Re: Chelation and age
> > I have been chelating my 8 year old during this past year.relative.
> > I think when one talks about "dramatic" gains, it is rather
>One substantial problem is as follows:
> I think Dr. Holmes is comparing the gains you would see on an
> 8 year old to the gains you would see on a 3 year old.
DAN! doctors take the patently absurd position that administration
frequency doesn't matter, and 3-4 vs 8 hour dosing makes no
difference. This is falsified by poll results on this listserver
(consiting of their patients) as well as being clearly nonsense on
basic chemical grounds.
Unfortunately, older kids are tougher so they don't suffer as
obviously as the younger ones when chelated every 8 hours.
Every DAN! doctor I have checked with (or with the patients of) has
most of the younger kids on a 3-4 hour protocol and most of the older
ones on an 8 hour protocol. Dr. McCandless states this is going on
with her patients in her book.
Since you would not expect as many kids to improve on the 8 hour
protocol as on the 3-4 hour protocol, it is impossible to tell how
much of the lower expectations for older children are due to an actual
age effect, and how much is due to the lower frequency of using an
appropriate chelation protocol in older children.
To the best of my knowledge, this expectation of less progress with
older children started with me, on this list, as SPECULATION when
there was inadequate data to really know. Since the current data is
confounded by this mixed protocol question I think it is still
SPECULATIVE to say that older children will respond slower or less
fully than younger ones. I still think there are many theoretical
reasons to believe this, but I would not consider it a foregone
conclusion that an older child will as a rule respond poorly to
I think it is likely that older children will respond more slowly than
younger ones. At this point I would say reports on this list are
supportive of this being a significant but not dramatic effect.
I think it is likely that severely impaired older children may not
recover as completely as equally severely impaired younger children
might. This is completely speculative at present.
I don't really think there is any good reason to believe that a mildly
impaired older child won't recover completely if you are simply
patient enough to chelate them for as long as it takes (using an
appopriate chelation protocol for them). Again, this is speculation,
but since there is no reason to believe it is otherwise I'd suggest
people whose older child is responding to chelation stick with it for
a long time before giving up on it.
If anyone has or knows how we can get some real data on this issue I
would greatly appreciate your letting me know. . . .. . . .
- I started Jon when he was 6. For over a year he couldn't tolerate any more than 7 - 10 mg of ALA.
I can now say proudly he handles 30mgs of ALA pretty well and I'm soon to up the dose in a month or 2.
He's doing very well. Went from no speech and no eye contact to recognizing everyone in person by name and in pictures. Boy was he zoned.
He will be 9 next month and he asks for simple objects (video games and food) and his waiting and attention span has increased.
I'm still waiting for a "why" question from him, then I will party.
I Never regret chelating him, only not doing it sooner...see the pictures in the photo section.
BTW, this wasn't easy, just rewarding.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]