Re: Answer to my question Message autism-Mercury 32693

[Guest guest]

> Whoa - ALA is only a fraction of a the Chelating agent DMSA or EDTA

is.

> As using those even at maximal dosages can take 1 -2 Years to remove

all the

> lead and mercury,

> it would take almost Forever to get these out with ALA alone,

Hello Mark,

The opinion you have stated above is one that is quite

contestable. If you'd care to read a contrary opinion,

you can do so here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autism-Mercury/files/ANDY_INDEX

Above is a collection of posts by Andy Cutler (including some

explanation of who Andy is, if that matters to you). He

believes that ALA is a ***far*** better chelator that EDTA,

and is also better than DMSA. He also believes that ALA

crosses the blood-brain-barrier and DMSA does not. There

are a number of posts (in above reference) with studies

and various arguments on these topics.

I am also aware of others who disagree with Andy, just

giving you this info FYI, if you would like to read about it

so that you have some basis to understand.

best regards,

Moria

[Guest guest]

Whoa - ALA is only a fraction of a the Chelating agent DMSA or EDTA is.

As using those even at maximal dosages can take 1 -2 Years to remove all the

lead and mercury,

it would take almost Forever to get these out with ALA alone,

Answer to my question Message

autism-Mercury 32693

A lot of adults succesfully detoxed with ALA alone (mostly because

they couldn't tolerate DMSA for some or other reason). The ALA is

essential to detox, the DMSA is not.

Andy

Thanks, SJ

[Guest guest]

> > Whoa - ALA is only a fraction of a the Chelating agent DMSA or

EDTA

> is.

> > As using those even at maximal dosages can take 1 -2 Years to

remove

> all the

> > lead and mercury,

> > it would take almost Forever to get these out with ALA alone,

>

> Hello Mark,

>

> The opinion you have stated above is one that is quite

> contestable.

More like flat out wrong, completely contradicted by all existing

literature on the subject, and clearly not consistent with the lab

tests any real doc would be seeing on his patients.

It is also pretty random and suggests the person you are quoting has

no clue about the chemistry of chelation. ALA is ineffective for

lead. DMSA is wonderfully effective for lead. ALA is the best

available for mercury and arsenic. DMSA is marginally useful to help

a little with mercury, and not effective for arsenic. DMPS is useless

for lead, somewhat effective for mercury, and decent for arsenic. Each

heavy metal is a distinct element with its own chemistry.

Andy

>If you'd care to read a contrary opinion,

> you can do so here:

> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autism-Mercury/files/ANDY_INDEX

>

> Above is a collection of posts by Andy Cutler (including some

> explanation of who Andy is, if that matters to you). He

> believes that ALA is a ***far*** better chelator that EDTA,

> and is also better than DMSA. He also believes that ALA

> crosses the blood-brain-barrier and DMSA does not. There

> are a number of posts (in above reference) with studies

> and various arguments on these topics.

>

> I am also aware of others who disagree with Andy, just

> giving you this info FYI, if you would like to read about it

> so that you have some basis to understand.

>

> best regards,

> Moria

[Guest guest]

No, the American Academy for the Advancement of medicine - The leading

organization for the use of Chelating Agents

recommends EDTA as the Single Best method for getting LEAD out and DMPS for

mercury.

In point of fact, patients are advised to Avoid ALA of the days when the

other chelating agents are used.

Re: Answer to my question Message

autism-Mercury 32693

> > Whoa - ALA is only a fraction of a the Chelating agent DMSA or

EDTA

> is.

> > As using those even at maximal dosages can take 1 -2 Years to

remove

> all the

> > lead and mercury,

> > it would take almost Forever to get these out with ALA alone,

>

> Hello Mark,

>

> The opinion you have stated above is one that is quite

> contestable.

More like flat out wrong, completely contradicted by all existing

literature on the subject, and clearly not consistent with the lab

tests any real doc would be seeing on his patients.

It is also pretty random and suggests the person you are quoting has

no clue about the chemistry of chelation. ALA is ineffective for

lead. DMSA is wonderfully effective for lead. ALA is the best

available for mercury and arsenic. DMSA is marginally useful to help

a little with mercury, and not effective for arsenic. DMPS is useless

for lead, somewhat effective for mercury, and decent for arsenic. Each

heavy metal is a distinct element with its own chemistry.

Andy

>If you'd care to read a contrary opinion,

> you can do so here:

> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autism-Mercury/files/ANDY_INDEX

>

> Above is a collection of posts by Andy Cutler (including some

> explanation of who Andy is, if that matters to you). He

> believes that ALA is a ***far*** better chelator that EDTA,

> and is also better than DMSA. He also believes that ALA

> crosses the blood-brain-barrier and DMSA does not. There

> are a number of posts (in above reference) with studies

> and various arguments on these topics.

>

> I am also aware of others who disagree with Andy, just

> giving you this info FYI, if you would like to read about it

> so that you have some basis to understand.

>

> best regards,

> Moria

[Guest guest]

> > > Whoa - ALA is only a fraction of a the Chelating agent DMSA or

> EDTA

> > is.

> > > As using those even at maximal dosages can take 1 -2 Years to

> remove

> > all the

> > > lead and mercury,

> > > it would take almost Forever to get these out with ALA alone,

> >

> > Hello Mark,

> >

> > The opinion you have stated above is one that is quite

> > contestable.

>

> More like flat out wrong, completely contradicted by all existing

> literature on the subject, and clearly not consistent with the lab

> tests any real doc would be seeing on his patients.

>

> It is also pretty random and suggests the person you are quoting

has

> no clue about the chemistry of chelation. ALA is ineffective for

> lead. DMSA is wonderfully effective for lead. ALA is the best

> available for mercury and arsenic. DMSA is marginally useful to

help

> a little with mercury, and not effective for arsenic. DMPS is

useless

> for lead, somewhat effective for mercury, and decent for arsenic.

Each

> heavy metal is a distinct element with its own chemistry.

>

> Andy

>

> >If you'd care to read a contrary opinion,

> > you can do so here:

> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autism-Mercury/files/ANDY_INDEX

> >

> > Above is a collection of posts by Andy Cutler (including some

> > explanation of who Andy is, if that matters to you). He

> > believes that ALA is a ***far*** better chelator that EDTA,

> > and is also better than DMSA. He also believes that ALA

> > crosses the blood-brain-barrier and DMSA does not. There

> > are a number of posts (in above reference) with studies

> > and various arguments on these topics.

> >

> > I am also aware of others who disagree with Andy, just

> > giving you this info FYI, if you would like to read about it

> > so that you have some basis to understand.

> >

> > best regards,

> > Moria

>

>

>