I have read andy cutlers book amalgam illness ,and was confused about something in the book, he mentions that unless you use alpha lipoic acic you will never get the brain mercury out ,and then later in the book he mentions that at 6-9 months that the brain mercury starts dumping on its own ,which one is true ?

Hi, I have his book. Can you tell me what page it is that he says that brain mercury starts dumping on its own after 6-9 months???

I do not recall anything like that. I do know that he says the body organs start to dump their storage of mercury after about 6-9 months, but I dont remember he said the brain. Brain mercury detox is specific in his book and has to be dealt with by a chelating agent that can permeate the blood brain barrier and remove mercury from that organ.

Let me know what page if you can because if that is so, then this guy is contradicting himself big time. I do find some of the book confusing and there are some contradictions in there for sure. People have gotten pretty aggravated by some of it, but mostly it is very sound and the chelation protocol itself is probably one of the best (if not the best) I have used. Extremely stable and effective.

hi bex : on page 52 figure 15 , it looks like a brain mercury chart ,and how you will feel doing different potocols,unless I am reading it wrong , item d shows the worst effect not using any chelation at all and shows brain mercury going up very high at 6-9 months and then on page 76 nine paragraphs down it mentions that if not using ALA ,that brain mercury will never removed from the brain ,but also mention in the same paragraph that if dmsa is used alone it will remove brain mercury but will take a little bite longer ( confused)??????????

Ok, I got page 52. From what I gather from looking at the chart, you'll see the different lines on the chart. The spacey line represents brain mercury and the solid line represents how you will feel during chelation.

With the spacey line (a), you see what happens when you use inappropriate chelation. Brain mercury increases. This is because mercury easily goes into the brain simply from wild mobilisation. But it does not come out so easily as it went in (unless you use a specific brain chelating agent to go get it back out). So it's unfortunate that it's easy to increase brain mercury, but very hard to decrease it.

Spacey line (b) shows that if you do no chelation or just a DMPS IV every month, that it has no effect on brain mercury either way. The mercury in the brain will not come down with either of those things or necessarily go up either.

spacey line (c) shows the line sloping down, which means that if a person is chelating properly and then including a brain chelator (ALA) at the right time, the mercury will then begin to decrease steadily over time.

Then you see the solid lines which represent how you will 'feel" during that time. So solid line (d) shows a typical response to inappropriate/random chelation. That you may find the symptoms intolerable or out of control, going right up and then down and then right up. This may also represent the movement of mercury as well. Extreme sensations.

Solid line (e) shows how you will feel during approprate safe chelation. You will still feel symptoms and you will get the ups and downs, but it should be on a much more tolerable scale and it should not be as extreme or wild as you can see the ups and downs are much less with this line.

So though both are a roller coaster ride, the safe chelation protocol generally should not cause a person's symptoms to peak and fall so wildly.

What I also got here was, if you look at spacey line (c) on the chart, you see that the mercury is not decreasing right from the beginning (left hand side) it only starts decreasing after a person has already reduced blood levels and is now starting on ALA and DMSA together (or ALA alone). Which is about 3 months after last amalgam removal. So if you look at the chart, that line only starts to decrease months into the programme, it does not start immediately.

This is if a person is following the protocol exactly. E.g. all amalgams removed, does DMSA (or nothing) for about 3 months, then brings ALA onboard from about 3 months onwards (the chart represents this senario). Either ALA is used alone or with DMSA. So you see by the chart, the brain mercury line begins decreasing only after the 2-4 month mark (when hopefully someone has already started the ALA).



On page 76, I couldn't quite get which part you meant....I read it all and I think this might be it. He mentions what happens if you dont bother with #5. Basically if a person decides to not bother with ALA, they may find their symptoms increase dramatically later on down the track. Plus they will not remove their brain mercury. What happens is, after about 3-9 months ( or somewhere inbetween)following last amalgam removal, some people find their symptoms increase dramatically. This is because during the first initial months, blood mercury often reduces gradually on its own (or you can help that along with DMSA) so a person may not notice many symptoms at that time, depends on how the removal went. however, after that point (after the 3 months or more)the organs then start to dump their storage of mercury and this increases symptoms, sometimes dramatically.

It's at that point that you already want to be starting ALA, either alone or preferably with DMSA (which helps the symptoms). This is because the ALA can start chelating organ mercury, as well as the brain. Which means as the mercury is slowly leaking back out of the organs, the ALA will be picking it up before it can build up in the blood and make the person feel extremely sick.

This is what andy meant by people who decide not to bother with chelation, OR they dont bother with a brain / ogan chelator (though they might use something else instead). So if they have significant brain/organ mercury, they may find their symptoms are not handled appropriately by letting nature take its course, or using just DMSA or DMPS by itself. Though those chelators do definitely help and chelate some mercury, they dont quite chelate organs and brain effectively enough.

Sorry I know it can be really confusing. Ive had to read this book so many times to even start to get the gist of it.

Basically DMSA and DMPS are optional. They are not an absolute necessity. Though they can be very helpful because they can help suppress some symptoms or even chelate a person quite nicely if the person has not got a significant brain mercury problem or (organ).

But ALA is usually essential, because it chelates organs and brain, though must be used only AFTER blood levels have reduced first. It takes about 2-3 months for the blood levels of mercury to reduce, either alone or with the aid of DMPS or DMSA. After that time, the real problems can begin as the organ mercury starts dumping it's storage. That's why if a person is not now using ALA, they will not be chelating the mercury leaking out everyday from their storage. So it's like a leaking tap that isn't being cleared out as it's leaking.

Though DMSA can still help with that, it cannot really chelate organs, so you have to wait till the mercury builds back up in the blood before DMSA can grab it. But again, it will not be chelating the brain.

Sorry I've gone on and on here and repeated myself, but I do know what you mean about this book and it can get really frustrating. I hope that helps and hope I haven't made it even worse. Took me sometime to really get it.

bex: thanks for clearing that up for me ,It's hard enough being poisoned but also tring to comprehend all the info out there ,it is overwhelming sometimes (what it basiclly comes down to ,is we are just hoping we find something out there that will make us feel a little bite better than the day before and eventually feel normal again.

here's another thing that's confusing about cutler's procotole.

Why does he reccommend to introduce ala once the BLOOD levels are down, and not once the BODY level are down? (which is different). The way I see it, you might have blood mercury very low but body mercury still high and once you introduce ala it is true you shouldn't put more mercury into the brain as there is no excess in the blood, but the ala is not selective as andy says, so it might pick up mercury somewhere from the body and then drop it in the brain as the round ends. Sure you should not increase brain mercury (amount) but you might not get it lower through redistribution, which is as bad as more brain mercury burden because of new damage.

It's analogical to taking ala with amalgams in the mouth. You maybe months away after the last exposure, but can't use ala due to the presence of 'source', which might put more mercury into the brain. High body burden is the same type of "source" from the brain chelation perspective.

So it is my opinion one should introduce ala once the body mercury is down so that once ala gets the brain mercury out, it gets it out permanently and not back again from the body.

I read that the half life of hg in the brain is twenty years so if you wait to naturally rid yourself of brain hg , you have a long wait ,especially if you are genotype APOe4.

Hi you're welcome Heavymetalme. Im the same, when you have toxicity like this, you can read something over and over and it is is nigh impossible at times to take it in as it is, or the mind will see it in another way. I have this a lot. You are not alone. Cutler's book could addle anybody. This is because it is not an organised book, and there are statements in there that dont always seem to match something else he may have said in another area.

Jinx, alpha lipoic acid chelates the body and the brain both. It is an organ chelator. DMSA does not chelate organs significantly, or barely at all. DMSA only really picks up mercury that is already accessible (mercury that the body would already be eliminating over time). It simply speeds up the process, plus makes a more thorough job of it and can suppress symptoms sometimes too (not always making them worse). I personally feel its a bit more powerful than that, but this is Cutlers view.

ALA should be brought onboard as soon as blood levels are reduced enough, because it will begin chelating the organs, as well as the brain. It is a chelator for the entire body/brain. But becuase of blood levels of mercury being still high right after amalgam removal or WITH amalgams, it is generally not advisable to bring ALA onboard too quick with high blood levels because though yes it chelates the body, it also passes over the blood brain barrier too and may take some more mercury with it. So you kind of want the blood levels lower, just to make things safer. Even though eventually it would bring that mercury back out again, it is just wiser to leave ALA out of it until you are 3 months or so past your last amalgam removal (or other mercury exposure).

But again, some people have actually cured themselves of mercury toxicity with DMSA alone, so that says a lot for DMSA! Though it apparently only chelates the blood and tissue, I believe to a point it must have some ability to chelate organ mercury a bit too. perhaps though it is just not as powerful as ALA and the fact is, you dont really want to hang around too long taking DMSA when it has simply stopped giving results.

In fact, Andy thinks getting onto ALA as early as possible (without causing unnecessary risk) is the best move. To get on with chelating the organs, where the mercury is coming from, where its stored because it'll just leak out over time continually. If you are chelating organs, the mercury will be grabbed before it can make you too ill. ALA will do this, but it is safer to use DMSA alongside ALA because as you know, DMSA can be stabler and may help the ALA grab more mercury at the sametime.

Yes, if a person has a lot of brain mercury, they will be wasting their time by "waiting it out". If mercury came out of the brain as easily as it naturally went in, we would not need ALA at all. ALA simply enables the mercury to pass more easily back across the blood brain barrier and out.

Mercury can already get in of its own accord, it does not need the escort of ALA to do that. It just needs to be mobilised all over the body to find its own way to the brain. But to get it back out? That is another story.

bex I understand cutler's logic, but don't fully agree with it. I agree ala is a chelator for the entire body, but as you said, the body can dump mercury on its own, the brain cannot. I think everyone will agree that the brain is the most important in terms of the fact that its the last you want to have damage to. And chelating with high body burden with ala will cause inevitable redistibtuion to the brain (not increasing brain mercury), something we don't want. But dmsa has the potential to chelate tissue , it's been numerously said that both dmps/dmsa clear the liver/kidneys. of course not all of it, hence ala should be brought on board eventually. But I think it should only be when the body levels are low, so instead of 3months after exposure and 3months into chelation with dmsa, it better be 4-6. I just think 3 months might be a bit too soon for some people.

A month ago I did that one day ala chelation and I was already 5 months post exposure, though had 3 amalgams(2 small), but I doubt much mercury has been pulled from them (yet maybe wrong), yet my brain "pattern" changed. I got huge shifting of mercury in my brain, which is bad, and I'm sure it was from the body. If I was to go on with this , using ala, (assuming I had no amalgams) this kind of 'shifting' would probably take place numerous times, with each consequitive round which equals to lots of damage, until enough rounds have been done to allow the brain actually clear. Besides you can have a lot of Hg in your organs, like kidneys but little in your brain and as you procede with ala chelation it will (inevitably) get redistributed to the brain from the kidneys until enough rounds have been done to eliminate that as well and it all.

Plus if you have high body mercury, you always run the risk of organs dumping, and THAT increasing your BLOOD levels, and that increases your chances of putting more merc into the brain with ala.

All I'm saying is that the brain being the most sensitive organ should go last to minimize the damage.

Hi Jinx, I am inclined to agree with you for the most part. I reckon it's best to probably wait for longer before using ALA perhaps.

The blood levels of mercury will not reduce until there is no amalgam in the teeth. So you chelating with ALA was a bad move. The body will automatically begin reducing blood levels as soon as its amalgam free. It's something that just happens naturally. Though the organs maybe burdened heavily with mercury, they often do not start dumping their mercury until months after amalgam removal. IT takes the body a while to be in a state where it's not daily storing mercury to then be free to begin dumping its storage.

It can start anytime. I know people who got the dumping stage occur 3 months past amalgam removal, many get it 6 months past. Occasionally a year or more can go by before it begins.

But it can also be this. You can get worse immediately after amalgam removal from exposure, plus the body attempting to get rid of the blood/tissue mercury, then feel better for a time inbetween and then feel worse again when the organs begin dumping.

So it can be really unpredictable. But I'd not wait for the mercury to come out on its own accord, I tried that method and was as sick as a dog. actively chelating within tolerance on a well tested safe protocol is the way to go so you are reducing as much mercury as possible to avoid future problems.

DMSA is great, I think but so long as it's used at a dose and in a manner that is not intolerable. I think it does a good clean up job, but dont believe it actively chelates organs like ALA. That's why I reckon it's better to use both DMSA and ALA when the person is ready to bring ALA onboard.

IF they feel more secure waiting it out for a bit longer than Cutler suggests, that's ok too. Also some people find they get more than enough detox symptoms on DMSA alone!! So that says alot. In other words if it's doing something by itself and so long as that is happening, maybe it's good to keep going with that alone until you find no real further improvements or detox symptoms occur.

Some people do not tolerate DMSA or DMPS at all, even in tiny amounts. These people can use ALA alone successfully and detox their body/brain. Though they should wait for 3 months or longer before doing that (as you know).

I dont know the perfect regime, but cutler is qualified, I am not. He has treated hundreds of patients around the world many times. So I would imagine he would have his protocol almost down to scratch. Spending years using it on patients and watching the effects, making minor adjustments and finding which way seems to be the best.

Jinx you appear to be in top form.

I had really high blood mercury levels over the winter which is why I had to find a doctor, it was dreadful scary. My blood mercury levels were reduced substantially, with amalgams still in, via chelation. But that initially was IV chelation which directly cleanses the blood since it enters the bloodstream immediately.

My use of DMSA is nothing near what people without amalgams here are doing,. I just use a maintenace dose, 50-75 mgs maybe 3 days a week, once in the evening on an empty stomach before bed. At this point I will sometimes add 25 mgs ALA extra to that (my DMSA formula already contains some), but only after eating a copious amount of garlic with an earlier meal (maybe 5-6 cloves chopped fine) and also having taken about 1/2 a teaspoon of chlorella w/fiber. Needless to say my ideal meal for a day I do that is currently my awesome cilantro pesto.. copious amounts of cilantro also.

And my head hasn't felt this great in years (with amlgams still in as I pray for more funds for fremoving).

If I do nothing, my blood mercury goes straight back up within a few days, I can feel it, it starts with just feeling achy then gets very achy...

Also.. chelation with amalgams still in may not be ideal, obviously. However, ideal scenarios aren't always possible.

My doctor was/is quite confident about chelating with amalgams still in, he too has treated hundreds, probably actually thousnads of people. He is a specialty trained board certified heavy metal toxicologist, quite well known, many many years of experience. I hope he does not retire before I am finished with this, he is old.

Thing is, chelation does not just address mercury, which seems to be your main complaint, and ther may be a tad fo risk concerning your/my amalgams. But the big picture in reality is that mercury cannot posibly be your or my only problem. there are other heavy metals we are all expsoed to.. lead, cadmium, nickel, whatever, that chelation helps resolve also. In that sense then, chelating with amalgams in, though not ideal, is ceratin to be helpful as it will help also to reduce other heavy metals that interact with the mercury to create greater toxicity when present.

Here is an interesting discussion on Mercury and ALA:
http://www.thorne.com/altmedrev/.fulltext/7/6/456.pdf

ALA versus Dithiol-based Chelating
Agents (DMPS, DMSA)
The ability of ALA to bind inorganic
mercury from rabbit renal tissue was compared
to glutathione and the chelators 2,3-
dimercaptopropane-1-sulfonate (DMPS), meso-
2,3-dimercapto- succinic acid (DMSA), penicillamine,
and ethylenediaminetetra acetic acid
(EDTA) (Figure 3).69
DMPS was the most efficient chelator,
removing 86 percent of the mercury in three
hours, with DMSA being the next-most efficient,
removing 65 percent of the mercury. In the same
time period, penicillamine removed 60 percent,
glutathione removed 50 percent, ALA removed
35 percent, and EDTA removed 20 percent. Only
the levels reached by DMSA and DMPS, however,
were statistically significantly different
from baseline (p<0.05). Therefore, the effect of
ALA and glutathione may show only a trend or
an apparent effect and are not comparable to
DMPS and DMSA. Although the actual effect of
a chelator or heavy metal-complexing agent cannot
be determined in a three-hour time period, and
acute doses of 10 mg/kg of inorganic mercury
would be considered highly toxic in an adult human,
there is evidence from this study that ALA
is a less efficient binder of inorganic mercury than
the recognized chelating agents, DMSA and
DMPS. All of the substances were used at a concentration
of 10 mM, a level difficult to reach with
ALA oral supplementation.
In another comparison study, ALA (25
mg/kg/day) resulted in an insignificant decrease
in blood and tissue lead in rats with lead toxicity
when compared to the dithiol-based chelating
agent, DMSA (dosed at 90 mg/kg/day) (Table 2).61