Well the theory is that a low level chelation challenge should not
result in a significant rise in urine excretion of the metal in
question. That's probably why it is reported against the basal
reference interval.
Nick Miller
London
On 9 September 2010 11:07, <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Isnt the problem one of interpretation? If you use a provocative test,
> it seems odd to use the standard non-challenged reference range.
>
> Gareth
>
>
> Gareth Llewelyn ap Huw Jones
> Principal Clinical Scientist
> Clinical Biochemistry UCLH
> 3rd Floor, 60 Whitfield Street
> London W1T 4EU
>
> (e) [log in to unmask]
> (t) 0845 155 5000 x2972
> (f) 020 7380 9586
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clinical biochemistry discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nick Miller
> Sent: 09 September 2010 10:27
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: alternative paractitioners anda heavy metal poisoning
>
> I don't agree with Stephen Barrett that challenge tests followed by
> urine analysis are an invalid way of testing for excess metal
> sequestration. It is biologically a perfectly plausible approach and may
> be useful in cases where, for one reason or another, blood levels fail
> to elucidate the problem. I have personally more than 30 years
> experience of analysing the results from such tests, starting with EDTA
> provocation for lead (which was recomended and used by Trevor Delves, no
> less) - so don't be put off so easily.
>
> Analysis of metals has improved considerably over the years due to the
> availability of ICPMS and the sterling work of the TEQAS scheme. There
> are however still some pretty odd results around - and results for
> elements in urine can be difficult to interpret at the best of times
> since for many metals it is not the normal route of excretion.
>
> Urine is, however, the specimen of choice for assessing nickel exposure
> (see "Handbook of the toxicology of metals" ed.Nordberg GF et al, 3rd
> edition Academic Press 2008, chapter 35 page 743 - 758).
>
> I know it is much easier to click on the web and ingest the rantings of
> an American neo-conservative, but I recomend the traditional route of
> looking at a "proper" academic text and thinking about the question.
>
> Nick Miller
> London
>
> On 9 September 2010 09:35, COLLINS MICHAEL (RM1) Norfolk and Norwich
> University Hospital <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Tests/urine_toxic.ht
>> ml
>>
>>
>> Mike Collins
>> BMS3
>> Biochemistry Automation
>> Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital
>> England
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.nnuh.nhs.uk/
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Clinical biochemistry discussion list
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ryan, Michael
>> Sent: 08 September 2010 17:05
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: alternative paractitioners anda heavy metal poisoning
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I have patient with bizaare symptoms who has been tested by an
> alternative practitioner who sent samples to a laboratory in Germany.
> The patient is now convinced she has lead, palladium, and nickel
> poisoning. She was initially treated with 'chelating agents' at synergy
> healthcare, and the urinary mineral analysis was carried out by
> Microtrace Minerals Gmbh.
>>
>> The levels of these metals appear to be within acceptable limits for
> the UK. The results are reported as 21.93ug/g creatinine (lead),
> 6.85ug/g creatinine (Nickel) and 2.05 ug/g creatinine (palladium) in a
> spot urine sample (0.3g creatinine per litre).
>>
>> All advice gratefully received.
>>
>> Michael Ryan
>>
>>
>> **********************************************************************
>> This email may contain proprietary and/or confidential information and
> is intended for the use of addressee(s) only. If you have received this
> e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your e-mail
> system. If you are not the intended recipient(s) alteration, disclosure,
> distribution, copying or printing of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.
> Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do
> not necessarily represent those of Northern Health and Social Care
> Trust.
>>
>> Unless legally exempt, the content of this e-mail and any attachments
> or replies may be subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of
> Information Act 2000.
>>
>> Whilst Northern Health and Social Care Trust has taken every
>> reasonable precaution to protect against infection by computer
>> viruses, we cannot accept liability for any damage which you sustain
>> as a result of computer viruses. You should therefore carry out your
>> own virus checks prior to opening any attachment contained within this
>
>> e-mail. (NHSCT_DM_01)
>> **********************************************************************
>>
>> ------ACB discussion List Information-------- This is an open
>> discussion list for the academic and clinical community working in
> clinical biochemistry.
>> Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the
> internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are
> responsible for all message content.
>> ACB Web Site
>> http://www.acb.org.uk
>> Green Laboratories Work
>> http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
>> List Archives
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
>> List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
>>
>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
>> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed.
>> If you have received this email in error please notify the originator
>> of the message. This footer also confirms that this email message has
> been scanned for the presence of computer viruses but this should not be
> relied upon as a guarantee that the contents are virus free.
>>
>> Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
>> sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority, states
>> them to be the views of the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals
>> NHS Foundation Trust. The information contained in this e-mail may be
>> subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act
>> 2000. Unless the information is legally exempt from disclosure, the
>> confidentiality of this e-mail and your reply cannot be guaranteed
>>
>>
>> ------ACB discussion List Information-------- This is an open
>> discussion list for the academic and clinical community working in
> clinical biochemistry.
>> Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the
> internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are
> responsible for all message content.
>> ACB Web Site
>> http://www.acb.org.uk
>> Green Laboratories Work
>> http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
>> List Archives
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
>> List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
>>
>
> ------ACB discussion List Information-------- This is an open discussion
> list for the academic and clinical community working in clinical
> biochemistry.
> Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the
> internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are
> responsible for all message content.
> ACB Web Site
> http://www.acb.org.uk
> Green Laboratories Work
> http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
> List Archives
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
> List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This email is confidential and is intended solely for the person or
> Entity to whom it is addressed. If this is not you, please forward the
> Message to [log in to unmask] We have scanned this email
> before sending it, but cannot guarantee that malicious software is
> absent and we shall carry no liability in this regard.
>
> We advise that information intended to be kept confidential should not
> Be sent by email. We also advise that health concerns should be
> Discussed with a medical professional in person or by telephone.
> NHS Direct can also provide advice. We shall not be liable for any
> failure to follow this advice. University College London Hospitals NHS
> Foundation Trust (UCLH).
>
>
------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
Green Laboratories Work
http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
|