Re: What our DAN said about porphyrin analysis results

[Guest guest]

Maybe since you have done all this work, increased their ability to

release metals, they are coming out now and moving thru their bodies.

Metals also get stored in the bones as well, so something has to

provoke the metals from bones to move.

Just my 2 cents

In EOHarm , " anacat_11 " <anacat_11@...> wrote:

>

> While at the DANs today, I asked whether the first and second run

of

> porphyrin analyses we took for the kids (from Philippe Auguste in

> Paris) differed because metals had been " shaken up " and became more

> visible during the course of treatment. She said yes.

>

> I thought this was interesting because of some discussions about

UPPA

> results " being all over the place " for some patients when testing

is

> repeated over a period of time. I'm not sure upon what this DAN

based

> her assertion. I thought, from my rank layman's perspective, that

it

> made sense that if you remove allergens from the diet and add

> supplements which increase the body's ability to detox that, even

> without chelating, metals will be back on the move (hopefully on

their

> way out).

>

> Our first UPPAs showed moderate levels of mercury for both kids.

The

> second UPPAs showed high amounts of mercury, lead and arsenic for

both

> kids, despite the fact that we stopped vaccinating, removed all the

> kids' lead-tainted toys, etc.. In between the two sets of tests

were

> months on the GF/CF/SF diet and treatment for malabsorbtion issues,

> treatment of yeast etc.. Only now are we considering chelating. The

> improvements in the kids just from dietary restrictions alone have

been

> massive and their glutathione levels have improved and other labs,

> especially issues of malabsorbtion and yeast.

>

> Any comments? I just find it fascinating that both kids showed the

same

> pattern of equivalent improvements in health, labs and behavior

along

> with increasing " visibility " of metals.

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks for both comments. It's possible the kids' protein levels are

too high at this point. We were concerned about growth retardation

and the DAN okayed an increase in protein, since their former intake

was a bit low. Maybe it's time to step back a bit and readjust.

> >

> > While at the DANs today, I asked whether the first and second run

> of

> > porphyrin analyses we took for the kids (from Philippe Auguste in

> > Paris) differed because metals had been " shaken up " and became

more

> > visible during the course of treatment. She said yes.

> >

> > I thought this was interesting because of some discussions about

> UPPA

> > results " being all over the place " for some patients when testing

> is

> > repeated over a period of time. I'm not sure upon what this DAN

> based

> > her assertion. I thought, from my rank layman's perspective, that

> it

> > made sense that if you remove allergens from the diet and add

> > supplements which increase the body's ability to detox that, even

> > without chelating, metals will be back on the move (hopefully on

> their

> > way out).

> >

> > Our first UPPAs showed moderate levels of mercury for both kids.

> The

> > second UPPAs showed high amounts of mercury, lead and arsenic for

> both

> > kids, despite the fact that we stopped vaccinating, removed all

the

> > kids' lead-tainted toys, etc.. In between the two sets of tests

> were

> > months on the GF/CF/SF diet and treatment for malabsorbtion

issues,

> > treatment of yeast etc.. Only now are we considering chelating.

The

> > improvements in the kids just from dietary restrictions alone

have

> been

> > massive and their glutathione levels have improved and other

labs,

> > especially issues of malabsorbtion and yeast.

> >

> > Any comments? I just find it fascinating that both kids showed

the

> same

> > pattern of equivalent improvements in health, labs and behavior

> along

> > with increasing " visibility " of metals.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

How did the creatinine levels compare between the tests?

>

> While at the DANs today, I asked whether the first and second run

of

> porphyrin analyses we took for the kids (from Philippe Auguste in

> Paris) differed because metals had been " shaken up " and became more

> visible during the course of treatment. She said yes.

>

> I thought this was interesting because of some discussions about

UPPA

> results " being all over the place " for some patients when testing

is

> repeated over a period of time. I'm not sure upon what this DAN

based

> her assertion. I thought, from my rank layman's perspective, that

it

> made sense that if you remove allergens from the diet and add

> supplements which increase the body's ability to detox that, even

> without chelating, metals will be back on the move (hopefully on

their

> way out).

>

> Our first UPPAs showed moderate levels of mercury for both kids.

The

> second UPPAs showed high amounts of mercury, lead and arsenic for

both

> kids, despite the fact that we stopped vaccinating, removed all the

> kids' lead-tainted toys, etc.. In between the two sets of tests

were

> months on the GF/CF/SF diet and treatment for malabsorbtion issues,

> treatment of yeast etc.. Only now are we considering chelating. The

> improvements in the kids just from dietary restrictions alone have

been

> massive and their glutathione levels have improved and other labs,

> especially issues of malabsorbtion and yeast.

>

> Any comments? I just find it fascinating that both kids showed the

same

> pattern of equivalent improvements in health, labs and behavior

along

> with increasing " visibility " of metals.

>

[Guest guest]

Creatinine levels actually amplified the results of both sets of

tests.

> >

> > While at the DANs today, I asked whether the first and second run

> of

> > porphyrin analyses we took for the kids (from Philippe Auguste in

> > Paris) differed because metals had been " shaken up " and became

more

> > visible during the course of treatment. She said yes.

> >

> > I thought this was interesting because of some discussions about

> UPPA

> > results " being all over the place " for some patients when testing

> is

> > repeated over a period of time. I'm not sure upon what this DAN

> based

> > her assertion. I thought, from my rank layman's perspective, that

> it

> > made sense that if you remove allergens from the diet and add

> > supplements which increase the body's ability to detox that, even

> > without chelating, metals will be back on the move (hopefully on

> their

> > way out).

> >

> > Our first UPPAs showed moderate levels of mercury for both kids.

> The

> > second UPPAs showed high amounts of mercury, lead and arsenic for

> both

> > kids, despite the fact that we stopped vaccinating, removed all

the

> > kids' lead-tainted toys, etc.. In between the two sets of tests

> were

> > months on the GF/CF/SF diet and treatment for malabsorbtion

issues,

> > treatment of yeast etc.. Only now are we considering chelating.

The

> > improvements in the kids just from dietary restrictions alone

have

> been

> > massive and their glutathione levels have improved and other

labs,

> > especially issues of malabsorbtion and yeast.

> >

> > Any comments? I just find it fascinating that both kids showed

the

> same

> > pattern of equivalent improvements in health, labs and behavior

> along

> > with increasing " visibility " of metals.

> >

>