Re: Questioning Rationale for Use of EPO
- The most accurrate way to assess how well an oxygenation program is working is
by doing a full panel of pulmonary function tests. This accounts for:
* upper airway mechanical ventilation issues
* lower airway obstruction
* various lung capacities
* ventilation-perfusion mismatches at the alveolar interface where gas exchange
* O2 affinity issues at both the pulmonary-capillary and capillary-cellular
interface. (remember the oxy-hemoglobin curve, Ellis?)
[No, I don't... - Ellis]
* hgb/hct levels, whether high or low
* and finally, O2 consumption at the cellular metabolic level.
You won't know exactly what is causing the improvement, it you have any, but
you will know that at the end of the pipeline, you perform better, and that you
are oxygenated sufficiently, or not.
If increasing your Hematocrit to 54 actually helps, you should see an
increased VO2 Max and you should also perform better on a stress test. If not,
then your oxygen carrying capacity at the lower number is sufficient for what
your tissues can utilize, even under extreme physical stress (that assumes that
you have no diseases such as COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), CHF
(Congestive Heart Failure), etc that are decreasing your ability to exercise to
an otherwise maximum level).
At that number, whatever it turns out to be, it is highly improbable that you
would ever have a need for more oxygenation under less physical stress. If
extra capacity is there, fine, as long as your blood is not too thick, although
it could get expensive and wasteful of EPO.
In response to the statement that extra oxygen equals more free radicals, I
don't think that is necessarily so (unless you get into very high levels of O2
seen in medicine at times and in diving, which overwhelm SOD and glutathione
peroxidase's free radical scaveging capacities).
Think of it this way: Say you're transporting ten loads of gravel to a
site/hr, and that is the most that can be accepted, then you start sending
12 loads/hr. All of a sudden 2 loads an hour start coming back to you.
You can't refill the truck, so you send them out with the same load.
Think of the trucks as red blood cells, and the gravel as oxygen. If the
partial pressure of oxygen in the tissues is higher, the RBC/hgb should
hold on to its O2 instead of releasing it.
In other words, the O2 affinity of the hgb is greater than that of the
surrounding tissues. If the tissue demand goes up, the extra O2 will start
being released because of the affinity shift. The net effect is that the
extra hgb holding onto its O2 is accomplishing nothing. It's not releasing O2,
and it's not transporting CO2 out of the cell. It's essentially an 'out of
service' taxi until needed (or until it dies off in ~ 30 days. That's why hgb
decreases when traveling from high to low elevations).
But as I mentioned earlier, the high hematocrit/hemoglobin also doesn't hurt
unless the blood is too viscous.
[Hello Mike... I'm not sure I understand everything you wrote, but I
understand the last sentence... "the high hematocrit/hemoglobin doesn't hurt
unless the blood is too viscous"... safety is all I'm worried about, and you
are saying it doesn't hurt if my blood is not too viscous. I'm not worried
about using EPO in a wasteful manner, if it is wasteful, because my instinct
keeps telling me that hematocrit of 52% to 54% is a good place for me to have
it, simply because I FEEL good, so I don't care if it is "wasteful"... that
isn't important... if it is beneficial, it isn't wasteful... and if it isn't
dangerous I want to know if it might be beneficial... I can only find out by
keeping my hematocrit at 52% to 54% for the rest of my healthy lifespan, or
as long as I can afford it.
I'm not sure if my VO2 Max has increased very much, but I know I don't
get tired easily, and I am going to be 59 years old very soon, so I think
that is good. Why change something that is good and working, just because
everybody else thinks I should? You and others have written that 54% is not
dangerous, and I also think it isn't... that is important... I think 52% to
54% is good for me in the long run, because I think it helps to prevent loss
of neurons... so that settles that.
Thanks for writing. I appreciate your opinion, and I think you are
mostly supportive of my position. - Ellis]
I'm new to this group. I know most of you here are looking at the affects of
anti-aging things. Which is great if one can be healthy in the process.
I'm looking at growth hormone from a different angle. My daughter has severe
heavy metals poisoning including mercury and lead. She has autism. We have
her on a chelation therapy and she is at least 60% better! Now we just
started growth hormone. I know there is info out there but I just can't seem
to find it.
I'm wanting info on Growth hormone and how it helps other areas besides growth.
For instance, how does it affect cognitive abilities? What neurotransmitters
does it affect? Digestion which is a huge problem for people with autism, most
are Celiac. Mood, social things. I'm craving info.
Anyone know these things or how I can attain information?
[Hello Jeanmarie, I'm sorry to hear of your daughter's metal poisoning.
You are right on the button with chelation therapy. There aren't any
studies that I know of about growth hormone and autism, but I know that
growth hormone will help the entire nervous system. It cannot remove
poison, but it helps give energy, and a general feeling of well-being.
A lot of the damage of mercury and lead poisoning is to the nervous
system, so I think you should also try hyperbaric oxygen. I would say
that everything that is good and correct in my "anti-sarcopenia" program
is also good and correct in the case of mercury or lead poisoning, to
help recover or prevent loss of neurons. See my anti-sarcopenia
Also look up "autism" at Vitamin Research Products, and read "Saving
Eli - One family's struggle with autism" by Jim English.
I hope this helps your daughter, and please write back and tell us if it
does. Good luck. - Ellis]