1. Patients launch $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
New Exercise Study Brings Both Illumination and Questions
Simon McGrath looks at new objective evidence of abnormal response to exercise in ME/CFS patients, and the questions that researchers are still trying to answer ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Hair Mineral Testing

Discussion in 'Alternative Therapies' started by Dog Person, Mar 10, 2012.

  1. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,249
    Likes:
    8,898
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    I believe that is incorrect, in the case of ARL. "Practioners" are required to have a specific certificate, not a license. And they can get that certificate by basically paying for it.
    hixxy likes this.
  2. gu3vara

    gu3vara Senior Member

    Messages:
    337
    Likes:
    44
    Nice, a semantic debate now, much needed.
  3. Kina

    Kina Moderation Team Lead

    Messages:
    5,520
    Likes:
    4,043
    Ontario, Canada
    129 dollars at ARL will get you:

  4. Kina

    Kina Moderation Team Lead

    Messages:
    5,520
    Likes:
    4,043
    Ontario, Canada
    Actually this thread is labelled as being about Hair Mineral Testing, therefore all relevant information related to HMA can be posted here.

    Maybe those who are interested in discussing Christine's analyses/findings etc and don't want to discuss anything else could start a "Group" related to this. The leader of the group can define what is going to be discussed within the group. Generally, if a member comes in and starts and off-topic conversation that is not relevant to the group, the leader can kick the member out of the group. This is a public thread about hair mineral testing and as long as the conversation is relevant and within forum rules, posters should not be questioned or admonished. Please consider starting a Group if you wish to discuss specific things relevant to Hair Mineral Testing.

    Kina.
    taniaaust1 and Valentijn like this.
  5. gu3vara

    gu3vara Senior Member

    Messages:
    337
    Likes:
    44
    A report done by a computer that is not necessarily tailored to your specific symptoms, health history, medications etc... No thanks, I prefer to have a human being capable of judgment to analyze my case and follow me through it, which is kindly done via email free of extra charge (as far as I'm aware off), call me old fashion.
    merylg and hixxy like this.
  6. hixxy

    hixxy Woof woof

    Messages:
    724
    Likes:
    107
    Russell Island, Australia

    This is precisely the point I was making with quote:

    Thank you aquariusgirl for making it more succinctly for me.
  7. hixxy

    hixxy Woof woof

    Messages:
    724
    Likes:
    107
    Russell Island, Australia
    Would a thread titled Christine's technique's with hair mineral analysis interpretation and treatment suffice?

    I've seen off-topic posts moved to other threads in the past. Can it be relied on for the moderators to facilitate this in the future if we went this path?

    If placed within the confines of the "Alternative Medicine" forum, can we rely on other members to not troll this thread with their blanket anti-Alternative Medicine views? Especially as these views are often delivered in condescending and insulting tones.

    The alternative medicine forum is clearly not the place for those with these views, but a place for those who wish to explore these treatment options to explore them in peace.

    A group is too obscure. This information should be readily available to all those who are interested in it. Not many people even bother to check what groups exist, let alone use them.

    A hair mineral analysis in my country costs upwards of $120 with a computer generated interpretation. $200 is a bargain for a human interpretation that also includes follow up assistance.
  8. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,446
    Likes:
    863


    The last sentence is my point. It's about choices and getting all the information to make those choices. What people do with my or anyone elses information is a personal decision. I had a question after visiting Christine's site. That's all.

    Barb C.:>)
    Valentijn likes this.
  9. Kina

    Kina Moderation Team Lead

    Messages:
    5,520
    Likes:
    4,043
    Ontario, Canada
    Hixxy, you really should not accuse members of trolling a thread because you don't like their opinion or asking questions about Hair Mineral Testing. Members are free to explore any forum, ask questions, post research, discuss research, discuss testing, discuss a business, discuss what they have found beneficial or no so beneficial if they remain within the stated forum rules. The Alternative therapy forum is for discussing Alternative therapies -- discussions involve all sorts of points of views and again as long as they are within forum rules, they will be allowed.

    If a group is too obscure, then you will have to accept differences among members. Groups don't have to be obscure. Groups can be announced on the forum in a new thread or within a thread.

    Thank you.

    Kina
    Valentijn likes this.
  10. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,527
    Likes:
    2,003
    Sofa, UK
    Naturally if a new thread is started, or this one is named or split, with one being about Hair Analysis in general and one being about Christine's business only, then however any such reshuffle might be organised, posts will be expected to stay on topic as always.


    If a post is ever delivered in "condescending and insulting tones" and it is reported as such, it is always dealt with, as that would be a clear rule breach. I don't recall ever seeing any reported posts from you regarding this subject. However, accusing others within a forum thread (rather than by a reported post) - whether specifically or as a general accusation against members of a certain point of view - of "condescending and insulting tones", is a personal attack, and another rule breach. Please read the forum rules, forum rules explained, and moderation pages, because you don't appear to understand the rules about this. To make such an allegation, do so by reporting the post. We have set this out very clearly in the documentation of the rules: please read that documentation.

    You can rely on the moderators to act if somebody questions the subject you are discussing in a disrespectful way - provided that you report the post where they do so (you should not expect us to read everything, and you should not be complaining about alleged offences that you have not reported). You cannot, however, demand that other members may not ask questions or post information about the subject of discussion just because those other members' posts call into question whether (for example) a treatment is credible or reliable. The rule is that any such questioning must be done politely and respectfully.

    I think that is the core of the misunderstanding here. The alternative treatment forums are public discussion forums which happen to deal with the subject of various 'alternative' treatments. Nowhere is it written that you have to believe in a given treatment in order to be allowed to post on a thread about it. The same rules apply to any thread: nowhere is it written that members can demand to discuss a subject without other members being allowed to question them about that subject. Opposing viewpoints are not censored out. The requirement is that everyone be polite and respectful, even if they disagree.


    If you want a place where you can say whatever you like and where opposing views and questioning of your claims is not allowed, then you can have that on a private group. You can't demand that a general, public forum thread should be censored to only allow your side of an argument.

    You appear to be asking, in the quote above, that Phoenix Rising should provide you with a public forum thread for information about Christine's business, and nobody on that thread may say anything asking questions about Christine's business; you wish to say that people who are sceptical about the subject may not post on that thread. You want it to be public because it's such important information, you want to use a Phoenix Rising thread to publicise that information (and this business) and yet you want that information to be free from scrutiny.

    I do not understand why you do not see that this is not going to happen. Those are not the rules of these forums. You have been offered a group - whose posts can be public - and you can moderate such a group yourselves as you see fit. But it seems that's not enough: you want a Phoenix Rising public forum thread to get maximum publicity for this business. And on that thread, you want to decide who may and may not post: only those who support the subject you want to discuss.

    The choice is clear, I hope. You may form a group to discuss the subject in your own terms, as your own group, excluding whoever you wish. Or you may discuss it openly on the forum, but you may not exclude other members and other points of view from that discussion. The "best of both worlds" option is not on the table, not for any particular point of view, and especially not for a specific business.
    CJB and Valentijn like this.
  11. hixxy

    hixxy Woof woof

    Messages:
    724
    Likes:
    107
    Russell Island, Australia
    I don't want the information to be free from scrutiny, but I also want people who follow these treatments to feel comfortable about their choices.

    That is the whole crux of this argument nothing else.

    I'm not even following the protocol. I am skeptical also, I voiced my opinion on my skepticism earlier in this thread. I didn't drag my skepticism through 27 pages worth of thread though. I voiced it briefly.

    I'm quite happy to unwatch this thread now and move on with my life. This is far too draining and I'm quite sick of having my words twisted and for it being implied that I am advertising or promoting Christine's business.

    Christine's well being is of no concern to me. I only care about the well being and freedom of those who are following her advice here on this forum, who are in many ways been marginalised.

    I'm beginning to guess this is precisely why curezone has support forums and debate forums. The two things don't mix well together.
    merylg and garcia like this.
  12. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,258
    Likes:
    612
    UK
    No thanks, personally I would rather not join a group here as we already have two, one public and one private, where we can discuss Christines theory and our experiences of her protocol in peace, without constantly having to defend our choice of treatment or to be asked to answer questions which should be directed to her from those who have no interest in HMA. There is too much hostility over this issue and very sick people can do without that.

    If anyone is genuinely interested they can get in touch privately with those who are following this method, though our ability to give advice is limited due to lack of energy, time, and at present, the paper from Christine we are awaiting.

    Kina

    Christine orders Profile 1, I believe which does not give the ARL interpretation.
    dmholmes, garcia and Shellbell like this.
  13. brenda

    brenda Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,258
    Likes:
    612
    UK
    More support for MHA from

    http://www.jonbarron.org/natural-he...&utm_content=NL Bob Carroll Part II - 5/21/12

  14. taniaaust1

    taniaaust1 Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,935
    Likes:
    4,900
    Sth Australia
    For those in Australia. I think I paid $110 for my hair analyses throu "InterClinical Laboratories". Its thou I think $130 if you dont have a doctors referal for it. (This is the lab which my CFS specialist recommended to me as he's finding this helpful)

    Its very much like what some here described for the Analytical Reseach lab but actually may be even better then that one (InterClinical Lab screens 37 different minerals and toxic metals ..someone said the Analytical Research lab screened only 20 different things) .. InterClinical lab also has the ratios, metabolic trends, possible related illneses to your results, and dietary changes recommends based on your results. (my report is 11 pages long with a further 2 pages and graphs of the results).

    For anyone interested in this one (you just post samples in, in the special envelop they provide with instructions on how much and how take the sample) .
    InterClinical Laboratories is at www.interclinical.com.au or Phone (02) 9693 2888 or email lab@interclinical.com.au

    Im very grateful for their findings as its helped me to know what other supplments I was needing and taking these has helped.
  15. xks201

    xks201 Senior Member

    Messages:
    612
    Likes:
    184
    Does anyone know Dog Person's website? (user here)
  16. dmholmes

    dmholmes Senior Member

    Messages:
    323
    Likes:
    78
    Houston
  17. Rand56

    Rand56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    491
    Likes:
    174
    Myrtle Beach, SC
    Hi Lou

    Could not have said this any better myself. It's no wonder they try to discredit other points of view. They have to keep a bigger share of their big money pie.
  18. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,446
    Likes:
    863
    http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jama.285.1.67

    While the medical system is far from perfect, I don't understand why people go to the extreme opposite.

    Barb C.:>)


  19. Lynn_M

    Lynn_M Senior Member

    Messages:
    133
    Likes:
    38
    Western Nebraska
    The JAMA article Barb cites refers to a 1985 JAMA study by Stephen Barrett. However, the author of that study, Stephen Barrett, and the study techniques he used have been discredited. I read a lengthy criticism of the 1985 JAMA piece years ago. One of the problems is the hair sampling technique used for this study: hair samples were collected from multiple people, from hairs of varying ages, not the recommended 1.5" closest to the scalp, mixed together, and then sent to the labs. So the sample each lab received could have varied widely from another lab's sample. Some labs washed the hair in solvent, ARL does not.

    http://www.vrp.com/accessories/mine...ue-technique-to-analyze-tissue-mineral-levelssays:
    Given the precedence of JAMA publishing the 1985 study, I have no reason to expect the 2001 study that Barb cites to be any more objective. This is ARL's response at http://www.arltma.com/HairAnalysis.htmto that study:
    Little Bluestem and Hanna like this.
  20. Lynn_M

    Lynn_M Senior Member

    Messages:
    133
    Likes:
    38
    Western Nebraska
    More rebuttal in regards to the 2001 JAMA article Barb cited:
    At http://drlwilson.com/Articles/explore article.htm, Dr. Larry Wilson wrote:
    The fact that the two labs that didn't wash the hair sample had identical or extremely close readings for the nine elements tested tells me that the test results are probably technically accurate.

    It is quite another thing to conclude that the interpretation of the tests results and recommendations given are valid. I don't know if there is anyway to know, except if the patient follows and benefits (or not) from the recommendations. You can't compare what is happening in the tissue to what can be measured in blood or serum. Hair mineral analysis is based more on pattern recognition, on the interaction among the minerals, rather than specific levels of minerals. I think there is quite a bit of room to disagree about the interpretation of results and what nutrients should be recommended. I think that part is an art.

    Dr. Wilson writes further:
    He discusses reference ranges further on. It's quite a lengthy article.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page