In these health plans there was no doubt who we were working for, the plan trustees for the benefit of the plan members. Getting rid of the 1% worst providers, and controlling the contracting with the insurance companies and some other things each year allowed about a 10% incremental savings each of the first 3 years.
What I fear most of course is not being able to order non prescription OTC supplements from the internet or local health stores. . . As I have mostly exclusively treated things with cash to health professional or self treatment and self diagnosis. I guess you could say I have no faith in the system, and you have devoted your life and career to trying to uphold the system despite it being over run with fraud.
The problem is always that of selection. One of the main driving forces of the HMO design is that a person is typically at far more risk from over treatment than under treatment. My father, going against what he had lived and breathed for 40 years, had a parathyroid surgery that only benefit was one less pill a day.
I think that mercury is over hypothesized by at least 2 orders of magnitude.
For true believers in mercury we might as well be talking "man influenced climate change". It is strictly "don't show me the statistics, results, bad outcomes etc because they always have their one patient who had a genuine problem.
And I essentially try to go by the results of the discussion boards of those who have tried Cutler's protocol. What makes Cutler a little more believable, is that he does mostly just post all his advice on the internet, since he is not a health care provider and is not invested in it. Shade is also not a MD. I pretty much run from MD's screaming.They are too institutionalized.
Cutler's boards on yahoo cover about 12 years. This makes me at least consider something is going on. I have studied, and have several books on Autism. I can definitely conclude it's sole cause is not mercury. But mercury plays a nasty involvement.
Another problem with heavy metals is that they enhance the toxicity of much more dangerous chemicals. You may not have enough heavy metals in you to create symptoms, but it might be enough to derail functions in the body that allow to detox solvents, plastics, etc. This combined with the processed diet, sets up a very nasty situation.
Given the MANY MANY benefits of R-LA, I do not see a lot of harm in trying to prophylatically treat heavy metal toxicity. R-LA will not even affect certain metals. I am at least currently interested in Shade's MicroSilica. I cannot say beyond a doubt or a proof that it is not a fraud. But I have a background in environmental remediation, and have read technical papers where microsilica was used in remediation cleanup jobs. I am willing to experiment. It doesn't pose much of a threat.
R-LA and microsilica are most likely to remove mercury, and also least likely to bother other minerals. I have not been sold on DMPS or DMSA, and even less on the other chelators. The quackery comes in with the IV chelation doses quite a bit.
The only real danger in trying to treat heavy metal toxicity are these IV chelations with chemical chelators, or the misuse of RLA in those who REALLY have heavy metal problems.
I have one tooth I suspect is an issue, and I am going to an oral surgeon on May 30th to get it removed. It is far easier to pay cash to have it extracted than deal with restorations or HMO's.