Re: ? - every other night DMSA supps/ALA

[Guest guest]

Often when people go in search of answers they already have an idea of

the answer that they want to hear. They will then seek out as many

opinions as they can to increase the likely hood that someone will tell

them what they want to hear.

42

Strozier wrote:

>

> How can you come to a board and ask for help then not listen ?????

>

>

>

> From: Mum231ASDaol (DOT) com & amp;lt;Mum231ASDaol (DOT) com & amp;gt;

>

> Subject: Re: [ ] Re: ? - every other night DMSA supps/ALA

>

>

>

> Date: Saturday, May 31, 2008, 9:28 AM

>

> & amp;gt; & amp;gt;As far as I aware Dr Geier is OBGYN....... ......... ..

>

> What is unclear is why you have so much respect for " doctors " who

> damaged your

>

> child in the first place.

>

> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _

>

> AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.

> aol.co.uk/ homepage/ now.

>

>

[Guest guest]

RE: The remarks about " why would you ask for help and then reject it? "

---------

No matter what information people are looking for, if they feel

personally attacked, they will tend to defend themselves. If the

avenue of attack is shooting down their ideas in a contemptuous

fashion, the avenue of defense will usually be to defend those ideas.

Few people are able to differentiate between the two things well

enough to separate those issues. Those who do (like me) are often

reacted to as if their concerns about being personally attacked are an

expression of " being too sensitive " , a " whiner " , etc.

Parents of disabled kids tend to be more defensive than average.

Parents looking for help when they have generally been told the child

cannot be helped feel strongly (and rightly so) that they are good and

devoted parents, trying to do their best by a child they love. Being

told in very strong (condemning) terms that they are harming thier

child is like telling them " You are wrong: you aren't a good parent.

In fact, you are really, really rotten parent. " That generally gets a

pretty strong negative reaction. Again, most people will " defend "

their view that they are good, devoted, loving parents by defending

what they are currently doing, defending the decision-making process

( " thousands of hours of research... " ) that brought them there, etc.

Hammering them harder usually only causes them to justify their

position all the more.

People who are handicapped themselves (as I am) or are responsible for

handicapped children (as I also am and most people on this list are)

typically have trouble making changes to their lives. When a person

is physically fragile, change can be dangerous. Even when I am

looking for support, I often find myself pushing away people's

suggestions because it feels invasive and threatening. I sometimes

change my mind later. I am highly aware of this behavior in myself and

still cannot seem to put a stop to it when I am feeling threatened in

some way. People are less aware of their own behaviors are going to

generally be unable to stop it at all. Again: being ganged up on,

hammered harder and so on will generally cause people to dig in their

heels harder and make their position more entrenched. No matter how

desperately they really want help, the social dynamic makes it

impossible to accept it. The only hope of getting through in such

situations is stop the social assault and make sure you aren't making

people feel attacked while offering information and opinions.

Just some observations. So I hope the mob doesn't turn thier baleful

eye on me and decide I'm the one to gang up on next.

Peace.

[Guest guest]

Dana, are there any specific tests or protocols you suggest for the

Hep B triggered kids?

My son has these characteristics:

Expressive Language Delay/Pronunciation problems

All other " autistic-like " symptoms seem to come and go with immune

triggers.

He has good balance, muscle tone, smiles, makes eye contact,

initiates social contact, mostly has great auditory/information

processing (follows directions/understands language).

I'm stumped because he's doesn't really " fit " autism.

He has slightly high lead and mercury levels, and high aluminum,

tungsten and copper levels.

Last weekend we did ALA only chelation and the weekend before we did

ALA + NAC. Well, I shouldn't have removed NAC because he had

terrible yeast this past week.

He does not tolerate DMG (haven't tried TMG yet), and will not

tolerate B vitamins. He also has trouble with herbs so I keep him on

pretty basic stuff.

If you have any insight, I would love it.

> > If I hadn't have run into someone whose child was horribly,

> permanently damaged by a well-known Dan! dr......there but for the

> grace of God, go I.

>

>

> A few years ago, I received an email from a mother whose son was a

> patient of a very well-known DAN doctor. This doctor has a waiting

> list, speaks at DAN conferences, etc. The doctor recommended to

this

> mother to give her younger child a HepB vax. The mother trusted

this

> doctor, so she allowed the vax. Within 3 weeks, the child was

> autistic like her brother. The mother was understandably

devastated.

>

> My son was autistic from HepB vax also, so I gave her info on what

> might help recover her child. Over the next month or so, the mother

> implemented many of my ideas and the child was " mostly " recovered,

> altho issues still remained.

>

> The mother still wanted to use a doctor for her children, so I

> recommended one of two options. Either take the child back to the

> doctor and insist that the doctor recover the child at NO expense to

> the mother. Or, find another doctor.

>

> Altho I never used a doctor and recovered my kids on my own, I

> understand why some parents want to use a doctor. However, ALWAYS

> consider the doctors advice and recommendations as just that, advice

> and recommendations. Use your own judgment to decide if it is

> something you want to pursue. Doctors are not gods, they are human

> and make mistakes. Sometimes they are simply idiots.

>

> And it is YOUR child.

>

> Do your own research and make your own decisions. Never fully

trust a

> doctor, ANY doctor, 100%.

>

> Dana

>

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: Michele

RE: The remarks about " why would you ask for help and then reject it? "

---------

No matter what information people are looking for, if they feel

personally attacked, they will tend to defend themselves. If the

avenue of attack is shooting down their ideas in a contemptuous

fashion, the avenue of defense will usually be to defend those ideas.

====>Hi Michele,

I don't always agree with you but I always appreciate your take on things.

I've been around here for about 3.5 years and it has NOT been my experience that

calm, logical reasoning does anything to dispel parents' from engaging in

further practices that might hurt their children. This approach is normally

advocated by the " we must be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).

Some people are afraid of any conflict. Conflict for it's own sake is not

useful but conflict is sometimes the catalyst that allows for clearing the air

and successful resolution of a problem.

Often when I do marriage counseling and we get to the point where we are

talking about problems, men will rationalize their behavior but when a lot of

women are confronted about a behavioral issue they will whine that " their

feelings are hurt. " Never mind that the issue is true or not, their " feelings "

are hurt.

In my mind mature people try to keep their feelings under control to deal with

whatever problem they are attempting to deal with. I know a lot of people here

who wish someone would have risked hurting their feelings and talking about the

wisdom of vaccinations.

And people fail to differentiate their ideas from themselves. If you challenge

someone's idea you are not attacking them personally, it's only an idea. The

problem comes into play when people wrap their ego up in an idea.

More likely, there is some unseen mechanism at work, in my opinion most

people have preconceived ideas about what they would like to do before they come

on and ask the ?. And most people only want to be told that what they have

thought of doing is right. As you probably well know even when people ask for

truth, they don't really want it.

They have heard about one or two kids who get better on whatever method they

are contemplating and they don't want to hear the " other " side of story.

Few people are able to differentiate between the two things well

enough to separate those issues. Those who do (like me) are often

reacted to as if their concerns about being personally attacked are an

expression of " being too sensitive " , a " whiner " , etc.

Parents of disabled kids tend to be more defensive than average.

Parents looking for help when they have generally been told the child

cannot be helped feel strongly (and rightly so) that they are good and

devoted parents, trying to do their best by a child they love. Being

told in very strong (condemning) terms that they are harming thier

child is like telling them " You are wrong: you aren't a good parent.

In fact, you are really, really rotten parent. " That generally gets a

pretty strong negative reaction. Again, most people will " defend "

their view that they are good, devoted, loving parents by defending

what they are currently doing, defending the decision-making process

( " thousands of hours of research... " ) that brought them there, etc.

Hammering them harder usually only causes them to justify their

position all the more.

People who are handicapped themselves (as I am) or are responsible for

handicapped children (as I also am and most people on this list are)

typically have trouble making changes to their lives. When a person

is physically fragile, change can be dangerous. Even when I am

looking for support, I often find myself pushing away people's

suggestions because it feels invasive and threatening. I sometimes

change my mind later. I am highly aware of this behavior in myself and

still cannot seem to put a stop to it when I am feeling threatened in

some way. People are less aware of their own behaviors are going to

generally be unable to stop it at all. Again: being ganged up on,

hammered harder and so on will generally cause people to dig in their

heels harder and make their position more entrenched. No matter how

desperately they really want help, the social dynamic makes it

impossible to accept it. The only hope of getting through in such

situations is stop the social assault and make sure you aren't making

people feel attacked while offering information and opinions.

Just some observations. So I hope the mob doesn't turn thier baleful

eye on me and decide I'm the one to gang up on next.

Peace.

[Guest guest]

>

> Dana, are there any specific tests or protocols you suggest for the

> Hep B triggered kids?

Just what has worked for my son.

http://www.danasview.net/myson.htm

> My son has these characteristics:

> Expressive Language Delay/Pronunciation problems

Check my section here, for language delays

http://www.danasview.net/issues.htm

> All other " autistic-like " symptoms seem to come and go with immune

> triggers.

My son was a high virus kid. I used high dose vitamin A protocol,

OLE, Virastop, vitamin C, and lysine, to eliminate viruses. I am

currently working on a possible new virus [viruses are much worse than

metals].

> Last weekend we did ALA only chelation and the weekend before we did

> ALA + NAC. Well, I shouldn't have removed NAC because he had

> terrible yeast this past week.

This can be for several reasons, one of which would be that the NAC

does not allow the ALA to pull as much metal. Not sure if that would

even apply [i am not a chemist], but metals moving thru the body tend

to increase yeast, so if there was not as much yeast, maybe there was

not as much metal pulled?

Or the NAC might have helped control the yeast, which in general does

not make sense because NAC tends to increase yeast.

My son did not do well with NAC but did well with straight cysteine.

He only needed it for a month or so tho.

> He does not tolerate DMG (haven't tried TMG yet), and will not

> tolerate B vitamins.

My son did not tolerate DMG but did well with TMG. He did not

tolerate B vitamins until about round 50 of ALA chelation. I used

biotin and GSE for yeast control.

>>He also has trouble with herbs so I keep him on

> pretty basic stuff.

My son did not tolerate herbs until well into chelation, plus other

supps especially selenium.

Dana

[Guest guest]

Thank you, Dana. I think we will work on the viral thing. Is there

any point where you would stop because of bad yeast? My son's never

had it so bad as he did with this past round. I went out and bought

Candex and some new probiotics. How much GSE did you give when there

was a bad flare up and how often?

> >

> > Dana, are there any specific tests or protocols you suggest for

the

> > Hep B triggered kids?

>

>

> Just what has worked for my son.

>

> http://www.danasview.net/myson.htm

>

>

> > My son has these characteristics:

> > Expressive Language Delay/Pronunciation problems

>

>

> Check my section here, for language delays

>

> http://www.danasview.net/issues.htm

>

>

> > All other " autistic-like " symptoms seem to come and go with

immune

> > triggers.

>

>

> My son was a high virus kid. I used high dose vitamin A protocol,

> OLE, Virastop, vitamin C, and lysine, to eliminate viruses. I am

> currently working on a possible new virus [viruses are much worse

than

> metals].

>

>

> > Last weekend we did ALA only chelation and the weekend before we

did

> > ALA + NAC. Well, I shouldn't have removed NAC because he had

> > terrible yeast this past week.

>

>

> This can be for several reasons, one of which would be that the NAC

> does not allow the ALA to pull as much metal. Not sure if that

would

> even apply [i am not a chemist], but metals moving thru the body

tend

> to increase yeast, so if there was not as much yeast, maybe there

was

> not as much metal pulled?

>

> Or the NAC might have helped control the yeast, which in general

does

> not make sense because NAC tends to increase yeast.

>

> My son did not do well with NAC but did well with straight

cysteine.

> He only needed it for a month or so tho.

>

>

> > He does not tolerate DMG (haven't tried TMG yet), and will not

> > tolerate B vitamins.

>

>

> My son did not tolerate DMG but did well with TMG. He did not

> tolerate B vitamins until about round 50 of ALA chelation. I used

> biotin and GSE for yeast control.

>

>

> >>He also has trouble with herbs so I keep him on

> > pretty basic stuff.

>

>

> My son did not tolerate herbs until well into chelation, plus other

> supps especially selenium.

>

> Dana

>

[Guest guest]

> >

> > Hi all! I just want to say our experience with our son. We started

> > with Andy's protocol for more than 6 months and saw GREAT gains.

> > However, as a family we could not do it any longer as my son is

> such

> > a light sleeper and waking him up in the middle of the night, even

> > sitting up in his bed quietly, woke him up for the rest of the day.

> > Add a newborn and a toddler was disastrous as his verbal stims and

> > turning on all the lights in all the rooms in the house was like

> > punishment. My husband and I could not function.

> >

> > We heard about Dr. Cave's protocol and read her books about vaccine

> > schedules. After our visit to Louisiana, we started 500mg of DMSA

> > once a week and my son is doing beautifully!!! I was soooo

> > apprehensive because I have read all of the previous comments and

> > experiences of other parents, but I needed to do something that fit

> > better with our family dynamic.

> >

> > My son, who is completely nonverbal since a few weeks after getting

> > the equivalent of eight shots at once (4 shots-2 w/3 in one),

> > said " go! " and is now appropriately saying a distinguishable " open "

> > for a bag of chips. Furthermore, he is more aware of his

> surroundings

> > and is actually afraid of running in the street because of cars!!!!

> > This is a child who used to be on a leash in public!

> >

> > Therefore, this is just my piece. I am sure that many will disagree

> > with me based on previous posts and experiences, but I truly

> believe

> > that you have to do what you can with what you can.

> >

> > Hope this helps...

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: Michele

>

>

>

> RE: The remarks about " why would you ask for help and then

reject it? "

> ---------

> No matter what information people are looking for, if they feel

> personally attacked, they will tend to defend themselves. If the

> avenue of attack is shooting down their ideas in a contemptuous

> fashion, the avenue of defense will usually be to defend those

ideas.

>

> ====>Hi Michele,

>

> I don't always agree with you but I always appreciate your take

on things. I've been around here for about 3.5 years and it has NOT

been my experience that calm, logical reasoning does anything to

dispel parents' from engaging in further practices that might hurt

their children. This approach is normally advocated by the " we must

be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).

Hi ,

I am not talking about " calm, logical reasoning " . Nor do I think

anyone believes I am " nice " (those folks who make the mistake of

thinking I am nice inevitably end up loathing me for letting them

down in a big way). It's probably more accurate to say I am quite

the ruthless bitch or I wouldn't be alive at all. " Calm, logical

reasoning " typically fails to address people as whole human beings.

It pretends that we are just discussing ideas when in fact we are

discussing how people live, " ethics " , etc. -- things which cut

extremely deeply. People inevitably get hurt by such discussions.

My preference is for discussing things like that rather than for

discussing " the weather " or whatever it is that passes for " polite "

conversation in most circles. So I am abundantly familiar with how

deeply hurt people get when you begin saying, in essence, that you

live better than they do, you raise your kids better than they do,

your method of problem solving is superior to theirs, and so on. I

know because I say things like that very routinely. It gets me

accused of being an egomaniac even though I have every reason to

believe that if I were male my behavior would be viewed as " humble " .

I don't say such things to lord it over people or to enhance my ego

or for any of the other " bad " motives that most people immediately

assume I have. It generally takes time to prove that to them. Why?

Because the vast majority of people they meet DO have those types of

motives. I do such things because I am a person whose innate wiring

is to help others. I just hate seeing people suffer when I know of a

solution. It's really quite the pain in the ass to live with and I

have wrestled with it a great deal in my life. One thing I have done

is to observe how other innately helpful people operate. The

picture is generally not pretty, which explains a lot about why

people are so enormously suspicious of help offered to them.

In my observation, it is common for " helpful " people to have a huge

need to be needed. Many of them will help a person only so far.

They seem to subconsciously want the person to remain unable to

stand on their own two feet because they desire to remain a " crutch "

for the individual. Many of them seem unable to believe anyone would

really love them and seem unable to engage in genuine friendship on

an equal footing, so they apparently can't imagine anyone hanging

around if the person no longer needs them. This very frequently

becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The majority of their

relationships are a one-up/one-down thing with them in the superior

position (because they are so " wise " and knowledgeable and helpful,

of course). They typically feel you owe them something if they

helped you. They often have a track record of having been " stabbed

in the back " repeatedly by people they have helped. My observation

is that this generally happens when the helpee gets more able to

take care of themselves and stops being content to essentially suck

up to the helper. I have alienated helper types who were

steadfastly there for me in my time of need but could not let go of

lording it over me when I became less needy. I didn't feel I was

the one who ended the relationship. I only intended to end the

lording it over me crap. They apparently could not tolerate that

and a falling out ensued. Oh well.

So when I observe group dynamics, it is informed by this very

cynical view of how such dynamics typically proceed. I loathe

heroics and wonder a lot about how one can implement real change

while side-stepping the " hero " role that other people inevitably try

to cast me in when I have a vastly superior solution to anything

they have previously heard. My observation is that most people have

the whole " feelings " thing backwards: if someone is expressing

emotional pain, it generally means there is real suffering going on

which they don't know how to resolve. I am dreadfully bad at giving

condolences, being a shoulder to cry on and so on because I think

being " emotionally supportive " is an utter waste of time and almost

always counterproductive. If you help the person solve the

underlying problem causing so much pain, the pain will eventually go

away on its own. This is where I get cast as a " hero " : I prefer to

solve problems and just as emotional pain is generally an expression

of underlying serious problems, the emotional reaction people have

to being " saved " when no one else could help them is very strong and

positive and aimed at me since I " caused " it. But it also comes

with 10,000 tons of emotional baggage, assumptions about who I am

and how I am supposed to behave forevermore...etc ad nauseum until I

am ready to go find a mountain to sit on and be a crotchety hermit

and yell at everyone to please leave me the hell alone. ( " No good

deed goes unpunished " and all that.) I still don't know what The

Solution is but I am doing better these days at sidestepping some of

the social bullshit that I used to get mired in when I helped people.

I am generally bluntly honest about difficult subjects. You can't

help people if you bullshit them. (Because " The truth shall set you

free " really works, in my experience.) However, I am mindful of the

saying about how people who value brutal honesty value the " brutal "

part more than the honest part. So while I am bluntly honest -- and

it does hurt lots of people's feelings -- I also have a great deal

of compassion for people and generally do not attribute their

behaviors to " bad " motives. You and other people here are basically

launching into attacks on the character of anyone who is not so good

as to immediately do things your way. Such behavior is almost

always about one's feelings and ego-needs, not " logic " or truth.

The truth is I get plenty of criticism on this list because I

chelated in a manner that one is " not supposed " to pursue. I did so

successfully and I have no reason at all to believe that it harmed

me as so many people here have tried to suggest it must have done.

The view that, in essence, Andy Cutler's protocol is the ONLY

acceptable, safe method is so entrenched that it's enormously

difficult to discuss anything here in a calm, logical fashion which

doesn't agree with that mantra. When I was asking for information

about how cilantro worked in order to understand what was happening

to me, instead of giving me the information I needed, I was

clobbered by multiple people screaching " DON'T GIVE YOUR KIDS

CILANTRO -- It's evil and will harm them!!!! " In other words,

people weren't even bothering to listen to what I was saying. It

took repeated attempts to explain that a) I was not PLANNING on

doing anything but was trying instead to understand something that

had already happened in the past and I wasn't doing anything at

all to my kids, this was something that happened to me before anyone

would even address my actual questions.

I see that kind of behavior a lot on this list. Anyone who comes

here and is doing something different is typically treated as a)

stupid and irresponsible (which is why they would defensively say

something like they did " thousands of hours of research " -- what

they are really saying is " I have a brain and I have behaved

responsibly, have even gone to great lengths to do the right thing,

so please stop with the campaign to smear my character " .) and

obviously not really open to new ideas. If they don't simply jump on

the bandwagon here immediately and enthusiastically, that just

completely proves to you and others how closed minded etc these

morally defective idiots are. Anyone who gets treated that way is

generally going to cease listening to your " logical, rational ideas "

and launch into a campaign to defend their dignity etc.

This is not just my opinion. I had a college class on negotiation

and conflict management. The textbooks were (at that time) the only

two books available on the subject which were research based.

Cultures which first take the time to deal with the social stuff --

introductions, warm-fuzzies, getting to know each other, etc --

leave less money on the table in the negotiation. Email lists whose

cultures have been shaped by my bitchy insistence on trying to treat

ALL members with genuine respect are cultures where rational,

logical ideas are far more readily discussed, where there is a

higher tolerance for the inevitable " conflict " which arises from

different people honestly expressing their different points of view

and so on. I have a track record of success in that regard. I

share such information because I know it works and the more people

who are aware of it, the more likely the group will function in a

way that tolerates a diversity of ideas and experience.

Groups that tolerate a diversity of ideas and experiences are groups

that have a higher chance of helping people solve their problems

because if X won't work for them, there are many other viable

solutions to pursue. It also avoids the social trap of damning

people for not doing things your way. Speaking in highly judgmental

and condemning tones of anyone who doesn't do it your way is like a

chinese finger puzzle: The more energy you put into trying to pull

out of it, the more stuck you get. The more you try to force them

to change their position, the more they defend themselves. The way

this group attacks people who are not already doing Andy's protocol

does a lot to make the attitudes of such people more entrenched. No

one here gives them a chance to " save face " -- to change their mind

and also keep their dignity and self respect. The way people are

verbally assaulted here, if they agreed to change what they were

doing they would also be " admitting " to all the flaws you attribute

to them: stupidity, moral defectiveness, etc. Most people have

difficulty separating themselves from their ideas and actions. What

are they if not their ideas and actions and so on? Your approach

does not help them separate themselves and their dignity from the

ideas they came here with.

Anyway, enough of my rambling.

Peace.

Michele

talithamichele@...

http://www.healthgazelle.org

http://www.kidslikemine.org

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: Michele

I am not talking about " calm, logical reasoning " . Nor do I think

anyone believes I am " nice "

====>Not my impression either. Not that you are rude, but that you say what

you think. Truthfully, I only agree with your point of view, rarely but I so

respect that you are forthright.====>

My preference is for discussing things like that rather than for

discussing " the weather " or whatever it is that passes for " polite "

conversation in most circles. So I am abundantly familiar with how

deeply hurt people get when you begin saying, in essence, that you

live better than they do, you raise your kids better than they do,

your method of problem solving is superior to theirs, and so on. I

know because I say things like that very routinely. It gets me

accused of being an egomaniac even though I have every reason to

believe that if I were male my behavior would be viewed as " humble " .

====>Lol, I have witnessed this and yes, men can " get away " with this behavior

much more easily. Being female doesn't however stop this behavior in myself,

blame my father who gave me the crazy idea that what I had to say was just as

important as what my brothers thought. Really he shouldn't have done that.====>

In my observation, it is common for " helpful " people to have a huge

need to be needed. Many of them will help a person only so far.

They seem to subconsciously want the person to remain unable to

stand on their own two feet

====>Yes, they don't help..... they take prisoners with the ultimate goal of

having undying admirers.====>

I loathe heroics and wonder a lot about how one can implement real change

while side-stepping the " hero " role that other people inevitably try

to cast me in when I have a vastly superior solution to anything

they have previously heard.

====>By stopping the help the moment you are successful in empowering people

to help themself. It does take a long time, sometimes as people generally have

to borrow your ego for awhile but in therapy I stop when the person says

something like " I was going to call you and ask what you thought about X, but

then I just kind of knew what you were going to say. " ====>

I am dreadfully bad at giving

condolences, being a shoulder to cry on and so on because I think

being " emotionally supportive " is an utter waste of time and almost

always counterproductive.

====>Maybe my therapist training but I think a reasonable amount of empathy is

important. I was required to pursue therapy as part of my training and in my

initial interview as I was relating a painful incident in my life all she would

say was " Uh huh, uh huh,etc, etc. I wanted to shake her and I wanted her to act

like a human being and say " Shit, that was horrible " .

Because she was so clinical and cold about my pain....I found the opposite, I

kept going on and on about it trying to get some kind of real, human emotion out

of this statue.====>

If you help the person solve the

underlying problem causing so much pain, the pain will eventually go

away on its own.

====>Yes, quickly but maybe physical problems lend themselves to much quicker

solutions than do emotional difficulties.====>

This is where I get cast as a " hero " : I prefer to

solve problems

====>Teach them how to solve the problem; point them to books, articles, etc.

Find past problems that they overcame and assist them in seeing they have the

strengths to solve their own problems. Sometimes people apologize to me when

they return to therapy after a break, ludicrous, like the only way you can learn

is in therapy.====>

I am generally bluntly honest about difficult subjects. You can't

help people if you bullshit them.

===>No, you can't but this IS the kind of help that many people are looking

for. Kind of like the friendships we had in middle school where if we asked our

girlfriends if we looked nice in something we wanted to be told yes even if it

made our ass look the size of a barn. This IS what most people consider helpful

and " kind " . I don't and I won't waste my time giving it, either.===>

You and other people here are basically

launching into attacks on the character of anyone who is not so good

as to immediately do things your way.

====>If we could stick to the series of posts in ?, I don't believe I attacked

her character, parenting, responsibility capacity. I did point her to more

reading to shore up what I was saying. If that is attacking people's character,

I'm guilty for sure.

I do find it almost incredible to believe that the poster read Andy's comment

on Ala and chose to ignore the MAIN point of his chelation protocol which is

timing.====>

The view that, in essence, Andy Cutler's protocol is the ONLY

acceptable, safe method is so entrenched that it's enormously

difficult to discuss anything here in a calm, logical fashion which

doesn't agree with that mantra.

====>Yes, this is probably true as most of us know only one way to help

people, Andy's way. I have noted with interest that Andy is much more flexible

in allowing different approaches that work (aside from the dose timing) as he

just plain has more knowledge in this area while the rest of us, for the most

part, only are comfortable on the very narrow pathway that will not lead to

harm.

This is not just my opinion. I had a college class on negotiation

and conflict management.

====>You don't need to defend your reasoning. Most of the important things I

have learned about therapy and life is general...were taught to me by patients.

Groups that tolerate a diversity of ideas and experiences are groups

that have a higher chance of helping people solve their problems

because if X won't work for them, there are many other viable

solutions to pursue. It also avoids the social trap of damning

people for not doing things your way. Speaking in highly judgmental

and condemning tones of anyone who doesn't do it your way

====>Here's the gist of the problem, though. If you don't say something then

we get the post a month or 3 months later and the kid is banging his head

against the wall or not speaking anymore. Not something I like and I try to

avoid saying " Well, just let us know how it goes. "

The best you can do is point to some additional reading for the person to

pursue, but you see this as condescending? Kind of like an offhanded way of

saying to the person that they haven't arrived at the right decision due to not

interpreting what they have read correctly?

Thanks for the discussion.

[Guest guest]

> I've been around here for about 3.5 years and it has NOT

> been my experience that calm, logical reasoning does anything to

> dispel parents' from engaging in further practices that might hurt

> their children. This approach is normally advocated by the " we must

> be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).

This has certainly been my experience - and I have kept score while trying the

'nice' and

the current 'bombastic' approach.

Personally I would prefer to be nice.

I would really love it if reason worked.

This appears not to be the case, and I view intervening to try to get parents

not to subject

their children to a substantial risk of serious, lasting, possibly permanent

harm to be

important enough that just letting them do their own thing and learn from their

mistakes

is no more ethical than letting a child play russian roulette instead of taking

the gun from

them. It's a difference of degree (death versus 'only' serious long term harm),

not kind.

I place a reasonable value on courtesy and manners, and have a lot of respect

for those

few parents who do seek any kind of alternative to ABA and special ed so their

kid will be

easier for the group home to control when s/he grows up. Thus I really don't

want to, nor

do I like, getting in the face of just these people and upsetting them.

However, it seems to be necessary to try to keep them from letting yet another

doctor hurt

their kid.

Given the current state of society, where the skepticism of the 19th century has

been

replaced by the gullibility of the later half of the 20th, it is very hard for

people to make

the leap from believing all they have to do is find the right doctor to

realizing almost no

doctors know what they are doing without using some stepping stones along the

way - e.

g. a DAN! doctor might be that 'right doctor' who will magically cure the kid.

The best solution I've found to this problem of helping parents not hurt their

kids

unnecessarily as a means of learning an important lesson is to be bombastic when

people

talk about " My doctor wants to do XYZ, what do you think? " Not a very good

solution. Not

a very nice one either as it causes a lot of emotional distress for people I

like and respect.

Any suggestions for ways to do this that might work are more than welcome - but

I

already know that 'being nice' and just letting the parents learn by the

experience are not

suitable choices of what to do.

Andy

[Guest guest]

> RE: The remarks about " why would you ask for help and then reject it? "

I don't think that is what is happening at all.

They come on the list saying " my DAN! doctor wants to do XYZ " to seek

affirmation.

I provide contradiction and confrontation, not affirmation.

Sometimes this is effective in derailing the affirmation ritual and we can start

to have a

rational discussion about the course of action proposed, sometimes not.

I think a lot of the people aren't really asking for help yet, I'm trying to get

them to do just

that rather than only seeking affirmation. Another way to view this is they are

asking for

help in the form of moral support to let the doctor do XYZ, and instead I offer

them the

help of what they really ought to be doing instead - often people are resistant

to help they

need but that is different from what they asked for.

Andy

[Guest guest]

Hi Andy,

Well understood and appreciated.

Here's two thoughts that you've probably already considered, but I'll

toss them out anyway...

A) Efficacy varies by personal style

-For some people (like me), the bombastic approach works very well,

and the underlying reasoning even more so. [it may be because I've

grown up with " strong personalities " that loved to argue, and

hopefully try to focus on the core arguments suggested. Who knows.]

-For others (like my wife), the conflict and bashing is a big

turnoff and they tend not to give the arguments/reasoning as much

credibility as it deserves because of it.

For better or worse, the majority of people who have ASD kids are

still having them be treated by DAN! doctors, some of which (i.e. 2 of

the 3 I've met) seem not to want to discuss your methods with

patients, or provide much help in using them. They just take umbrage

( " he hates all doctors " , " he hates DAN! doctors " , etc) and seem to try

to filter you out of the treatments discussion.

You've got me right now. We've seen good initial progress and I'm

sold. We're trying to reasonably and thoughtfully apply what you

suggest, and stick to the chelator dose size and timing guidelines

while supporting our son with the supplements advised. [To this

point, I'm tickled pink and hopeful for the future.]

However, if the goal is to do the most good for the most kids, there

might need to be a truce, no??

Just a thought.

>

> > I've been around here for about 3.5 years and it has NOT

> > been my experience that calm, logical reasoning does anything to

> > dispel parents' from engaging in further practices that might hurt

> > their children. This approach is normally advocated by the " we must

> > be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).

>

> This has certainly been my experience - and I have kept score while

trying the 'nice' and

> the current 'bombastic' approach.

>

> Personally I would prefer to be nice.

>

> I would really love it if reason worked.

>

> This appears not to be the case, and I view intervening to try to

get parents not to subject

> their children to a substantial risk of serious, lasting, possibly

permanent harm to be

> important enough that just letting them do their own thing and learn

from their mistakes

> is no more ethical than letting a child play russian roulette

instead of taking the gun from

> them. It's a difference of degree (death versus 'only' serious long

term harm), not kind.

>

> I place a reasonable value on courtesy and manners, and have a lot

of respect for those

> few parents who do seek any kind of alternative to ABA and special

ed so their kid will be

> easier for the group home to control when s/he grows up. Thus I

really don't want to, nor

> do I like, getting in the face of just these people and upsetting them.

>

> However, it seems to be necessary to try to keep them from letting

yet another doctor hurt

> their kid.

>

> Given the current state of society, where the skepticism of the 19th

century has been

> replaced by the gullibility of the later half of the 20th, it is

very hard for people to make

> the leap from believing all they have to do is find the right doctor

to realizing almost no

> doctors know what they are doing without using some stepping stones

along the way - e.

> g. a DAN! doctor might be that 'right doctor' who will magically

cure the kid.

>

> The best solution I've found to this problem of helping parents not

hurt their kids

> unnecessarily as a means of learning an important lesson is to be

bombastic when people

> talk about " My doctor wants to do XYZ, what do you think? " Not a

very good solution. Not

> a very nice one either as it causes a lot of emotional distress for

people I like and respect.

> Any suggestions for ways to do this that might work are more than

welcome - but I

> already know that 'being nice' and just letting the parents learn by

the experience are not

> suitable choices of what to do.

>

> Andy

>

[Guest guest]

In a perfect world there would only be a few of us parents dealing with this and

we could get to know each other and learn how best to approach one another.

However, there are thousands and we can only help each other out by stating

facts and experience. I, too, think Andy can be harsh, but I'm not here to give

lessons on manners or critique the delivery of someone's advice. I'm here

fighting for my son. When we were using a DAN! I had severe misgivings about

sticking an I.V. in his arm or putting suppositories up his bum. I also had some

serious doubts as to the chelators that were being given. When I found this

board it was a relief to hear practical, sound, and reasonable ways to chelate.

Andy's method was the DAN! method's approach for many years and has recovered

countless children, and I want very much for my son to be in this group. I'm

sure we all want our children in this group. This is a long, hard, painful

journey...the way Andy states something isn't really the issue. Take it for what

it is, experience and concern for our children.

andrewhallcutler <AndyCutler@...> wrote:

> I've been around here for about 3.5 years and it has NOT

> been my experience that calm, logical reasoning does anything to

> dispel parents' from engaging in further practices that might hurt

> their children. This approach is normally advocated by the " we must

> be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).

This has certainly been my experience - and I have kept score while trying the

'nice' and

the current 'bombastic' approach.

Personally I would prefer to be nice.

I would really love it if reason worked.

This appears not to be the case, and I view intervening to try to get parents

not to subject

their children to a substantial risk of serious, lasting, possibly permanent

harm to be

important enough that just letting them do their own thing and learn from their

mistakes

is no more ethical than letting a child play russian roulette instead of taking

the gun from

them. It's a difference of degree (death versus 'only' serious long term harm),

not kind.

I place a reasonable value on courtesy and manners, and have a lot of respect

for those

few parents who do seek any kind of alternative to ABA and special ed so their

kid will be

easier for the group home to control when s/he grows up. Thus I really don't

want to, nor

do I like, getting in the face of just these people and upsetting them.

However, it seems to be necessary to try to keep them from letting yet another

doctor hurt

their kid.

Given the current state of society, where the skepticism of the 19th century has

been

replaced by the gullibility of the later half of the 20th, it is very hard for

people to make

the leap from believing all they have to do is find the right doctor to

realizing almost no

doctors know what they are doing without using some stepping stones along the

way - e.

g. a DAN! doctor might be that 'right doctor' who will magically cure the kid.

The best solution I've found to this problem of helping parents not hurt their

kids

unnecessarily as a means of learning an important lesson is to be bombastic when

people

talk about " My doctor wants to do XYZ, what do you think? " Not a very good

solution. Not

a very nice one either as it causes a lot of emotional distress for people I

like and respect.

Any suggestions for ways to do this that might work are more than welcome - but

I

already know that 'being nice' and just letting the parents learn by the

experience are not

suitable choices of what to do.

Andy

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

=======================================================

[Guest guest]

Hello,

I have been following this post. My DAN doctor wanted to do chelation, and I

felt uncomfortable. I started to research. I wanted the safest methods for my

son. It seems that the low and slow seems to be pretty safe. Also the

transdermal doesn't seem to harmful (maybe I'm wrong). Anyway I still go to my

DAN doctor, and although he wanted to do a challenge test (which I won't do), IV

glutathione(which I considered and didn't do because of Andy's book), and

chelation (I didn't ask him his method, I researched so I can tell him what

method I want to use). I am happy with my DAN.

I am just wondering has everyone had such negative experiences with their DAN

doctors? So far mine has slowly added in supplements and gotten rid of yeast. I

guess the thing is I am not at all experienced with medical terms. I try to

read medical books, and I feel overwhelmed. A lot of time these message boards

will give conflicting advice, so I like to have a doctor to give suggestions and

bounce ideas off of (and them I research to double check them). The mainstream

doctors are mostly against biomedical, and they pretty much tell you do ABA (and

its hopeless). Are there that many of doing this on your own? How do you find

solid research? Where do you find information to check up on effects of

supplements?

Thanks,

From: maggie_orourke@...

Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 13:51:58 -0700

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: ? - every other night DMSA supps/ALA

In a perfect world there would only be a few of us parents dealing

with this and we could get to know each other and learn how best to approach one

another. However, there are thousands and we can only help each other out by

stating facts and experience. I, too, think Andy can be harsh, but I'm not here

to give lessons on manners or critique the delivery of someone's advice. I'm

here fighting for my son. When we were using a DAN! I had severe misgivings

about sticking an I.V. in his arm or putting suppositories up his bum. I also

had some serious doubts as to the chelators that were being given. When I found

this board it was a relief to hear practical, sound, and reasonable ways to

chelate.

Andy's method was the DAN! method's approach for many years and has recovered

countless children, and I want very much for my son to be in this group. I'm

sure we all want our children in this group. This is a long, hard, painful

journey...the way Andy states something isn't really the issue. Take it for what

it is, experience and concern for our children.

andrewhallcutler <AndyCutler@...> wrote:

> I've been around here for about 3.5 years and it has NOT

> been my experience that calm, logical reasoning does anything to

> dispel parents' from engaging in further practices that might hurt

> their children. This approach is normally advocated by the " we must

> be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).

This has certainly been my experience - and I have kept score while trying the

'nice' and

the current 'bombastic' approach.

Personally I would prefer to be nice.

I would really love it if reason worked.

This appears not to be the case, and I view intervening to try to get parents

not to subject

their children to a substantial risk of serious, lasting, possibly permanent

harm to be

important enough that just letting them do their own thing and learn from their

mistakes

is no more ethical than letting a child play russian roulette instead of taking

the gun from

them. It's a difference of degree (death versus 'only' serious long term harm),

not kind.

I place a reasonable value on courtesy and manners, and have a lot of respect

for those

few parents who do seek any kind of alternative to ABA and special ed so their

kid will be

easier for the group home to control when s/he grows up. Thus I really don't

want to, nor

do I like, getting in the face of just these people and upsetting them.

However, it seems to be necessary to try to keep them from letting yet another

doctor hurt

their kid.

Given the current state of society, where the skepticism of the 19th century has

been

replaced by the gullibility of the later half of the 20th, it is very hard for

people to make

the leap from believing all they have to do is find the right doctor to

realizing almost no

doctors know what they are doing without using some stepping stones along the

way - e.

g. a DAN! doctor might be that 'right doctor' who will magically cure the kid.

The best solution I've found to this problem of helping parents not hurt their

kids

unnecessarily as a means of learning an important lesson is to be bombastic when

people

talk about " My doctor wants to do XYZ, what do you think? " Not a very good

solution. Not

a very nice one either as it causes a lot of emotional distress for people I

like and respect.

Any suggestions for ways to do this that might work are more than welcome - but

I

already know that 'being nice' and just letting the parents learn by the

experience are not

suitable choices of what to do.

Andy

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

=======================================================

[Guest guest]

Hi , I have access to a database through my college library

with tons of scholarly articles. I've gotten better at understanding

some of the terms, but much is still over my head. One thing I have

done with some success is write and email to the author of the study

to ask for clarification. I also post articles, such as the one

before your post to ask if I am right in my interpretation.

Sometimes I get a response, sometimes I don't. This is why I look at

LOTS of sources when I try to find the answer to my questions.

I listen to my child's body. He's never tolerated supplements with

lots of ingredients so I try to keep it simple, that way I know if

there is an adverse reaction to something I am giving him. In his

diet, we have gone to mainly just " whole foods " , no gluten, casein,

soy, artificial flavors-colors, No MSG.

I take what Andy and Dana say with heavy weight. They have no money

to make here, they are simply people who care about other people.

>

> > I've been around here for about 3.5 years and it has NOT

>

> > been my experience that calm, logical reasoning does anything to

>

> > dispel parents' from engaging in further practices that might

hurt

>

> > their children. This approach is normally advocated by the " we

must

>

> > be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).

>

>

>

> This has certainly been my experience - and I have kept score while

trying the 'nice' and

>

> the current 'bombastic' approach.

>

>

>

> Personally I would prefer to be nice.

>

>

>

> I would really love it if reason worked.

>

>

>

> This appears not to be the case, and I view intervening to try to

get parents not to subject

>

> their children to a substantial risk of serious, lasting, possibly

permanent harm to be

>

> important enough that just letting them do their own thing and

learn from their mistakes

>

> is no more ethical than letting a child play russian roulette

instead of taking the gun from

>

> them. It's a difference of degree (death versus 'only' serious long

term harm), not kind.

>

>

>

> I place a reasonable value on courtesy and manners, and have a lot

of respect for those

>

> few parents who do seek any kind of alternative to ABA and special

ed so their kid will be

>

> easier for the group home to control when s/he grows up. Thus I

really don't want to, nor

>

> do I like, getting in the face of just these people and upsetting

them.

>

>

>

> However, it seems to be necessary to try to keep them from letting

yet another doctor hurt

>

> their kid.

>

>

>

> Given the current state of society, where the skepticism of the

19th century has been

>

> replaced by the gullibility of the later half of the 20th, it is

very hard for people to make

>

> the leap from believing all they have to do is find the right

doctor to realizing almost no

>

> doctors know what they are doing without using some stepping stones

along the way - e.

>

> g. a DAN! doctor might be that 'right doctor' who will magically

cure the kid.

>

>

>

> The best solution I've found to this problem of helping parents not

hurt their kids

>

> unnecessarily as a means of learning an important lesson is to be

bombastic when people

>

> talk about " My doctor wants to do XYZ, what do you think? " Not a

very good solution. Not

>

> a very nice one either as it causes a lot of emotional distress for

people I like and respect.

>

> Any suggestions for ways to do this that might work are more than

welcome - but I

>

> already know that 'being nice' and just letting the parents learn

by the experience are not

>

> suitable choices of what to do.

>

>

>

> Andy

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

>

>

> =======================================================

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I'm glad you have a good DAN! I don't dislike them all....but I have an issue

with the one I took my son to.

campbell <daff0dil77@...> wrote:

Hello,

I have been following this post. My DAN doctor wanted to do chelation, and I

felt uncomfortable. I started to research. I wanted the safest methods for my

son. It seems that the low and slow seems to be pretty safe. Also the

transdermal doesn't seem to harmful (maybe I'm wrong). Anyway I still go to my

DAN doctor, and although he wanted to do a challenge test (which I won't do), IV

glutathione(which I considered and didn't do because of Andy's book), and

chelation (I didn't ask him his method, I researched so I can tell him what

method I want to use). I am happy with my DAN.

I am just wondering has everyone had such negative experiences with their DAN

doctors? So far mine has slowly added in supplements and gotten rid of yeast. I

guess the thing is I am not at all experienced with medical terms. I try to read

medical books, and I feel overwhelmed. A lot of time these message boards will

give conflicting advice, so I like to have a doctor to give suggestions and

bounce ideas off of (and them I research to double check them). The mainstream

doctors are mostly against biomedical, and they pretty much tell you do ABA (and

its hopeless). Are there that many of doing this on your own? How do you find

solid research? Where do you find information to check up on effects of

supplements?

Thanks,

From: maggie_orourke@...

Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 13:51:58 -0700

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: ? - every other night DMSA supps/ALA

In a perfect world there would only be a few of us parents dealing with this and

we could get to know each other and learn how best to approach one another.

However, there are thousands and we can only help each other out by stating

facts and experience. I, too, think Andy can be harsh, but I'm not here to give

lessons on manners or critique the delivery of someone's advice. I'm here

fighting for my son. When we were using a DAN! I had severe misgivings about

sticking an I.V. in his arm or putting suppositories up his bum. I also had some

serious doubts as to the chelators that were being given. When I found this

board it was a relief to hear practical, sound, and reasonable ways to chelate.

Andy's method was the DAN! method's approach for many years and has recovered

countless children, and I want very much for my son to be in this group. I'm

sure we all want our children in this group. This is a long, hard, painful

journey...the way Andy states something isn't really the issue. Take it for what

it is, experience and concern for our children.

andrewhallcutler wrote:

> I've been around here for about 3.5 years and it has NOT

> been my experience that calm, logical reasoning does anything to

> dispel parents' from engaging in further practices that might hurt

> their children. This approach is normally advocated by the " we must

> be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).

This has certainly been my experience - and I have kept score while trying the

'nice' and

the current 'bombastic' approach.

Personally I would prefer to be nice.

I would really love it if reason worked.

This appears not to be the case, and I view intervening to try to get parents

not to subject

their children to a substantial risk of serious, lasting, possibly permanent

harm to be

important enough that just letting them do their own thing and learn from their

mistakes

is no more ethical than letting a child play russian roulette instead of taking

the gun from

them. It's a difference of degree (death versus 'only' serious long term harm),

not kind.

I place a reasonable value on courtesy and manners, and have a lot of respect

for those

few parents who do seek any kind of alternative to ABA and special ed so their

kid will be

easier for the group home to control when s/he grows up. Thus I really don't

want to, nor

do I like, getting in the face of just these people and upsetting them.

However, it seems to be necessary to try to keep them from letting yet another

doctor hurt

their kid.

Given the current state of society, where the skepticism of the 19th century has

been

replaced by the gullibility of the later half of the 20th, it is very hard for

people to make

the leap from believing all they have to do is find the right doctor to

realizing almost no

doctors know what they are doing without using some stepping stones along the

way - e.

g. a DAN! doctor might be that 'right doctor' who will magically cure the kid.

The best solution I've found to this problem of helping parents not hurt their

kids

unnecessarily as a means of learning an important lesson is to be bombastic when

people

talk about " My doctor wants to do XYZ, what do you think? " Not a very good

solution. Not

a very nice one either as it causes a lot of emotional distress for people I

like and respect.

Any suggestions for ways to do this that might work are more than welcome - but

I

already know that 'being nice' and just letting the parents learn by the

experience are not

suitable choices of what to do.

Andy

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

=======================================================

[Guest guest]

Thanks,

Can I have a link to the site you use for research?

I am so thankful for this list! I couldn't find any info on IV glutathione, but

I felt uncomfortable with anything IV (especially when everyone I ask just

shrugs off my concerns) then I found Andy's opionion and didn't do it. I also

felt uncomfortable with the challenge test, but I probably would have allowed my

doctor to talk me into it if I hadn't found any negative information on it

(thanks to this list I won't do that to my poor cutie who has already been

through enough). I am still scared to chelate, but I am finding myself getting

more comfortable. I am working milk of thistle into his supplements (just added

zinc). I am trying to figure out how to give the night dose (my kid sleeps so

deep I've had trouble getting fever reducing medicine in him when his sick cause

he just won't wake up - if you wake him up he throws a fit over it). I try to

read all of Dana's and Andy's posts. It is really kind of them to take the time

to help everyone. This group gives me hope of recovery for my son, and that is

the biggest gift anyone can give!

Thank you to everyone!

@...: elizabethsoliday@...: Mon, 2

Jun 2008 22:09:22 +0000Subject: [ ] Re: ? - every other night DMSA

supps/ALA

Hi , I have access to a database through my college library with tons of

scholarly articles. I've gotten better at understanding some of the terms, but

much is still over my head. One thing I have done with some success is write and

email to the author of the study to ask for clarification. I also post articles,

such as the one before your post to ask if I am right in my interpretation.

Sometimes I get a response, sometimes I don't. This is why I look at LOTS of

sources when I try to find the answer to my questions. I listen to my child's

body. He's never tolerated supplements with lots of ingredients so I try to keep

it simple, that way I know if there is an adverse reaction to something I am

giving him. In his diet, we have gone to mainly just " whole foods " , no gluten,

casein, soy, artificial flavors-colors, No MSG. I take what Andy and Dana say

with heavy weight. They have no money to make here, they are simply people who

care about other people.> > > I've been around here for about

3.5 years and it has NOT > > > been my experience that calm, logical reasoning

does anything to > > > dispel parents' from engaging in further practices that

might hurt > > > their children. This approach is normally advocated by the " we

must > > > be NICE at any cost " people (mostly women).> > > > This has certainly

been my experience - and I have kept score while trying the 'nice' and > > the

current 'bombastic' approach.> > > > Personally I would prefer to be nice.> > >

> I would really love it if reason worked.> > > > This appears not to be the

case, and I view intervening to try to get parents not to subject > > their

children to a substantial risk of serious, lasting, possibly permanent harm to

be > > important enough that just letting them do their own thing and learn from

their mistakes > > is no more ethical than letting a child play russian roulette

instead of taking the gun from > > them. It's a difference of degree (death

versus 'only' serious long term harm), not kind.> > > > I place a reasonable

value on courtesy and manners, and have a lot of respect for those > > few

parents who do seek any kind of alternative to ABA and special ed so their kid

will be > > easier for the group home to control when s/he grows up. Thus I

really don't want to, nor > > do I like, getting in the face of just these

people and upsetting them.> > > > However, it seems to be necessary to try to

keep them from letting yet another doctor hurt > > their kid.> > > > Given the

current state of society, where the skepticism of the 19th century has been > >

replaced by the gullibility of the later half of the 20th, it is very hard for

people to make > > the leap from believing all they have to do is find the right

doctor to realizing almost no > > doctors know what they are doing without using

some stepping stones along the way - e. > > g. a DAN! doctor might be that

'right doctor' who will magically cure the kid.> > > > The best solution I've

found to this problem of helping parents not hurt their kids > > unnecessarily

as a means of learning an important lesson is to be bombastic when people > >

talk about " My doctor wants to do XYZ, what do you think? " Not a very good

solution. Not > > a very nice one either as it causes a lot of emotional

distress for people I like and respect. > > Any suggestions for ways to do this

that might work are more than welcome - but I > > already know that 'being nice'

and just letting the parents learn by the experience are not > > suitable

choices of what to do.> > > > Andy> > > > ------------------------------------>

> > > =======================================================> > Statements

posted on this list are for information only, > > and should NOT be taken as

medical advice. If you need > > medical advice, you should seek it from those

who are > > authorized to give medical advice: doctors. > > > > Post message:

> > Subscribe:

-subscribe > > Unsubscribe:

-unsubscribe > > Shortcut URL:

> > Answers to common questions: > >

/files/Mercury-Autism%20FAQ!

Groups Links> > > >

[Guest guest]

Hi Maggie,

Sorry to hear about your DAN! experiences.

>

> ....I, too, think Andy can be harsh, but I'm not here to give

lessons on manners or critique the delivery of someone's advice.

We can have a healthy debate about things w/o there needing to be

suggestions of blatant condescension, right??

I think that it's a given here that everyone's darn glad that Andy

figured out so much and has been so tremendously generous in sharing

what he knows. Your kid and mine stand a much better chance at a

better (even normal??) life because of it. Personally, in all

honesty, I can't think of anything more valuable in this world right now.

Furthermore, esp. since I naturally have a similar style as Andy's (or

even more pronounced), I think I understand/appreciate it, and believe

that I see the good intented affect.

Permit me to share something that I found interesting...

One of the ways I vetted Andy's arguments (on challenge tests,

chelator selection and dosing/frequency, etc) in my mind was by

carefully presenting them to DAN! doctors, as non-threateningly as I

could, in order to hear their counterpoints. [One of those doctors

was a name you'd likely know.]

To my considerable surprise, despite trying repeatedly, I haven't

heard almost any pushback on the substance of those arguments. As

mentioned, what came back instead seemed to be more of an affront at

the style. " He hates DAN!s. " " He hates all doctors. " [You can argue

perhaps that was a logical trap being set for me to draw leverage, but

I didn't take it as such, and didn't follow it regardless.]

This floored me. Wouldn't any good doctor/scientist focus on the core

of the argument and not any nuances in the delivery?? Can't any DAN!

defend their position, or is there just not enough there to go on?

[Now *THAT'S* scary...]

Next comes the thought.... Would DAN! come back a bit, and

acknowledge/suggest Cutler chelation more if not threatened?

That may be a crazy thought, but it would help a lot more kids if true.

[it's also very clear and understood that given the spotty practices

that go on, not speaking out loudly against them also has a

non-trivial cost... That's a harder one to weigh.]

I trust Andy to have a thick enough skin to consider this for whatever

it's worth to him. [No one benefits from only hearing good data

points and good experiences. If he thinks I'm full of hooey, that's

fine (and that wouldn't be the first time that that was right in

part/whole ;^) ).]

Just my $0.02, from my limited view.

[Guest guest]

>

>

>

> I am not talking about " calm, logical reasoning " . Nor do I think

> anyone believes I am " nice "

>

> ====>Not my impression either. Not that you are rude, but that

you say what you think. Truthfully, I only agree with your point of

view, rarely but I so respect that you are forthright.====>

Interesting, since you took my words and suggested I was trying to

get people to be " nice " . In my home, my kids laugh at the idea that

I am " nice " . They take that to mean someone is completely

ineffectual and they see me as highly competent. I have no desire

to suggest that anyone be " nice " . I think most " nice " people are,

well, kind of like the 50% of people who kept the Nazi's in power

(Godwin's law -- I lose :-) ).

It gets me

> accused of being an egomaniac even though I have every reason to

> believe that if I were male my behavior would be viewed

as " humble " .

>

> ====>Lol, I have witnessed this and yes, men can " get away " with

this behavior much more easily. Being female doesn't however stop

this behavior in myself, blame my father who gave me the crazy idea

that what I had to say was just as important as what my brothers

thought. Really he shouldn't have done that.====>

Really, he SHOULD have. But you were probably being sarcastic. :-)

(I sometimes spend too much time with my very literal-minded, ASD

kids. Oops.)

>

>

>

> In my observation, it is common for " helpful " people to have a

huge

> need to be needed. Many of them will help a person only so far.

> They seem to subconsciously want the person to remain unable to

> stand on their own two feet

>

> ====>Yes, they don't help..... they take prisoners with the

ultimate goal of having undying admirers.====>

Well, as a hopelessly " helpful " person, I have worked hard to find

approaches which don't duplicate those traps. They do not appear to

make anybody happy, not the person getting such toxic help and not

the person giving it.

>

>

> I loathe heroics and wonder a lot about how one can implement

real change while side-stepping the " hero " role that other people

inevitably try

> to cast me in when I have a vastly superior solution to anything

> they have previously heard.

>

> ====>By stopping the help the moment you are successful in

empowering people to help themself. It does take a long time,

sometimes as people generally have to borrow your ego for awhile but

in therapy I stop when the person says something like " I was going

to call you and ask what you thought about X, but then I just kind

of knew what you were going to say. " ====>

Somewhat amusing to me since I didn't mean on that scale. I have

the patter down pretty well about how " I can't save you. I can only

offer you a map and point you in the right direction. But you have

to take the journey. " I contemplate a larger scale, like " how does

one change how cystic fibrosis is treated on planet earth? " But,

shhhh! don't tell anyone. They would think I have a huge ego.

People think that enough.

>

>

>

> I am dreadfully bad at giving

> condolences, being a shoulder to cry on and so on because I

think

> being " emotionally supportive " is an utter waste of time and

almost

> always counterproductive.

>

> ====>Maybe my therapist training but I think a reasonable amount

of empathy is important. I was required to pursue therapy as part of

my training and in my initial interview as I was relating a painful

incident in my life all she would say was " Uh huh, uh huh,etc, etc.

I wanted to shake her and I wanted her to act like a human being and

say " Shit, that was horrible " .

>

> Because she was so clinical and cold about my pain....I found

the opposite, I kept going on and on about it trying to get some

kind of real, human emotion out of this statue.====>

No, that isn't what I meant at all. Of course people need validation

(exactly one of the things people don't get on this list when they

say they are doing a protocol not approved here). Though I

generally don't say things like " that was horrible " because a) I

could be projecting. Maybe they don't feel that way about it. And

remarks like that can help people remain trapped in a victim

mentality -- exactly why I stopped therapy at some point: rehashing

my issues constantly was no longer giving me forward progress in

coping with them and was, instead, just keeping my negative self

image alive.

What I mean is that what passes for " emotional support " in most

cases is either a) a pity party (often thrown by people who would

like to tell you how pathetic you are because it makes them feel

better about their own problems) or part of the social construct

that reinforces the idea that you are helpless and shouldn't really

do anything constructive about your problems -- ie it reinforces the

idea that your bad feelings are somehow separate from your genuine

problems instead of caused by them. Women get this crap a LOT --

you know, give them valium for their depression instead of wondering

what the underlying cause of their depression is. If you try to

manipulate someone into " feeling better " by ONLY addressing the

feelings and not the underlying cause of the feelings, it generally

means the real cause of the problems is being inadvertently kept

alive by this process. I think that is really cruel and uncaring.

I can't do that to people.

But it's midnight, I've had a crappy day, my sinuses are killing

me. So I will skip trying to explain that one any further. <shrug>

>

>

>

> If you help the person solve the

> underlying problem causing so much pain, the pain will

eventually go

> away on its own.

>

> ====>Yes, quickly but maybe physical problems lend themselves to

much quicker solutions than do emotional difficulties.====>

Um, not sure what you meant by that.

>

>

>

> This is where I get cast as a " hero " : I prefer to

> solve problems

>

> ====>Teach them how to solve the problem; point them to books,

articles, etc. Find past problems that they overcame and assist them

in seeing they have the strengths to solve their own problems.

Sometimes people apologize to me when they return to therapy after a

break, ludicrous, like the only way you can learn is in therapy.====>

I wish it were that simple. I most often get cast in a " hero " role

when I am offering what I have learned in my journey in life that I

can't find books, websites and so forth about. That's what a couple

of my websites grew out of: demand on email lists for what I knew

that they absolutely couldn't find anywhere else. For example: Do

you know anyone else with a son with cystic fibrosis who hasn't been

on antibiotics in 10 years? I don't and I belong to several CF

lists, with possibly a couple thousand or so members between them (a

fairly big number given that there are only about 30,000 people in

the US diagnosed with it). Most people with CF seem to count their

successes in terms of how long they have managed to avoid being

hospitalized. Some folks with CF get hospitalized twice a year,

regularly. Others get hospitalized once a year, regularly. If it's

been over a year since a person with CF was hospitalized, they

typically count that as a " success " . So although I do refer other

people regularly to CF lists and CF websites that I feel are good

resources, I really cannot tell people to go elsewhere for what I

know. I do not think anyone else on the planet can offer information

comprable to what I currently understand about how to get well with

CF.

>

>

>

> I am generally bluntly honest about difficult subjects. You

can't

> help people if you bullshit them.

>

> ===>No, you can't but this IS the kind of help that many people

are looking for. Kind of like the friendships we had in middle

school where if we asked our girlfriends if we looked nice in

something we wanted to be told yes even if it made our ass look the

size of a barn. This IS what most people consider helpful

and " kind " . I don't and I won't waste my time giving it, either.===>

It MAY be the kind of help they are looking for. Or maybe it is the

only kind of help they KNOW to look for. I was a mess as a young

woman and didn't know how look for the kind of help I really needed,

couldn't even imagine it existed. It was too alien to my life's

experiences. I always keep that in mind when I am trying to assist

others: that they may just not know what they really need, what

really helps, what a good paradigm is for addressing their issues

and so on. If so, then there is an education process which must take

place to bridge the gap between what they THINK they want and what

will really get them what they want.

But, again, I'm just too tired and in too much pain to really dig

around for a good example in the recesses of my mind...or whatever.

So will stop here.

>

>

>

> You and other people here are basically

> launching into attacks on the character of anyone who is not so

good

> as to immediately do things your way.

>

> ====>If we could stick to the series of posts in ?, I don't

believe I attacked her character, parenting, responsibility

capacity. I did point her to more reading to shore up what I was

saying. If that is attacking people's character, I'm guilty for sure.

I am not up to rereading all the posts right now. My observations

are intended to be helpful, not intended to attack you or anyone

else. But I find it odd that a therapist by trade seems to not

realize that if several person criticize one individual publically

who has no one on their side, especially if they don't really know

these people, it comes across like a polite little lynch mob.

I am reminded of a great show my son and I watched recently about

the internet and about how microsoft wanted to run netscape out of

business and basically did. It was a wonderful show with very

illustrative imagery in it. It gave Microsoft's version of events,

showing this light-hearted, happy-go-lucky meeting between the two.

Then it showed Netscapes version of events, with a black cloud over

the table and mafia-like people on one side of the table. Microsoft

didn't feel threatened. Netscape did. Microsoft planned on putting

them out of business and essentially did. I think Netscape was

RIGHT to feel very threatened. The final outcome indicates they

weren't being paranoid at all.

>

> I do find it almost incredible to believe that the poster read

Andy's comment on Ala and chose to ignore the MAIN point of his

chelation protocol which is timing.====>

Um, I would think you would be aware that about 90% of all human

communication is really about pecking order. People are so busy

trying to make sure they are respected and heard and validated and

have a spot in the social setting they are in and so on that they

may hardly notice details like that, especially when they feel

ganged up on and so on. There is good reason people put so much

time and energy into worrying about how they are perceived socially,

where they stand and so forth. If you are shunned or ousted, it can

essentially be a death sentence -- even if doesn't literally kill

you these days, say, being fired from your job usually hurts your

career whereas leaving a job voluntarily because you have found

another usually improves your career. And there can be very long

term negative consequences from something like that.

>

>

> The view that, in essence, Andy Cutler's protocol is the ONLY

> acceptable, safe method is so entrenched that it's enormously

> difficult to discuss anything here in a calm, logical fashion

which

> doesn't agree with that mantra.

>

> ====>Yes, this is probably true as most of us know only one way

to help people, Andy's way. I have noted with interest that Andy is

much more flexible in allowing different approaches that work (aside

from the dose timing) as he just plain has more knowledge in this

area while the rest of us, for the most part, only are comfortable

on the very narrow pathway that will not lead to harm.

Andy is very knowledgeable and generally reasonable. I will suggest

(at serious risk of going down in flames) that if people here are

being rigid because they only know one way that works -- Andy's way -

- whereas Andy himeself is more flexible than that, then the idea

that newcomers are the ones failing to responde to " logic "

and " reasoning " may be erroneous. It may be the folks here who are

speaking largely out of fear. Because of things I have been

through, I have relatively few taboos and generally do not use

strongly condemning language. I have concluded that taboos are

about society trying to prevent something so heinous that it cannot

be recovered from at all. On CF lists, there is ENORMOUS fear. CF

kills people, and at tragically young ages, and causes enormous

suffering leading up to that. So what I find is that most people on

CF lists who know of some things that help are quite preachy about

it, implying by their manner that you are a bad parent if you don't

do these things for your kid. It tends to make it difficult to

discuss stuff -- in the face of such preachiness, people don't want

to admit they are " sinners " , so to speak. I am not preachy because

I am not afraid. My son is well and I am getting well. It is clear

to me that I WILL be well one day, it is only a matter of time. I

have this " demon " called CF on the run. I am unafraid. It's a lot

of work, it's a huge nuisance, but it is not some mysterious threat

that cannot be coped with anymore. So when I talk to people, I am

calm and non-judgmental and give suggestions for how they can

improve on what they currently doing, with an emphasis on making do-

able suggestions, knowing this folks are overwhelmed, short of

sleep, probably suffering under a huge financial burden, etc. I

encourage them to raise the bar gradually, at a comfortable rate. I

don't set a bar so high they cannot imagine reaching it. I don't

give the message that it's dreadful if they don't meet my standard.

The fact that I am calm was really weird to people at first. It

made me a freak and that made me even more bewildering and thus more

frightening to people. Now that they have had some time to get to

know me, it is becoming what I knew it would: a gravity well that

draws desperate people in to the only calm they have ever glimpsed

in the endless storm of their difficult lives.

>

>

>

> This is not just my opinion. I had a college class on

negotiation

> and conflict management.

>

> ====>You don't need to defend your reasoning. Most of the

important things I have learned about therapy and life is

general...were taught to me by patients.

>

>

>

> Groups that tolerate a diversity of ideas and experiences are

groups

> that have a higher chance of helping people solve their problems

> because if X won't work for them, there are many other viable

> solutions to pursue. It also avoids the social trap of damning

> people for not doing things your way. Speaking in highly

judgmental

> and condemning tones of anyone who doesn't do it your way

>

> ====>Here's the gist of the problem, though. If you don't say

something then we get the post a month or 3 months later and the kid

is banging his head against the wall or not speaking anymore. Not

something I like and I try to avoid saying " Well, just let us know

how it goes. "

I am not suggesting that you say nothing.

>

> The best you can do is point to some additional reading for the

person to pursue, but you see this as condescending? Kind of like an

offhanded way of saying to the person that they haven't arrived at

the right decision due to not interpreting what they have read

correctly?

I don't really know how to respond to that right now. It seems like

one of those " Do you still beat your wife? " type questions. You

sound defensive and thus somewhat condemning. Since my only hope is

to suggest a more effective means for addressing an issue that you

and others have expressed frustration with, I see no point in

getting into what is likely to end up as a " pissing contest " , no

matter what the intent might be (cuz, hey, the road to hell is paved

with good intentions. good intentions are far from " enough " to

avoid the path to hell, so speak.)

>

> Thanks for the discussion.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I love a good debate.

I have a feeling that many DAN!'s don't like the Cutler protocol because we

parents can do it ourselves.

mildcasedad <mildcasedad@...> wrote:

Hi Maggie,

Sorry to hear about your DAN! experiences.

>

> ....I, too, think Andy can be harsh, but I'm not here to give

lessons on manners or critique the delivery of someone's advice.

We can have a healthy debate about things w/o there needing to be

suggestions of blatant condescension, right??

I think that it's a given here that everyone's darn glad that Andy

figured out so much and has been so tremendously generous in sharing

what he knows. Your kid and mine stand a much better chance at a

better (even normal??) life because of it. Personally, in all

honesty, I can't think of anything more valuable in this world right now.

Furthermore, esp. since I naturally have a similar style as Andy's (or

even more pronounced), I think I understand/appreciate it, and believe

that I see the good intented affect.

Permit me to share something that I found interesting...

One of the ways I vetted Andy's arguments (on challenge tests,

chelator selection and dosing/frequency, etc) in my mind was by

carefully presenting them to DAN! doctors, as non-threateningly as I

could, in order to hear their counterpoints. [One of those doctors

was a name you'd likely know.]

To my considerable surprise, despite trying repeatedly, I haven't

heard almost any pushback on the substance of those arguments. As

mentioned, what came back instead seemed to be more of an affront at

the style. " He hates DAN!s. " " He hates all doctors. " [You can argue

perhaps that was a logical trap being set for me to draw leverage, but

I didn't take it as such, and didn't follow it regardless.]

This floored me. Wouldn't any good doctor/scientist focus on the core

of the argument and not any nuances in the delivery?? Can't any DAN!

defend their position, or is there just not enough there to go on?

[Now *THAT'S* scary...]

Next comes the thought.... Would DAN! come back a bit, and

acknowledge/suggest Cutler chelation more if not threatened?

That may be a crazy thought, but it would help a lot more kids if true.

[it's also very clear and understood that given the spotty practices

that go on, not speaking out loudly against them also has a

non-trivial cost... That's a harder one to weigh.]

I trust Andy to have a thick enough skin to consider this for whatever

it's worth to him. [No one benefits from only hearing good data

points and good experiences. If he thinks I'm full of hooey, that's

fine (and that wouldn't be the first time that that was right in

part/whole ;^) ).]

Just my $0.02, from my limited view.

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

=======================================================

[Guest guest]

Well I think you've hit on an important point. Many doctors are so used

to patients following their advice to the letter, that when a patient

says " NO I won't do that, what about this other way? " A lot of doctors

feel threatened by this. Even more so when the patient has knowledge

that the doctor has not considered.

Its not very often they will turn to you and say " You know, I don't know

anything about that. I will look into it further for you and give you

an opinion when I know enough. "

Maggie O'rourke wrote:

>

> I love a good debate.

>

> I have a feeling that many DAN!'s don't like the Cutler protocol

> because we parents can do it ourselves.

>

> mildcasedad <mildcasedad@... <mailto:mildcasedad%40>>

> wrote:

> Hi Maggie,

>

> Sorry to hear about your DAN! experiences.

>

>

> >

> > ....I, too, think Andy can be harsh, but I'm not here to give

> lessons on manners or critique the delivery of someone's advice.

>

> We can have a healthy debate about things w/o there needing to be

> suggestions of blatant condescension, right??

>

> I think that it's a given here that everyone's darn glad that Andy

> figured out so much and has been so tremendously generous in sharing

> what he knows. Your kid and mine stand a much better chance at a

> better (even normal??) life because of it. Personally, in all

> honesty, I can't think of anything more valuable in this world right now.

>

> Furthermore, esp. since I naturally have a similar style as Andy's (or

> even more pronounced), I think I understand/appreciate it, and believe

> that I see the good intented affect.

>

> Permit me to share something that I found interesting...

>

> One of the ways I vetted Andy's arguments (on challenge tests,

> chelator selection and dosing/frequency, etc) in my mind was by

> carefully presenting them to DAN! doctors, as non-threateningly as I

> could, in order to hear their counterpoints. [One of those doctors

> was a name you'd likely know.]

>

> To my considerable surprise, despite trying repeatedly, I haven't

> heard almost any pushback on the substance of those arguments. As

> mentioned, what came back instead seemed to be more of an affront at

> the style. " He hates DAN!s. " " He hates all doctors. " [You can argue

> perhaps that was a logical trap being set for me to draw leverage, but

> I didn't take it as such, and didn't follow it regardless.]

>

> This floored me. Wouldn't any good doctor/scientist focus on the core

> of the argument and not any nuances in the delivery?? Can't any DAN!

> defend their position, or is there just not enough there to go on?

> [Now *THAT'S* scary...]

>

> Next comes the thought.... Would DAN! come back a bit, and

> acknowledge/suggest Cutler chelation more if not threatened?

>

> That may be a crazy thought, but it would help a lot more kids if true.

>

> [it's also very clear and understood that given the spotty practices

> that go on, not speaking out loudly against them also has a

> non-trivial cost... That's a harder one to weigh.]

>

> I trust Andy to have a thick enough skin to consider this for whatever

> it's worth to him. [No one benefits from only hearing good data

> points and good experiences. If he thinks I'm full of hooey, that's

> fine (and that wouldn't be the first time that that was right in

> part/whole ;^) ).]

>

> Just my $0.02, from my limited view.

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> =======================================================

>

[Guest guest]

>

> I love a good debate.

>

> I have a feeling that many DAN!'s don't like the Cutler protocol

because we parents can do it ourselves.

My inner cynic agrees, and recognizes that there's no revenue stream

there.

On the flip-side, I don't know how many parents will reliably wake up

every three hours on weekends for a couple of years to do the AC

protocol, really stop rounds if they miss a dose by >30 minutes or so,

read up on all the supplements, ... Or would many parents do this

well and follow the rules if given the option and more backing??

As crazy as it sounds, might the DAN!s methods of shots, etc serve a

purpose by helping more kids albeit at increased risk at times??

Hard questions.

[Guest guest]

This is offered as " food for thought " :

Your current behavior on list looks remarkably like what is getting

criticized and atributed by you and others to " only wanting

validation " and so forth: You asked for help and are now basically

defending and justifying your current course of action, essentially

dismissing my suggestions.

I do not believe you are simply closed-minded and looking for

validation for a pre-determined course of action from which you

refuse to be swayed. I believe you very much want a better approach

to this problem. Perhaps the reasons you are reacting this way

will shed some light for you on why other people may be reacting

this way to you.

HTH.

>

> > RE: The remarks about " why would you ask for help and then

reject it? "

>

> I don't think that is what is happening at all.

>

> They come on the list saying " my DAN! doctor wants to do XYZ " to

seek affirmation.

>

> I provide contradiction and confrontation, not affirmation.

>

> Sometimes this is effective in derailing the affirmation ritual

and we can start to have a

> rational discussion about the course of action proposed, sometimes

not.

>

> I think a lot of the people aren't really asking for help yet, I'm

trying to get them to do just

> that rather than only seeking affirmation. Another way to view

this is they are asking for

> help in the form of moral support to let the doctor do XYZ, and

instead I offer them the

> help of what they really ought to be doing instead - often people

are resistant to help they

> need but that is different from what they asked for.

>

> Andy

>

[Guest guest]

> ... when a patient

> says " NO I won't do that, what about this other way? " A lot of doctors

> feel threatened by this.

If you threaten them, you lose any value that you could get from them.

Whether that's a big or small loss is your call and bears considering.

Personally, I try to adopt polite psychologist/office-politics speak

to get around this. This usually works reasonably well.

[if I burn in hell for doing this, but my kid is recovered, I'll still

be happy.]

e.g.

" That's interesting doctor. What about XXX and YYY? What about the

ZZZ study that showed ... "

" What about the recent Rossignol studies, a guy that's very

sympathetic to HBOT, showing mostly only help in decreasing

inflamation and bacteria... I don't claim to understand all that it

can do perfectly, but given that and the lack of other good studies it

just got me thinking... Might there be a simpler way of doing the same

thing?.... I've heard of all the *possible* benefits, but don't see

how the HBOT can tie everything that's going on in the body as

coherently as metals issues seem to. "

" I'm trying to read up on all this and don't claim to understand it

perfectly, but doesn't glutathione just move metals around because it

has one thiol (to bind onto the metal for a bit and push it around,

but not be of much help otherwise), whether it's given TD or orally?

What's been your experience and what are the risks there if metals are

present (as seems to be the case from the porphyrin test)? "

" Are EDTA or DMPS shots approved by the FDA? ...I know that you don't

like his some of his comments, but what's wrong with Cutler's

arguments about shots causing a spike and then dropping the metals at

random everywhere as they come out of solution? It made a lot more

sense to us to want to keep a constant dose of chelator in the blood

to try to avoid that...esp. since we're a bit worried about the risks

of trying any sort of chelation on even a trial basis... "

" ... wouldn't doing a challenge test with a shot have similar

risks.... and how do you know you're not just pulling the metals from

the easy places like the kidneys when you do that? ... How do you

know that that's indicative of the full body burden in the brain, deep

tissue, etc? ... What sort of norms are you comparing the results to?

Is that in comparison to normal kids too? How many parents in their

right mind would give their a healthy kid a chelator challenge test??

...I guess we thought about that a good bit, and had a harder time

with understanding the basis there... "

" We respect that view, but after doing a lot of reading, we just found

that metals issues to be one of the few things that can potentially

tie together all the issues we're seeing. HBOT/rectal leeches and

blood-letting/etc don't seem to potentially explain everything as well

to us. Do you think you can help us in trying the Cutler protocol, or

do you just not support that? "

[Guest guest]

I agree....perhaps the DAN!s know that some parents will not follow through.

Being from a single income family and not being able to afford a DAN! I can say

I was tremendously relieved to learn my son's recovery did not depend on his

parent's wealth (or lack there of). When I discovered that all it would take is

a few wake-ups during the evening on weekends I thought it was the bargain of

the century. As for the supplements, well, it really isn't that difficult when

you get the hang of it and introduce a good multi 4 x daily that includes many

supps that are required.

I often wonder about those children who are affected living with single moms,

or with families that are barely scraping by. Are they going to be denied a

promising treatment because of their family's economic status? Do these DAN!s

turn them away? Sadly, I believe the answer is yes. That's why I hold a very

tender spot in my heart for the people on this board who give away so freely the

same advice that people pay a DAN! $450 an hour for. We can't forget that this

is a grassroots movements and many unamed heroes are helping us out every day

with no pay, no glory, no expectations. I'm getting a little choked up thinking

about it. I owe every bit of my son's progress to people who I wouldn't

recognize on the street and I'll probably never meet them face to face, but I

have an immense amount of love and gratitude for them.

You're right...there are some hard questions and we should absolutely debate

anytime we feel it's relevant. That's how we get answers and come up with new

questions.

mildcasedad <mildcasedad@...> wrote:

>

> I love a good debate.

>

> I have a feeling that many DAN!'s don't like the Cutler protocol

because we parents can do it ourselves.

My inner cynic agrees, and recognizes that there's no revenue stream

there.

On the flip-side, I don't know how many parents will reliably wake up

every three hours on weekends for a couple of years to do the AC

protocol, really stop rounds if they miss a dose by >30 minutes or so,

read up on all the supplements, ... Or would many parents do this

well and follow the rules if given the option and more backing??

As crazy as it sounds, might the DAN!s methods of shots, etc serve a

purpose by helping more kids albeit at increased risk at times??

Hard questions.

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

=======================================================