Alternatives & Traditional

Posts tagged ‘myth’

Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Part 2: Iodine Supplementation Support Forum by VWT Team Part 1

Curezone actually has two separate iodine support forums.  I don’t trust the information being given on either one of the forums.  The forum that most worries me though is the Iodine Supplementation Support Forum by VWT Team forum.

One of the issues I have with this forum is that I have read so many people complaining of iodine poisoning symptoms on this forum.  When people report their side effects though it is always the same false reply.  The people dealing with iodine poisoning are told that their symptoms are actually from a “bromine detox”.

Two of the main recommendations that the people suffering from iodine poisoning are given is to do a salt flush and then increase their iodine intake even more.  The salt flushes are claimed to flush the bromine out of their systems, but salt flushes push the excess iodine causing the poisoning out of their system.  The induced hyperthyroidism from the toxic levels of iodine is then suppressed by taking even larger doses of iodine, which force the thyroid to start shutting down thus getting rid of the iodine induced hyperthyroidism.

The VWT team is not worried about who their advice is going to injure, they just want people to consume more iodine so they can sell those people more iodine.  It’s actually quite a scam.  Get people to take toxic levels of iodine, get them to flush out the excess iodine with a salt flush and finally get them to buy and take even more iodine from them to suppress the thyroid the iodine induced hyperactivity in.

Anyone questioning the safety of the recommendations are banned from the forum as I was and this poster:

I was eventually banned completely from Curezone after putting up several posts proving the dangers of taking too much iodine.  I found out later that Trapper, the “T” in VWT was one of the originals on Curezone and is an advertiser on Curezone.  And since the Curezone Webmaster cares as little about safety as the VWT team and is also money oriented I clearly had to go since I was questioning safety of Curezone protocols.

One of the common symptoms that are reported is acne, which again is incorrectly blamed on a bromine detox.  It was known long before bromine became somewhat common in food that iodine could cause acne.  This article from 1912 demonstrates this fact.


More currently, these articles again show a link between iodine and acne:—The-Controversy&id=348151


Even naturopathic doctors  admit that iodine can cause acne:

“SSKI or iodine can very occasionally cause acne, which also goes away once the source of iodine is discontinued.”


When I posted the Science News article discussing the connection I had several iodine supporters start claiming that I was against iodine supplementation.  Despite explaining to them multiple times that I use and recommend herbs with iodine and that the problem only occurs in some sensitive individuals the iodine forum supporters kept up with the same bogus claims.

I have never been against iodine, I am against the recommending of toxic doses of iodine.  As I told the iodine forum supporters too much water or oxygen can kill a person.  This does not mean people should not drink water or stop breathing.

It has been shown that both bromine and iodine can cause acne for the same reasons, irritation and inflammation off the follicles, there are differences.  Bromine induced acne results in  deeper infections and abscesses.  In addition, bromine acne takes much longer to clear up than iodine induced acne.  Bromine induced acne takes around 3 weeks to clear up as where iodine induced acne clears up in a short time.

Despite the acne breakouts from the excess iodine people are reporting not fitting the description of bromine induced acne the iodine forum supporters keep holding to their bogus claim.

More evidence that their claim is bogus can be seen by the simple fact that the breakouts only occur when iodine is ingested.  How is this proof?  Simple.   People are not being exposed to anywhere near as much bromine as the iodine forum supporters are trying to lead people in to believing.  This is why bromism (bromine poisoning) is considered extremely rare.  And in those very rare cases they have been linked almost exclusively to the use of bromine pharmaceutical drugs, which are not widely used.  Since bromine has a very short half-life in the body it just does not get built up in the body again except in extremely rare cases.  In addition, bromine is readily displaced by chlorine and especially fluoride.  The average person is exposed to tremendously larger amounts of chlorine and fluoride than bromine.  Simply taking a bath or shower leads to the absorption of a large amount of chlorine.  Swimming in a pool can do the same thing.  Eating most processed foods or drinks exposes us to large amounts of fluoride as fluoridated water is used to produce the products.  Drinking tap water or brushing the teeth or using fluoridated mouthwash can further expose people to more fluoride.  Green tea has been especially popular over the last few years due to its purported health properties.  Green tea, oolong and black teas are extremely high in natural fluoride, yet there is no epidemic of acne outbreaks among tea drinkers.  With all these more reactive halogens constantly displacing the already short half-life bromine in the body how does it build up in the body as the iodine forum supporters claim?   So far, they have yet to explain this magical phenomenon that they tout.

Also of interest is that when people complain of iodine poisoning symptoms the iodine forum supporters keep telling people to do a salt flush to flush out the bromine that they claim is built up in the tissues.  The salt actually flushes out the excess iodine helping to reduce the symptoms of iodine poisoning.   The important point here though is that the salt (sodium chloride) is half chlorine, which displaces the iodine, especially if not iodized itself.  The salt can also displace bromine out of the body as well if present.  This brings us to the question though of considering how much salt people consume on a daily basis from processed foods, salting their foods, salts naturally occurring in meats,  beer, etc. how can bromine that we are hardly exposed to build up even with all the salt people consume?  Add to this all the other sources of halogens we are exposed to that displace bromine on a daily basis and it is pretty clear that the “bromine detox” claims are simply a myth.

Yet, there is still even more evidence the “bromine detox” claims are a myth.

For example, why don’t people break out all over from soaking in brominated hot tubs?

So far the iodine forum supporters have never been able to answer my questions or counter any of my points with evidence.  Only personal attacks, which proves to me that they cannot support their claims.

If the do try then they don’t even read their own evidence.  For example, in one post an iodine forum supporter posted this study as evidence:

As we read the study we find out that the study is based on ONE case. Yet the people arguing with me try to make it sound like we have a widespread epidemic of bromine poisoning because they found one study about one person developing bromism. Or they read the claim from the first person who made this claim and ran with it without ever checking their facts. In fact the first line of the abstract states “Bromism is an UNUSUAL occurrence”.

Then there is this statement from the same review:

“Bromism, the chronic intoxication with bromide is rare and has been almost forgotten.”

So where are all the cases of bromism?  The iodine forum supporters are making it sound like bromine is in everything so most people will have excess bromine in their system.  If this were the case though then the MAJORITY of the population would have serious acne lesions.  In reality though this is obviously is not the case.  Even when I used to drink sodas like Mountain Dew and ate tons of bread I never got acne.  I never suffered brain damage either or any of the other side effects they claim can occur.  Different people can react differently to bromine, but I find it interesting that as common as they claim bromine exposure is that we do not see more symptoms actually associated with bromism.  Are the majority of people immune to the supposed side effects of bromine, soy and the many other substances that the “sky is falling” proponents are running around warning us about?  Or is it simply more hype than fact?  If it were fact I would also expect there to be a lot of research backing up these claims.  Yet the research is seriously lacking.

Additionally, look at the reactivity of different halogens:

The reactivity of halogens goes from fluorine to chlorine to bromine and finally iodine with fluorine being the most reactive and iodine the least reactive.

The more reactive halogens will displace the less reactive halogens, not the other way around.  So how can the iodine being pushing the bromine out of the body to cause acne when the bromine is a more reactive than the iodine.  If anything the bromine would be pushing the iodine out through the skin once again causing iodine induced acne.

So the iodine forum supporters keep claiming that all the more reactive fluorine and chlorine we are exposed to on a daily basis are not displacing the bromine, but taking less reactive iodine is somehow, suddenly pushing the bromine out of the body.

As we can see the reality of the situation is that the iodine, not bromine, is responsible for these common acne breakouts when taking excess iodine.

Why Statins and Low Cholesterol Cause Heart Attacks and Strokes

No studies have ever proven that high cholesterol causes heart disease since this simply is not true.  Inflammation, not high cholesterol leads to atherosclerosis.  Yet the pharmaceutical companies keep pushing the cholesterol myth to promote drug sales while ignoring the fact that they are endangering lives.

Statins are the most commonly prescribed form of medicine for the treatment of “high” cholesterol.  The drug companies have failed though to inform the public about the dangers of not only these drugs, but also of the dangers of low cholesterol, which among other things can cause heart attack and stroke.

I find it rather ironic that the drug companies are pushing statins claiming they help prevent heart disease when these drugs are well known to increase the risk of heart failure, heart attacks and strokes!  There are several reasons for this.

Other than liver damage, the best known side effect of statins is a condition known as rhabdomyolosis.  This is a condition in which muscle tissue deteriorates.  The deterioration occurs from declining levels of CoQ10 in the tissues, which is required for the proper function of cells and their energy production through the formation of adenosine triphosphate (ATP).  What people often do not stop and think about is that the heart is also a muscle and is prone to the same damaging effects from the use of statins.  If taking statins I highly recommend taking at least 200mg of CoQ10 daily to help reduce the risk of statin induced heart failure.

The increased risk of heart attack and stroke actually occur for a totally different reason.  If you read my blog articles on the dangers of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) you will see that the risk of heart attack and stroke are related.  Several NSAIDs, such as Vioxx and Celebrex have been either pulled off the market or have required stronger warning labels warning of the increased risk of heart attack and stroke from these drugs.  Even though the drug companies tried to make it sound like a new discovery, the risk had been known prior to the drugs ever reaching the market.  The problem stems from the way these drugs work.  NSAIDs interfere with inflammatory prostaglandins.  Inflammatory prostaglandins are hormones that dilate blood vessels.  For example during injuries these hormones open up blood vessels to increase oxygen and nutrient levels to the area to promote healing.  By inhibiting these hormones NSAIDs decrease blood flow to the organs including the heart and brain.  If the blood supply is sufficiently reduced to the heart and brain, heart attack or stroke can occur.

So what does all this have to do with statins and cholesterol levels?  Prostaglandins, as with other hormones, are formed from cholesterol.  Therefore, reduced cholesterol levels lead to decreased prostaglandin formation, which in turn decreases blood flow to the organs.  This explains why studies have consistently shown increased mortality with decreased cholesterol levels.

The Cholesterol Myth

One of the largest frauds perpetuated on the American public has been the false claim that high cholesterol causes heart disease.  Even though this has been known for decades to be false the myth keeps getting promoted by the drug companies to increase drug sales of drugs, such as statins.  The whole idea of high cholesterol causing heart disease started with a faulty, outdated rabbit study from the 1920s.  No solid evidence of high cholesterol causing heart disease in humans has ever been shown.  In fact, evidence is to the contrary.  Several studies have confirmed that as cholesterol levels go down that the mortality rate goes up primarily from increased heart attacks and strokes.  It has been known for a while that around 50% of people who die from heart vascular disease have normal to low cholesterol levels.

What I really find interesting is how doctors who should be reasonably intelligent don’t seem to be questioning how people can have low cholesterol and clogged arteries or high cholesterol and clean arteries.  In fact I just heard a commercial for Lipitor where Dr. Jarvic is claiming that high cholesterol can lead to heart attack and stroke.  I would love to ask him in person to explain this mechanism since there is absolutely no science whatsoever to back up his claim!

Cholesterol levels are actually totally irrelevant to the risk of atherosclerosis.  It is inflammation, not high cholesterol that leads to atherosclerosis.  Cholesterol is actually a healing agent for the body.  Where there is an injury in the body cholesterol will increase in that area to aid in the healing by acting as both a patchwork and as a precursor for other substances such as hormones that play a role in healing.  Various things can cause trauma and inflammation to the arteries and are well known for increasing the risk of heart disease.  These include high blood pressure, diabetes, smoking and even bypass operations.  Damage to the arterial lining leads to inflammation.  In response, cholesterol floods the area and lays down as a “patchwork” over the injured area.  The problem is that if the source of inflammation is not removed then the cholesterol will keep depositing in an attempt to heal the injured area narrowing the artery.

Tag Cloud