Hi guys - anyone willing to have a stab at my questions? I could probably guess at a few of them, but not with any confidence; I've bought most of the products and I want to get my daughter started on this - but I need to be able to give her plenty of reassurance and respond to her doubts from a position of some knowledge, and I don't I'm quite there yet.
HI Colinmb,
I'll get to answering your previous post. The pre-colonoscopy prep knocked the stuffing out of me in more ways than one, and my digestion is only beginning to work normally again, I've had a very intense paradoxical folate deficiency episode with "merely" an additional 25mg of B1 on two successive days and then had a CNS healing startup with resultant intense shooting pains in my nerves and mood and personality shifts, fouled up prescriptions, 4, at two different stores and 2 different doctors' offices and getting a transmission leak fixed but got worse instead. And it is all data, except the foul-ups and even those illustrated to me the mood/personality shifts.
I'm a Sherlock fan and really like this new BBC Sherlock series. I'm sorry to say I don't always "get it" as fast as he does. I'm only a systems analyst and I have to just plod along. The relevance of this will be clear in a minute.
A week ago I went outside and saw a bloody mess on the driveway, well, a tablespoon of blood anyway and a lot of feathers. I jumped to the assumption that it was a cat that had gotten a bird. Now I have seen lots of that through the years and I had never seen a cat arrange the feathers in a circle with a clear space and blood in the middle. In fact I have never seen so much as a drop of blood from a cat killing a bird so the whole scene bothered me. It wasn't right.
The answer dropped in yesterday out of the sky. On the fence 10 feet away from the kill scene sat a young peregrine falcon in the process of molting to adult feathers. Falcons are messy eaters. When they fly off the downbeat of the wings clears a circle. There is the answer that fits all the clues. No dissonance any more from facts not coinciding with the theory. Theories are usually wrong. My immediate presumption of a cat was wrong.
History, and data are always being re-evaluated in hindsight. So some of your questions go to the apparent contradictions. Many things I have said are specific to the question. Some go to semantics.
I've been at the actual practice of healing my body with b12 et al for 11 years. The first 5 gave me all 4 of the deadlock quartet and the disaster of glutathione. Disasters can be very educational when understood. The next almost 6 years has been spent learning about methylfolate and it's modifiers. And it really is something new. All the research on B1, B2 and B3 and other things were done in the absence of methylfolate and active b12s.. One thing I had noted was that virtually ALL the other vitamins and supplements had much more effect with the deadlock quartet, with most of the nutritional research done on people in starvation mode for b12 and the pseudo vitamin folic acid.
In the presence of the active b12s and folate, B1, B2 and B3 are a real surprise as they are tremendously more powerful in the presence of the active b12/folate.
Each of the factors in turn has required a complete re-evaluation from the base up and modification of the model. Nothing stays fixed. Taking these things into account changes everything. So over time everything changes. Even at this pace, 11 years, it will take 100 years for all this to come as a result of "standard" research models, maybe never. B-complex is treated as an object but it is all wrong using active b12 and methylfolate. The only problem is that they based the They do single items, maybe even 2 or 3, not 4 items as an object and then stacking another 6 critical cofactors or so to get the first 4 working and another 3 or more major modifiers. The models they use and hence the questions they ask can't ever find this. It is invisible. So for Cerefolin with NAC they don't (can't) recognize induced methyltrap/methylation block (paradoxical folate deficiency) when it hits their subjects upside the head. It's just "side effects", not a CRITICAL side effect, not a complete blocking of all that expensive Metafolin. So if they tried NAC on people without having had methylation startup, the side effects can be already existing symptoms, not side effects and hence invisible. The amount of MeCbl in Cerefolin with NAC isn't enough to generally start healing when taken purely orally. They don't have a theory or model that allows them to see all this. I see what works and come up with the theory
I learned a long time ago that "side effects' are important. I learned that all the little details can be critical Patterns of side effects. Patterns of symptoms. Mashing it all together statistically gives the equivalent of mashed potatoes, the appearance of uniformity. I am, and probably most of us here are in the tails, outside of 95%, 2 standard deviations, in all sorts of these things. To heal myself I had to ask why I was on the outside. I can see now that the B-50 complex I took for decades was damaging me, making me sicker. The standard explanation was that it was "out of balance" with the arbitrary 50mg of each. These statements were made even way back in the 60s about these supplements. Now it is obvious how it was out of balance. So, look at the dates. The newest posts reflect the newest understandings. and newest models. Also, I have been exploring ways to make the startup more comfortable. Some people react differently and some tremendously more intensely and some both and discover the reasons. As reasons are understood, changes can be made. I'm working on a post that will modify startup procedure and will likely have that later today or tomorrow or maybe a little longer. It's going to be more modular.