Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

counting rules

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

In a message dated 22/06/2005 21:42:47 GMT Daylight Time, karen@... writes:

Well I am thoroughly confused now! I had a DDi hair test done for Joe as a marker before we start chelation and have had the result back. I have applied the counting rules and he doesn't meet any of the 3 steps. Does this mean there is no point in chelating? Mandi, or anyone,what do I do now?

>>>have you been supplementing him for 3 months before the test? That can efect reults. I would do a trial anyeway

Mandi x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I thought there were 5 steps?

>From: Mum231ASD@...

>Reply-Desperate4DMPSEurope

>Desperate4DMPSEurope

>Subject: Re: Counting Rules

>Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:03:13 EDT

>

>

>In a message dated 22/06/2005 21:42:47 GMT Daylight Time,

>karen@... writes:

>

>Well I am thoroughly confused now! I had a DDi hair test done for Joe

>as a marker before we start chelation and have had the result back. I

>have applied the counting rules and he doesn't meet any of the 3

>steps. Does this mean there is no point in chelating? Mandi, or

>anyone,what do I do now?

>

>

>

> >>>have you been supplementing him for 3 months before the test? That can

>efect reults. I would do a trial anyeway

>

>Mandi x

_________________________________________________________________

Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!

http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

>

>

> >>>have you been supplementing him for 3 months before the test?

That can

> efect reults. I would do a trial anyeway

>

Thanks Mandi yes I have been supplementing for about 3 years before

the test!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

--- >

> I thought there were 5 steps?

>

>Well Stuart I've looked again and can only find 3 steps to ascertain

abnormal mineral transport. Having read on to the next page though

(always useful!) I have found the heading " when mineral transport is

normal- other toxic metals " . I think this bit means that for Joe's

result, the toxic metals section should be read as it looks ie high in

aluminuim,antimony (in the red section),bismuth, lead, silver (but

this was after I had given him colloidial silver) and tin.There was a

little bit of mercury too. The row at the bottom of this

section " total toxic representation " is also in the red.

So now I am wondering does this mean if I chelate the toxic metals

will come out easily as Joe is showing normal mineral transport (she

says hopefully)? What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi

did not meet the counting rules just before we started chelating - he had been on many supplements prior to this. We have been chelating now since january and have just repeated the hair test - he is now all over the place with 5 minerals in the red - he does meet the couting rules! Confusing or what. I have a consult with Dr Usman on Monday and will do a full report then.

basically, as Mandi said, the counting rules are not 100% accurate if you have a good supplementation programme in place. is pulling toxic metals in the stool (nickel in the red), I am still waiting for the urine results.

Based on our experience I would chelate for a while and see what happens.

JMHO

Tina Charman <karen@...> wrote:

--- > > I thought there were 5 steps?> >Well Stuart I've looked again and can only find 3 steps to ascertain abnormal mineral transport. Having read on to the next page though (always useful!) I have found the heading "when mineral transport is normal- other toxic metals". I think this bit means that for Joe's result, the toxic metals section should be read as it looks ie high in aluminuim,antimony (in the red section),bismuth, lead, silver (but this was after I had given him colloidial silver) and tin.There was a little bit of mercury too. The row at the bottom of this section "total toxic representation" is also in the red.So now I am wondering does this mean if I chelate the toxic metals will come out easily as Joe is showing normal mineral transport (she says hopefully)? What do you

think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi !

I've got Andy Cutler's latest book, there are five in

there.............where are you looking?

I believe the hair test reflects mineral absorbtion in the period the hair

sample has grown. So, If your mineral levels are looking normalish, then

great - suggests minerals are getting where they need to. The

supplementation will inevitably compensate for dietary as well as absorbtion

and transportation issues.

Your theory on being able to draw more out because the transport is

interesting. If you could determine what the impact of diet and supplement

is, then you may be able to draw conclusions.

I'd chelate anyway if I was you. In my humble opinion, if your child has

autism, metal toxicity is a reasonable bet. Hair tests, stool analysis

simply give you different, additional pieces of evidence.

Give it a reasonable period of time (3months). If you've seen no progress at

all, then re-assess.

If you get a chance give me a call tonight - wouldn't mind catching up

generally.

Regards

Stuart

>From: " Charman " <karen@...>

>Reply-Desperate4DMPSEurope

>Desperate4DMPSEurope

>Subject: Re: Counting Rules

>Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 18:02:13 -0000

>

>--- >

> > I thought there were 5 steps?

> >

> >Well Stuart I've looked again and can only find 3 steps to ascertain

>abnormal mineral transport. Having read on to the next page though

>(always useful!) I have found the heading " when mineral transport is

>normal- other toxic metals " . I think this bit means that for Joe's

>result, the toxic metals section should be read as it looks ie high in

>aluminuim,antimony (in the red section),bismuth, lead, silver (but

>this was after I had given him colloidial silver) and tin.There was a

>little bit of mercury too. The row at the bottom of this

>section " total toxic representation " is also in the red.

>So now I am wondering does this mean if I chelate the toxic metals

>will come out easily as Joe is showing normal mineral transport (she

>says hopefully)? What do you think?

>

>

>

_________________________________________________________________

Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!

http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

In a message dated 24/06/2005 18:29:21 GMT Daylight Time, karen@... writes:

I'm off to see the Bay City Rollers,Osmonds, Cassidy and Essex tomorrow night! (about 30 years too late, but am going with my 2 best friends of that era so we can regress to age 11 together!)

>>>OMG, I wish I was coming - where is this?

Mandi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Stuart

I got the info from one of the groups, CK2 or autismmercury,

whichever one Andy Cutler is on (sorry to be so vague!), I think the

counting rules were on a file there. I guess it doesn't really matter

as I'm going to chelate anyway.

Probably won't be able to call tonight as I have to go to a committee

meeting (not happy about that, Friday nights are for eating pizza and

drinking wine) but I will try to call Sunday night - I'm off to see

the Bay City Rollers,Osmonds, Cassidy and Essex tomorrow

night! (about 30 years too late, but am going with my 2 best friends

of that era so we can regress to age 11 together!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

>

>

>

> >>>OMG, I wish I was coming - where is this?

>

Wembley, they are playing Sunday as well, might be some tickets left

for Sunday night (saw it advertised in Sunday papers last week).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

hello, are the counting rules for the DDI hairtest anywhere on the web?

i have andy's amalgam illness book, but not the newer hairtest book. the

only " counting rules " in the amalgam book that i've found relate to symptoms

and results of tests, p. 60-61. i think i have 14 " positives " out of 33

tests, which appears to be 99.9% indicative of mercury.

am i understanding this correctly? even if i had 60 tests, it appears that

15 is about the most one could have to indicate mercury.

gratefully,

kendra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...