Re: Iodine Receptors

[Guest guest]

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. CroweFlourine 19Chlorine  35.5Bromine  80.Iodine    127 The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with a lower weight. 

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight to regular iodine.

PamOn Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...> wrote:

 

Can someone refresh me on this....

I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and

radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.

What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others

off as compared to the weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

[Guest guest]

Pam,

Thanks for this info.

If iodine can displace the other, lower-weight halogens, and they

cannot displace iodine, then how is it that, even after we are

"saturated" with long-term, high dosages of iodine, we continue to

be at risk for new infusions of the other halogens?  Put another

way, why is it we must continue a life-long maintenance dose?  Does

the iodine deteriorate or get "used up" leaving the receptors once

more open for invasion?

On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

 

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from

J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine  35.5

Bromine  80.

Iodine    127

 The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is

in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means

that any one of the four can displace the element with a

higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with

a lower weight. 

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these

levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when

the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is

sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the

radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight

to regular iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM,

A. <rubyrain11@...>

wrote:

 

Can someone refresh me on this....

I understand that bromide, chlorine,

fluoride, iodine, and

radioactive iodine compete for receptors in

body.

What is the order of heaviest to lightest or

strongest in kicking the others

off as compared to the weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

[Guest guest]

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. Crowe Flourine 19

Chlorine  35.5

Bromine  80.

Iodine    127

 The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with a lower weight. 

 

If one of these elements cannot displace an element with a lower weight, how does taking iodine force out bromine?

 

Kiera

[Guest guest]

Oh. Ok. Thank you.AliOn Apr 12, 2011, at 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. CroweFlourine 19Chlorine 35.5Bromine 80.Iodine 127 The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with a lower weight.

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight to regular iodine.

PamOn Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...> wrote:

Can someone refresh me on this....

I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and

radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.

What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others

off as compared to the weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

[Guest guest]

Iodine is "used" by the body so you must continue to supply the needs plus combating halide issues.

Buist, ND

Re: Iodine Receptors

Pam,Thanks for this info.If iodine can displace the other, lower-weight halogens, and they cannot displace iodine, then how is it that, even after we are "saturated" with long-term, high dosages of iodine, we continue to be at risk for new infusions of the other halogens? Put another way, why is it we must continue a life-long maintenance dose? Does the iodine deteriorate or get "used up" leaving the receptors once more open for invasion?On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine 35.5

Bromine 80.

Iodine 127

The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with a lower weight.

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight to regular iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...> wrote:

Can someone refresh me on this....I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, andradioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the othersoff as compared to the weakest?Thanks.Ali

[Guest guest]

Thanks,

On 4/12/2011 4:21 PM, ladybugsandbees wrote:

 

Iodine is "used" by the body so you must continue

to supply the needs plus combating halide issues.

 

Buist, ND

 

 

Re:

Iodine Receptors

 

Pam,

Thanks for this info.

If iodine can displace the other, lower-weight

halogens, and they cannot displace iodine, then how is

it that, even after we are "saturated" with long-term,

high dosages of iodine, we continue to be at risk for

new infusions of the other halogens?  Put another way,

why is it we must continue a life-long maintenance

dose?  Does the iodine deteriorate or get "used up"

leaving the receptors once more open for invasion?

On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

 

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD

1957 from J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine  35.5

Bromine  80.

Iodine    127

 The clinical activity of any of these four

halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic

weight. This means that any one of the four can

displace the element with a higher atomic weight,

but cannot displace an element with a lower

weight. 

For me, I think I can say that I moved through

these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because

that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away.

If the body is sufficient in iodine then it

wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which

likely has similar atomic weight to regular

iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at

12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...>

wrote:

 

Can someone refresh me on this....

I understand that bromide, chlorine,

fluoride, iodine, and

radioactive iodine compete for

receptors in body.

What is the order of heaviest to

lightest or strongest in kicking the

others

off as compared to the weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

[Guest guest]

,

Perhaps I am misreading your post ...?

All of the other (lower atomic weight) halogens can displace iodine but iodine

cannot displace any of them.

The trick appears to be to displace the lower atomic weight halides and then

maintain adequate iodine levels so that the halide receptors are primarily

taking in iodine and not the other halides.

> >

> > Can someone refresh me on this....

> >

> > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and

> > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.

> >

> > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking

> > the others

> > off as compared to the weakest?

> >

> > Thanks.

> > Ali

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Pam,So what you are saying is that if we are iodine deficient and are just beginning the process of iodine supplementation, that we will be at risk to the radioactive iodine that is coming over from Japan?

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Alison Trotta-Marshall <rubyrain11@...> wrote:

 

Oh. Ok. Thank you.AliOn Apr 12, 2011, at 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

 

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. CroweFlourine 19Chlorine  35.5Bromine  80.Iodine    127 The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with a lower weight. 

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight to regular iodine.

PamOn Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...> wrote:

 

Can someone refresh me on this....

I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and

radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.

What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the others

off as compared to the weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

-- " I have come to believe that in the world there is nothing to explain the world. " Loren Eiseley

[Guest guest]

,I read in Brownstein's book that iodine is a relatively rare mineral. Does this mean that at some point we will run out? especially if people catch on to the therapeutic value?

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:31 PM, clairewest <clairewest@...> wrote:

 

Thanks,

On 4/12/2011 4:21 PM, ladybugsandbees wrote:

 

Iodine is " used " by the body so you must continue

to supply the needs plus combating halide issues.

 

Buist, ND

 

 

Re:

Iodine Receptors

 

Pam,

Thanks for this info.

If iodine can displace the other, lower-weight

halogens, and they cannot displace iodine, then how is

it that, even after we are " saturated " with long-term,

high dosages of iodine, we continue to be at risk for

new infusions of the other halogens?  Put another way,

why is it we must continue a life-long maintenance

dose?  Does the iodine deteriorate or get " used up "

leaving the receptors once more open for invasion?

On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

 

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD

1957 from J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine  35.5

Bromine  80.

Iodine    127

 The clinical activity of any of these four

halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic

weight. This means that any one of the four can

displace the element with a higher atomic weight,

but cannot displace an element with a lower

weight. 

For me, I think I can say that I moved through

these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because

that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away.

If the body is sufficient in iodine then it

wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which

likely has similar atomic weight to regular

iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at

12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...>

wrote:

 

Can someone refresh me on this....

I understand that bromide, chlorine,

fluoride, iodine, and

radioactive iodine compete for

receptors in body.

What is the order of heaviest to

lightest or strongest in kicking the

others

off as compared to the weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

-- " I have come to believe that in the world there is nothing to explain the world. " Loren Eiseley

[Guest guest]

Iodine is only rare in finding in our soils. It is not rare where it is "harvested". We will not run out.

Steph

Re: Iodine Receptors

Pam,Thanks for this info.If iodine can displace the other, lower-weight halogens, and they cannot displace iodine, then how is it that, even after we are "saturated" with long-term, high dosages of iodine, we continue to be at risk for new infusions of the other halogens? Put another way, why is it we must continue a life-long maintenance dose? Does the iodine deteriorate or get "used up" leaving the receptors once more open for invasion?On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine 35.5

Bromine 80.

Iodine 127

The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with a lower weight.

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight to regular iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...> wrote:

Can someone refresh me on this....I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, andradioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the othersoff as compared to the weakest?Thanks.Ali

-- "I have come to believe that in the world there is nothing to explain the world." Loren Eiseley

[Guest guest]

,Iodine is displaced by the lower weight halogens. Iodine cannot displace the lower weight halogens. We are exposed to chlorine and flouride in our drinking water unless filtered out by homeowner. Bromine is used as fire retardant and herbicide for strawberries and other crops among other uses.

By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can undo some of the problems created by this. Iodine works from our heads down the body healing.Iodine increases our resistance to disease whether cancer or bacteria, increases our ability to repair and remove toxins and heavy metals and helps our bodies to recover. All the blood in the body passes through the thyroid gland every 17 minutes so if your thyroid has sufficient iodine then it will kill weakened germs and weaken strong germs with each passage. 

Iodine can help your body to be more energetic, brain work better, less insomnia, healthier thyroid, better hormone use and help fight various cancers even ones we aren't aware of having. 

PamOn Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:42 PM, clairewest <clairewest@...> wrote:

 

Pam,

Thanks for this info.

If iodine can displace the other, lower-weight halogens, and they

cannot displace iodine, then how is it that, even after we are

" saturated " with long-term, high dosages of iodine, we continue to

be at risk for new infusions of the other halogens?  Put another

way, why is it we must continue a life-long maintenance dose?  Does

the iodine deteriorate or get " used up " leaving the receptors once

more open for invasion?

On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

 

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from

J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine  35.5

Bromine  80.

Iodine    127

 The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is

in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means

that any one of the four can displace the element with a

higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with

a lower weight. 

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these

levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when

the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is

sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the

radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight

to regular iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM,

A. <rubyrain11@...>

wrote:

 

Can someone refresh me on this....

I understand that bromide, chlorine,

fluoride, iodine, and

radioactive iodine compete for receptors in

body.

What is the order of heaviest to lightest or

strongest in kicking the others

off as compared to the weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

[Guest guest]

Baxrox,

You read my post correctly, and the sense of it was backwards

because I read Pam's post incorrectly.

When Pam wrote "This means that any one of the four can displace the

element with a higher atomic weight" I understood her to

mean "This means that any one of the four can displace the element by

means of a higher atomic weight". In the same way I

read "but cannot displace an element with a lower weight" as

"but cannot displace an element by means

of a lower weight."

But the misunderstanding wouldn't have occured if I had been more

focused and tuned in to her prior statement re: "inverse

proportion." I probably shouldn't even read these posts after the

sun goes down -- which is about the time my brain goes down.

<sigh>

And now I'm sitting here wondering . . . if iodine isn't able to

displace the existing halogens through lack of weight -- exactly how

does it manage to take over those receptors?

I'll wait until the morning to read your answer.

On 4/12/2011 5:16 PM, baxrox wrote:

,

Perhaps I am misreading your post ...?

All of the other (lower atomic weight) halogens can

displace iodine but iodine cannot displace any of them.

The trick appears to be to displace the lower atomic

weight halides and then maintain adequate iodine levels so

that the halide receptors are primarily taking in iodine

and not the other halides.

> >

> > Can someone refresh me on this....

> >

> > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride,

iodine, and

> > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in

body.

> >

> > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or

strongest in kicking

> > the others

> > off as compared to the weakest?

> >

> > Thanks.

> > Ali

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

And now I'm sitting here wondering . . . if iodine isn't able to displace the existing halogens through lack of weight -- exactly how does it manage to take over those receptors?  I'll wait until the morning to read your answer.

 

 

 

Yep, that's what I am asking too.

 

Kiera

 

[Guest guest]

Pam,

I wasn't going to read anything further after replying to Baxrox,

but then I saw your post directed to me and I didn't have the

discipline to wait until morning.

<By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can undo some of the

problems created by this.>

Okay, now my head is really swimming.  If iodine can't replace the

dangerous halogens, exactly how does it mitigate those dangers? 

I've been assuming for a long time now -- apparently without any

real understanding --  that it displaces the other halogens and

chelates them out of the body.

I really will wait for morning now to read your answer.

 

 On 4/12/2011 7:45 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

 

,

Iodine is displaced by the lower weight halogens.

Iodine cannot displace the lower weight halogens. 

We are exposed to chlorine and flouride in our drinking

water unless filtered out by homeowner. Bromine is used as

fire retardant and herbicide for strawberries and other

crops among other uses.

By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can undo

some of the problems created by this. Iodine works from

our heads down the body healing.

Iodine increases our resistance to disease whether

cancer or bacteria, increases our ability to repair and

remove toxins and heavy metals and helps our bodies to

recover. All the blood in the body passes through the

thyroid gland every 17 minutes so if your thyroid has

sufficient iodine then it will kill weakened germs and

weaken strong germs with each passage. 

Iodine can help your body to be more energetic, brain

work better, less insomnia, healthier thyroid, better

hormone use and help fight various cancers even ones we

aren't aware of having. 

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:42 PM,

clairewest <clairewest@...>

wrote:

 

Pam,

Thanks for this info.

If iodine can displace the other,

lower-weight halogens, and they cannot

displace iodine, then how is it that, even

after we are "saturated" with long-term,

high dosages of iodine, we continue to be at

risk for new infusions of the other

halogens?  Put another way, why is it we

must continue a life-long maintenance dose? 

Does the iodine deteriorate or get "used up"

leaving the receptors once more open for

invasion?

On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

 

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c.

Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine  35.5

Bromine  80.

Iodine    127

 The clinical activity of any of

these four halogens is in inverse

proportion to its atomic weight. This

means that any one of the four can

displace the element with a higher

atomic weight, but cannot displace an

element with a lower weight. 

For me, I think I can say that I

moved through these levels in about

3-4 months at 50mg because that is

when the fibroids in my breasts went

away. If the body is sufficient in

iodine then it wouldn't pick up the

radioactive iodine which likely has

similar atomic weight to regular

iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr

12, 2011 at 12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...>

wrote:

 

Can someone refresh me

on this....

I understand that

bromide, chlorine,

fluoride, iodine, and

radioactive iodine

compete for receptors in

body.

What is the order of

heaviest to lightest or

strongest in kicking the

others

off as compared to the

weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

[Guest guest]

Yes you are greater risk for absorbing radioactive iodine, but you are acting to change that as much as you can each day.  I had been talking to my family to take iodine for four years and suddenly they all are now.So keep up the fight. Much of the radiation that has been admitted to happened in the first few days.This situation is still unstable and could be in difficulty for years from the articles that I have read. Chernobyl was simpler and capped with a cement cap after about ten days time. Chernobyl was only 3 months old. These were 6 plants and had 600,000 nuclear rods and waste pools and were 40 years old so much larger amount of radiation to contain.

 Keep in mind Canada turned off their own nuclear  monitoring system and our EPA changed the admissable daily rate by a factor of 100,000 times. There is no scientific means to justify either country's actions or logic except for politics.

 I read one article that even in Japan after Nagasaki and Hiroshima, there were 2 side by side hospitals. One hospital served miso soup daily and the other didn't. They had drastically different outcomes in various types of cancers. Iodine and some other ingredient of the soup made a much larger difference than expected.

65% of US Population lives within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor and there are 15 of the same design as Japan here in US(GE). Those Japanese reactors survived an earthquake 15 times what it was built for but they were not built to withstand a tsunami according to one of the original engineers on NPR. There are still 58 more reactors in Japan and 104 here in US built before 1979. One of the reasons the news is so weak on this nuclear mess is that there are currently 20 nuclear plants in the paperwork and planning process here in the US. We need to get active on alternative energy sources and ideas and keep the patents out of the hands of the oil companies. Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 7:58 PM, clairewest <clairewest@...> wrote:

 

Baxrox,

You read my post correctly, and the sense of it was backwards

because I read Pam's post incorrectly.

When Pam wrote " This means that any one of the four can displace the

element with a higher atomic weight " I understood her to

mean " This means that any one of the four can displace the element by

means of a higher atomic weight " .  In the same way I

read " but cannot displace an element with a lower weight " as

" but cannot displace an element by means

of a lower weight. "

But the misunderstanding wouldn't have occured if I had been more

focused and tuned in to her prior statement re:  " inverse

proportion. "    I probably shouldn't even read these posts after the

sun goes down -- which is about the time my brain goes down. 

<sigh>

And now I'm sitting here wondering . . . if iodine isn't able to

displace the existing halogens through lack of weight -- exactly how

does it manage to take over those receptors? 

I'll wait until the morning to read your answer.

On 4/12/2011 5:16 PM, baxrox wrote:

 

,

Perhaps I am misreading your post ...?

All of the other (lower atomic weight) halogens can

displace iodine but iodine cannot displace any of them.

The trick appears to be to displace the lower atomic

weight halides and then maintain adequate iodine levels so

that the halide receptors are primarily taking in iodine

and not the other halides.

> >

> > Can someone refresh me on this....

> >

> > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride,

iodine, and

> > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in

body.

> >

> > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or

strongest in kicking

> > the others

> > off as compared to the weakest?

> >

> > Thanks.

> > Ali

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Iodine does push the other halides off the receptors. You must supply a large enough dose to do this but what this is for each person varies.

Buist, ND

Re: Iodine Receptors

Pam,I wasn't going to read anything further after replying to Baxrox, but then I saw your post directed to me and I didn't have the discipline to wait until morning. <By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can undo some of the problems created by this.>Okay, now my head is really swimming. If iodine can't replace the dangerous halogens, exactly how does it mitigate those dangers? I've been assuming for a long time now -- apparently without any real understanding -- that it displaces the other halogens and chelates them out of the body.I really will wait for morning now to read your answer. On 4/12/2011 7:45 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

,

Iodine is displaced by the lower weight halogens. Iodine cannot displace the lower weight halogens.

We are exposed to chlorine and flouride in our drinking water unless filtered out by homeowner. Bromine is used as fire retardant and herbicide for strawberries and other crops among other uses.

By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can undo some of the problems created by this. Iodine works from our heads down the body healing.

Iodine increases our resistance to disease whether cancer or bacteria, increases our ability to repair and remove toxins and heavy metals and helps our bodies to recover. All the blood in the body passes through the thyroid gland every 17 minutes so if your thyroid has sufficient iodine then it will kill weakened germs and weaken strong germs with each passage.

Iodine can help your body to be more energetic, brain work better, less insomnia, healthier thyroid, better hormone use and help fight various cancers even ones we aren't aware of having.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:42 PM, clairewest <clairewest@...> wrote:

Pam,Thanks for this info.If iodine can displace the other, lower-weight halogens, and they cannot displace iodine, then how is it that, even after we are "saturated" with long-term, high dosages of iodine, we continue to be at risk for new infusions of the other halogens? Put another way, why is it we must continue a life-long maintenance dose? Does the iodine deteriorate or get "used up" leaving the receptors once more open for invasion?

On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine 35.5

Bromine 80.

Iodine 127

The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with a lower weight.

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight to regular iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...> wrote:

Can someone refresh me on this....I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, andradioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the othersoff as compared to the weakest?Thanks.Ali

[Guest guest]

Ahh.  The strength-in-numbers thingy.

On 4/13/2011 3:19 AM, ladybugsandbees wrote:

 

Iodine does push the other halides off the

receptors.  You must supply a large enough dose to do

this but what this is for each person varies.

 

Buist, ND

 

Re:

Iodine Receptors

 

Pam,

I wasn't going to read anything further after replying

to Baxrox, but then I saw your post directed to me and

I didn't have the discipline to wait until morning.

<By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can

undo some of the problems created by this.>

Okay, now my head is really swimming.  If iodine can't

replace the dangerous halogens, exactly how does it

mitigate those dangers?  I've been assuming for a long

time now -- apparently without any real understanding

--  that it displaces the other halogens and chelates

them out of the body.

I really will wait for morning now to read your

answer.

 

 On 4/12/2011 7:45 PM, Pamela Valley wrote:

 

,

Iodine is displaced by the lower weight

halogens. Iodine cannot displace the lower weight

halogens. 

We are exposed to chlorine and flouride in our

drinking water unless filtered out by homeowner.

Bromine is used as fire retardant and herbicide

for strawberries and other crops among other uses.

By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can

undo some of the problems created by this. Iodine

works from our heads down the body healing.

Iodine increases our resistance to disease

whether cancer or bacteria, increases our ability

to repair and remove toxins and heavy metals and

helps our bodies to recover. All the blood in the

body passes through the thyroid gland every 17

minutes so if your thyroid has sufficient iodine

then it will kill weakened germs and weaken strong

germs with each passage. 

Iodine can help your body to be more energetic,

brain work better, less insomnia, healthier

thyroid, better hormone use and help fight various

cancers even ones we aren't aware of having. 

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at

2:42 PM, clairewest <clairewest@...>

wrote:

 

Pam,

Thanks for this info.

If iodine can displace the other,

lower-weight halogens, and they

cannot displace iodine, then how is

it that, even after we are

"saturated" with long-term, high

dosages of iodine, we continue to be

at risk for new infusions of the

other halogens?  Put another way,

why is it we must continue a

life-long maintenance dose?  Does

the iodine deteriorate or get "used

up" leaving the receptors once more

open for invasion?

On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley

wrote:

 

Relative Atomic Weight- book

by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from

J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine  35.5

Bromine  80.

Iodine    127

 The clinical activity of

any of these four halogens is

in inverse proportion to its

atomic weight. This means that

any one of the four can

displace the element with a

higher atomic weight, but

cannot displace an element

with a lower weight. 

For me, I think I can say

that I moved through these

levels in about 3-4 months at

50mg because that is when the

fibroids in my breasts went

away. If the body is

sufficient in iodine then it

wouldn't pick up the

radioactive iodine which

likely has similar atomic

weight to regular iodine.

Pam

On

Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40

PM, A. <rubyrain11@...>

wrote:

 

Can someone

refresh me on

this....

I understand

that bromide,

chlorine,

fluoride,

iodine, and

radioactive

iodine compete

for receptors in

body.

What is the

order of

heaviest to

lightest or

strongest in

kicking the

others

off as compared

to the weakest?

Thanks.

Ali

[Guest guest]

thanks Pam On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Pamela Valley <2007pams@...> wrote:

 

Yes you are greater risk for absorbing radioactive iodine, but you are acting to change that as much as you can each day.  I had been talking to my family to take iodine for four years and suddenly they all are now.So keep up the fight. Much of the radiation that has been admitted to happened in the first few days.This situation is still unstable and could be in difficulty for years from the articles that I have read. Chernobyl was simpler and capped with a cement cap after about ten days time. Chernobyl was only 3 months old. These were 6 plants and had 600,000 nuclear rods and waste pools and were 40 years old so much larger amount of radiation to contain.

 Keep in mind Canada turned off their own nuclear  monitoring system and our EPA changed the admissable daily rate by a factor of 100,000 times. There is no scientific means to justify either country's actions or logic except for politics.

 I read one article that even in Japan after Nagasaki and Hiroshima, there were 2 side by side hospitals. One hospital served miso soup daily and the other didn't. They had drastically different outcomes in various types of cancers. Iodine and some other ingredient of the soup made a much larger difference than expected.

65% of US Population lives within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor and there are 15 of the same design as Japan here in US(GE). Those Japanese reactors survived an earthquake 15 times what it was built for but they were not built to withstand a tsunami according to one of the original engineers on NPR. There are still 58 more reactors in Japan and 104 here in US built before 1979. One of the reasons the news is so weak on this nuclear mess is that there are currently 20 nuclear plants in the paperwork and planning process here in the US. We need to get active on alternative energy sources and ideas and keep the patents out of the hands of the oil companies. Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 7:58 PM, clairewest <clairewest@...> wrote:

 

Baxrox,

You read my post correctly, and the sense of it was backwards

because I read Pam's post incorrectly.

When Pam wrote " This means that any one of the four can displace the

element with a higher atomic weight " I understood her to

mean " This means that any one of the four can displace the element by

means of a higher atomic weight " .  In the same way I

read " but cannot displace an element with a lower weight " as

" but cannot displace an element by means

of a lower weight. "

But the misunderstanding wouldn't have occured if I had been more

focused and tuned in to her prior statement re:  " inverse

proportion. "    I probably shouldn't even read these posts after the

sun goes down -- which is about the time my brain goes down. 

<sigh>

And now I'm sitting here wondering . . . if iodine isn't able to

displace the existing halogens through lack of weight -- exactly how

does it manage to take over those receptors? 

I'll wait until the morning to read your answer.

On 4/12/2011 5:16 PM, baxrox wrote:

 

,

Perhaps I am misreading your post ...?

All of the other (lower atomic weight) halogens can

displace iodine but iodine cannot displace any of them.

The trick appears to be to displace the lower atomic

weight halides and then maintain adequate iodine levels so

that the halide receptors are primarily taking in iodine

and not the other halides.

> >

> > Can someone refresh me on this....

> >

> > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride,

iodine, and

> > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in

body.

> >

> > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or

strongest in kicking

> > the others

> > off as compared to the weakest?

> >

> > Thanks.

> > Ali

> >

> >

> >

>

-- " I have come to believe that in the world there is nothing to explain the world. " Loren Eiseley

[Guest guest]

Do you have a specific reference to research documenting how iodine pushes other

halides off of the receptors? There are a bunch of citations, for example, on

the following page on the Iodine 4 Health site, but I don't know if this

specific claim is established there:

http://www.iodine4health.com/special/halogens/halogens.htm

>

>

> Can someone refresh me on this....

>

> I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and

> radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.

>

> What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking

the others

> off as compared to the weakest?

>

> Thanks.

> Ali

>

[Guest guest]

Pamela,

snip:

Keep in mind Canada turned off their own nuclear monitoring system and our EPA changed the admissable daily rate by a factor of 100,000 times. There is no scientific means to justify either country's actions or logic except for politics.

***Where do you get this information??

Re: Re: Iodine Receptors

Yes you are greater risk for absorbing radioactive iodine, but you are acting to change that as much as you can each day. I had been talking to my family to take iodine for four years and suddenly they all are now.So keep up the fight. Much of the radiation that has been admitted to happened in the first few days.This situation is still unstable and could be in difficulty for years from the articles that I have read. Chernobyl was simpler and capped with a cement cap after about ten days time. Chernobyl was only 3 months old. These were 6 plants and had 600,000 nuclear rods and waste pools and were 40 years old so much larger amount of radiation to contain.

Keep in mind Canada turned off their own nuclear monitoring system and our EPA changed the admissable daily rate by a factor of 100,000 times. There is no scientific means to justify either country's actions or logic except for politics.

I read one article that even in Japan after Nagasaki and Hiroshima, there were 2 side by side hospitals. One hospital served miso soup daily and the other didn't. They had drastically different outcomes in various types of cancers. Iodine and some other ingredient of the soup made a much larger difference than expected.

65% of US Population lives within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor and there are 15 of the same design as Japan here in US(GE). Those Japanese reactors survived an earthquake 15 times what it was built for but they were not built to withstand a tsunami according to one of the original engineers on NPR. There are still 58 more reactors in Japan and 104 here in US built before 1979. One of the reasons the news is so weak on this nuclear mess is that there are currently 20 nuclear plants in the paperwork and planning process here in the US. We need to get active on alternative energy sources and ideas and keep the patents out of the hands of the oil companies. Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 7:58 PM, clairewest <clairewest@...> wrote:

Baxrox,You read my post correctly, and the sense of it was backwards because I read Pam's post incorrectly. :)When Pam wrote "This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight" I understood her to mean "This means that any one of the four can displace the element by means of a higher atomic weight". In the same way I read "but cannot displace an element with a lower weight" as "but cannot displace an element by means of a lower weight."But the misunderstanding wouldn't have occured if I had been more focused and tuned in to her prior statement re: "inverse proportion." I probably shouldn't even read these posts after the sun goes down -- which is about the time my brain goes down. <sigh>And now I'm sitting here wondering . . . if iodine isn't able to displace the existing halogens through lack of weight -- exactly how does it manage to take over those receptors? I'll wait until the morning to read your answer.

On 4/12/2011 5:16 PM, baxrox wrote:

,Perhaps I am misreading your post ...?All of the other (lower atomic weight) halogens can displace iodine but iodine cannot displace any of them. The trick appears to be to displace the lower atomic weight halides and then maintain adequate iodine levels so that the halide receptors are primarily taking in iodine and not the other halides. > >> > Can someone refresh me on this....> >> > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and> > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.> >> > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking> > the others> > off as compared to the weakest?> >> > Thanks.> > Ali> >> >> >>

[Guest guest]

This must have been something revealed by Dr. Abraham's work? It would be great

to have a document to refer to since the written information by Dr. Jarvis in

1957 is the most referred to at the moment and he definitively states that a

reverse order is not possible as does the current chemistry references (in

vitro).

Did Dr. Abraham find a different result in vivo? Can you direct me to the

document which provides explanation as to how large amounts of iodine can

displace the other halides?

Even after reading the Optimox documents I was under the impression that

chloride (unrefined celtic sea salt in the protocol) is what displaces bromide

(or at least it is more desirable to use than fluoride in vivo).

Thanks!

>

>

> Can someone refresh me on this....

>

> I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and

> radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.

>

> What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking

the others

> off as compared to the weakest?

>

> Thanks.

> Ali

>

[Guest guest]

,

You will see a post show up from me that asks a similar question :-)

While poking around the internet I came across an interesting site:

http://www.americanchemistry.com/s_chlorine/sec_content.asp?CID=1133 & DID=8381 & CT\

YPEID=109

I am pondering this paragraph:

Are all halogens the same?

No, although they have some similar properties. The Halogen family of chemical

elements, including fluorine, chlorine, bromine, iodine and astatine, are

grouped together in the Periodic Table of the Elements based upon their

electronic structure. Because of this electron configuration, all of the Halogen

elements are quite reactive and form compounds by gaining an electron from other

chemical elements. However, there are significant differences among the Halogen

elements. For example, at room temperature fluorine and chlorine are gases,

bromine is a liquid and iodine and astatine are solids. Astatine, naturally

radioactive, is much rarer than the other Halogens.

The properties of chemical elements are unrelated to the properties of the

compounds in which they occur. It is not possible to make broad statements about

the chemical, physical or biological properties of the wide variety of

halogen-containing compounds.

-Also-

Due to their enormous reactivity, the Halogen elements can form many types of

compounds in addition to salts. One of the tenets of chemistry is that the

properties of compounds are entirely independent of the properties of their

constituent elements (for example, water, H2O, is very different from hydrogen

or oxygen). While the Halogen elements share similar properties (their chemical

tendency to swipe electrons, for example, makes them all good oxidizers), the

physical, chemical and even biological properties and the toxicities of

halogen-containing compounds can vary greatly. It is not possible, therefore, to

make general statements about the characteristics of all halogen-containing

compounds.

<end excerpt>

This is telling me that perhaps there are so many factors at play that getting a

definitive answer may not be possible...

What do you think?

> >

> >

> > Can someone refresh me on this....

> >

> > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and

> > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.

> >

> > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking

the others

> > off as compared to the weakest?

> >

> > Thanks.

> > Ali

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I got this information from a friend in Canada who shared the Natural News with me.  Shows how uninformed the general public is when 6 giant corporations own most of the Western Hemisphere's News/information sites.

 Keep in mind that this situation could be unstable for years according to the articles on this website.

65% of US population lives within 50 miles of a nuclear plant and 15 of same design in US. None have been built since 1979 so all of dated technology. There are current plans to working through to get 20 new nuclear plants going and that creates political pressure to keep this situation quiet and unknown.  

            http://www.woweather.com/weather/news/fukushima?LANG=us & VAR=nilujapan131

http://www.naturalnews.com/031963_radiation_exposure.html   This shows what US and Canada are up to in changing their radiation levels so whatever happens is still considered safe even if math must change by 100,000 give or take.

- Hide quoted text -NaturalNews Insider Alert ( www.NaturalNews.com ) email newsletter 

(Unsubscribe instructions at bottom)Dear NaturalNews readers,

The EPA has a big problem: There's a massive release of radiation into our world happening right now thanks to Fukushima, where 2.4 million gallons of radioactive water are being flushed into the Pacific Ocean as we speak.

What to do? The bureaucrats have it all figured out. For the EPA, you see, the answer is seductively simple: Just redefine the radiation exposure limits to make sure that even Fukushima's radioactive fallout is now considered " safe! "

Think I'm making this up? Ah, you may underestimate the creativity and abandonment of actual science at the EPA! Read it yourself to learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/031963_radiation_exposure.html

If you missed our urgent alert sent out earlier, here's a shocking piece of news: North Carolina is about to vote on state legislation that would turn naturopaths, homeopaths, herbalists and energy healers intofelons. This is the beginning of the medical police state that's attempting to imprison all the healers and remove all competition from the pharma-medical-industrial complex.

Ethan Huff reports this shocking (but true) news:http://www.naturalnews.com/031953_medical_practice_licensing.html

The vote on that " criminalize all the healers " bill has been delayed until Tuesday, April 5, meaning that there's still probably time for you to join in and take action on this! Click the story link above for the phone numbers to call...

Just in case you weren't already amused enough today, " scientists " are now crossing human genes with cow genes to create cows that produce " human " breast milk. OMG, I wish I were making this up as some sort of sick April Fool's joke, but I'm not. This is being called cutting-edge science. It's just what we all need to feed our babies, right? Genetically modified nearly-human bovine breast milk!

http://www.naturalnews.com/031952_genetically_modified_cows_breast_milk.html

Speaking of the situation with science today, have you seen the amazing new book called Blinded By Science? You can download it from a UK website right now. I interview the author and will be posting that shortly. Here's our story about it:

http://www.naturalnews.com/031962_science_vibrational_healing.htmlP.S. For all those still waiting on Nascent Iodine shipments from our store, all the remaining orders will be filled in the next two days! And by Friday we'll have Nascent Iodine back in inventory.

More news continues below on amazing stuff you won't believe, including natural cures, GMOs, the benefits of maple syrup and much more (see below)...

This email newsletter is made possible by sponsorship from these quality product providers: ( more info )

• Stop Joint Pain Now! Get A Trial Size Glucosagen One™ from Health Freedom Nutrition - Learn More Here!

• Magnetic Clay Radiation Detox Baths - Draw Radiation Toxins from the Body w/ Healing Bentonite Clay.

• Mole Removal - Get Rid Of Moles - Naturally! Safe Proven Treatment, No Scarring! Save 10% (coupon code: moles)

• Follow the Health Ranger on Twitter: www.Twitter.com/HealthRanger

• Follow NaturalNews on Facebook: http://Facebook.NaturalNews.com

Today's Feature Stories:

EPA to raise limits for radiation exposure while Canada turns off fallout detectors

(NaturalNews) The mass radioactive contamination of our planet is now under way thanks to the astonishing actions taking place at the Fukushima nuclear facility in Japan. As of last night, TEPCO announced it is releasing 10,000 tons of radioactive...

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 7:46 AM, gwen <mt1911@...> wrote:

 

Pamela,

snip:

Keep in mind Canada turned off their own nuclear  monitoring system and our EPA changed the admissable daily rate by a factor of 100,000 times. There is no scientific means to justify either country's actions or logic except for politics.

 

***Where do you get this information??

 

 

Re: Re: Iodine Receptors

 

Yes you are greater risk for absorbing radioactive iodine, but you are acting to change that as much as you can each day.  I had been talking to my family to take iodine for four years and suddenly they all are now.So keep up the fight. Much of the radiation that has been admitted to happened in the first few days.This situation is still unstable and could be in difficulty for years from the articles that I have read. Chernobyl was simpler and capped with a cement cap after about ten days time. Chernobyl was only 3 months old. These were 6 plants and had 600,000 nuclear rods and waste pools and were 40 years old so much larger amount of radiation to contain.

 Keep in mind Canada turned off their own nuclear  monitoring system and our EPA changed the admissable daily rate by a factor of 100,000 times. There is no scientific means to justify either country's actions or logic except for politics.

 I read one article that even in Japan after Nagasaki and Hiroshima, there were 2 side by side hospitals. One hospital served miso soup daily and the other didn't. They had drastically different outcomes in various types of cancers. Iodine and some other ingredient of the soup made a much larger difference than expected.

65% of US Population lives within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor and there are 15 of the same design as Japan here in US(GE). Those Japanese reactors survived an earthquake 15 times what it was built for but they were not built to withstand a tsunami according to one of the original engineers on NPR. There are still 58 more reactors in Japan and 104 here in US built before 1979. One of the reasons the news is so weak on this nuclear mess is that there are currently 20 nuclear plants in the paperwork and planning process here in the US. We need to get active on alternative energy sources and ideas and keep the patents out of the hands of the oil companies. Pam

[Guest guest]

Here is a question from a science minded friend I am unable to answer...Would someone like to take a crack at it?She has recently begun iodine:I am thinking that chlorine is one of the basic elements the body uses as well as iodine and they both have different uses to the body, so it would not be very useful for the body to have chlorine sticking to its iodine receptors, so there is probably a mechanism by which it cannot do so. It can't just be down to atomic weights otherwise we'd have fluorine going through the chlorine channels. I wonder if anyone can enlighten us more on that score.On Apr 13, 2011, at 3:19 AM, ladybugsandbees wrote:

Iodine does push the other halides off the receptors. You must supply a large enough dose to do this but what this is for each person varies.

Buist, ND

Re: Iodine Receptors

Pam,I wasn't going to read anything further after replying to Baxrox, but then I saw your post directed to me and I didn't have the discipline to wait until morning. <By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can undo some of the problems created by this.>Okay, now my head is really swimming. If iodine can't replace the dangerous halogens, exactly how does it mitigate those dangers? I've been assuming for a long time now -- apparently without any real understanding -- that it displaces the other halogens and chelates them out of the body.I really will wait for morning now to read your answer. On 4/12/2011 7:45 PM, Pamela Valley wrote: ,

Iodine is displaced by the lower weight halogens. Iodine cannot displace the lower weight halogens.

We are exposed to chlorine and flouride in our drinking water unless filtered out by homeowner. Bromine is used as fire retardant and herbicide for strawberries and other crops among other uses.

By taking sufficient iodine to saturate we can undo some of the problems created by this. Iodine works from our heads down the body healing.

Iodine increases our resistance to disease whether cancer or bacteria, increases our ability to repair and remove toxins and heavy metals and helps our bodies to recover. All the blood in the body passes through the thyroid gland every 17 minutes so if your thyroid has sufficient iodine then it will kill weakened germs and weaken strong germs with each passage.

Iodine can help your body to be more energetic, brain work better, less insomnia, healthier thyroid, better hormone use and help fight various cancers even ones we aren't aware of having.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:42 PM, clairewest <clairewest@...> wrote:

Pam,Thanks for this info.If iodine can displace the other, lower-weight halogens, and they cannot displace iodine, then how is it that, even after we are "saturated" with long-term, high dosages of iodine, we continue to be at risk for new infusions of the other halogens? Put another way, why is it we must continue a life-long maintenance dose? Does the iodine deteriorate or get "used up" leaving the receptors once more open for invasion?

On 4/12/2011 2:13 PM, Pamela Valley wrote: Relative Atomic Weight- book by d.c. Jarvis, MD 1957 from J. Crowe

Flourine 19

Chlorine 35.5

Bromine 80.

Iodine 127

The clinical activity of any of these four halogens is in inverse proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four can displace the element with a higher atomic weight, but cannot displace an element with a lower weight.

For me, I think I can say that I moved through these levels in about 3-4 months at 50mg because that is when the fibroids in my breasts went away. If the body is sufficient in iodine then it wouldn't pick up the radioactive iodine which likely has similar atomic weight to regular iodine.

Pam

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:40 PM, A. <rubyrain11@...> wrote:

Can someone refresh me on this....I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, andradioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in kicking the othersoff as compared to the weakest?Thanks.Ali

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the information. The 2004 Pavelka survey paper " Metabolism of bromide

and its interference with the metabolism of iodine " certainly argues that

bromide will decrease the body's uptake of iodide. However, the article does

seem to agree that chloride, not iodide supplementation is the key to getting

rid of bromide. However, correcting an iodide deficiency may help the thyroid

while the chloride is helping to get the bromide out of the body. High dose

iodide seems to not be useful: " On the other hand, superfluous iodine intake had

no effect. " Further, chloride may also reduce iodide, just like bromide!

" Considering the chemical similarity of bromine to iodine, on the other hand,

goitrogenic effects of bromide may be assumed. Indeed, an enhanced bromide

intake in the rat could markedly reduce iodide accumulation in the thyroid (Van

Leeuwen et al. 1988, Buchberger et al. 1990, Pavelka et al. 1999a), as well as

in the skin (Pavelka et al. 2001b). "

" The results of this study indicate that bromide toxicity is dependent upon the

state of iodine supply in the organism: the signs of hypothyroidism caused by

bromide intake were significantly enhanced under the conditions of simultaneous

iodine deficiency. The virtue of the toxic effects of bromide on the thyroid

gland and mechnisms of its interference with the biosynthesis of thyroid

hormones, however, have not been so far elucidated. "

" It is important that the magnitude of the decrease in the /[br] ratio also

depended on the level of iodine supply in the organism. The /[br] ratio in

the thyroid was as much as five times lower in rats with a marginal iodine

deficiency than in animals with a sufficient or an excessive iodine intake. On

the other hand, superfluous iodine intake had no effect. "

" By accelerating the renal excretion of iodide, excessive bromide can also

influence the pool of exchangeable iodide in the thyroid, in a similar way as

chloride does (Pavelka et al. 1999b). "

> > >

> > >

> > > Can someone refresh me on this....

> > >

> > > I understand that bromide, chlorine, fluoride, iodine, and

> > > radioactive iodine compete for receptors in body.

> > >

> > > What is the order of heaviest to lightest or strongest in

kicking the others

> > > off as compared to the weakest?

> > >

> > > Thanks.

> > > Ali

> > >

> >

>