Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Reverse T3

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

What is RT3 used for in the body?

Thanks,

..

..

>

> Posted by: " " kennio@...

> <mailto:kennio@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Reverse%20T3>

> Kennio <Kennio>

>

>

> Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:42 pm (PDT)

>

> And what can be done about it?

>

> On Mar 24, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Chuck B <gumboyaya@...

> <mailto:gumboyaya%40cox.net>> wrote:

>

> wrote:

> >

> >

> > My understanding is that the body mostly uses T4 just to make T3 and for

> > very little if anything else. If that's not right I hope someone will

> > correct it.

>

> Nearly half of the T4 converts to RT3. An imbalance in the proportion of

> T3 and RT3 can effectively manifest as a conversion problem.

>

> Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Chuck, some who follow allopathic medical procedures alone seem to

poo-poo the idea that anyone [ or almost anyone] could benefit from T3

if they have plenty of T4. Yet we see and hear considerable anecdotal

evidence that some percentage of hypothyroidism patients do in fact

benefit from T3 in some form. In addition we hear of T4-T3 conversion

problems in some people.

How well supported do you consider the need for T3 in some patients with

sufficient T4? Are there credible studies, or is it a considerable body

of anecdotal evidence? I read of a study [i think in England] which

found no statistical support for any benefit from Armour over Synthroid.

Thanks,

..

..

>

> Posted by: " Chuck B " gumboyaya@...

> <mailto:gumboyaya@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Reverse%20T3>

> gumbo482001 <gumbo482001>

>

>

> Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:39 pm (PDT)

>

> wrote:

> >

> >

> > And what can be done about it?

>

> Increase T3 intake until the condition changes.

>

> Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Ok.

Re oprah, yes she has always battled her weight. She has yo-yoed her whole

life. She admits that. She finally got it together 2 yrs ago, but then she

started going thru peri menopause and with that her genetics kicked in and

she apparently has developed Hashi's w/ hypo T. So, now she has a big weight

problem and she has a bunch of docs who are stuck in the mud as to how to

treat her. As in having her eat lots of soy, which competes with the thyroid

hormone's binding sites on the cells. A big no-no if you have thyroid

disease. Plus, these docs won't even consider trying her on combination

thyroid meds if she ends up not responding to synthroid. They also do not

believe in treating to one's symptoms and they apparently don't believe in

testing to the frees or reverse T3.

How do I know this? My sister knows a mutual friend of theirs. She gets all

the scoop.

-- Re: Reverse T3

Hi Nancie!

That is precisely why I qualified my statement, in advance, by opening with

Not necessarily! " Micahel appeared to be under the presumption that one had

to be over-weight in order to be hypoT. My point was that many people, with

Hashis, begin life with normal weight, and maintain relatively normal weight

often with small swings, but still relatively normal, until their thyroid

is destroyed to the point that it can no longer produce enough thyroid

hormone to meet their needs; then people " usually " (I will state that this

time) begin to put on weight that is difficult, if not impossible, to take

off until their thyroid is adequately treated.

Once again, using myself as an example, I got so frustrated that about 6

months ago, I cut down to less than 700 calories a day for a good 2 months

and still only lost 2 or 3 pounds. Once my doctor finally increased my

thyroid med, and I had worked my way up to tolerate the increase, the weight

came off without effort...mostly in the form of pee; I obviously had lots of

water retention throughout my entire body being stored within mucin..

something Dr. Mark Starr discusses in his book, " Hypothyroidism Type 2 The

Epidemic " .

Regarding Oprah, I agree, she probably does have Hashis antibodies, but this

has never been stated publicly, to my knowledge. Also, I am old enough to

remember the days when Oprah's show first came to television and she did NOT

have any obvious weight problems back in those days.

Have a great day...

>

> My point is that Not everyone is the Same! We all are different

genetically

> and not every person with Hashi's or even hypo T will present with

Identical

> symptoms.

> You made a statement that " If a person is in early stages of Hashimotoes,

> then they

> > would have hyper/hypo swings, which overall would have the effect of

> keeping

> > their body weight relatively normal. "

> That is implying that everyone will experience what You experienced.

Clearly

> that is not the case as my example of Oprah " s experience shows.

> BTW, apparently she does have antibodies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

But, how was the study designed? How many patients did it have enrolled? was

it double or triple blinded?

you do know that armour has been around for 100 years. it was the very first

thyroid med and the only reason it lost favor with the medicine was that

Merck developed synthroid to compete with armour and then convinced the

providers through manipulation to write for synthroid instead of armour.

-- Re: Reverse T3

Chuck, some who follow allopathic medical procedures alone seem to

poo-poo the idea that anyone [ or almost anyone] could benefit from T3

if they have plenty of T4. Yet we see and hear considerable anecdotal

evidence that some percentage of hypothyroidism patients do in fact

benefit from T3 in some form. In addition we hear of T4-T3 conversion

problems in some people.

How well supported do you consider the need for T3 in some patients with

sufficient T4? Are there credible studies, or is it a considerable body

of anecdotal evidence? I read of a study [i think in England] which

found no statistical support for any benefit from Armour over Synthroid.

Thanks,

..

..

>

> Posted by: " Chuck B " gumboyaya@...

> <mailto:gumboyaya@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Reverse%20T3>

> gumbo482001 <gumbo482001>

>

>

> Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:39 pm (PDT)

>

> wrote:

> >

> >

> > And what can be done about it?

>

> Increase T3 intake until the condition changes.

>

> Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I don't recall anything about the validity of the study but there's a

good chance Chuck is familiar with it or could easily find out about it

if needed.

If you read carefully I'm asking about the level of support for the

belief that Armour can/does provide additional help for some significant

percentage of hypo patients.

.

..

..

>

> Posted by: " Nancie Barnett " deifspirit@...

> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Reverse%20T3>

> aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1>

>

>

> Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:57 pm (PDT)

>

> But, how was the study designed? How many patients did it have

> enrolled? was

> it double or triple blinded?

> you do know that armour has been around for 100 years. it was the very

> first

> thyroid med and the only reason it lost favor with the medicine was that

> Merck developed synthroid to compete with armour and then convinced the

> providers through manipulation to write for synthroid instead of armour.

>

> -- Re: Reverse T3

>

> Chuck, some who follow allopathic medical procedures alone seem to

> poo-poo the idea that anyone [ or almost anyone] could benefit from T3

> if they have plenty of T4. Yet we see and hear considerable anecdotal

> evidence that some percentage of hypothyroidism patients do in fact

> benefit from T3 in some form. In addition we hear of T4-T3 conversion

> problems in some people.

>

> How well supported do you consider the need for T3 in some patients with

> sufficient T4? Are there credible studies, or is it a considerable body

> of anecdotal evidence? I read of a study [i think in England] which

> found no statistical support for any benefit from Armour over Synthroid.

>

> Thanks,

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Yes, I read carefully. You wrote: I read of a study [i think in England]

which

> found no statistical support for any benefit from Armour over Synthroid.

and I asked how was the study designed.

-- Re: Reverse T3

>

> Chuck, some who follow allopathic medical procedures alone seem to

> poo-poo the idea that anyone [ or almost anyone] could benefit from T3

> if they have plenty of T4. Yet we see and hear considerable anecdotal

> evidence that some percentage of hypothyroidism patients do in fact

> benefit from T3 in some form. In addition we hear of T4-T3 conversion

> problems in some people.

>

> How well supported do you consider the need for T3 in some patients with

> sufficient T4? Are there credible studies, or is it a considerable body

> of anecdotal evidence? I read of a study [i think in England] which

> found no statistical support for any benefit from Armour over Synthroid.

>

> Thanks,

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

In an emergency situation, it can help the body cope by shutting or slowing down

non-essential functions to help preserve energy. For example, if one were

caught in a blizzard, energy could be conserved to protect the core of the body

to preserve the function of the body's organs...the heart, lungs, digestive

tract, brain, etc...

>

> What is RT3 used for in the body?

>

> Thanks,

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Okay; I thought you might have received the impression I'm attacking the

idea that Armour seems to help some patients who do not seem to do well

with Synthroid, which is not the case. As a matter of fact I

interpreted Chuck's post as indicating support for the idea that T3 or

Armour provides benefits not found from the use of Synthroid in some

patients and my interest was in finding out if he knew of specific

credible studies supporting that opinion or if it were based upon the

mass of anecdotal evidence or some other evidence.

I would not present the study I mentioned as being credible research

without remembering more about it than I do now. But I'm under the

impression that a number of studies have been done that obtained

basically the same result. Again, I have no details.

..

..

>

> Posted by: " Nancie Barnett " deifspirit@...

> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Reverse%20T3>

> aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1>

>

>

> Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:05 pm (PDT)

>

> Yes, I read carefully. You wrote: I read of a study [i think in England]

> which

> > found no statistical support for any benefit from Armour over

> Synthroid.

> and I asked how was the study designed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nancie,

You wrote:

> ... it was the very first

> thyroid med and the only reason it lost favor with the medicine was that

> Merck developed synthroid to compete with armour and then convinced the

> providers through manipulation to write for synthroid instead of armour.

Merck had nothing to do with it. Although T4 was first synthesized in

1926 in Wales, Synthroid was not marketed until 1955 by Boots

Pharmaceuticals. They were acquired by Knolls and then by Abbott Labs.

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

This day in history was indeed a dark day in medicine, the start of a

giant step backward.

Neil

Chuck B wrote:

>

>

> Merck had nothing to do with it. Although T4 was first synthesized in

> 1926 in Wales, Synthroid was not marketed until 1955 by Boots

> Pharmaceuticals. They were acquired by Knolls and then by Abbott Labs.

>

> Chuck

>

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> No virus found in this incoming message.

> Checked by AVG.

> Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.29/2024 - Release Date: 3/26/2009

7:12 AM

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

,

In answer to your question:

> How well supported do you consider the need for T3 in some patients with

> sufficient T4? Are there credible studies,...

I have read about a dozen credible studies that support this. The

problem with many of the other studies that conclude the opposite, is

that the dosages follow a conventional protocol. This insures that

people that do poorly on T4 only, also do poorly on Armour or T3,

because they simply don't get enough of either. is quite correct

in her questions. They can effectively cherry pick candidates by

eliminating the ones that have problems on T4 only. If they don't

eliminate them, they just under treat them.

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

It seems to me that all drug studies are cherry picked

for the best candidates. That's how they get approval.

Roni

<>Just because something

isn't seen doesn't mean it's

not there<>

From: Chuck B <gumboyaya@...>

Subject: Re: Re: Reverse T3

hypothyroidism

Date: Thursday, March 26, 2009, 4:35 PM

,

In answer to your question:

> How well supported do you consider the need for T3 in some patients with

> sufficient T4? Are there credible studies,...

I have read about a dozen credible studies that support this. The

problem with many of the other studies that conclude the opposite, is

that the dosages follow a conventional protocol. This insures that

people that do poorly on T4 only, also do poorly on Armour or T3,

because they simply don't get enough of either. is quite correct

in her questions. They can effectively cherry pick candidates by

eliminating the ones that have problems on T4 only. If they don't

eliminate them, they just under treat them.

Chuck

------------------------------------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

hooray! you get an A for this post.

:)

Gracia

,

In answer to your question:

> How well supported do you consider the need for T3 in some patients with

> sufficient T4? Are there credible studies,...

I have read about a dozen credible studies that support this. The

problem with many of the other studies that conclude the opposite, is

that the dosages follow a conventional protocol. This insures that

people that do poorly on T4 only, also do poorly on Armour or T3,

because they simply don't get enough of either. is quite correct

in her questions. They can effectively cherry pick candidates by

eliminating the ones that have problems on T4 only. If they don't

eliminate them, they just under treat them.

Chuck

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.29/2024 - Release Date: 03/26/09

07:12:00

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Ok, I couldn't remember the pharm company, thought it was Merck guess I was

wrong.

The point is that armour was the only thyroid drug in this country until the

pharmaceutical company of Boots pharm which manipulated the providers to

write for synthroid instead of armour. Armour has been around for 100 years

compared to synthroid.

-- Re: Re: Reverse T3

Nancie,

You wrote:

> ... it was the very first

> thyroid med and the only reason it lost favor with the medicine was that

> Merck developed synthroid to compete with armour and then convinced the

> providers through manipulation to write for synthroid instead of armour.

Merck had nothing to do with it. Although T4 was first synthesized in

1926 in Wales, Synthroid was not marketed until 1955 by Boots

Pharmaceuticals. They were acquired by Knolls and then by Abbott Labs.

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...