Jump to content



Your existing Forum account allows you to comment on articles and download behavior charts on the new ACN Latitudes Website. You will need to login with your email address and password when signing into the forums or the new website. Our new site gives you searchable access to hundreds of free articles, social media, a store for products, and more. We also have a special membership plan, which includes new premium features on the forums.

To chelate or not to chelate


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Beth K._*

Guest_Beth K._*
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2003 - 01:46 AM

We have visited two DAN doctors, one who feels strongly that chelation is too dangerous and other who is pushing DMSA but willing to go the TTFD route instead based on your work and that of Lonsdale. The first one says that the safety of chelation has not been shown over the long-term and her view is that it might remove mercury and other metals from some places where it isn't doing much damage (the bone) and put them in worse places than they already area (the brain). She feels that the damage from the metals is already done and trying to get it out would do more damage. She feels that going the oral gamma globulen route (with Oralgam) is a better approach to helping the autism based on her participation in a clinical trial (she's in the Phoenix/Scottsdale area). The other doc has all the standard DAN reasons for wanting to move ahead with chelation ASAP and is fearful of the gamma globulin due to the risk of bloodborne disease like mad cow and subviruses that have yet to even be identified. I would love to have your response to these two very different approaches.

A generic response is fine, but a bit about us in case you need it: we are gf/cf/sf, have eliminated lots and lots of problem foods and been on a rotation diet since July. We use lots of supplements, Kirkman's (Everyday Companion, calcium, milk thistle, idebenone), Ecological Formulas (B-Complex), NF Formulas (NAG), Water Oz (zinc, sulphur), Brainchild (multi). Hi arsenic, antimony, and lead on the hair test, the RBC showed high aluminum and tin, but arsenic was low, and not too much mercury. Almost everything was out of whack on the OAT; positive for MBP antibodies, negative for Dr. Singh's measles titer and Neurofilament test, heavy duty cysteine wasting from the kidneys. We done one round of flagyl and nystatin which didn't seem to have much effect on behavior, appetite, etc. Major GI problems.

Thanks for all you do for our kids! You are awesome.

Beth


#2 dr_mccandless

dr_mccandless

    Advanced Member

  • Premium
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts

Posted 15 March 2003 - 12:31 AM

Dear Beth: In my opinion, properly conducted oral chelation in a well mineralized child whose gut health has been tended to is not dangerous. Experts I trust (e.g. Dr. Boyd Haley at the Univ. of Kentucky and one of the world experts on mercury) say that once DMSA "grabs" the mercury it does not let it go so it can go anywhere else but out (the urine and feces). It may stress the liver a bit like most medicines, and I would not do it in a child who has elevated liver enzymes until that is corrected. I also think the gut should be helped as much as possible, but at some point if a child is mercury poisoned you'll have to move on, as the gut may never get better until the metal load is down.
Oral immunoglobulin helps the immune system in children, and is particularly helpful for kids with intractable diarrhea, but there is no evidence it chelates other than generally the better the immune system is the better the child can detoxify themselves. I do not consider it dangerous in terms of BSE (never reported and highly unlikely from this source), but not my first choice to get a heavy metal load removed. Presently, I am getting excellent results with the TTFD, and though not technically a "chelator", it must be doing something to help the child detoxify itself, as very appreciable amounts of metals are coming out in urine tests and correlate with positive clinical effects. I notice this particularly in those children who can tolerate the transdermal glutathione and even more with those who also get the daily B12 injections.
Many of us have noted that tin (from Mom's amalgams?) tend to hide the mercury on hair and urine tests. Jaquelyn
Jaquelyn McCandless, MD
Author, Children with Starving Brains

#3 Guest_Beth K._*

Guest_Beth K._*
  • Guests

Posted 15 March 2003 - 01:03 AM

I would just like to clarify. Are there any reasons that we might not want to proceed with either DMSA or TTDF chelation? We were quite interested in doing it until visiting the DAN doctor in Arizona who pointed out that we have no way of knowing whether there could be very negative effects down the road (say 10 or 15 years from now) and we won't know that until there have been long-term trials or anecdotal evidence. (How long have people been chelating children with autism, anyway?). Also, if we go ahead, what is the basis for choosing whether to go DMSA, TTDF, or using both? Thanks so much.

#4 dr_mccandless

dr_mccandless

    Advanced Member

  • Premium
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts

Posted 15 March 2003 - 01:22 AM

Dear Beth: I have nothing to say to those who want to wait 10-15 years to see if something has bad side effects that in our considered estimation is as safe or safer than many things we've done for our kids that were endorsed by our CDC, AMA, FDA, etc. By the time long range studies have been done, it is too late to help, and there's a bigger risk in doing nothing in my opinion. If after reading my book you still feel you don't want to take any risk to get your child better, that is your right. I'm not in the business of trying to convince anyone to do something they are questioning, and suggest you wait for peer-reviewed studies to make your decision. Jaquelyn
Jaquelyn McCandless, MD
Author, Children with Starving Brains




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users