![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 88 to 112 of 112. Go back in thread:
Posted by coach on April 21, 2005, at 8:07:14
In reply to so does it..did it work for you? (nm) » coach, posted by joebob on April 20, 2005, at 16:30:30
I am not the user but the supplements are working for our situation. The tests results have correlated with the observations I have made. You can watch behavior and then look at the test results and they are in line. We only use the NS supplements. I read from another website (not NS) that uses aminoacid Pre-cursor therapy that they have had problems when users start takeing multi-vitamins. I know multivitamins dont usually have aminoacids but aminoAcids compete for access across the blood brain barrier so definitly you want to watch mixing aminoacids. Most of the supplements have you take them 30 minute before a meal. To prevent that sort of thing. With the testing you can figure pretty quickly , I would say a week or two, if the supplements are doing what they are designed to do. Thats what so good about the testing. You can see whats going on inside.
Posted by coach on April 21, 2005, at 8:17:47
In reply to do you have babblemail turned on...i'd love to » coach, posted by joebob on April 20, 2005, at 19:03:22
I turned it on.
Posted by joebob on April 21, 2005, at 22:17:50
In reply to Re: do you have babblemail turned on...i'd love to, posted by coach on April 21, 2005, at 8:17:47
Posted by Larry Hoover on April 26, 2005, at 8:26:18
In reply to Re: Urine Testing, posted by coach on April 20, 2005, at 11:27:11
> We tried using our own seperately purchased nutrients from the health food store to regulate brain chemistry. We then got connected with the NeuroScience testing and the results showed that we were not balancing the NT with our regimine of store bought supplements. After a short time using the NeuroScience formulas the additional tests showed that the NT balance was balancing out really nicely. The tests results correlated and backed up what we were trying to accomplish by giving certain Neuro Science's supplement formulas.
I appreciate the tests were being used as feedback, but you don't say if you were taking the correct stuff (storebought nutrients) before using the Neuroscience products. Also, all you speak of is urine testing. How did you feel?
> For example at first we we trying to boost the inhibatory neurotransmitters to slow down the hyper excreation of the NT thru the urine. Once the system was calmed down then we could proceed with other treatments for the NT system. Certain ingrediants do certain things and the tests showed that the supplements we were using did indeed do their job as described.
>
> I am not a doctor but very informed on the subject. So take this information as you may.The urine test does *not* show that the supplements were doing their job. How you *feel* does. Not once did you mention pre-testing symptoms, symptom remission, or treatment effects in terms of symptoms.
Lar
Posted by coach on April 26, 2005, at 15:27:02
In reply to Re: Urine Testing » coach, posted by Larry Hoover on April 26, 2005, at 8:26:18
Larry,
I am not the patient but I am trying to help out a family member. Sorry I can't give you personal feedback on how I feel. But I would like to maintain some privacy here , so I wont give out specific details. I want to help out so I will say what we observed and what the tests showed were in line. It is a complex system we are dealing with so it is not cut and dried. But we did see improvements in what was being felt and what the supplements were designed to do and what we were trying to accomplish. My observations from watching behavior closely was that things were improving. We tried our own store bought supplements individually but I dont think we got as good of an effect as the NS supplements. But I am not here to sell you anything. If I were to make any suggestion it would be the testing opens up a whole new window to see whats going on and how your supplements are working to change your chemistry. For Example if you take the Neuroscience product to boost serotonin and if you tested before and after takeing the supplements for a week or 2 you will see improvements in your test results. Like I said we saw a correlation in behavior that was inline with the improvements of test results.
Posted by coach on April 26, 2005, at 15:44:11
In reply to Re: Urine Testing » coach, posted by Larry Hoover on April 26, 2005, at 8:26:18
Larry, In response to the statement:
> I appreciate the tests were being used as >feedback, but you don't say if you were taking >the correct stuff (storebought nutrients) >before using the Neuroscience products. Also, >all you speak of is urine testing. How did you >feel?I would say this, The reason for the testing is to know exactly what is needed. Tests results as well as how you feel are taken into account. Its not just strictly test results but they do know what ideal levels are and what the theraputic levels and ratios should be. I most likely was not giving the perfectly correct supplements before and giving them in the most efficient ratios. You can overload the system. By going to the NS supplements I most likely was giving a more efficient supplement. I read on one website but I cant remember which one, that they saw problems with a person takeing a multivitamin because it was messing with their nutritional regimine they were trying to treat the person with.
Posted by Larry Hoover on April 27, 2005, at 7:38:00
In reply to Testing and Store Bought Supplements, posted by coach on April 26, 2005, at 15:44:11
> Larry, In response to the statement:
>
> > I appreciate the tests were being used as >feedback, but you don't say if you were taking >the correct stuff (storebought nutrients) >before using the Neuroscience products. Also, >all you speak of is urine testing. How did you >feel?
>
> I would say this, The reason for the testing is to know exactly what is needed. Tests results as well as how you feel are taken into account. Its not just strictly test results but they do know what ideal levels are and what the theraputic levels and ratios should be. I most likely was not giving the perfectly correct supplements before and giving them in the most efficient ratios. You can overload the system. By going to the NS supplements I most likely was giving a more efficient supplement. I read on one website but I cant remember which one, that they saw problems with a person takeing a multivitamin because it was messing with their nutritional regimine they were trying to treat the person with.I thing the issues in debate are not the same on both sides of this conversation. I am not meaning to sound in the least bit dismissive, or sceptical. I'm unconvinced.
Your earlier posts were that taking the NS supplements affected urinary parameters. I asked about mood response, as it wasn't really clear, in that regard. You acknowledge mood response.
I'm a scientist, and I always want to know what's going on. But, at the same time, I'm always cautious in what I'll acknowledge that we can learn from a particular set of observations.
The NS supplements are correlated with changes in urinary components.
The NS supplements are correlated with improved mood? (you didn't really say).Correlations have four possible explanations.
1. Random chance sampling.
2. Variable A affects Variable B.
3. Variable B affects Variable A.
4. Both A and B are affected by a third variable, C.You state that NS supps lead to changes in urinary neurotransmitter content. I have no reason to doubt that, and the second type of correlation is most likely.
You state that NS supps lead to changes in mood. Again, the second explanation seems valid.
However, the hypothesis that changes in urine affect mood is not supported by the evidence, and we already know that the fourth type of correlation is in operation. Two variables, each separately correlated with a third variable, will also be correlated to each other. In other words, the urine output and mood changes are a chance correlation, simply because they have a common cause.
So, at the end of the day, I find no evidence that urinary components have any bearing whatsoever on the mood effectiveness of the NS supplements. My earlier hypothesis that the supplements will affect mood, as their primary effect, is not invalidated by anything NS or anyone else has ever published.
It is my sincere belief that they sell you the urinalysis for two reasons: to make even more money from you; and to give you a reason to believe in what they are doing. Faith in your caregiver is a good thing. Faith alone can improve response. But, in the end, all and everything taken into account, it comes down to eating supps and feeling better.
As a scientist, this is how I apply my training. And, as a person, this is how I judge it.
Lar
Posted by coach on April 27, 2005, at 10:21:56
In reply to Re: Testing and Store Bought Supplements » coach, posted by Larry Hoover on April 27, 2005, at 7:38:00
Larry,
I see your view point. I am not here to sell you anything so I wont go on any further on testing. If you want to try it out and see if it can help you then thats up to you. If later down the road it pans out that it was just a bunch hocus pocus I will get back on here and let everyone know. But as of right now it has been working so we will keep on the track.
The whole idea of urinary excreation of neurotransmitters is still being figured out. It may be something to research on and learn about. I think they do know that stressful excitable situations will increase the excreation of neurotransmitters thru the kidneys to the urine. The reasons why is unknown. But what I take from that is if you try to "not" get stressed or out of controll emotionally you can preserve you levels of NT's in the brain thus saving your valueable stores of NT's. Its been noted also that as the system gets calmed down the urinary excreation slows down thus not loosing valuable stores of NT's. Thats why they always try to calm the system down first with inhibatory regimine of amino supplements then add excitatory aminos and precursors later. ITs all a big balancing act that needs to have sufficient levels of NT's to help the system work and stay balanced. Like priming a pump. You have to have enough to get the system kick started. The thing against drugs is they dont increase your working levels of NT's but they just deal with the low levels you got. By blocking the reuptake or the break down of the NT's they make more "seem" available. But if your extremely low in the first place alot of times you have too low of levels for even the drugs to work. Once the system gets out of balance it can be hard to get it inbalance again and it takes time. MY advice is to try and not to excited about anything, boost your NT's with amino acid therapy, and make sure you know what NT's need addressed by urinary testing. Whoops I wasnt supposed to mention testing again , oh well.
Posted by coach on April 27, 2005, at 12:42:13
In reply to Re: Testing and Store Bought Supplements, posted by coach on April 27, 2005, at 10:21:56
Posted by Larry Hoover on April 28, 2005, at 8:48:14
In reply to Article, posted by coach on April 27, 2005, at 12:42:13
> http://www.fwweekly.com/content.asp?article=169.
Hey coach. I feel like you are hurt or upset or something by my manner of discussing this treatment program. That's not what I'm trying to do at all.
If I may state my case simply, I hope you see that we're actually promoting the same mechanism of finding wellness.
Getting the right nutrients can heal mental illness. It is a fundamental core belief of mine, and I'm sure you'll find ample evidence on this board to support that.
With respect to NS and similar clinical entities....
I believe their nutrient plans work to relieve mental health issues.
I believe that urine testing is irrelevant to the effects of the nutrients on mental health, as even the proponents (those selling this testing) provide not a single shred of medical evidence that urine analysis tells us anything at all. Check the onsite references. There simply aren't any that apply to urinalysis.
Back to the core belief....the nutrients promote wellness. But, wellness would occur (or not), totally irrespective of whether anyone is measuring urinary excretion, or not. 90% of neurotranmsitter biochemistry occurs outside the brain, and the liver kicks in to deal with any excess floating around. Making urine a certain way does not translate into evidence that the brain has been made to be a certain way. It could simply mean your liver is working right.
I am far more interested in finding out how many patients get nice urine but are still unwell, or how many patients start feeling better but still have weird urine, or how many simply are not helped. Selecting out the success stories for publicity tells us nothing about efficacy. Failing to seek publication of trial data (Surely, with thousands of these urine tests on file, and all the subjects who supplied them, there's enought data to publish about even an open trial.) keeps me extremely sceptical. I've been published. It's not hard to get published. If I had something that worked, I wouldn't be keeping the data secret.
No, even the urine laboratory posts a major disclaimer on its website, that the concentrations of neurotransmitters and metabolites in urine is of no diagnostic value. If its of no diagnostic value, why is it being done?
Lar
Posted by coach on April 28, 2005, at 9:50:47
In reply to Re: Article » coach, posted by Larry Hoover on April 28, 2005, at 8:48:14
I see your concerns about nothing to back up the testing. I am not a scientist so I look at things more simply. But I am in a technical field so I do look at details. But simple put when the behavior is backed up by the test results and then the treatment approach is shown to be working thru the test results and new behavior then it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is some validity to this.
Now if the test results showed elevations in certain neurotransmitters that did not make sense in view of the persons feelings or behavior then it would be hard to figure that it's valid. Plus if the supplements were supposed to boost serotonin and the test results showed that serotonin went lower and dopamine went higher then it would be hard to believe its validity.
But I do know where you are coming from , you are a scientist and you are trained to rely on hard facts and research studies in controlled situations. This is a new field and they are trying to learn things as fast as they can and hopefully they will fund some research projects. But I would imagine they view their test results as proprietery and they have to make money to be able to further the cause. Its the American way, I think?
I think you can go by feelings alone and use the current knowledge of supplements to affect your feelings. But I think its not as accurate as getting test results of 10 or 12 neurotransmitter plus taking into account feelings and behavior. Maybe urine testing is not perfect but it another tool that gives indications of whats going on inside you. Its not the magic bullet but its a diagnostic tool that is no invasive and easy to do. I wish it was less expensive so more pepole could use it but I think some insurances pay for it. Neuro Science works thru Doctors not directly with the public. Their stuff is used in conjuction with the Doctors other treatment options. If your going to a Doctor then the insurance should pay for some of the diagnostic procedures.
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 22, 2005, at 10:24:27
In reply to Re: Article, posted by coach on April 28, 2005, at 9:50:47
> I see your concerns about nothing to back up the testing. I am not a scientist so I look at things more simply. But I am in a technical field so I do look at details. But simple put when the behavior is backed up by the test results and then the treatment approach is shown to be working thru the test results and new behavior then it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is some validity to this.
>
> Now if the test results showed elevations in certain neurotransmitters that did not make sense in view of the persons feelings or behavior then it would be hard to figure that it's valid. Plus if the supplements were supposed to boost serotonin and the test results showed that serotonin went lower and dopamine went higher then it would be hard to believe its validity.
>
> But I do know where you are coming from , you are a scientist and you are trained to rely on hard facts and research studies in controlled situations. This is a new field and they are trying to learn things as fast as they can and hopefully they will fund some research projects. But I would imagine they view their test results as proprietery and they have to make money to be able to further the cause. Its the American way, I think?
>
> I think you can go by feelings alone and use the current knowledge of supplements to affect your feelings. But I think its not as accurate as getting test results of 10 or 12 neurotransmitter plus taking into account feelings and behavior. Maybe urine testing is not perfect but it another tool that gives indications of whats going on inside you. Its not the magic bullet but its a diagnostic tool that is no invasive and easy to do. I wish it was less expensive so more pepole could use it but I think some insurances pay for it. Neuro Science works thru Doctors not directly with the public. Their stuff is used in conjuction with the Doctors other treatment options. If your going to a Doctor then the insurance should pay for some of the diagnostic procedures.Fair enough. Except it's *not* diagnostic. It *may* be useful for a monitoring tool (change from baseline, with specific supp concentrations/doses), but *not* diagnostic. There are no absolute standards for baseline urine constituents as markers for mood.
Here's the problem with correlation. If I gave a depressed person 40 mg of Prozac a day, and told them to stand on their head each day for 20 minutes, and the Prozac worked, there would also be a correlation with standing on your head. Obviously, the latter correlation is coincidence.
I believe the same thing about urine testing.
The independent variable is the nutrient supps. The dependent variable is mood characteristics. The supps change the mood, and would do so in the absence of urine testing, in any case. Even if they correlate, they tell you nothing new. You would still individualize the nutrient supp program based on mood response, irrespective of urine test results.
Lar
Posted by Paulk on February 21, 2008, at 13:46:37
In reply to Re: Vitamin D and depression - Larry Hoover » JLx, posted by Larry Hoover on November 4, 2004, at 12:18:00
> I couldn't agree more. Linus Pauling, a two-time Nobel laureate, was vilified in some of the most unscientific and political acts I've ever seen in the scientific arena.
>
> Here's a lovely essay on the subject.
> http://www.internetwks.com/pauling/hoffer.htmlActually, it is much more complicated than the link makes it sound. Linus Pauling actually destroyed the research of his chief scientist that showed an increase in cancer with high Vitamin C. He was successfully sued for the damage for something around $700,000 at the time.
This has nothing to do with Vitamin D.
Posted by Franz on April 28, 2008, at 9:29:03
In reply to Re: Vitamin D, and safety » JLx, posted by tealady on November 4, 2004, at 21:00:32
Vitamin D is wonderful but avoid overriding your body's intuitive wisdom and allow the normal feedback loops to operate and shut down your vitamin D production if you have too much. That just doesn't happen when you swallow vitamin D, your levels just keep going higher and higher.
I read it on other websites too.
Is this a problem at reasonable doses?.
Thanks.
Posted by ep7 on April 28, 2008, at 15:56:58
In reply to Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by Franz on April 28, 2008, at 9:29:03
Hi there. I haven't posted for years, but this post came up on my email and I have some relevant information. I have been taking 2000iu of D3 daily for three years now, after my daughter was diagnosed with depression and it turned out to be vit D deficiency. I've also made an effort to see the sun a lot more. My vit D levels three years ago before I started taking the supplements were 51nmol/l, after three years of taking what are considered 10X the normal dose as well as becoming less sun avoidant, my level is now 71nmol/l. The best levels are meant to be 100-150 nmol/l and by my reckoning at this rate I won't get there for another 9 years... Check out the vitamin d council website for lots of excellent info about dosages etc. It's very hard to overdose!!!! I think the only record of an overdose was some guy who took 40,000 iu a day for a month or something. But check out this website: it's REALLY worth reading some of the things on it.
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/
Bye now
ep7
Posted by JLx on September 8, 2008, at 12:17:36
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by ep7 on April 28, 2008, at 15:56:58
Anyone from this old thread still interested? Have you done any experimenting with Vit D since then? It's certainly in the media these days as it appears the medical establishment has woken up to what alt med knew years before.
I've been upping my intake as the years go by and may up it even more this year. I went from 2000 to 4000 IU to 7200 last winter. I don't get that much sun in the summer either, so I think I will start taking 4 of the 2400 IU capsules I have, possibly more and then have it tested myself.
Through Life Extension, for nonmembers, it's $68. Still pricey as far as I'm concerned but much less than going to a doc.
There is also a home blood spot test available through ZRT labs and some alt med websites. That would be better yet, but costs $130.
http://www.zrtlab.com/Page.aspx?nid=12&action=view&category=12
http://www.virginiahopkinstestkits.com/vitamindtest.html
http://www.oasisadvancedwellness.com/products/vitamin-D-blood-spot-test.html
Last winter when I took the extra Vit D and also Vit C (Emergen-C) was the first time in years I have not gotten sick.
From the Vit D Council,
"Heaney's recent research indicates that healthy humans utilize about 4,000 units of vitamin D a day (from all sources). Heaney R, Davies K, Chen T, Holick M, Barger-Lux MJHuman serum 25 hydroxycholecalciferol response to extended oral dosing with cholecalciferol.Am J Clin Nutr. 2003;77:20410 However, 40,000 units a day will hurt them (over several years). Vieth RVitamin D supplementation, 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration, and safety.Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;69:84256 Therefore, vitamin D has a therapeutic index of 10 (40,000/4,000), twice as safe as water. Although we are not saying it is as safe as water, we are saying vitamin D is safe when used in the doses nature uses." http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/vitaminDToxicity.shtml
JL
Posted by paulk on September 8, 2008, at 12:24:37
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by JLx on September 8, 2008, at 12:17:36
My experience with D3 is it stopped my SAD I get in the winter. The first time I took it (5,000/day) I felt much improved in just two days - much better effect than any SSRI I took for the same thing.
I take it year round - don't know that I need to - but everything I've read says it is perfectly safe if in the form of D3.
Posted by JLx on September 10, 2008, at 11:31:05
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by paulk on September 8, 2008, at 12:24:37
> My experience with D3 is it stopped my SAD I get in the winter. The first time I took it (5,000/day) I felt much improved in just two days - much better effect than any SSRI I took for the same thing.
>
> I take it year round - don't know that I need to - but everything I've read says it is perfectly safe if in the form of D3.Hey, that's great. I'm thinking of taking more, I just wish I knew how much I could take without having a test to prove I'm not taking too much. From what I've read though, when people "overdose" it's been from really huge amounts and I don't think there's permanent damage.
JL
Posted by paulk on September 10, 2008, at 12:48:59
In reply to Re: Vitamin D -- new experiences? » paulk, posted by JLx on September 10, 2008, at 11:31:05
>Hey, that's great. I'm thinking of taking more, I just wish I knew how much I could take
> without having a test to prove I'm not taking too much.
>From what I've read though, when people "overdose" it's been from really huge amounts and I don't think there's
>permanent damage.I can't think of any reason to take more than 5,000/day - you can buy capsules in that amount. (D-max? or something with a similar name to that)
I don't think there is any record of anyone OD on D3 - what I read said it was other forms that had the potential to cause problems..
Posted by wellpro on September 11, 2008, at 15:27:18
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by JLx on September 8, 2008, at 12:17:36
There is a vitamin test out there that will tell you exactly what you need to be taking, or what you may be taking too much of. Its a great test called the Spectracell Intracellular Analysis. To read more about it i recommend this site. www.wellprovitamins.com
Posted by JLx on September 11, 2008, at 17:49:36
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by wellpro on September 11, 2008, at 15:27:18
> There is a vitamin test out there that will tell you exactly what you need to be taking, or what you may be taking too much of. Its a great test called the Spectracell Intracellular Analysis. To read more about it i recommend this site. www.wellprovitamins.com
Sure, for a mere $395.
JL
Posted by wellpro on September 11, 2008, at 19:08:16
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production? » wellpro, posted by JLx on September 11, 2008, at 17:49:36
> > There is a vitamin test out there that will tell you exactly what you need to be taking, or what you may be taking too much of. Its a great test called the Spectracell Intracellular Analysis. To read more about it i recommend this site. www.wellprovitamins.com
>
> Sure, for a mere $395.
>
> JL
>
Only $175 if you have insurance though
>
Posted by 49er on September 21, 2008, at 11:46:11
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by wellpro on September 11, 2008, at 19:08:16
Hi,
I have recently increased mine from about 400mg to the 1200 to 1600mg range. I definitely feel it makes a difference.
I think this is a very important issue so thanks for resurrecting the thread.
49er
Posted by paulk on September 21, 2008, at 18:00:18
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by 49er on September 21, 2008, at 11:46:11
I am thinking that the small effect I got from a light-box was from vitamin D produced in the skin. I quit using my light box after taking D3 last winter and didn't miss it at all.
I've also heard that internal medicine docs are now testing for low Vitamin D in elderly, and I wonder if this will show even more of a link with SAD as more studies are done.
I think the big lesson learned from this is to not trust government numbers (RDA etc). (The same can be said from the effects of low fat diets the gov recommends - these are in effect high-carb diets which are really bad for you. I've been low carb for the last 9 months and found less mood swings and an easy time of keeping weight off. See 'Good calories- Bad Calories' by Gary Taubs) The government does not exist to protect us - it exists to further those interests that supply campaign money. And those interests include the food and pharmacy industries.
Posted by Mistermindmasta on September 28, 2008, at 21:15:48
In reply to Re: Can D3 supplements alter body´s production?, posted by paulk on September 21, 2008, at 18:00:18
Yeah you can essentially take anywhere from 2000-10,000 IU and not get toxicity from vit D. Anyone who does get ill from those doses have hypersensitive vitamin D receptors, and uncommon phenomenon.
10,000 IU, from all the most recent research, is the upper level of what youd want to be taking.
2,000-4,000 IU is safe, for sure.
I think vitamin D is necessary for mood. I think when I take more I feel better and I definitely appear to be sick less when I take it regularly.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Alternative | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.