[Heavy metals toxicity test with provocation using the DMPS chelator agent]
After long days of waiting, the results of my DMPS provocation test have finally arrived ! For more information on the test procedure, you can check my previous article on my provocation test at the IBC (in the Netherlands).
My first reaction was : “Wow, there are 8 values in the red, I am intoxicated !”. I then asked several Facebook groups if they could help me read these numbers… nobody seemed to know better than me. We see values in the red, we worry, we are a bit confused… finally, nobody really knew how to read these figures !
Having no more information than that, I called the IBC. I was then put in communication with Dr. Raymond Pahlplatz. The latter told me that my results don’t show any abnormal value and that I don’t need chelation !
In fact, there are no standard values for provocation tests. The values of the “Baseline URINE Norm” column correspond to the levels present in the urine in the absence of a chelator. So, when using a chelator, you can logically face higher values, that are possibly in the red. In my case, this proves a certain contamination with heavy metals, but it doesn’t show any high intoxication.
It’s is not about whether we have heavy metals or not, but more about “how much” !
The fact that there are no standardized values for the provocation tests is a voluntary approach. We all react differently to heavy metals. Some will tolerate large amounts while others will feel very sick with small amounts. This is why it’s impossible to standardize these values.
Ok… but then, how do we know ?
That’s where it becomes pretty delicate. Since there are no standard values, you need a experimented eye. This is why you must carefully choose the doctor who has you take the test : it’s him that will decide if you are intoxicated, based on his experience. This analysis can also be based on your symptoms and additional tests.
I asked if I could have, in order to compare, the results of some intoxicated person, but it has been refused (even if anonymizing the results). It’s a shame. If you ever have such results, tell me if you would agree on me posting them here !
I’ve read on Facebook :
At the first test I was 60 in mercury and 107 in lead.
(I am respectively at 16 and 63, which is indeed much lower)
I contacted the lab to tell them they had forgotten Zinc. In fact, zinc is contained in the Zn-DTPA chelator (as the name suggests), which makes this value irrelevant.
I don’t have sufficient knowledge to compare values between provocation and Oligoscan. The IBC didn’t take the time to do it either (probably not much to say about it in my case).
From what I understood : Oligoscan focus on the intracellular testing, while the chelation targets the extracellular levels. So, if a value is high on the Oligoscan but low with the provocation test, it means that the body has trouble detoxifying it. Which doesn’t seem to be my case.
It would be rather the opposite for me. If we look at certain values such as Thallium or Manganese : they are high for the provocation test, but low for the Oligoscan.
The DMPS and ZnDTPA chelators don’t cross the blood brain barrier, and therefore don’t access the brain. My main symptom being the brain fog, it’s a pity. But hey, I knew it before undergoing the test.
From this point of view, it may be interesting to do a hair analysis as a complementary exam. Indeed, the elements found in the hair had to cross this barrier that separates the body of the brain. However, the hair reflects what the body is able to evacuate and not what is stored in the organs.
Dr. Pahlplatz spontaneously gave me no advice – which is understandable if he considers my profile to be healthy. So I had to insist on having some. For my brain fog, he advised me high dose ozone therapy.
Since it’s very expensive, I then asked what were the natural alternatives. He then replied : Chlorella… Nothing about the digestive system, nothing about saunas, nothing about food supplements… he wasn’t very talkative and I’m a bit disappointed.
I told him that I had read that Chlorella could contain toxic substances from the environment where it has grown. He replied that it was true, and then advised me two brands ( Phycosens and Sun-chlorella ). Well… Why not saying it in the first place ? It’s damn important !
In short, the IBC focuses on chemical chelation and to me it doesn’t seem like good advices for the rest. I understand that there is a lot to be done in this area (chemical chelation), especially when you are a leader, and I don’t blame them.
It’s both good news and bad news. I thought I had a track, but apparently it isn’t that obvious anymore. * Sigh *
On the other hand, I still have heavy metals in my body ! And if the quantities are low, it means that I can maybe try to get them out naturally, by stimulating my detoxification process or with a gentle chelating agent.
Many people claim that the provocation test isn’t the most reliable and that it’s better to do a hair test analysis for metals and minerals (I think that there is then a quite technical work of interpretation to do). So I decided to do this test, to see what it says, and to be able to compare it with the provocation test within a sufficiently close amount of time. To be continued…
If you can read anything in my results, don’t hesitate to leave me a message in the comments !