POTS! (but Not Pans. )

[Interactome]

The fact I keep getting anaemic really strongly indicates to me that it's bacterial, and my symptoms mirror something like borrelia (IMO)...

How would you test for this? Are IgG and IgM antibodies reliable?

 

[Emstar1892]

How would you test for this? Are IgG and IgM antibodies reliable?

Borellia is specific so quite reliable, though it's usually a co-infection from a lyme tick, so if positive, definitely look into lyme. In the UK you can test for both but the lyme is not reliable. I haven't tested Borellia yet. The lyme thing is awkward for me, not just because the tests are unreliable but also because I was bitten in Costa Rica in the talamanca mountains, and not much is known about the tick infections and co-infections there. Also I was bitten 2 years ago, so the delay can also yield negative results.

 

[Interactome]

Borellia is specific so quite reliable, though it's usually a co-infection from a lyme tick, so if positive, definitely look into lyme. In the UK you can test for both but the lyme is not reliable. I haven't tested Borellia yet. The lyme thing is awkward for me, not just because the tests are unreliable but also because I was bitten in Costa Rica in the talamanca mountains, and not much is known about the tick infections and co-infections there. Also I was bitten 2 years ago, so the delay can also yield negative results.

I've tested that last year and it came back negative. It's just that a holistic doc mentioned infections with "nano-organisms". I wonder if there are any tests that would show infection with such. An infection must leave a trace, either a toxin, immune activity, or something. But we're all infected all the time, so how do we know if we're infected infected or just too weakened somehow to withstand our usual level of infection? Just brainstorming.

 

[Emstar1892]

I've tested that last year and it came back negative. It's just that a holistic doc mentioned infections with "nano-organisms". I wonder if there are any tests that would show infection with such. An infection must leave a trace, either a toxin, immune activity, or something. But we're all infected all the time, so how do we know if we're infected infected or just too weakened somehow to withstand our usual level of infection? Just brainstorming.

Yes they have to leave a trace but our ability to identify 'traces' is severely deficient. For a start they have to correlate people's antibodies to identify a common cause, at which point they generalise and say 'this much be the reaction to x, y or z infection,' which means antibodies to rarer/slightly different strains will be missed or ignored. So for me I'll test until I'm blue in the face but if nothing comes up I'm STILL convinced I'm infected!!!!

Regarding your second point, I think the difference is just that if you've exhausted all metabolic avenues and are still declining, its probably infection infection. In my opinion.

 

[Interactome]

Yes they have to leave a trace but our ability to identify 'traces' is severely deficient. For a start they have to correlate people's antibodies to identify a common cause, at which point they generalise and say 'this much be the reaction to x, y or z infection,' which means antibodies to rarer/slightly different strains will be missed or ignored. So for me I'll test until I'm blue in the face but if nothing comes up I'm STILL convinced I'm infected!!!!

Regarding your second point, I think the difference is just that if you've exhausted all metabolic avenues and are still declining, its probably infection infection. In my opinion.

I guess you only find what you're looking for. It would be nice if they could look for everything. Just look at the blood directly and see what's in it instead of all this beating around the bush for years, draining people of their money and health. It feels like another conspiracy for me. It's like society always takes the path of slowest progress and maximum profit.

 

[Emstar1892]

I guess you only find what you're looking for. It would be nice if they could look for everything. Just look at the blood directly and see what's in it instead of all this beating around the bush for years, draining people of their money and health. It feels like another conspiracy for me. It's like society always takes the path of slowest progress and maximum profit.

Haha I'm so with you!!!!

Same with treatment of course. In fact treatment is worse, it's not even slow progress and maximum profit...it's further damage, and maximum profit.

Like the contraceptive pill that "cures" PCOS
Like insulin that "cures" diabetes
Like statins that "cure" high cholesterol
Like antidepressants that "cure" depression

 

[Interactome]

Same with treatment of course. In fact treatment is worse, it's not even slow progress and maximum profit...it's further damage, and maximum profit.

Like the contraceptive pill that "cures" PCOS
Like insulin that "cures" diabetes
Like statins that "cure" high cholesterol
Like antidepressants that "cure" depression

I've slowly come to understand this too over the past year. Every invasive test I've done made things worse. If the body's healing abilities are low, and no one looks for that, then every test or drug has the potential of making things worse.

Correct me if I see it the wrong way, but for me right now, it's truly mind-boggling how people can talk about economic prosperity, given that most people work for businesses that create products that drain nature and drain health. Then new businesses spring forth that provide services to said health draining businesses. Money makes everything move much much slower. Once people have invested in a product, they will not let it go until it has returned their investment 1 billion fold, no matter how many lives it will ruin.

If society were truly after health and truth, there wouldn't be that many sick people in the world. E.g., how come that people have been treated for cancer in essentially the same way for the past 50 years or more? Could it be because someone is making a profit on those treatments?

 

[Emstar1892]

Once people have invested in a product, they will not let it go until it has returned their investment 1 billion fold, no matter how many lives it will ruin.

If society were truly after health and truth, there wouldn't be that many sick people in the world. E.g., how come that people have been treated for cancer in essentially the same way for the past 50 years or more? Could it be because someone is making a profit on those treatments?

To your first point, yeah, this kinda says it all really: Medscape: Medscape Access definitely no cures in this list.

To your second point, I understand your thinking. I'm not in the whole "there's a cure for cancer that's 100% natural and is being hidden from us" camp, mainly because I think 'cancer' is a term that applies very broadly to very different things, and those to which it applies are all incredibly complex. But definitely, things like chemo and radiotherapy are unnecessarily pushed on people despite poor success rates. Aside from needing something that can be patented and make a profit, I also think that those companies need to market something that doesn't seem like a gamble - any diet, regime or 'alternative' or 'natural' therapy makes them seem liable (since, at least today, improving biochemical markers are not satisfactory to fulfill the pharma/public desire for proof of immediate cancer cell death). As in, it literally comes down to "Chemo kills! Immediately! Look! Here are slides of cells actually dying right away! That's proof! Furthermore, chemo doesn't ever NOT kill cells! So it's reliable!"

 

[Interactome]

To your first point, yeah, this kinda says it all really: Medscape: Medscape Access definitely no cures in this list.

To your second point, I understand your thinking. I'm not in the whole "there's a cure for cancer that's 100% natural and is being hidden from us" camp, mainly because I think 'cancer' is a term that applies very broadly to very different things, and those to which it applies are all incredibly complex. But definitely, things like chemo and radiotherapy are unnecessarily pushed on people despite poor success rates. Aside from needing something that can be patented and make a profit, I also think that those companies need to market something that doesn't seem like a gamble - any diet, regime or 'alternative' or 'natural' therapy makes them seem liable (since, at least today, improving biochemical markers are not satisfactory to fulfill the pharma/public desire for proof of immediate cancer cell death). As in, it literally comes down to "Chemo kills! Immediately! Look! Here are slides of cells actually dying right away! That's proof! Furthermore, chemo doesn't ever NOT kill cells! So it's reliable!"

That's a lot of profit! Now I see why it's too expensive to spend too much time and effort on each individual patient to figure out what exactly is the root cause of their problem. The company selling the drugs and the doctors pushing them wouldn't make a profit otherwise. That shows that it's not the patients interest that comes first but rather their income. I think that doctors income should somehow hinge upon the patients satisfaction instead of the number of prescriptions they issue.

Don't know much about cancer yet. I'm trying understand this Warburg effect that's being talked about.

Speaking of biochemical markers, have you had an Organic Acid Test done?

 

[moss]

That was the one ingredient that really concerned me knowing Ray's work. The thing that stumped me is the isolation of diosgenin versus the whole root. Is it a case of when God created the poison, he packaged the antidote with it?

Dioscorea villosa (Wild yam) contains a steroidal saponin called dioscin and the aglycone of dioscin is diosgenin. Diosgenin is a precursor for the synthesis of progesterone manufactured in a sequence of steps in a laboratory and yet Wild yam when taken orally or applied to the skin does not perform those same steps in the body.

So what are your thoughts, Blossom or anyone? Do you guys think the whole wild yam root is toxic like an extract of diosgenin? Does anyone happen to have any links to studies done on the whole root? I tried finding some before I ordered the formula, but came up short. I don't want to keep taking the endocrine formula if wild yam root is truly toxic.

Jennifer, I have no idea of the formula you are using which contains Wild yam, nor the strength or if it is a Fluid extract, powder or pre-formulated tablets......
As for toxicity, I don't consider Wild yam to be a dose critical herb and yet, like with any herbs/supplements, toxicity may depend on dosage range, therapeutic objectives, and the individual. I believe a good guide in general with regards to herbs is to not generally take anything for longer than 6 weeks and then to give the body a break.

Yeah, I honestly don't know if the root is the same as the extract! Forum member @moss seems to be very knowledgeable about herbs so perhaps she would know?

Blossom, not sure if I have interpreted and answered your question? The medicinal part of Wild yam is the root (rhizomes). An extract is also known as a Fluid extract which is the most concentrated of all herbal preparations. Usually alcohol-based in which one part menstrum (solvent) is used to 1 part crude herb, therefore a 1:1 preparation. Fluid extracts may also apply to a 1:2, 1:3, or a 1:5. The extract would contain the root (active ingredients).
Extracts of a herb may come in the form of powder/capsules as well.

Jennifer a few articles.

Wild yam (Dioscorea villosa) | Plant Profiler

· Hormonal properties: Estrogenic and anti-inflammatory effects of diosgenin have been hypothesized as due to structural similarities to estrogen precursors. However, no natural progesterones, estrogens, or other reproductive hormones are found in Dioscorea. Diosgenin is not converted into hormones in the human body, and can only be transformed into progesterone through chemical manipulation.3 Synthetic progesterone has reportedly been added to some wild yam products.

Marker degradation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Marker degradation is a three-step synthetic route in steroid chemistry developed by American chemist Russell Earl Marker in 1938–40. It is used for the production of cortisone and mammalian sex hormones (progesterone, estradiol, etc.) from plant steroids, and established Mexico as a world center for steroid production in the years immediately after World War II.[1] The discovery of the Marker degradation allowed the production of substantial quantities of steroid hormones for the first time, and was fundamental in the development of the contraceptive pill and corticosteroid anti-inflammatory drugs. In 1999, the American Chemical Society and the Sociedad Química de México named the route as an International Historic Chemical Landmark.[1]


http://www.frostburg.edu/fsu/assets/File/ACES/Dioscorea villosa - FINAL.pdf

There is an article by RP in the Townsend Letters. pdf
For some reason, I cannot upload the pdf here - technology not being my strong point!
Concerns About Progesterone Cream and Yam Extracts RP (Page 100-101).

 

[Blossom]

Thanks @moss for the very helpful explanation.

 

[Giraffe]

There is an article by RP in the Townsend Letters. pdf
For some reason, I cannot upload the pdf here - technology not being my strong point!
Concerns About Progesterone Cream and Yam Extracts RP (Page 100-101).

Townsend Letter Collection

 

[moss]

Thanks, Giraffe.

 

[Giraffe]

my high b12

Emma, I wonder if the linked article might help you to get more tests. Check figures 2 and 3.

http://qjmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/106/6/505

Thanks, Giraffe.

Not at all! :)

 

[Emstar1892]

Emma, I wonder if the linked article might help you to get more tests. Check figures 2 and 3.

http://qjmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/106/6/505


Not at all! :)

Thanks man :) yeah i'm actually pretty clued up on that, sadly my GP isn't though. Another reason I literally can't be asked to see him anymore! Hopefully he's good at meaningless stuff like chesty coughs and baby development, but interpreting blood tests is just...no. He can book them, but he can't interpret them.

This is the same guy who said that testing free T3 would be silly because it's "make believe." I kid you not!

 

[tara]

This is the same guy who said that testing free T3 would be silly because it's "make believe." I kid you not!

Possibly Peat might kind of agree with him on this point - I think he's said they tend to measure free T3 and T4 as though they have to be free to count. But they can actually get into cells and be used in some bound forms too.
Total T3 test might be more meaningful, but may not be any easier to get.

 

[Emstar1892]

Possibly Peat might kind of agree with him on this point - I think he's said they tend to measure free T3 and T4 as though they have to be free to count. But they can actually get into cells and be used in some bound forms too.
Total T3 test might be more meaningful, but may not be any easier to get.

I would understand if he meant it from Peat's perspective, but the wider context was that free thyroid hormones are "hocus pocus" (again his words) that "googlers" keep coming to him and asking him about, when the TSH is a perfectly good indicator of health

 

[tara]

I would understand if he meant it from Peat's perspective, but the wider context was that free thyroid hormones are "hocus pocus" (again his words) that "googlers" keep coming to him and asking him about, when the TSH is a perfectly good indicator of health

 

[kiran]

Problem is until I get my cortisol levels up, I can't take thyroid, so I'm stuck.

Such a bummer man! I'm looking into methylene blue atm...thinking this is a good potential avenue?

Hmm, have you considered trying T3 anyway? Small frequent doses work best.

Methylene blue is pretty decent.

Consider keeping some OJ or even candy at hand if you wake up too early.

 

[kiran]

You'll hear that cortisol is needed to push T3 into the cells, but it shouldn't be necessary. Just nourish your adrenals with some fresh OJ, thats what I did.

Tiny doses of T3 should do the trick.