff, then " consider the

source " .

Clean the air in your house. Search ozone air purification.

Drink RO water.

Move you lymph system

And detox first if you have metals.

Take care,

Ron

[Guest guest]

Thanks for this message Ron -it helped me understand more of where

you are coming from.

I agree with you of course on the importance of clean air and pure

water. I too try to buy just organtic now when possible. I don't

believe in vegan diets, especially strict ones and especially for

children http://www.mercola.com/article/Diet/former_vegan.htm

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/24/ctv.swinton/

And because our body doesn't make EFAs you need to keep consuming

them for your life -whether it's from plant or fish etc. To me that

answers the question you raise. If you get them in your diet -don't

need to take the capsules.

Question and hope you have a sense of humor -how do you move your

lymph system? Tai Chi or Yoga?

" You must move your lymph system; so enquire about Tai Chi or Yoga

classes Find out about exercise classes (but not too strenuous if

you haven't done any exercise for years). "

http://www.megahealth.co.uk/newsarticlesandreports/cancerfirst15steps.htm

And since you are the one that is so quick to warn of red flags -I

found a question in the following quotes.

Issue 86, January/February 1998

" Kane, PhD, is director of medical research, Carbon Based

Corporation and director of the Bio Body Centre, Five Osprey Drive,

Millville, New Jersey 08332 "

http://www.mothering.com/10-0-0/html/10-8-0/10-8-conference86.shtml

and http://www.testfoundation.org/hgzn.htm

" Due to philosophical and clinical differences, since December 1997,

Kane has not been associated with Carbon Based Corporation.

The Company believes that it is imperative that the research that is

referred to by our patented and patent pending reports be performed

and reviewed by qualified individuals with impeccable professional

and educational credentials. Our multi-disciplined Medical Advisory

Board now performs this role for us. "

http://www.wellnesstoday.com/november/newpage1.htm

" be performed and reviewed by qualified individuals with impeccable

professional and educational credentials " ?

Dr. Kane was the doctor behind the blood testing for Suzanne's

then 5 year old daughter that I just posted

about. ('s testing was not accurate, which again is why

Suzanne is now going to medical school. Suzanne wants to be part of

the neuroMD research for her daughter and all the children like her)

Even though so far this testing (which is not close to being

inexpensive) is only anecdotally reported by not just the archives

but by some of the neuroMDs to be accurate around only 50% of the

time in our group, I'm glad to hear your child was part of that 50%

that it was successful for.

=====