Poor excretors and Porpyria

[Guest guest]

Posted by: " tomashley75 " tomashley75@... tomashley75

Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:36 pm (PDT)

>Still learning and trying to educate myself. Why would a hair test be

valid if someone is a poor excretor/detoxifier?

Because if they are not excreting into hair, then the _essential elements_

become chaotic in certain systemic ways, and that can be detected.

>Some here say the DMPS

push/urine test is not useful, but why would a hair test be valid if

your body hyas a hard time excreting toxins? The push would force the

metals out of hiding, where a hair analysis might not show them.

The push would pick up some easily accessible mercury, dump it into your

bloodstream, take out only a small part, and allow the rest to go back into

your tissues. Easily accessible areas are usually places like your kidneys,

but are notably _not_ places like your brain.

>Also, anyone (TK?) heard of porpyria? What is it?

Certain kinds of blockages in the pathway to heme production - but if you want

to know this kind of thing, you should really be doing your own research. I

find wikipedia a good place to start for most technical things, from software

to biochemistry.

>To everyone, what is your fav ezyme to take with food?

Some use enzymes from HoustonNI.Com.

>Thanks, Tom in Atlanta

[Guest guest]

Still trying to help my little brain understand. If you are a poor

excretor/detoxifier, why would a hair test be better than a push? A

push gets metals out of hiding at least.

Anyone heard of porphyria?

[Guest guest]

>

> Still trying to help my little brain understand.

>If you are a poor

> excretor/detoxifier, why would a hair test be better than a push?

I assume that you are meaning to determine whether or not the person

is mercury poisoned.

A push is not recommended by this group at all. What happens is that

the chelator picks up some of the readily available metals, puts some

in the urine (which would not be much in the case of a poor excretor),

and redistributes lots to other places including the brain leading to

worsening of symptoms. Therefore it is a high risk procedure. The

results have little meaning because whatever metals are in the urine

are not a representative sample of what is in the body, and the

standard used to measure the results against is an average from people

who have not had any chelator, so of course there will be more metals

than the standard in most cases.

When people are mercury poisoned their mineral transport in the body

usually becomes deranged. This is what often shows up in the hair

test, even when the actual amount of mercury in hair is very low

(because mercury interferes with excretion, and people are often

genetically less able to excrete toxins as compared to normal

individuals). Andy has reviewed hundreds of tests to come up with the

counting rules. For more information his " Hair Test Interpretation "

book explains it all.

A

> push gets metals out of hiding at least.

>

Not much, and the risk of worsening, unreliability of the results,

makes it not worthwhile.

> Anyone heard of porphyria?

>

Yes. Use www.onibasu.com to search, wikipedia, google, or Andy's two

books.