Gary Moller: [DipPhEd PGDipRehab PGDipSportMed(Otago)FCE Certified, Kordel's and Nutra-Life Certified Natural Health Consultant]. ICL Laboratories registered Hair Tissue Mineral Analysis and Medical Nutrition Consultant.

More than a thousand free articles with advice and commentary about health, fitness and medical matters.

Gary's new website

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Is the Hair Tissue Mineral Analysis an accurate measure of heavy metal contamination?

The Lead Group of Australia has said that the Hair Tissue Mineral Analysis is not reliable as a measure of heavy metal contamination, such as lead. Is this true?

Also, is it better to use aggressive methods like EDTA chelation to remove heavy metals from the body?
___________________________
Gary comments:
Here is the link to the article concerned. Please read it then come back to this article.

The first comment about the Lead Group's advice is that it is far too dated: Hair testing technologies have made enormous advances since 1990.

When it comes to shifting heavy metals like mercury, cadmium, lead and uranium, I would always be inclined to stick to the conservative, tried and proven methods (antagonistic minerals and vitamins) for several months and then repeat the testing.

You do not want to aggressively shift sequestered heavy metals into the circulation too quick. It is safest to shift them very slowly using minerals and vitamins that neutralise their effects.

It is sad that the Lead Group have adopted a negative stance over the HTMA test when it is scientifically robust and when there is such a huge problem in Australia with heavy metal contamination. It would be very interesting to find out all the connections of the various experts and finding sources of this volunteer group. Is the negative stance to the HTMA because this test will show the full extent of contamination and lead to an explosion of compensation law suits? Better that big industry keeps the lid on it and one way to do this is to discredit valid forensic testing tools that can show evidence of harmful contamination long ago.

A blood test is useful only in that it will show recent exposure and/or recent mobilisation from tissue such as fat and bone. A blood test will not show historic contamination - the HTMA will show contamination even decades ago.

When reviewing numerous HTMAs there are common patterns of contamination within industry by type. I need no more than this consistent pattern to be convinced that the test is accurate.
Your email address:



Powered by FeedBlitz

Do you have a question?
Email Gary: gary at myotec.co.nz (Replace the "at" with @ and remove spaces). Please include any relevant background information to your question.
Post a Comment