Nothing succeeds like excess...
Dr Buttar's office has asked us (after being on TD DMPS for about 11 mos) to come on IV EDTA/ozone protocol over a two month period every two weeks. TD DMPS and TD EDTA will continue on a Mon, Wed, Fri schedule after the IV's
Every 2 weeks our son will get IV EDTA and ozone (which will be infused in his blood and given via IV) and on the second day he will get minerals. The reason given for ozone is to reduce persistent organics in his system. There is no test being recommended to determine if the child will be a good candidate for ozone. Apparently, some children are seeing good results and Dr Buttar is trying this treatment on older children (greater than 7). Dr Buttar's office has provided some research on ozone done by a MD researcher in NY whom we spoke with. The immediate reaction of this researcher was that there has not been any study with children while ozone therapy is safe and has been used on millions of people in Europe. The researcher was not aware of Dr Buttar or his protocol on children and said that one needs to establish first if ozone therapy is needed.
I would like to hear from other parents if they have researched this. We just don't want to do anything that is invasive.
Another big concern we have is the mineral supplementation is being recommended by Dr Buttar's office. The office looks at the essential urine mineral test (and not RBC) to determine the right dosage for the minerals.They prescribed copper which according to many doctors is a neurotoxin. We are just concerned about not giving adequate minerals. Can someone tell us the minerals on 1 day/1 day off protocol.
There is just so much wrong here that I was at first at a loss where (or if) to begin. In the end, it was the antics of one of Dr. Buttar's apologists that prompted me to speak out.
 IV EDTA:
Where do I begin with this one? EDTA, since about 1992, has been a secondary treatment for lead poisoning. It was supplanted by DMSA, which was vastly safer, more effective and easier to use. EDTA must be given intravenously (IV) to work, since it is not adequately absorbed when taken orally. Oh, and it also isn't likely to be absorbed throught the skin - it's a big, highly polar molecule.
For mercury, EDTA has always been a poor choice. Studies done in the 1980's showed that it was not very effective for mercury poisoning, although it was used as a treatment for a while because the only other choice - BAL (dimercaprol) - was even more toxic. Since the development of DMSA (and DMPS), EDTA has had no significant role in mercury poisoning.
Back to the Buttar Protocol. By combining DMPS and EDTA, you have two drugs that do the same thing, except that one (EDTA) is both less effective and more toxic than the other. So, the net effect is to significantly increase the risk of injury or death without reaping a corresponding increase in effectiveness.
Now, the probable fact is that Buttar's TD-DMPS isn't being absorbed, so the IV-EDTA will undoubtedly increase the amount of chelation going on. However, an even greater effect could be achieved by simply giving the DMPS orally (or intravenously). So, why go to an "invasive" treatment that is painful and dangerous when a less painful and less dangerous (and more effective) treatment is available? Beats me. I just can't see the point.
Excuse me, but weren't people saying that autism was due to antioxidant depletion? Didn't I read where Jill James or someone was saying that it was the depletion of glutathione from mercury that caused autism in the first place? Maybe I misread that, because I can't think of too many compounds you could inject (!) into a person that are more oxidizing than ozone. I mean, sure, you could inject them with perchlorate or nitric acid, but ozone is about the strongest oxidizer you can inject and not kill 100% of your "patients".
This brings two contrasting approaches into stark juxtaposition. On the one hand, you have Dr. Buttar, who is trying to improve the "wellness" of his patients by injecting them with ozone and on the other hand you have government agencies - like the EPA - trying to reduce ozone in the air we breathe. Both claim to be doing it to improve health. Which one do we believe?
The potential toxicity of copper pales to insignificance after IV EDTA and ozone. Anyone who is healthy enough to survive the first two should sail through a modest overdosage of copper without turning a hair.
Now, I may be in the minority when I say that I think that Dr. Buttar is sincerely trying to help his patients. I have seen no data, no hint that he is other than a firm believer in his own therapies. However, being sincere and honest does not preclude being wrong!
For the benefit of the people reading this blog who are supporters of Dr. Buttar, let me reiterate:
I am not accusing Dr. Buttar of lying - of that, I have no evidence. What I am asserting is that he is wrong. There is a difference!
With that, let the flames begin!