Question:

… I know you are busy with your closed practice and everything, but think of patients like my daughter, outside of your closed practice, who could benefit from a machine that does what you claim that it does…<snip…

 I have not been on the net over the years to solicit patients, but to  discuss nutritional concepts, and to hear about other practitioners and  their success with using new or *undocumented* treatments and remedies.  I’ve posted plenty of formulations myself in the past for other people  to try out, but I’ve never had any intentions to promote the system that  I personally use, and I don’t like bringing it up, as it always leads to  a hostile exchange.  I have a whole binder full of prospective patients who have been on a  waiting list for several years already, so I can’t just drop everything  any time someone hears about my system and wants to be tested right away.  Yes, your daughter would very likely benefit from an analysis that is  able to individualize nutrition, but then, I can’t think of anyone that  *wouldn’t* benefit from such a test. Machine or no machine, at some point you are bound to expire and we wouldn’t want this going to the grave with you.  I know you have taught someone to do this on horses, but maybe it’s time to try to "prove" what you already seem to know, for the betterment of mankind in general <snip

 The healthcare systems in most countries are bound to change over the  next decades, as many are on the brink of bankruptcy.  In Canada, a day  doesn’t go by where there aren’t some bed, ward, or hospital closures  or amalgamation to reduce healthcare spending. I believe that into the  next century, the onus is going to be much more than ever on people to  look after their own health through prevention, education, and maybe  even SELF-TREATMENT.  Instead of training more and more practitioners to help an absolutely  bottomless pit of patients, my idea would be to use "home diagnostic"  units, like I use, whereby people would run tests on their own, and  then adjust their diet and/or supplementation on their own as well.  For more complicated situations, they would enter the data into a  centralized computer which would then help solve any problems.  MDs  would only get involved in typical surgical procedures or very specific  medical situations, while specially trained nutritionists would look  after more complicated "home" cases, or the elderly.  While I’m presently trying to figure out a way to simplify my system  enough so that average individuals would be able to use such a device,  I’m probably not the only one toying with such an idea, and it may not  be long before other individuals will come up with the same diagnostic  concept and with perhaps additional means to cut through any red tape,  and also have the resources to go into mass production.  Since those following a customized, nutritional plan will automatically  only need a fraction of the drugs previously used, or none at all – as  is happening right now with most of my patients – the impact on the  pharmaceutical industry would be enormous and create additional, if not  different types of problems.  "Modern medicine" is set up to dispense  *drugs* for that migraine or chronic bladder infection – versus running  a nutritional profile and then ordering the appropriate supplements to  get rid of the cause more permanently – not to mention people themselves  all of a sudden being able to treat most of what ails them without much  - or any – professional help. —   * Ron Roth

Response:

Aside from the fact that you are wrong in your calcium assessment methods…

 Well I’m delighted that you’re using the right methods, which are? …although I must admit with your premise that ratios are of first importance and then levels – I am sick and tired of people (not just you, Ron) blaming everything on genes – as if you have to live with the "cards you are dealt".

 If it weren’t for genes, we would only have to deal with accidental  encounters, as everything else regarding health would become quite  predictable, including the effects of any drugs or remedies, disease  prevention, and even the approximate time of one’s death. Even though this is the attitude held by the majority of people, including reputable scientists, in this day and age, with our knowledge increasing at an exponential rate the "fact" that genes, once "given" are not viable to repair and are immutable, is simply untrue.

 Hm… we all go through live "suffering" from genetic defects, and much  of society is structured around it to a multi-billion-dollar tune with  most TV commercials and magazine ads catering to the improvement of body,  mind or spirit.  While a "cure" may be elusive – there is no lack of  offerings to help all your (genetic) imperfections, medical or otherwise,  or you can become more aggressive and venture into the operating room to  spite your genes… or you can take a visit to your allopath who will  "fix" your mind with that SSRI, so you can cope with tomorrow.  Or with the help of the latest technology, a ten-minute laser session  will make you look at God’s imperfect creation through new eyes with  20/20 vision – or you could have your meridians zapped with acupuncture,  or get your minerals balanced with my quack machine…for a "new you." …<snip……And the cause of disease is not some mystical, complex genetic, bacterial, viral or biochemical unknown – no, we already know 10 times more than we are using in our everyday lives.  We truly HAVE seen the enemy – and it really IS us.  Dr. AVB

 Doc, you sound angry, is that another genetic flaw? —  Na, even the creator has on occasion been angry, and He *is* perfect, so  it couldn’t be. Time for you to pop in a calming CD, and grab a relaxing  book….a NON-medical book! —   * Ron Roth

Response:

While I’m presently trying to figure out a way to simplify my system enough so that average individuals would be able to use such a

device, ROFL.  Why don’t you simplify it enough that your average pathologist or chemical engineer can use it, and then you can take that trip to Stockholm for your prize, after which your fame will allow you to make any applications of the thing to public life you like.                                   Steve Harris, M.D.

Response:

Ron said– Instead of training more and more practitioners to help an absolutely bottomless pit of patients, my idea would be to use "home diagnostic" units, like I use, whereby people would run tests on their own, and then adjust their diet and/or supplementation on their own as well.

Fair enough.  When might they become available (just a ball park estimate)? Also, I think that wager you offered Steve sounds reasonable, but I doubt if he could find a sponsor unless you also agreed to put money into escrow.  I’m not going to sponsor Steve, because I’d be pulling for you, of course! Plus I don’t have the money.   But if you were willing to put the money into escrow, maybe he could ask the LEF to sponsor him.  It seems to me they might be interested in a win-win situation like this.  If they win, they get the ten thousand dollars.  If they lose, they find a great new way to extend life (assuming improved nutritional status would extend life).  And I would just bet that this kind of wager might appeal to their libertarian philosophy!! BL

Response:

Let’s start with vitamin status first: For over 35 years now microanimals (protozoa) have been used to determine vitamin status both in humans and animals.  protozoan reagents, unlike bacteria, have proven to me the most sensitive and specific for the vitmain analyzed and for pinpointing clinical (overt) and subclinical (hidden) vitamin deficits… <snip Do you use this method, Ron??

 No, I don’t.  I use electronic measurements to test for all relevant  functions, although some items I test don’t have their own cellular  receptors, so their requirements are determined by evaluating mineral  patterns. As far as mineral analysis are concerned – while blood and serum do contain minerals they may not be completely representative of the body’s tissue burden.  In many cases the serum levels is maintained at optimum but at the expense of the tissue concentration… <snip

 Agreed, that’s why they have limited applications for nutritional  purposes. Tissue mineral analysis is a good indicator of the metabolic processess occurring within the cell (intracellular)…<snip…More cost-effective, less susceptible to homeostatic mechanism that affect trace minerals and mostly – long-term deviations of mineral retention or losses are more easily detected in hair than in blood.  Concentrations of most elements in the hair are significantly higher than found in the blood and other tissues, and last, as I mentioned with Napoleon, hair provides an accurate record of past as well as present trace element levels – ie biological activity. <snip

 I have used hair analysis for a number of years in the late 70’s and  early 80’s, and while it offers some potential in the measurements of  heavy metals, or to analyze the chemical status of century-old corpses,  I found it to be a totally impractical tool to effectively normalize a  patient’s nutritional status.  To get a ballpark idea or establish a  trend (of whether someone is consistently high or low in a particular  mineral), it’s ok.  And interestingly enough, in a case like that, hair  analysis is *identical* in its findings to electronic measurements done  with Acu-Cell Analysis.   However to actually use hair analysis as the  main diagnostic tool in a clinic, there would be numerous problems:  a) one gets the results back from a time period when the hair was     growing, which can be 2-4 months earlier.  That’s stale data.  b) it’s useless in acute situations where you have to establish the     reason for a particular medical problem in a hurry.  c) there is no way to monitor any progress – one has to wait patiently     for months and hope for any results – which will never materialize.     I have followed the recommendations from the labs, and I have tried     to balance minerals on my own based on hair analysis – it just never     worked out.  After six or seven tries spanning over several months     or even years – patients’ chemical profiles were as mixed up as ever,     and there were generally only minimal improvements, if any, in their     medical conditions.  Again, forget about urgent care altogether.  d) I have sent samples from the same person to different labs – and as     you can imagine – different interpretations!  I don’t even want to     hear about "contamination" or "shampoo’ problems, and neither do my     patients.     I have also heard claims about people sending the same hair sample     to the same labs with different names, and apparently they also got     different results and interpretations!!  e) What do you do if during a typical day one patient shows up with     chest pains, another with abdominal pain, another has a high fever,     etc, etc..?  Do you order a hair analysis…??  There are lots more     problems, but I guess you get the drift.  Perhaps if you have no     other methods to work with, hair analysis, if repeated often enough,     may establish a trend (as mentioned above), that perhaps has limited     potential for some chronic conditions, but there are still not enough     items tested to be as valuable as some people make it out to be. But overall – I like my methods better than yours.  Dr. AVB

 Well, it depends what kind of practice you run, if any, or what kinds  of problems you attempt to treat, and of course it also depends what  expectations your patients have in your treatments.  I book 30-min nutritional consultations for most patients, with some  extra time when a physical treatment (electro-acupuncture) is needed.  By the time patients leave, THEY HAVE THEIR TEST RESULTS ALREADY IN  THEIR HANDS, and since I don’t sell anything, they are free to buy  their supplements wherever they like.  They also get unlimited free  phone support 7 days a week which I can offer, since very few patients  run into problems and need to contact me.  Their chart includes a record of their spinal alignment in the event  that they also regularly visit a chiropractor, or need to see one, and  their nutritional recommendations are customized to whatever medical  problems – acute – chronic – serious – not-so-serious… they suffer  from.  Of course, like anyone else, I come across patients that defy  any treatments that my system can offer, and some of those patients  who are on an extra large number of drugs from their regular drs can  be a real challenge as well.  Fortunately, many of them can reduce, or  discontinue prescribed medications once the nutritional program has  had the time to take effect. —   * Ron Roth

Response:

Ron, I know you are busy with your closed practice, but it would be nice if you could do at least some clinical studies on this.  Machine or no machine, at some point you are bound to expire and we wouldn’t want this going to the grave with you.  I know you have taught someone to do this on horses, but maybe it’s time to try to "prove" what you already seem to know, for the betterment of mankind in general (if not for the Nobel Prize, as Steve suggests).  I am almost certain that my daughter suffers mineral imbalance problems and I am NOT satisfied with blood serum measurements.  I am going to have her get a hair analysis soon (as Dr. AVB suggests).  But if you have something better to offer, please, for the sake of all of us, try to figure out some way to be more convincing than posting to a newsgroup about it.  I know you are busy with your closed practice and everything, but think of patients like my daughter, outside of your closed practice, who could benefit from a machine that does what you claim that it does. I know that studies aren’t necessary to prove to yourself  that it works, but they are necessary for others to accept it. BL

Response:

S R You should ask Steve how *he* measures your calcium and magnesium S R to arrive at your personal, *nutritional* requirements. S S Magnesium levels are easy to draw, and anyone with a level at the high S end of normal is certainly getting enough. S Calcium is harder, but it’s a rare person who needs more than they get S in their diet plus one RDA worth of supplement (which I encourage, S especially for people past 50).  So how *do* you test for nutritional requirements of calcium, and how  do you know that "it’s a rare person who needs more than they get in  their diet plus one RDA worth of supplement" if you don’t test for it?  How – without a test – do you spot those who have too much already, or  does med school teach you that you can’t overdose on calcium? S A DEXA scan also is a quick way of telling how bones are doing.  How about the rest of the body, as far as the nutritional needs of  calcium are concerned? S No, I don’t use a quack machine, like yours.    Steve Harris, M.D.  If the test results of my machine were as vague as yours, I’d donate it  to allopathic medicine tomorrow, because then, it would fit right in… —   * Ron Roth

Response:

S Calcium is harder, but it’s a rare person who needs more than they get S in their diet plus one RDA worth of supplement (which I encourage, S especially for people past 50). So how *do* you test for nutritional requirements of calcium, and how do you know that "it’s a rare person who needs more than they get in their diet plus one RDA worth of supplement" if you don’t test for

it?    The studies on calcium requirements in populations have been done. That’s how we got the RDA, don’t you know.  It’s what it takes to keep 95% of the population in calcium balance.  Add what you get in a normal diet to that, and the number will be larger.    No, I don’t do calcium balance studies to catch that one individual out of 100 or something who isn’t getting enough even taking the RDA on top of a normal diet.  But these people generally show up with osteoporosis, and DEXA catches that.  99% of your body’s calcium is in the skeleton, and DEXA sees the density of the skeleton. How – without a test – do you spot those who have too much already, or  does med school teach you that you can’t overdose on calcium?

   Not on a normal diet you can’t.  You can with supplements (at several RDA worth), or with quarts of milk, particularly with alkali loading.  But people who are doing that, are doing something rather unnatural. S A DEXA scan also is a quick way of telling how bones are doing. How about the rest of the body, as far as the nutritional needs of calcium are concerned?

   Calcium in the rest of the body (the 1%) is maintained at the expense of the bones (99%).  That’s one reason why it’s difficult to tell whether a person is getting enough calcium on a day to day basis.  It’s like telling whether or not a person with 30 years’ salary saved in the bank is living beyond their means. S No, I don’t use a quack machine, like yours.    Steve Harris, M.D. If the test results of my machine were as vague as yours, I’d donate

it  to allopathic medicine tomorrow, because then, it would fit right in… * Ron Roth    I’m sure the results of your machine are far from vague.  Quack machines give great answers.  They just have nothing to do with reality.    How many times can I say this?  You have a machine which you say can test for mineral levels, and even vitamin levels (like B12!!!) in the human body, and even in samples of blood.  It hasn’t been validated in any chemical journal as a real chemical or biochemical test (it would immediately win the inventor a Nobel prize, of course, if it had– for it would literally revolutionize laboratory pathology, not to say industrial chemical engineering process control, in one giant step). It’s not part of medicine because its results are bogus.  In a double blind test I could PROVE to you in an afternoon that it was bogus, and I stand ready to do it.  It’s a quack machine.  The stuff you say on this forum based on the results it give you, is bullshit of the highest caliber.  It’s a perfect example of all that will remain wrong with "alternative" medicine until it learns what to do with the scientific method.                                        Steve Harris, M.D. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Aside from the fact that you are wrong in your calcium assessment methods…  Well I’m delighted that you’re using the right methods, which are? Let’s start with vitamin status first: For over 35 years now microanimals (protozoa) have been used to determine vitamin status both in humans and animals.  protozoan reagents, unlike bacteria, have proven to me the most sensitive and specific for the vitmain analyzed and for pinpointing clinical (overt) and subclinical (hidden) vitamin deficits.  Protozoa are most specific for B12 and are superior to the US Pham Lactobacilius leichmanni B12 assay.  The accuracy of protozoan methods for vitamin detection has never been challenged (by anyone in his or her right mind that is, Ron). These methods can measure degrees of severity of a vitamin deficit and malabsorption that functional analysis cannot because protozoa are sensitive to levels far beyond chemical or enzyme detectablility – approx 1 part per trillion.  They also detect only those form that are metabolically active and are more specific for overall vitamin detection detection than functional analysis or other microbial and radiochemical assays.  Protozoa do not depend upon on trace metals or apoenzymes in biologic fluids to yield accurate results.  Do you use this method, Ron??

As far as mineral analysis are concerned – while blood and serum do contain minerals they may not be completely representative of the body’s tissue burden.  In many cases the serum levels is maintained at optimum but at the expense of the tissue concentration (homeostatic mechanisms).  Serum levels change with hormonal fluctuations, emotional up and down’s, proximaty of food ingestion – magnesium can even fluctuate depending on the blood drawing technique (hypoxia).  Both symptoms of iron and calcium depletion are seen long before their absence is detected in the serum.  Blood analysis is a good indicator of the TRANSPORT of minerals to and fro the storage areas of the body (extracellular).Hair is formed  in the dermis from a cluster of matrix cells that make up the follicle.  During the growth phase metabolic activity is greatly increased exposing the hair to the internal metabolic environment – including the extracellular fluids, circulating blood and lymph.  As the hair reaches the skin surface its outer layers harden, locking in the metabolic products accumelated during the hair formation.  Hair is the second most (metabolically) active tissue and by its very nature provides a permanent record (we founds Napoleon’s means of demise by his flock of saved hair!) during its growth.  Tissue mineral analysis is a good indicator of the metabolic processess occurring within the cell (intracellular).  All over the world scientists are beginning to standardize testing methods, and, with few exception and limitations, and correct interpretation training (about as easy as learning to read EEG’s or EKG’s) it can provide (with a few exceptions) a more "wholistic" and comprehensive picture upon which to base nutritional therapy  Advantages: specimen grows back.  Collected cheaper, quicker, more easily than blood urine or any other tissue.  More cost-effective, less susceptible to homeostatic mechanism that affect trace minerals and mostly – long-term deviations of mineral retention or losses are more easily detected in hair than in blood.  Concentrations of most elements in the hair are significantly higher than found in the blood and other tissues, and last, as I mentioned with Napoleon, hair provides an accurate record of pst as well as present trace element levels – ie biological activity.  It’s almost like reading the fossil record.  Because it is! Obviously, like with anything else, biochemical individuality, metabolic types, exogenous toxins or artifacts must be considered.  But overall – I like my methods better than yours. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – …although I must admit with your premise that ratios are of first importance and then levels – I am sick and tired of people (not just you, Ron) blaming everything on genes – as if you have to live with the "cards you are dealt".  If it weren’t for genes, we would only have to deal with accidental  encounters, as everything else regarding health would become quite  predictable, including the effects of any drugs or remedies, disease  prevention, and even the approximate time of one’s death. You 0obviously did not read my post very well.  You’re the only one who was unable to read between the (very obvious) lines. Even though this is the attitude held by the majority of people, including reputable scientists, in this day and age, with our knowledge increasing at an exponential rate the "fact" that genes, once "given" are not viable to repair and are immutable, is simply untrue.  Hm… we all go through live "suffering" from genetic defects, and much  of society is structured around it to a multi-billion-dollar tune with  most TV commercials and magazine ads catering to the improvement of body,  mind or spirit.  While a "cure" may be elusive – there is no lack of  offerings to help all your (genetic) imperfections, medical or otherwise,  or you can become more aggressive and venture into the operating room to  spite your genes… or you can take a visit to your allopath who will  "fix" your mind with that SSRI, so you can cope with tomorrow.

The vast majority of people do NOT go thru life "suffering" from genetic defects.  Instead most are enjoying its wider scope and its incredible potential for adaptation to a sicker world.   And television an magazine ads cater mostly to the elderly (who are making it further than ever) and to the vain.  But most of the world is also "structured" around McDonalds and Coca-Cola.  What does that have to do with the price of beans in Chille?  Or with the help of the latest technology, a ten-minute laser session  will make you look at God’s imperfect creation through new eyes with  20/20 vision – or you could have your meridians zapped with acupuncture,  or get your minerals balanced with my quack machine…for a "new you." Yeah – ain’t technology terrific? …<snip……And the cause of disease is not some mystical, complex genetic, bacterial, viral or biochemical unknown – no, we already know 10 times more than we are using in our everyday lives.  We truly HAVE seen the enemy – and it really IS us.  Dr. AVB  Doc, you sound angry, is that another genetic flaw? —  Na, even the creator has on occasion been angry, and He *is* perfect, so  it couldn’t be. Time for you to pop in a calming CD, and grab a relaxing  book….a NON-medical book!

Na, not angry.  Just frustrated with people who, while claiming to be wholistic in their attitude and armamentarium, are unable to look at scientific data objectively just because it comes from the "other camp".  I’ll stick to my (extensive) medical library, thank you.Dr. AVB   * Ron Roth

– A. Van Beveren, Ph.D., CNC 609-924-7337   |Au-d.l.r.u? Nutritional Biochemist and Physiologist   |

Response:

V I am curious what tests you perform on your patients to make this V determination of calcium and/or magnesium deficiency and, if such V a deficiency exists, what parameters you use to determine whether V or not supplimentation would benefit them. Thanks and best regards, —  I use an electronic method (Acu-Cell Analysis) to measure cellular  levels of around two dozen minerals in addition to other factors.  Combining the levels of ALL minerals, an average is established to  arrive at an individual or genetic "ideal," which changes under  different circumstances (I already covered this in more detail a  few weeks ago).  Supplementation is dependent on the assessment of those mineral ratios  the same way as you develop medical symptoms.  You may have normal or  even above-normal Mg levels, but if associated or interactive minerals  (zinc, chromium, iron, calcium, sodium, potassium…) are much higher,  you’ll develop symptoms of a magnesium deficiency, so supplementation  is recommended.  OTOH, you may have *low* magnesium levels, but if related minerals are  even lower than Mg, the emphasis is on raising those lower minerals, as  you would NOT develop symptoms of a Mg deficiency in such a case. So in  other words, I always adjust mineral RATIOS before levels. —   * Ron Roth

Response:

L ummm so any thoughts relative to my headaches ! ? L — You should ask Steve how *he* measures your calcium and magnesium to arrive at your personal, *nutritional* requirements. —  * Ron Roth

Magnesium levels are easy to draw, and anyone with a level at the high end of normal is certainly getting enough.  Calcium is harder, but it’s a rare person who needs more than they get in their diet plus one RDA worth of supplement (which I encourage, especially for people past 50). A DEXA scan also is a quick way of telling how bones are doing. No, I don’t use a quack machine, like yours.                                      Steve Harris, M.D.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – harder than you think to be on a mineral-poor diet (at least as far as Ca & Mg are concerned), The SAD is a chelation diet.  It saps calcium and magnesium and other alkaline minerals even though there is enough of them in all the food we eat (even junk food).  It is the junk part of the food that allows/forces us to buffer the blood pH with our own depleting bank of minerals. How are you measuring minerals? Dr. AVB —  A lot of theories can be postulated on paper, but in reality, lots of  "junkies" are surviving quite well compared to many healthfood nuts.  It’s all in the genes.  Of course yours, or the findings of some other armchair  ’practitioners’ may vary. —   * Ron Roth

Aside from the fact that you are wrong in your calcium assessment methods – although I must admit with your premise that ratios are of first importance and then levels – I am sick and tired of people (not just you, Ron) blaming everything on genes – as if you have to live with the "cards you are dealt". Even though this is the attitude held by the majority of people, including reputable scientists, in this day and age, with our knowledge increasing at an exponential rate the "fact" that genes, once "given" are not viable to repair and are immutable, is simply untrue. The popular view point goes something like this: Genes are rods of nuclear tissue that are impervious to environmental assault.  Any change that does occur in their structure of function is the result of mutation, which is an unpredictable, uncontrollable, chance occurrence that descends upon an unfortunate or, in some cases, fortunate few.  Much like my example of the healthy, stong, body-building tri-athlete who, upon turning the corner, discovers s/he has been assaulted by predating & lethal bacteria or virus’ and thereupon immediately succumbs to a life-long, chronic illness from wich s(he) can never recover "except by the judicious intake of immunoSUPRESSING drugs". Yeah, right. The reason why some women, listening to their "preventative-oriented" ob/gyn’s, have their breast lopped off is the ASSumption that genes cannot be altered by their environment and that these snips of DNA/RNA in their family tree are the "root" cause of their future demise.  The implication is that someday..doctors will simply diagnose their patient’s illness thru (expensive) genetic testing, give them the appropriate (expensive) snippets of molecular thread and send them (with the appropriate genetically-modified/space grown, very expensive drugs) home cured.   Such nonsense.  Sort of like a high-tech aspirin curing a genetic fever.  We need to ask those scientists in the HGP: what causes a gene to mutate in the first place?  And: how can it be prevented?  And:  what are the factors that contribute to CHANGES (not just "mutations" – with all the negative implication with which this word has been infused) in the DNA/RNA? Unfortunately the medical community is much too quick to blame things they do not yet understand as the cause of disease.  First it was assumed that bacteria CAUSED disease.  This is being disproven on a daily basis despite the recentl hooplala about H, pylori.  Bacteria are innocent bystanders that are called by the body to do a job: transform diseased or even deficient tissues into their component parts.  Systems, organisms and tribes be damned.  Then we discovered the lowly virus.  Yet everyday papers are being published that seem to suggest that, they, too are not the ultimate cause of disease and it won’t be long before a new theory will displace the one we have now which basically says: disease is not our fault – the blame belongs to those little beasts who dare occupy our body without permission.  Such is the case with genetics. Again the blame belongs anywhere but with us.  The responsibility therefore lies with our parents, who blame their parents, who blame…well you get the idea.  Adam and Eve must be having a hell-of-a-time. Like most other tissues genes, or rather genetic material, possess both protective and repair mechanisms and any kind of "genetic disease" manifests clinically only after most protective factors have been completely destroyed and/or after any and all repair mechanisms have been overwhelmed or environmentally thwarted. We know the protective factors.  Linus Pauling was right despite his then current detractors.  Science News Vol 145 No3 pp 44-5 (1/15/94)…"no matter what the specific death signal or cell type – once a cell is bent on dying, it does so via free radicals, turning loose a chain of ruinous chemical reactions".  But not all FR mediated reactions are bad.  Many essential biochemical reaction proceed via FR activity. Pg synthesis, peroxidase and phagycytosis – just to mention very few.   When under biological control FRA is predominantly beneficial.  When from outside sources (Xrays – etc) they are harmfull.   Balance, again, is the key. Could we give too many FR scavengers?  Absolutely.  Both vitamin C excess as well as deficiency results in dysequilibrium and  presents a threat to the balance of FRA. Both the hydroxyl radical and singlet oxygen are responsible for damage to the genes. Joentje (a former school mate of mine), et al says: (not an exact quote) DNA damage is caused by -OH or synglet oxygen and secondary reactive species (amino acid radicals and lipid-perox. products) are also capable of damaging the genome.   There is more – but you get the gist. Here is the little known fact: repair is possible! Ross and Moldeus state in Membrane Lipid Oxidation Vol 2 CRC press Boca Raton, FLA 1991 p156 :  "repair of DNA can be either chemical, involving interaction of electron donors such as sulfhydryls and ascorbate with DNA, or may be enzymatic …..- which may require the activity of glycosylases, endo- and exonucleases and ligases…." And, most importantly, they are not talking generations from now.  They are talking about the here and now. Seems to me that through the intelligent use of lifestyle modifications and antioxidants we can help prevent genetic damage and now (ask me how!) even repair them.  And with Goulds work/papers on genetics and evolution, the transposition theories of the (genius) late Barbara McClintock (bless her female soul!) and the incredible fascinating chaos/fractal developments – we are at a different crossroad in our philosophy that is not yet mainstream: namely that genetic damage only leads to the manifestation of disease – it is not the ultimate cause. Here is my summary:  (Sorry galls and guys for the length of this monolog but I had to get it off my chest): Genes DO interact with their environment.  They are nothing more than little tuning forks that set the evolutionary most survival-oriented vibration coursing thru our (different) fields/bodies to attract the proper building blocks/appetites/attitudes.  And their tune can be modified AND more rapidly than was previously understood.  And that means the kidneys, too Ron.  And the cause of disease is not some mystical, complex genetic, bacterial, viral or biochemical unknown – no, we already know 10 times more than we are using in our everyday lives.  We truly HAVE seen the enemy – and it really IS us. Dr. AVB A. Van Beveren, Ph.D., CNC 609-924-7337   |Au-d.l.r.u? Nutritional Biochemist and Physiologist   |

Response:

you think to be on a mineral-poor diet (at least as far as Ca & Mg are concerned), The SAD is a chelation diet.  It saps calcium and magnesium and other alkaline minerals even though there is enough of them in all the food we eat (even junk food).  It is the junk part of the food that allows/forces us to buffer the blood pH with our own depleting bank of minerals. How are you measuring minerals? Dr. AVB — A. Van Beveren, Ph.D., CNC 609-924-7337   |Au-d.l.r.u? Nutritional Biochemist and Physiologist   |

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – than you think to be on a mineral-poor diet (at least as far as Ca & Mg are concerned), The SAD is a chelation diet.  It saps calcium and magnesium and other alkaline minerals even though there is enough of them in all the food we eat (even junk food).  It is the junk part of the food that allows/forces us to buffer the blood pH with our own depleting bank of minerals. How are you measuring minerals? Dr. AVB

   Ron thinks he can measure minerals and vitamins with his magic electric machine, puting probes on the skin.  Too bad you’re not anywhere near Salt Lake City, Ron— we’d work up a double blind demonstration with a side bet, ala Randi and the skeptic society.  I’ve got $500 that says that when you and the "patient" are blinded, you can’t tell vitamin levels any better than my dog can.                                     Steve Harris, M.D.

Response:

ummm so any thoughts relative to my headaches ! ? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – than you think to be on a mineral-poor diet (at least as far as Ca & Mg are concerned), The SAD is a chelation diet.  It saps calcium and magnesium and other alkaline minerals even though there is enough of them in all the food we eat (even junk food).  It is the junk part of the food that allows/forces us to buffer the blood pH with our own depleting bank of minerals. How are you measuring minerals? Dr. AVB    Ron thinks he can measure minerals and vitamins with his magic electric machine, puting probes on the skin.  Too bad you’re not anywhere near Salt Lake City, Ron— we’d work up a double blind demonstration with a side bet, ala Randi and the skeptic society.  I’ve got $500 that says that when you and the "patient" are blinded, you can’t tell vitamin levels any better than my dog can.                                     Steve Harris, M.D.

Response:

I’m ordering my front seat tickets as I type. Dr. AVB The SAD is a chelation diet. How are you measuring minerals? Dr. AVB    Ron thinks he can measure minerals and vitamins with his magic electric machine, puting probes on the skin.  Too bad you’re not anywhere near Salt Lake City, Ron— we’d work up a double blind demonstration with a side bet, ala Randi and the skeptic society.  I’ve got $500 that says that when you and the "patient" are blinded, you can’t tell vitamin levels any better than my dog can.                                     Steve Harris, M.D.

– A. Van Beveren, Ph.D., CNC 609-924-7337   |Au-d.l.r.u? Nutritional Biochemist and Physiologist   |

Response:

harder than you think to be on a mineral-poor diet (at least as far as Ca & Mg are concerned), The SAD is a chelation diet.  It saps calcium and magnesium and other alkaline minerals even though there is enough of them in all the food we eat (even junk food).  It is the junk part of the food that allows/forces us to buffer the blood pH with our own depleting bank of minerals. How are you measuring minerals? Dr. AVB

–  A lot of theories can be postulated on paper, but in reality, lots of  "junkies" are surviving quite well compared to many healthfood nuts.  It’s all in the genes.  If your kidneys function reasonably well, all  this protein and phosphorus antagonism to calcium, and their ratios,  can be stretched to incredible lengths, as kids and teens on junkfood  prove every day by increasing bone mass despite nutritional calculations  to the contrary.  Chromium, manganese, phosphorus, sulfur, tin, iron, silicon, and even  sodium, and in many areas iodine, are way ahead of calcium & magnesium  as one of the most deficient minerals, measured by cellular method, in  the *average* individual.  Even adjusting minerals by age or locale, only in the 60-year+ category  does Mg move ahead of Na in deficiency, while hormone changes towards,  and during middle age will cause certain minerals to decline faster than  others, such as potassium or zinc, but NOT calcium.  If Ca *were* to decrease, we’d see much fewer cases of arteriosclerosis  /cardiac problems, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, stones/spurs, chronic  fatigue with aches and pains, stomach problems, hypoglycemic symptoms,  and many others.  Those are hands-on, measured results, reflecting my  own practice.  Of course yours, or the findings of some other armchair  ’practitioners’ may vary. —   * Ron Roth

Response:

L ummm so any thoughts relative to my headaches ! ? L —  You should ask Steve how *he* measures your calcium and magnesium  to arrive at your personal, *nutritional* requirements. —   * Ron Roth

Response:

  Ron thinks he can measure minerals and vitamins with his magic electric machine, puting probes on the skin.  Too bad you’re not anywhere near Salt Lake City, Ron— we’d work up a double blind demonstration with a side bet, ala Randi and the skeptic society. I’ve got $500 that says that when you and the "patient" are blinded, you can’t tell vitamin levels any better than my dog can.                                    Steve Harris, M.D.

–  Only $500?  That’s a typo, right?  Some of my out-of-town patients  spend just about that on plane tickets alone when they fly in for  their appointments.  I will accept your challenge on the following terms and conditions:  a) Instead of travelling to Salt Lake City, I live close enough to     McMaster University/Hospital centre in Hamilton, Ontario, and even     though it’s a drag, I’m willing to take my machine there (I’ve     taken it to the hospital often enough before) – provided you are     willing to set up the details with the hospital.  b) I’ll be off the last two weeks in December, and though it’ll mean     a change of plans for me, I will make myself available from the     18th to the 30th of December.  c) To keep things safe enough for tests subjects, I propose a few     common supplements such as Calcium, Magnesium, Potassium and Zinc     for the experiment.  Since we just had a debate on Vit B12 a few     weeks ago, we might as well throw that in as well.  I would also     suggest that you pick reasonably healthy people, as they’ll have     to take quite a bit above the RDA, so cellular levels will change     fast enough for my machine to pick up the increase in activity     within the few days we’ll be doing the experiment.  You wouldn’t     want to make them sick by using large amounts of things like iron,     selenium, or lithium, etc, but I’ll leave that up to you.  d) You’ll have to raise your stakes a bit to cover my expenses, say     around ten grand or so, which for you is probably a week’s wages.     I’ve been doing this sort of thing for free far too long, so I     wouldn’t mind making this worth my while for a change.  If you     don’t want to spend that much money, you could always let someone     known as nimnodius or something similar – our net expert on double-     blind studies.  He could also help you put the study together.     As soon as the money is in trust, let me know, and we can have a     go at it, and once I’m paid, I’ll even fly down to Salt Lake City     and buy you dinner.  e) To make things a bit more interesting, I would also propose that     the test subjects taking the minerals are not only tested by myself     with my method, but that you have them tested with YOUR methods as     well (use the best labs you can find!). I’m exceedingly curious to     find out how well your tests (under double-blinded conditions) will     be able to pick out the minerals the test subjects are taking. The     results may give you second thoughts on how great a return you’ve     got for the effort you’ve put into your medical education… —   * Ron Roth

Response:

LI dont have a diet regularly high in calcium so i decided to supplement Land i am getting a weird reaction. When i take them which is at night i Lwake up with a hangover like headache the next day. the first product i Ltook had calcium magnesium zinc copper potassium and manganese. I stuck Lwith it having these headaches for a while as it took a little bit to Lmake the full connection and it eventually gave me a nose bleed ! Lthe next product i took a year later had just calcium and magnesium and Lzinc and i got a headache as well. Both of these had 1000mg of calcium Land 400 mg of magnesium.  Any ideas? —  Has it ever occurred to you that you may not need extra Ca & Mg?  From experience, only (approximately) 1 out of 5 patients I test  shows enough of a deficiency to warrant calcium supplementation,  and perhaps one third might benefit from extra magnesium.  Even  junk food contains minerals – it’s much harder than you think to be  on a mineral-poor diet (at least as far as Ca & Mg are concerned),  so that extra need is usually not created from lack in the diet,  but from impaired kidney or liver functions, or some other chronic  condition.  However, if it’s a genetic problem, you’re pretty well  stuck with life-long supplementation — but then you’d feel better,  not worse from taking them. —   * Ron Roth

Response:

I dont have a diet regularly high in calcium so i decided to supplement and i am getting a weird reaction. When i take them which is at night i wake up with a hangover like headache the next day. the first product i took had calcium magnesium zinc copper potassium and manganese. I stuck with it having these headaches for a while as it took a little bit to make the full connection and it eventually gave me a nose bleed ! the next product i took a year later had just calcium and magnesium and zinc and i got a headache as well. Both of these had 1000mg of calcium and 400 mg of magnesium. Any ideas? note: this is not a fake address so you can send to it.

Response:

I dont have a diet regularly high in calcium so i decided to supplement and i am getting a weird reaction. When i take them which is at night i wake up with a hangover like headache the next day. the first product i took had calcium magnesium zinc copper potassium and manganese. I stuck with it having these headaches for a while as it took a little bit to make the full connection and it eventually gave me a nose bleed ! the next product i took a year later had just calcium and magnesium and zinc and i got a headache as well. Both of these had 1000mg of calcium and 400 mg of magnesium. Any ideas? note: this is not a fake address so you can send to it.

Just a data point that may or may not be relevant. I have been taking about 1000 mg of magnesium oxide a day for many years. I almost never have any headaches.

Response:

Just a data point that may or may not be relevant. I have been taking about 1000 mg of magnesium oxide a day for many years. I almost never have any headaches.

Don’t you get muscle twitches with that high dosage of Magnesium? I used to get twicthes all over my body, in the triceps, near the solar plexus(?), even eye lids. I read on this newsgroup someone mentioning similar effects and I have found them gone after stopping intake of Mg. Chandra

Response:

I have been taking about 1000 mg of magnesium oxide a day for many years. I almost never have any headaches. Don’t you get muscle twitches with that high dosage of Magnesium? I used to get twicthes all over my body, in the triceps, near the solar plexus(?), even eye lids. I read on this newsgroup someone mentioning similar effects and I have found them gone after stopping intake of Mg. Chandra

I am sorry. I forgot to mention other significant conditions I was in at the same time. I was also taking almost everyday about 20-28 oz of a vegetable juice [containing mostly carrot and a few oz's of celery/cucummber/spinach/beets and wheatrgrass juice]. I also reduced the intak eof this to about half. Especially that of wheatgrass from 2 oz/day to 1 oz/day. Chandra

Response:

Related Questions