"You just say anything to try and make DMPS look bad."

Not really. I am just cautious and skeptical. There is no question that some get well with IV DMPS, but some become much worse from it. I have seen very few posts from those who used oral DMPS. I have a feeling that oral DMPS might not be that much different in effectiveness than DMSA. I might become convinced of the effectiveness of oral DMPS if I see that a number of people were cured using it. I have not seen that yet though, just reports of some getting cured and some getting worse with IV DMPS.

"Once again you are just throwing out "facts" which you have provided no scientific link or data."

No one seems to provide any data at all for humans. All the data I have seen is for animal studies. Who knows how similar the results would be for humans.

"Yet you make ME provide links to everything I say. I'm getting sort of sick of this game. "

That is the problem. This all seems like guesswork. When in doubt though, it seems prudent to take the safest path. The question remains though why so few are getting good results with ALA+DMSA on the Cutler protocol, even when decent sized doses(such as 1 mg per kg of body weight) are used for many rounds. I think Cutler's response to this is to just do more rounds, but after around 50 rounds many become very tired of this process, especially due to the sleep disruptions.


"You do all of this simply to make DMPS look bad for unknown personal reasons."

No, I am just trying to balance the enthusiasm some have for oral DMPS that is not yet based in fact. As I said before, I am skeptical. There are enough reasons not to use DMPS(much greater toxicity than DMSA, much higher cost than DMSA, difficulty in finding a physician who will use it for those with amalgam illness(as opposed to an industrial accident with huge sudden exposure), and the lack of insurance coverage for it(since in the US it is not FDA approved and still considered experimental).
I guess the reason we see so little written about oral DMPS is that DMPS has been used primarily as an IV treatment for emergency industrial mercury exposure when a person has a significant chance of dying soon.

"You have never even tried DMPS"

Of course I haven't tried it yet. I am not convinced that oral DMPS is effective, and I still question how safe it is. Since DMSA is much cheaper than DMPS, much less toxic, and much easier to get, the burden of proof is on showing that oral DMPS does in fact work significantly better than oral DMSA, and that toxicity is not a problem. Until I am convinced of that, I will recommend DMSA rather than DMPS.

"If you had tried it yourself and had a bad experience, then I could understand your concerns....but you haven't. "

"If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving isn't for you".

I like the idea of experimenting, as long as it is proven to be safe. I am not convinced of the safety of DMPS though. Some might say it is risky but worth the risk, however until I see some proof that oral DMPS works significantly better than DMSA, and that toxicity is not a problem, I don't want to take it. I also don't like the idea that DMPS capsules are not FDA approved, and is not available from a major manufacturer. How can you be sure that the DMPS you get is in the proper dosage, or that the manufacturing process is good and the dosage won't vary significantly from capsule to capsule?

There are ways to experiment without using DMPS. Cilantro holds much promise, as does NAC and MSM. Perhaps higher dosages vitamin D or other supplements may boost glutathione enough and get the body to detox from mercury? Has anyone with mercury toxicity tried getting their vitamin D level tested very frequently, and staying on high vitamin D doses, keeping their blood vitamin D level just under 80 ng/ml?