Re: References on Deranged Mineral Transport

[Guest guest]

In frequent-dose-chelation Darren wrote:

Hi everyone,

In Hair Test Interpretation (HTI, p.6), Andy says " The fact that

mercury causes deranged mineral transport appears to not be widely

known in the medical community... "

From reading HTI, it sounds like Andy may have made novel connections

between disorderly/deranged mineral transport (DMT), patient symptoms,

and patient success with chelation, arriving at the conclusion that

mercury toxicity almost always leads to DMT.

For many of Andy's conclusions, he cites old medical texts and journal

articles (e.g., relatively obscure Russion article showing the

chelating power of alpha lipoic acid). Does anyone know if there are

any such references (even an obscure or old one) that define the

concept of DMT and discuss mercury being a cause of it? Perhaps the

answer is no, not yet, and that Andy is the first to discover it.

---------From my reading about this, what I have concluded is that Andy

learned that some alternative practitioners were able to recognize mercury

poisoning in a hair test and say that it had " the look and feel " of mercury, but

had no way of quantifying this. He then developed the counting rules as a way

of doing this, using probabilities of the likelihood of this happening randomly

or not, to make a hair test easily readable and quantifiable as far as mercury

is concerned. So I take this as meaning that he is the first one who has been

able to quantify it in some easily useable form. I don't know if he was the

first to " discover " it. And he seems to know that mercury is the only metal

that will cause this. I don't know if he discovered that on his own, or if

there is any reference to that, or if these other practitioners noticed this

also. But he does say in HTI that no other metal on its own will cause this

pattern of derangement in a hair test. So I believe that his

chemistry/physics/mathematical background and intense interest in this subject

allowed him to discover this relationship between DMT and mercury, or at least

quantify it into an easily useable and understandable form. So I don't think

you're going to find much reference to this, and Andy's Hair Test book might be

the first one to explain it.---------Jackie

Thanks!

Darren

[Guest guest]

Thanks for your responses...

The reason I am asking is to see if there is any chance of using a DMT

hair test to demonstrate mercury toxicity for insurance-related

purposes. Without at least some peer-reviewed published article(s)

linking mercury with " out of control " mineral transport in hair, using

the DMT hair test to convince the " mainstream " that it points to

mercury toxicity is a difficult task, especially when mercury itself

is in the " green. " Even the Doctor's Data test interpretation itself

claims, " In general, the amount of an element that is irreversibly

incorporated into the growing hair is proportional to the level of the

element in other body tissues. "

While Andy certainly created a novel method using statistical methods

to establish rules of thumb (counting rules) to help define

disorderly mineral transport, it would be helpful to know if there are

actually articles buried in the medical literature that establish that

deranged mineral transport is definitely due to mercury and only

mercury. It would certainly be ideal if someone has established a

link between mercury in biopsied tissue and hair test results, but

somehow I doubt that such reasearch has been done.

Maybe I'll do some digging into the references Andy cites to see if

such a reference exists. In the meantime, is there any

precedent for using a DMT hair test for convincing anyone in

mainstream medicine that it means mercury toxicity?

Thanks again,

Darren (Hair Test #147)

> >

> >

> > Hi everyone,

> >

> > In Hair Test Interpretation (HTI, p.6), Andy says " The fact that

> > mercury causes deranged mineral transport appears to not be widely

> > known in the medical community... "

> >

> > From reading HTI, it sounds like Andy may have made novel

connections

> > between disorderly/deranged mineral transport (DMT), patient

symptoms,

> > and patient success with chelation, arriving at the conclusion that

> > mercury toxicity almost always leads to DMT.

> >

> > For many of Andy's conclusions, he cites old medical texts and

journal

> > articles (e.g., relatively obscure Russion article showing the

> > chelating power of alpha lipoic acid). Does anyone know if there are

> > any such references (even an obscure or old one) that define the

> > concept of DMT and discuss mercury being a cause of it? Perhaps the

> > answer is no, not yet, and that Andy is the first to discover it.

> >

> > ---------From my reading about this, what I have concluded is that

> Andy learned that some alternative practitioners were able to

> recognize mercury poisoning in a hair test and say that it had " the

> look and feel " of mercury, but had no way of quantifying this. He

> then developed the counting rules as a way of doing this, using

> probabilities of the likelihood of this happening randomly or not, to

> make a hair test easily readable and quantifiable as far as mercury is

> concerned. So I take this as meaning that he is the first one who has

> been able to quantify it in some easily useable form. I don't know if

> he was the first to " discover " it. And he seems to know that mercury

> is the only metal that will cause this. I don't know if he discovered

> that on his own, or if there is any reference to that, or if these

> other practitioners noticed this also. But he does say in HTI that no

> other metal on its own will cause this pattern of derangement in a

> hair test. So I believe that his chemistry/physics/mathematical

> background and intense interest in this subject allowed him to

> discover this relationship between DMT and mercury, or at least

> quantify it into an easily useable and understandable form. So I

> don't think you're going to find much reference to this, and Andy's

> Hair Test book might be the first one to explain it.---------Jackie

> >

> >

> >

> > Thanks!

> > Darren

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> >

>

[Guest guest]

In frequent-dose-chelation Darren wrote:

Thanks for your responses...

The reason I am asking is to see if there is any chance of using a DMT

hair test to demonstrate mercury toxicity for insurance-related

purposes. Without at least some peer-reviewed published article(s)

linking mercury with " out of control " mineral transport in hair, using

the DMT hair test to convince the " mainstream " that it points to

mercury toxicity is a difficult task, especially when mercury itself

is in the " green. " Even the Doctor's Data test interpretation itself

claims, " In general, the amount of an element that is irreversibly

incorporated into the growing hair is proportional to the level of the

element in other body tissues. "

While Andy certainly created a novel method using statistical methods

to establish rules of thumb (counting rules) to help define

disorderly mineral transport, it would be helpful to know if there are

actually articles buried in the medical literature that establish that

deranged mineral transport is definitely due to mercury and only

mercury. It would certainly be ideal if someone has established a

link between mercury in biopsied tissue and hair test results, but

somehow I doubt that such reasearch has been done.

Maybe I'll do some digging into the references Andy cites to see if

such a reference exists. In the meantime, is there any

precedent for using a DMT hair test for convincing anyone in

mainstream medicine that it means mercury toxicity?

-----------Not that I'm aware of, and my guess would be no, but this would be

a good question to ask on Autism-Mercury also, if anyone there has tried it.

Otherwise, what has told me, is that if you go into most

mainstream doctor's offices and start talking about mercury poisoning, they

usually refer you to the psych doctor, so it is quite an uphill battle.

Otherwise, you may have more luck with a porphyrins test. I believe years ago

I ran across a blurb that said this test was FDA approved for confirming

toxicity. The problem is the test is very sensitive to handling, so lots of

errors, so hard to get accurate results. Because of that blurb, I actually got

my mainstream doc to run the test back then, but I'm sure mine wasn't accurate,

because my clinic had never done this test before, and I'm not confident the lab

doing it handled it correctly either, and they didn't even test

*precoproporphyrin*, which Andy says is a specific marker for mercury

intoxication. So around that same time, I did a hair test, met 2 almost 3 of

the counting rules, and never pursued it again.

And here's another point. I have extremely elevated arsenic on my hair tests,

found out it was in my well water, and had to get a distiller. Since the

arsenic was elevated, so wouldn't have to try convincing a mainstream doctor

about DMT and low mercury, that maybe I could get my insurance to cover me for

arsenic poisoning and maybe pay for the distiller. had a good point, that

if I pursued this, they might want to treat me *there way* or demand a challenge

test as proof, so could end up harming me in the long run. So by not pursuing

insurance covereage for this, I can treat myself in a manner that I know is

safe, e.g. following Cutler's protocol. I don't even know what the FDA approved

method of chelating arsenic is, but I can guarantee you it's not Cutler's

protocol. So just some things for you to think about -------------Jackie

Thanks again,

Darren (Hair Test #147)

>

[Guest guest]

In frequent-dose-chelation Darren wrote:

Thanks for your responses...

The reason I am asking is to see if there is any chance of using a DMT

hair test to demonstrate mercury toxicity for insurance-related

purposes. Without at least some peer-reviewed published article(s)

linking mercury with " out of control " mineral transport in hair, using

the DMT hair test to convince the " mainstream " that it points to

mercury toxicity is a difficult task, especially when mercury itself

is in the " green. " Even the Doctor's Data test interpretation itself

claims, " In general, the amount of an element that is irreversibly

incorporated into the growing hair is proportional to the level of the

element in other body tissues. "

While Andy certainly created a novel method using statistical methods

to establish rules of thumb (counting rules) to help define

disorderly mineral transport, it would be helpful to know if there are

actually articles buried in the medical literature that establish that

deranged mineral transport is definitely due to mercury and only

mercury. It would certainly be ideal if someone has established a

link between mercury in biopsied tissue and hair test results, but

somehow I doubt that such reasearch has been done.

Maybe I'll do some digging into the references Andy cites to see if

such a reference exists. In the meantime, is there any

precedent for using a DMT hair test for convincing anyone in

mainstream medicine that it means mercury toxicity?

-----------Not that I'm aware of, and my guess would be no, but this would be

a good question to ask on Autism-Mercury also, if anyone there has tried it.

Otherwise, what has told me, is that if you go into most

mainstream doctor's offices and start talking about mercury poisoning, they

usually refer you to the psych doctor, so it is quite an uphill battle.

Otherwise, you may have more luck with a porphyrins test. I believe years ago

I ran across a blurb that said this test was FDA approved for confirming

toxicity. The problem is the test is very sensitive to handling, so lots of

errors, so hard to get accurate results. Because of that blurb, I actually got

my mainstream doc to run the test back then, but I'm sure mine wasn't accurate,

because my clinic had never done this test before, and I'm not confident the lab

doing it handled it correctly either, and they didn't even test

*precoproporphyrin*, which Andy says is a specific marker for mercury

intoxication. So around that same time, I did a hair test, met 2 almost 3 of

the counting rules, and never pursued it again.

And here's another point. I have extremely elevated arsenic on my hair tests,

found out it was in my well water, and had to get a distiller. Since the

arsenic was elevated, so wouldn't have to try convincing a mainstream doctor

about DMT and low mercury, that maybe I could get my insurance to cover me for

arsenic poisoning and maybe pay for the distiller. had a good point, that

if I pursued this, they might want to treat me *there way* or demand a challenge

test as proof, so could end up harming me in the long run. So by not pursuing

insurance covereage for this, I can treat myself in a manner that I know is

safe, e.g. following Cutler's protocol. I don't even know what the FDA approved

method of chelating arsenic is, but I can guarantee you it's not Cutler's

protocol. So just some things for you to think about -------------Jackie

Thanks again,

Darren (Hair Test #147)

>

[Guest guest]

Darren.

This is a valid question, which I've asked him. This is my

understanding, limited though it is.

There are transport molecules on the surface of cells that allow various

molecules to get in or out. There is a great deal of work that shows

that mercury is such a systemic toxin that it interferes with basically

all of those biochemical transport systems. So, there is a biochemical

basis for the notion of " disordered mineral transport " . Now, how would

you tell if there is some kind of systemic problem going on? Well, the

basic idea is simple. You have a lot of minerals that have to be taken

in to the cell and whose levels have to be managed. You would expect

that if you look at the levels of these minerals, they should cluster

around the mean. If they don't then there is some kind of overarching

problem. Here is where the engineering rule of thumb that he mentions

in his hair test book comes in. How do you tell if you are faced with a

systemic problem? Well, you could have things coming out systemically

high or low (so you look at how many are above the mean or below the

mean and see if that number is improbably high) or they could come out

basically balanced, but highly scattered, eg on average they are too far

from the mean (so you look at how many are outside of the green band;

you might also check how many are in the red zones and in either case

flag it if you are seeing something highly improbable). Highly

improbably means, in this case, about 2.5% of the population.

A further point that he has made is that you look for congoners. These

are elements whose electron structure are similar. If they are at

similar levels in the cell, then that means that the cells capacity to

differentiate between these elements is being lost. This, as I

understand it, is one of the specific characteristics of disordered

mineral transport.

Finally start looking at hair tests. I have downloaded and looked at a

couple of hundred of them now. There is an absolutely unmistakable

pattern that is recognizable and seems reasonably well operationalized

by Andy's counting rules.

I believe that is a fairly good rendition of where we are with this at

the moment.

Someone who knows more, please add it!

Dave.

[Guest guest]

Darren. If the mercury in your hair is _high_, you may be able to get

someone (not an AMA doctor, but someone with some mental flexibility

left) to pay some attention. If it is low, then forget it. In either

case, I doubt it would be any use for insurance, but the right doctor

might be willing to help you inquire a little further.

Now, are you interested in getting disability, or is it getting

treatment that you are after? If the latter, there is no point. First,

they will want to treat you using an improper protocol, and second,

proper treatment is cheap - a bit of ALA. If the former, then I think

you are going about this the wrong way. First, you should be using the

porphyrin test. In fact, you might just use the old one, that does not

distinguish mercury/lead/aresenic, because showing heavy metal tox

should be sufficient. Second, you should see a neuro-psychologist to

see if they can documents some functional deficits and link them to the

results of the porphyrin test.

Dave.

[Guest guest]

Thanks for your responses, Dave.

My inquiry is actually related to short-term disability, actually. I

was already approved for 2 months. My DMSA-challenge test showed

mercury through-the-roof and was part of the objective evidence I

provided to demonstrate that my symptoms are real and have an

underlying physiological explanation.

I am seeking 6-months coverage, though I have decided to go back to

work in a more limited capacity instead of seeking ongoing disability

coverage, even though I don't yet feel and am not functioning much if

any better. But I am now being asked for additional, new clinical

information supporting my health problems. Since my hair test is very

recent, I thought that perhaps I could use it, but only if I found

some solid, peer-reviewed journal article defining DMT and linking it

with mercury toxicity. Obviously, the state of medical science isn't

there yet, in terms of broad acceptability of this test, but with

Andy's continued work, hopefully that will happen eventually.

Thanks again,

Darren

>

> Darren. If the mercury in your hair is _high_, you may be able to get

> someone (not an AMA doctor, but someone with some mental flexibility

> left) to pay some attention. If it is low, then forget it. In either

> case, I doubt it would be any use for insurance, but the right doctor

> might be willing to help you inquire a little further.

>

> Now, are you interested in getting disability, or is it getting

> treatment that you are after? If the latter, there is no point.

First,

> they will want to treat you using an improper protocol, and second,

> proper treatment is cheap - a bit of ALA. If the former, then I think

> you are going about this the wrong way. First, you should be using the

> porphyrin test. In fact, you might just use the old one, that does not

> distinguish mercury/lead/aresenic, because showing heavy metal tox

> should be sufficient. Second, you should see a neuro-psychologist to

> see if they can documents some functional deficits and link them to the

> results of the porphyrin test.

>

> Dave.

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks for your responses, Dave.

My inquiry is actually related to short-term disability, actually. I

was already approved for 2 months. My DMSA-challenge test showed

mercury through-the-roof and was part of the objective evidence I

provided to demonstrate that my symptoms are real and have an

underlying physiological explanation.

I am seeking 6-months coverage, though I have decided to go back to

work in a more limited capacity instead of seeking ongoing disability

coverage, even though I don't yet feel and am not functioning much if

any better. But I am now being asked for additional, new clinical

information supporting my health problems. Since my hair test is very

recent, I thought that perhaps I could use it, but only if I found

some solid, peer-reviewed journal article defining DMT and linking it

with mercury toxicity. Obviously, the state of medical science isn't

there yet, in terms of broad acceptability of this test, but with

Andy's continued work, hopefully that will happen eventually.

Thanks again,

Darren

>

> Darren. If the mercury in your hair is _high_, you may be able to get

> someone (not an AMA doctor, but someone with some mental flexibility

> left) to pay some attention. If it is low, then forget it. In either

> case, I doubt it would be any use for insurance, but the right doctor

> might be willing to help you inquire a little further.

>

> Now, are you interested in getting disability, or is it getting

> treatment that you are after? If the latter, there is no point.

First,

> they will want to treat you using an improper protocol, and second,

> proper treatment is cheap - a bit of ALA. If the former, then I think

> you are going about this the wrong way. First, you should be using the

> porphyrin test. In fact, you might just use the old one, that does not

> distinguish mercury/lead/aresenic, because showing heavy metal tox

> should be sufficient. Second, you should see a neuro-psychologist to

> see if they can documents some functional deficits and link them to the

> results of the porphyrin test.

>

> Dave.

>

[Guest guest]

Darren, have you connected with Bernie Windham? I think he's still

President of DAMS, and he keeps an online warehouse of various

studies, etc., on mercury toxicity. If memory serves me right, he's

also had his share of personal experience with this. You can email

him at berniew1@...

I wish you all the best in facing the challenges ahead.

Keep us posted,

Joanne

>

> Thanks for your responses, Dave.

>

> My inquiry is actually related to short-term disability, actually. I

> was already approved for 2 months. My DMSA-challenge test showed

> mercury through-the-roof and was part of the objective evidence I

> provided to demonstrate that my symptoms are real and have an

> underlying physiological explanation.

But I am now being asked for additional, new clinical

> information supporting my health problems. Since my hair test is

very

> recent, I thought that perhaps I could use it, but only if I found

> some solid, peer-reviewed journal article

[Guest guest]

[sorry, missed the subject heading - so I'll add here that it would be

nice to check

my explanation of deranged mineral transport with Andy. He may have

something

to add or correct - in which case either my or his improved version

could go in the

files.]

Darren -

I am now being asked for additional, new clinical

information supporting my health problems.

Yes, then in that case you might consider showing them the hair test,

but only if you found very elevated mercury in the hair. In that case

you might document that the EPA, the WHO and the IAEC (Internat

Atomic Energy Commission) all accept hair testing as a valid way of

looking for toxicity. If the mercury was not very elevated, forget it.

In that case, get the prophyrin test and combine it with a neuro-psych

evaluation. The latter will show that not only are you mercury toxic,

but that you are having functional deficits that might be attributed to the

toxicity. I think this is definitely the right approach. Don't make any

attempt to get any satisfaction through MDs. If you want, you might

specifically look for a neuro-psychologist that works with people who

have been poisoned. They are called " neuro-psycho-toxicologists " and

usually do evaluations of people with occupational exposures. You don't

have to come out and say it's your fillings. Until you have some pretty

good

idea that they are open minded about such things, ust say you don't know

where it came from.

Where are you located? Are you in or reasonably near a fairly large city?

Dave.

[Guest guest]

My hair test (#147) shows only modest mercury levels but meetings

several counting rules for DMT. So if I used it as evidence of my

health problems I would likely end up shooting myself in the foot.

I'm hoping not to have any more tests done for the

insurance/disability purpose, other than the Hormone Evaluation Panel

that I will be doing this week (the reason for this is to guide my

adrenal support, not for insurance/disability, but it may serve both

purposes). Maybe I will end up getting the polyporphin test, we'll

see. As far as the neuro-psych evaluation for functional/cognitive

deficits, I could probably find someone in either the D.C. area or

Richmond, since I'm in Virginia.

But I'm concerned about the accuracy of such testing. Each person's

type of cognitive difficulties are different. And some days are much

worse than others. Today is a horrible brain fog day, but other

problems aren't quite as bad. Who knows what would happen on the day

I actually went for such a test. And couldn't someone purposely

" tank " later in the day to make it look like they ran out of mental

energy? Not sure how they distinguish genuine energy problems with

fakers.

Anyway, the period of disability I'm seeking approval for has already

passed, so it's a retrospective evaluation at this point. Even though

I still feel crappy, tired, and foggy, I'm hoping to get back to work

soon in some capacity, and that the chelation will start alleviating

symptoms a bit in the coming months. Lord willing!

Thanks, Dave.

Darren

>

> Darren -

>

> I am now being asked for additional, new clinical

> information supporting my health problems.

>

> Yes, then in that case you might consider showing them the hair test,

> but only if you found very elevated mercury in the hair. In that case

> you might document that the EPA, the WHO and the IAEC (Internat

> Atomic Energy Commission) all accept hair testing as a valid way of

> looking for toxicity. If the mercury was not very elevated, forget it.

> In that case, get the prophyrin test and combine it with a neuro-psych

> evaluation. The latter will show that not only are you mercury toxic,

> but that you are having functional deficits that might be attributed

to the

> toxicity. I think this is definitely the right approach. Don't

make any

> attempt to get any satisfaction through MDs. If you want, you might

> specifically look for a neuro-psychologist that works with people who

> have been poisoned. They are called " neuro-psycho-toxicologists " and

> usually do evaluations of people with occupational exposures. You don't

> have to come out and say it's your fillings. Until you have some

pretty

> good

> idea that they are open minded about such things, ust say you don't know

> where it came from.

>

> Where are you located? Are you in or reasonably near a fairly large

city?

>

> Dave.

>

[Guest guest]

Joanne,

I haven't heard about Bernie Windham, but your post led me to a

couple of interesting sites:

http://www.cfspages.com/bernie.html

http://www.immunesupport.com/library/showarticle.cfm/ID/3305

Thanks.

Also, I have many of the same hormone imbalances and also feel worse

after exercise, as you listed in your other recent post. I, too,

believe it's hypothalamus and/or pituitary poisoning due to Hg, as you

mentioned. DHEA hasn't helped me, but I plan on trying Maca and

Pregnonelone soon, and potentially higher doses of HC. We'll see.

Maybe someone else can offer some more helpful feedback to you.

Darren

> >

> > Thanks for your responses, Dave.

> >

> > My inquiry is actually related to short-term disability, actually. I

> > was already approved for 2 months. My DMSA-challenge test showed

> > mercury through-the-roof and was part of the objective evidence I

> > provided to demonstrate that my symptoms are real and have an

> > underlying physiological explanation.

>

> But I am now being asked for additional, new clinical

> > information supporting my health problems. Since my hair test is

> very

> > recent, I thought that perhaps I could use it, but only if I found

> > some solid, peer-reviewed journal article

>

[Guest guest]

Joanne & Darren-

OMG! Thanks for the article - I am a former dental worker & this is

astonishing! Since I am so bogged down just trying to get well, I

haven't really done the background research. This sure gives validity

for those that look at me with skeptisim. Thanks!!

Joy

> > >

> > > Thanks for your responses, Dave.

> > >

> > > My inquiry is actually related to short-term disability,

actually. I

> > > was already approved for 2 months. My DMSA-challenge test

showed

> > > mercury through-the-roof and was part of the objective evidence

I

> > > provided to demonstrate that my symptoms are real and have an

> > > underlying physiological explanation.

> >

> > But I am now being asked for additional, new clinical

> > > information supporting my health problems. Since my hair test

is

> > very

> > > recent, I thought that perhaps I could use it, but only if I

found

> > > some solid, peer-reviewed journal article

> >

>