Hi Dan,,
His work resulted in a published clinical study with Dr. Neil Nathan involving 30 patients, 2/3rds of whom improved during the study period.
Yes, I read it. He also sent me the rawest data he had and I did some rearrangements and reinterpretations, sent that to him and a lot of my data. In a general way, and it had to be because they collected only some very specific symptoms, becasue it has to be frozen before it is started, before it goes in front of the IRB. In any case, at the level of granularity of information he had, I could do only limited things. "Improved" is a relative term. What I was able to do was group the relative reponses and relative lack of responses by specific nutrient(s). Very interesting. While I can't release my analysis, I will be posting the reponsive symptoms by nutrients data when I figure out how to do it understandably and somehow readably with the limited formatting we have in a text box. Then anybody can read the article and do a somewhat different level of results and groupings. It's nothing mindblowing. It fits nicely into my arrangement of information. It doesn't change anything, just a different understanding of the same data.
I know your protocol has worked for the most part for you, and for others as well, but that doesn't mean it will work for everyone, just like Rich admitted repeatedly that his protocol was probably not enough -- that infections, environmental issues also may need to be addressed. I guess my point is that I don't think you'd appreciate it if the same were said about you -- that you're protecting your theoretical 'turf'. I know I'm a broken record on this subject, but with any protocol -- yours, or Rich's, or Martin Pall's -- what works for one person might be poison for another. There is no one-size-fits-all answer, just like there is no one-size-fits-all diet. One person will need more protein, one will need more fat, and others will need more carbs -- and vice versa.
Please also note I am going WAY WAY WAY beyond what Rich claims he was dealing with, specifically partial methylation block. Rich says so in a number of posts. Again, Rich points at partially blocked methylation causing low glutathione and hence CFS/FMS/ME. I say that there is a common cause of CFS/FMS/ME that causes the partial methylation block that casues low glutathione. I maintain that is one of hundreds of biochemical changes, a result not a cause though it does cause a group of symptoms. The study only used about 30 or so symptoms. I'm going after the whole hierarchy of partial methylation block, methyltrap and Partial Mito Blockage in both body and CNS. Going specifically after glutathione misses the forest for all the trees in the way All six of the blockages need to be dealt with. Dealing with one of them doesn't usually do much relative to the whole. There is no one size fits all answer. Quite right. I know enough about permutations, combinations and all that good stuff. And you know. When I started all this I said it needs a lot of customizing which if explained was lots of comparison titrations to effect. Now I can say it needs lots of A-B trial titrations to effect. So far I've identified several main branches and can distinguish between them with a questionaire and by effects of substances. There are several more branches that are not defined. This 6 blockage conceptualization is just happening now because of this discussion. It's another way to rearrange data to see of there are some other understandings to find in it and maybe new predictablity. The 4 cobalamin deficiencies and methylfolate deficiency and LCF is another 6 items in combination, the various blockages are 6 more complex things but they are functional statements which may help understanding differently. I would like to bring the other 5 up to the same and better understanding tham partial methylation block exists. You know that Rich pointed out to me where what I was thinking at the time wasn't very proabable. It was missing folate in it's confusing role.
The oldest historical approach I can find is the "Tantric meal" of the beefsteak, fish, whole grain items specifically and other fruits and veggies chosen for various reasons. The point is in India, with lots of lifelong vegetarians, they had a lot of hyper-responsive people to AdoCbl, MeCbl, l-methylfolate, carnitine, high quality proteins, b-complex, omega3 oils. It was known for it's "magical effects" for tantric spiritual/sexual practice. From the description people had some mild startup for a day, a brightening of mood and increase in energy. That goes back more than a thousand years in a form that could be done at the time in a practice that incuded herbs special foods and healing.