OC
HOME
How We Heal
Douglas W. Morrison
Newsletter
Basic Diet
Contact
Body Electronics Recommended Reading
Supplements
Enzymes
Minerals Grainfields Green Papaya
Metabolic Typing Oral Chelation John Whitman Ray (1934-2001)
EFAs
Acidophilus Vitamin B12 Vitamin A Raw Protein
Mercury Facilitation
Twelve Points on Body Electronics
yellow
Click here for information on ordering a copy of How We Heal
autographed by author Douglas W. Morrison.
Click here to receive price and ordering information by e-mail on all other supplements.
Please be sure to include your NAME & ADDRESS in your e-mail.
Click here to go directly to the Grainfields USA website,
to obtain prices and place orders directly for shipment to you within the USA.
Click here to go directly to the Grainfields Australia website,
to obtain prices and place orders directly for shipment from Australia to you.

Oral Chelation & Heavy Metal Detoxification

My Own Experiences with Oral Chelation & Mercury Toxicity

In mid 2005, my good friend the late Roy Kupsinel M.D. from Florida had recommended the Coenzyme Minerals to the parents of several autistic patients. The parents, being aware of the link between various heavy metals and autism, expressed justifiable concerns to Roy due to the presence in the Coenzyme Minerals (as duly noted on their label) of various potentially toxic elements such as aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, etc.

What the late Dr. John Ray always said was that these elements, while indeed present in the Coenzyme Minerals, were in a form that was harmless to the human body and would not accumulate over time. John taught, quite to the contrary, that the Coenzyme Minerals would actually help to detox the body of toxic elements previously accumulated. Unfortunately, there were no formal research studies to verify this, simply the excellent results obtained by so many of us over the years.

So Roy, knowing that I had used the Coenzyme Minerals myself in large quantities for twenty years, asked if I would be willing to have a hair analysis done to test my own levels of toxic elements. I happily agreed. While I was quite certain myself that the Coenzyme Minerals were safe and effective, I felt this would be a nice way of gathering some evidence that might be useful to others.

The Coenzyme Minerals come in two forms: liquid and capsules. The conversion is that 1 capsule contains the same amount of minerals as 1.38 ounces of the liquid. I have consumed either the liquid or the capsules (or both) daily since June 26, 1985. During that period of time, the minimum daily amount that I have consumed was either 5 capsules or 4 ounces. My first six months on Coenzyme Minerals, I consumed anywhere from 20 to 35 ounces daily. For more than five years, I consumed 10 capsules daily. In the four years immediately prior to the hair test, I'd been consuming 4 ounces daily. So while it is not possible to tell at this point exactly how much I've consumed over more than twenty years, it would certainly be safe to say that I have consumed a considerable amount of Coenzyme Minerals in the past twenty years, and quite literally have never gone a single day without taking liquid or capsules or both during this time.

In a nice convergence of events, at the same time a student of mine (who had suffered in the past with mercury toxicity herself) expressed similar concerns about the Coenzyme Minerals and had paid to have a lab analysis done on the product. The analysis of the Coenzyme liquid minerals was done by QC Laboratories in Southampton PA. This is what it showed:


Table1

ND means "not detected"

RLs means laboratory reporting limits

So this would seem to indicate two things with regard to the Coenzyme Minerals:

        • Barium, Lead, Thallium, and Mercury are extremely minimal if present at all.

        • Aluminum, Arsenic, and Cadmium are definitely present.

My first hair analysis was done from hair collected on July 22, 2005 and was performed by Doctor's Data, Inc. of St. Charles IL.

With respect to the three toxic elements present in the Coenzyme Minerals, my results were:

        • Aluminum 1.8 ppm with reference being < 7.0 ppm

        • Arsenic 0.050 ppm with reference being < 0.080 ppm

        • Cadmium 0.089 ppm with reference being < 0.15 ppm

(Note: the lab reports lists results as microgram per gram, which is equivalent to ppm or parts per million since there are a million micrograms per gram)

These levels of Aluminum, Arsenic, and Cadmium are all considered quite normal or typical levels. In other words, this result would strongly confirm my belief that the Coenzyme Minerals are quite safe and that their consumption will not lead to the accumulation of toxic elements in the body.

(For my complete test results, see further below.)

In fact, of the 16 toxic elements tested, I had relatively low levels for 15 of them: Aluminum, Antimony, Arsenic, Beryllium, Bismuth, Cadmium, Lead, Platinum, Thallium, Thorium, Uranium, Nickel, Silver, Tin, and Titanium. Again, further confirmation of my belief that the Coenzyme Minerals are safe and effective.

But.....there was one surprise, at least for me: Mercury. (Note well: the Coenzyme Minerals themselves have undetectable levels of mercury.) My mercury level was 4.8 ppm, which is extremely high, well into the danger zone.

There is a graphic with the hair analysis which shows a horizontal bar graph against a field divided into thirds. The left third is colored green for safe. The middle third is colored yellow for caution. The right third is colored red for danger. For me, the other 15 toxic elements were all in the green, and not even close to being in the yellow. But the mercury was far into the red. There are 16 bars for the 16 elements tested. There is also a 17th bar for Total Toxic Representation. Despite the other 15 all being in the green, I had such a high mercury level that this 17th bar was far into the red.

So, what was the source of all that mercury? It couldn't be the Coenzyme Minerals, as they have undetectable levels of the mercury. And I had my eight (8) silver amalgam fillings removed way back in 1986. The only obvious potential culprit was tuna.

Note added April 2012: Several years after writing this summary, I came across information on mercury being present in compact fluorescent bulbs. At that time, I still used full spectrum compact fluorescent bulbs in my house (since replaced with LEDs). On several occasions prior to the original hair test, I had broken one of these bulbs and cleaned up the debris without being aware of the mercury exposure involved. It would seem quite possible that this may have also been a significant source of my mercury toxicity.

In my efforts to avoid farmed fish, since late 2002 I had been consuming tuna on a regular basis. I live near Harrisburg PA, and have found that most locally available varieties of fish are farmed rather than wild. Tuna is readily available and not farmed. Plus I like tuna. So I ate tuna steaks. Lots of tuna steaks. Probably averaged three or more per week for the approximately 32 months previous.

Okay, so in 20/20 hindsight, obviously not a real bright move on my part! And no doubt some of you might have had the foresight not to have eaten so much tuna. I've certainly learned my lesson on this particular point! And by the way, if you like seafood and want to know the typical mercury levels in various types, please go to www.gotmercury.org for further details.

So, what to do? No more tuna, and no more fish high up the food chain, where mercury will be concentrated. (Note: There is no way to prove that the tuna was the source of the mercury. But whether the mercury came from tuna or elsewhere, discontinuing tuna was still imperative.) Luckily for me, there is a local farmer who provides raw organic grass fed dairy products, organic grass fed beef, plus excellent organic eggs.

Upon Roy's advice, I began taking a product called Oral Chelation. I began with one capsule per day for the first month, then went to three capsules per day, as per Roy's instructions. This is a product designed to pull various heavy metals out of the body. (I continued throughout to consume 4 ounces daily of the Coenzyme Minerals, in case you are wondering.) Roy had suggested that we wait six months and then do another hair test to see how I was progressing.

So, having started on the Oral Chelation in mid August 2005, I waited until February 14, 2006 to collect the next hair sample for Doctors Data to analyze. And the news was very good. Of the 15 toxic elements (which had all been low to begin), most of them reduced, generally quite substantially. (My lead, for example, dropped from 0.97 to 0.14 ppm in just six months. My cadmium dropped from 0.089 to 0.023 ppm in the same time.) Three had increased: Arsenic from 0.050 to 0.056 ppm, Nickel from 0.08 to 0.10 ppm, and Tin from 0.12 to 0.19 ppm. But as Roy explained to me, with hair analysis you may get a rise in some elements, because as the body releases them, they may show up in the hair. So even these three rises were considered good signs. And in both tests, the levels of these three elements were in the mid or lower end of the green. (As the body releases toxic elements, and as new hair grows, sometimes more of these elements may end up in the hair than would otherwise happen. The hair sample is generally taken from the back of the head or nape of the neck. Hair grows about one half inch per month, so a one inch sample will reflect what has been going on in the body for the past two months.)

But it was not these 15 other elements that were in the green to begin with that concerned me. It was, of course, the mercury. Well, this had fallen tremendously, from 4.8 ppm to only 1.8 ppm. Meaning that my body had eliminated a huge amount of mercury. This moved my mercury out of the red and into the lower half of the yellow. And it moved my Total Toxic Representation almost into the green, just barely in the yellow. (Note: I have continued on the Oral Chelation ever since. I had another hair test done about six months later, by which point both my mercury and my Total Toxic Representation were down into the green.)

I cannot say with certainty just how much of the reduction in mercury is attributable to discontinuing tuna and how much comes from the Oral Chelation. But if I had to guess, I'd say the vast majority comes from the Oral Chelation. There have been studies done where they've measured the urinary excretion of various toxic elements one morning, then given the person some Oral Chelation that evening, and then remeasured the urinary excretion the following morning. The result? Massive increases in urinary excretion, clearly demonstrating that Oral Chelation greatly assists the body to eliminate these toxic elements.

For those interested in the full results of the two tests for Toxic Elements, here they are:

Table2

Anyways, here are some of my conclusions based upon these experiences:

        • As for the Coenzyme Minerals: It would appear that despite the presence of certain toxic elements in them (Aluminum, Arsenic, Cadmium), that this does not cause a buildup of these in the body, exactly as Dr. John Ray always maintained. Given my relatively low levels of all toxic elements other than mercury (which is not detectable in the Coenzyme Minerals in any case), as well as my extensive daily consumption of them for over twenty years, this seems a pretty reasonable conclusion. And I will certainly continue to consume them myself

        • As for tuna: As there are no other major dietary or environmental sources of mercury apparent, it would appear that consuming large amounts of tuna as I had done is a very poor idea. Is there a safe amount? I do not know, but at this point I have no plans to begin eating tuna or other fish high in mercury. And if I were to do so again, it would certainly be on an extremely infrequent basis.

        • The Oral Chelation product seems to do an outstanding job of removing heavy metals, including but not limited to mercury. My lead, for example, dropped from 0.97 to 0.14 ppm in six months. My cadmium dropped from 0.089 to 0.023 ppm in six months. And these were both low levels to begin.

There are a number of things we do not know, such as:

What would a hair analysis have shown in 2002 just before I began eating so much tuna?
How much tuna could I have eaten without it increasing my mercury levels?
Did the Coenzyme Minerals have any effect on mercury levels, i.e. if I'd eaten the same amount of tuna during those 32 months but not taken the minerals, would I have ended up with the same mercury levels or would they have been higher?
Did the Coenzyme Minerals help remove the mercury after the tuna was discontinued, i.e would the drop in mercury levels between the hair tests have been the same with or without the minerals?