Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

That faulty iodine paper

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

,

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

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

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<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

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" 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

> >

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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). "

-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

> >

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken,

You wrote:

>

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

Indeed, but it comes from your changing micrograms (in the paper) to

milligrams in your quote.

Two sentences later, the paper you cited gives the range of reported

averages of iodine intake in Japan as somewhere between 0.739 - 3.286

mg/day, for which it again cites Nagataki from 1993, Japan: status of

iodine nutrition. IDD Newsltr 9:11. It gives the U.S. average urinary

excretion as within the Japanese range (168 mcg/d versus 114-890 mcg/d

in Japan).

Good citation, BTW, but it confirms everything I had been saying, with

just a slightly higher maximum estimate for the Japanese daily intake.

The old 1967 claim was for 13.8 mg/d. I don't know where you get 7 g/day

from that paper. It is clear that even the most extreme estimates are

only 1/4 of what Abraham claims. Usually such outliers are ignored or at

least discounted. Perhaps you are confusing urine excretion in mg/LITER

with intake in mg/day.

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I wasn't clear. I wasn't suggesting that somehow treating patients

wrongly would or should work out. I was rather stating that they get away with

doing that most of the time.

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

> >

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken,

You wrote:

>

> You are failing to mention that the paper cites UE went as high as 19

> mg/day, and also that it was quite frequent to see average UE at

> 5mg/day....

Neither of those is the AVERAGE for the country. Abraham's claim was

that the overall AVERAGE was 13.8 mg/day. Even with an average under 1

mg/day, I would expect small groups well in excess of 20 mg/day. That is

just statistics.

Most of the " seven or eight " iodine doctors you mention are either

directly on the Optimox payroll, or they collaborate on papers with

direct employees. Abraham owns the company.

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah! The old adage of " Follow the Money " reigns true again.

Roni

<>Just because something

isn't seen doesn't mean it's

not there<>

>

> You are failing to mention that the paper cites UE went as high as 19

> mg/day, and also that it was quite frequent to see average UE at

> 5mg/day....

Neither of those is the AVERAGE for the country. Abraham's claim was

that the overall AVERAGE was 13.8 mg/day. Even with an average under 1

mg/day, I would expect small groups well in excess of 20 mg/day. That is

just statistics.

Most of the " seven or eight " iodine doctors you mention are either

directly on the Optimox payroll, or they collaborate on papers with

direct employees. Abraham owns the company.

Chuck

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Chuck,

From what I'm reading, after Abraham and Brownstein do their testing and

determine there's a greater need for Iodine, they usually give their patients a

loading dose of around 50-100mg Iodine for about 3 months. Then, if all appears

to be well, they drop it down to an incredible 6-12mg/day (although the numbers

can vary), with 12mg or so being the gold standard.

Do you have any information about how long it takes for true thyroid issues to

show up after a person starts ingesting that much Iodine daily (esp after

already starting with 50-100 for 3 months)?

-Ken Bagwell

> >

> > You are failing to mention that the paper cites UE went as high as 19

> > mg/day, and also that it was quite frequent to see average UE at

> > 5mg/day....

>

> Neither of those is the AVERAGE for the country. Abraham's claim was

> that the overall AVERAGE was 13.8 mg/day. Even with an average under 1

> mg/day, I would expect small groups well in excess of 20 mg/day. That is

> just statistics.

>

> Most of the " seven or eight " iodine doctors you mention are either

> directly on the Optimox payroll, or they collaborate on papers with

> direct employees. Abraham owns the company.

>

> Chuck

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been assuming that you are aware of the financial relationships

between Optimox [a company that sells iodine products] and Abraham,

Flechas and Brownstein. Are you aware of those connections?

..

..

>

> Posted by: " kenancy2000 " kenancy2000@...

>

<mailto:kenancy2000@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20That%20faulty%20iodine%20paper>

> kenancy2000 <kenancy2000>

>

>

> Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:24 pm (PDT)

>

>

>

> Hi Chuck,

>

> My mistake. I changed that measurement because I wanted to highlight

> that it was 7mg/day, and forgot to change the " 7,000 " to " 7 " . Dumb

> idea, I suppose, but honest mistake.

>

> You are failing to mention that the paper cites UE went as high as 19

> mg/day, and also that it was quite frequent to see average UE at

> 5mg/day. The range in Japan is much wider than in the U.S., according

> to this paper. The average intake is also, at a minimum, usually 3

> times higher. But whatever.

>

> I will continue to research the matter. Obviously, if Abraham is truly

> far off in his daily intake estimates (not sure of that yet), then I

> would have to ask why he and 7 or 8 other doctors haven't noticed

> this, and why Abraham is recommending such a high dose if thyroid

> issues are SUPPOSED to pop up in most people in that intake range. It

> may be that he felt the 1967 intake figures were in fact correct after

> seeing his own patients doing well with that same daily intake range.

> But that may well be OK, since Americans are fully loaded with

> goitrogens, and consume ever more, daily.

>

> The following may also make things somewhat thorny...

>

> " Little is known about the prevalence of thyroid dysfunction that

> would be related to excess iodine intake in the general population

> that is chronically exposed to large doses of iodine mainly from

> dietary sources. "

>

> Thank you, Chuck.

>

> -Ken Bagwell

>

>

> > >

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

> >

> > Indeed, but it comes from your changing micrograms (in the paper) to

> > milligrams in your quote.

> >

> > Two sentences later, the paper you cited gives the range of reported

> > averages of iodine intake in Japan as somewhere between 0.739 - 3.286

> > mg/day, for which it again cites Nagataki from 1993, Japan: status of

> > iodine nutrition. IDD Newsltr 9:11. It gives the U.S. average urinary

> > excretion as within the Japanese range (168 mcg/d versus 114-890 mcg/d

> > in Japan).

> >

> > Good citation, BTW, but it confirms everything I had been saying, with

> > just a slightly higher maximum estimate for the Japanese daily intake.

> >

> > The old 1967 claim was for 13.8 mg/d. I don't know where you get 7

> g/day

> > from that paper. It is clear that even the most extreme estimates are

> > only 1/4 of what Abraham claims. Usually such outliers are ignored

> or at

> > least discounted. Perhaps you are confusing urine excretion in mg/LITER

> > with intake in mg/day.

> >

> > Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to be misunderstanding or choosing to do so,  no matter what I say, so

in order not to have an argument over nothing, I am choosing to end my

participation in this particular discussion. I'm not angry or annoyed or

anything else except lost interest.

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, 6:58 PM

So, I'd take from that that you feel these 7 or 8 doctors are not getting more

good results than bad, using iodine?

( " most of the time " )

-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

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi ,

I could see those three being related, as all their work on the Iodine Project

has been together, although Abraham has done the lion's share.

Tell me everything you know about their financial relationship.

-Ken Bagwell

> > > >

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

> > >

> > > Indeed, but it comes from your changing micrograms (in the paper) to

> > > milligrams in your quote.

> > >

> > > Two sentences later, the paper you cited gives the range of reported

> > > averages of iodine intake in Japan as somewhere between 0.739 - 3.286

> > > mg/day, for which it again cites Nagataki from 1993, Japan: status of

> > > iodine nutrition. IDD Newsltr 9:11. It gives the U.S. average urinary

> > > excretion as within the Japanese range (168 mcg/d versus 114-890 mcg/d

> > > in Japan).

> > >

> > > Good citation, BTW, but it confirms everything I had been saying, with

> > > just a slightly higher maximum estimate for the Japanese daily intake.

> > >

> > > The old 1967 claim was for 13.8 mg/d. I don't know where you get 7

> > g/day

> > > from that paper. It is clear that even the most extreme estimates are

> > > only 1/4 of what Abraham claims. Usually such outliers are ignored

> > or at

> > > least discounted. Perhaps you are confusing urine excretion in mg/LITER

> > > with intake in mg/day.

> > >

> > > Chuck

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Chuck has already answered that.

..

..

>

> Posted by: " kenancy2000 " kenancy2000@...

>

<mailto:kenancy2000@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20That%20faulty%20iodine%20paper>

> kenancy2000 <kenancy2000>

>

>

> Wed Sep 30, 2009 11:20 pm (PDT)

>

>

>

> Hi ,

>

> I could see those three being related, as all their work on the Iodine

> Project has been together, although Abraham has done the lion's share.

>

> Tell me everything you know about their financial relationship.

>

> -Ken Bagwell

>

>

> >

> > I have been assuming that you are aware of the financial relationships

> > between Optimox [a company that sells iodine products] and Abraham,

> > Flechas and Brownstein. Are you aware of those connections?

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken,

You wrote:

>

> ... Do you have any information about how long it takes for true thyroid

> issues to show up after a person starts ingesting that much Iodine daily

> (esp after already starting with 50-100 for 3 months)?

The Wolff-Chaikoff effect hits immediately, but that is usually gone after 10

days. Since the hypoT issues are mainly mediated by the immune system, I would

expect risk of an autoimmune reaction to accumulate with time. It could be dose

related, but once triggered at any dose or time, it would not stop.

Gracia said she stayed above 50 mg per day for a lot longer than 3 months.

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Roni,

I guess I wasn't clear.

You said the medical community has been treating patients wrong for years, and

getting away with it. I was trying to ask you if you felt the iodine doctors

were also " getting away with it " .

In other words, if the patients come in with a complaint, and Doc Z says " Try

Iodine! " And the patient comes back with positive results in actual clinical

observation and tests, what can be said?

-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

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abraham and others have been studying this for about 10 years now, and

implementing this into their practice for maybe 5 years or longer. I would

expect some real autoimmune issues to have shown up in someone by now.

Maybe I'll have to ask about that.

-Ken Bagwell

> >

> > ... Do you have any information about how long it takes for true thyroid

> > issues to show up after a person starts ingesting that much Iodine daily

> > (esp after already starting with 50-100 for 3 months)?

>

> The Wolff-Chaikoff effect hits immediately, but that is usually gone after 10

days. Since the hypoT issues are mainly mediated by the immune system, I would

expect risk of an autoimmune reaction to accumulate with time. It could be dose

related, but once triggered at any dose or time, it would not stop.

>

> Gracia said she stayed above 50 mg per day for a lot longer than 3 months.

>

> Chuck

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want me to comment about each and every patient that took or takes iodine?

Can't be done. What I was saying is that there have been treatments with this or

that medication through the years that have proven to be wrong for any number of

reasons. Efficacy, side effects, non combing with other drugs, causing illness

themselves. If you had been following these posts all along you would have seen

that my mother was put on iodine, and then

she had to have surgery to remove her thyroid. I would not take it. There are

other things that I would not take, like coumadin for example. If you or anyone

else wants to take iodine, be my guest. I'm here to help and be helped, not to

get into these endlessly futile debates.

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: Thursday, October 1, 2009, 3:21 PM

Hi Roni,

I guess I wasn't clear.

You said the medical community has been treating patients wrong for years, and

getting away with it.  I was trying to ask you if you felt the iodine doctors

were also " getting away with it " .

In other words, if the patients come in with a complaint, and Doc Z says " Try

Iodine! " And the patient comes back with positive results in actual clinical

observation and tests, what can be said?

-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

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know when the message was posted or the title of the post? I tried

looking it up through a search of the forum " optimox financials " but didn't see

anything.

-Ken Bagwell

> > >

> > > I have been assuming that you are aware of the financial relationships

> > > between Optimox [a company that sells iodine products] and Abraham,

> > > Flechas and Brownstein. Are you aware of those connections?

> > >

> > >

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a study I found involving only 24 participants, however, interestingly

enough, both high dietary intakes of seaweed and 25 mg iodine doses (for up to 4

weeks) are mentioned in the study, with both causing hypothyroidism in the same

people.

Alright, so I'm weirded out. I will be asking others about this.

http://journalreview.org/v2/articles/view/3722332.html

The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism. 1986 Aug;63(2):412-7

Studies of hypothyroidism in patients with high iodine intake.

" Twenty-two patients with spontaneously occurring primary hypothyroidism were

studied to evaluate the spontaneous reversibility of the hypothyroid state.

Twelve (54.5%) became euthyroid after restriction of iodine intake for 3 weeks

(reversible type). In the remaining 10 patients, thyroid function did not

improve with restriction of iodine alone, and thus, replacement therapy was

required, (irreversible type).

Seven patients with the reversible type were given 25 mg iodine daily for 2-4

weeks; all became hypothyroid again. Two patients had a history of habitual

ingestion of seaweed (25.4 and 43.1 mg iodine, respectively), but the remaining

10 patients ingested ordinary amounts of iodine (1-5 mg) daily. The patients

with reversible hypothyroidism had focal lymphocytic thyroiditis changes in the

thyroid biopsy specimen, whereas those with irreversible hypothyroidism had more

severe destruction of the thyroid gland. "

-Ken Bagwell

> >

> > ... Do you have any information about how long it takes for true thyroid

> > issues to show up after a person starts ingesting that much Iodine daily

> > (esp after already starting with 50-100 for 3 months)?

>

> The Wolff-Chaikoff effect hits immediately, but that is usually gone after 10

days. Since the hypoT issues are mainly mediated by the immune system, I would

expect risk of an autoimmune reaction to accumulate with time. It could be dose

related, but once triggered at any dose or time, it would not stop.

>

> Gracia said she stayed above 50 mg per day for a lot longer than 3 months.

>

> Chuck

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken,

You wrote:

>

>

> Abraham and others have been studying this for about 10 years now, and

> implementing this into their practice for maybe 5 years or longer. I

> would expect some real autoimmune issues to have shown up in someone by now.

>

The people that have bad reactions to Optimox treatments don't stick

around to give Abraham feedback. We have had some of them post on this

list. I believe is still here.

The fact that iodine doses greater than about 3 mg per day trigger or

aggravate Hashimoto's is rather well documented in the literature.

Health Canada has issued several strong warnings about kelp products for

just that reason. The latest one was last year:

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/advisories-avis/_2008/2008_77-eng.php

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...