Paul Cutler, MD, PC
652 Elmwood Avenue
Niagara Falls, NY 14301

Dear Dr. Cutler:

Thank you very much for your letter of interest regarding oral chelation. I believe that there is a very important story regarding the potential benefits mankind may derive from oral chelators including EDTA. I agree that ACAM is clearly not helping their members get the facts. I fear that this policy of NOT allowing open debate, and not helping the members have access to the extensive scientific supporting material will be to the detriment of that organization.

Another Past President, Dr. Halstead is involved with Rectal suppositories of EDTA, and Dr. Rozema has reported that "EDTA in a rectal form . . . effectively removes lead . . ." I also know that Stephen Holt, MD, PhD, is working with Baylor University to finalize development of a liposome form of oral EDTA that he believes will be around sixty percent absorbed. Furthermore, I am being asked to consult with Proctor & Gamble on a new orally effective chelator they have developed. Thus I feel that ACCURATE information regarding EDTA administered in ANY form is vital for the credibility of all chelating physicians.

I was recently speaking with Mr. Joe Carmarmi, who is currently taking oral EDTA. He informed me that he has attended multi-level meetings of the Golden Pride people who specialize in promoting EDTA in honey for several years. He informed me that the founders of the company, now in their mid-80s, are vibrantly healthy and purportedly are examples of the benefits of years of continuously consuming oral EDTA. Their users describe many often benefits they believe they are getting from ingesting oral EDTA, taken in honey.

I am convinced that EDTA offers many benefits far beyond those involving vascular disease, on which ACAM has excessively focused, that patients in a polluted world will derive from the oral ingestion of EDTA.

More work needed to identify the mechanisms responsible for some of the benefits of EDTA. One of these, for example, is the "adjunctive" function of EDTA where benefits exceed anything that we can attribute to the simple chelation of metals.

One of these is the benefit of safe blood thinning. It was reported that heparin was found to become virtually as effective when taken by mouth as it had been by injection when given in the presence of EDTA (Nature, 1961).

This was the research that caused me to became extremely interested in adding oral EDTA to supplements back when I began working with Dr. Lester Morrison, whose life’s work on chrondroitin sulfate led to a sulfated polysaccharide derived from red algae that appeared to provide significant cardiovascular protective effects which we determined was due to its heparin-like activity. His Formula was shown to have a better 90 % reduction in heart attack incidence in 2 separate studies, described in published literature on my website.

Unfortunately, his original formula required people to take two tablespoons daily year after year, of something as unappealing as Metamucil twice a day to get those benefits. When I worked with Dr. Morrison and added oral EDTA to his formula, we were able to get the same benefits from a markedly reduced dosage form. This is now down to three capsules given twice a day, which I have chosen to formulate under the name Garlic Plus for Longevity Plus.

This highly effective oral detoxifying/ cardiovascular support formula is available for $10 per 100 to physicians. I am convinced because of the benefits seen in over fifteen years of clinical practice and the research with the Chandler-Loop test, which Dr. Morrison relied on for proof of anticoagulant activity, that we have a useful alternative for people who are unable to tolerate aspirin or who are not ill enough to warrant the even more risky use of Coumadin and heparin. Particularly, since page 407 of the book Vulnerable Plaque, produced by the American Heart Association, states that aspirin, heparin and Coumadin are all really not adequate for the task of safe and effective blood thinning, and they thus have a far worse benefit-risk ratio than the natural products I have chosen to put together which collectively are known as Beyond Chelation (9 caps-twice daily) which includes EPA, which BY ITSELF provably is more effective than aspirin in published studies.

There are other activities involving oral EDTA, which still require more research. For example the researchers at Los Alamos Laboratory commented that there was apparently a surprising increase in lead excretion, in some cases reportedly from 10 to 30-fold, in patients on oral EDTA taking the established dose of 1000mg to 3000mg per day. This apparently was more than could be logically explained from the five percent absorption that their research had established.

Furthermore, Chickens fed a Zinc deficient diet were effectively cured of signs of Zinc deficiency with oral EDTA. Yet some would have us believe that the oral use of EDTA would INDUCE zinc deficiency. Furthermore, rotifers lived fifty percent longer when repeatedly immersed in EDTA and sperm cells lived generations longer. These are just some of the facts gleaned from reviewing published literature that makes me convinced that there is still far more to learn regarding the potential benefits of oral Chelation and that make be believe there are still unidentified beneficial mechanisms of action of EDTA in the body.

Some researchers suggest that the "benefits" ascribed to EDTA merely prove the powerfully negative effect of today’s pollution on our health. This may be the lesson that we have to learn and clearly D. Blumer's 18+ years of research in Switzerland with CALCIUM EDTA strongly supports the notion that simple deleading offers such powerful benefits (90% reduction in Cardiovascular death rates over 18 years) that we DARE not belittle the benefits of oral Chelation for the average person.

In fact, I do not believe that it is necessary or possible to remove all of toxic metals. Although it has been proven advantageous to maintain as low levels as reasonably possible of heavy metals, (improved IQ etc) and clearly it is nice to be in negative balance, i.e. losing more toxic metals every day than we absorb, Yet, I believe that simply by adding EDTA to the body, which already has many other metal binders such as transferin, ferritin, ceruloplasmin, albumin and metallothionine, we aid the body in more effectively operating in this sea of heavy metal pollution we find ourselves confronting. This belief is augmented by the FDA clearly stated position that adding EDTA to FOODS diminishes oxidative degradation of nutrients in the foods.

I was rather shocked by the tone of letter to the editor that appeared in the ACAM Journal of Advancement in Medicine article written by Dr. Elmer Cranton suggesting that it was deceptive and possibly dangerous to have people take oral EDTA.

Dr Cranton suggests that there are going to be serious trace mineral deficiencies induced in anyone regularly consuming any significant quantities of EDTA. I do not deny that ALL interventions MUST have a benefit/risk analysis but I believe there are widely available effective mineral supplements, Dr Cranton and I had designed Basic Prevention for AMNI/Mineralab years ago and I have designed an improved version of this formula that I have great confidence will be more than adequate to prevent such trace mineral deficiencies. Furthermore, he is writing to the Physicians who use IV EDTA who presumably should be competent to diagnose or treat any such problems associated with therapies they recommend. . However, he asserts that intravenous therapy, since it is not given on a daily basis, avoids this serious danger. The fact that some of our most dramatic examples of EDTA’s benefits, such as Dr. Becquet and Dr. John Baron each have received well over 1,000 treatments, suggests to me that he may be completely wrong regarding this danger of too frequent exposure to EDTA, it seems to me that the rotifer experiment proves the opposite, namely that the MORE EDTA we receive (within limits to be determined I admit) the better!

Unfortunately, I am having trouble getting the true dimensions of this story out and, even though GLCCM allowed a so-called "great oral Chelation debate," I was only given fifteen minutes, and I was not permitted to hand out any of the supporting references on oral EDTA to the attendees.

The director of GLCCM scientific committee, James Carter, MD, PhD, is writing a formal report that I am concerned will be so incomplete that it will simply further obfuscate the facts. Dr. Carter’s preliminary report mentioned that one physician attendees claimed she did not see any benefits from the Beyond Chelation product. I later determined she did NO before and after and had no idea what the THERAPEUTIC dose for heavy metal Chelation (as distinguished from a maintenance/preventive dose) of the involved product was.

She merely looked at a 24-hour urine without bothering to go to therapeutic doses of the product, and never had a "before" to compare it to. This observation apparently more than neutralizes the over 100 published abstracts I had attempted to show the audience on overheads in the allotted 15 minutes!

I prefer to rely on the published literature and the use of correct therapeutic doses, which are as stated, 1000mg per 35 pounds of body weight, this is the correct dose, if you are convinced that you need to document a significant outpouring in the urine of heavy metals immediately, to benefit the patient because they have a more acute metal toxicity related problem.

Otherwise except for acute poisoning or severe metal toxicity, it is difficult to justify IV therapy as the sole treatment for heavy metal toxicity. IV Chelation therapy however is VERY helpful for provocative TESTING to accurately establish the level of heavy metal problem in a particular patient. It must however be relatively obvious to anyone looking at the facts, that heavy metal toxicity is all relative, since there is NO ONE alive today who is not carrying a greater load of toxic heavy metals than is in their best interests, but clearly a recent history compatible with acute exposure, and/or a patient presenting with more acute symptoms WARRANTS more aggressive therapy with parenteral chelating agents.

I think that IV EDTA will one day find its proper place in medicine as an ANTI- AGING therapy. I hope that ORAL Chelation does not try to claim to replace the unique benefits that as of now only IV EDTA offer, but I simply am too busy to get an IV each day of my life.

I am also quite concerned that ACAM continues to inadequately instruct their physicians that both intravenous and oral EDTA used by themselves are NOT an adequate therapy for ARTERIOSCLEROSIS. We must learn that many long-term Chelation patients who, when they die, still have obvious advanced atherosclerosis. This must start us realizing that at least some of the perceived and reported benefits of EDTA in our patients are not directly related to reversal of arteriosclerosis. We simply cannot afford as a professional medical group to have ANY of our patients continuing to be mislead on this critical point.

I firmly believe that probably almost everyone has some provable real benefits from receiving IV EDTA chelation, but all too often the patient thinks they are really removing all the plaque from their arteries. I believe in many patients the improvements they feel come from a far more generalized benefit coming from the detoxifying effects. (I believe that DR Blumer’s 18-year study strongly supports this belief- and since this chelation treatment takes only 5 minutes, meaning many more people could enjoy this chelation benefit, since it does not entail so much time lost from work, I believe we NEED to refocus on this issue).

If ACAM physicians accept this concept, then clearly we need to complete our research on what oral chelators can do as they would be far more cost effective for a world population that now provably has as much as 1000 times more lead in their bones than was commonly seen before the industrial age. Furthermore, because of the current interest from leading cardiologists in the country to treat the bloodstream with adequate blood thinning/anticoagulant/anti-platelet activity, I am convinced that the work that I have done with Dr. Lester Morrison whereby EDTA is a major part of making the red algae/sulfated polysaccharide/anticoagulant effect that we have documented in vitro.

We all know that EDTA, in the blood tubes, obviously prevents coagulation. We must recognize that the TOTAL coagulation cascade that leads to the fatal blood clots that kills perhaps 85% of all heart attack and stroke victims, as understood today is far more complex than the few simple tests bleeding and clotting and prothrombin tests that we have erroneously relied on to date. Fibrinogen, adhesion molecules and platelet aggregation are just some of the new areas that warrant careful studies, not just with EDTA alone, but working with other compounds where EDTA exerts its adjunctive action as described in the literature on heparin-like compounds.

I have not had the time to organize the massive pile of data I have in my file cabinets into any simple packet that I can affordably arrange to send to colleagues. However, Vitamin Research of Carson City, Nevada, 1-800-877-2447 does have a very excellent bibliography on most of the listed articles on oral EDTA to the best of my knowledge. If the demand became great enough and if ACAM continues to ignore its obvious responsibility in making this information available to physicians, then perhaps they will consider photocopying their excellent copies of this literature for a fee, or I will find I am forced to fill the void.

What I do supply to doctors who do have access to my website (www.gordonresearch.com) is the same articles that are on there, free of charge, and we supply those in a $10 packet upon request from any of my colleagues or interested public.

I hope to get ACAM to prioritize making available the incredible abundance of published material on EDTA that came out of the collaborative efforts of myself, Dr. Harold Harper and Martin Rubin, PhD and others. Unfortunately, Dr. Rubin withheld these materials illegally from ACAM and myself for over ten years, but they have now been released to Dr. Ted Rozema.

Once ACAM realizes that its credibility is on the line and they MUST begin to train physicians in the use of oral chelators, then due to low toxicity and affordability, oral EDTA will begin to assume its proper role. I believe it MAY be nearly as useful as Vitamin C since I believe we all need additional detoxification and metal binding regularly to deal with our toxic world. I want to see the research materials in Dr. Rozema’s possession, some of which are LEGALLY mine, become available to every interested person as soon as possible. They should be copied and put into a facility that will permit their review and/or photocopying, by all interested parties including you.

I am the only one that has probably seen much of that material. It shows clinical benefits in rheumatoid arthritis, cirrhosis, psoriasis and other conditions regarding which we have never taught ACAM doctors the diverse potential applications for this incredibly beneficial therapy whether it is given intravenously, rectally or orally.

I have carefully not made a major point to date out of revealing the extent of occasionally somewhat dramatic benefits seen with oral EDTA even in serious peripheral vascular disease. Dr. Parks, a developer of the Parks-Doppler, became aware of the oral use of EDTA in patients, which was being made widely available by a wealthy manufacturer/chemist in his area. He saw and documented improved blood flow similar to that seen with IV Chelation. He was embarrassed for us as he felt that doctors would suppress this information since the oral use is so inexpensive.

Nonetheless, I do not want to ever replace intravenous chelation therapy with oral because nothing can do some of the things IV chelation does, but no one can be tied up to an IV every day of their life. If oral garlic/EDTA products are significantly showing benefits on the tests done today in what I call molecular-based cardiology, using the latest tests such as VCAM, ICAM, Fibrinogen, c-reactive protein as done in the cardiovascular panel offered by Dr. Vojdani at ImmunoSciences Laboratory of Beverly Hills, California, then I believe there are clear benefits to this oral therapy and the attack on oral edta must cease.

I will agree, however, there probably are no significant therapeutic interventions that do not carry some possible risk, including a high fiber diet, which, provably, can also further deplete trace elements stores in humans according to some research. Nonetheless, I am not willing to give up the benefits of a high fiber diet because of this minor problem which I believe, as a trained, nutritionally-aware physician, I can adequately deal with. I believe that the oral EDTA/garlic products will help patients avoid acute heart attacks and strokes so that they can come in to doctor’s offices and enjoy, at their leisure, the benefits of prolonged but possibly less frequent infusions of intravenous chelation for what I am convinced is its significant anti-aging effects.

I hope that you will not mind of I make your letter to me widely available to other interested doctors. Dr. Lonsdale, editor of ACAM Journal, has agreed to publish my rebuttal to Dr. Cranton’s unfortunately rather one-sided attack on oral chelation in the last ACAM Journal. Unfortunately, the average doctor reading Dr. Cranton’s attack on oral chelation will not be aware that he was once a silent partner of Advanced Medical Nutrition, Inc. along with Dan Black. They will not know that he, while so involved, asked me to submit an article to him supporting the use of oral EDTA, which as editor he then published in the American Journal of Holistic Medicine. I had at the time he and Dan Black acquired Mineralab from me provided them with extensive documentation regarding oral EDTA, as memorialized in the legal documents of that sale.

That article was designed to bring out the positive side of oral EDTA use, because at that time he had a significant interest in seeing the OC pack, which I had developed when I was a principal at Mineral Lab, a forerunner to AMNI, widely sold. It appears that at that time he was interested in seeing the enhanced revenue from sale of that product. Now that he has sold his stock in AMNI and no longer enjoys any revenue from that source, his interest in oral chelation has apparently markedly declined. Amni was subsequently purchased by Douglas Laboratories, who still sell that OC (ORAL CHELATION) product. Now, he apparently is more clearly focused on the benefits achievable with IV chelation only.

Attached you will find a preliminary rebuttal letter, which is in its non-final form. I expect to see it published in the upcoming ACAM Journal. Thank you again for your interest in the oral chelation issue.

Sincerely,
Garry F. Gordon, MD,DO,MD(H)