Perhaps it's the misreading the intention of the posts, but I get the impression you were upset by the ongoing promotion of a protocol that seems to be helping people on here and elsewhere..? I realise you are doing well, yu've mentioned this a number of times with your amalgams in, but you don't seem to take into account those that get hurt by such methods and we've had threads with people mentioning it on this very forum already... The first thing any good doctor or specialist should go by is "first do no harm".. if I've misread you I would apologise. But you haven't even tried his protocol, unless I"m mistaken? Did you read what happened to people using cilantro on that particular thread brought up quite sometime ago? Again is Andy lying about irreversible worsening from certain protocols?

I do not know if Dr Godfrey chelates people with amalgams in or not. He's a very cautious person, but so is a biologic dentist here and he detoxes patients with amalgams (using NDF), plus dietry and supplementary aids and claims a good track record. He sticks with it. It did not work out ok with me, but again it obviously worked with others.

My life is not at stake sosick if people criticise Cutler's protocol, but I fear for others when I hear the adverse reports on other protocols. So yes, I am dogmatic when it comes to that kind of thing. If long term or irreversible damage wasn't an issue, I wouldn't have one either <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> I never used to be this strong on the issue. I recommended his protocol, as anybody recommended theirs...until the further adverse and serious reports of others.

I am not sure about Andy's stance on chelating with amalgams, that is something I am in two minds about because it seems people are very much either doing well with that or have had very bad results....again if there is high risk potential, it needs to be said instead of saying "well i'm ok with it, so they'll be ok too". I've herad a few people suggest they got worse....I never chelated with amalgams, so I have no idea either way. I can't be against it personally because I never did it. But I can be against it if it's potentially risking someone else to get much worse.....

I cannot help emotions coming into it when other people mention getting hurt....it makes it very hard to be open to other methods when you know the risks attached. I recommend cutler's yes, but wouldn't careles about other ways people wish to chelate if there wasn't these reports. That's what I am trying to say.

By the way, your comments:


Were somewhat unfair don't you think? Let's consider how many times I have mentioned my mercury toxic journey on here and how I got well from it. What happened later sosick? 2003 I wound up with a very obviously vicious viral/bacterial infection that I have never experienced before (even with past glandular fever) and something no doctor has been able to get results for or explain. I know what happened personally, but the circumstnaces were very bizzare but very real. This is outside of the mercury problem and has damaged me even more than mercury toxicity. AT least with mercury there are healing crisis and ability to eliminate metals with chelation. This is almost like aids, it DOESN'T go and leaves me in a permanent position of making marathon efforts to get some control of the situation....so you are hardly in a position to judge my health status regarding mercury toxicity when this is outside of that.

This is a very different matter and one that has impeded me severely, more than anything I've ever had. I do my best under the cirumstances and chelation no matter what I try (yes I've given cilantro a go and used DMSA as you suggested), nothing helps. So I assume mercury may not be such an issue these days.

Take the viral infection away and then compare our health status from a few years ago with the mercury issue and we'd come up with a very different senario... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

You are certainly proof of your protocol and all power to you. I admire your tanacity as I do anybody who has suffered with this toxicity. I am not putting down other methods for the sake of a guy I don't even know (cutler). I'm not getting paid for it either, hence the ongoing slow pay off of my new expensive dental materials.

Look, I don't know enough about your methods in all honesty. I am only reporting high risk senarios for the sake of other people. NO agenda here sosick, just wanting people to get well in the safest way possible. You are right of course, if people can get better by chelating with amalgams in, then yes it is wrong to prevent that. It is also wrong to ignore the other side of the issue - severe adverse effects....

So perhaps we'll just go around in circles on this issue because it's doubtful anybody has the perfect solution to all of this...they really don't. Even the specialists in my country don't or they woudn't have toxic patients continually coming back to get benefit forms filled out....there are cures, but most people struggle along for a long time trying to get this poison out one way or the other...hopefully in a manner that won't screw them up long term or even permanently.

I don't wish to argue with you personally, or score points because I'm not interested. just trying to do the right thing. Also you are mistaken, people here including myself have mentioned the potential of toxicity and allergy from other dental materials and the need to do testing beforehand - serum testing, possible gum and cheek testing etc. People are on here for amalgam toxicity....they wish to get their amalgams replaced for the most part.

What do you suggest? Yes these materials can contain other toxic chemicals, but I doubt I or anybody else has the ideal solution to amalgam. We can only advise testing beforehand which maybe far from perfect too. Perhaps we should all just say leave the amalgams in and chelate....? everybody is different and I don't see enough people in your situation to be able to judge.