ThomasJoel2;58936 wrote: I agree with Danny33 that doing low dose DMPS is relatively harmless and likely to provide relief [h]if indeed mercury is a problem[/h].
(Highlighting by me.)
The highlighted part is the key. If, and only if, mercury is the cause of your problems, then chelating might help. If mercury is not the cause of your problems, chelating is risky.
Chelating at a low dose is of course less risky. But it is still risky. The stress on your liver and kidneys will be lower, but there will still be stress. Your electrolyte balances will not be disturbed as much, but they will still be disturbed.
Chelating with low doses for a prolongued time and then pretending you are safe, is the same as taking antibiotics in a low dose for a prolongued time and then pretending your are safe.
ThomasJoel2;59110 wrote: It’s my opinion […] that mercury and heavy metals are the primary reason we suffer.
Any reason for your belief?
ThomasJoel2;59110 wrote: Removing the metals safely usually leads to either significant improvements or a full recovery.
Sure. But I cannot repeat enough: this is only true IF metals are the cause of the problem.
Removing non-existent metals is unlikely to solve any problem at all.
ThomasJoel2;59110 wrote: I’m doing MUCH better now than before I had started chelation.
You are doing MUCH better now because more than two years have passed. You would have done even better if you would not have poisoned your organs by the chelation chemicals.
Really, if chelation would help, it would be used by doctors. Luckily, doctors know their stuff, so they are chelating their patients only after having tested them for metal poisoning.