Re: Porphyrin Tests/ was Hair test results: need your experienced opinions!

[Guest guest]

The paper Anita posted was by a Dr. Rossignol, I think.

Here is how my unscientifically oriented brain thinks about the

porphyrin test these days:

If it says you are toxic, you are, though the degree of toxicity

indicated by the test is probably wrong.

If it says you are not toxic, it may be right, it may be wrong. Try

chelation to see if it helps, and if you feel like spending more

money, try rerunning the porphyrin test to see if it indicates

toxicity after some chelation. I have heard of this happening.

Not very optimistic, but that is how I understand these tests to work.

Anne

> >

> > Thank you so much for your comments.

> >

> > I have a few more questions now for you & others who can hopefully

> > reply this weekend before I meet with the DAN! doc again on

Monday.

> >

> >

> >

> > > > I've posted my daughter's DDI results in the hopes that Andy &

> others

> > > > with experience can comment. File is in the Files section,

Hair Test

> > > > folder, File name: Gs hair test - dec 17-07.JPG

> > > >

> > > > The results don't meet the counting rules, but I'm assuming

that the

> > > > very high uranium and moderately high

arsenic/lead/tin/aluminium put

> > > > the results in the suspicious category.

> > >

> > >

> > > You are right it does not meet the counting rules, doesn't even

> > > come close. Supplementation and other interventions that help

> > > can make the hair test look more normal. Also, mercury in the

> > > brain won't derange the hair test.

> > >

> > > Body burden of lead is not always well reflected in hair. She

has

> > > enough to justify DMSA chelation as there may be more in her

bones

> > > and brain than the test shows. I would include ALA so you will

get

> > > rid of any mercury and it will help with lead issues.

> > >

> > > For dosage and timing, see the FAQ and the Moria's website in

the

> > > files section. Ask questions if you are unsure about anything.

> >

> > > > My first question to you all is: what metals do the results

confirm?

> > > > They don't meet the rules, but can I deduct there is mercury?

> Should I

> > > > chelate based on the test results (FYI, I'm ready and anxious

to

> > > > chelate just based on my daughter's bevy of ASD traits &

learning

> > > > difficulties, which match so many of the symptoms of toxicity

> > > > described in Andy's book).

> > >

> > >

> > > The only metal that appears to be a problem is lead. There

could

> > > be mercury, but the test is not saying it. Yellow level toxics

are

> > > not significant.

> >

> > I highly suspect mercury so maybe it is mostly in the brain now.

If I

> > understand correctly, Andy says that Hg amounts from fish are not

> > significant, but I ate a *lot* of fish while pregnant with my

daughter

>

>

>

> Fish can *certainly* make you toxic, especially the tuna and

> swordfish you mention below. Many types of salmon are not good

> either.

>

>

>

>

> > (esp. salmon, tuna, swordfish - French doctors never me warned

against

> > it). I knew within a few months of birth that something wasn't

right

> > and then we added to it with a boat load of vaccines in her first

2

> > years of life. Mercury does seem very possible to me.

>

>

>

> Yes, your history of exposure indicates to me that mercury is a

> problem, too.

>

>

>

>

> > As for lead, we moved into an old house when she was 20 months old

> > that had lots of lead paint on doors, radiators, etc. We were

advised

> > at the time to paint over it, which we did, as this was safer than

> > removing it. All work was done before we moved in but still there

was

> > lots of dust & she could have been exposed during our 3 years

there so

> > yes, the lead could be higher than on the test.

> >

> > And what about the arsenic? It's higher that the lead but do you

not

> > think it's significant?

>

>

> It is not a big concern, the lead is a much bigger problem because

> hair lead can be falsely low. And mercury is a big concern, too.

> Those are the ones you need to focus on.

>

>

>

>

> > Of course the DAN! sees only mercury as a problem as per

porphyrins

> > results (she told me months ago not to bother doing a hair test

> > because the porphyrins was all I needed and a " better " test). She

> > didn't mention any other metals based on the porphyrins. And if I

> > recall, she mentioned using DMPS not DMSA, but that would not

correct

> > to treat mercury & lead.

>

>

>

> My understanding is porphyrins testing is subject to problems

> and I would believe a lead result in hair before I believed

> the lack of evidence of lead in a porphyrins test.

>

> The hair test result indicates an unhealthy level of lead and

> there is likely more in her bones and brain than the hair test

> shows - there is no way to measure that part, but if she has

> it in her body, some of it got into her bones and brain as well.

>

> It makes sense to use DMSA for awhile to clear some lead. It

> chelates mercury, too. In Hair Test Interpretation, Andy suggests

> chelating with DMSA on a regular basis initially. After a while you

> can use DMSA less often, perhaps once a month as lead slowly moves

> out of the bones and brain.

>

> You can use ALA with the DMSA. This is the most important chelator

> because it clears mercury out of the brain. DMPS can't do that.

If

> you want to use DMPS/ALA later when you are using DMSA/ALA only

once

> a month, that is fine.

>

>

>

>

> > > > Am I correct in concluding adrenal fatigue? (results seem

moderately

> > > > high + she has symptoms of it)

> > >

> > >

> > > There is no adrenal sign on the hair test. If she has symptoms

> > > of adrenal problems you can try some adrenal cortex extract,

> > > the hair test doesn't always show the problem. I needed

adrenal

> > > support and my hair test did not say so.

> >

> > There are signs and Andy mentions that many labs recommend ACE

for all

> > patients so I figure I have nothing to lose.

>

>

> Yes, it is fine to try it and see how she does.

>

>

>

>

> > > > What extra supplements should I be giving based on these

results?

> > >

> > > All I would suggest based on the hair test is chelation as

above,

> > > and basic recommended supplements are in the supplement file.

> > >

> >

> > > > As extra input, here is the link to her previous urinary

> porphyrins &

> > > > blood work through the French lab:

> > > > Autism-

Mercury/files/people/

> > > > (File name: G's test results).

> > >

> > > Maybe someone else will respond. I don't know how to interpret

these.

> >

> >

> > Yes please if someone knows how to interpret the porphyrins for

lead &

> > other toxins, that would be helpful.

>

>

> Andy has posted about these tests in the past and you may want to

> check archives and Moria's website for his comments.

>

> Also, Anita posted some information in the files some time back

that

> may help you interpret these.

>

> --

>

>

>

>

>

> > > > Finally, for chelation I guess we'd have to go with ALA

(mercury,

> > > > arsenic) and DMSA for the lead. What is normally done about

> arsenic -

> > > > do you start with ALA & then possibly add DMPS if needed down

the

> > > > road? And what happens to the aluminum since it can't be

chelated?

> > >

> > >

> > > Focus on chelating the lead. Using DMSA/ALA will also take

care

> > > of any mercury. The others don't appear to be a problem.

> > >

> > > --

> >

>