Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Medical topics with questions, information and discussion related to Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases.
rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Tue 8 Sep 2009 21:40

Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing or "provoked" urine metal testing--used by some "Lyme literate" practitioners and encouraged by certain LymeLand publications--provoked a position paper from the American College of Medical Toxicology.

The AMCT statement concludes: "Post-challenge urinary metal testing has not been scientifically validated, has no demonstrated benefit, and may be harmful when applied in the assessment and treatment of patients in whom there is concern for metal poisoning."

http://www.acmt.net/cgi/page.cgi?aid=29 ... &zine=show
Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing

by Nathan Charlton, MD and Kevin L. Wallace, MD FACMT,
posted on 10:35 AM, July 27, 2009

American College of Medical Toxicology Position Statement on Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing

Heavy metals, such as lead and mercury, are ubiquitous in the environment [1-4]. Exposure in human populations is constantly occurring, and detectable levels of lead and mercury are commonly found in blood and urine of individuals who have no clinical signs or symptoms of toxicity and may be considered background or reference values [1-5].

Although urine testing for various metals in an appropriate clinical context, using proper and validated methods, is common and accepted medical practice, the use of post-challenge (a.k.a., post-provocation) urine metal testing, wherein specimens are typically collected within 48 hours of chelation agent administration, is fraught with many misunderstandings, pitfalls and risks. The American College of Medical Toxicology issues this position statement in disapproval of the use of post-challenge urinary metal testing in clinical practice and the use of such test results as an indication for further administration of chelating agents.

In current evidence-based medical practice, urinary testing is commonly used in the biomonitoring of exposure to certain metals such as arsenic and inorganic mercury and the severity of their associated toxicity. It is accepted practice to conduct such testing, e.g., in exposed individuals with clinical evidence of peripheral neuropathy, as long as validated collection and analytical methods are employed prior to, or after, a sufficiently long time interval (e.g., 3-5 days) following administration of a chelating agent, i.e., applied to non-challenge urine specimens, and the results are compared to appropriate reference values [5, 6].

In some non-evidence-based medical practices, however, assessment of metal poisoning is frequently based on non-validated post-challenge urine metal testing, which invites inappropriate comparison to normal urine reference ranges [4-7].

Chelating agents such as dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA), dimercaptopropanesulfonic acid (DMPS), dimercaprol (BAL), and edetate calcium disodium (CaNa2-EDTA) bind metallic and metalloid elements and have been shown to increase their elimination from the body. Chelating agents have been found to mobilize metals in healthy individuals who have a body burden considered normal for a standard reference population, as well as in those who are determined to have a high body burden of the same metallic species [4, 8-11].

More specifically, urine specimens collected in relatively close temporal proximity to administration of chelating agents, i.e., post-challenge specimens, are expected to have increased concentrations of metallic elements. This includes elements, such as zinc, that are essential to normal physiologic functions and maintenance of good health.

Normal reference values for non-challenge urine metal test results vary among and within different populations. Ranges for these values have been established in nationally certified laboratories that meet proficiency standards for urinary metal testing [5].

However, scientifically acceptable normal reference values for post-challenge urine metal testing have not been established [10].

In addition, scientific investigation to date has failed to establish a valid correlation between prior metal exposure and post-challenge test values [10]. Despite the lack of scientific support to do so, it is also a common practice of some laboratories and care providers to provide or apply non-challenge normal reference values as a comparative means of interpreting results of post-challenge urine metal testing [5]. Currently available scientific data do not provide adequate support for the use of post-challenge urine metal testing as an accurate or reliable means of identifying individuals who would derive therapeutic benefit from chelation.

Unfortunately, the practice of post-challenge urine metal testing and its application to assessment of metal poisoning often leads to unwarranted and prolonged oral and/or intravenous administration of chelating agents, in response to the results of serial post-challenge testing that remain elevated above non-challenge reference values.

Chelation therapy based on such laboratory values, in addition to being of no benefit to patient outcome, may actually prove harmful [5, 12]; catastrophic outcomes such as acute fatal hypocalcemia have been reported following the improper use of a chelating agent, edetate disodium (Na2-EDTA) [13].

In addition, the safer formulation of this agent, CaNa2-EDTA, has been demonstrated to increase urinary excretion of essential minerals such as iron, copper and zinc [8, 14]. There is published experimental evidence that deleterious effects may occur when chelation is applied in the absence of prior lead exposure. [15] Other chelating agents such as DMSA and DMPS may also increase the elimination of certain essential elements, as well as promote target organ redistribution of metallic elements of concern such as mercury [16-18].

It is, therefore, the position of the American College of Medical Toxicology that post-challenge urinary metal testing has not been scientifically validated, has no demonstrated benefit, and may be harmful when applied in the assessment and treatment of patients in whom there is concern for metal poisoning.

References


1.Third National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Atlanta, GA, 2005.
2.Toxicological Profile for Lead. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry: Atlanta, GA, 2007.
3.Anonymous. Toxicological Profile for Mercury. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry: Atlanta, Georgia, 1999.
4.Brodkin E, Copes R, Mattman A, Kennedy J, Kling R, Yassi A. Lead and mercury exposures: interpretation and action. CMAJ 2007;176(1):59-63.
5.Kales SN, Goldman RH. Mercury exposure: current concepts, controversies, and a clinic's experience. J Occup Environ Med 2002;44(2):143-54.
6.Risher JF, Amler SN. Mercury exposure: Evaluation and intervention. The inappropriate use of chelating agents in the diagnosis and treatment of putative mercury poisoning. NeuroToxicology 2005;26(4):691-99.
7.Vamnes JS, Eide R, Isrenn R, Hol PJ, Gjerdet NR. Diagnostic value of a chelating agent in patients with symptoms allegedly caused by amalgam fillings. J Dent Res 2000;79(3):868-74.
8.McKay C, Holland M, Nelson L. A call to arms for medical toxicologists: The dose, not the detection, makes the poison. Internet J Med Toxicol 2003;6(1):1.
9.Kalia K, Flora SJS. Strategies for safe and effective therapeutic measures for chronic arsenic and lead poisoning. J Occup Health 2005;47(1):1-21.
10.Bell RF, Gilliland JC, Boland JR, Sullivan BR. Effect of oral edathamil calcium-disodium on urinary and fecal lead excretion; comparative excretory studies with intravenous therapy. AMA Arch Ind Health 1956;13(4):366-71.
11.Frumkin H, Manning CC, Williams PL, Sanders A, Taylor BB, Pierce M, Elon L, Hertzberg VS. Diagnostic chelation challenge with DMSA: A biomarker of long-term mercury exposure? Environ Health Perspect 2001;109(2):167-71.
12.Fayez I, Paiva M, Thompson M, Verjee Z, Koren, G. Toxicokinetics of mercury elimination by succimer in twin toddlers. Pediatric Drugs 2005;7(6):397-400.
13.Dietrich KN, Ware JH, Salganik M, Radcliffe J, Rogan WJ, Rhoads GG, Fay ME, Davoli CT, Denckla MB, Bornschein RL, Schwarz D, Dockery DW, Adubato S, Jones RL. , and for the Treatment of Lead-Exposed Children Clinical Trial Group. Effect of chelation therapy on the neuropsychological and behavioral development of lead-exposed children after school entry. Pediatrics 2004;114(1):19-26.
14.Brown MJ, Willis T, Omalu B, Leiker R. Deaths resulting from hypocalcemia after administration of edetate disodium: 2003-2005. Pediatrics 2006;118(2):e534-536.
15.Powell JJ, Burden TJ, Greenfield SM, Taylor PD, Thompson RPH. Urinary excretion of essential metals following intravenous calcium disodium edetate: An estimate of free zinc and zinc status in man. J Inorganic Biochem 1999;75(3):159-165.
16.Stangle DE, Smith DR, Beaudin SA, Stawderman MS, Levitsky DA, Strupp BJ. Succimer chelation improves learning, attention, and arousal regulation in lead-exposed rats but produces lasting cognitive impairment in the absence o f lead exposure. Environ Health Persp 2007;115(2):201-9.
17.Chisolm JJ, Thomas DJ. Use of 2,3-dimercaptopropane-1-sulfonate in treatment of lead poisoning in children. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1985;235(3):665-9.
18.Smith DR, Calacsan C, Woolard D, Luck M, Cremin J, Laughlin NK. Succimer and the urinary excretion of essential elements in a primate model of childhood lead exposure. Toxicol Sci 2000;54(2):473-80.
19.Rooney JPK. The role of thiols, dithiols, nutritional factors and interacting ligands in the toxicology of mercury. Toxicology 2007;234(3):145-56.

This statement has been developed by members of the ACMT with principal contribution in writing by Nathan Charlton, M.D. and Kevin L. Wallace, M.D., F.A.C.M.T., reviewed and approved by the ACMT Practice Committee and Board of Directors, and opened to comment by all members of the College. Disclosure statements for participating members of the ACMT Practice Committee and ACMT Board of Directors are available.

June 2009

Claudia
Posts: 1448
Joined: Wed 14 Nov 2007 1:19
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by Claudia » Tue 8 Sep 2009 23:56

An explanation of how the test scam set-up works and is presented to patients in order to convince them that they need medically unnecessary and potentially harmful chelation therapy, IV, supplements, or whatever other "detoxification" therapies being sold by these practitioners:

How the "Urine Toxic Metals" Test Is Used to Defraud Patients
Stephen Barrett, M.D.

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRel ... toxic.html

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Wed 9 Sep 2009 1:25

.
Regulatory Actions

Regulatory Actions

At least four state licensing boards have been concerned about the issue of provoked urine testing as a prelude to chelation.

Connecticut has included a provoked testing ban in settlement agreements with two practitioners. In 2005, Robban Sica, M.D., signed a consent order under which she was prohibited from using a provoked test to diagnose heavy metal toxicity [7]. In 2006, George Zabrecky, D.C., was ordered to stop all testing that might be preliminary to chelation therapy [8].

In 2006, Washington's Bureau of Medical Quality Assurance charged Stephen L. Smith,M.D., with unprofessional conduct for relying on unreliable tests that included a urine toxic metals test. In 2007, he was ordered to pay a $5,000 fine and undergo a practice evaluation [9].

In 2007, Tennessee suspended the license of Joseph E. Rich, M.D., after concluding that he had mismanaged the care of 15 patients, including three who were chelated after undergoing a provoked urine test. [10].

In 2007, the North Carolina Medical Board charged Rashid A. Buttar, M.D., with exploiting four patients by charging exorbitant fees for worthless tests and treatments. At a 2008 hearing Buttar indicated that he recommends chelation for nearly all patients who consult him and routinely uses the urine toxic metals testing to evaluate them.

In 2004, CIGNA HealthCare Medicare Administration, which processes Medicare claims for Idaho, North Carolina, and Tennessee, issued a "Progressive Correction Action Review" which concluded that many claim submissions for chelation therapy had been inappropriate. This conclusion was documented by a study of 40 claims which found that in many cases, "heavy metal toxicity" was inappropriately diagnosed and no need for chelation with edetate calcium disodium was documented. The review criticized provoked testing and noted that it does not provide a basis for diagnosing past or current poisoning [11].

I believe that several agencies can and should do something to stop the fraud. If the FDA has jurisdiction over the software used to generate the test reports, it could ban its use. State licensing boards could prohibit the use of provoked testing and discipline practitioners who use it. State laboratory licensing agencies could prohibit testing of provoked specimens or order Doctor's Data to raise its reference ranges and to stop comparing provoked test results to these non-provoked ranges. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Division of Laboratory Services can also ban the testing of provoked specimens. In addition, all of these agencies can and should issue public warnings.

Claudia
Posts: 1448
Joined: Wed 14 Nov 2007 1:19
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by Claudia » Wed 9 Sep 2009 16:36

Rita wrote:
Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing or "provoked" urine metal testing--used by some "Lyme literate" practitioners and encouraged by certain LymeLand publications--provoked a position paper from the American College of Medical Toxicology.

The AMCT statement concludes: "Post-challenge urinary metal testing has not been scientifically validated, has no demonstrated benefit, and may be harmful when applied in the assessment and treatment of patients in whom there is concern for metal poisoning."
Labs sited in the article How the "Urine Toxic Metals" Test Is Used to Defraud Patients:
Doctor's Data, the Chicago-based laboratory that caters to nonstandard practitioners also processes the urine toxic metals test for The Great Plains Laboratory, Inc., of Lenexa, Kansas.
From Rosner's Lymebook.com's Lyme Disease Insights Blog
Tests and Diagnosis -The Basics

Lyme Disease Tests
By Bryan Rosner on Jul 11, 2008 in Testing & Diagnosis

This post is an excerpt taken from my new book, written with Tami Duncan, called The Lyme Autism Connection, available from http://www.lymebook.com/lyme-autism-connection.

Heavy Metal Testing

It is well known that autism can be associated with heavy metal poisoning, by elements such as arsenic, copper, mercury, and others. For this reason, heavy metal testing should be conducted. The labs most often relied on are Great Plains Laboratory and Doctors Data. See Appendix C for more information. Since heavy metals are not always found in the blood and many prefer tissue, bone or other locations, this is a useful screen test. At times, it requires some expertise to read the results since some minerals can be high or low and either can be a flag for further follow up.

According to Dr. James Schaller, MD:

"Based on my research, all Americans have levels of some toxic heavy metals which undermine optimal health. This research was based on using a wide variety of respected chelation challenge agents, and doing pre- and post- testing which fit each agent’s mechanism. All patients were found to have heavy metal ranges that would undermine health.

If this is true, why allow autistic or Lyme infected children to have this additional burden on neurologic and immune function to exist? There are many child-friendly chelation agents available at this time. So talk to an expert in chelation and read widely.

Some health care professionals might be too frozen into using a limited number of options, and may not be familiar with the full range of non-IV options presently available."


http://lymebook.com/blog/testing-diagno ... ycoplasma/

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Wed 9 Sep 2009 23:55

http://www.ncahf.org/policy/chelation.html
NCAHF Policy Statement on Chelation Therapy

Chelation therapy is a series of intravenous infusions of disodium EDTA plus various other substances. It is sometimes done by swallowing EDTA or other agents in pill form. Proponents claim that chelation is effective against coronary artery disease, peripheral vascular disease, Alzheimer's disease, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, autism, and many other serious medical problems. However:

No well-designed research has shown that chelation can help any of these conditions.

Several well-designed studies have yielded negative results.

Further use has no scientifically plausible rationale.

Using chelation instead of proven treatments (such as coronary bypass surgery) can have fatal consequences.


Many chelation therapists use hair analysis or other bogus laboratory tests to diagnose nonexistent "poisoning" with lead, mercury, or other heavy metals. Although chelation therapy can be used to treat actual heavy metal poisoning, genuine chelation therapy uses calcium EDTA and a much shorter timetable.

Many chelation therapists submit insurance reports claiming to have treated lead poisoning or another alleged toxic state. However, most insurance companies detect the fraud, so that the client is responsible for the costs.

Some chelationists allege that childhood autism is caused by mercury toxicity and treatable with chelation. However, there is no scientific evidence that autism has a toxic cause or is associated with abnormal levels of heavy metals.

Some chelationists claim to treat "mercury poisoning" produced by amalgam dental fillings. However, the mercury in amalgam is chemically bound so that significant amounts do not enter the body.

In 1998, the Federal Trade Commission secured a consent agreement barring the leading chelationist organization from falsely advertising that chelation therapy is effective against atherosclerosis or any other circulatory problem. The agreement is binding only on the group itself, not its individual members.

The National Council Against Health Fraud believes that chelation therapy is unethical and should be banned and that chelation therapy of autistic children should be considered child abuse.
___________

NCAHF is a nonprofit consumer protection organization that promotes rational health care. This statement was approved by its board of directors in October 2002. This statement may be noncommercially reproduced with appropriate credit.


© 2002 National Council Against Health Fraud
119 Foster Street, Bldg. R, 2nd Floor, Peabody, MA 01960
(978) 532-9383 ||| http://www.ncahf.org

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Thu 10 Sep 2009 16:25

Claudia pointed out:
From Rosner's Lymebook.com's Lyme Disease Insights Blog
Tests and Diagnosis -The Basics

Lyme Disease Tests
By Bryan Rosner on Jul 11, 2008 in Testing & Diagnosis

This post is an excerpt taken from my new book, written with Tami Duncan, called The Lyme Autism Connection, available from http://www.lymebook.com/lyme-autism-connection.

Heavy Metal Testing

It is well known that autism can be associated with heavy metal poisoning, by elements such as arsenic, copper, mercury, and others. For this reason, heavy metal testing should be conducted.

The labs most often relied on are Great Plains Laboratory and Doctors Data.
see: http://www.medpie.com/Conversations/cro ... inics.html

Chelation Clinic and Lab under Legal Assault for Alternative, Fraudulent Practice

CARE Clinics, of Austin Texas, its owner Kazuko Curtin, its subsidiaries, and Chicago-based Doctor's Data have been sued for fraud, negligence, and conspiracy in connection with the treatment of 43-year-old Ronald Stemp, who charges that he was improperly diagnosed and treated for “toxic metals” over a 10-month period.

CARE Clinics specializes in the "biomedical treatment" of children with autism, but it also treats adults. Doctor’s Data is used primarily by chiropractors and medical doctors who require tests unavailable at mainstream laboratories. Its tests include a urine test said to detect poisoning with lead, mercury, or other heavy metals.

The suit petition states that Stump originally sought help for memory loss, inability to sleep, difficulty concentrating, and depression. After going through a battery of tests, he was told that he suffered from heavy metal poisoning and should undergo intravenous chelation therapy. The chelation caused Stemp to feel nauseous, lethargic, depressed, constantly drowsy, and weak. He subsequently learned that the diagnosis was incorrect and that the test used to diagnose it—Doctor's Data's urine toxic metals test—is not valid because it reports insignificant levels as “elevated” or “very elevated.”

The treatments were very costly. According to a newspaper report, Stemp's insurance company was billed for a total of $180,000.

The suit also named the CARE Clinic’s medical director, Jesus Caquias, M.D. who has been disciplined twice by the Medical Board of Texas. Caquias is under investigation for his treatment of other patients, and the clinic (recently closed) is under investigation for submitting false insurance claims.

A few days after the suit was filed, the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service raided the clinic.
Suit petition at: CARE Clinics, Doctor's Data, Sued for Fraud
.

Claudia
Posts: 1448
Joined: Wed 14 Nov 2007 1:19
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by Claudia » Fri 11 Sep 2009 17:15

Thumbs up on this scam from another of the usual Lymeland suspects in the prolific spread of quackery and misinformation.
From Scott Forsgren aka the BetterHealthGuy:

Heavy Metals

[SNIP]

Though there are many tests that can be used to test for the presence of heavy metals, it is my opinion that the most useful is to do a challenge test with a provocation agent such as DMPS or DMSA and then collect urine for 24 hours. The test results will show the amount of the various metals that were released from the body as a result of the mobilizing agents. Hair testing can also be useful, but is likely not as beneficial as a true challenge test as an initial screening tool. A negative test result does not necessarily mean that there are no metals.

Testing

Heavy metal testing can be performed through Doctor's Data using either a hair or urine analysis. Another option is the Metametrix Urine Porphyrins panel. The Porphyrins panel is one tool I am using to monitor my progress. I am using the panel from http://www.labbio.net in Paris, France. Some have commented that it is more reliable than the Metametrix panel.

http://www.betterhealthguy.com/index.ph ... &Itemid=82

Claudia
Posts: 1448
Joined: Wed 14 Nov 2007 1:19
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by Claudia » Wed 23 Sep 2009 15:10

Dr. Klinghardt, another "Lyme literate" practitioner that uses Doctor's Data and the post-challenge urinary metal test in assessing and treating patients.
From Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt:

DMPS Challenge

...In patients who had the amalgam taken out months, years, or decades before, this diagnostic test and treatment method should still be used as soon as the problem of heavy metal toxicity is suspected.

The content of the ampule (or 3 mg/kg body weight) is drawn up into a 5 cc syringe and slowly injected into the patient with a 25 gauge butterfly over a 5 minute period of time (1 cc per minute). The patient is then asked to collect all urine for 24 hours in the container provided by Dr's Data. On the lab slip, the doctor has to mark off the following urine tests: "special mercury" and "elements". The patient will fill the provided mailing tube with a sample from the urine collected over the 24-hour period. After voiding the first urine into the container, the provided ampule of nitric acid is added to the urine in the container. The patient is responsible for the mailing of his own urine. A mailing container is provided by Dr's Data. Paravenous infiltration of DMPS is harmless, but creates an itching sensation at the injection site for half an hour or so. DMPS appears to clear the vascular system and the connective tissue of heavy metals. However, as the connective tissue becomes "cleaned up" more heavy metals move from the intracellular space into the extracellular space (if the body burden of heavy metals is high) . Therefore the following reactions are often seen: The patient feels better for several days after the injection, then starts feeling bad again. Often the patient will have a feeling of "emptiness in his head" and difficulty concentrating for a few days. I attribute this to a lack of "good minerals" in his system. No mineral supplements should be given 24 hours before and 48 hours after the test. Otherwise DMPS will bind to calcium, magnesium, and other "good" minerals and not get to the mercury. The urine test results come back after three weeks or so. The patient is instructed to come back after four weeks. If any of the toxic metals are elevated above normal or mercury excretion is more than 1 mcg/24 hours, the next injection is given. I recommend to repeat the urine test at the time of the third shot (two months after beginning of treatment) . By mobilizing mercury, copper, nickel, etc. from the intracellular space to the extracellular space and from there out of the system, the heavy metal related symptoms of the patient can be temporarily aggravated (i.e. joint pains, depression, fatigue, etc.) . However, this is transient. In my experience, the patient will always feel better within three to four weeks following the shot (that means better than before beginning of treatment). In my experience, dentists have required six to eight treatments to get the heavy metal burden down to "normal". They then require a shot every four to six months or so to stay current. Alternately, they can use oral chelation with chlorella (8 caps/day). People that had exposure to amalgam through their fillings will typically require three to five injections. People who have never had amalgam fillings, but show evidence or suspicion of heavy metal toxicity through other sources, typically require one to two injections.

http://www.klinghardtacademy.com/Articl ... lenge.html

Fin24
Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat 8 Mar 2008 20:14

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by Fin24 » Mon 28 Sep 2009 4:47

By mobilizing mercury, copper, nickel, etc. from the intracellular space to the extracellular space and from there out of the system, the heavy metal related symptoms of the patient can be temporarily aggravated
Mercury- I can see possibly it needing removal from system IF there are high blood levels, and if removed by reputable methods;However the half life of mercury in humans is only 2-3 months and its constantly being eliminated anyways. just how much mercury do these "doctors" claim we are exposed to ?

( a fairly balanced site about metal toxicity,by a Dr that eschews provocative urine tests is found at http://www.drcranton.com/mercury.htm)

BUT removal of Copper and nickel from cells??? Isnt nickel needed ( albeit in trace amounts) for enzyme and hormone function, iron metabolism?? And the same goes for copper.Used in melanin production and as anti antioxidant ..some proponents claim ADDING copper to diet alleviates arthritis type inflammation

dragging Nickel and copper ( and who knows what other necessary metals) out of the cells ( if thats even possible) may not be the best thing to do IMO.

"heavy metals" as a term are generally eschewed by scientists, due to ambiguity. scientists know that the definition can refer to high atomic weight or high density or even just "toxic metals". depending upon who you talk to, that can even include IRON which is a necessary nutrient in humans. And anything can be toxic in excess, including water so that term " toxic metal" may too be meaningless. few metals are 'toxic' unless theyre in high enough levels. Lead and arsenic come to mind.

this term came widely into use due to pollution and the increased exposure and ingestion of metals normally needed only in trace or lower amounts than what the polluters were emitting into the environment.The "toxicity" occurred due to higher amounts ingested and absorbed. For some who are exposed,its serious poisoning and requires chelation.

the term was then was "adopted" by those seeing dollar signs and offering toxic metal removal in all who suffer various maladies. Kinda like ghost busters. Dont need to prove the ghosts are there--just offer to get rid of them--for a fee of course :roll:

getting the basics wrong is what alerts me to lack of enough knowledge about it

rlstanley
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2007 2:53

Re: Post-Chelator Challenge Urinary Metal Testing blasted

Post by rlstanley » Sun 22 Nov 2009 19:42

.
Chicago Tribune:

Autism treatments: Risky alternative therapies have little basis in science

Alternative therapies amount to uncontrolled experimentation on children, investigation finds


Snippets:
Thousands of U.S. children undergo these therapies and many more at the urging of physicians who say they can successfully treat, or "recover," children with autism, a disorder most physicians and scientists say they cannot yet explain or cure.

But after reviewing thousands of pages of court documents and scientific studies and interviewing top researchers in the field, the Tribune found that many of these treatments amount to uncontrolled experiments on vulnerable children.

The therapies often go beyond harmless New Age folly, the investigation found. Many are unproven and risky, based on scientific research that is flawed, preliminary or misconstrued.

Laboratory tests used to justify therapies are often misleading and misinterpreted. And though some parents fervently believe their children have benefited, the Tribune found a trail of disappointing results from the few clinical trials to evaluate the treatments objectively.
The Tribune found children undergoing daylong infusions of a blood product that carries the risk of kidney failure and anaphylactic shock. Researchers in the field emphatically warn that the therapy should not be used to treat autism.
Last year, the National Institutes of Health halted a controversial government-funded study of chelation before a single child with autism was treated. Researchers at Cornell University and University of California, Santa Cruz, had found that rats without lead poisoning showed signs of cognitive damage after being treated with a chelator
...Jordan's troubling results were based on a lab test that is common in the world of alternative autism treatments and is practically guaranteed to give incredible results. It's called a provoked urinary toxic metals test, and here's how it works.

First, a child is given a chelating drug that "provokes" the body to excrete some of the metals that nearly everybody -- healthy or not -- has in the body in trace amounts. Those metals are excreted in urine, which is sent to a lab offering these tests.

Nobody knows what normal results of this test would look like, toxicologists say. There is no accepted reference range. Nonetheless, the lab sends back color-coded charts that show alarming peaks of metals graphed against a meaningless reference range that was calculated for people who had never been given a chelator.

"That is exactly the wrong way to do it," said Dr. Carl R. Baum, director of the Center for Children's Environmental Toxicology at Yale- New Haven Children's Hospital. "There is a whole industry that preys on people's fears of heavy metal poisoning."

Though most labs note that the reference range used is for unprovoked results, the apples-to-oranges comparison still can set off panic in parents.
Baum and other toxicologists urge physicians in the alternative movement to do standard, unprovoked tests for metals. "I guarantee you the results ... will not be so dramatic," Baum said.

In fact, a study published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health Perspectives in October found that children with autism had lower levels of mercury in their blood than those developing typically. The reason? The children without autism ate more fish, a source of mercury.
As long as doctors continue to attend seminars every two years, they can remain listed. As of this month, 350 physicians, naturopaths, chiropractors, nurses and others were listed on the Defeat Autism Now! U.S. registry for state-licensed health care providers.

Many sell supplements to patients, which most practitioners consider a serious conflict of interest. Of 300 U.S. Defeat Autism Now! clinicians who answered a question about supplement sales for the registry, 80 percent indicated they sold the products to patients. Some even sold proprietary formulas.

"This is one of the most ... grave violations of our code of conduct, codes and ethics," Rust, the neurologist, testified in vaccine court.

A disclaimer on the registry site states that the Autism Research Institute does not "guarantee competence, skill, knowledge, or experience" of those listed. Johnson said the providers sell supplements to ensure quality control.

One physician on the registry was Dr. Roy Kerry of Pennsylvania. In 2005, a 5-year-old with autism had a heart attack and died while being intravenously chelated in his office, according to court records.

Less than a year later, Kerry was added to the registry. In 2008 he voluntarily surrendered his medical license pending criminal charges of involuntary manslaughter in connection with the boy's death, according to the Pennsylvania Board of Medicine.

Those charges were dropped, but in July of this year the state board suspended his license for six months, with 2 1/2 years of probation, state records show.

Kerry's lawyer, Al Augustine of Chicago, said there was no proof chelation killed the child and that Kerry agreed to the suspension to avoid the cost and emotional hardship of contesting it.

Defeat Autism Now! continued to list the doctor until Nov. 5, a day after the Tribune inquired about his inclusion.

Johnson said the group had already planned to drop him this month because he had not filled out paperwork on his medical license.
Full story: http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ch ... full.story
.

Post Reply