Chelation anyone?

[Alvin Chan]

[Moderator's Note:  this topic was split from a topic on Kechari Mudra.]

David, I may sound too nervous. But not without reasons. You know what those "silver" dental amalgam fillings are made of? Sorry, not silver. Over 50% of it is Mercury, which is highly toxic when enter our body, even in that form. Cognitive function, depression, liver/kidney damage, etc, just anything bad could happen. It's true that the mental only disolve slowly, but blood tests has shown that those with such fillings in their teeth really has a considerably higher blood mercury level (and in their tissues too, as shown by hair analysis).

I myself was a victum, and once I discovered this terrible fact I went to a mercury-free dentist to remove it, and then I went through a few rounds of chelation treatment (on my own as it was too expensive for me[]) to remove the mercury. Since then I cut off virtually all fish products, and replacing my omega-3 all from plants. And I am a bit nervous too, towards any potential toxins in my food/daily life.

So even what's to be put into our mouth could be THAT bad. And remember, they won't include impurities in the labelings. Our foods, especially those which are not organic, contains many kinds of toxins. But will you find the term "pesticides" on the list of "ingredients"? So I have even less faith to anything which are not supposed to be put into the mouth...

I prefer to get a "nerve hook" which Ether mentioned. I am sure it's more expensive, but I don't want any risk. Not in this way. Sorry if my nervousness sound too extreme. I don't suggest anyone to be that extreme. And I'm becoming less extreme now, since my friends sometimes feel annoyed towards my taste of eating: cleanness always comes first!

[david_obsidian]

OK Alvin.  Let me just say that I see a huge difference between the risks of having a mercury filling, that is,  a mercury-laden compound in your mouth for half a million minutes every year,  constantly emitting measurable mercury vapor, and having in your mouth for only a few minutes a year,  a steel object which emits no measurable mercury vapor.

But we all must estimate risks in our own way.  No pressure.  

[david_obsidian]

BTW,  I eliminated all of my own mercury fillings too when I discovered these things.

The fillings are constantly giving off measurable mercury vapor which is being constantly inhaled.  People with mercury fillings are essentially exposed to air with a higher-than average level of mercury.

The half-life of mercury in the body is about 50-100 days.  So it does go away by itself in reasonable time (about two years) without chelation.  That's the option I went for.

-D

[Alvin Chan]

Oh, you were also a victum.... I was angry to death when I discovered this, and my anger further weakened my health (seriously) for many months!! My irritable nature at that time also made my family and friends suffer greatly. A rather stupid reaction when I looked back now.

quote:The half-life of mercury in the body is about 50-100 days. So it does go away by itself in reasonable time (about two years) without chelation. That's the option I went for.

Is the half-life that short? I hope it's true. But may be it's just the blood level. I've read that mercury has the tendency to cling to (bond with) our central nervous system including our brain, and then it's very difficult to remove. On the other hand, chelation could also make things worse by moving the mercury around in the body, producing further damages.

[david_obsidian]

Whilst the half-life of mercury in the blood has been estimated as about 3 days, mercury in body tissues clears slowly, with a half-life of about 90 days. So cessation of exposure will not therefore have immediately beneficial results, in the event of mercury poisoning - benefits of ceasing exposure will only be seen after about a year - four half-lives.


This is from

http://www.mercurysafety.co.uk/hlthinfo.htm

These results seem to indicate that chelation is unnecessary,  though I am open to any contradictory evidence.

The other question too is,  if there are some tissues in the body where the mercury levels have a half-life of 100 years,  what the evidence is that chelation clears it so quickly.

[Alvin Chan]

The main evidences of why chelation works (whether it is convincing enough, I have no comment.) are that:
 
1. The agents (e.g. DMSA) bond with mercury in the laboratory environment (not in our body)

and (this is a better evidence):

2. There is a considerable increase in the amount of mercury level in the urine and faeces when chelation is being done.

I don't know how they measure the blood/body tissues mercury level half-life. (Mercury has a greater tendency to stick to some particular organs, such as our brain. These organs cannot be easily checked!!) I only know that the TOTAL amount of mercury being excreted is really increased with chelation. So the total amount of mercury in the body will drop quicker with chelation.

There are also some researches on animals on the removal of brain mercury level with some chelating agents (not all of them can reach the brain) But I can't find them right now.

All these don't necessarily mean that chelation is good, of course. And I am aware of the fact that some of these claims are exaggerated or mistakened, by those doctors who are in the chelation business!!!

[david_obsidian]

There's no controversy over whether chelation helps in marked heavy-metal toxicity;  it certainly does.  It's used by mainstream medicine in the case of serious heavy-metal toxicity.  I'm asking questions about whether chelation is indicated in the case of very moderate mercury toxicity as could come from mercury fillings;  is it true that Hg has a half-life of 100 years in some tissues as Melissa states?  Where are the research sources for this?  And if this is true,  does chelation correct the problem?

Chelation itself is very hard on the body;  the chelation compounds are toxic in themselves and can do damage if not used properly.  That is why I opted to allow my body to eliminate the mercury by itself.

For more on chelation,  which should not be engaged in lightly,  see here

Alvin said:
On the other hand, chelation could also make things worse by moving the mercury around in the body, producing further damages.


Yes.  I wish I could know the truth about chelation.

Do you have any impression about whether chelation helped you?

[Alvin Chan]

Even in moderate mercury toxicity the level of mercury expelled out would be increased, at least initially. But again I'm not saying that overall it helps.

quote:is it true that Hg has a half-life of 100 years in some tissues as Melissa states? Where are the research sources for this?

The 100 years claim is probably just an advertisement made by proponents of chelation therapy. But it is true that heavy metals tends to stay in some tissues such as our brain. I remember reading some researches done on Rats. (not on the half-life, though. But on measuring the amount of heavy metal in the brain.) But I can't give you references right now.

quote:Do you have any impression about whether chelation helped you?

NO. At least no observable results. It's NOT a rational choice that I did chelation. It's simply a personal choice. Like those supplements/vitamins: we don't know for sure whether they are good or bad, but many of us still take it. No one on earth can be sure about the truth of chelation. It's like grambling.

[Etherfish]

chlorella is supposed to remove mercury in a safer way:

http://www.mercola.com/chlorella/index.htm

[Alvin Chan]

Chlorella, selenium, L-Glutathione, Alpha Lipoic Acid,....

The problem is: how fast? How effective? Even without these our body can remove some mercury. But those in your tissues or your brain are not likely to be removed either with or without these stuffs (except Alpha Lipoic acid)

[Lavazza]

I have a lot of amalgam fillings. I will replace as they get old, but I am in no hurry.