@
Freddd
My point was not to debate the effectiveness of generally accepted medical knowledge, just to identify theories as, well, theories--so as to be clear.
And also not to question the results of your trials, just to clarify their nature, so that readers do not mistake them for other types of trials. I also don't debate the value of anecdotal evidence--sometimes that is all we have. We just need to identify it as such.
Sushi
Hi Sushi,
I got much deeper into b12 and folate than I ever intended. I thought it would be quick and simple Little did I know. You know Sushi, the glutathione in a way is my only failure in all this. It also is the only one that didn't reach my usual standard for inclusion. But it was needed to untangle the paradoxical folate Insufficiency. I speculated that it might be a good thing but it never proved out.
Many things were technical, such as how much room light exposure to ruin injectable MeCbl, how much difference folic acid , folinic acid and l-methylfolate and glutathione made in cobalamin excretion, and how much of what kinds of dosing equaled each other via urine colorimetry. It was a lot of foundational work critical for those needing certain types of therapy. Most of the last 5 years has been untangling the array of side effects, induced deficiencies and the like and actually tracking the clinical pathways to healing. Nobody at all is asking that question.
I've got it up to the "I bet my life on it" level. I also have it up to the "I can guarantee a percentage of healing that will be reflected in decreased utilization." if offered as a system to an insurance health co-op or whatever.
And also not to question the results of your trials, just to clarify their nature, so that readers do not mistake them for other types of trials. I also don't debate the value of anecdotal evidence--sometimes that is all we have. We just need to identify it as such.
I consider it very important that people know what kind of trials they are. People need to know it isn't the same warmed over research on a Nobel Prize lab mistake that went undiscovered for 11 years and largely ignored for the past 53 years. As a whole the industry is fighting against this as hard as they did hand washing. These are trials that directly ask questions that actually relate directly to our healing, not in maintaining us indefinitely in an ill state, chronically ill but manageable, by far the most profitable.
Half of the secret of getting useful answers is asking the right questions. The first trial I ran was in 1979-81, taking 100 350 grain desiccated liver tablets daily for 2 years and did indeed find out that liver had what I would call today, all 4 components of the deadlock quartet, just not enough for me to be healthy. I ran a trial with N=10 on glutathione and/or precursors, I did an N=1000 questionnaire development study with 1000 personally done symptoms histories and interviews.
It wasn't handing out a questionnaire, it was developing one, and coupling each and every personal face to face live interview with the observed response to a dose of MeCbl 1000 mcg , 1 of 2 5 star brands, MeCbl 5000mcg 1 5 star brand, 3mg AdoCbl or 1mg MeCbl and 3mg AdoCbl. And before that I ran a N=5 trial comparing 10 brands of MeCbl. That was the trial that gave us some predictable and reliable brands of MeCbl for use and comparison. Oh yes, then there were the trials that pinpointed paradoxical folate deficiency/insufficiency in humans, made the low potassium sometimes noted in b12 trials predictable and can be worked with.
They are also the trials that established the 4 way deadlock of both b12s, methylfolate and LCF. They also led to the first description of the internal triage levels of B12 and folate in the body, the layers of methylation and healing. And these same series of trials have led so far to a partial description of some of the pathways to potential healing from b12 and folate deficiencies in about half of us, if identified and done properly.
Also resulting from the trials some of the practical effects of b1, b2 and b3 upon a base of the active vitamins, MeCbl, AdoCbl and L-methylfolate, basic research that has never been performed because the industry was busy researching the relatively inactive forms cobalamin and folate. In fact the industry has never appeared to ask why so many of us are sick with these deficiencies while more of us are taking more vitamins than ever before. Results, side effects, or lack there of with CyCbl, HyCbl, ALCAR, folic acid and folinic acid are not predictive of the same with AdoCbl, MeCbl, L-methylfolate and l-carnitine fumarate.
Some of the test results have changed in the direction of deficiency over the last 20 years and so now deficiencies are being maintained by treating to test results. These deficiencies have become invisible to the testing world. They make so many things go wrong that it makes way too many problems for one cause.