This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

Am brand new here --
Would appreciate any feedback re: chelation. CSSVI approach to MS is something I just read about a few days ago. But while reading, was
thinking that IV Chelation might be a safer route to go--it purports to clear out the calcium deposits that clog arteries and veins, as well as the trace mineral, such as the iron, that seems to cause problems acc to CSSVI research. So my thinking is, with chelation would not need the balooning operation, and quite possibly neither the stents; and if then eat properly, would keep things clear. I've noted that some people who have had stents need to get them again.
I have read that chelation does help MS, but could never find good explanation. This CCSVI seems to be the explanation that shows why chelation would help.

Will be seeing my doctor to discuss this on the 2nd of Dec. She knows nothing yet of the CCSVI research, I will give it to her, but she does do chelation.

Anyone done chelation?
Anyone see flaws with my reasoning?
Anyone see my reasoning as reasonable?

Many thanks for any comments, info, etc.

I wrote this somewhere else under IP6, it it chelate iron



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of the main health writers on IP6 is Bill Sardi, and he says that it has gotten the wrong reputation as an anti-nutrient. He wrote a book called The Iron Timebomb. But he touts the ability of phytic acid to chelate iron without affecting nutrient profile.

shortened link

I have ordered this stuff but I am waiting for it to arrive. I live in Canada and I order a lot of my stuff from iHERB..com. So I cannot attest to it just yet, but I am very much looking forward to trying it.

One in six Irish people carry a gene for hemochromatosis... my is of Irish/Scot and I have never had a Dr. asked me if I should be or wanted to be tested for iron overload. If you ever you Dr. 's website, look up Parkinson's and iron because that condition also has high iron in the brain. Dr. Mercola if he has any credence recommends IP6 to chelate iron, says it is effective. That is one of my questions about the iron depositions in the veins and brain, as to whether one can chelate out the iron. They use IP6 very heavily in the autism community, because some of those kids are iron toxic.

shortened link

Thanks Merlyn
yes, I am aware of IP 6 -- I do know that these natural chelators take MUCH more time than EDTA-
am going to discuss with Dr today re IP-6 being taken between EDTA drips---EDTA works almst immediately, so if just get 1 drip per week, could use IP -6 until next drip in order to keep chelation process going.

Also, could just use IP 6, as well as methionine, malic acid and a few other chelators, and see if that works.

I am just tired of being tired, etc, so would like to speed up the process.

Had thought of chelation quite a while ago, but since could find not much on chelation and MS, decided not to. Do take methionine. Could be part of reason (do many other things also) have kept things from regressing.
But do have ups and downs, mostly related I'm pretty sure to diet.
Keep us posted on the IP_6, and I'lll keep posting re Chelation (of one type or another).

I just called a local natural health chelation doctor (Dr. Cutler, lot of articles on the web). The initial appt is $300-500, then if IV's are used it's $125 a treatment.
They don't participate in insurance, I can submit the bills but who knows what I would get back.
I dunno.....

Aargh, chelation therapy is one of the currently hot quack therapies. It is risky, and its claims of effectiveness are unsupported by scientific evidence.

Check out these links to learn more:
http://www.ncahf.org/policy/chelation.html
shortened link
http://whatstheharm.net/chelationtherapy.html

But to more specifically answer your question, the venous blockages reported by Dr. Zamboni are due to structural problems including twisted and pinched veins, and even veins that are blocked by growths. This is very different from the artery blockages that chelation therapy claims to treat by dissolving deposits. So even if chelation therapy did what it says, it wouldn't apply to CCSVI.

/Scut

Scut,

I think the chelation intends not to dissolve blockages caused by iron, but instead dissolve the deposits in the brain, at least that's my understanding. So, theoretically, the immune system would stop attacking because the iron is no longer in the brain.

Anyway, if you look at the studies done with ECGC and Lipoic Acid, both of which are iron chelators (i think), you will see there are some general health benefits as well as iron chelation benefits. In fact, I believe someone on TIMS is participating in the ECGC study and claimed to not have a relapse in two years.

Here's another product that I frankly have never heard of:

http://www.aismax.com/blog/?tag=apo-lactoferrin

Sounds interesting though. EDTA chelation is so expensive and I am wondering if I could handle the removal of nutrient elements as I always seem to be short on a few.

As I understand the theory, chelation attempts to remove metals from your bloodstream by injecting a chelating solution that binds to these metals in your blood. In general, your brain is protected from your bloodstream by the blood-brain barrier, so it's unclear how well the chelating solution would be able to reach the brain to remove iron there. I have read that MS is characterized by a breech of the blood-brain barrier, so there's some plausibility, but it still seems like a stretch.



Do you have any links or references to scientific, peer-reviewed clinical studies that show these benefits? The articles I linked to above claim there are no such studies (e.g. studies that are both scientifically valid and show positive benefits), while they reference multiple studies demonstrating no benefits for chelation. As we all know, the lack of a relapse during a span of time in RRMS doesn't really prove anything: even without treatment, relapses don't hold to a fixed schedule.

Bottom line, using chelation for CCSVI seems like using a dubious, expensive, risky procedure as a speculative treatment for an unproven condition. I'm not against gambling in general, but the odds here are pretty extreme.

/Scut

I did the EDTA chelation therapy when first diagnosed. Before doing the therapy I had hair and blood analysis of heavy metals in my system and they were found to be off of the charts - especially arsenic and nickel.
I won't say the chelation therapy was easy - had to come up with time off of work (1/2 days), it was somewhat expensive, my emotions were raging for days after the treatments (deep depression, tears, anger, short fuse), and the follow up colonics were less than pleasant. But it seemed like a logical avenue for me - if I have excessive heavy metals in my system that can't be good.
I have no idea if the treatment has been a benefit to me but it is certainly part of my arsenal of attack on ms - chelation, copaxone, accupuncture, yoga, massage, counseling, diet management, etc.. but I have not had an exercibation since my first initial one 7 years ago and have had only one new brain lesion in that time.
Some people may call this all quackery but I have learned that I am the one that needs to watchout for and make the decisions of what is right for me. It is clear medical doctors don't have all of the answers - oh wait I am not sure they have any of the answers with ms

No one really knows what's going on with the BBB, that's why this CCSVI research is so exciting. In any case, there are many studies on pubmed that you can research if you want. Let me first clarify my statement, however. What I meant to say was that that egcg and lipoic acid are both iron chelators and they prove beneficial in some studies for MS, lipoc acid having been studied more so. Whether the Iron chelation is the cause or merely a bystander remains to be seen, and more studies are always welcome. However, regardless of their underlying mechanics, the studies do show benefits of lipoic acid on MS, and recent studies show egcg proves beneficial in eae.

And you're right, I wasn't trying to prove anything regarding my relapse free comment. I was merely repeating a vague memory about an anecdotal story about someone on egcg. Take it with a grain of salt.

my understanding is that veins from brain were malformed OR blocked.
I will re-read, looking for this specific info. But if blocked, rather than malformed, chelation might work.
One of the questions (of many) that I have about Samboni's procedure relates to this. If in someone who does have malformed veins, wouldn't that mean lifetime with stents? And they are relatively new--ie, no one has lived lifetime yet with them. I know of two people who got stents for arteries re Cardio problems, neither lived very long. No idea if death related to stents, but the stents clearly did not prevent death.
That is why I think we need to wait for more studies (unless you are in very serious shape--then I would consider it).
I know there is anecdotal info re good results for MS from edta chelation-i will seach for more concrete specifics, and post.

RE:
Check out these links to learn more:
http://www.ncahf.org/policy/chelation.html
shortened link
http://whatstheharm.net/chelationtherapy.html

the very procedure we are all here trying to get a handle on, CSSVI, is already rejected by the AMA, so you cannot use these three main stream sources you list as any sort of criteria in trying to evaluate chelation.
Chelation process, if accepted only for its use in cardiovascular disease, would put many cardiovascular Drs, surgeons, etc out of business--so of course main stream medicine will not see its benefits.

Merly,
you are tested every 4-5 IV treatments with chelation for your minerals, to make sure you get into balance. Also, some minerals are infused along with the EDTA.

And I might have mislead people, IF i did chelation it would be to get rid of the iron that I believe is part of the lesions, not to improve the arteries/veins.
The idea would be a super-charged way of getting rid of it as opposed to the ecgc or ip6 approach.

Oh, please. AMA has not "rejected" CCSVI. I'm not actually aware of them having any stated position on the topic (a search of their website turned up nothing), so if you have a reference that would be great. Even if they did "reject" it, that wouldn't provide any logical basis for discarding all mainstream sources. Just as one crazy crank promoting clown-slapping therapy (for example) doesn't prove all non-mainstream sources are bogus.

CCSVI is a theory in its infancy. Mainstream medicine is (rightly) skeptical because it has not yet been subjected to or passed sufficient scientific criteria for acceptance, e.g. results that are reproduced by others, large clinical trials, etc.

Mainstream medicine's position on chelation therapy is different: chelation therapy has been around for a long time, and it has failed all (or at least most) rigorous tests of its effectiveness. It's also being aggressively promoted by hucksters. That's very different.

It remains possible that chelation therapy is useful for MS or some other condition. But existing evidence suggests the most likely thing it will cure is excessive wallet weight.

/Scut