That faulty iodine paper

June 9, 2007

,

You mentioned the discredited claim of 13.8 mg per day of iodine

consumption among healthy Japanese. This came from a misinterpretation

of the following paper from 1967, which overestimates the iodine content

of kelp by confusing wet with dehydrated forms:

Nagataki S, et al. Thyroid function in chronic excess iodide ingestion:

comparison of thyroidal absolute iodine uptake and degradation of

thyroxine in euthyroid Japanese subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab

1967;27:638–647.

The mistake was pointed out in Dr. Alan Gaby's highly critical editorial

on the claims of the iodine docs, Abraham and Brownstein. Both sides of

the argument with responses are available at the Townsend Letter from

last year:

http://www.townsendletter.com/April2006/iodine0406.htm

Here is the relevant excerpt:

" ... The idea that Japanese people consume 13.8 mg of iodine per day

appears to have arisen from a misinterpretation of a 1967 paper.6 In

that paper, the average intake of seaweed in Japan was listed as 4.6 g

(4,600 mg) per day, and seaweed was said to contain 0.3% iodine. The

figure of 13.8 mg comes from multiplying 4,600 mg by 0.003. However, the

4.6 g of seaweed consumed per day was expressed as wet weight, whereas

the 0.3%-iodine figure was based on dry weight. Since many vegetables

contain at least 90% water, 13.8 mg per day is a significant

overestimate of iodine intake. In studies that have specifically looked

at iodine intake among Japanese people, the mean dietary intake

(estimated from urinary iodine excretion) was in the range of 330 to 500

mcg per day,7,8 which is at least 25-fold lower than 13.8 mg per day.

The other argument being proposed to support a high iodine requirement

is that it takes somewhere between 6 and 14 mg of oral iodine per day to

keep the thyroid gland fully saturated with iodine. Whether or not that

is true, it is not clear that loading the thyroid gland or other tissues

with all the iodine they can hold is necessarily a good thing. Since

emerging from the iodine-rich oceans to become mammals, we have evolved

in an iodine-poor environment. Our thyroid glands have developed a

powerful mechanism to concentrate iodine, and some thyroid glands (or

other tissues) might not function as well after a sudden 90-fold

increase in the intake of this mineral. As I will explain later,

relatively small increases in dietary iodine intake have been reported

to cause hypothyroidism or other thyroid abnormalities in some people.

It has also been observed that iodine supplementation promotes the

urinary excretion of potentially toxic halogens such as bromide and

fluoride. While that effect might be beneficial for some people, it is

not clear to what extent it would shift the risk-benefit ratio of

megadose iodine therapy for the general population..... "

7. Ishizuki Y, et al. [The variation of Japanese urinary excretion of

iodine in different decades of age]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon

Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1994;70:1093–1100.

8. Ishizuki Y, et al. [urinary iodide excretion in Japanese people and

thyroid dysfunction]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai

Zasshi 1992;68:550–556.

I'm thinking at least a link to the exchanges on the Townsend Letter

ought to be a part of the FAQ.

Chuck

June 10, 2007

It should seem strange that the claim that Japanese consumed 1000% to

2500% MORE iodine than they actually did in the study keeps turning up

here. I had actually thought the error had been discovered before 2006.

Yes, I think this should be in the FAQ if the invalid study is going to

keep being quoted here and elsewhere.

Thanks,

>

> That faulty iodine paper

>

<hypothyroidism/message/28659;_ylc=X3oDMTJxNGVna2k\

1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMjg2NTkEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE4MTQ2ODgyMg-->

>

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

>

<mailto:gumboyaya@...?Subject=%20Re%3AThat%20faulty%20iodine%20paper>

> gumbo482001 <gumbo482001>

>

> Sat Jun 9, 2007 11:55 am (PST)

>

> ,

>

> You mentioned the discredited claim of 13.8 mg per day of iodine

> consumption among healthy Japanese. This came from a misinterpretation

> of the following paper from 1967, which overestimates the iodine content

> of kelp by confusing wet with dehydrated forms:

>

> Nagataki S, et al. Thyroid function in chronic excess iodide ingestion:

> comparison of thyroidal absolute iodine uptake and degradation of

> thyroxine in euthyroid Japanese subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab

> 1967;27:638–647.

>

> The mistake was pointed out in Dr. Alan Gaby's highly critical editorial

> on the claims of the iodine docs, Abraham and Brownstein. Both sides of

> the argument with responses are available at the Townsend Letter from

> last year:

>

> http://www.townsendletter.com/April2006/iodine0406.htm

> <http://www.townsendletter.com/April2006/iodine0406.htm>

>

> Here is the relevant excerpt:

>

> " ... The idea that Japanese people consume 13.8 mg of iodine per day

> appears to have arisen from a misinterpretation of a 1967 paper.6 In

> that paper, the average intake of seaweed in Japan was listed as 4.6 g

> (4,600 mg) per day, and seaweed was said to contain 0.3% iodine. The

> figure of 13.8 mg comes from multiplying 4,600 mg by 0.003. However, the

> 4.6 g of seaweed consumed per day was expressed as wet weight, whereas

> the 0.3%-iodine figure was based on dry weight. Since many vegetables

> contain at least 90% water, 13.8 mg per day is a significant

> overestimate of iodine intake. In studies that have specifically looked

> at iodine intake among Japanese people, the mean dietary intake

> (estimated from urinary iodine excretion) was in the range of 330 to 500

> mcg per day,7,8 which is at least 25-fold lower than 13.8 mg per day.

>

> The other argument being proposed to support a high iodine requirement

> is that it takes somewhere between 6 and 14 mg of oral iodine per day to

> keep the thyroid gland fully saturated with iodine. Whether or not that

> is true, it is not clear that loading the thyroid gland or other tissues

> with all the iodine they can hold is necessarily a good thing. Since

> emerging from the iodine-rich oceans to become mammals, we have evolved

> in an iodine-poor environment. Our thyroid glands have developed a

> powerful mechanism to concentrate iodine, and some thyroid glands (or

> other tissues) might not function as well after a sudden 90-fold

> increase in the intake of this mineral. As I will explain later,

> relatively small increases in dietary iodine intake have been reported

> to cause hypothyroidism or other thyroid abnormalities in some people.

>

> It has also been observed that iodine supplementation promotes the

> urinary excretion of potentially toxic halogens such as bromide and

> fluoride. While that effect might be beneficial for some people, it is

> not clear to what extent it would shift the risk-benefit ratio of

> megadose iodine therapy for the general population..

> ... "

>

> 7. Ishizuki Y, et al. [The variation of Japanese urinary excretion of

> iodine in different decades of age]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon

> Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1994;70:1093–1100.

> 8. Ishizuki Y, et al. [urinary iodide excretion in Japanese people and

> thyroid dysfunction]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai

> Zasshi 1992;68:550–556.

>

> I'm thinking at least a link to the exchanges on the Townsend Letter

> ought to be a part of the FAQ.

>

> Chuck

September 29, 2009

Hi Chuck,

I found your post regarding what you and percieved to be G.

Abraham's " gross error " on the amount of iodine ingested daily by

mainland Japanese.

Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby? Abraham clearly laid

out in his rebuttal what the error was, and why the original figures

(13.8 g/day of Iodine) were certainly correct. Please let me know if I

am missing something.

http://www.townsendletter.com/Oct2005/gabyrebuttal1005.htm

<http://www.townsendletter.com/Oct2005/gabyrebuttal1005.htm>

" Gaby mentioned that the calculation we used to estimate the average

daily intake of mainland Japanese was based on dry weight whereas the

data in Nagataki's publication23 on iodine in seaweed was reported per

wet weight. Quoting from that article: 'For example, the dry weight of

such food as " tangle " (Laminaria) contains 0.3% iodine1 and this may be

eaten in quantities as large as 10 g daily.'23 This daily intake would

compute to 30mg of elemental iodine. However, on page 643 of the same

article, Nagataki et al23 misquoted their Reference #13, that is our

Reference #26, when they stated: '…according to the statistics of

the Ministry of Health and Welfare,13 the average daily intake of

seaweed was 4.6 g (wet weight),' when in fact, that Organization

confirmed by a phone interview (6/21/05) that their data on seaweed are

always expressed as dry weight.

For example, in table 8 of Nagataki's Reference #13, values for

seaweed consumption for several years from 1950 to 1963 are listed in

gms of dry weight, confirmed by the Japanese Ministry of Health and

Welfare. We have compiled some of these data in our Table II, taken from

reference 13 of Nagataki's article. The value of 4.6 g that Nagataki

quoted as wet weight was actually expressed as dry weight and Nagataki

used the value for the year 1963 only, that is, 4.6 gm. Nagataki et al

mentioned correctly dry weight on page 638 at the beginning of their

article, and for some unknown reason, they erroneously mentioned wet

weight on page 643 of the same publication, which is confusing. We have

relied, therefore, on the original information supplied by the Japanese

Ministry of Health and Welfare, that is Nagataki's Reference #13, and

our reference #26.

The average daily intake of iodine by mainland Japanese in 1963 was

13.8 mg, based on information supplied by the Japanese Ministry of

Health, which used only dry weight in their calculations, confirmed by a

phone interview of one of us (GEA) on June 21, 2005, with officials of

this organization (See Table II).

In a phone interview with Guy E. Abraham, M.D., on June 21, 2005,

using Miss Hisa Izumi as an interpreter, the interviewees Miss Nichi and

Mister Arai at the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare confirm that,

in the nutritional surveys published in 1965, the average daily amount

of seaweed consumed is expressed as gms of dried seaweed. "

23. Nagataki, S., Shizume, K., Nakao, K., Thyroid Function in Chronic

Excess Iodide Ingestion: Comparison of Thyroidal Absolute Iodine Uptake

and Degradation of Thyroxine in Euthyroid Japanese Subjects. J. Clin.

Endocr., 27:638-647, 1967.

26. Nutrition in Japan, 1964. Nutrition Section, Bureau of Public

Health, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Japan. Printed: Tokyo, Japan,

March 1965.

-Ken Bagwell

>

> ,

>

> You mentioned the discredited claim of 13.8 mg per day of iodine

> consumption among healthy Japanese. This came from a misinterpretation

> of the following paper from 1967, which overestimates the iodine

content

> of kelp by confusing wet with dehydrated forms:

>

> Nagataki S, et al. Thyroid function in chronic excess iodide

ingestion:

> comparison of thyroidal absolute iodine uptake and degradation of

> thyroxine in euthyroid Japanese subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab

> 1967;27:638–647.

>

> The mistake was pointed out in Dr. Alan Gaby's highly critical

editorial

> on the claims of the iodine docs, Abraham and Brownstein. Both sides

of

> the argument with responses are available at the Townsend Letter from

> last year:

>

> http://www.townsendletter.com/April2006/iodine0406.htm

>

> Here is the relevant excerpt:

>

> " ... The idea that Japanese people consume 13.8 mg of iodine per day

> appears to have arisen from a misinterpretation of a 1967 paper.6 In

> that paper, the average intake of seaweed in Japan was listed as 4.6 g

> (4,600 mg) per day, and seaweed was said to contain 0.3% iodine. The

> figure of 13.8 mg comes from multiplying 4,600 mg by 0.003. However,

the

> 4.6 g of seaweed consumed per day was expressed as wet weight, whereas

> the 0.3%-iodine figure was based on dry weight. Since many vegetables

> contain at least 90% water, 13.8 mg per day is a significant

> overestimate of iodine intake. In studies that have specifically

looked

> at iodine intake among Japanese people, the mean dietary intake

> (estimated from urinary iodine excretion) was in the range of 330 to

500

> mcg per day,7,8 which is at least 25-fold lower than 13.8 mg per day.

>

> The other argument being proposed to support a high iodine requirement

> is that it takes somewhere between 6 and 14 mg of oral iodine per day

to

> keep the thyroid gland fully saturated with iodine. Whether or not

that

> is true, it is not clear that loading the thyroid gland or other

tissues

> with all the iodine they can hold is necessarily a good thing. Since

> emerging from the iodine-rich oceans to become mammals, we have

evolved

> in an iodine-poor environment. Our thyroid glands have developed a

> powerful mechanism to concentrate iodine, and some thyroid glands (or

> other tissues) might not function as well after a sudden 90-fold

> increase in the intake of this mineral. As I will explain later,

> relatively small increases in dietary iodine intake have been reported

> to cause hypothyroidism or other thyroid abnormalities in some people.

>

> It has also been observed that iodine supplementation promotes the

> urinary excretion of potentially toxic halogens such as bromide and

> fluoride. While that effect might be beneficial for some people, it is

> not clear to what extent it would shift the risk-benefit ratio of

> megadose iodine therapy for the general population..... "

>

> 7. Ishizuki Y, et al. [The variation of Japanese urinary excretion of

> iodine in different decades of age]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon

> Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1994;70:1093–1100.

> 8. Ishizuki Y, et al. [urinary iodide excretion in Japanese people and

> thyroid dysfunction]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai

> Zasshi 1992;68:550–556.

>

> I'm thinking at least a link to the exchanges on the Townsend Letter

> ought to be a part of the FAQ.

>

> Chuck

>

September 29, 2009

Ken,

You wrote:

>

> Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?...

Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers

were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a

single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about isolated

coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave an

average above about 1 mg.

As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp

consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT with

iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was

consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less.

http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php

Chuck

September 30, 2009

Hi Chuck,

Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then.

See left column on page 153...

http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japane\

se.pdf

<http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japan\

ese.pdf>

" Japanese foods in a regular diet have a high iodine content

(33,34) and a major dietary source of iodine is seaweed that is

served in a large variety of ways under a number of different

names, e.g., Kombu (tangle weed, Laminaria japonica), Hijiki

(Hizikia fusiformis), and Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) (35).

According to the national nutrition survey carried out from

1975 to 2000 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and

Welfare (36), the daily consumption of seaweed per capita is

4.9 to 6.1 g (average: 5.4 g). Kombu, the most iodine-rich

seaweed, contains 1.3mg of iodine per gram; therefore, the

average dietary iodine intake SOLEY from Kombu is 7,000 mg

per day. "

How do you reconcile this, Chuck? Would Japan's Ministry of Health be

wrong year after year after year since 1967?

I do note that the figures above are average 7g/day from 1975-2000, and

that the 1967 figures were 13.8 g/day. I'm not concerned about that

discrepancy so much, as even if we go with the lowest figure, it's still

far, far above anything we Americans are consuming.

One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base

his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more

on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were

literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they

would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method

of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and

after blood measurements and ultrasounds.

http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm

<http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm>

I briefly looked up the other 7 or so doctors who are in general

agreement with Abraham. These aren't just some dumbells with no

background. These are legitimate medical professionals. I don't see

how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting

at least decent results.

-Ken Bagwell

> >

> > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?...

>

> Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers

> were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a

> single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about

isolated

> coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave

an

> average above about 1 mg.

>

> As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp

> consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT

with

> iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was

> consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less.

>

> http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php

>

> Chuck

>

September 30, 2009

<One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base

his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more

on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were

literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they

would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method

of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and

after blood measurements and ultrasounds.>

I don't think that this is logical reasoning. The medical community has been

treating patients wrong for a number of different things for years and years and

losing thousands of patients. Just read the stories from the member of this

list. They are all still in business.

If you think you should eat 7000 gr of iodine a day or a week or whatever, do

it. Why is it so important to you to prove this particular person right. He

could be right, wrong or partially right or partially wrong. In the end,

everyone has to choose for themselves how they take care of their bodies and

what they put into them.

Roni

<>Just because something

isn't seen doesn't mean it's

not there<>

From: kenancy2000 <kenancy2000@...>

Subject: Re: That faulty iodine paper

hypothyroidism

Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 3:21 AM

Hi Chuck,

Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then.

See left column on page 153...

http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japane\

se.pdf

<http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japan\

ese.pdf>

" Japanese foods in a regular diet have a high iodine content

(33,34) and a major dietary source of iodine is seaweed that is

served in a large variety of ways under a number of different

names, e.g., Kombu (tangle weed, Laminaria japonica), Hijiki

(Hizikia fusiformis), and Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) (35).

According to the national nutrition survey carried out from

1975 to 2000 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and

Welfare (36), the daily consumption of seaweed per capita is

4.9 to 6.1 g (average: 5.4 g). Kombu, the most iodine-rich

seaweed, contains 1.3mg of iodine per gram; therefore, the

average dietary iodine intake SOLEY from Kombu is 7,000 mg

per day. "

How do you reconcile this, Chuck? Would Japan's Ministry of Health be

wrong year after year after year since 1967?

I do note that the figures above are average 7g/day from 1975-2000, and

that the 1967 figures were 13.8 g/day. I'm not concerned about that

discrepancy so much, as even if we go with the lowest figure, it's still

far, far above anything we Americans are consuming.

One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base

his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more

on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were

literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they

would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method

of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and

after blood measurements and ultrasounds.

http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm

<http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm>

I briefly looked up the other 7 or so doctors who are in general

agreement with Abraham. These aren't just some dumbells with no

background. These are legitimate medical professionals. I don't see

how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting

at least decent results.

-Ken Bagwell

> >

> > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?...

>

> Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers

> were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a

> single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about

isolated

> coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave

an

> average above about 1 mg.

>

> As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp

> consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT

with

> iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was

> consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less.

>

> http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php

>

> Chuck

>

September 30, 2009

Roni Molin wrote:

> <One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base

> his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more

> on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were

> literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they

> would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method

> of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and

> after blood measurements and ultrasounds.>

>

> I don't think that this is logical reasoning. The medical community has been

treating patients wrong for a number of different things for years and years and

losing thousands of patients. Just read the stories from the member of this

list. They are all still in business.

I concur. " Orthodox " medicine does what's most profitable and accuses

all else of being Kooks. Examples abound, advances are made, and the

past errors of orthodoxy are " forgotten " . For example, while anti-acid

medications were still under patent and very high priced, everyone and

their cousin were diagnosed with Ulcers. The evidence existed that the

primary cause in 95 percent of ulcer cases was a bacteria, and that

antibiotics where the best method and produced a cure, but it didn't

produce chronic intake of prescription medications and associated profts

so " orthodox " medicine denied, in most cases, the actual facts. When

the standard prescribed ulcer medications came off patent, suddenly, the

patented antibiotics where the chosen medical option since it became the

most profitable option. Today, its rare to know someone who has been

diagnosed with an Ulcer.

Statin drugs will be coming off patent in the next half dozen years or

so. What will be the " new " cure then since statin drugs don't generally

reduce all cause mortality, only shift the causes of death?

Thyroid resistance (often related to adrenal fatigue) don't exist

according to most medical orthodoxy. There is after all no on-patent

drug to treat adrenal fatigue. Orthodoxy claims that at the statically

dividing line between additions disease and health, that one side is

perfectly " normal " and the other side of the line is life threatening.

Any rational consideration would admit a continuum. However, if there

was a patented drug to treat adrenal fatigue, you can be sure that the

FOX network, CNN, and others would be advertising it every 30 minutes

and asking you to ask your doctor if that drugs was " right for you " .

--

Steve - dudescholar4@...

" The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you

run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher

" Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism "

Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

September 30, 2009

" Why is it so important to you to prove this particular person right. "

It's called " debate " , Roni.

-Ken Bagwell

-- In hypothyroidism , Roni Molin <matchermaam@...> wrote:

>

> <One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base

> his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more

> on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were

> literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they

> would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method

> of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and

> after blood measurements and ultrasounds.>

>

> I don't think that this is logical reasoning. The medical community has been

treating patients wrong for a number of different things for years and years and

losing thousands of patients. Just read the stories from the member of this

list. They are all still in business.

>

> If you think you should eat 7000 gr of iodine a day or a week or whatever, do

it. Why is it so important to you to prove this particular person right. He

could be right, wrong or partially right or partially wrong. In the end,

everyone has to choose for themselves how they take care of their bodies and

what they put into them.

>

> Roni

> <>Just because something

> isn't seen doesn't mean it's

> not there<>

>

> From: kenancy2000 <kenancy2000@...>

> Subject: Re: That faulty iodine paper

> hypothyroidism

> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 3:21 AM

>

> Hi Chuck,

>

> Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then.

>

> See left column on page 153...

>

> http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japane\

> se.pdf

> <http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japan\

> ese.pdf>

>

> " Japanese foods in a regular diet have a high iodine content

> (33,34) and a major dietary source of iodine is seaweed that is

> served in a large variety of ways under a number of different

> names, e.g., Kombu (tangle weed, Laminaria japonica), Hijiki

> (Hizikia fusiformis), and Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) (35).

> According to the national nutrition survey carried out from

> 1975 to 2000 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and

> Welfare (36), the daily consumption of seaweed per capita is

> 4.9 to 6.1 g (average: 5.4 g). Kombu, the most iodine-rich

> seaweed, contains 1.3mg of iodine per gram; therefore, the

> average dietary iodine intake SOLEY from Kombu is 7,000 mg

> per day. "

>

> How do you reconcile this, Chuck? Would Japan's Ministry of Health be

> wrong year after year after year since 1967?

>

> I do note that the figures above are average 7g/day from 1975-2000, and

> that the 1967 figures were 13.8 g/day. I'm not concerned about that

> discrepancy so much, as even if we go with the lowest figure, it's still

> far, far above anything we Americans are consuming.

>

> One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base

> his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more

> on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were

> literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they

> would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method

> of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and

> after blood measurements and ultrasounds.

>

> http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm

> <http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm>

>

> I briefly looked up the other 7 or so doctors who are in general

> agreement with Abraham. These aren't just some dumbells with no

> background. These are legitimate medical professionals. I don't see

> how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting

> at least decent results.

>

> -Ken Bagwell

>

> > >

> > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?...

> >

> > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers

> > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a

> > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about

> isolated

> > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave

> an

> > average above about 1 mg.

> >

> > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp

> > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT

> with

> > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was

> > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less.

> >

> > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php

> >

> > Chuck

> >

>

September 30, 2009

Hi Roni,

You said... " The medical community has been treating patients wrong for a number

of different things for years and years and losing thousands of patients. "

That's why I added at the end of my post...

" I don't see how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't

getting at least decent results (with iodine). "