Guest guest Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 , You mentioned the discredited claim of 13.8 mg per day of iodine consumption among healthy Japanese. This came from a misinterpretation of the following paper from 1967, which overestimates the iodine content of kelp by confusing wet with dehydrated forms: Nagataki S, et al. Thyroid function in chronic excess iodide ingestion: comparison of thyroidal absolute iodine uptake and degradation of thyroxine in euthyroid Japanese subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1967;27:638–647. The mistake was pointed out in Dr. Alan Gaby's highly critical editorial on the claims of the iodine docs, Abraham and Brownstein. Both sides of the argument with responses are available at the Townsend Letter from last year: http://www.townsendletter.com/April2006/iodine0406.htm Here is the relevant excerpt: " ... The idea that Japanese people consume 13.8 mg of iodine per day appears to have arisen from a misinterpretation of a 1967 paper.6 In that paper, the average intake of seaweed in Japan was listed as 4.6 g (4,600 mg) per day, and seaweed was said to contain 0.3% iodine. The figure of 13.8 mg comes from multiplying 4,600 mg by 0.003. However, the 4.6 g of seaweed consumed per day was expressed as wet weight, whereas the 0.3%-iodine figure was based on dry weight. Since many vegetables contain at least 90% water, 13.8 mg per day is a significant overestimate of iodine intake. In studies that have specifically looked at iodine intake among Japanese people, the mean dietary intake (estimated from urinary iodine excretion) was in the range of 330 to 500 mcg per day,7,8 which is at least 25-fold lower than 13.8 mg per day. The other argument being proposed to support a high iodine requirement is that it takes somewhere between 6 and 14 mg of oral iodine per day to keep the thyroid gland fully saturated with iodine. Whether or not that is true, it is not clear that loading the thyroid gland or other tissues with all the iodine they can hold is necessarily a good thing. Since emerging from the iodine-rich oceans to become mammals, we have evolved in an iodine-poor environment. Our thyroid glands have developed a powerful mechanism to concentrate iodine, and some thyroid glands (or other tissues) might not function as well after a sudden 90-fold increase in the intake of this mineral. As I will explain later, relatively small increases in dietary iodine intake have been reported to cause hypothyroidism or other thyroid abnormalities in some people. It has also been observed that iodine supplementation promotes the urinary excretion of potentially toxic halogens such as bromide and fluoride. While that effect might be beneficial for some people, it is not clear to what extent it would shift the risk-benefit ratio of megadose iodine therapy for the general population..... " 7. Ishizuki Y, et al. [The variation of Japanese urinary excretion of iodine in different decades of age]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1994;70:1093–1100. 8. Ishizuki Y, et al. [urinary iodide excretion in Japanese people and thyroid dysfunction]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1992;68:550–556. I'm thinking at least a link to the exchanges on the Townsend Letter ought to be a part of the FAQ. Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2007 Report Share Posted June 10, 2007 It should seem strange that the claim that Japanese consumed 1000% to 2500% MORE iodine than they actually did in the study keeps turning up here. I had actually thought the error had been discovered before 2006. Yes, I think this should be in the FAQ if the invalid study is going to keep being quoted here and elsewhere. Thanks, > > That faulty iodine paper > <hypothyroidism/message/28659;_ylc=X3oDMTJxNGVna2k\ 1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMjg2NTkEc2V\ jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE4MTQ2ODgyMg--> > > > > Posted by: " Chuck B " gumboyaya@... > <mailto:gumboyaya@...?Subject=%20Re%3AThat%20faulty%20iodine%20paper> > gumbo482001 <gumbo482001> > > > Sat Jun 9, 2007 11:55 am (PST) > > , > > You mentioned the discredited claim of 13.8 mg per day of iodine > consumption among healthy Japanese. This came from a misinterpretation > of the following paper from 1967, which overestimates the iodine content > of kelp by confusing wet with dehydrated forms: > > Nagataki S, et al. Thyroid function in chronic excess iodide ingestion: > comparison of thyroidal absolute iodine uptake and degradation of > thyroxine in euthyroid Japanese subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab > 1967;27:638–647. > > The mistake was pointed out in Dr. Alan Gaby's highly critical editorial > on the claims of the iodine docs, Abraham and Brownstein. Both sides of > the argument with responses are available at the Townsend Letter from > last year: > > http://www.townsendletter.com/April2006/iodine0406.htm > <http://www.townsendletter.com/April2006/iodine0406.htm> > > Here is the relevant excerpt: > > " ... The idea that Japanese people consume 13.8 mg of iodine per day > appears to have arisen from a misinterpretation of a 1967 paper.6 In > that paper, the average intake of seaweed in Japan was listed as 4.6 g > (4,600 mg) per day, and seaweed was said to contain 0.3% iodine. The > figure of 13.8 mg comes from multiplying 4,600 mg by 0.003. However, the > 4.6 g of seaweed consumed per day was expressed as wet weight, whereas > the 0.3%-iodine figure was based on dry weight. Since many vegetables > contain at least 90% water, 13.8 mg per day is a significant > overestimate of iodine intake. In studies that have specifically looked > at iodine intake among Japanese people, the mean dietary intake > (estimated from urinary iodine excretion) was in the range of 330 to 500 > mcg per day,7,8 which is at least 25-fold lower than 13.8 mg per day. > > The other argument being proposed to support a high iodine requirement > is that it takes somewhere between 6 and 14 mg of oral iodine per day to > keep the thyroid gland fully saturated with iodine. Whether or not that > is true, it is not clear that loading the thyroid gland or other tissues > with all the iodine they can hold is necessarily a good thing. Since > emerging from the iodine-rich oceans to become mammals, we have evolved > in an iodine-poor environment. Our thyroid glands have developed a > powerful mechanism to concentrate iodine, and some thyroid glands (or > other tissues) might not function as well after a sudden 90-fold > increase in the intake of this mineral. As I will explain later, > relatively small increases in dietary iodine intake have been reported > to cause hypothyroidism or other thyroid abnormalities in some people. > > It has also been observed that iodine supplementation promotes the > urinary excretion of potentially toxic halogens such as bromide and > fluoride. While that effect might be beneficial for some people, it is > not clear to what extent it would shift the risk-benefit ratio of > megadose iodine therapy for the general population.. > ... " > > 7. Ishizuki Y, et al. [The variation of Japanese urinary excretion of > iodine in different decades of age]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon > Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1994;70:1093–1100. > 8. Ishizuki Y, et al. [urinary iodide excretion in Japanese people and > thyroid dysfunction]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai > Zasshi 1992;68:550–556. > > I'm thinking at least a link to the exchanges on the Townsend Letter > ought to be a part of the FAQ. > > Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2009 Report Share Posted September 29, 2009 Hi Chuck, I found your post regarding what you and percieved to be G. Abraham's " gross error " on the amount of iodine ingested daily by mainland Japanese. Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby? Abraham clearly laid out in his rebuttal what the error was, and why the original figures (13.8 g/day of Iodine) were certainly correct. Please let me know if I am missing something. http://www.townsendletter.com/Oct2005/gabyrebuttal1005.htm <http://www.townsendletter.com/Oct2005/gabyrebuttal1005.htm> " Gaby mentioned that the calculation we used to estimate the average daily intake of mainland Japanese was based on dry weight whereas the data in Nagataki's publication23 on iodine in seaweed was reported per wet weight. Quoting from that article: 'For example, the dry weight of such food as " tangle " (Laminaria) contains 0.3% iodine1 and this may be eaten in quantities as large as 10 g daily.'23 This daily intake would compute to 30mg of elemental iodine. However, on page 643 of the same article, Nagataki et al23 misquoted their Reference #13, that is our Reference #26, when they stated: '…according to the statistics of the Ministry of Health and Welfare,13 the average daily intake of seaweed was 4.6 g (wet weight),' when in fact, that Organization confirmed by a phone interview (6/21/05) that their data on seaweed are always expressed as dry weight. For example, in table 8 of Nagataki's Reference #13, values for seaweed consumption for several years from 1950 to 1963 are listed in gms of dry weight, confirmed by the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare. We have compiled some of these data in our Table II, taken from reference 13 of Nagataki's article. The value of 4.6 g that Nagataki quoted as wet weight was actually expressed as dry weight and Nagataki used the value for the year 1963 only, that is, 4.6 gm. Nagataki et al mentioned correctly dry weight on page 638 at the beginning of their article, and for some unknown reason, they erroneously mentioned wet weight on page 643 of the same publication, which is confusing. We have relied, therefore, on the original information supplied by the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare, that is Nagataki's Reference #13, and our reference #26. The average daily intake of iodine by mainland Japanese in 1963 was 13.8 mg, based on information supplied by the Japanese Ministry of Health, which used only dry weight in their calculations, confirmed by a phone interview of one of us (GEA) on June 21, 2005, with officials of this organization (See Table II). In a phone interview with Guy E. Abraham, M.D., on June 21, 2005, using Miss Hisa Izumi as an interpreter, the interviewees Miss Nichi and Mister Arai at the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare confirm that, in the nutritional surveys published in 1965, the average daily amount of seaweed consumed is expressed as gms of dried seaweed. " 23. Nagataki, S., Shizume, K., Nakao, K., Thyroid Function in Chronic Excess Iodide Ingestion: Comparison of Thyroidal Absolute Iodine Uptake and Degradation of Thyroxine in Euthyroid Japanese Subjects. J. Clin. Endocr., 27:638-647, 1967. 26. Nutrition in Japan, 1964. Nutrition Section, Bureau of Public Health, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Japan. Printed: Tokyo, Japan, March 1965. -Ken Bagwell > > , > > You mentioned the discredited claim of 13.8 mg per day of iodine > consumption among healthy Japanese. This came from a misinterpretation > of the following paper from 1967, which overestimates the iodine content > of kelp by confusing wet with dehydrated forms: > > Nagataki S, et al. Thyroid function in chronic excess iodide ingestion: > comparison of thyroidal absolute iodine uptake and degradation of > thyroxine in euthyroid Japanese subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab > 1967;27:638–647. > > The mistake was pointed out in Dr. Alan Gaby's highly critical editorial > on the claims of the iodine docs, Abraham and Brownstein. Both sides of > the argument with responses are available at the Townsend Letter from > last year: > > http://www.townsendletter.com/April2006/iodine0406.htm > > Here is the relevant excerpt: > > " ... The idea that Japanese people consume 13.8 mg of iodine per day > appears to have arisen from a misinterpretation of a 1967 paper.6 In > that paper, the average intake of seaweed in Japan was listed as 4.6 g > (4,600 mg) per day, and seaweed was said to contain 0.3% iodine. The > figure of 13.8 mg comes from multiplying 4,600 mg by 0.003. However, the > 4.6 g of seaweed consumed per day was expressed as wet weight, whereas > the 0.3%-iodine figure was based on dry weight. Since many vegetables > contain at least 90% water, 13.8 mg per day is a significant > overestimate of iodine intake. In studies that have specifically looked > at iodine intake among Japanese people, the mean dietary intake > (estimated from urinary iodine excretion) was in the range of 330 to 500 > mcg per day,7,8 which is at least 25-fold lower than 13.8 mg per day. > > The other argument being proposed to support a high iodine requirement > is that it takes somewhere between 6 and 14 mg of oral iodine per day to > keep the thyroid gland fully saturated with iodine. Whether or not that > is true, it is not clear that loading the thyroid gland or other tissues > with all the iodine they can hold is necessarily a good thing. Since > emerging from the iodine-rich oceans to become mammals, we have evolved > in an iodine-poor environment. Our thyroid glands have developed a > powerful mechanism to concentrate iodine, and some thyroid glands (or > other tissues) might not function as well after a sudden 90-fold > increase in the intake of this mineral. As I will explain later, > relatively small increases in dietary iodine intake have been reported > to cause hypothyroidism or other thyroid abnormalities in some people. > > It has also been observed that iodine supplementation promotes the > urinary excretion of potentially toxic halogens such as bromide and > fluoride. While that effect might be beneficial for some people, it is > not clear to what extent it would shift the risk-benefit ratio of > megadose iodine therapy for the general population..... " > > 7. Ishizuki Y, et al. [The variation of Japanese urinary excretion of > iodine in different decades of age]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon > Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1994;70:1093–1100. > 8. Ishizuki Y, et al. [urinary iodide excretion in Japanese people and > thyroid dysfunction]. [Article in Japanese]. Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai > Zasshi 1992;68:550–556. > > I'm thinking at least a link to the exchanges on the Townsend Letter > ought to be a part of the FAQ. > > Chuck > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2009 Report Share Posted September 29, 2009 Ken, You wrote: > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about isolated coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave an average above about 1 mg. As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT with iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Hi Chuck, Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then. See left column on page 153... http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japane\ se.pdf <http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japan\ ese.pdf> " Japanese foods in a regular diet have a high iodine content (33,34) and a major dietary source of iodine is seaweed that is served in a large variety of ways under a number of different names, e.g., Kombu (tangle weed, Laminaria japonica), Hijiki (Hizikia fusiformis), and Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) (35). According to the national nutrition survey carried out from 1975 to 2000 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (36), the daily consumption of seaweed per capita is 4.9 to 6.1 g (average: 5.4 g). Kombu, the most iodine-rich seaweed, contains 1.3mg of iodine per gram; therefore, the average dietary iodine intake SOLEY from Kombu is 7,000 mg per day. " How do you reconcile this, Chuck? Would Japan's Ministry of Health be wrong year after year after year since 1967? I do note that the figures above are average 7g/day from 1975-2000, and that the 1967 figures were 13.8 g/day. I'm not concerned about that discrepancy so much, as even if we go with the lowest figure, it's still far, far above anything we Americans are consuming. One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and after blood measurements and ultrasounds. http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm <http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm> I briefly looked up the other 7 or so doctors who are in general agreement with Abraham. These aren't just some dumbells with no background. These are legitimate medical professionals. I don't see how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting at least decent results. -Ken Bagwell > > > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... > > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about isolated > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave an > average above about 1 mg. > > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT with > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. > > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php > > Chuck > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 <One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and after blood measurements and ultrasounds.> I don't think that this is logical reasoning. The medical community has been treating patients wrong for a number of different things for years and years and losing thousands of patients. Just read the stories from the member of this list. They are all still in business. If you think you should eat 7000 gr of iodine a day or a week or whatever, do it. Why is it so important to you to prove this particular person right. He could be right, wrong or partially right or partially wrong. In the end, everyone has to choose for themselves how they take care of their bodies and what they put into them. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> From: kenancy2000 <kenancy2000@...> Subject: Re: That faulty iodine paper hypothyroidism Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 3:21 AM Hi Chuck, Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then. See left column on page 153... http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japane\ se.pdf <http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japan\ ese.pdf> " Japanese foods in a regular diet have a high iodine content (33,34) and a major dietary source of iodine is seaweed that is served in a large variety of ways under a number of different names, e.g., Kombu (tangle weed, Laminaria japonica), Hijiki (Hizikia fusiformis), and Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) (35). According to the national nutrition survey carried out from 1975 to 2000 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (36), the daily consumption of seaweed per capita is 4.9 to 6.1 g (average: 5.4 g). Kombu, the most iodine-rich seaweed, contains 1.3mg of iodine per gram; therefore, the average dietary iodine intake SOLEY from Kombu is 7,000 mg per day. " How do you reconcile this, Chuck? Would Japan's Ministry of Health be wrong year after year after year since 1967? I do note that the figures above are average 7g/day from 1975-2000, and that the 1967 figures were 13.8 g/day. I'm not concerned about that discrepancy so much, as even if we go with the lowest figure, it's still far, far above anything we Americans are consuming. One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and after blood measurements and ultrasounds. http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm <http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm> I briefly looked up the other 7 or so doctors who are in general agreement with Abraham. These aren't just some dumbells with no background. These are legitimate medical professionals. I don't see how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting at least decent results. -Ken Bagwell > > > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... > > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about isolated > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave an > average above about 1 mg. > > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT with > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. > > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php > > Chuck > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Roni Molin wrote: > <One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base > his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more > on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were > literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they > would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method > of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and > after blood measurements and ultrasounds.> > > I don't think that this is logical reasoning. The medical community has been treating patients wrong for a number of different things for years and years and losing thousands of patients. Just read the stories from the member of this list. They are all still in business. I concur. " Orthodox " medicine does what's most profitable and accuses all else of being Kooks. Examples abound, advances are made, and the past errors of orthodoxy are " forgotten " . For example, while anti-acid medications were still under patent and very high priced, everyone and their cousin were diagnosed with Ulcers. The evidence existed that the primary cause in 95 percent of ulcer cases was a bacteria, and that antibiotics where the best method and produced a cure, but it didn't produce chronic intake of prescription medications and associated profts so " orthodox " medicine denied, in most cases, the actual facts. When the standard prescribed ulcer medications came off patent, suddenly, the patented antibiotics where the chosen medical option since it became the most profitable option. Today, its rare to know someone who has been diagnosed with an Ulcer. Statin drugs will be coming off patent in the next half dozen years or so. What will be the " new " cure then since statin drugs don't generally reduce all cause mortality, only shift the causes of death? Thyroid resistance (often related to adrenal fatigue) don't exist according to most medical orthodoxy. There is after all no on-patent drug to treat adrenal fatigue. Orthodoxy claims that at the statically dividing line between additions disease and health, that one side is perfectly " normal " and the other side of the line is life threatening. Any rational consideration would admit a continuum. However, if there was a patented drug to treat adrenal fatigue, you can be sure that the FOX network, CNN, and others would be advertising it every 30 minutes and asking you to ask your doctor if that drugs was " right for you " . -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 " Why is it so important to you to prove this particular person right. " It's called " debate " , Roni. -Ken Bagwell -- In hypothyroidism , Roni Molin <matchermaam@...> wrote: > > <One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base > his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more > on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were > literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they > would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method > of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and > after blood measurements and ultrasounds.> > > I don't think that this is logical reasoning. The medical community has been treating patients wrong for a number of different things for years and years and losing thousands of patients. Just read the stories from the member of this list. They are all still in business. > > If you think you should eat 7000 gr of iodine a day or a week or whatever, do it. Why is it so important to you to prove this particular person right. He could be right, wrong or partially right or partially wrong. In the end, everyone has to choose for themselves how they take care of their bodies and what they put into them. > > > Roni > <>Just because something > isn't seen doesn't mean it's > not there<> > > > > > From: kenancy2000 <kenancy2000@...> > Subject: Re: That faulty iodine paper > hypothyroidism > Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 3:21 AM > > > > Hi Chuck, > > Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then. > > See left column on page 153... > > http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japane\ > se.pdf > <http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japan\ > ese.pdf> > > " Japanese foods in a regular diet have a high iodine content > (33,34) and a major dietary source of iodine is seaweed that is > served in a large variety of ways under a number of different > names, e.g., Kombu (tangle weed, Laminaria japonica), Hijiki > (Hizikia fusiformis), and Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) (35). > According to the national nutrition survey carried out from > 1975 to 2000 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and > Welfare (36), the daily consumption of seaweed per capita is > 4.9 to 6.1 g (average: 5.4 g). Kombu, the most iodine-rich > seaweed, contains 1.3mg of iodine per gram; therefore, the > average dietary iodine intake SOLEY from Kombu is 7,000 mg > per day. " > > How do you reconcile this, Chuck? Would Japan's Ministry of Health be > wrong year after year after year since 1967? > > I do note that the figures above are average 7g/day from 1975-2000, and > that the 1967 figures were 13.8 g/day. I'm not concerned about that > discrepancy so much, as even if we go with the lowest figure, it's still > far, far above anything we Americans are consuming. > > One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base > his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more > on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were > literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they > would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method > of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and > after blood measurements and ultrasounds. > > http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm > <http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm> > > I briefly looked up the other 7 or so doctors who are in general > agreement with Abraham. These aren't just some dumbells with no > background. These are legitimate medical professionals. I don't see > how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting > at least decent results. > > -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > > > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... > > > > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers > > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a > > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about > isolated > > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave > an > > average above about 1 mg. > > > > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp > > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT > with > > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was > > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. > > > > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Hi Roni, You said... " The medical community has been treating patients wrong for a number of different things for years and years and losing thousands of patients. " That's why I added at the end of my post... " I don't see how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting at least decent results (with iodine). " -Ken Bagwell -- In hypothyroidism , Roni Molin <matchermaam@...> wrote: > > <One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base > his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more > on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were > literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they > would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method > of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and > after blood measurements and ultrasounds.> > > I don't think that this is logical reasoning. The medical community has been treating patients wrong for a number of different things for years and years and losing thousands of patients. Just read the stories from the member of this list. They are all still in business. > > If you think you should eat 7000 gr of iodine a day or a week or whatever, do it. Why is it so important to you to prove this particular person right. He could be right, wrong or partially right or partially wrong. In the end, everyone has to choose for themselves how they take care of their bodies and what they put into them. > > > Roni > <>Just because something > isn't seen doesn't mean it's > not there<> > > > > > From: kenancy2000 <kenancy2000@...> > Subject: Re: That faulty iodine paper > hypothyroidism > Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 3:21 AM > > > > Hi Chuck, > > Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then. > > See left column on page 153... > > http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japane\ > se.pdf > <http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japan\ > ese.pdf> > > " Japanese foods in a regular diet have a high iodine content > (33,34) and a major dietary source of iodine is seaweed that is > served in a large variety of ways under a number of different > names, e.g., Kombu (tangle weed, Laminaria japonica), Hijiki > (Hizikia fusiformis), and Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) (35). > According to the national nutrition survey carried out from > 1975 to 2000 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and > Welfare (36), the daily consumption of seaweed per capita is > 4.9 to 6.1 g (average: 5.4 g). Kombu, the most iodine-rich > seaweed, contains 1.3mg of iodine per gram; therefore, the > average dietary iodine intake SOLEY from Kombu is 7,000 mg > per day. " > > How do you reconcile this, Chuck? Would Japan's Ministry of Health be > wrong year after year after year since 1967? > > I do note that the figures above are average 7g/day from 1975-2000, and > that the 1967 figures were 13.8 g/day. I'm not concerned about that > discrepancy so much, as even if we go with the lowest figure, it's still > far, far above anything we Americans are consuming. > > One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base > his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more > on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were > literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they > would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method > of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and > after blood measurements and ultrasounds. > > http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm > <http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm> > > I briefly looked up the other 7 or so doctors who are in general > agreement with Abraham. These aren't just some dumbells with no > background. These are legitimate medical professionals. I don't see > how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting > at least decent results. > > -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > > > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... > > > > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers > > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a > > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about > isolated > > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave > an > > average above about 1 mg. > > > > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp > > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT > with > > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was > > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. > > > > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Ken, You wrote: > > Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then.... Indeed, but it comes from your changing micrograms (in the paper) to milligrams in your quote. Two sentences later, the paper you cited gives the range of reported averages of iodine intake in Japan as somewhere between 0.739 - 3.286 mg/day, for which it again cites Nagataki from 1993, Japan: status of iodine nutrition. IDD Newsltr 9:11. It gives the U.S. average urinary excretion as within the Japanese range (168 mcg/d versus 114-890 mcg/d in Japan). Good citation, BTW, but it confirms everything I had been saying, with just a slightly higher maximum estimate for the Japanese daily intake. The old 1967 claim was for 13.8 mg/d. I don't know where you get 7 g/day from that paper. It is clear that even the most extreme estimates are only 1/4 of what Abraham claims. Usually such outliers are ignored or at least discounted. Perhaps you are confusing urine excretion in mg/LITER with intake in mg/day. Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 I guess I wasn't clear. I wasn't suggesting that somehow treating patients wrongly would or should work out. I was rather stating that they get away with doing that most of the time. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> > > > From: kenancy2000 <kenancy2000@...> > Subject: Re: That faulty iodine paper > hypothyroidism > Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 3:21 AM > > > > Hi Chuck, > > Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then. > > See left column on page 153... > > http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japane\ > se.pdf > <http://iodine4health.com/research/fuse_2007_smaller_thyroid_gland_japan\ > ese.pdf> > > " Japanese foods in a regular diet have a high iodine content > (33,34) and a major dietary source of iodine is seaweed that is > served in a large variety of ways under a number of different > names, e.g., Kombu (tangle weed, Laminaria japonica), Hijiki > (Hizikia fusiformis), and Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) (35). > According to the national nutrition survey carried out from > 1975 to 2000 by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and > Welfare (36), the daily consumption of seaweed per capita is > 4.9 to 6.1 g (average: 5.4 g). Kombu, the most iodine-rich > seaweed, contains 1.3mg of iodine per gram; therefore, the > average dietary iodine intake SOLEY from Kombu is 7,000 mg > per day. " > > How do you reconcile this, Chuck? Would Japan's Ministry of Health be > wrong year after year after year since 1967? > > I do note that the figures above are average 7g/day from 1975-2000, and > that the 1967 figures were 13.8 g/day. I'm not concerned about that > discrepancy so much, as even if we go with the lowest figure, it's still > far, far above anything we Americans are consuming. > > One thing that does intrugue me about Abraham is that he does not base > his protocols just on what the Japanese may or may not consume, but more > on clinical observation. If Abraham, Fletchas, and the rest were > literally poisoning thousands of their own patients, do you think they > would still be in business 10 years later? I looked at Fletchas' method > of prescribing iodine, and he is very careful to take all before and > after blood measurements and ultrasounds. > > http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm > <http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-10/IOD_10.htm> > > I briefly looked up the other 7 or so doctors who are in general > agreement with Abraham. These aren't just some dumbells with no > background. These are legitimate medical professionals. I don't see > how that many doctors would be taken for a ride if they weren't getting > at least decent results. > > -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > > > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... > > > > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers > > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a > > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about > isolated > > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave > an > > average above about 1 mg. > > > > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp > > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT > with > > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was > > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. > > > > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Ken, You wrote: > > You are failing to mention that the paper cites UE went as high as 19 > mg/day, and also that it was quite frequent to see average UE at > 5mg/day.... Neither of those is the AVERAGE for the country. Abraham's claim was that the overall AVERAGE was 13.8 mg/day. Even with an average under 1 mg/day, I would expect small groups well in excess of 20 mg/day. That is just statistics. Most of the " seven or eight " iodine doctors you mention are either directly on the Optimox payroll, or they collaborate on papers with direct employees. Abraham owns the company. Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Ah! The old adage of " Follow the Money " reigns true again. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> > > You are failing to mention that the paper cites UE went as high as 19 > mg/day, and also that it was quite frequent to see average UE at > 5mg/day.... Neither of those is the AVERAGE for the country. Abraham's claim was that the overall AVERAGE was 13.8 mg/day. Even with an average under 1 mg/day, I would expect small groups well in excess of 20 mg/day. That is just statistics. Most of the " seven or eight " iodine doctors you mention are either directly on the Optimox payroll, or they collaborate on papers with direct employees. Abraham owns the company. Chuck ------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Hi Chuck, From what I'm reading, after Abraham and Brownstein do their testing and determine there's a greater need for Iodine, they usually give their patients a loading dose of around 50-100mg Iodine for about 3 months. Then, if all appears to be well, they drop it down to an incredible 6-12mg/day (although the numbers can vary), with 12mg or so being the gold standard. Do you have any information about how long it takes for true thyroid issues to show up after a person starts ingesting that much Iodine daily (esp after already starting with 50-100 for 3 months)? -Ken Bagwell > > > > You are failing to mention that the paper cites UE went as high as 19 > > mg/day, and also that it was quite frequent to see average UE at > > 5mg/day.... > > Neither of those is the AVERAGE for the country. Abraham's claim was > that the overall AVERAGE was 13.8 mg/day. Even with an average under 1 > mg/day, I would expect small groups well in excess of 20 mg/day. That is > just statistics. > > Most of the " seven or eight " iodine doctors you mention are either > directly on the Optimox payroll, or they collaborate on papers with > direct employees. Abraham owns the company. > > Chuck > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 I have been assuming that you are aware of the financial relationships between Optimox [a company that sells iodine products] and Abraham, Flechas and Brownstein. Are you aware of those connections? .. .. > > Posted by: " kenancy2000 " kenancy2000@... > <mailto:kenancy2000@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20That%20faulty%20iodine%20paper> > kenancy2000 <kenancy2000> > > > Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:24 pm (PDT) > > > > Hi Chuck, > > My mistake. I changed that measurement because I wanted to highlight > that it was 7mg/day, and forgot to change the " 7,000 " to " 7 " . Dumb > idea, I suppose, but honest mistake. > > You are failing to mention that the paper cites UE went as high as 19 > mg/day, and also that it was quite frequent to see average UE at > 5mg/day. The range in Japan is much wider than in the U.S., according > to this paper. The average intake is also, at a minimum, usually 3 > times higher. But whatever. > > I will continue to research the matter. Obviously, if Abraham is truly > far off in his daily intake estimates (not sure of that yet), then I > would have to ask why he and 7 or 8 other doctors haven't noticed > this, and why Abraham is recommending such a high dose if thyroid > issues are SUPPOSED to pop up in most people in that intake range. It > may be that he felt the 1967 intake figures were in fact correct after > seeing his own patients doing well with that same daily intake range. > But that may well be OK, since Americans are fully loaded with > goitrogens, and consume ever more, daily. > > The following may also make things somewhat thorny... > > " Little is known about the prevalence of thyroid dysfunction that > would be related to excess iodine intake in the general population > that is chronically exposed to large doses of iodine mainly from > dietary sources. " > > Thank you, Chuck. > > -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > > > Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then.... > > > > Indeed, but it comes from your changing micrograms (in the paper) to > > milligrams in your quote. > > > > Two sentences later, the paper you cited gives the range of reported > > averages of iodine intake in Japan as somewhere between 0.739 - 3.286 > > mg/day, for which it again cites Nagataki from 1993, Japan: status of > > iodine nutrition. IDD Newsltr 9:11. It gives the U.S. average urinary > > excretion as within the Japanese range (168 mcg/d versus 114-890 mcg/d > > in Japan). > > > > Good citation, BTW, but it confirms everything I had been saying, with > > just a slightly higher maximum estimate for the Japanese daily intake. > > > > The old 1967 claim was for 13.8 mg/d. I don't know where you get 7 > g/day > > from that paper. It is clear that even the most extreme estimates are > > only 1/4 of what Abraham claims. Usually such outliers are ignored > or at > > least discounted. Perhaps you are confusing urine excretion in mg/LITER > > with intake in mg/day. > > > > Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 You seem to be misunderstanding or choosing to do so, no matter what I say, so in order not to have an argument over nothing, I am choosing to end my participation in this particular discussion. I'm not angry or annoyed or anything else except lost interest. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> From: kenancy2000 <kenancy2000@...> Subject: Re: That faulty iodine paper hypothyroidism Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 6:58 PM So, I'd take from that that you feel these 7 or 8 doctors are not getting more good results than bad, using iodine? ( " most of the time " ) -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... > > > > > > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers > > > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a > > > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about > > isolated > > > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave > > an > > > average above about 1 mg. > > > > > > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp > > > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT > > with > > > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was > > > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. > > > > > > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 Hi , I could see those three being related, as all their work on the Iodine Project has been together, although Abraham has done the lion's share. Tell me everything you know about their financial relationship. -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > > > Well, it appears we have a conundrum, then.... > > > > > > Indeed, but it comes from your changing micrograms (in the paper) to > > > milligrams in your quote. > > > > > > Two sentences later, the paper you cited gives the range of reported > > > averages of iodine intake in Japan as somewhere between 0.739 - 3.286 > > > mg/day, for which it again cites Nagataki from 1993, Japan: status of > > > iodine nutrition. IDD Newsltr 9:11. It gives the U.S. average urinary > > > excretion as within the Japanese range (168 mcg/d versus 114-890 mcg/d > > > in Japan). > > > > > > Good citation, BTW, but it confirms everything I had been saying, with > > > just a slightly higher maximum estimate for the Japanese daily intake. > > > > > > The old 1967 claim was for 13.8 mg/d. I don't know where you get 7 > > g/day > > > from that paper. It is clear that even the most extreme estimates are > > > only 1/4 of what Abraham claims. Usually such outliers are ignored > > or at > > > least discounted. Perhaps you are confusing urine excretion in mg/LITER > > > with intake in mg/day. > > > > > > Chuck > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 I believe Chuck has already answered that. .. .. > > Posted by: " kenancy2000 " kenancy2000@... > <mailto:kenancy2000@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20That%20faulty%20iodine%20paper> > kenancy2000 <kenancy2000> > > > Wed Sep 30, 2009 11:20 pm (PDT) > > > > Hi , > > I could see those three being related, as all their work on the Iodine > Project has been together, although Abraham has done the lion's share. > > Tell me everything you know about their financial relationship. > > -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > I have been assuming that you are aware of the financial relationships > > between Optimox [a company that sells iodine products] and Abraham, > > Flechas and Brownstein. Are you aware of those connections? > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 Ken, You wrote: > > ... Do you have any information about how long it takes for true thyroid > issues to show up after a person starts ingesting that much Iodine daily > (esp after already starting with 50-100 for 3 months)? The Wolff-Chaikoff effect hits immediately, but that is usually gone after 10 days. Since the hypoT issues are mainly mediated by the immune system, I would expect risk of an autoimmune reaction to accumulate with time. It could be dose related, but once triggered at any dose or time, it would not stop. Gracia said she stayed above 50 mg per day for a lot longer than 3 months. Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 Hi Roni, I guess I wasn't clear. You said the medical community has been treating patients wrong for years, and getting away with it. I was trying to ask you if you felt the iodine doctors were also " getting away with it " . In other words, if the patients come in with a complaint, and Doc Z says " Try Iodine! " And the patient comes back with positive results in actual clinical observation and tests, what can be said? -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > > > > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... > > > > > > > > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers > > > > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a > > > > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about > > > isolated > > > > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave > > > an > > > > average above about 1 mg. > > > > > > > > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp > > > > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT > > > with > > > > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was > > > > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. > > > > > > > > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php > > > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 Abraham and others have been studying this for about 10 years now, and implementing this into their practice for maybe 5 years or longer. I would expect some real autoimmune issues to have shown up in someone by now. Maybe I'll have to ask about that. -Ken Bagwell > > > > ... Do you have any information about how long it takes for true thyroid > > issues to show up after a person starts ingesting that much Iodine daily > > (esp after already starting with 50-100 for 3 months)? > > The Wolff-Chaikoff effect hits immediately, but that is usually gone after 10 days. Since the hypoT issues are mainly mediated by the immune system, I would expect risk of an autoimmune reaction to accumulate with time. It could be dose related, but once triggered at any dose or time, it would not stop. > > Gracia said she stayed above 50 mg per day for a lot longer than 3 months. > > Chuck > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 You want me to comment about each and every patient that took or takes iodine? Can't be done. What I was saying is that there have been treatments with this or that medication through the years that have proven to be wrong for any number of reasons. Efficacy, side effects, non combing with other drugs, causing illness themselves. If you had been following these posts all along you would have seen that my mother was put on iodine, and then she had to have surgery to remove her thyroid. I would not take it. There are other things that I would not take, like coumadin for example. If you or anyone else wants to take iodine, be my guest. I'm here to help and be helped, not to get into these endlessly futile debates. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> From: kenancy2000 <kenancy2000@...> Subject: Re: That faulty iodine paper hypothyroidism Date: Thursday, October 1, 2009, 3:21 PM Hi Roni, I guess I wasn't clear. You said the medical community has been treating patients wrong for years, and getting away with it. I was trying to ask you if you felt the iodine doctors were also " getting away with it " . In other words, if the patients come in with a complaint, and Doc Z says " Try Iodine! " And the patient comes back with positive results in actual clinical observation and tests, what can be said? -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > > > > > Did you or did you not read the response to Gaby?... > > > > > > > > Yes, I did. Abraham clearly thought the Ministry of Health's numbers > > > > were reliable, as did they at the time. However, I have yet to find a > > > > single source since then to confirm it. I have seen data about > > > isolated > > > > coastal populations that had double digit intakes but none that gave > > > an > > > > average above about 1 mg. > > > > > > > > As an example, this study in 1998 compared " high " with " moderate " kelp > > > > consuming regions. Although they did not find an increase in hypoT > > > with > > > > iodine consumption, they found an average from urine testing was > > > > consistent with 1.5 mg/day or less. > > > > > > > > http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/199909/000019990999A0183589.php > > > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 Do you know when the message was posted or the title of the post? I tried looking it up through a search of the forum " optimox financials " but didn't see anything. -Ken Bagwell > > > > > > I have been assuming that you are aware of the financial relationships > > > between Optimox [a company that sells iodine products] and Abraham, > > > Flechas and Brownstein. Are you aware of those connections? > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2009 Report Share Posted October 2, 2009 Here is a study I found involving only 24 participants, however, interestingly enough, both high dietary intakes of seaweed and 25 mg iodine doses (for up to 4 weeks) are mentioned in the study, with both causing hypothyroidism in the same people. Alright, so I'm weirded out. I will be asking others about this. http://journalreview.org/v2/articles/view/3722332.html The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism. 1986 Aug;63(2):412-7 Studies of hypothyroidism in patients with high iodine intake. " Twenty-two patients with spontaneously occurring primary hypothyroidism were studied to evaluate the spontaneous reversibility of the hypothyroid state. Twelve (54.5%) became euthyroid after restriction of iodine intake for 3 weeks (reversible type). In the remaining 10 patients, thyroid function did not improve with restriction of iodine alone, and thus, replacement therapy was required, (irreversible type). Seven patients with the reversible type were given 25 mg iodine daily for 2-4 weeks; all became hypothyroid again. Two patients had a history of habitual ingestion of seaweed (25.4 and 43.1 mg iodine, respectively), but the remaining 10 patients ingested ordinary amounts of iodine (1-5 mg) daily. The patients with reversible hypothyroidism had focal lymphocytic thyroiditis changes in the thyroid biopsy specimen, whereas those with irreversible hypothyroidism had more severe destruction of the thyroid gland. " -Ken Bagwell > > > > ... Do you have any information about how long it takes for true thyroid > > issues to show up after a person starts ingesting that much Iodine daily > > (esp after already starting with 50-100 for 3 months)? > > The Wolff-Chaikoff effect hits immediately, but that is usually gone after 10 days. Since the hypoT issues are mainly mediated by the immune system, I would expect risk of an autoimmune reaction to accumulate with time. It could be dose related, but once triggered at any dose or time, it would not stop. > > Gracia said she stayed above 50 mg per day for a lot longer than 3 months. > > Chuck > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2009 Report Share Posted October 2, 2009 Ken, You wrote: > > > Abraham and others have been studying this for about 10 years now, and > implementing this into their practice for maybe 5 years or longer. I > would expect some real autoimmune issues to have shown up in someone by now. > The people that have bad reactions to Optimox treatments don't stick around to give Abraham feedback. We have had some of them post on this list. I believe is still here. The fact that iodine doses greater than about 3 mg per day trigger or aggravate Hashimoto's is rather well documented in the literature. Health Canada has issued several strong warnings about kelp products for just that reason. The latest one was last year: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/advisories-avis/_2008/2008_77-eng.php Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.