Re: New to the group...hair sample interpretation please! -

[Guest guest]

,

I am sorry for my delayed reply on this.

I won't bother with the counting rules since it is difficult to

apply them to this test. It is possible that the " 4 in red "

rule is met - you didn't indicate if any of the red essentials

is touching the very end of the red zone - if 4 of them are

touching the end, then the rule is met.

Even if this rule is not met, the test is suspicious for mercury

since tin and antimony are very elevated. This can happen when

mercury causes them to be retained by the body.

In either case, chelation seems justified. See the Files section

for more information on how to chelate safely and what supplements

to take.

Very high gadolinium is unusual. This can come from injected

contrast agent for MRI imaging. If there has been exposure, it

is recommended not to use it in the future.

The cadmium level is strange. The numeric result is not high

enough to indicate a red range elevation. The uranium is not

really elevated either. Genova (GSDL) makes their test results

appear much more toxic than they really are. However, the

antimony and tin levels appear to be truly elevated and removing

sources of exposure is a good idea.

--

> >

> > ,

> >

> > Since this is a Genova (GSDL) test, I would need more

> > information to interpret (it's a bit different from a DDI

> > test). The main thing is the ranges are different - a

> > result is not considered red unless it goes all the way to

> > the end of the result plot. Using DDI test rules, this

> > test would meet the counting rules, but it may not using

> > the the modified rules for GSDL.

> >

>

> >

> > So I need to know if any of the red range results are all

> > the way to the end of the red zone (touching the end).

> > Looks like at least potassium and lithium are touching

> > the left side since they are not detectable. Please

> > tell me if any other essentials, or any of the toxics

> > are all the way to the edge of the plot.

> >

> > Also for the under/over designation, you should consider

> > 50% to be a line straight down the middle of the result

> > plots.

> >

>

> >

> > --

> >

>