I do not usually pipe in on these sort of topics, but I want to this time.
Combining a single or combination of substances that have been extracted or
aquisitioned from nature, or a natural origin in powder form and putting it into
a manufactured gel capsule can hardly be called "Natural". I have never seen or
heard of a gel cap growing indigenously any where in the world "Naturally".
Sticking a sharp, hollow metal pipe into one's arm is anything but "Natural",
and eating, or living ourselves into unhealth, or disease by choice can hardly
be synonamous with "Natural".

Some may say it is "Natural to strive in any way, shape, or form to improve
ourselves in every aspect of our lives. Fortunately along the way we make
mistakes which we hopefully learn from and make corrections while moving
forward. We are practioners of medicine, and medicine comes in many forms. The
way most people live is extreme, and may require extreme therapies to resolve
challenges that arise concerning health and wellness. Picking an apple off of
the tree (in the season therof), and biting into it with the teeth that God gave
us is "Natural", but drying it and pulverizing it into powder form to be put
into a capsule, or sold in bulk form is not "Natural".

I think Naturopathic medicine revolves around the individual, and chelation as
well as all other therapies should be approached with this core principle in
mind. Some may need, and be able to handle chelation therapy, whereas others
may not be able to handle any type of chelation other than what the body does
naturally as they return to health through the many therapies we as Naturopaths
have available to us. I could write much more concerning this topic, but alas, I
have taken enough virtual space for one email. The point I am trying to make
is "I love you man!!!" As doctor Deng would say "Pizza....out!"

JT


-----Original Message-----
From: NDPhilosophy@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Carol Anne spooner
Sent: Tue 4/17/2007 7:13 PM
To: NDPhilosophy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NDPhilosophy] Is chelation therapy philosophically in line?

I think utilizing chelation therapy gives us the opportunity to remove
significant obstacles to health that most people in this age have as a result of
pollution, etc. Utilizing chelation biochemistry we can disengage progression of
certain pathologies- therefore eliminate disease occurance.

I realize Dr Crinnion has taught us @ SCNM that oral EDTA doea not work, but I
have seen studies where it did. Further, I have seen studies that showed
Autistic kids successfully chelating by taking a bath with EDTA. It is very
gentle and when given with RNA drops it increases the chelating potency (due to
this RNA "unlocking" the autistic patient's cells - apparently their bodies
don't respond to heavy metal challenges and hold onto metals more readily than
an average person's body.)... Think about that- a bath helping autism...it is
gentle and less risky.

I have often thought that checking cr. clearance before and periodically during
chelation is a smart idea. I haven't seen it done though....

As far as IV's go, chelation or otherwise, it seems to me I have been told
anytime we include magnessium we risk an event :. we need a code cart. It is
that way in the hosptials also.

The issue of chelation therapy not being "natural" indicates a preconceived
thought that only treatment that is natural = naturopathy. I think removing
obsatcles to cure without doing harm is our job as naturopaths. Further, I think
in some cases to not utilize a risky treatment measure (in which we have
expertise) can potentially risk someone's health as much as that same treatment
could have adverse effect in another person...again it boils down to individuals
being treated individually.

I think it most wise to generally start with the basics of nutrition and certain
supplements to increase optimal function... adding in anything extra after a
baseline is established. In that way, you truely know what helped-it is not a
guessing game. By fortifying neurotransmitter functions optimizing brain & body
function allows the patient to heal herself/himself. From there we have any
number of protocols to allow optimum anything.... While I find it hard to
imagine a patient can dump the same volume of metals possible as with chelation
treatment, I suspect the body would increase dumping from its previous status
quo simply because I believe the intelegence of the body, being fortified by the
bountiful fuel we provide provides impetus for the patient's internal mileu to
cleanse... I believe in the power of nature.

I have chelated my body. It was one of the hardest things I did to heal- also
among the most effective.

Well I just rambled on a little longer than I intended...
I enjoy reading what you all write... keep it up

peace
Carol










MaryK Martin Geyer <naturecure@...> wrote:
I see that my original question was more poorly articulated that I had realized.
Let me expound. My question is not whether or not it is in our arsenal (as I
will point out is mesotherapy and many other 'debateable' philosophical topics),
or where one might place it in the therapeutic order/hierarchy (although,
perhaps Drs. Zeff or Snider could augment this aspect of the discussion). My
question is regarding the fundamental foundations of our medicine, predating the
therapeutic order, predating our "six principles".

Is introducing a foreign substance, that is potentially harmful to the patient,
fundamentally Naturopathic? If we wanted to put it in the context of our six
principles, would it fulfil 'first do no harm'? While I realize that the most
serious adverse effects, such as kidney damage with EDTA, that were not uncommon
in the beginning of its use are now none to rare with safer practices and doses.
I've also seen it be very rough on patients, and have witnessed it do more harm
than good. I know that AZ requires a 'crash cart' in our practice if doing
chelation, because of a potential.

I don't believe that IV nutrients are comparable with IV chelation. With IV
nutrients, we are adding exactly that, nutrients to build, feed, aid our body.
Obviously we have to respect and maintain healthy osmolarity,drip rates, and
always practice safely (this is why we trained in accredited naturopathic
medical schools).

I can't help but wonder what Lindlahr, Lust, Hahnemann, and the many others
would say. This is why I turn to all of your brilliant minds. I look forward
to some of you adding dimensions I have not realized.

Naive, idealistic, and in constant aw of this amazing medicine called
Naturopathy~ MaryK



On 4/15/07, Jennifer Williamson <dj.williamson@...> wrote:
Sorry to answer a question with a question, but I'm new to the clinic and
actually using the therapeutic order. Isn't the first step "Remove obstacles to
health"? Wouldn't chelation therapy fall into this category?

If we avoid chelation therapy because of its potential for harm, despite its
benefits in patients with heavy metal toxicities, I think that we would actually
be doing a disservice to the patient and causing them more harm by not using
something in our arsenal. Some botanical medicines are toxic and can cause
harm, yet if we use them responsibly and when appropriate they are quite
beneficial.

Also, if we avoid the first step of the therapeutic order, wouldn't any
treatment be considered palliation? Isn't the first step what differentiates us
from the allopaths?

Jennifer Williamson


----- Original Message ----
From: Greg Nigh <gnigh2@... >
To: NDPhilosophy@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 8:50:07 PM
Subject: Re: [NDPhilosophy] Is chelation therapy philosophically in line?

Well, I'll weigh in with a few thoughts.

My first thought is that I'm not sure I understand the question. It seems to me
that it assumes chelation causes harm. If that's an accurate reading of the
question, then I think it's simply a trick question.

Chelation therapy does not, in and of itself, cause harm. It is a very useful
therapy (yes, I do chelation therapy on occasion) that has the *potential* to
cause harm. That certainly does not make it unique within the naturopathic set
of tools. Further, I would say that it does something that can't be done with
any other therapy, at least none that I know of. If someone has a very
significant amount of mercury (or lead, or cadmium, or arsenic, or etc., or more
commonly a combination of these) in their body, I don't know of any other
therapy that will pull it out. In fact, any therapy that *does* pull it out is,
by definition, chelation therapy.

In this light, I believe it follows the principle of using "the least force
necessary" to accomplish the goal.

I suspect that the intention behind the question was to explore where people
feel it fits within the therapeutic hierarchy. It certainly has a greater
potential for harm than, say, homeopathy, and I would also say that it's more
"invasive" than many other therapies we do (invasive is in quotes because not
all chelation is via IV, but is also done orally).

Given it's greater potential for harm, I think that it falls further down the
therapeutic order than many other kinds of therapy. I also think there is a
greater onus of responsibility on the practitioner to be competent in its use so
that harm isn't done. This is no different than, say, physical manipulation,
which can do very significant and lasting harm if done incompetently.

That's my $.02

Regards,

Greg

MaryK wrote:
I would love to stir up some deep reflection and thoughts on a topic
that I've been adamently questioning for a long time now. Is chelation
therapy philosophically in line with our medicine? Does it fall
under 'first do no harm'?

This was the last conversation I had with Dr. Bill Mitchell, who I
deeply respect. I think there are many docs on here, and brilliant
questioning students, that might be able to share things that I have
not considered previously.

Peace and Light
MaryK













---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos.









--
To be impeccable means to put your life on the line to back up your decisions,
and then do quite a lot more than your best to realize those decisions.
--Don Juan Matus, The Art of Dreaming




---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.