I hope no-one minds a basic question from a newbie. I don't have autism or CFS, but this seems to be one of the few forums where methylation can be discussed - & I am presently very interested in that.
Firstly, condolences to all on the death of Rich van K - an inspirational man. I hope it's a slender consolation that he continues to help people (greatly in my case) even in his absence.
I've been chelating mercury with the Cutler protocol for 16 months, & (with the help of hydrocortisone, dessicated thyroid & a pile of supplements) have improved quite a bit from the adrenal fatigue that put me on the floor in the middle of last year.
However a recent long (30-day) round of cheation stirred up serious reactions to thiol (sulphur) foods that are still ongoing. I've been fairly dysfunctional for 3 months, & can't do any more chelation.
I gather this (& probably many other problems going back years, such as low energy & brainfog) may be related to faulty methylation, & am now keen to explore that.
I'm reading Dr Yasko's book, & quite a few websites - tho I am still a real amateur.
Dr Nathan's study on 21 CFS patients with a standardised protocol of (chiefly) methyl B12 & methyl folate had good results. But it's a bit disappointing that only 22% in the forum survey at http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/rich-vanks-simplified-methylation-protocol-poll.3579/page-2 gained "major improvement". (Isn't it?)
In addition to that, others have opined that using a "one size fits all" approach can harm you. I don't want to give myself schizophrenic symptoms, which the poster below this article implies I might:
http://www.mthfrsupport.com/articles.html
A friend (on the other hand) used the simplified protocol & gained great beneit immediately - a huge turnaround in his life.
I work in Cambodia as an aid worker, & get a lowish salary. Being monitored by a doctor would be impossible (there aren't any here), as would receiving a steady supply of supplements, due to the expense. (There is no postal service.) But I could manage to do the simplified protocol, I believe.
So the pragmatic question is: Before leaping into the time & expense of genetic testing, a practitioner, & then a more elaborate supplement regime (as I think Dr Yasko & others suggest), would it be worth trying the Van K/Nathan 'simplified protocol'? Or is it too risky (especially, perhaps, with all the mercury I seem to have circulating at present)?
I suspect this dilemma may even be artificial, as Rich van K's work stemmed from Dr Yasko's as I understand it - so there are likely to be subtleties here that have hitherto escaped me.
Thanks to all,
John
Firstly, condolences to all on the death of Rich van K - an inspirational man. I hope it's a slender consolation that he continues to help people (greatly in my case) even in his absence.
I've been chelating mercury with the Cutler protocol for 16 months, & (with the help of hydrocortisone, dessicated thyroid & a pile of supplements) have improved quite a bit from the adrenal fatigue that put me on the floor in the middle of last year.
However a recent long (30-day) round of cheation stirred up serious reactions to thiol (sulphur) foods that are still ongoing. I've been fairly dysfunctional for 3 months, & can't do any more chelation.
I gather this (& probably many other problems going back years, such as low energy & brainfog) may be related to faulty methylation, & am now keen to explore that.
I'm reading Dr Yasko's book, & quite a few websites - tho I am still a real amateur.
Dr Nathan's study on 21 CFS patients with a standardised protocol of (chiefly) methyl B12 & methyl folate had good results. But it's a bit disappointing that only 22% in the forum survey at http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/rich-vanks-simplified-methylation-protocol-poll.3579/page-2 gained "major improvement". (Isn't it?)
In addition to that, others have opined that using a "one size fits all" approach can harm you. I don't want to give myself schizophrenic symptoms, which the poster below this article implies I might:
http://www.mthfrsupport.com/articles.html
A friend (on the other hand) used the simplified protocol & gained great beneit immediately - a huge turnaround in his life.
I work in Cambodia as an aid worker, & get a lowish salary. Being monitored by a doctor would be impossible (there aren't any here), as would receiving a steady supply of supplements, due to the expense. (There is no postal service.) But I could manage to do the simplified protocol, I believe.
So the pragmatic question is: Before leaping into the time & expense of genetic testing, a practitioner, & then a more elaborate supplement regime (as I think Dr Yasko & others suggest), would it be worth trying the Van K/Nathan 'simplified protocol'? Or is it too risky (especially, perhaps, with all the mercury I seem to have circulating at present)?
I suspect this dilemma may even be artificial, as Rich van K's work stemmed from Dr Yasko's as I understand it - so there are likely to be subtleties here that have hitherto escaped me.
Thanks to all,
John