Guest guest Posted January 19, 2003 Report Share Posted January 19, 2003 the metals theory is fairly straight forward............................................................... ....................................................................... ............. you appear to be having issues with the fact that 'authority figures' don't know what they are talking about sulphur is just the right chemical stickyness and continually flushes through the body taking a spectrum of metals with it onto the skin or hair or intestine if the metals transport is disordered this this will be reflected in the hair mineral spectrum... mercury and other sh- reactive metals bind to sh gruops on enzymes etc interfering systemically with basic body chemical reactions......... to help remedy this several things have to happen and what you do depends on the degree of heavy metal loading......... u can enhance metals transport funtion with msm(sulphur), selenomethione, methylselnocystiene, zinc, boron, manganese......... chelation is just a dove tailing in addition to this where by a sulphur flush element (ala) also by virtue of the two 'pincer' placed sulphur atoms is capable of lifitng mercury out of what ever molecular bonds it has formed selenium is a more potent chelator than ala ......... wether a good trace mineral background enables selenium to remove the mercury from the body is an open question that i favour......YES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 >>>> the metals theory is fairly straight The theory is easy...it is the practical application of getting it done that is such a bear. >>> you appear to be having issues with the fact that 'authority figures' don't know what they are talking about I have a problem with self proclaimed authority figures trying to pass off their untested opinions as pure well-established fact and telling everyone that this is what should be done exclusively because no one else knows what they are talking about and not disclosing all the shortcomings and hazards of the procedures they insist on. Also, because this is not without risk, it seems many are simply experimenting on whoever walks by...and charging them heavily for that priveledge. I tend toward working for improvements and positive results, and making progress. In the world of metal removing it is getting more splintered and more devisive instead of coming together...progress could be keeping what is working and discarding things that are not. But instead it is more and more fragmented. More negative. More arguing and bickering. Just two days ago I read another post from a parent crushed over their son drastically regressing from the high level chemical dan procedure and lamenting where to go next. Some said go to Pfieffer, some said you can't do those together, some said yes you can, some said use Metal-free, some said find an emergency room, some said find the doctor in California. Now the Pfeiffer folks are at odds with dan people (or is that the other way around). And the low dose Andy C method is at odds with them all. Very depressing. Do you have good solution through this for someone just starting out? or for those not new to this but no further along in understanding which is better? No wonder it is such a nightmare. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Well what timing. I am at a loss as to what to do concerning chelation and knows this, too. Everytime I think I am ready to do something, something appears on the mercury board that concerns me. Is it just me, or do most people end up with yeast problems from chelating? It is one thing to have a situation where you feel you have little to lose, but we do not want to risk any problems here since things have gone well with enzymes. On the other hand, I know there is still room for something.... , what is the ratio of selenium to zinc again? Thanks! > >>>> the metals theory is fairly straight > > The theory is easy...it is the practical application of getting it > done that is such a bear. > > >>> you appear to be having issues with the fact that 'authority > figures' don't know what they are talking about > > I have a problem with self proclaimed authority figures trying to > pass off their untested opinions as pure well-established fact and > telling everyone that this is what should be done exclusively > because no one else knows what they are talking about and not > disclosing all the shortcomings and hazards of the procedures they > insist on. Also, because this is not without risk, it seems many are > simply experimenting on whoever walks by...and charging them heavily > for that priveledge. > > I tend toward working for improvements and positive results, and > making progress. In the world of metal removing it is getting more > splintered and more devisive instead of coming together...progress > could be keeping what is working and discarding things that are not. > But instead it is more and more fragmented. More negative. More > arguing and bickering. > > Just two days ago I read another post from a parent crushed over > their son drastically regressing from the high level chemical dan > procedure and lamenting where to go next. Some said go to Pfieffer, > some said you can't do those together, some said yes you can, some > said use Metal-free, some said find an emergency room, some said > find the doctor in California. Now the Pfeiffer folks are at > odds with dan people (or is that the other way around). And the low > dose Andy C method is at odds with them all. Very depressing. > > Do you have good solution through this for someone just starting > out? or for those not new to this but no further along in > understanding which is better? No wonder it is such a nightmare. > > . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Okay, I mean (LOL), we have not done any chelating and, am I misinterpreting, or do most people seem to end up with yeast problems? > > >>>> the metals theory is fairly straight > > > > The theory is easy...it is the practical application of getting it > > done that is such a bear. > > > > >>> you appear to be having issues with the fact that 'authority > > figures' don't know what they are talking about > > > > I have a problem with self proclaimed authority figures trying to > > pass off their untested opinions as pure well-established fact and > > telling everyone that this is what should be done exclusively > > because no one else knows what they are talking about and not > > disclosing all the shortcomings and hazards of the procedures they > > insist on. Also, because this is not without risk, it seems many > are > > simply experimenting on whoever walks by...and charging them > heavily > > for that priveledge. > > > > I tend toward working for improvements and positive results, and > > making progress. In the world of metal removing it is getting more > > splintered and more devisive instead of coming together...progress > > could be keeping what is working and discarding things that are > not. > > But instead it is more and more fragmented. More negative. More > > arguing and bickering. > > > > Just two days ago I read another post from a parent crushed over > > their son drastically regressing from the high level chemical dan > > procedure and lamenting where to go next. Some said go to Pfieffer, > > some said you can't do those together, some said yes you can, some > > said use Metal-free, some said find an emergency room, some said > > find the doctor in California. Now the Pfeiffer folks are at > > odds with dan people (or is that the other way around). And the low > > dose Andy C method is at odds with them all. Very depressing. > > > > Do you have good solution through this for someone just starting > > out? or for those not new to this but no further along in > > understanding which is better? No wonder it is such a nightmare. > > > > . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Do you have good solution through this for someone just starting out? or for those not new to this but no further along in understanding which is better? No wonder it is such a nightmare I would love more answers to this myself. I have been reading for quite awhile about chelation...more lately...and I totally agree that it is unreal all the different opinions...and quite frankly those opinions are not spoken in a very helpful manner most of the time on the A/M board. I have never posted there and would be scared to death to do so since so many people just blatantly attack each other. I don't find that helpful at all when I'm just looking for facts...which aren't very abundant. It is indeed frusterating. --- In , " jornmatt <kjorn@t...> " <kjorn@t...> wrote: > >>>> the metals theory is fairly straight > > The theory is easy...it is the practical application of getting it > done that is such a bear. > > >>> you appear to be having issues with the fact that 'authority > figures' don't know what they are talking about > > I have a problem with self proclaimed authority figures trying to > pass off their untested opinions as pure well-established fact and > telling everyone that this is what should be done exclusively > because no one else knows what they are talking about and not > disclosing all the shortcomings and hazards of the procedures they > insist on. Also, because this is not without risk, it seems many are > simply experimenting on whoever walks by...and charging them heavily > for that priveledge. > > I tend toward working for improvements and positive results, and > making progress. In the world of metal removing it is getting more > splintered and more devisive instead of coming together...progress > could be keeping what is working and discarding things that are not. > But instead it is more and more fragmented. More negative. More > arguing and bickering. > > Just two days ago I read another post from a parent crushed over > their son drastically regressing from the high level chemical dan > procedure and lamenting where to go next. Some said go to Pfieffer, > some said you can't do those together, some said yes you can, some > said use Metal-free, some said find an emergency room, some said > find the doctor in California. Now the Pfeiffer folks are at > odds with dan people (or is that the other way around). And the low > dose Andy C method is at odds with them all. Very depressing. > > Do you have good solution through this for someone just starting > out? or for those not new to this but no further along in > understanding which is better? No wonder it is such a nightmare. > > . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 Is it just me, or do most people end up with yeast problems from chelating? Its not just you and that is a big concern for me as well. My daughter has a bacteria problem...as a matter of fact I am planning to ask our dr for an antibiotic since the Culturelle doesn't seem to really kick it-and I am afraid chelation will cause a big yeast problem. We haven't had that problem and it concerns me to start it since it seems like everyone who battles it has to keep battling it indefinitely. On the other hand, so many amazing improvements with chelation in many cases. *sigh* Its tough being the parent. --- In , " Kelley <ckelley100@c...> " <ckelley100@c...> wrote: > Well what timing. I am at a loss as to what to do concerning > chelation and knows this, too. Everytime I think I am ready > to do something, something appears on the mercury board that concerns > me. > > Is it just me, or do most people end up with yeast problems from > chelating? > > It is one thing to have a situation where you feel you have little to > lose, but we do not want to risk any problems here since things have > gone well with enzymes. On the other hand, I know there is still > room for something.... > > , what is the ratio of selenium to zinc again? Thanks! > > > > > > > >>>> the metals theory is fairly straight > > > > The theory is easy...it is the practical application of getting it > > done that is such a bear. > > > > >>> you appear to be having issues with the fact that 'authority > > figures' don't know what they are talking about > > > > I have a problem with self proclaimed authority figures trying to > > pass off their untested opinions as pure well-established fact and > > telling everyone that this is what should be done exclusively > > because no one else knows what they are talking about and not > > disclosing all the shortcomings and hazards of the procedures they > > insist on. Also, because this is not without risk, it seems many > are > > simply experimenting on whoever walks by...and charging them > heavily > > for that priveledge. > > > > I tend toward working for improvements and positive results, and > > making progress. In the world of metal removing it is getting more > > splintered and more devisive instead of coming together...progress > > could be keeping what is working and discarding things that are > not. > > But instead it is more and more fragmented. More negative. More > > arguing and bickering. > > > > Just two days ago I read another post from a parent crushed over > > their son drastically regressing from the high level chemical dan > > procedure and lamenting where to go next. Some said go to Pfieffer, > > some said you can't do those together, some said yes you can, some > > said use Metal-free, some said find an emergency room, some said > > find the doctor in California. Now the Pfeiffer folks are at > > odds with dan people (or is that the other way around). And the low > > dose Andy C method is at odds with them all. Very depressing. > > > > Do you have good solution through this for someone just starting > > out? or for those not new to this but no further along in > > understanding which is better? No wonder it is such a nightmare. > > > > . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 >>>Everytime I think I am ready to do something, something appears on the mercury board that concerns me....but we do not want to risk any problems here since things have gone well with enzymes. Same here, . Just recently it comes up that ALA doesn't remove metal from the brain afterall. I think. or they think so. or maybe not. If all the doctors and scientists don't know what is going on, how is a non-scientific parent supposed to decide??? Some of these people are simply making stuff up as they go but not disclosing that that is what they are doing. Very depressing. I am about ready to give up on the entire idea. So what were those ratios, andrew? . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 I don't have a hair analysis for these reasons: 1. When I emailed Doctor's Data a few months ago asking what info they could send me about the test, they emailed back the price and that my doctor had to order it. Well, the doctor wanted to know more about the test and asked me to get her the info. 2. From what I read on the a-m list, it is recommended that no matter what your DDI results are, you should consider chelation. 3. It costs $75 for the test when I am either going to chelate or not, regardless of the results. I read the success stories there and do not doubt them, I know many people have very good results. I think my son is having a yeast problem now - smearing in the underwear is back right along with self- biting when corrected on something. He does that when he doesn't feel well. So I am motivated to do something, but the terrible yeast battles some seem to bring on can't be ignored either. We are adding back zinc, but it made him wet again (as in the past) so I have to go slower with it. Zinc seemed to take care of the SIBs one other time in the past, interestingly. Eventually, though, the wetting became a problem and we stopped it. Thanks for everyone's input, > Hi > Do you have DDI hair analysis. I do wonder to myself that if Sam had the >have been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 > Just two days ago I read another post from a parent crushed over > their son drastically regressing from the high level chemical dan > procedure and lamenting where to go next. Some said go to Pfieffer, > some said you can't do those together, some said yes you can, some > said use Metal-free, some said find an emergency room, some said > find the doctor in California. Now the Pfeiffer folks are at > odds with dan people (or is that the other way around). And the low > dose Andy C method is at odds with them all. Very depressing. > So then you do what I did. Read a lot of info, create your own protocol, and then do it. Modify it as you go along. It worked for me. My protocol is not *accepted* by any of the major players, but my kids are no longer autistic, their food issues are dramatically reduced, things are going along just great. Dana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 > Well what timing. I am at a loss as to what to do concerning > chelation and knows this, too. Everytime I think I am ready > to do something, something appears on the mercury board that concerns > me. Don't believe everything you read there. > > Is it just me, or do most people end up with yeast problems from > chelating? I think most people do. I fought yeast for the first year, now I only fight it when I give too much sugar. For about 3 months I did not have to deal with it, just recently it arrived *slightly* because of the holiday cookies. Dana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 > Same here, . Just recently it comes up that ALA doesn't remove > metal from the brain afterall. I think. or they think so. or maybe > not. If all the doctors and scientists don't know what is going on, > how is a non-scientific parent supposed to decide??? This is my personal opinion. SO WHAT IF ALA DOES NOT REMOVE METALS FROM THE BRAIN?? Now mind you I don't believe that, because here is what happened to my family last Saturday. We went to ride on some mini-trains. Up until last weekend, if I teased my #3 son and said " do you want to go to bed? " , he would have replied " no " and then " train " . Last Saturday he said " no bed, sit on train " . This was 2 days after round 53 ended, and he had NEVER said that many words together that actually made sense, without scripting a video. My #2 son I have watched the metals coming out of the back of his eyes, he literally one day an hour after I gave an ALA dose, opened his eyes really wide and then STOPPED ALL VISUAL STIMS. His language is slightly behind #3, but this round I am watching his little mind work to find the right words to put together. So I believe metals are definitely coming out of their brains. But if not, they are NT now anyway, so what do I care about the actual mechanism? The scientists can try to figure it out, but from my parent perspective, I don't really care. My kids are no longer autistic, they can eat foods now that they were not able to eat even with enzymes, I have reduced the enzyme usage to 1/4-1/2 capsule per meal for #2 and #3, my #4 can now eat foods WITHOUT enzymes, they rarely have yeast anymore, etc. Whatever ALA does, it does it well, at least for my family. But I do believe it removes metals from the brain, because I am watching it do so with my own eyes. Very exciting! Dana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 > Hi > Do you have DDI hair analysis. I do wonder to myself that if Sam had the > level of functioning your boy and s have, wether I would do it all. I > guess thats because I started with such severe child? I did not chelate my #1 child until I saw that my #2 and #3 were so much improved. So yes, a higher functioning child did cause me to be more cautious. I am going slower with him, but I am glad I did decide to chelate him also, because he is also showing improvements. > We do get yeast flares, bash em back down and keep on going looking for the > elusive 'Dana Stage' as we affectionatly call it We had yeast again with all the holiday cookies and things, but we are back to normal again now. Funny you call it the Dana Stage! =) Dana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.