31/1/2025
Wichtig: das Video ist nur für DGUHT Mitglieder. Der Videolink darf nicht öffentlich geteilt werden, noch in eine andere Webseite eingebunden werden.
Important: the video is for DGUHT members only. The video link is not allowed to be shared publicly, nor to be embedded in another website.
In der Beschreibung unter dem Video sind Kapitel verlinkt, d. h. hier können Sie zu den entsprechenden Vorträgen springen.
14/12/2023
Wichtig: das Video ist nur für DGUHT Mitglieder. Der Videolink darf nicht öffentlich geteilt werden, noch in eine andere Webseite eingebunden werden.
Important: the video is for DGUHT members only. The video link is not allowed to be shared publicly, nor to be embedded in another website.
In der Beschreibung unter dem Video sind Kapitel verlinkt, d. h. hier können Sie zu den entsprechenden Vorträgen springen.
6/1/2022
Wichtig: das Video ist nur für DGUHT Mitglieder. Der Videolink darf nicht öffentlich geteilt werden, noch in eine andere Webseite eingebunden werden.
Important: the video is for DGUHT members only. The video link is not allowed to be shared publicly, nor to be embedded in another website.
Hinweis: die ersten ca. 5 Minuten fehlen leider.
6/1/2022
Wichtig: das Video ist nur für DGUHT Mitglieder. Der Videolink darf nicht öffentlich geteilt werden, noch in eine andere Webseite eingebunden werden.
Important: the video is for DGUHT members only. The video link is not allowed to be shared publicly, nor to be embedded in another website.
7/7/2021
Wichtig: das Video ist nur für DGUHT Mitglieder. Der Videolink darf nicht öffentlich geteilt werden, noch in eine andere Webseite eingebunden werden.
Important: the video is for DGUHT members only. The video link is not allowed to be shared publicly, nor to be embedded in another website.
Description
In English-, Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries, his name is synonymous with chelation therapy, which he helped shape like no other. He introduced countless of his colleagues to chelation therapy, taught and still teaches orthomolecular medicine in combination with chelation therapy. He conducted groundbreaking research and I had the opportunity to be present at some of his conferences. There he spoke and still speaks in front of hundreds of listeners.
His knowledge is extensive and the international group of DGUHT listeners got a taste of it on June 25. Admittedly, his entertaining lecture was tailored to chelation therapists with some knowledge and the resulting questions showed that there is a need for information, even among the very experienced of the colleagues present.
Olszewer's talk focused primarily on the treatment and detoxification of diabetics and atherosclerotics, and he also touched on his research. Olszewer answered questions about the treatment and detoxification of multiple sclerosis and gave practical advice on how to perform EDTA chelation therapy, making it clear that his very large practice (which I was privileged to visit) uses only NaMgEDTA, not CaEDTA. He briefly discussed DMPS, DMSA, and cysteine, chelating substances particularly suited for mercury detoxification. The entertaining 90 webinar minutes did not allow for more. An extremely instructive workshop, for which, it may be mentioned, Dr. Olszewer took no fee. He waived this in favor of the DGUHT e.V..
Answer from Eleonore Blaurock-Busch PhD an open question (from Frank):
Please can you tell us something about chelat-provocation as test method?
Hello Frank,
Sorry, I evaded the question. Reason: Time was running out and I thought this questions would demand more time. First of all, I am providing you an excerpt of my book EVIDENCE BASED CHELATION THERAPY. Here it goes in blue:
Urine contains minerals, trace elements, including toxic ones and is, in most cases, an easy-to-obtain material. When we compare a nonchallenged versus a challenged urine sample, we assess the chelating agent’s effectiveness and the detoxification process.
Following is an excerpt from Margret E. Sears’ CHELATION: HARNESSING AND ENHANCING HEAVY METAL DETOXIFICATION—A REVIEW, published online at Scientific World Journal , April 18, 2013. This review clearly states the importance of comparing levels of metals in urine before and after the administration of chelating agents.
“One of the most effective methods to evaluate net retention, or at least the biologically readily available metal load, is to compare the levels of metals in urine before and after the administration of a pharmaceutical chelating agent such as CaNa2EDTA, DMSA, or DMPS (Hoet 2006) Variously known as “mobilization,” “chelation challenge,” or a “provocation” test, this procedure is not universally accepted as standard of care. Criticisms have included risks of the chelating drugs, and inappropriate comparisons of the provocation results with population norms rather than with patient baseline concentrations [85]. Indeed, some go so far as to say that any testing for metals when the exposure has not been identified; that is, when there is no reason for suspicion based upon known environmental history that toxins may be elevated, is inappropriate because of the possibility that false positives may lead to inappropriate, ineffective therapies and their attendant risks (Hoffman 2007). The use of chelation for diagnostic purposes, following dental amalgam removal or in asymptomatic patients with baseline urine or blood levels approximating population norms was deemed inappropriate in 2005 by staff of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (Risher 2005). Another criticism of use of a provocation test to judge net retention is the lack of a standard protocol, and laboratory reference ranges or guidance for interpretation of results (Brodkin 2007). Nevertheless, these shortcomings do not fundamentally invalidate the concept; work in this regard has started. Hansen et al. established such norms for protocol involving an oral DMPS test with four-hour urine collection, among 2223 citizens in Luxembourg (Hansen et al).
Pre- and post-challenge testing may allow the clinician to identify which chelating agent is the most effective for the patient, and if oral agents are employed, possible absorption or tolerance problems may be identified. An open research question has to do with changes in metals excreted over an extended course of chelation treatments; whether in a person with high levels of multiple metals, one will be preferentially chelated initially, with a second then third being excreted over time with repeated treatments. This research would aid interpretation of chelation challenge tests, as well as enhance knowledge of chelation therapy itself.
Comparison of baseline and provoked urine levels is entering standard practice and was used to determine inclusion in a trial of chelation therapy for children with autism. In this trial, however, a few children experienced worsening symptoms. Such worsening is ascribed to redistribution of toxic metals, with insufficient excretory mechanisms in place, leading some practitioners to prefer unprovoked analyses up front, in sensitive, fragile patients. Therapy may be guided by parental, caregiver, and patient observations.”
There is much more to say about provocation tests and I will propose to the DGUHT committee that we set up a workshop, providing there is enough interest.
Let me know if you have specific questions. ebb@microtrace.de.
SPEAKERS/Lecturers Prof. Efrain Olszewer
MD of Sao Paulo, Brazil who is an internationally renowned pioneer, lecturer and researcher of chelation and orthomolecular therapy. Eleonore Blaurock-Busch PhD – Member of DGUHT’s scientific advisory board, internationally recognized author and lecturer on metal toxicology and diagnostics.
Record from 25.06.2021
Contact details from Prof. Efrain Olszewer:
E-Mail: efraorto@terra.com.br
Whatsapp: 5511999555240
Slides from Prof. Efrain Olszewer for Download: