Re: paper in the journal Toxicology... Andy....

[Guest guest]

Reading this article, it seems to say that supplementing selenium will

subvert chelation to some extent. Based on this, would you advise

against supplementing selenium during the chelating phase?

NJ

Here's the quote:

" However, it has been observed in rats that simultaneous

administration of selenium (in the form of sodium

selenite) and a chelating agent (DMSA or DMPS) leads

to reduced excretion and considerable redistribution of

mercury - specifically a reduction of kidney mercury and

an increase in liver concentrations although it should

be noted other organs were not examined in this study

(Juresa et al., 2005). Since the chelators used (DMSA

and DMPS) act to increase urinary excretion of mercury

and since selenoprotein-P seems to prevent uptake

of mercury by the kidneys, Juresa et al. (2005) proposed

that ligand competition between the chelators and

selenoprotein-P led to the redistribution of mercury and

decreased urinary excretion.

A further complicating factor in the relationship

between selenium and mercury toxicity, is that reduced

selenium levels have been seen to induce hepatic production

of GSH (Hill and Burk, 1985), resulting in a

doubling of plasma GSH level. As noted earlier, GSH is

involved in mercury uptake by the kidneys, so the effect

of selenium on GSH levels may also be relevant to the

toxic effects of mercury "

>

> In writing the book, I did not play academic dweeb and cite tons of

material, even though I

> used a lot of it. I mostly cited stuff that is worth reading and

only played academic dweeb

> for the page 16-25 section. For example I did not cite the Leskova

paper even though it is

> very important because it is in Russian and I thought it unlikely

most people who read my

> book could read it.

>

> My half life estimates are based on compilation of all data in the

literature available to me

> (I'm a kineticist, I don't take the word of liberal arts majors like

MD's for what the rate

> constant is without personally evaluating the data) which did

include much of this and

> other information.

>

> Also note that there is person to person variation, and also the

effects of oral

> administration on kinetics need to be considered so it isn't as

simple as selecting a

> random paper, gullibly believing whatever the author says, and

setting an alarm clock for

> 1.000 X plasma halflife.

>

> While Dr. Rooney chose to think and write a good paper, it seems

unlikely it will encourage

> too many others to do so.

>

> Data bias ( " Different papers probably report different results

depending on how the

> studies were done) is a major issue and one as a kineticist I do

know how to pay attention

> to. Liberal arts majors doing the trained monkey act of aping

scientists mostly pay

> attention to pushing the numbers into a statistical package on a

computer, reporting what

> it says and not even discussing what that means, much less

considering the reality that

> while there are equations to handle random variation due to

sampling, the real issue in

> almost all experimental research is the sampling bias (also known as

systematic error)

> which can't be addressed mathematically.

>

> Andy

[Guest guest]

I am familiar with the work cited.

I don't think it is applicable or interpretable, though interesting. Large

amounts of

selenite were given at chelation time. This alone makes it uninterpretable both

as it was

selenite and also as it was with the chelator.

You have to forget everything you think you know about glutathione and start

learning

over to actually understand it due to certain intellectual flaws in medical

training. Start by

learning kinetics and mass transport, then learn about acute versus chronic

poisoning,

then worry about glutathione.

I think it is presently intractable to decide what exactly selenium does in

people with

mercury problems based on existing literature or theories, however it is clear

empirically

that it does help and one can reasonably interpret the literature to support

that without

inconsistency (which I am not going to do here) so I suggest people use it.

It is possible this slows down detox modestly though I would be surprised if so,

but if it IS

so I think most people would choose the greater comfort during detox over the

speedier

but rougher ride.

Andy

> >

> > In writing the book, I did not play academic dweeb and cite tons of

> material, even though I

> > used a lot of it. I mostly cited stuff that is worth reading and

> only played academic dweeb

> > for the page 16-25 section. For example I did not cite the Leskova

> paper even though it is

> > very important because it is in Russian and I thought it unlikely

> most people who read my

> > book could read it.

> >

> > My half life estimates are based on compilation of all data in the

> literature available to me

> > (I'm a kineticist, I don't take the word of liberal arts majors like

> MD's for what the rate

> > constant is without personally evaluating the data) which did

> include much of this and

> > other information.

> >

> > Also note that there is person to person variation, and also the

> effects of oral

> > administration on kinetics need to be considered so it isn't as

> simple as selecting a

> > random paper, gullibly believing whatever the author says, and

> setting an alarm clock for

> > 1.000 X plasma halflife.

> >

> > While Dr. Rooney chose to think and write a good paper, it seems

> unlikely it will encourage

> > too many others to do so.

> >

> > Data bias ( " Different papers probably report different results

> depending on how the

> > studies were done) is a major issue and one as a kineticist I do

> know how to pay attention

> > to. Liberal arts majors doing the trained monkey act of aping

> scientists mostly pay

> > attention to pushing the numbers into a statistical package on a

> computer, reporting what

> > it says and not even discussing what that means, much less

> considering the reality that

> > while there are equations to handle random variation due to

> sampling, the real issue in

> > almost all experimental research is the sampling bias (also known as

> systematic error)

> > which can't be addressed mathematically.

> >

> > Andy

>

[Guest guest]

>It is possible this slows down detox modestly though I would be surprised if

so, but if it IS

>so I think most people would choose the greater comfort during detox over the

speedier

>but rougher ride.

>Andy

Selenium was one of the last supplements I added (don't know why I waited so

long) and it has one of the most significant effects.

I really began to feel clear again with an improved sense of awareness.

I now believe it to be one of the most important supporters of chelation.

Well, that is based on a single-case study - me.

It definitely brought greater comfort during detox for me.

It actually came in a supplement bound to zinc. I don't know if the combination

was more helpful than selenium alone.

Thanks again to you Andy for your brilliant work.

Dean

[Guest guest]

Andy:

Would it make sense to suppliment inbetween rounds instead of during, so the

DMSA doesn't get used up chelating with - for example - supplimental zinc?

RO

Re: paper in the journal Toxicology...

Andy....

I am familiar with the work cited.

I don't think it is applicable or interpretable, though interesting. Large

amounts of

selenite were given at chelation time. This alone makes it uninterpretable

both as it was

selenite and also as it was with the chelator.

You have to forget everything you think you know about glutathione and start

learning

over to actually understand it due to certain intellectual flaws in medical

training. Start by

learning kinetics and mass transport, then learn about acute versus chronic

poisoning,

then worry about glutathione.

I think it is presently intractable to decide what exactly selenium does in

people with

mercury problems based on existing literature or theories, however it is clear

empirically

that it does help and one can reasonably interpret the literature to support

that without

inconsistency (which I am not going to do here) so I suggest people use it.

It is possible this slows down detox modestly though I would be surprised if

so, but if it IS

so I think most people would choose the greater comfort during detox over the

speedier

but rougher ride.

Andy

> >

> > In writing the book, I did not play academic dweeb and cite tons of

> material, even though I

> > used a lot of it. I mostly cited stuff that is worth reading and

> only played academic dweeb

> > for the page 16-25 section. For example I did not cite the Leskova

> paper even though it is

> > very important because it is in Russian and I thought it unlikely

> most people who read my

> > book could read it.

> >

> > My half life estimates are based on compilation of all data in the

> literature available to me

> > (I'm a kineticist, I don't take the word of liberal arts majors like

> MD's for what the rate

> > constant is without personally evaluating the data) which did

> include much of this and

> > other information.

> >

> > Also note that there is person to person variation, and also the

> effects of oral

> > administration on kinetics need to be considered so it isn't as

> simple as selecting a

> > random paper, gullibly believing whatever the author says, and

> setting an alarm clock for

> > 1.000 X plasma halflife.

> >

> > While Dr. Rooney chose to think and write a good paper, it seems

> unlikely it will encourage

> > too many others to do so.

> >

> > Data bias ( " Different papers probably report different results

> depending on how the

> > studies were done) is a major issue and one as a kineticist I do

> know how to pay attention

> > to. Liberal arts majors doing the trained monkey act of aping

> scientists mostly pay

> > attention to pushing the numbers into a statistical package on a

> computer, reporting what

> > it says and not even discussing what that means, much less

> considering the reality that

> > while there are equations to handle random variation due to

> sampling, the real issue in

> > almost all experimental research is the sampling bias (also known as

> systematic error)

> > which can't be addressed mathematically.

> >

> > Andy

>