Recent blood tests

[scottbushey]

Dr. Price learned that the most common bacteria infecting a root canal tooth was streptococcus. Staphlococci, spirochetes and fungi were also frequently identified.

Bacteria, Staph and Fungi are measurable in typical blood tests or cultures.......

[godsilove]

Some reading on the concept of "focal infections", and the link between oral and systemic health:

http://jada.ada.org/content/vol137/suppl_2/index.dtl

[ofonorow]

No one seems to want to address my question: If Cathcart is saying that a cancer can be treated with Vitamin C, why is Levy saying differently? Surely a raging cancer has a higher level of toxicity. I don't hear Cathcart telling us that his research has shown that one root canal nullified all the benefit of vitamin c therapy and getting to bowel tolerance did not necessarily prove that the cancer was being treated.

I think I understand your point, but I do not agree with the premise that fighting Cancer (by oxygenating cancer cells) and detoxifying root canals have anything in common. (What toxicity are you associating with cancer?) But I think your point is that if vitamin C is a primary detoxifying agent, why can't large amounts overcome the bacteria "excrement" derived toxicity in root canals? Say in the same way it can generally detoxify heavy metals. As a previous poster just said, part of the problem is that the immune system (and vitamin C) cannot reach these oxygen-deprived areas where the bacteria thrive. I infer that Levy/Huggins/Boyd are making the point that root canals create the most dangerous toxin known. Who knows whether or not vitamin C can mitigate this toxicity? I do know that if taking a high vitamin C regimen can overcome this toxin, as Levy states, your cholesterol would probably come down, giving at least an indication that there is less toxin to fight.

[scottbushey]

Owen,
You're not really getting my point; I'm not just focusing on Cancer. I am focusing on Cathcarts theory and outcomes. What I'm hearing at this point is that if I take VC to bowle tolerance and I have any toxins in my system, the toxins will nullify the benefit until the VC wins the battle against said toxin-if it wins the battle, or the toxin is removed. Additionally, my having loose stools from taking 20grams of VC is no indicator of anything really....

Is that correct?

[ofonorow]

You are right, I do not arrive at the same conclusion you do so I am missing something in your question. It might be worth reviewing Cathcart's theory why high dose (bowel tolerance) C is effective, as it has to do with squelching a cascade of free radicals that toxins and viruses emit. Under his theory, the vitamin C itself does not inactivate the virus, it protects and enhances the immune system which then can attack and resolve the virus. From
http://www.orthomed.com/nonrate.htm VITAMIN C:
THE NONTOXIC, NONRATE-LIMITED, ANTIOXIDANT FREE RADICAL SCAVENGER
.

By neutralizing virtually all unwanted free radicals and toxic oxidants, massive doses of ascorbate can be made to protect the immune system to such a degree that early in acute viral diseases, the immune system can usually destroy the pathogen within hours. When used later in the course of an acute viral disease where the pathogen has established itself intracellularly in significant numbers of cells, massive doses of ascorbate can protect the immune system, suppress most symptoms, and prevent secondary complications until the immune system destroys the pathogen by secondary means such as with antibodies.

Note that because the immune system has little or no access to the root canal bacteria, there is no destruction of the source of the toxicity, at best, only a constant detoxification process.

Patients must be encouraged to take these massive doses. Patients taking vitamin C on their own, seldom take doses high enough to discover this effect. I do not want to give the impression that this method is easy to use; the mechanics of taking these doses can be very difficult for many patients. Nevertheless, when properly instructed, the majority of patients are able to achieve these effects. If a patient is relatively intolerant to oral ascorbate only because of gastrointestinal complaints, and if his disease is one that usually responds to oral ascorbate in tolerant patients, and if the severity of the condition warrants the inconvenience and expense, then intravenous ascorbate is indicated.

Such effects of these large doses of ascorbate cannot be readily explained from its known vitamin functions. The spectrum of diseases affected by massive doses of ascorbate is a wonder in itself, but also gives some hint at the probable mechanisms involved. The sudden detoxifying effect experienced clinically only at the very high threshold doses, suggests that ascorbate is participating in chemical reactions where a critical concentration of ascorbate is necessary, or where a certain ratio between ascorbate and certain other reactants must be achieved. The concept that free radicals and other highly reactive oxidants are a frequent factor in pathologic processes (7,8) and that ascorbate is an antioxidant free radical scavenger, could explain much of this.

So Cathcart's theory/experience is vitamin C in large doses seems to be able to squelch a free radical cascade caused by viral infections/toxins. So there is a large use of ascorbate in this case, creating dehydroascorbate in the process (the oxidized form of vitamin C, that requires glutathione to recycle back to ordinary ascorbate.) The question is how much ascorbate is then left in the blood stream available for the "ordinary" vitamin functions, which may include collagen production and arterial strengthening. And whether we can orally consume enough for both functions.

So again, from another angle, the idea of Lypo-C - an alternative to IVC - pops out as a logical method to raise blood levels in lieu of IV.

Lets review, you are taking high-vitamin C lysine, yet your cholesterol is rising significantly.

After eliminating other probable causes, the idea was raised that your cholesterol is reacting to a toxicity, maybe dental.

Your question seems to be, why aren't bowel tolerance dosages able to perform both functions - eliminate the toxins and reduce cholesterol?

The logical answer is that you require higher dosages than can be taken orally, and that the bowel tolerance dosages do not have the same effect in this case because the immune system (and antibiotics) can not reach the root canal bacteria. (Note, ascorbic acid would be better than sodium ascorbate in your case - in theory) and you are fighting a constant battle (unlike an ordinary infection which the immune system can resolve) and it is impractical to be hooked to an IV all the time. So everything argues for a constant flood of ascorbate, but does not explain why other people with dental work do not all experience this issue. However, it does argue for Lypo-C which has been shown to increase blood levels better than ordinary oral forms (See; Vitamin C The Real Story by Hickey/Saul). It may be a good method to increase the ascorbate treatment, (along with liposomal glutathione to help recycle oxidized ascorbate per Levy's suggestion), especially if you are unable to otherwise address/reduce a known source of high toxicity.

[godsilove]

You assume that the high cholesterol is the result of an unidentified "toxicity", although I'm not sure what data you are basing this assumption on.

Secondly, Scott seems to be assuming that vitamin C combats all or most forms of "toxicity", again the basis of which is not clear to me.

For starters, it would be useful to establish whether or not there is in fact an underlying "toxicity" which is affecting Scott's lab values. If it is bacteria harbored by the root canals, then there should be some way of objectively assessing this. If the bacteria are in a place where the immune system is unable to combat them as Owen suggests, then it raises the question of how the bacteria can then have any effects on distant organs, unless there is a one-way street.

[VanCanada]

... However, it does argue for Lypo-C which has been shown to increase blood levels better than ordinary oral forms (See; Vitamin C The Real Story by Hickey/Saul).

Taking high molecular weight aloe vera gel along with the vitamin C will also increase blood levels. Lily of the Desert have paid for the scientific proof of this claim. But if you take one half ounce or one ounce aloe vera juice/gel for every dose or two of vitamin C then your money saving may be slim to none.

I've tried the aloe vera with vitamin C; haven't tried the Lypo-C yet. I'm not sure how one would inexpensively, objectively contrast their effectiveness other than the crude measure of how one feels.

It will interesting to see the results of your next blood test.

[ofonorow]

You assume that the high cholesterol is the result of an unidentified "toxicity", although I'm not sure what data you are basing this assumption on.

Extensive writing by Dr. Levy on the issue of dental toxicity, i.e., at least four books, three of which I have read, with some important quotes posted previously. In review, as a cardiologist, he clinically observed that his patient's cholesterol reliably dropped something like 20 points after their dental revisions. This made no sense and prompted him to review the literature on the relationship between cholesterol and dentistry. He found the evidence that cholesterol levels react to (increase with) the toxic load, and reported his (and/or the authors) findings that cholesterol is one of the body's natural detoxification mechanisms. From memory, these experiments were mostly in animals. I will try to dig up the specific references.

For starters, it would be useful to establish whether or not there is in fact an underlying "toxicity" which is affecting Scott's lab values. If it is bacteria harbored by the root canals, then there should be some way of objectively assessing this. If the bacteria are in a place where the immune system is unable to combat them as Owen suggests, then it raises the question of how the bacteria can then have any effects on distant organs, unless there is a one-way street.

The theory, as I understand it, is that the anerobic bacteria are quarantined, but the toxicity is related to their waste products. (I am admittedly confused because the purpose of the root canal in the first place is to eliminate the places where these bacteria might live. I understand the fit isn't perfect, the material placed in the canal shrinks leaving space for millions of bacteria, but I don't understand how the bacteria threat is eliminated by removing the root canal.)

[VanCanada]

If the bacteria are in a place where the immune system is unable to combat them as Owen suggests, then it raises the question of how the bacteria can then have any effects on distant organs, unless there is a one-way street.

They receive their food and release their waste products through small passageways called dental tubulines. These are too small for the body's immune system.
Hal Huggins discussed this question in an excellent interview by Patrick Timpone - the link to the interview is here:
http://www.oneradionetwork.com/mercury_fiillings_-_root_canals_-_ancestral_diet_-_dr._hal_huggins_03.02.09/

Discussion of root canal toxicity and porphyrins begins at minute 20.

The discussion of testing root canal using the DNA of root canal bacteria, of diptheria toxins, of dental tubulines and so on begins at minute 28.

[jknosplr]

Would the real McCoy please stand up!

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRel ... ggins.html

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRel ... rcury.html

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRel ... cdent.html

Being a ordinary "Joe the plumber", the large volume of information on this subject, all the different opinions what is one really to believe???

[ofonorow]

Oh yes, Quackwatch is a reliable source. Yes definitely. And their arguments are so powerful they have to refer to a ruling of an "administrative law judge." (Lest we forget about how such kangaroo courts operate, Listen to Dr. Levin on tape: http://www.vitamincfoundation.org/voice/#WL

Are there any pro-mercury arguments that you find particularly compelling?

[jknosplr]

No, none that are compelling, why because I don't know enough about any of this material to make an intelligent argument. I look for consistence in each and every presentation and make decision on that right wrong or indifferent. To be an expert in any of these fields that are being discussed would take a lifetime of knowledge and another lifetime to dispute it. The ADA could be behind the whole thing. In for a penny in for a pound as they say. ADA has the most to loose if it is true, throw money at it to maintain damage control. Same as big Pharma as you say, I seen an add for stains the other night where right after their speal they put in a disclaimer about "not preventing future heart attack". If any person with half a brain is listening, what good is the product and why is it being pushed? Better yet why is the FDA allowing it? I know the answer $$$$$ from the lobbyist. $$$$, thats why everybody is in it for the bucks even Huggins. If every person, company president and chemist that are selling their product had CVD, then I'm sure we would not need one line of testimonial on a web page. Every one would be sitting in a 50 gallon drum of their product and it would sell its self. I for one know I'm getting side benefits from C. The reason that I started it was not because the vessels in my anus were bleeding. They stopped bleeding within three months of the regiment and have not rebound. The reason I started is CVD disease!. But if C healed above mentioned issue then my logic says that its helping the heart problem, Just slower so stick with it and learn all you can about it. My big question is why is there always an excuse for it not working on a particular person. A guy like Scott cannot afford to have all his teeth pulled due to root canals. Seems to me if these root canals were excreting toxins to the degree that has been mentioned then the CRP test should show something. Toxins produce inflammation and inflammation can be measured. His insurance company does not recognize alternative medicine so we the "people" are once again stuck between a rock and a hard place, again due to the bucks! Its not a matter of not believing in an alternative to muscle atrophy its a matter of paying for it and getting positive results!!. This is a matter of life and death to some of us!
Hear anything on my films cath lab films yet?

[jknosplr]

[godsilove]

Jknosplr, you make some good points.

If the bacteria are in a place where the immune system is unable to combat them as Owen suggests, then it raises the question of how the bacteria can then have any effects on distant organs, unless there is a one-way street.

They receive their food and release their waste products through small passageways called dental tubulines. These are too small for the body's immune system.
Hal Huggins discussed this question in an excellent interview by Patrick Timpone - the link to the interview is here:
http://www.oneradionetwork.com/mercury_fiillings_-_root_canals_-_ancestral_diet_-_dr._hal_huggins_03.02.09/

Discussion of root canal toxicity and porphyrins begins at minute 20.

The discussion of testing root canal using the DNA of root canal bacteria, of diptheria toxins, of dental tubulines and so on begins at minute 28.

I've given it a brief listen, but I'm still baffled as to how nutrients are able to reach these bacteria, but antibiotics are not. I'm not even sure what experimental research Huggins has done to verify this claim. I'm going to give it a full listen later this week.

[ofonorow]