Re: Amalgam Illness, a criticism of Andy's book...

[Guest guest]

>

> I'm spending the weekend working through the famed Amalgam Illness

> book. Throughout, I can't help but wonder why the book is so different

> than what we talk about here on this site in terms of dosages. I

> understand that everybody is different and we need to find dosages

> that work for each of us but it makes me wonder, when I'm advised at

> almost every other post to " buy Andy's $40 book " , why his basic

> treatment, the cornerstone of the whole protocol, disagrees with this

> site.. Is the book out of date? Is there another edition in the works?

Andy's advice has become more conservative since writing the

book, based on the fact that some people are very sensitive.

Not everyone is so sensitive - some do tolerate the doses he

recommends in the book, but it is best to start low.

> I mean, paying $40 for a desktop publishing edition, you'd assume the

> thing would be totally up to date. and, btw, how about using an

> editor?

I, for one, feel that $40 is extremely reasonable for the incredible

coverage, depth, and accuracy of information in Andy's book. I also

found it quite challenging to take in all the information in the

beginning, and still do to some extent. The group can help by

suggesting sections or pages of the book, just ask questions if you

can't find something or if you are overwhelmed and need help to focus

in on what you need most. I sometimes found it easier at first to

take in information from Moria's website than from the book.

I think the book is an incredibly low cost for the great value of

the information it contains. I have developed greater appreciation

for this over time.

Here is what Andy has to say in response to similar criticism:

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/frequent-dose-chelation/message/4568

> When people are sick (brain-fogged) with this stuff, the obvious thing

> is to want to read clear concise cut-to-the-chase stuff about what to

> do to get our noggins working a little better. THEN we can read all

> that high-falutin' fine-tuning scientific stuff about what to take for

> what ailment; All these amazing pronouncements that only Andy seems to

> know about EXACTLY how one's entire body functions.

I have found that Andy does, in fact, know vastly, vastly more

about chelation and many related matters than any doctor. He knows

about the reality of how things work vs. the theory about how they

are purported to work or supposed to work. He also knows a lot

about how things work differently in mercury toxic people than in

other people. The fact that he is a chemist allows him to understand

and evaluate some of the literature that doctors cannot and do not

even try to do. And he is a careful scientist - he checks sources

and checks the reasoning used to derive conclusions before he believes

and follows what is stated in the literature. We are extremely lucky

to have his advice and his books.

> But it is in Andy's protocol, the very treatment we sick patients are

> seeking, that we are not to believe him as there seems to be a rather

> large disagreement in terms of amounts/days of treatment.... why is

> this? His dosages START at 400% of what I've been memorizing here on

> this site where 12.5mg DMSA is the mantra. Mr. Cutler says that

> 50-200mg DMSA is an effective dose to start with and 10 days on and

> 3-4 days off is the way to go..

From my own experience and what I have observed in others over the

past 2.5 years, the dosage is one of very few recommendations that

have changed. If a person tries those doses, it is far less harmful

than the doses usually recommended, and if there is a bad reaction

it is a fairly easy inference for a person to make that either

reducing the dose or seeking more information would be helpful.

Andy's website, email address and phone number are available in the

book. Links to useful internet groups are found on his website.

> To make matters even more complicated, an NAET doctor of oriental

> medicine here in town studied with Andy and told me that I should be

> taking DMSA before and during my amalgam removal treatment. She swore

> that was his recommendation. I didn't do that as per this site.

It is unfortunate, but true, that just because someone attends

Andy's seminar, does not mean they understand or accept every detail

of what was presented.

> I had 9 crowns-over-amalgam/gold replaced a couple days ago, and am

> consequently having a lot of brain fog/confusion but between this

> tumid book, what I'm hearing and what I'm reading on the site, I'm

> more confused than ever. I hardly know where to start to help my

> symptoms.

Try asking questions when you can't find things or when you don't

know where to begin. I know it is very hard to understand and retain

things in the beginning, not to mention focusing, etc.

> I very much like what Cutler says about doctors treating patients and

> about patients dealing with doctors; oh we all know that so well! But,

> again, his rather dogmatic pronouncements on EXACTLY how the body

> works and EXACTLY what to take for what thing makes me a bit

> suspicious; He's doing the same thing as they! The same

> high-and-mighty know-it-all overly-scientific diagrammed stuff that

> doctors do to sort of scare you into thinking they know more than you

> and so you should follow their advise lock, stock, and barrel. How can

> anyone purport to know EXACTLY how the body works? Every part of it!

> This problem alone makes me a bit nervous about following his

> protocol...

So be suspicious for now. I was, too. I have found that Andy turns

out to be very right about so many things it is hard to believe.

Another important quality Andy has is he doesn't make " pronouncements "

until he has enough data and/or enough knowledge to be pretty sure

about what he is saying.

Andy would be the first to tell you that there are exceptions - you

may find you don't tolerate a supplement or some other advice may not

work well for you. But his recommendations are based on experience

with a lot of people and are far more accurate than any doctor I have

seen or heard of, and more accurate than any information I have read.

I think many other people here have had the same experience.

> I surely don't mean to disparage any of the good work done by this

> site or by Mr. Cutler. I simply have some problems with the advocacy

> angle, a site advertising a book whose treatment differs from its own

> recommendations.

>

> Also, since hundreds of people are buying a $40 book because they are

> desperate and instructed to do so by this site, you'd THINK the author

> would either update his manuscript, add an addendum or, at least, come

> visit more often in person or SOMETHING to show more support for his

> advocacy group, the mediators of this informative site.

Andy does a lot of things to help " us " , meaning mercury-poisoned

people in general. He is only one person. We are grateful to

hear from him in person when he has the time, but his time and

effort are often better spent in other ways, such as writing other

books, consulting on cases, posting on other groups where there

is less accurate information provided than what is provided here.

This is probably the least important place for him to visit in

terms of what he can do to help. JMO.

--

> i'm sorry to not be so gung-ho about Andy but, really...

> ~robin

>

[Guest guest]

>

> I'm spending the weekend working through the famed Amalgam Illness

> book. Throughout, I can't help but wonder why the book is so different

> than what we talk about here on this site in terms of dosages. I

> understand that everybody is different and we need to find dosages

> that work for each of us but it makes me wonder, when I'm advised at

> almost every other post to " buy Andy's $40 book " , why his basic

> treatment, the cornerstone of the whole protocol, disagrees with this

> site..

For one thing, we are a support group. We are supporting people who

are chelating using Andy's protocol. We are all poisoned. The ones

who devote time to helping others do so because we know what it is

like, others helped us when we were confused, we know the answers are

in Andy's books, we don't like to read the stories of how horribly

worse people got with other protocols. We don't have the time to type

Andy's book out word for word for people. We can refer people to the

page where the information that they are looking for is at.

All it takes is a couple of appointments with doctors who prescribe

the witch doctor protocols to realize the value of Andy's $35.00

books. For example, I wasted money traveling to another city (gas,

hotel, food plus hundreds of dollars the doctor charged me) for an

EDTA IV that the well meaning doctor thought would help when in fact

it screwed me up considerably, and for chelation advise that would

have likely killed me (250 mg DMSA once per day and 250 mg R-ALA once

per day). Thankfully, an internet angel who was aware of and

understood Andy's book stopped me from following that advise. Another

well meaning, well respected doctor and dentist advised me to use NDF

- which was not only a waste of over a hundred dollars, but also

minimal amounts screwed me and a close friend up considerably.

Perhaps it takes those kinds of experiences to truly appreciate the

value of Andy's books. There is nothing in Andy's books that will

hurt people, if they take the time to study it. The book is jam

packed full of information that will help people.

The EDTA IV, the NDF, and ALL of the many other things that doctors

prescribe in the harmful inappropriate protocols do serious damage

that makes appropriate chelation more difficult and that may be

irreversible. If a person starts at a dose of 50 mg and gets scared

the damage is usually reversible.

A closer look at his book will reveal that he does provide cautions

similar to those discussed in this group. On p74 he is talking about

patient management directed at health care professionals who are

managing toxic people. In the previous paragraphs he instructs the

professionals to do the appropriate tests and prescribe the

appropriate supplements and medications and to modify therapy as test

results come in (that are all discussed in other parts of the book).

On p 75 his instructions are to " Always test the chelators for side

effects by ramping up dosage from 25 or 50 mg the first time. " 25 mg

is not too far off from the 12.5 mg that we recommend in this group.

It is hugely far off from the 10 mg/kg (do the calculation yourself to

see how much that is) that has been routinely prescribed by DAN and

other doctors. I believe that the 10 mg/kg DMSA is even in the

physician's desk reference for treatment of lead poisoning.

Look around for other places in Andy's books where he cautions to

adjust the dose depending on side effects. That is the part that many

people have missed and that we emphasize in this group by telling

people to start at 12.5 mg.

> Is the book out of date?

The book was published in 1999. Of course much has been learned from

the experience of the hundreds of people who have chelated

successfully and reported their results to Andy over a 9 year period

of time.

The vast majority of the book is not out of date.

>Is there another edition in the works?

Someone on adult metal asked this question. Andy's response was that

there are numerous other projects that he will be devoting his limited

time to before " Amalgam Illness " gets a rewrite.

In " Hair Test Interpretation " he does give some clues that his next

book will focus on the treatment of children. In my opinion that book

is desperately needed because of the autism, ADHD, epidemics. Spend

some time in the autism mercury group to develop some appreciation for

what parents are going through, and how much time Andy selflessly

devotes to helping them.

> I mean, paying $40 for a desktop publishing edition, you'd assume the

> thing would be totally up to date. and, btw, how about using an

> editor?

>

This type of not very constructive criticism has come up before in

groups. I have come to the conclusion that some people want to

attract negative attention.

Andy has acknowledged people who review his books.

I can only guess that an editor who does not understand the content

would not be helpful.

> When people are sick (brain-fogged) with this stuff, the obvious thing

> is to want to read clear concise cut-to-the-chase stuff about what to

> do to get our noggins working a little better.

I think that you have really hit the nail on the head here. The

problem is not so much with Andy's books as it is with his audience.

He is writing for people who are having difficulty with concentration,

attention, focus, memory and often serious psychological problems. I

found myself that I had trouble focusing on the book and remembering

anything about what I had read. I use it more like a reference book.

As a person finds the appropriate diet, supplements, medication, and

chelates properly they find that they understand the book more easily.

Personally I find Andy's style of writing very skillful considering

that he is a PhD writing to an audience of people who mostly have no

science background at all.

>THEN we can read all

> that high-falutin' fine-tuning scientific stuff about what to take for

> what ailment; All these amazing pronouncements that only Andy seems to

> know about EXACTLY how one's entire body functions.

>

Sometimes I wonder if the reason that I appreciate Andy's writing more

than some people seem to is because my background is in science and I

spent my working years working with scientists in research.

Considering that Andy is a chemist it is actually very impressive that

he DOES know exactly how one's body functions. He has invested an

enormous amount of time in educating himself, and continues to do so.

> But it is in Andy's protocol, the very treatment we sick patients are

> seeking, that we are not to believe him as there seems to be a rather

> large disagreement in terms of amounts/days of treatment.... why is

> this? His dosages START at 400% of what I've been memorizing here on

> this site where 12.5mg DMSA is the mantra.

As I just pointed out, in AI Andy suggests starting at 25 mg. 25 mg

is only twice as much as 12.5 mg.

Many people are fine with starting at 25 mg or higher. By starting at

12.5 mg we are trying to protect the really sick frail people who

would get scared off with those doses (but who might get killed off

with any other protocol, as I truly believe I would have).

If anyone calculates the 1/8-1/2 mg per pound that is mentioned at

Moria's web site they will find that 12.5 mg is 1/8 mg per pound for a

100 lb person.

Mr. Cutler says that

> 50-200mg DMSA is an effective dose to start with and 10 days on and

> 3-4 days off is the way to go..

>

> To make matters even more complicated, an NAET doctor of oriental

> medicine here in town studied with Andy and told me that I should be

> taking DMSA before and during my amalgam removal treatment. She swore

> that was his recommendation.

Clearly many people don't read his books carefully and pass on mis

information. Andy clearly advises to avoid any and all chelators

until all amalgam is safely removed, and never has said anything that

could possibly be interpreted as the NAET doctor did.

I didn't do that as per this site.

>

> I had 9 crowns-over-amalgam/gold replaced a couple days ago, and am

> consequently having a lot of brain fog/confusion but between this

> tumid book, what I'm hearing and what I'm reading on the site, I'm

> more confused than ever. I hardly know where to start to help my

> symptoms.

>

Start with the diet and supplement sections. You may find that you

need to read them several times. Or, try some alka seltzer gold

before reading.

> I very much like what Cutler says about doctors treating patients and

> about patients dealing with doctors; oh we all know that so well! But,

> again, his rather dogmatic pronouncements on EXACTLY how the body

> works and EXACTLY what to take for what thing makes me a bit

> suspicious; He's doing the same thing as they!

Perhaps you will start to understand when you start to experiment and

find that so many things that Andy writes about turn out to be true

for you. This has been the case with me - starting with the

description of poisoning, my hair test that turned out just as he

would have predicted, my reaction to sulfur foods, my need for certain

supplements, hormones, medications.

The same

> high-and-mighty know-it-all overly-scientific diagrammed stuff that

> doctors do to sort of scare you into thinking they know more than you

> and so you should follow their advise lock, stock, and barrel. How can

> anyone purport to know EXACTLY how the body works? Every part of it!

> This problem alone makes me a bit nervous about following his

> protocol...

>

You really need to do more reading.

> I surely don't mean to disparage any of the good work done by this

> site or by Mr. Cutler. I simply have some problems with the advocacy

> angle, a site advertising a book whose treatment differs from its own

> recommendations.

>

> Also, since hundreds of people are buying a $40 book because they are

> desperate and instructed to do so by this site, you'd THINK the author

> would either update his manuscript, add an addendum or, at least, come

> visit more often in person or SOMETHING to show more support for his

> advocacy group, the mediators of this informative site.

>

> i'm sorry to not be so gung-ho about Andy but, really...

This type of criticism has come up before from negative toxic people.

All you need to do is go to the autism mercury archives and count the

number of posts that Andy has submitted over the number of years he

has been contributing to chelation groups to realize that he has

devoted thousands of un paid hours of his free time to helping toxic

people and all too often what he gets back is abuse from people who

are too toxic to see what they are doing.

There are also thousands of posts from people who thank him for the

recovery of themselves or their child. They are the ones who realize

that without Andy's protocol there is no safe way out.

Just because Andy found the safe way out, wrote the books, and

continues to be the most knowledgeable person in the world about metal

toxicity, does not mean that he has any obligation to hand hold people

on the internet (nor does he have much time for it). If people truly

want or need his attention the positive, reasonable way to ask for it

is to ask their health care provider to consult with him. Then they

will find out how limited his time is.

J

> ~robin

>

[Guest guest]

I wouldn't be looking at your site or reading this book if I didn't

think there was some merit in it. I'm a veteran of support groups and

my writing can be found all over the Internet. I'm typically upbeat

and positive. It's quite rare that I find myself in the position of

critic but from the beginning, this mercury-poisoning " movement " has

made me a bit nervous. It has sometimes sounded less like science and

more like dogma.

I bring this up because I too am a scientist and have a natural

dislike of fundamentalism. I generally like what Mr. Cutler is doing

and I think your site and the other two I look at are great. After

researching others, I've chosen to follow this protocol.

I paid 40 dollars for a book that I simply think could have been a lot

better had the author resisted overstatement and organized it in a

more useful way. Also, the primary information, the whole point of the

book, the small/low-dose protocol turns out to be wrong now.

What would be so hard about including a one page addendum that updates

his key message, his current position on dosage and protocol?

I'm agreeing with you that this is important stuff to get out there.

People need to have a choice of treatment. But, right now, were I to

offer this book to a suffering friend, I would have to explain a whole

lot about what Andy REALLY means to say. That's just silly and casts

his book, from the start, in a rather questionable light.

> This type of not very constructive criticism has come up before in

> groups. I have come to the conclusion that some people want to

> attract negative attention.

I'm sorry. " not very constructive criticism " ? It is entirely

constructive. A book is not well laid out if you need a team of

moderators on a support group to explain what the author means.

> I can only guess that an editor who does not understand the content

> would not be helpful.

This is what editors do...

> Considering that Andy is a chemist it is actually very impressive that

> he DOES know exactly how one's body functions.

Yes. It is rather incredible and that's what makes me nervous -- his

tone of certainty about the way the body works. That is an automatic

turn-off for me as a patient. This stuff is just not so black and

white.

> This type of criticism has come up before from negative toxic people.

I'm not sure that name-calling is an effective means of support. It's

this sort of thinking that will hurt your cause and propel

well-meaning savvy people like me, who have already gone through

numerous therapies and doctors, to question the basis of Andy's

claims. Is he for real or is this adulation? It's clear that Mr.

Cutler has a faithful following. He's also making a living putting on

seminars and writing books for sick desperate people. I'm just trying

to gather some facts and find something that I trust will work for me

and for my friends.

So, once again I will say, the point of my post is not to be angry or

toxic or negative but simply this:

The author of a $40 hand-made textbook ought to update his book for

sick readers somehow. If he doesn't agree with the doses/protocol in

his current edition then he should include, at the very least, an

addendum, a little note sent out with the book. What's so hard about

that?

~robin

[Guest guest]

I wouldn't be looking at your site or reading this book if I didn't

think there was some merit in it. I'm a veteran of support groups and

my writing can be found all over the Internet. I'm typically upbeat

and positive. It's quite rare that I find myself in the position of

critic but from the beginning, this mercury-poisoning " movement " has

made me a bit nervous. It has sometimes sounded less like science and

more like dogma.

I bring this up because I too am a scientist and have a natural

dislike of fundamentalism. I generally like what Mr. Cutler is doing

and I think your site and the other two I look at are great. After

researching others, I've chosen to follow this protocol.

I paid 40 dollars for a book that I simply think could have been a lot

better had the author resisted overstatement and organized it in a

more useful way. Also, the primary information, the whole point of the

book, the small/low-dose protocol turns out to be wrong now.

What would be so hard about including a one page addendum that updates

his key message, his current position on dosage and protocol?

I'm agreeing with you that this is important stuff to get out there.

People need to have a choice of treatment. But, right now, were I to

offer this book to a suffering friend, I would have to explain a whole

lot about what Andy REALLY means to say. That's just silly and casts

his book, from the start, in a rather questionable light.

> This type of not very constructive criticism has come up before in

> groups. I have come to the conclusion that some people want to

> attract negative attention.

I'm sorry. " not very constructive criticism " ? It is entirely

constructive. A book is not well laid out if you need a team of

moderators on a support group to explain what the author means.

> I can only guess that an editor who does not understand the content

> would not be helpful.

This is what editors do...

> Considering that Andy is a chemist it is actually very impressive that

> he DOES know exactly how one's body functions.

Yes. It is rather incredible and that's what makes me nervous -- his

tone of certainty about the way the body works. That is an automatic

turn-off for me as a patient. This stuff is just not so black and

white.

> This type of criticism has come up before from negative toxic people.

I'm not sure that name-calling is an effective means of support. It's

this sort of thinking that will hurt your cause and propel

well-meaning savvy people like me, who have already gone through

numerous therapies and doctors, to question the basis of Andy's

claims. Is he for real or is this adulation? It's clear that Mr.

Cutler has a faithful following. He's also making a living putting on

seminars and writing books for sick desperate people. I'm just trying

to gather some facts and find something that I trust will work for me

and for my friends.

So, once again I will say, the point of my post is not to be angry or

toxic or negative but simply this:

The author of a $40 hand-made textbook ought to update his book for

sick readers somehow. If he doesn't agree with the doses/protocol in

his current edition then he should include, at the very least, an

addendum, a little note sent out with the book. What's so hard about

that?

~robin

[Guest guest]

> I mean, paying $40 for a desktop publishing edition, you'd assume

the

> thing would be totally up to date. and, btw, how about using an

> editor?

Hi Robin:

This was the best $40 I have spent, possibly ever in my life. I am

reading the book for the second time. Admittedly, the first time

that I read it was hard for me as brain fog made it hard to

understand. When the chelation starts to clear the brain fog, you

understand just how clear and concise this book is.

> When people are sick (brain-fogged) with this stuff, the obvious

thing

> is to want to read clear concise cut-to-the-chase stuff about what

to

> do to get our noggins working a little better. THEN we can read all

> that high-falutin' fine-tuning scientific stuff about what to take

for

> what ailment;

I should, probably, mention that every time that I have a problem, I

look it up in the book. Usually, the supplement suggested is just

what I needed. Not a placebo effect either, as the benefits last

as long as I take the supplements. From time to time, I stop my

supplements (foolish, but I fool myself into thinking I need a

break). Within a short time, I start to feel the effects and start

them up again. Always, I feel better within a few days.

All these amazing pronouncements that only Andy seems to

> know about EXACTLY how one's entire body functions.

>

> But it is in Andy's protocol, the very treatment we sick patients

are

> seeking, that we are not to believe him as there seems to be a

rather

> large disagreement in terms of amounts/days of treatment.... why is

> this? His dosages START at 400% of what I've been memorizing here on

> this site where 12.5mg DMSA is the mantra. Mr. Cutler says that

> 50-200mg DMSA is an effective dose to start with and 10 days on and

> 3-4 days off is the way to go..

I started at 12.5 mg DMSA and 6 mg. ALA. I am up to 50 mg. ALA.

>I hardly know where to start to help my

>symptoms.

The information out there was so conflicting, and I was scared. I

wasn't sure where to start. I had a time finding the book. But, I

looked up the links, used searches, and asked questions on this

forum. It was a great help, and just what I needed.

> I surely don't mean to disparage any of the good work done by this

> site or by Mr. Cutler. I simply have some problems with the advocacy

> angle, a site advertising a book whose treatment differs from its

own

> recommendations.

I appreciate that you don't mean to disparage any of his good work,

as many of us are being helped by the information in this book.

Wishing you the best in whatever you choose to do.

Jan

[Guest guest]

> I mean, paying $40 for a desktop publishing edition, you'd assume

the

> thing would be totally up to date. and, btw, how about using an

> editor?

Hi Robin:

This was the best $40 I have spent, possibly ever in my life. I am

reading the book for the second time. Admittedly, the first time

that I read it was hard for me as brain fog made it hard to

understand. When the chelation starts to clear the brain fog, you

understand just how clear and concise this book is.

> When people are sick (brain-fogged) with this stuff, the obvious

thing

> is to want to read clear concise cut-to-the-chase stuff about what

to

> do to get our noggins working a little better. THEN we can read all

> that high-falutin' fine-tuning scientific stuff about what to take

for

> what ailment;

I should, probably, mention that every time that I have a problem, I

look it up in the book. Usually, the supplement suggested is just

what I needed. Not a placebo effect either, as the benefits last

as long as I take the supplements. From time to time, I stop my

supplements (foolish, but I fool myself into thinking I need a

break). Within a short time, I start to feel the effects and start

them up again. Always, I feel better within a few days.

All these amazing pronouncements that only Andy seems to

> know about EXACTLY how one's entire body functions.

>

> But it is in Andy's protocol, the very treatment we sick patients

are

> seeking, that we are not to believe him as there seems to be a

rather

> large disagreement in terms of amounts/days of treatment.... why is

> this? His dosages START at 400% of what I've been memorizing here on

> this site where 12.5mg DMSA is the mantra. Mr. Cutler says that

> 50-200mg DMSA is an effective dose to start with and 10 days on and

> 3-4 days off is the way to go..

I started at 12.5 mg DMSA and 6 mg. ALA. I am up to 50 mg. ALA.

>I hardly know where to start to help my

>symptoms.

The information out there was so conflicting, and I was scared. I

wasn't sure where to start. I had a time finding the book. But, I

looked up the links, used searches, and asked questions on this

forum. It was a great help, and just what I needed.

> I surely don't mean to disparage any of the good work done by this

> site or by Mr. Cutler. I simply have some problems with the advocacy

> angle, a site advertising a book whose treatment differs from its

own

> recommendations.

I appreciate that you don't mean to disparage any of his good work,

as many of us are being helped by the information in this book.

Wishing you the best in whatever you choose to do.

Jan

[Guest guest]

>

Also, the primary information, the whole point of the

> book, the small/low-dose protocol turns out to be wrong now.

>

>

This is a false conclusion that you have come to. I can't fix that

for you. I suggest more reading. If you don't like the book try

searching chelation archives.

[Guest guest]

>

Also, the primary information, the whole point of the

> book, the small/low-dose protocol turns out to be wrong now.

>

>

This is a false conclusion that you have come to. I can't fix that

for you. I suggest more reading. If you don't like the book try

searching chelation archives.

[Guest guest]

Robin:

I'm a huge fan of Andy's. I agree with everything says about him -

his generosity, the incredible number of people he's helped, his brilliant

fresh look at the problem of chelation, the incredible amount of information

in his book... The list goes on and on. I too was a skeptic at the outset

but after months of research, I think Andy towers above everyone else in the

field of chelation.

At the same time, I think it is a valid criticism that the book continues to

propone doses that are - according to much experience - too high. It IS

confusing for a newcomer. I do wish he would revise his recommendations, go

on record with the new protocol, and be done with it.

Dean

[Guest guest]

> > Also, the primary information, the whole point of the

> > book, the small/low-dose protocol turns out to be wrong now.

> This is a false conclusion that you have come to. I can't fix that

> for you. I suggest more reading. If you don't like the book try

> searching chelation archives.

>

>

, I'm not looking for a fight. Why are you making this personal?

In the book, if you are new to mercury toxicity, you will thumb

through and naturally turn to the chapter titled " What to do about

mercury poisoning " . If you read through that chapter, after about 20

pages you will finally see the heading " Chelation " . That is on page

89 where his very first sentence is:

" Chelation takes the mercury out of you and makes you healthier.

Everything else in this chapter corrects the problems mercury causes

and makes you feel better while you are detoxing, but it does not cure

you. Chelation is what cures you. "

Great. That makes me want to read on. I say to myself, what can I do

to get rid of this stuff?

So right after that first sentence, and the first time he mentions the

size/timing of a dose he says, " Under ideal circumstances the total

amount of chelating agent used would not be limited and high doses

would be used to cure the patient quickly. A typical dose would be

200-400mg DMSA every 4 hours, or 400-800 mg. DMPS every 8 hours. "

And then if you continue reading, a page later he amends that dose to

say, in a bulleted graph, " starting 4 days after the last filling is

replaced, 50-100 mg. DMSA every 4 hours (including getting up at night

to take a dose) for 2 - 6 months until urine mercury is reduced 80% "

I've read repeatedly, on this site, that that dose is wrong. It's too

high and can make you sick. Evidently Andy himself has changed his

mind about this dosage, reduced the recommended dosage by over 400%.

Well, that's great but why doesn't he tell me, the buyer of his book?

How am I supposed to know about what he really recommends if he

doesn't tell me, the reader? After all, this is the most important

information in the book, the whole point of it really.

If you buy a book, especially one that is seemingly independently

published and probably a bit easier to amend or add an addendum, you

should at least try to get the most updated information possible out

to your reader. It's simple. Please don't get bent out of shape about

this. I'm doing the protocol with the low doses. Everything's fine.

I'm really sorry I brought it up. Good night.

~robin

[Guest guest]

Robin wrote:

> Is there another edition in the works?

My understanding is Andy is working on another book and that takes priority over

a new

edition of Amalgam Illness.

> His dosages START at 400% of what I've been memorizing here on

> this site where 12.5mg DMSA is the mantra. Mr. Cutler says that

> 50-200mg DMSA is an effective dose to start with and 10 days on and

> 3-4 days off is the way to go..

I started at 25 mg DMSA and did fine. Others? Not so. You don't want to

freak yourself

out with a bad reaction at too high a dose and possibly give up chelating. Time

and

experience have shown that for many people, starting very low is wise.

And really, when you think about it, it's really not a serious change in

protocol. Spend

some time skimming Autism-Mercury, and yeesh, you'll see parents getting on

there

saying their DAN doctor told them to chelate this way, then that. It's as if

there are fads

re: how to chelate, and it bounces all over the place. In comparison, the

changes Andy has

made over the years have been minor, and it's clear to me he knows what he is

talking

about.

I wasn't that happy with the appearance or organization of Amalgam Illness

either, and I'd

love to see a good editing. However, I'm also amazed he can spend the time he

does

answering questions and helping kids get well (and adults too). I'd also rather

see him

write a book for kids first, before going back to AI.

There is a good section on chelation itself in his Hair Test Book, which came

after AI.

It's not a perfect system of getting the info out, but we'd all be lost without

him and his

work.

And btw, thanks to not only Andy, but to all the people who day after day

thoughtfully

answer question after question here, and at A-M.

, chelating adult, also chelating 2 kids

[Guest guest]

Hello again and sorry to use a post just to say thanks but under the

circumstances I thought it important. I wanted to thank ,

, Jan and Dean for weighing in and sharing their thoughts.

I've been a group moderator a time or two and know what a lot of

(thankless) work it can be. It helps to be dedicated and your whole

group surely is.

I look forward to following the protocol and sharing results along the

way. I've already steered a sister and two friends to Andy's protocol

and am currently waging a little battle with a couple of doctors here

:-)

Thanks again!

~robin

[Guest guest]

>

> , I'm not looking for a fight. Why are you making this personal?

>

Because the EDTA and NDF hurt me more than Andy's protocol ever could.

My chelation experience taught me that I really would have died if I

had used the 250 mg DMSA, 250 mg R-ALA protocol the doctor gave me

(because I was so toxic). If I had started on the low end of doses

Andy recommends, even the ones in AI, I would have only scared the

living daylights out of myself. The difference is the first 3 would

have caused serious regressions whereas using Andy's protocol at doses

that were too high for me would only cause serious side effects.

Regressions go on for a long time, maybe forever. Side effects

resolve after a week or so.

J

[Guest guest]

Robin,

It sounds like you want some guarantee...and no one is able to give you that.

Every person is individual in their treatment. Mercury is an awful beast that

invades different organs for different people, hence the varying symptoms and

the difficulty in diagnosing the illness.

As and point out, Andy has saved people from seriously

damaging their bodies, perhaps even death. He has gone against the cement-minds

of the AMA and what they advocate for detox. This took courage and stubbornness

on his part to go against the grain.

He didn't have to publish the book, he could have just cured himself and his

girlfriend's child and went on his merry way. He didn't.

Robyn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I wouldn't be looking at your site or reading this book if I didn't

think there was some merit in it. I'm a veteran of support groups and

my writing can be found all over the Internet. I'm typically upbeat

and positive. It's quite rare that I find myself in the position of

critic but from the beginning, this mercury-poisoning " movement " has

made me a bit nervous. It has sometimes sounded less like science and

more like dogma.

--robin ann

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

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

[Guest guest]

For what it's worth...

>

> I wouldn't be looking at your site or reading this book if I didn't

> think there was some merit in it. I'm a veteran of support groups and

> my writing can be found all over the Internet. I'm typically upbeat

> and positive. It's quite rare that I find myself in the position of

> critic but from the beginning, this mercury-poisoning " movement " has

> made me a bit nervous. It has sometimes sounded less like science and

> more like dogma.

>

I just discovered this alternative chelation protocol movement last

month, and am very excited about it's potential to help me turn my

health situation around. But I agree that it often comes across as

dogmatic, moreso in the forums than in the book.

> I bring this up because I too am a scientist and have a natural

> dislike of fundamentalism. I generally like what Mr. Cutler is doing

> and I think your site and the other two I look at are great. After

> researching others, I've chosen to follow this protocol.

>

Me too.

> I paid 40 dollars for a book that I simply think could have been a lot

> better had the author resisted overstatement and organized it in a

> more useful way. Also, the primary information, the whole point of the

> book, the small/low-dose protocol turns out to be wrong now.

>

As I told my D.C., who is willing to learn along with me, thankfully,

Amalgam Illness seems to contain nuggets of invaluable information

regarding the effects of mercury and what to do about it. However,

the organization of the book is bewildering, at best.

> What would be so hard about including a one page addendum that updates

> his key message, his current position on dosage and protocol?

>

A very good point. For several weeks I debated posting a simple

question on this forum: " Is there any website that contains an

official listing of the points that need to be updated from the 1999

edition of AI? " Instead of posting this, I resorted to searching

Andy's posts and this site, discovering on my own that (a) there

definitely have been revisions to the recommended protocol, and (

there is no one site containing an update list for AI. It took a lot

of work to figure this out, and I'm sure others will continue to have

this same questions and degree of confusion until the situation is

remedied. I do not intend to criticize Andy or anyone else personally

-- I just echo Robin's suggestion that an update would be a helpful

improvement.

If the recommended dosages have been updated since 1999, what other

parts of the book need to be revised?

> I'm agreeing with you that this is important stuff to get out there.

> People need to have a choice of treatment. But, right now, were I to

> offer this book to a suffering friend, I would have to explain a whole

> lot about what Andy REALLY means to say. That's just silly and casts

> his book, from the start, in a rather questionable light.

Agreed.

>

> > This type of not very constructive criticism has come up before in

> > groups. I have come to the conclusion that some people want to

> > attract negative attention.

>

> I'm sorry. " not very constructive criticism " ? It is entirely

> constructive. A book is not well laid out if you need a team of

> moderators on a support group to explain what the author means.

>

> > I can only guess that an editor who does not understand the content

> > would not be helpful.

>

> This is what editors do...

>

> > Considering that Andy is a chemist it is actually very impressive that

> > he DOES know exactly how one's body functions.

>

> Yes. It is rather incredible and that's what makes me nervous -- his

> tone of certainty about the way the body works. That is an automatic

> turn-off for me as a patient. This stuff is just not so black and

> white.

>

I was immediately bothered, too, by the " tone of certainty " when I

read AI, which seems certain about exactly how the body will respond

to various treatments, without stating why in many cases. I hate to

call it pseudo-science, but that's what it seems like to me. That

said, I think it may very well still be the best resource available

for mercury toxic individuals. All of the proclamations in the book

are certainly not 100% correct, especially 9 years later, but at least

he offers a lot of options and theories for individuals to try out on

their own or under the guidance of their doctor.

> > This type of criticism has come up before from negative toxic people.

>

> I'm not sure that name-calling is an effective means of support. It's

> this sort of thinking that will hurt your cause and propel

> well-meaning savvy people like me, who have already gone through

> numerous therapies and doctors, to question the basis of Andy's

> claims. Is he for real or is this adulation? It's clear that Mr.

> Cutler has a faithful following.

A very faithful following, indeed.

He's also making a living putting on

> seminars and writing books for sick desperate people. I'm just trying

> to gather some facts and find something that I trust will work for me

> and for my friends.

>

> So, once again I will say, the point of my post is not to be angry or

> toxic or negative but simply this:

> The author of a $40 hand-made textbook ought to update his book for

> sick readers somehow. If he doesn't agree with the doses/protocol in

> his current edition then he should include, at the very least, an

> addendum, a little note sent out with the book. What's so hard about

> that?

>

> ~robin

>

Agree. My only disagreement is that the main point of the book does

not seem to be the " low dose " aspect of the protocol. Frustratingly,

AI is 'all over the place' when it comes to recommended dosages, even

stating that " Exactly how much DMSA, LA " is not important (Page 73),

" You select the dosages of DMSA and LA based on how you feel when you

take them, " (Page 90), " Suggested target dose (DMSA, DMPS) = maximum

tolerated dose " (Page 204), and " DMSA dosages will usually be driven

by economics " (Page 208).

I believe the main pillars of AI's mercury detox protocol are these:

(I) Avoid chelating until amalgams are safely removed

(II) Avoid using " partial (single thiol) chelators, " which are not

true chelators but merely mobilizers of mercury

(III) When chelating, maintain fairly steady plasma concentrations of

the chelators by taking them frequently enough (DMSA-4 hours, ALA-3

hours, DMPS-8 hours) during campaigns.

The fourth pillar seems to have been an amendment to the protocol

based on patient experience since 1999:

(IV) start with extremely low doses (e.g., 12.5mg) and only gradually

work your way up to modest doses (e.g., 50mg)

Am I missing any Pillars?

Anyway, it is encouraging to hear about so many people finding healing

through this protocol. I am hoping to be one of the success stories,

eventually. God knows I've tried everything else, it seems. For

others in our predicament, hopefully these posts -- and potentially an

updated version of AI someday or a website showing the protocol

recommendations that have changed since 1999, would make it easier for

other newbies trying to find their way.

Darren

[Guest guest]

I think I have read everybody's posts about this up to Monday at noon, and would

like to add a few comments. I will comment below, because this is the most

important point which needs to be addressed, IMO.-----------Jackie

In frequent-dose-chelation wrote:

>

Also, the primary information, the whole point of the

> book, the small/low-dose protocol turns out to be wrong now.

-------------This is a dangerous statement, and I don't want newcomers to be

confused by this, so I want to clarify something, that I feel I understand very

well from reading Andy's posts for over 2-1/2 years, and I have heard him say.

The basic protocol is very simple, and the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT part of the

protocol is the FREQUENT DOSING. The most important thing is to take the

chelators based on their half lives, so as to keep a fairly constant level of

chelator in your bloodstream, so you can safely remove the metals out of your

body with a minimum amount of damage and redistribution. This is the core of

his protocol, and this has not changed one bit since publishing his book. So to

state that the whole protocol is wrong in the book is not correct. Things that

do vary and each person has to find what works best for them personally, is the

dosage and length of chelation rounds. But the absolutely most important part

of his protocol, the frequent dosing, has not changed, is still the same, and

always will be, and is what sets his protocol apart from all the others. This

is the very core concept that everyone needs to understand.

I agree that AI has its problems, but I also feel that it and Andy have saved

me from much harm. If I wouldn't have purchased his book, I would not have

known that ALA should never be taken with amalgams still in your mouth, and the

first alternative doctor (who supposedly knew about mercury poisoning) I seen

would have done me much harm. She prescribed me a supplement containing ALA,

and she had no idea it was a chelator. She would have also eventually sent me

to the IV chelation doctor for a challenge test, before *allowing* me to have my

fillings removed. The next alternative doctor I tried was a DAN doctor, and

would have prescribed infrequent, high dose DMSA protocol, which probably would

have killed me or made me severely worse. I have often thought, what would a

500mg dose of DMSA do to me when 25mg was too much to start with? So I feel

that Andy's book and information saved me from a horrible fate, and I will be

forever grateful for that. So I understand where 's and others passions

and emotions come from, and feel that the money spent on his books was

priceless.

You questioned how can he be so right about so many things, and I also find it

amazing that he knows and understands so much, but I have heard people time and

time again say that " Andy was right " and " his protocol works " . I think the key

is that he was sick himself, and there's nothing like being sick yourself, to

make you understand what it feels like, and to go searching for answers, and

luckily for us, he had the chemistry background to understand all of this. One

more recent one that sticks in my mind was somebody saying that they had MCS for

years and no doctor could help, and then within a week of doing what Andy

suggested was much better! His depth of knowledge just amazes me.

And as others have mentioned, I am also amazed at his generosity of time with

answering questions on the internet. I used to read over at A-M alot more, and

he would answer fairly frequently, which is where I gained alot more knowledge

from him and insight into who he is. I typed in just his name as a Search

criteria on A-M, and it said there were OVER 5000 hits! So he has given

generously of his time, IMO.

You make some valid points about the book. I remember being disappointed when

I seen the cover, wondering if I had just wasted my money. But when I read the

description of what mercury poisoning does to you starting on page 25, it was an

OMG moment for me, confirmation and validation that this is what's wrong with

me. I'll never forget that. (And then it saved me from the above doctors.)

It can be a very overwhelming book, especially at first. It is not a read

once or twice from front to back kind of book. It is one you will refer back to

time and time again, more like a reference book, as others have said. I'm

guessing that Andy struggled with what all to put in it, and my feeling is that

he tried to pack as much information as he possibly could that could possibly

help different people into it, hoping it would help the most people. Is it too

much all at once or at first? Yes. Am I glad its all in there now? Yes.

I agree that with just the book, it would be very confusing to decide at what

dose to start at. The best advice I got from these groups was to start lower

than the book. I was one of them that needed to start low. Would have 50mg

killed me? I don't think so, I just wouldn't have felt very good. That is

still 10 times LESS than what the DAN doctor would have started me out on. But

you do have a point that it would be nice to have an addendum or something added

to the book, explaining that with more experience and feedback now, that many

people suggest starting even lower. Hopefully most, if not all, people who buy

the book also join these groups. And as others have stated, Hair Test

Interpretation is newer and probably laid out better, and my understanding is

that Andy's next book is for the kids, which I think is very important, so I

guess we'll just have to wait our turn. He's only one man trying to help so

many. I guess we should clone him!

Anyway, sorry to ramble on so long. I agree that AI isn't perfect, but then

what in life is, and I am very thankful that Andy did write it, because I

believe the information in his book saved me, and I will be forever grateful to

him for that.

Jackie

This is a false conclusion that you have come to. I can't fix that

for you. I suggest more reading. If you don't like the book try

searching chelation archives.

[Guest guest]

I think I have read everybody's posts about this up to Monday at noon, and would

like to add a few comments. I will comment below, because this is the most

important point which needs to be addressed, IMO.-----------Jackie

In frequent-dose-chelation wrote:

>

Also, the primary information, the whole point of the

> book, the small/low-dose protocol turns out to be wrong now.

-------------This is a dangerous statement, and I don't want newcomers to be

confused by this, so I want to clarify something, that I feel I understand very

well from reading Andy's posts for over 2-1/2 years, and I have heard him say.

The basic protocol is very simple, and the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT part of the

protocol is the FREQUENT DOSING. The most important thing is to take the

chelators based on their half lives, so as to keep a fairly constant level of

chelator in your bloodstream, so you can safely remove the metals out of your

body with a minimum amount of damage and redistribution. This is the core of

his protocol, and this has not changed one bit since publishing his book. So to

state that the whole protocol is wrong in the book is not correct. Things that

do vary and each person has to find what works best for them personally, is the

dosage and length of chelation rounds. But the absolutely most important part

of his protocol, the frequent dosing, has not changed, is still the same, and

always will be, and is what sets his protocol apart from all the others. This

is the very core concept that everyone needs to understand.

I agree that AI has its problems, but I also feel that it and Andy have saved

me from much harm. If I wouldn't have purchased his book, I would not have

known that ALA should never be taken with amalgams still in your mouth, and the

first alternative doctor (who supposedly knew about mercury poisoning) I seen

would have done me much harm. She prescribed me a supplement containing ALA,

and she had no idea it was a chelator. She would have also eventually sent me

to the IV chelation doctor for a challenge test, before *allowing* me to have my

fillings removed. The next alternative doctor I tried was a DAN doctor, and

would have prescribed infrequent, high dose DMSA protocol, which probably would

have killed me or made me severely worse. I have often thought, what would a

500mg dose of DMSA do to me when 25mg was too much to start with? So I feel

that Andy's book and information saved me from a horrible fate, and I will be

forever grateful for that. So I understand where 's and others passions

and emotions come from, and feel that the money spent on his books was

priceless.

You questioned how can he be so right about so many things, and I also find it

amazing that he knows and understands so much, but I have heard people time and

time again say that " Andy was right " and " his protocol works " . I think the key

is that he was sick himself, and there's nothing like being sick yourself, to

make you understand what it feels like, and to go searching for answers, and

luckily for us, he had the chemistry background to understand all of this. One

more recent one that sticks in my mind was somebody saying that they had MCS for

years and no doctor could help, and then within a week of doing what Andy

suggested was much better! His depth of knowledge just amazes me.

And as others have mentioned, I am also amazed at his generosity of time with

answering questions on the internet. I used to read over at A-M alot more, and

he would answer fairly frequently, which is where I gained alot more knowledge

from him and insight into who he is. I typed in just his name as a Search

criteria on A-M, and it said there were OVER 5000 hits! So he has given

generously of his time, IMO.

You make some valid points about the book. I remember being disappointed when

I seen the cover, wondering if I had just wasted my money. But when I read the

description of what mercury poisoning does to you starting on page 25, it was an

OMG moment for me, confirmation and validation that this is what's wrong with

me. I'll never forget that. (And then it saved me from the above doctors.)

It can be a very overwhelming book, especially at first. It is not a read

once or twice from front to back kind of book. It is one you will refer back to

time and time again, more like a reference book, as others have said. I'm

guessing that Andy struggled with what all to put in it, and my feeling is that

he tried to pack as much information as he possibly could that could possibly

help different people into it, hoping it would help the most people. Is it too

much all at once or at first? Yes. Am I glad its all in there now? Yes.

I agree that with just the book, it would be very confusing to decide at what

dose to start at. The best advice I got from these groups was to start lower

than the book. I was one of them that needed to start low. Would have 50mg

killed me? I don't think so, I just wouldn't have felt very good. That is

still 10 times LESS than what the DAN doctor would have started me out on. But

you do have a point that it would be nice to have an addendum or something added

to the book, explaining that with more experience and feedback now, that many

people suggest starting even lower. Hopefully most, if not all, people who buy

the book also join these groups. And as others have stated, Hair Test

Interpretation is newer and probably laid out better, and my understanding is

that Andy's next book is for the kids, which I think is very important, so I

guess we'll just have to wait our turn. He's only one man trying to help so

many. I guess we should clone him!

Anyway, sorry to ramble on so long. I agree that AI isn't perfect, but then

what in life is, and I am very thankful that Andy did write it, because I

believe the information in his book saved me, and I will be forever grateful to

him for that.

Jackie

This is a false conclusion that you have come to. I can't fix that

for you. I suggest more reading. If you don't like the book try

searching chelation archives.

[Guest guest]

> >

> > There is a file called " Andy's protocol " that sums up his current

> > chelation protocol in two pages. This is what we give parents on

> > Autism-Mercury who need to learn about it.

>