Curing Alzheimer’s, Parkinson's and AIDS… or A Further Bit of Wild Speculation

                Light and sound, by augmenting existing therapies or eradicating infections or conditions outright, may also prove critical in defeating Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, AIDS and every other infectious disease on Earth besides AIDS. These effects may not exactly be a #CancerMoonshot, but given the opportunity to bring them up – and potentially to wipe out over half the major diseases on Earth – we might as well cover all bases. The methods would not be exactly the same in each case, but there is sufficient overlap between them to warrant further consideration, especially given the advantages noted in our initial #CancerMoonshot.

                To begin, there are frequencies of blue and red light which can kill bacteria, extremely brief pulses of laser light can destroy viruses, ultrasound can be tuned to destroy specific pathogens whether viral or bacterial, infrared light and ultrasound can destroy protein tangles (and ultrasound can ease open the blood-brain barrier to help sweep them away), near-infrared light can already help treat Parkinson’s and visible and infrared light (not to mention DCA, quercetin and PQQ) can reactivate mitochondria. How does all of this help us?

                Because, as with cancer, we may be able to combine these non-traditional and mostly non-toxic interventions in ways that enhance their potency and compensate for each other’s limitations. We will get to those enhancements shortly. But first, let’s review the above techniques.

                So, red and blue LEDs have both been used to kill bacteria. For example, this study on the impact of blue light on bacterial infection or this one on red light destroying bacteria through photodynamic action.

“In a proof-of-concept study, led by Dr. Michael R. Hamblin of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, an array of blue LEDs was used to treat infected burns on lab mice. More specifically, the blue light was used to selectively eradicate potentially-lethal Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteria in the animals’ skin and soft tissues.

“The results of the study were promising. All of the light-treated mice survived, while 82 percent of the untreated control group died. Additionally, unlike bacteria-killing ultraviolet light, the blue light wasn’t harmful to the animals’ own cells.”

This technology is probably the least dramatic option available to us, but is an important place to start. As noted previously, not only can these lights shine with some limited penetration through human skin, every endoscopic probe contains a fiber-optic cable, allowing access into the body’s depths though the respiratory, digestive and circulatory systems.  

Further, if red and blue LED lights can be used to kill bacteria, why not use genetic engineering to create blood cells with similar properties for temporary transfusion into the body (using optogenetics as an optional trigger)? Modifying organisms to give them bioluminescence is, for better or worse, one of the most common demonstrations of genetic modification and red blood cells do not reproduce themselves. Such a transfusion could be run through the body temporarily until replaced by a second transfusion or simply left in place until the cells were replaced naturally. Either way, modified cells would represent a relatively non-invasive way to wipe out a rampant bacterial infection.

                But while eliminating bacteria is useful, it is only the beginning.

                Further, certain frequencies of light have been observed to break up the protein tangles associated with Alzheimer’s. To the extent that countering this symptom helps in the disease’s overall treatment, it is worth noting. Indeed, any symptoms which can be countered in a safe, non-invasive way may be worth eliminating, particularly if these interventions prove effective in slowing the pace of the condition. Johns Hopkins came up with a means of killing viruses via laser, albeit one which is of greater value, at present, for purging blood and other fluids removed from the body.

“A study by Kong-Thon Tsen of Arizona State University along with researchers at Johns Hopkins University shows how strong blasts of visible light from a low-power laser can kill viruses.”

“The researchers aimed a low-power laser with a pulse lasting 100 femtoseconds (10-13 second) into glass tubes containing saline-diluted viruses that infect bacteria, also known as bacteriophages.  The amount of infectious virus within each cube plummeted 100- to 1000-fold after the laser treatment.”

                Granted, this particular technology would be of greater use at present in purging a patient’s blood, lymph and/or other bodily fluids, particularly if it were impractical to simply transfuse uninfected fluids to replace them. However, as micro-technology improves, including a temporary or permanent stint in a large blood vessel to deliver these pulses and steadily purge the circulatory system of viruses might have its own advantages. Unfortunately, even given a non-chemical form of high-density power storage, there limits to how much concentrated energy we will want to implant in the sensitive tissues of a human body, and the only means of point-to-point energy transmission likely to emerge in the near future is not available for public consumption for unrelated safety issues. Still, as a means of augmenting other antiviral procedures, this technology is worth noting.

                Which brings us to a more promising method of attacking viral invaders throughout the body, ultrasound. To sum up:

“Healthy cells and tissue have a natural frequency within which they resonate. Maladies such as viruses, bacteria, parasites, other infectious agents, and cancerous cells/tissue generally have different natural resonating frequency ranges compared to healthy cells and tissue. If a carefully selected level of ultrasound energy with a carefully selected frequency is delivered to a subject with a malady, the ultrasound energy has the capability of destroying viruses, bacteria, parasites, other infectious agents, and cancerous cells/tissue at their respective resonating frequencies. An advantage is that due to the differences in the natural resonance ranges, one frequency that disrupts or destroys viruses, bacteria, parasites, other infectious agents, and cancerous cells/tissue can leave healthy cells and tissue unharmed.”

                Determining the ideal resonant frequency for destroying a particular target – viral, bacterial, parasitic, etc – should be a simple matter of testing, and those frequencies can be recorded to create a library for medical practitioners. This testing should ultimately be automated to speed the analysis of every major viral and bacterial infection, though of course still supported with human oversight. Should a particular species change rapidly over time, such as a typical flu virus, simply extract a sample of the targeted pathogen as necessary and test destructive frequencies on it again. Augmented by other resources such as existing medications, light-based therapies and so forth, it should be possible to decimate any normal infection in short order, and potentially to defeat even extraordinarily resilient viruses such as AIDS.

                Which brings us to another application of ultrasound, breaking up beta-amyloid tangles and removing them from the brain. Granted, the degree to which beta-amyloids and tau proteins are the primary or sole culprit in the deterioration due to Alzheimer’s is an open question, but obviously the team investigating this method enjoyed positive results from it.

“Publishing in Science Translational Medicine, the team describes the technique as using a particular type of ultrasound called a focused therapeutic ultrasound, which non-invasively beams sound waves into the brain tissue. By oscillating super-fast, these sound waves are able to gently open up the blood-brain barrier, which is a layer that protects the brain against bacteria, and stimulate the brain’s microglial cells to activate. Microglila cells are basically waste-removal cells, so they’re able to clear out the toxic beta-amyloid clumps that are responsible for the worst symptoms of Alzheimer’s.

“The team reports fully restoring the memory function of 75 percent of the mice they tested it on, with zero damage to the surrounding brain tissue. They found that the treated mice displayed improved performance in three memory tasks - a maze, a test to get them to recognise new objects, and one to get them to remember the places they should avoid.”

                Clearly, if damage has already been done, then eliminating the proximate cause may not lead to ultimate repair of that injury, though it can help prevent matters from getting worse. Still, we want to examine multiple methods of treatment for both halting the decline and reversing existing loss of function, memory, etc.

                With Parkinson’s, there is a question of whether the accumulated Lewy bodies found in deteriorating parts of the brain are a cause of the damage or protective. In the former case, however, the ability to break down and remove these structures may prove useful, using the same methods described above for Alzheimer’s. However, there is another proposal suggesting that red and infrared light - especially near-infrared light - could have neuroprotective effects on those suffering from Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s by restoring mitochondrial functions in ailing brain cells.

The linked article is worth reading in its entirety. But to include some excerpts: “Previous studies have used NIr to treat tissue stressed by hypoxia, toxic insult, genetic mutation and mitochondrial dysfunction with much success. Here we propose NIr therapy as a neuroprotective or disease-modifying treatment for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's patients.”

                “In the context of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, although they have distinct initiating causes, both diseases converge on common pathways of inflammation and oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction and neuronal death, indicating that NIr may be beneficial to both through the same protective mechanisms.”

                “To the best of our knowledge, there have been no major publications—at least in peer-reviewed journals—on the efficacy of NIr in Alzheimer's patients. There are some web pages referring to either an Alzheimer extracranial “helmet,” housing many LEDs of wavelengths ranging from 660 to 1070 nm (e.g., http://www.emersonww.com/InfraredHelmet.htm; http://www.science20.com/news_releases/can_this_infra_red_helmet_cure_alzheimers_in_10_minutes_a_day; http://www.instructables.com/id/LED-helmet-for-dementia-alzheimers-parkinsons), or an intranasal device delivering NIr to the brain (http://www.mediclights.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Alzheimer-with-intranasal-light-08-22-13-1.pdf). However, there are no reports, either published, or in progress, of clinical trials on Alzheimer's patients. Two clinical studies by Naeser et al. (2011, 2014) have reported improvements in executive function, learning and memory after NIr treatment—delivered via an extracranial helmet-like device using two LEDs—in a small number of patients suffering chronic traumatic brain injury. Further, there are two human studies in healthy individuals reporting that NIr therapy improves attention and short-term memory (Barrett and Gonzalez-Lima, 2013) and executive functions (Blanco et al., 2015). Although these studies are promising in the sense that NIr therapy resulted in cognitive improvements, the subjects were not Alzheimer's patients.”

                “In summary, a number of experimental studies have demonstrated that NIr therapy improves motor behavior and provides neuroprotection in various rodent models of both Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease; for Parkinson's disease, these benefits have been reported in a non-human primate model as well. However, the evidence for therapeutic benefit at the clinical level is far sparser, prompting the need for systematic, large-scale clinical trials of NIr therapy in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's patients.”

                “The putative NIr protective mechanisms in the brain. (A) Direct NIr stimulation of the mitochondria of the damaged neurons or endothelial cells. This stimulation would repair the damage leading to neuronal protection. NIr may also stimulate neurogenesis in the hippocampus and/or synaptogenesis in the damaged neurons (B) indirect (remote) stimulation via circulating immune cells and/or bone marrow stem cells leading to neuronal protection. The latter is similar to the so-called “abscopal” effect in the treatment of cancer metastasis. We suggest that the primary mechanism is the direct effect, of neurons and/or of endothelial cells, while the systemic indirect effect forms a secondary supportive mechanism.”

“The phenomenon of indirect NIr-induced neuroprotection is likely to involve the same mechanisms, at a cellular level, as those that provide neuroprotection to damaged cells with direct NIr stimulation (i.e., stimulation of mitochondrial function; Figure ​Figure2A).2A). Although the concept of indirect, remote NIr therapy holds promise for future applications, it is not yet as fully understood and developed as direct NIr therapy, thus our subsequent discussion will focus primarily on direct NIr stimulation. Further, some early results in an animal model of Parkinson's disease suggest that, although remote NIr provides neuroprotection, this protection was not as robust as when NIr was applied directly to the head (Stone et al., 2013; Johnstone et al., 2014b; presumably stimulating local neurons and/or endothelial cells). In other words, neuroprotection was achieved with both local and remote NIr treatment, but the local treatment was the more effective. As a working hypothesis, we suggest that direct stimulation of the mitochondria and reparative mechanisms, either in the neurons themselves or in the local endothelial cells (and/or stimulation of neurogenesis), forms the primary mechanism of NIr-induced neuroprotection. A more systemic (indirect) stimulation of immune and/or stem cells may form a secondary and complementary mechanism. We suggest that stimulation of both direct and indirect mechanisms would generate maximum NIr-induced neuroprotection.”

“To date, there are no reports of major safety issues nor side-effects after NIr treatment. The commercial LED panels for NIr therapy have already received non-significant risk status by the Food and Drug Administration and previous studies have indicated no adverse impact on brain tissue structure and function after NIr treatment (power range from ~1 to 700 mW/cm²; Desmet et al., 2006; Hamblin and Demidova, 2006; Ilic et al., 2006; Zivin et al., 2009; McCarthy et al., 2010; Naeser et al., 2011, 2014; Rojas and Gonzalez-Lima, 2011; Chung et al., 2012; Tata and Waynant, 2012; Quirk et al., 2012a,b; Moro et al., 2014). There is one sole account of some neuronal damage and negative behavioral outcomes in mice, but this was evident after an exceptionally high power intensity (750 mW/cm²; Ilic et al., 2006), approximately one hundred times higher than the dose required to elicit a therapeutic response (e.g., < 10 mW/cm²). Hence, when taken together, these data indicate that when NIr was applied at therapeutic doses (and even well above these doses), its impact on body tissue was overwhelmingly positive, and had a very large safety margin of application...” “Further, there appears to be no longer-term side effects associated with NIr application; in a long-term study in rats, no adverse effects were noted after daily treatment for 12 months (McCarthy et al., 2010).”

So now we come full circle, discussing how all the methods cited above could be even more effective when applied, as appropriate, in concert.

For example, as we have just cited, one possible factor in cellular deterioration in Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s is a shutdown in their mitochondria. The suggestions previously offered for reactivating mitochondria for the purpose of causing apoptosis in cancerous cells also apply when attempting to restore mitochondrial activity in failing brain cells in Parkinson’s. To sum up, DCA has been reactivating mitochondria in these cells so they could trigger the signal causing these otherwise “immortal” cells to die, as has quercetin. PQQ has a similar effect on mitochondria, especially in conjunction with COQ10 and NAC, as does NIR and the Q1000 with its mix of FIR and visible light.

So once again, why not combine these factors when restoring mitochondrial function, along with any other non-toxic means of doing the same thing? And at the same time, use the ultrasound method for removing disruptive beta-amyloids and tau proteins in Alzheimer’s or Levy structures in Parkinson’s. You can continue to use other existing therapies, but also consider other known, non-invasive methods for accomplishing the same ends, such as using sensory-deprivation tanks to boost natural dopamine levels in early-onset Parkinson’s patients.

And the synergies do not end there. As discussed previously, every endoscope contains a fiber-optic line which can transmit visible and infrared light, simplifying the localized concentration of, say NIr therapy on specific cells. But if we can genetically modify an infusion of blood to generate blue or red bio-luminescence, why not to generate far or near infrared light? Of course, we would want to study the long-term effects of using such infusions, but the blood circulating around the brain might prove a relatively non-invasive means to shine the necessary frequencies on otherwise deteriorating cells. Other alternatives might include the permanent alteration of supportive tissues within the brain itself, though this would require careful risk assessment as well.

                Similarly, purging the blood of pathogens on the one hand while working ones way down the body with an ultrasound application pitched to destroy the diagnosed viral infection could prove a useful one-two approach to avoid too many viruses slipping past that methodical approach through our rapidly pulsing circulatory system. Light and ultrasound could also be combined against bacterial intruders.

                And so uniting these disparate elements forms a whole greater than its constituent parts, a demonstration of the power of unity in diversity.

                We originally forwarded this suggestion that visible and infrared light could combine with DCA anything else restoring mitochondrial activity as a cure to cancer to the U.S. Federal government sometime around 10/20/16. These more recent articles merely expand on that in light of the Vice-President’s #CancerMoonshot, in the hope that someone may take note of any useful ideas herein. All these suggestions are hereby placed into public domain.

Curing All Cancers, or... A Bit of Wild Speculation

            The Obama Administration asked for our best ideas to be researched in their #CancerMoonshot, so here are three key concepts which they might find useful.

            The first core idea is to combine several techniques at once which are apt to lead to the death of cancerous cells while only enhancing each method’s effectiveness instead of interfering with each other. The second core idea is to apply some of these techniques to other major diseases. The third core idea is to enhance other elements of health care to help with diagnosis and prevention of cancer as well as other illnesses.

            So, to begin, the suspected cancer-fighting benefits of dichloroacetic acid (DCA) caused quite a stir a few years ago. DCA was reputedly reactivating mitochondria in cancer cells which had shifted to glycolysis (a less efficient, anaerobic form of energy production found in these oxygen-starved cells). These newly awakened mitochondria were, in turn, triggering apoptosis (cell death) in these malignant cells. Further, a similar effect has been noted when using the supplement quercetin on tumors, and reactivating mitochondria is also a property of pyrroloquinoline quinone (or PQQ), particularly when used in concert with COQ10 and N-acetylcysteine.

            My as-yet-untested (but public domain) idea is this: A device called the Q1000 generates far-infrared radiation (FIR) and red-spectrum light which supposedly have a number of positive effects on the body, including an enhancement of mitochondrial function by as much as 150% and an increase in blood circulation in the area targeted, even in conventional use of the device. My thought is that these light-therapy effects, whether from this instrument or another, could be leveraged with a number of tactics and resources, including some other methods for boosting circulation in a targeted area or reducing it (as appropriate)… potentially triggering the same reactivation of mitochondria and cell apoptosis claimed in the DCA research, only more dramatically so, while combining this treatment with other treatments which also lead to the destruction of cancerous cells.

            If we can reach that end goal of restarted mitochondria and resultant dying cancer cells consistently, cheaply, safely, non-toxically and with primarily positive side effects (if any), we could revolutionize cancer treatment… by destroying cancer.

            Failing that, if we can merely augment existing treatments cheaply and effectively, we would at least have the chance to dramatically reduce fatalities associated with the disease.

            Let us discuss a few options possible in such a treatment.

            First, the claim of wholly beneficial impacts of the Q1000 and/or similar forms of light therapy, even if true, is probably only accurate within some limited level of use, if not standard recommended exposures. But as we are trying to kill the cells in question (if not surrounding or interposing cells), a certain measure of latitude is possible here. Hence, if continuous exposure increases the likelihood of mitochondria reactivation, then we have every reason to pursue it. (How we can bring about this exposure and effectively target it without strapping multiple low-powered far-infrared lasers to the body of a hapless patient or lab rat will be dealt with below.)

            Second, changing circulation levels may prove useful in a few different ways. There are a number of physical and chemical methods for changing overall circulation either in the entire body or in specific areas, from niacin to negative pressure and so forth, but a less well-known and less intrusive technique is Dr. Win Wenger’s “Expansion method,” wherein you imagine a part of your body an inch larger in all dimensions and an inch further from the center of your body. This latter effect can be more precisely targeted than many, and being non-physical combines easily with other tools. (If necessary for some patients, more elaborate biofeedback training could refine this effect. And clearly the Q1000 itself is another source of targeted circulation enhancement, which is already involved in the overall process.)

            Depending on various tumors respond, these tools, used separately or in concert, could help reverse the shift to glycolysis as part of the reactivation of more normal cell function and the mitochondria themselves.

            Alternatively, if reactivating mitochondria does not require further circulation, but a reduction of circulation augmented by the Q1000 itself is required in any instance, there is a little-tested variant of the Expansion method, the Contractile technique. Imagining a part of the body as an inch smaller in all dimensions and an inch closer to the center of the body may well reduce circulation in that area. One reason to employ this tool could be to reduce blood flow to a newly forming tumor and to encourage its early shift to glycolysis so that change can be fatally reversed with Q1000 targeting and other resources. A shutdown in localized circulation by also encouraging glycolysis in cells on the surface of tumor which might not reach that state as quickly as the rest of the mass. Basic biofeedback techniques should help if any extensive training in this (very simple) technique) is needed, not to mention providing one objective measure of whether they are working at specific sites in the body.

            Further, ultrasound increases the absorption of topical quercetin up to a thousand times, which leads to two other interesting treatments – high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and hyperthermia. Increasing the heat of tumors by a few degrees can also trigger apoptosis, and ultrasound is one way this heat can be transmitted. Another obvious way to transmit heat would be far-infrared wavelengths as employed by the Q1000 and similar therapies (which also have some ability to penetrate tissues). The precise, ideal intensities of FIR/red-spectrum light and ultrasound to be employed, as well as the optimal quantities of the above substances is clearly a matter for experimentation and will likely vary based on the cancer’s type, location and stage of development, as well as factors apt to vary from patient to patient.

(Incidentally, ultrasound can also open the blood-brain barrier when passing medications into the central nervous system, which has implications for cancer and other treatments in that part of the body.)

            Third, these tools can be combined with supplements and/or drugs (such as DCA) already known or suspected as mitochondrial rejuvenators or reactivators. These could be injected directly into tumors of sufficient size or as close to them as possible. Testing alternatives for relative value, compatibility with common drugs and so forth would be the obvious choice.

            Conventional drugs attacking the cancer may or may not be counterproductive, synergistic or neutral in their impact – alternatively disrupting mitochondrial reactivation, supplementing the effect with a lethal impact on targeted cells (especially surface cells), or having no significant net result. Again, DCA is an obvious option, as are quercetin, PQQ and anything likely to work synergistically in reactivating mitochondria.

            Allowing these supplements to flow in prior to any disruption in circulation may be necessary, depending on what you decide to do with blood flow around tumors. On the other hand, you may use such manipulations to boost the presence of these materials before beginning Q1000 exposure in earnest, perhaps increasing their levels again during breaks in FIR/red-spectrum treatment. Then again, injections, as well as another technique discussed below, may make these effort unnecessary.

            Fourth, how could these energies be transmitted continuously to precise locations without immobilizing the subject? Simple. Far-infrared, near-infrared and the entire spectrum of visible light can be transmitted over fiber optic lines. Said lines are also used in endoscopic surgery. These lines can be run through clothing made for this purpose, with their end points transmitting the necessary light and/or infrared radiation into fixed points. The cables can be set in position by any number of methods, from tight clothing molded to the body, to periodic patient/practitioner adjustment (with key points temporarily inked as indicators), to something as prosaic as a light bandage or tape. Internal transmission of these wavelengths is possible through medical endoscopes, though presumably for much shorter periods of time. Ultrasonic transmitters could similarly integrated into clothes or strapped on to the body.

            As an aside, to the extent that certain of these spectrums are capable of killing bacteria, then, to the extent that they penetrate human tissue more effectively than anything else in the visible spectrum, they may be effective for targeted or more broad-based elimination of harmful bacteria, such as in a patient suffering from a serious disease. The degree to which directly affecting its environment with light, FIR, ultrasound, heat and other factors, particularly in concert with conventional treatments can destroy bacterial or even viral infections may prove a critical area of study. Imagine if AIDS could be purged from lymph nodes or anywhere it may conceal itself in the body, turning its traditional safe havens into deathtraps for the virus.

            Further, certain frequencies of light have been observed to break up the protein tangles associated with Alzheimer’s. To the extent that countering this symptom helps in the disease’s overall treatment, it is worth noting. Indeed, any symptoms which can be countered in a safe, non-invasive way may be worth eliminating, particularly if these interventions prove effective in slowing the pace of the condition.

            Alternatively, to the extent that that transmission of light into mitochondria serves as an additional energy source, the above clothing, used within reasonable limits, might serve as an effective way to help normal exercising individuals increase their overall energy levels. Even people engaged in their daily activities might find such clothing useful, though again, within safe limits. (The potential impacts on fitness, obesity, diabetes and so forth require further consideration.)

            Finally, there are many other resources which should be tested for their value in diagnosis, for directly targeting (or healing) aberrant cells, for prevention of these or other illnesses and for the general enhancement of human health. For example, right now IBM has been developing a diagnostic version of Watson which collects symptoms and checks them against its database, presumably using both hard data from testing and subjective information from the patient’s comments and their doctor’s observations. But as our processing power and sensors’ accuracy continue to skyrocket, imagine a medical system that collected as much information as possible – continuously – from each patient included and uploaded them as anonymous profiles to an immense database. That next-generation supercomputer, be it Watson or whatever, would be constantly that array of subjective commentary and that ocean of hard data against everyone else, and would take particular note whenever someone was conclusively diagnosed with a particular condition. By taking that information and comparing patients against a host of other profiles, our neo-Watson could potentially note problems emerging before anyone thought to notice them, and narrow down if not correctly identify them in very little time. Other diagnostic and treatment options emerge in the face of even more radical improvements in processing power and sensor design, such as scanning every cell in the body non-invasively to look for any threats or problems, however small, and the potential capacity to address them all. However, that discussion will have to wait for a description of those next-generation technologies, which is beyond the scope of this article.

            Another curious option is simple hypnosis. Even self-hypnosis (listening to pre-recorded suggestions prepared by a hypnotist who may have no connection to the subject at all) has repeatedly been able to cause very measurable changes in the bodies of adults. Ironically, researcher repeated the same test over and over since the first trials in the 70s, but it has only been in the last 15 years or so that anyone has really been asking whether we should be applying the ability to make these changes to anything that actually matters – healing wounds, curing illnesses, improving circulation, reducing excess fat, increasing muscle strength, reducing the symptoms of aging or improving the fundamental bases of intelligence, to name a few. Self-hypnosis is, of course, almost an open invitation to fraudulent products, especially given that the only guarantor of effectiveness is market competition, and even a very well received recording may only be making someone feel good rather than dealing with the underlying problem it supposedly targets. Nevertheless, an effective recording can be duplicated without limit, and therefore any such tools which can be confirmed to be effective can be used at minimal expense to prevent or ameliorate conditions without disrupting any other interventions or therapies.

            Another question would be whether heavy metals and other toxins accumulating in the body could be purged or at least reduced. Obviously some issues arise with the overuse of powerful chelation techniques, but if safer and less-disruptive tools exists, they could be a fruitful means to prevent any number of long-term problems.

            Again, I do not presently have the resources to test the above suppositions, and this innovation was never the primary thrust of my research. But these techniques, speculative as they are, are now in the public domain. You may do with them as you will.