Would like help interpreting DDI results ...

[Guest guest]

(Comments below)

Posted by: " " lindajaytee@...

Thu Apr 3, 2008 10:35 pm (PDT)

> > >You meet rule number 4, having 11 or less in the middle green/white

> > >bands with SHORT bars. Dont count the ones that go to the middle

> this is where the confusion came in. For this rule count the results

> in the green and white zones. The white zone includes the middle, and

> those are counted.

> > >or end of green. Just the ones that are short..that would be 7.

> >

> > Jada - Since when? There are three counting rules -

> Actually, in Andy HTI book there are FIVE now.... not much has changed.

> > number to the left/right,

> In HTI the no. to the left/right are separated to 2 rules.

Ok.

> > number of reds, and number in the middle band. That middle

> > band is the whole green+white area. Our brownian friend is in the

> > " unusual " realm, with 3 reds. The number to the right is 8, but since

> > we don't know exactly where the base-line is, the number could be

> > anywhere from 6 to 8 ( " suspicious " to " not uncommon " ).

> The way I would count it is Cu, Se, Ba, look like they are going below

> the mid point, so I wouldn't count them. Iron is above the mid point,

> but in the white zone, so I would count it as half. That gives me

> 7.5. Not sure if Andy would like my interpretation

I see. Actually, I hadn't even counted Cu and Se. They are right smack

on the mean (I have a copy of the reference ranges, if anyone wants

them), so they count as half one way and half the other. Then Sulfur is

low (not Barium), so that doesn't count for the high side. Finally, I

count Iron as high, given that it's above the mean. So, I we most

properly get 9 high. Then we notice that since we don't exactly know

the base-line, those close to the mean could go either way. So, it

might be as few as 7 high. So this could be anywhere form Andy's

" unusual " to totally normal. In either case, not too convincing as far

as indicating a problem goes. The most indicative count is the

" unusual " result of having 3 reds.

> The fifth rule has something to do with how many come one short of a

> rule, or something like that. I have to look it up everytime.

Ah, right. If there are two counts that are " suspicious " (miss by one)

then that counts as positive for Hg. I had forgotten that one, thanks.

> > Still, I do agree that by symptoms s/he is probably toxic - thought

> > they need to convince themselves of that.

> I agree too, that this person is most likely toxic and will benefit

> the most from proper amalgam removal and chelation.

Yes, most convincing to me are the fact that the hair test is clearly

not quite right, along with the very typical set of symptoms. I think

it's important that we remember that Andy came to this at a time when

there was a lot of " lore " about hair tests. All high, all low, lots of

scatter, these were things that had been identified. In trying to make

sense of how to operationalize it, he came up with his counting rules -

but they are nothing but a rule of thumb meant to capture the

accumulated knowledge of alternative practitioners. There is actually a

research project that needs to be done here to pin this down.

> J

> > Dave.

Dave.

[Guest guest]

>

>

>

> In AI, the " Do You Have It? " chapter, starting on page 54, lists a lot

> of things you can evaluate, some of them are symptoms and some are

> actual lab test results, and then calculate the likelihood that it's

> mercury.

I went through this diagnostic checklist. There were many of the

points that I knew the answers to. I forget my score, but it was very

clear after doing the test that I was toxic. (It just wasn't clear

how I would convince others). My hair test met 3 counting rules. And

then I had a huge reaction to DMSA. Plus, health deterioration was

correlated to heavy mercury exposures. Nothing could be more clear

than all of that.

J

This is an EXTREMELY confusing and difficult chapter (at

> least it was for me) and I kept skipping it. Then I finally sat down

> with a highlighter and all of my lab test results (that I'd gotten a

> copy of from my doctor) and worked through it. When I was done and I

> looked at the tables on pg 61, I felt very sure that mercury was my

> " root " problem.

>

> As I understood it, there are any number of other conditions that can

> account for any subset of symptoms and results, but that at some point

> you have SO MANY of them that it's not likely that there is any other

> single, root cause.

>

> I do think it's a difficult chapter, but if you already have a lot of

> lab results to reference, it can be done at no additional cost. For

> me, it did answer the question of " how likely is it mercury? "

>

[Guest guest]

Dave and others,

Dean wrote me and said my hair test is posted: #153.

Thanks to all for the help.

norske