274 replies to this topic

[Absent]

niner,

It is worth me pointing out that gland calcification is a very common medical condition. It is something easily testable via x-ray/cat scans. The problem tends to plague older people more than younger people, as Halides for their calcium counterparts at various glands. The Pineal Gland is notorious for accumulating a lot of calcium-fluoride/bromide/chloride. These reactants form very hard shells around the glands, most commonly the pineal gland, and thus inhibit their function. The body does have natural mechanisms to remove these calcification but like any other system in the body it is one of those ones that loses its functioning rather quickly with age. Various bodily conditions such as alkalinity can influence how well the body can 'detox' itself of this calcification.

Now, Assuming Iodine helps in this declassification process, which many say it does, then toxic amounts of bromide, chlorine, and fluoride can be released into the blood stream. While the amounts of these 'poisons' that we intake on a daily basis are not toxic in the amounts that they are present, they inevitably build to TO toxic amounts.

I know nothing else about the accumulation of these calcium salts of fluoride/bromide/chlorine, but it is easily verifiable that gland calcification is a real thing that occurs and does inhibit the function of these vital glands.

[BioFreak]

yeah iodoral.thanks for suggestions man.i use 200mcg selenomethionine.vitamin c at the same time?

iodoral or lugols? The first one is in pill form the second one a brownish fluid where 1 drop should be around 6mg (5% lugols assumed).
You can take vit c and selen at the same time, no problems there.

[finalgates]

iodoral.is it a diference?in the way that works?i mean if absorption problem with iodine salt vit c same time?

[BioFreak]

Iodoral should cause less intestinal problems then lugols, so I am a bit surprised. Are you sure this is coming from Iodoral? You may want to consider to get a bacterial supplement from the pharmacy to build up the right type of bacteria in your intestinal tract.

No, there should be no problem with absorption, not that I know about. You probably shouldn't salt load and take iodoral at the same time(maybe an hour apart), and if you use a supplement with bacteria in it, you should also not take it with iodoral, but thats it.

[finalgates]

ok thanks man.i will report in a few weeks

[renfr]

That brominism link essentially makes my point. In order to see toxicity from bromine, you need to have A LOT of it. There's no way that so many iodine users have bromine levels high enough to cause toxicity. The toxic symptoms that many people get from high dose iodine use are probably real, but I don't think we can blame them on bromine. Saline loading causes a lot of different physiological responses; I don't see how it's indicative that something harmful is being flushed out. How much (and what concentration) saline are you using?

It's quite common for people to adapt to a substance over time, such that amounts that cause toxic symptoms initially are tolerated without trouble later. People may be adapting to high dose iodine over time, but maybe no one wants to admit that the toxic symptoms are due to iodine because that doesn't fit the narrative of it being a completely benign substance.

Knowing that we get in touch with bromide a lot then small but continuous accumulation of bromide would cause your system to have lots of it, you don't necessarily need to take bromide hypnotics to reach toxic levels or unsafe levels.
May I add that bromide is used a lot in pools as a disinfectant concomitantly with fluoride. All of this stuff gets absorbed through your skin hence why some people get allergies from treated pools.
Hopefully BVO is banned in Europe but we still get it in our pools.

I'm not sure adaptation to high iodine doses is at least in my case possible or it would be permanent or very long lasting knowing the fact that I didn't take a single iodine pill for several weeks and then suddenly I started downing 800mcg a day and that was not unbearable compared to first time.

[niner]

Why not? Chronic exposure to bromide can lead to a high buildup in the body that is incorporated into cells and not necessarily in high levels in the blood. When iodine pushes out bromide and fluoride out of the cell, the kidneys may not be clearing those from the blood stream fast enough - especially true for bromide that is known to leave the body very slowly. Now with suddenly spiking levels of halides in the blood, I can imagine that symptoms, psychologically, or on the skin can manifest. The skin is one way for the body to dispose of toxins, so skin rashes make sense.

Even though I still believe that the fast clearance rate of iodine, and the slow one of bromide make it more likely that bromide is the cause of the skin rashes (and their persistence for months after stopping iodine supplementation), as well as the fact that saline loading makes them go away within days to a week... We both can't be sure unless we get blood and urine tests, especially while saline loading. If I am correct, there should be high levels of bromide(or other nasty elements), but virtually none of iodine in the urine while the skin rash clears up. If you are correct, I would imagine the opposite. Right? Also, blood bromide levels should spike after iodine supplementation, so pre and after iodine supplement blood tests would shed light on it also. Maybe I should search for a lab to do blood and urine tests for me directly but I am afraid I might not be able to afford them atm. Also, I heard that only a few labs are prepared to do bromide testing in germany nowadays (which might have to do with bromide being banned as a food ingredient).

The reason why not has to do with the relative toxicity of iodine and bromine, and the exposures that people have to each of these. Bromine just isn't that toxic. People have used daily doses of multiple grams, for example in the treatment of seizure disorders or with heavy use of OTC bromides. In a case of bromine toxicity, you would see urinary levels of 50mg/litre or higher. That's a thousand times higher than the urinary bromide level I saw mentioned in one of the iodine papers. In the 1930's, sodium bromide was second only to aspirin in amount consumed in America. In those days, you could have found people with high bromine levels, but today, there are few environmental sources, and the ones that still exist are either rarely encountered by most people (e.g. methyl bromide) or are ingested only in small amounts (brominated oils, fireproofing agents). In Europe, exposure levels are even lower than in America. (In America, we consider the profit of the few to be more important than the health of the many...)

I have an alternative explanation for the reduction in symptoms caused by sodium loading: The sodium loading is increasing the rate of excretion of iodine, allowing you to drop down below the toxic level.

Thanks for the historical refs. Iodine has been a mystery for a LONG time! It looks like it has some sort of biphasic toxicology, where some people see problems at low levels, while perhaps not at high levels, and vice versa. There is probably some factor (or factors) that would explain it, if we knew what it was. I just don't think that bromine "detox" is the explanation.

[niner]

It is worth me pointing out that gland calcification is a very common medical condition. It is something easily testable via x-ray/cat scans. The problem tends to plague older people more than younger people, as Halides for their calcium counterparts at various glands. The Pineal Gland is notorious for accumulating a lot of calcium-fluoride/bromide/chloride. These reactants form very hard shells around the glands, most commonly the pineal gland, and thus inhibit their function. The body does have natural mechanisms to remove these calcification but like any other system in the body it is one of those ones that loses its functioning rather quickly with age. Various bodily conditions such as alkalinity can influence how well the body can 'detox' itself of this calcification.

Pineal gland calcification certainly occurs, but the calcifications are composed of calcium, phosphorus, carbon, and oxygen:

J Inorg Biochem. 1993 Feb 15;49(3):209-20.
Physical, chemical, and mineralogical characterization of carbonate-hydroxyapatite concretions of the human pineal gland.
Bocchi G, Valdre G.

Dipartimento di Scienze Mineralogiche, Universite di Bologna, Italy.

Physical, chemical, and mineralogical investigations of mineral concretions found in the human pineal gland were performed by means of optical microscopy and modern techniques of analytical electron microscopy and x-ray powder diffraction (OM,SEM + EDS,TEM + EDS,XRD). The mineral concretions were found to be nano-crystalline carbonate-hydroxyapatite with a mean Ca/P molar ratio equal to 1.65, very close to the theoretical value of 1.67. TEM and XRD showed that this is the only inorganic phase present in the concretions without the presence of amorphous phosphate as precursor. SEM and EDS, performed on cross-sectioned samples, showed a concentric layered distribution of the inorganic phase permeated by organic matter, within the concretions, with a slight increasing of the Ca/P molar ratio in their internal part.

PMID: 8381851

Bioelectromagnetics. 2002 Oct;23(7):488-95.
Calcite microcrystals in the pineal gland of the human brain: first physical and chemical studies.
Baconnier S, Lang SB, Polomska M, Hilczer B, Berkovic G, Meshulam G.

Department of Chemical Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 84105 Beer Sheva, Israel.

A new form of biomineralization has been studied in the pineal gland of the human brain. It consists of small crystals that are less than 20 microm in length and that are completely distinct from the often observed mulberry-type hydroxyapatite concretions. A special procedure was developed for isolation of the crystals from the organic matter in the pineal gland. Cubic, hexagonal, and cylindrical morphologies have been identified using scanning electron microscopy. The crystal edges were sharp whereas their surfaces were very rough. Energy dispersive spectroscopy showed that the crystals contained only the elements calcium, carbon, and oxygen. Selected area electron diffraction and near infrared Raman spectroscopy established that the crystals were calcite. With the exception of the otoconia structure of the inner ear, this is the only known nonpathological occurrence of calcite in the human body. The calcite microcrystals are probably responsible for the previously observed second harmonic generation in pineal tissue sections. The complex texture structure of the microcrystals may lead to crystallographic symmetry breaking and possible piezoelectricity, as is the case with otoconia. It is believed that the presence of two different crystalline compounds in the pineal gland is biologically significant, suggesting two entirely different mechanisms of formation and biological functions. Studies directed toward the elucidation of the formation and functions, and possible nonthermal interaction with external electromagnetic fields are currently in progress.

PMID: 12224052

Biol Trace Elem Res. 2007 Nov;119(2):120-7.
High accumulation of calcium and phosphorus in the pineal bodies with aging.
Ongkana N, Zhao XZ, Tohno S, Azuma C, Moriwake Y, Minami T, Tohno Y.

Laboratory of Cell Biology, Department of Anatomy, Nara Medical University School of Medicine, Kashihara, Nara 634-8521, Japan.

To elucidate compositional changes of the pineal body with aging, the authors investigated age-related changes of elements in the pineal body. After the ordinary dissection by medical students was finished, the pineal bodies and seven arteries were resected from the subjects ranging in age from 58 to 94 years. The element contents were determined by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry. It was found that a high accumulation of Ca and P occurred in the pineal bodies with aging. Regarding the relationships among the elements, it was found that there were significant direct correlations among the contents of Ca, P, and Mg. With regard to the relationships between the pineal body and the arteries, no significant correlations were found in the Ca content between the pineal body and the arteries, such as the thoracic and abdominal aortas and the coronary, common carotid, pulmonary, splenic, and common iliac arteries.

PMID: 17916935

In 1997, a graduate student named Jennifer Luke looked at the concentration of fluoride in aged pineal glands. She used a method that may or may not have been very accurate, and the work was never replicated. She found that the pineal glands in elderly people contained an average of 297 parts per million fluoride. The average pineal gland weighed 112mg, thus the TOTAL fluoride content, assuming Luke's measurements are correct, is 0.033mg. This is essentially nothing; about the amount of fluoride in a thimble-full of typical tea. The full text of Luke's paper is here.

I've never seen any evidence of a significant bromine content in the pineal gland. Even if the pineal gland were pure sodium bromide, it wouldn't represent a toxic dose, or even a therapeutic dose.

Therefore, I don't think that the hypothesis of the pineal gland as toxin reservoir released by iodine holds water. There just isn't enough of anything there.

Now, Assuming Iodine helps in this declassification process, which many say it does, then toxic amounts of bromide, chlorine, and fluoride can be released into the blood stream. While the amounts of these 'poisons' that we intake on a daily basis are not toxic in the amounts that they are present, they inevitably build to TO toxic amounts.

There is no evidence that most people have toxic levels of bromide, chloride, or fluoride, or that they are "driven out" or otherwise "activated" by iodine. As far as I can tell, that's simply a widespread internet myth.

[BioFreak]

The reason why not has to do with the relative toxicity of iodine and bromine, and the exposures that people have to each of these. Bromine just isn't that toxic. People have used daily doses of multiple grams, for example in the treatment of seizure disorders or with heavy use of OTC bromides.

Potassium bromide for example for epilepsy exactly makes my point again It's not being used anymore because of the side effects common with appropriate dosage. Its still in use in germany in childhood epilepsy as a third level choice, but for example has no FDA approval. Don't forget, epilepsy is considered more dangerous then skin rashes, and skin rashes and other side effects of similar danger level could be considered acceptable (when it was still widely used because of lack of other effective anti epileptic agents, as long as the therapeutic outcome is positive. It's not like they would kill you instantly. And long term effects are still poorly understood.

In a case of bromine toxicity, you would see urinary levels of 50mg/litre or higher. That's a thousand times higher than the urinary bromide level I saw mentioned in one of the iodine papers.

At least one of Abrahams papers mentions 141mg/L or higher:

We have previously observed that some patients who experienced side effects while on orthoiodosupplementation excreted large amounts of bromide in the urine. Orthoiodosupplementation induced and increased mobilization of bromine from storage sites with increased urinary excretion of bromide ^(4,6,12). The halide bromide was measured in the serum and urine samples of the second loading test. Bromide levels were markedly elevated in the 24 hr urine collections, at 192 mg/24 hr, compared to 3-12 mg/24 hr reported in normal subjects ^(8,9). Serum bromide levels were markedly elevated with a baseline of 141 mg/L, with post-iodine load values as high as 202 mg/L (Fig. 3). The renal clearance of bromide in adult subjects not ingesting large amount of chloride is around 1 L/24 hr. Therefore, the 24 hr urine bromide levels at steady state conditions should be equal to the amount of bromide in one liter of serum. The levels of bromide in serum and urine were some 20 times higher than expected in normal subjects. Since chloride increases renal clearance of bromide ^(10,11), she was placed on sodium chloride (Celtic Sea Salt) at 10 gms per day for one week. After one day on chloride, urine bromide levels increased to 530 mg/24 hr and after the seventh day to 760 mg/24 hr. With a daily average excretion of 530 + 760 / 2 = 645 mg, she excreted 645 x 7 = 4515 mg of bromide during that week. Her serum bromide level after seven days on the chloride load decreased markedly to 43.2 mg/L, from a pre-chloride load of 141 mg/L. Since orthoiodosupplementation increases markedly urine excretion of bromide ^(4,6,12), it is likely that the patient's total body bromine content was much higher prior to starting the iodine supplementation. This patient was not taking a bromide-containing medication. Her elevated serum and urine bromide levels are most likely from a dietary source.

http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/IOD-11/IOD_11.htm

But even levels below 50mg/L do not negate the possibilty of chronic bromide intoxication. Once the majority of bromide has been incorporated into the cells, it's not in the blood serum anymore, but still disturbing cell function.

In the 1930's, sodium bromide was second only to aspirin in amount consumed in America. In those days, you could have found people with high bromine levels, but today, there are few environmental sources, and the ones that still exist are either rarely encountered by most people (e.g. methyl bromide) or are ingested only in small amounts (brominated oils, fireproofing agents).

There is a case report from not so long ago, from 97, which says it is still possible:
"Bromism from excessive cola consumption"
http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9140329

"A diagnosis of severe bromism was eventually made and his serum bromide was confirmed at 3180 mg/L"
3,2 grams of bromide in serum, from COLA.
Interesting too, is the fact that the cola subject did not recover from saline loading.

Same decade, in sweden:
"Swedish bromism does exist in the 90ies" http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8051999

bromism through antiepileptic drugs in children:
http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8309208
http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9291516

Bromism from antiinflammatory drugs containing bromide(2001):
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/11605223

bromism in france, 2003:
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/12733857

bromism by analgetic injectables(2007, taiwan):
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/18375642

bromism in NY, 2009(!):
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3550397/

Non-deadly? Yes. Effective for epilepsy? Often. Free of bromism side effects? I don't think so. Bromism from dietary sources is documented. And all papers listed here are from 1990ties or 2000-2009.

I hope these papers prove to you that bromide is a nasty halide. It has no functions in the body, but can massively disturb the brain and body functions. Chronic exposure is likely to incorporate bromide into the cells, replacing other halides, while acute bromide poisoning can be considered lucky because it can be treated easier - bromide in this case is just in the blood stream, but not yet in the cell.

Chronic bromide toxification is also nasty because the symptoms may be less strong, leading to false diagnoses, while they still severely disturb a patients life. It is also hard to diagnose because serum levels may be within normal levels, because bromide has been absorbed into the cells already and disturbs cell function.

In Europe, exposure levels are even lower than in America. (In America, we consider the profit of the few to be more important than the health of the many...)

Nowadays this is true, but bromide, when incorporated into the cell, stays there forever (unless being replaced by another halide), so anyone exposed to bromide before the bromide free time can still suffer from chronic bromism.
Also any child in germany treated with PB today has a chance to develop bromide toxicity symptoms.
Commercially available products like mountain dew still contain bromide in the US, and I would bet so do many others.

I have an alternative explanation for the reduction in symptoms caused by sodium loading: The sodium loading is increasing the rate of excretion of iodine, allowing you to drop down below the toxic level.

Yes, I have thought about that too. But the rapid clearance rate of iodine makes this less likely then for bromine. The only way to be sure is with lab tests however.

Thanks for the historical refs. Iodine has been a mystery for a LONG time! It looks like it has some sort of biphasic toxicology, where some people see problems at low levels, while perhaps not at high levels, and vice versa. There is probably some factor (or factors) that would explain it, if we knew what it was. I just don't think that bromine "detox" is the explanation.

My pleasure . I always thought that the main problem with people having problems at low levels was due to iodine damaging the thyroid in those people without selenium (which increases oxidative stress in the thyroid while producing t4 and can lead to an autoimmune response, exactly the opposite of how high iodine dosages help with this condition, by decreasing the production.).

But people with thyroid nodules may react differently(hyperthyroid) then normal thyroids.

And then there is the benefit of decreasing thyroid function with higher then 30mg iodine, which is helping people with autoimmune disorders of the thyroid, while lower dosages would increase their problems.

Also there is toxicity from acute halogen poisoning when iodine replaces them in the cell and forces them into the serum, causing strong side effects in people loaded with bromide or fluoride.

And of course iodine just as any substance has it's own levels where it becomes toxic. The problem here is that it is very different, depending on what kind of iodine. Elemental iodine, potassium iodine are the two most common, and they seem to have a very different toxicity profile, but there are over 40 different iodine formulations that were used at one time. The iodine forms that were bound to lipids had a faster onset of toxicity, I think. You mentioned brominated oils - I would argue that bromide lipid complexes should also be more toxic then potassium bromide for example. It would make sense. They also could make it easier into the cell, making conventional toxicological checks with blood serum useless.

So all those factors make iodine a complex issue, and I am not surprised that we don't have all the facts yet.

I must admit I enjoy debating with you, niner. I'm actually exited to read your posts, makes me think from another perspective. And because of our debate, I've actually found a load of interesting papers.

Niner, could you point me to papers you mentioned where there were no high bromide levels with high doses of iodine ( preferably with 30-100mg/iodine per day)?

I think the main problem we have with the question if iodine does replace other halides in the cell or not is that the only papers I have found are from Abraham (and anecdotal evidence), there is no replication by other researchers. I guess we'll have to wait long for that...

[BioFreak]

(potassium) Iodide was known to "redissolving and eliminating lead from the system":
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2260583/

That's what Abraham reported also:

"In the adult, 1,500 mg of iodine was retained at sufficiency,⁴¹ an amount 50 times higher than the amount of total body iodine reported in medical textbooks. We have confirmed³⁸ the observation of our medical predecessors⁴⁶ that iodine detoxifies the body from the heavy metals lead and mercury."
http://www.optimox.c...D-16/PUB_16.htm

[BioFreak]

Selenium alleviated the toxic effects of iodine in mice:
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/16943608

"The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of Se supplementation on the depression of type 1 deiodinase (D1) and glutathione peroxidase (GSHPx) activities caused by excessive iodine. D1 activity was assayed by the method with 125I-rT3 as a substrate. Compared to the effect of iodine alone, iodine in combination with selenium increased the activities of D1 and GSHPx. The addition of selenium alleviated the toxic effects of iodine excess on the activities of D1 and GSHPx"

[BioFreak]

Some of you may have noticed the video on the iodineresearch.com website by brownstein... I've found the slides for the video here:
http://americannutri...rownstein 1.pdf
http://americannutri...rownstein 2.pdf
http://americannutri...rownstein 3.pdf
It's worth mentioning because many of his slides include references for the claims he is making.

[Absent]

There is no evidence that most people have toxic levels of bromide, chloride, or fluoride, or that they are "driven out" or otherwise "activated" by iodine. As far as I can tell, that's simply a widespread internet myth.

You are right! Iodine does not cause a direct detox. What causes the detox is the thyroid and its hormones. Iodine kicks the thyroid, and the metabolism, into overdrive.

The levels of bromide, chloride, or fluoride in the bloodstream are not inherently toxic in the sense that they will damage the body permanently. They merely just accumulate overtime lessening the efficiency of various bodily systems. Saying they are toxic in those cumulative quantities is like saying anything that causes aging is toxic simply because it causes aging. This notion most people would disagree with, but anything that causes aging is inherently damaging the body in some slight way, and thus is toxic, even if it is reversible via the right mechanism.

[BioFreak]

You are right! Iodine does not cause a direct detox. What causes the detox is the thyroid and its hormones. Iodine kicks the thyroid, and the metabolism, into overdrive.

Do you have sources for this?

According to Abraham, this is not correct. Iodine can replace other halides in the cell, because it has a similar atomic structure. This is why halides increase in the bloodstream during iodine supplementation. For this the concentration of iodine in the body needs to be high enough. Also, iodine has a slightly diuretic component, increasing the kidneys output.

But the thyroid can clean the blood from viruses and bacteria more easily, the more iodine it has to work with. (this might not be entirely correct since I have not looked for papers about that yet, so I won't put my hand into the fire for it ) However I can say that high dose iodine definitely has a positive effect on flu symptoms, and, if given early enough might even prevent a full blown flu (personal experience)

But I found this:
"Iodides have many non-endocrine biologic effects, including a role they play in the physiology of the inflammatory response. Iodides when given systemically or applied locally increase the movement of granulocytes into areas of inflammation. They improve the phagocytosis of bacteria by granulocytes and the ability of granulocytes to kill bacteria. They alter native protein to make it more susceptible to enzymes produced by granulocytes. They increase glandular secretions and make mast cells more labile. They concentrate around tumors and granulomas in man and animals. They also move into areas of tissue injury. When iodide is redistributing around sites of tumors or injuries there is decreased thyroid uptake and decreased renal excretion. The multiple effects of iodides have suggested that iodide may have a physiological role in inflammation."

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/3367805

And lot's of papers about iodine and the immune system:

"Iodine has been used effectively therapeutically in pathologies for which the immune system is
known to play a role. Moreover, there is evidence that iodine is accumulated in diseased tissue.

One significant body of research shows that iodide can be used in a potent anti-microbial process
involving a peroxidase, hydrogen peroxide, and a halide. This anti-microbial process quickly kills
bacteria, viruses, fungi, and various other micro-organisms.

This process has been studied in neutrophils, an abundant type of white blood cell important in the
defense of the body against infection.

Iodide is significantly more effective in this process than the other halides, but chloride may be
used more often because of its ready availability.

Iodide is accumulated during phagocytosis, the process of engulfing and ingesting bacteria and
other foreign bodies. The iodide is attached to the bacteria and to proteins, creating iodoproteins
including monoiodotyrosine (T1). Sometimes, the thyroid hormones are utilized as the source of
the iodide.

Various groups of researchers have focused on different parts of the iodine-immune connection."

http://iodineresearch.com/immunepg1.html
The references are on that site too.

Edited by BioFreak, 28 November 2013 - 05:14 PM.

[niner]

Thanks for the excellent collection of references, BioFreak. I certainly hadn't considered that people were drinking 2-4 liters of soda per day! I suppose that anything that can happen, will happen at some point. For people living in countries (USA) where brominated vegetable oils are permitted in soft drinks, they are getting about 8 milligrams per liter of soda. While the half life of inorganic bromide is normally 12 d, the half life of organobromides is likely to be significantly longer. I didn't appreciate the quantity that some people might be getting by this route. There are also foods (as opposed to such obvious errors as colas) that contain significant amounts of bromine, particularly nuts. Brazil nuts, for example, contain 87 mg/kg dry weight! Bromine is more prevalent in the natural world than I thought, and is found in most foods, probably as the ion.

Brominism is certainly a real thing, although a rare thing. It looks like it only occurs in cases where people are ingesting excessive amounts of bromine-containing drugs or unusual amounts of brominated drinks. The organic bromine compounds could represent a body reservoir of bromine that would take a very long time to leave the system. They would also be susceptible to nucleophilic attack from iodide, thus representing a source of inorganic bromide. This is a mechanism that I hadn't considered previously, and is different than Abraham's claim that iodide displaces bromide on the basis of its physical similarity, suggesting that bromide is non-covalently bound to a receptor site. If such a receptor exists, I can't find any evidence of it. There are probably transporters that would shuttle bromide ion, but not hold onto it tightly.

Abraham says that normal subjects excrete 3-12 mg/L Br-, but he does find cases that excrete amounts of bromide that would be consistent with toxicity. These seem to be rather few and far between, but they apparently exist. On the other hand, it seems like most people who take high dose iodine think that they are detoxing bromide. I still think that most of those are probably not brominism, but something else. However, I don't doubt that it's possible to carry a large body burden of bromide from certain sodas and drugs, if they're used in excess, and that these people may well show bromide-related symptoms when they take high dose iodine.

I sure wish there was someone besides Abraham and his cronies looking at all of this. Abraham never publishes in peer-reviewed journals. All of his publications are in the same Natural Healing/Chiropractic magazine, called "The Original Internist". He provides financial support to the publication through his company, and he also sells the products that he writes about. In terms of conflict of interest, it doesn't get much worse than this. His work isn't obviously wrong, but it's limited to small cohorts and also to case studies, which would be called "anecdotes" if they were reported here.

[Absent]

BioFreak,

The Thyroid, like every other gland, is responsible for many functions. Every gland in the body produces hormones that regulate bodily systems, and thus as a consequence regulate the immune system in some indirect or direct fashion. It is just common sense.

I personally do not know if there is such a thing as a bromide detox, I'm just saying, there are some ideas out there to support the argument.

On my experiments:

I have decided to take a pause from the Iodine for a week. Mainly because I'm getting nasty acne breakouts that don't seem to be healing very quickly, despite the Vitamin E and Zinc that I take which has always made them heal more quickly. Funnily, in my 2-3 days that I've been off Iodine I am still retaining the effects of the previous doses, which, is good! My acne is also clearing up pretty quickly as well.

Since the effects seem to be sustained, I may allow my dosing only to be a couple of times a week. Even if it means sacrificing a little bit of energy. I enjoy my clear skin too much . I feel full of energy regardless so I'm not worried.

[renfr]

Brazil nuts, for example, contain 87 mg/kg dry weight!

Wow, niner thanks for that, I was eating them in order to up my selenium intake but I guess I will throw that bag in the garbage, I probably didn't take more than 1mg every day but it's still already a significant amount, I'll have to flush that out right now.

[markymark]

Here is a huge document on iodine...
https://docs.google....92rg/edit?pli=1

Yes it is true, that the whole iodine issue is not based on lots of peer review evidence level 1a papers. It is painful to realize this.
However I see a switch towards mg-doses emerging... And at least this review documents, that mg I-doses have arrived at the scientific level and are being promoted by good scientists.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/23607319

[adrenalin]

are you people dumb? taking such doses of iodine? do you want to kill yourself? the maximum dose is 1100 mcg, if you take too much iodine will cause hypothyroidism, auto immune thyroiditis and destroy your thyroid function, no one needs to ever supplement iodine you get enough in table salt
if you have a thyroid dysfunction go to a doctor to get prescribed T4 treatment don't resort to dangerous homemade treatments with iodine which will make things worse

[OneScrewLoose]

This is either placebo or due to a thyroid issue. If you think placebo can't do this, check out this documentary:


Seeing this in one of my classes and learning some other things lead me to figure out my own placebo effects like my ADHD, which was helped by weird drugs but not by Adderall. I had it since I was 7 and met all the diagnostic criteria (except the adderall thing) but I found out it was largely psychogenic. I know this because it's, in many ways, fucking gone.

[Absent]

It definitely isn't a placebo. Almost immediately upon dosing I can feel waves of warmth go through my body, similar to, but not as strong as ecstasy. What, are you going to tell me ecstasy is just a placebo effect as well? I am well aware of the things placebo effects can do, but there is a line that has to be drawn. When I start borderline hallucinating from sheer thought enhancement, I tend to rule out placebo.

I have actually been off the Iodine for a week, something in my stack is causing me acne and I need to figure out what it is. When on the Iodine I definitely would sweat WAY more and my body temperature was always much higher. Not sure if the acne was merely a detox, or pores clogging. One noticable thing was that on Iodine I barley got thirsty and I would go an entire day without more than a cup of water in the morning, so that might have caused the acne as well.

I noticed as well even though I haven't taken Iodine in a good 7-10 days, my body temperature is still very warm, my thoughts maintain a degree of strength and organization, my cold tolerance is way up, etc. All of the 'enhancements' that Iodine gave have basically stayed, just to not a strong extent. Daily dosing Iodine felt like these effects, mostly the positive ones, were increasingly rapidly.

[blood]

... something in my stack is causing me acne and I need to figure out what it is... Not sure if the acne was merely a detox, or pores clogging.

How committed are you to the "bromine detox" hypothesis?

I was amused & alarmed to read the following comment apparently made by bromine detox-believer Paul Jaminet:

http://paleohacks.co...l#axzz2mUAXXLum

Iodine consumption often triggers bromine release from cells and high serum and urinary bromine. Bromine is a known cause of acne. However, sustained intake of iodine will eventually clear bromine from the body and end the acne. In some cases, this can take a year or more.

Enjoy your 12 months of acne.

Edited by blood, 04 December 2013 - 06:50 AM.

[OneScrewLoose]

I'm not saying it's probable, I'm saying it's possible, and that's a scientific fact regardless of what you feel. Watch the documentary. If someone can die from what was likely a placebo, than this is possible, however improbable, and you can't rule out the few percent chance that it is.

[Absent]

Lol I don't attribute much to the Detox theory, mostly because I have no evidence to support it eitherway. I just know Iodine has major positive effects more me. More intense than a lot of supplements I take.

OneScrew,

I know people can get really sick from Placebo. I know people can die from Placebo. I know people can be HEALED from placebo. The fact is the mind possess extreme capabilities of influence over the body.There exits experienced meditators who have demonstrated their control of their autoimmune system in a laboratory environment to such an extent where they can willfully and consciously grow baseball size cancerous tumors on their arm in minutes, and in that same time make them disappear at will within a similar time period. Look up Swami Rama. Many scientific tests were conducted on him in terms of his ability to influence the body with the mind. Then there's also the common yogic practice of G-tummo, influencing the body temperature with the mind to extents as extreme as being able to meditate in the snow and cause snow to melt up to 10-20 feet around the meditator.

The point I'm making is I know what I am experiencing is not placebo. The effects are too extreme and immediate. If I was more focused on the longterm things, yeah placebo is a possibility. Though, I don't believe Iodine is a magical cure that much. I have believed in the past many supplements could cure all my problems and I was disappointed. It is foolish to think that Iodine just came a long and caused an 'extreme placebo' effect in so many physical aspects of my health when no other supplement in the world has caused those effects.

I'm very internally-aware of my body and psychology. I take many supplements on a daily basis and meditate on a daily basis. I am extremely familiar with my day to day mind and body state, how I feel, how I think, etc. These are things I pay close attention to. A huge hobby of mine is constantly trying to improve aspects of myself so I tend to notice pretty immediately when some of those aspects take a huge turn in another direction, just as easily as a person notices they get catapulted into four dimensional space time when they take a puff of DMT. I am very conscious of my health so I tend to notice the difference between being in a better mood/outlook, versus functioning differently on a base-chemical level.

I guess those sweat stains in 4 of my shirts that magically appeared when I was on Iodine were caused by the Placebo effect as well.

Also:

To comment on these cases you mentioned. If someone dies and the doctors cannot find anything wrong with him, it doesn't necessarily mean the placebo effect is killing him. We discover new diseases and bacteria every single day. While placebo can have a powerful effect, and belief can play a role, not every case of something that cannot be understood is a placebo, and this should be kept in mind. At least with Iodine we have the very obvious Thyroid Hormone connection to reason around.

Edited by Siro, 04 December 2013 - 06:26 PM.

[BioFreak]

Thanks for the excellent collection of references, BioFreak. I certainly hadn't considered that people were drinking 2-4 liters of soda per day! I suppose that anything that can happen, will happen at some point. For people living in countries (USA) where brominated vegetable oils are permitted in soft drinks, they are getting about 8 milligrams per liter of soda. While the half life of inorganic bromide is normally 12 d, the half life of organobromides is likely to be significantly longer. I didn't appreciate the quantity that some people might be getting by this route. There are also foods (as opposed to such obvious errors as colas) that contain significant amounts of bromine, particularly nuts. Brazil nuts, for example, contain 87 mg/kg dry weight! Bromine is more prevalent in the natural world than I thought, and is found in most foods, probably as the ion.

If it can be done, it will be done. I actually know someone who drinks 2-4 liters of soda a day. But fortunately he lives in europe and does not have to fear bromide in his drinks. I must say I am surprised by nuts being a source of bromide. Thanks for the links.

Brominism is certainly a real thing, although a rare thing. It looks like it only occurs in cases where people are ingesting excessive amounts of bromine-containing drugs or unusual amounts of brominated drinks. The organic bromine compounds could represent a body reservoir of bromine that would take a very long time to leave the system. They would also be susceptible to nucleophilic attack from iodide, thus representing a source of inorganic bromide. This is a mechanism that I hadn't considered previously, and is different than Abraham's claim that iodide displaces bromide on the basis of its physical similarity, suggesting that bromide is non-covalently bound to a receptor site. If such a receptor exists, I can't find any evidence of it. There are probably transporters that would shuttle bromide ion, but not hold onto it tightly.

I definitely have to look into nucleophilic substitution. Thanks for sharing the idea. A quick 2 minute search didn't find me anything on iodine receptors too(pubmed), but I must confess I am short on time right now so I can't really look. Hmm, maybe they mean the receptors the thyroid hormones use?

Abraham says that normal subjects excrete 3-12 mg/L Br-, but he does find cases that excrete amounts of bromide that would be consistent with toxicity. These seem to be rather few and far between, but they apparently exist. On the other hand, it seems like most people who take high dose iodine think that they are detoxing bromide. I still think that most of those are probably not brominism, but something else. However, I don't doubt that it's possible to carry a large body burden of bromide from certain sodas and drugs, if they're used in excess, and that these people may well show bromide-related symptoms when they take high dose iodine.

Normal subjects, right. He also says that brominism is quite rare in his experience(therefore low urine bromide levels). The question is how many of the high dose iodine supplementing population actually have skin rashes? Maybe that fraction is quite low, fitting the amount of people that could have brominism, but they are the only ones to speak up? While those with no problems with iodine don't say much. Without data, its hard to say.
Don't forget, iodine treatments in the last centuries were in the gram range. I would figure if iodine itself causes skin rashes within the 100mg range, it would be unbearable in the 1000+mg range, and even more in the 10g range. (disclaimer: those dosages were only reported for potassium iodide, not other forms of iodine and I would highly recommend NOT to try those dosages just because some forum user, in this case me, wrote that he read about it in old studies. small reminder, high iodine dosages can lead to blindness, see earlier posts)
So I would figure that this and its fast clearance rate make skin rashes only realistic with really high dosages.

I sure wish there was someone besides Abraham and his cronies looking at all of this. Abraham never publishes in peer-reviewed journals. All of his publications are in the same Natural Healing/Chiropractic magazine, called "The Original Internist". He provides financial support to the publication through his company, and he also sells the products that he writes about. In terms of conflict of interest, it doesn't get much worse than this. His work isn't obviously wrong, but it's limited to small cohorts and also to case studies, which would be called "anecdotes" if they were reported here.

This sucks. You are right. And I can not understand why brownstein and others using abrahams methology do not keep records for every patient and publish them. By now, according to them, thousands have been treated. But where is the data? Why do they not publish in a good peer reviewed journal? If I did not have positive results with iodine, I'd be the first to scream SNAKE OIL!

Also I do not understand why they do not publish papers on iodine's toxicity. This is one of the main points why iodine has a bad reputation, and the first thing to do would be to set the facts right to get recognition and THEN move forward with the other stuff.

It gives me the impression that they like to be and to stay underdogs, and that they do not want to turn around the mainstream view of iodine in medicine.

[BioFreak]

are you people dumb? taking such doses of iodine? do you want to kill yourself? the maximum dose is 1100 mcg, if you take too much iodine will cause hypothyroidism, auto immune thyroiditis and destroy your thyroid function, no one needs to ever supplement iodine you get enough in table salt
if you have a thyroid dysfunction go to a doctor to get prescribed T4 treatment don't resort to dangerous homemade treatments with iodine which will make things worse

This is either placebo or due to a thyroid issue. If you think placebo can't do this, check out this documentary:

Thyroid is not the only organ that needs iodine. Apart from the thyroid iodine has many functions. Check out www.iodineresearch.com to see for yourself. But I agree, many of Siros reported effects sound like his thyroid works better when he is supplementing with iodine.

... something in my stack is causing me acne and I need to figure out what it is... Not sure if the acne was merely a detox, or pores clogging.

How committed are you to the "bromine detox" hypothesis?

I was amused & alarmed to read the following comment apparently made by bromine detox-believer Paul Jaminet:

http://paleohacks.co...l#axzz2mUAXXLum

Iodine consumption often triggers bromine release from cells and high serum and urinary bromine. Bromine is a known cause of acne. However, sustained intake of iodine will eventually clear bromine from the body and end the acne. In some cases, this can take a year or more.

Enjoy your 12 months of acne.

That's why if someone has bromide acne, he/she should salt load to dramatically increase bromide excretion. I for one have tried both, with salt loading its a matter of days, without, it takes months for even a minimal improvement.

Siro: Just wondering, did you ever get a full thyroid blood work? Free and bound t3 and t4, reverse t3 and antibodies? At least some of the effects you describe sound like the thyroid starts working again how it should when you supplement with iodine, while without, it does malfunction.

[Absent]

No I have not had time to get bloodwork done. I am a full time student and I manage 3 home businesses, as well as taking care of my siblings. Don't exactly have the time.

[niner]

Just a note regarding Chloride (Saline) loading- If you're going to consume ten grams of salt per day, you probably ought to not use sea salt, since it's 0.2% bromide. Thus you'd be eating an extra 20mg/day of bromide. It's conceivable that sea salt has other components that are useful in the procedure, although it does contain a lot of stuff, some of which you probably don't really want to eat, like one microgram of Uranium in 10g sea salt.

[finalgates]

so is himalayan safest?or has some bad stuff too?

as for iodine the fatigue has gone.maybe it was a detox.diarrhea too.but i dont see benefits so far.except more intense dreams.i use 12,5mg iodoral a day.with cofactors.

[BioFreak]

Just a note regarding Chloride (Saline) loading- If you're going to consume ten grams of salt per day, you probably ought to not use sea salt, since it's 0.2% bromide. Thus you'd be eating an extra 20mg/day of bromide. It's conceivable that sea salt has other components that are useful in the procedure, although it does contain a lot of stuff, some of which you probably don't really want to eat, like one microgram of Uranium in 10g sea salt.

Himalaya salt or salt from underground deposits should be fine, when it comes to pollution mankind created(I'm always wondering if there are nano plastic particles in sea salt?). But don't forget, with 10g of salt loading a day, the half life of bromide is very short, so a bit extra bromide should not make a difference in this case.

And speaking from experience... refined table salt tastes awful Also speaking from experience, the extra bromide in unrefined salt - if mine had any - did not in any way make my symptoms worse. Salt loading pretty much kicks ass for getting rid of high iodine induced, possible bromide or fluoride acne.

Time table for eliminating acne caused by this(own experience):
no salt loading: months to years
salt loading, depending on dosage and severity: days to weeks