list claims chelating could be dangerous. Andy?

[Guest guest]

Hi,

I'm a silent member of the list, just to get more education. These are the

people

who focus on the viral, anti-fungal issues. Dr. Goldberg's patients, I think.

The

doctors won't even accept a patient who was previously chelated. Since, I

haven't

begun chelation for my son, I am concerned...and still trying to make decisions

based

on collecting info. Here is a quote from one of the posts. I'm not sure what

study they're

referring to:

------

Hi, I reposted some info that may help explain some of this. Probably the

most important question is whether there's a real need for chelation.

We don't know if the immune suppression is the reason some are responding.

We also don't know why the children in that controlled study had some areas

like intelligence and behavior become a little worse when chelated. Was it

the chelator itself causing some type of damage...or was it possibly due to

increased metal deposits in the frontal part of the brain like a study I

found on chelated mice.

Chelation is not a benign procedure that should be tried because of

someone's theory. If testing at a major medical center shows real poisoning,

then depending on levels it might become necessary.

Unfortunately there are all kinds of different opinions and theories which

may or may not be backed by credible science or the proof that's needed.

-------

Does anyone know about the " increased metal deposits in the frontal part of

brains of

chelated mice " ? Andy?

Thanks, Jill

[Guest guest]

> Hi,

> I'm a silent member of the list, just to get more education. These are

the people

> who focus on the viral, anti-fungal issues. Dr. Goldberg's patients, I think.

The

> doctors won't even accept a patient who was previously chelated. Since, I

haven't

> begun chelation for my son, I am concerned...and still trying to make

decisions based

> on collecting info. Here is a quote from one of the posts. I'm not sure what

study they're

> referring to:

> ------

>

> Hi, I reposted some info that may help explain some of this. Probably the

> most important question is whether there's a real need for chelation.

>

> We don't know if the immune suppression is the reason some are responding.

>

> We also don't know why the children in that controlled study had some areas

> like intelligence and behavior become a little worse when chelated. Was it

> the chelator itself causing some type of damage...or was it possibly due to

> increased metal deposits in the frontal part of the brain like a study I

> found on chelated mice.

>

> Chelation is not a benign procedure that should be tried because of

> someone's theory. If testing at a major medical center shows real poisoning,

> then depending on levels it might become necessary.

>

> Unfortunately there are all kinds of different opinions and theories which

> may or may not be backed by credible science or the proof that's needed.

> -------

> Does anyone know about the " increased metal deposits in the frontal part of

brains of

> chelated mice " ? Andy?

Since the people are just as lacking in technical background as

any other liberal arts major with an MD, they are incapable of reading

the literature and understanding what chelation protocols are harmful

and which helpful.

It is true that chelation is not a benign procedure (neither is

anything prescribes) and if you do it wrong it can be disastrous.

Since they don't really know anything aboiut chelation, pharmacology,

pharmacokinetics, or thinking, you would be well advised to consider

their mad yammering as a heads up that they have seen problems and you

need to learn more about chelation, but not as any reason to avoid

doing it once you have learned. After all, they are telling you they

have seem some people have problems, they just aren't able to keep

track of what protocols those people were on (chelation is a very

general term, like exercise or food or antibiotic).

E. g. check www.dmpsbackfire.com for typical adult reports on the

inappropriate use of DMPS, or find assorted stories about the DAN!

protocol. Doing it right minimizes risk but does not completely

eliminate it.

It is unfortunate that medical training includes corruption of morals

to such an extent that some doctors think it is OK to speak as

authorities on subjects they aren't very knowledgeable in. This is

apparently happening at , where they should be very cautious in

what they say about chelation (since they clearly don't know anything

about it and don't have any experience) and mostly stick to advice on

what to do with infectious agents of the sort they do understand.

> Thanks, Jill

You are welcome,

Andy . .. . . . . .

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 7/19/2004 9:18:54 AM Central Standard Time,

Jill@... writes:

<<The doctors won't even accept a patient who was previously chelated.

>>

While I know they keep saying this on that list, it is not true. My son

fully completed chelation before Dr. Goldberg accepted him as a patient. He

said

he will drop a patient if he/she does start chelating.

Kathy, with the NY clinic, has frequently said that their clinic will

not accept chelated patients because they've found that the chelated kids don't

respond as quickly to the protocol. However, she's never provided any

additional information or anything to back up this claim even though I've asked

very specific questions about it numerous times.

<< Here is a quote from one of the posts. I'm not sure what study they're

referring to:

------

We also don't know why the children in that controlled study had some areas

like intelligence and behavior become a little worse when chelated.>>

I don't recall the exact study citation this is referring to but I'm sure you

could find it in the archives since it is the study frequently posted on

the list to discourage chelation. I read the study the first time it was

posted. It was a study focusing on treating lead poisoning using a protocol

different from what is usually used for other metals toxicity -- 21 days. It is

also important to know that while there was a very slight report by some

parents of some worsening of behavior and a few had IQ points drop, the study

stated

that the the differences were small as to not be considered statistically

significant.

This was one study. There are many other studies showing benefits of

chelation for anyone wanting to take the time to do a search and read them.

<<or was it possibly due to increased metal deposits in the frontal part of

the brain like a study I found on chelated mice.>>

I don't recall the specifics on this study but I'm sure you could find it in

the archives since Cheryl is very good at posting things like this that

she refers to. Look for chelation as the subject and cibro as the author.

I do recall a study posted to this list a few years ago that showed a larger

amount of arsenic in mice brains that were given DMSA than those given DMPS.

If I recall correctly, it was in the frontal lobe area. That study made the

suggestion that those with arsenic should start with DMPS instead of DMSA. I

found that very interesting and a bit disconcerting since we started on this

path with DMSA because of arsenic poisoning.

Gaylen

[Guest guest]

>we started on this

>path with DMSA because of arsenic poisoning.

>Gaylen

-----

Gaylen:

What kind of protocol did you use for the arsenic chelation?

Thanks, C.

[Guest guest]

Andy,

I hate to put a damper on your MD bashing...but that was a post from

another non-medical professional like you. (Posted here without my

permission btw) Obviously I disagree with you since I know your

background and mine. The difference is that I'm not acting like one

and advising people on what to take....just posts on the most common

side effects when you've missed them.

You should follow the advice you give people during your net-working

sales talks. (especially the part about saying less) You really

don't need to bash other people to improve your confidence or

sales.

--- In , " andrewhallcutler "

> Since the people are just as lacking in technical background

as

> any other liberal arts major with an MD, they are incapable of

reading

> the literature and understanding what chelation protocols are

harmful

> and which helpful.

>

> It is true that chelation is not a benign procedure (neither is

> anything prescribes) and if you do it wrong it can be

disastrous.

>

> Since they don't really know anything aboiut chelation,

pharmacology,

> pharmacokinetics, or thinking, you would be well advised to

consider

> their mad yammering as a heads up that they have seen problems and

you

> need to learn more about chelation, but not as any reason to avoid

> doing it once you have learned. After all, they are telling you

they

> have seem some people have problems, they just aren't able to keep

> track of what protocols those people were on (chelation is a very

> general term, like exercise or food or antibiotic).

>

> E. g. check www.dmpsbackfire.com for typical adult reports on the

> inappropriate use of DMPS, or find assorted stories about the DAN!

> protocol. Doing it right minimizes risk but does not completely

> eliminate it.

>

> It is unfortunate that medical training includes corruption of

morals

> to such an extent that some doctors think it is OK to speak as

> authorities on subjects they aren't very knowledgeable in. This

is

> apparently happening at , where they should be very cautious

in

> what they say about chelation (since they clearly don't know

anything

> about it and don't have any experience) and mostly stick to advice

on

> what to do with infectious agents of the sort they do understand.

>

> > Thanks, Jill

>

> You are welcome,

>

> Andy . .. . . . . .