Hair Analysis

My perhaps outdated understanding of hair analysis is that it is not that accurate. However, Doctor's Data is a long-standing, reputable US company used by many alternative health professionals, and measures heavy metals in hair, as well as after administration of chelation drugs.


About Doctor's Data: https://www.doctorsdata.com/about-us/


Qualifications and licensing: https://www.doctorsdata.com/licensing/


Clinical Laboratory and Technologies: https://www.doctorsdata.com/clinical-lab-technologies/


Hair elements test:

https://www.doctorsdata.com/hair-elements/#detailed_information


About 20 years ago I did a hair analysis - not through Doctor's Data.

This test did not compare well to chelation provoked heavy metals tests I had done.

However, my hair analysis was as noted, about 20 years ago.

In my experience, chelation drugs do pull out heavy metals, but are tough for pwME re pulling out good metals (e.g. iron), and could be a problem due to drug and chemical sensitivity.

It might be worth asking companies like Doctor's Data about how the tests compare.
 
DokaGirl said:
This test did not compare well to chelation provoked heavy metals tests I had done.
Click to expand...
Provoked testing is very inaccurate. If you took 1,000 people and did a provoked test every single test would show up as positive. However, if those same people did an unprovoked test chances are very few would get a positive result. We all have some metals in us that don't do any harm. It's when they are in high amounts that they cause problems.
 
TigerLilea said:
Provoked testing is very inaccurate. If you took 1,000 people and did a provoked test every single test would show up as positive. However, if those same people did an unprovoked test chances are very few would get a positive result. We all have some metals in us that don't do any harm. It's when they are in high amounts that they cause problems.
Click to expand...


My understanding is heavy metals are sequestered in the tissues shortly after exposure, and are not easily released from tissues without provocation. Therefore, yes, unprovoked testing would not yield much in the way of any heavy metals. We can all cope with a certain level of heavy metals, but amounts don't need to be extremely high to cause problems.

From Statistics Canada on heavy metal exposure:

"Findings
The heavy metals lead, mercury and cadmium are widely dispersed in the environment, and at excessive levels, are toxic to humans. Chronic exposure to these substances may also be hazardous. Although these metals occur naturally, exposure may be increased by human activities that release them into the air, soil, water and food, and by products that contain heavy metals." (emphasis added)

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82-003-x/2008004/article/6500106-eng.htm


From the Doctor's Data website:https://www.doctorsdata.com/urine-toxic-metals/

"Detailed Information

Analysis of the levels of toxic metals in urine after the administration of a metal detoxification agent is an objective way to evaluate the accumulation of toxic metals. Acute metal poisoning is rare. More common, however, is a chronic, low-level exposure to toxic metals that can result in significant retention in the body that can be associated with a vast array of adverse health effects and chronic disease. One cannot draw valid conclusions about adverse health effects of metals without assessing net retention. For an individual, toxicity occurs when net retention exceeds physiological tolerance. Net retention is determined by the difference between the rates of assimilation and excretion of metals. To evaluate net retention, one compares the levels of metals in urine before and after the administration of a pharmaceutical metal detoxification agent such as EDTA, DMSA or DMPS...." (emphasis added)

This is a sample report for heavy metal testing with Doctor's Data:

https://www.doctorsdata.com/resources/uploads/sample_reports/Sample Report UT.PDF
 
A few words of caution if looking at one's heavy metal status. Some with various health concerns may consult dentists, who believe that mercury in dental fillings causes health problems. Without getting too far into whether the mercury in amalgam dental fillings causes health problems, I would caution about the alternative advice to extract all root canaled teeth. The theory goes that these stay infected regardless of dental expertise in treating them.

IMHO, extracting asymptomatic root canaled teeth does not cure health problems. That's just my opinion. Others may say differently.
 
I've always assumed that shampoo, conditioner, and other hair products would distort the results of any hair analysis. As would air freshener. Also, anyone who works in a dirty industry could have dodgy results, as could anyone who always walked along busy roads or cycled to work. All the exhaust fumes would settle on skin and hair and might not all get washed out. I've always been dubious about hair testing reliability as a result - I think it would measure environmental pollution more than metals trapped in the body.
 
DokaGirl said:
A few words of caution if looking at one's heavy metal status. Some with various health concerns may consult dentists, who believe that mercury in dental fillings causes health problems. Without getting too far into whether the mercury in amalgam dental fillings causes health problems, I would caution about the alternative advice to extract all root canaled teeth. The theory goes that these stay infected regardless of dental expertise in treating them.

IMHO, extracting asymptomatic root canaled teeth does not cure health problems. That's just my opinion. Others may say differently.
Click to expand...

A few years ago i was talking to someone who was convinced my ME was the cause of mercury in fillings and proceeded to talk at me about this for 10 minutes.

She forgot to ask if i even had any. I’d never had a single filling in my life :laugh:
 
DokaGirl said:
My understanding is heavy metals are sequestered in the tissues shortly after exposure, and are not easily released from tissues without provocation.
Click to expand...
Hospitals don't seem to have any problem diagnosing heavy metals and they don't use provocation.
 
Hair testing , i am told used to be used to assess calcium levels in heart conditions pre CAC scan. ( Chemistry professor)

A chemistry lecturer i had a discussion with was of the opinion that they had some use, however it is interpretation that may be a bigger issue. His background pre teaching was research ( effect of PUFAs) and later food industry.

My son had bad PV fatigue after glandular fever. Doctors did not have a clue ( he should have rested more and was basically forced back to school too early).

He had a 4 day migraine like headache which saw him admitted to hospital and he had a lumbar puncture ( suspected bleed on brain ). This was the first time i had seen doctors truly flummoxed and as a parent it was oretty scary.

This shed no light for the neurologist so he was discharged with paracetamol (!) . No follow up, no suggestions.

We did a hair test with an alternative pratitioner afterwards. I was a complete skeptic and offered no info on his health other than he had previously been asthmatic and the headache.

This process was different to doctors data in that you had a couple of phone consultation s ( too ill to travel) , one before and one after. I was a bit gobsmacked by the amount of info that could be presented, moreover that the feedback accurately captured specifics to his health over the past couple of years that i had not detailed.

The test flagged up very skewed , very low electrolytes.

Supplementation and focused diet made a huge difference, and although he lost the last two years of school, he recovered and is now at college.
He did not have ME ( though now my GP thinks he " probably did").

I appreciate that he may have recovered anyway. Given the very low base we were at, i doubt that it would have been within the timeframe experienced.

We have done hair tests for my daughter which also show really crap electrolytic ratios, though these have improved over the past 10 months.
She also has issues flagged up with metals, which , given the limited toe we have dipped into genetics, makes sense.

I would not vouch for complete accuracy, but in our case, these have been a useful tool.
 
Since we are a forum discussing science, I thought it would be fair to take a look at what mainstream medicine things of hair analysis.

Quack Watch does just this:
https://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/hair.html

Here is an exerpt:
Scientific Facts
Proponents claim that hair analysis is useful for evaluating a person's general state of nutrition and health and is valuable in detecting predisposition to disease. They also claim that hair analysis enables a doctor to determine if mineral deficiency, mineral imbalance, or heavy metal pollutants in the body may be the cause of a patient's symptoms. These claims are false.

  • Hair analysis is not reliable for evaluating the nutritional status of individuals. In 1974, the AMA Committee on Cutaneous Health and Cosmetics noted: "The state of health of the body may be entirely unrelated to the physical and chemical condition of the hair . . . Although severe deficiency states of an essential element are often associated with low concentrations of the element in hair, there are no data that indicate that low concentrations of an element signify low tissue levels nor that high concentrations reflect high tissue stores. Therefore . . . hair metal levels would rarely help a physician select effective treatment." [3]
  • Most commercial hair analysis laboratories have not validated their analytical techniques by checking them against standard reference materials. The techniques typically used to prepare samples for analysis can introduce errors for many of the elements being determined.
  • Hair mineral content can be affected by exposure to various substances such as shampoos, bleaches and hair dyes. No analytic technique enables reliable determination of the source of specific levels of elements in hair as bodily or environmental.
  • The level of certain minerals can be affected by the color, diameter and rate of growth of an individual's hair, the season of the year, the geographic location, and the age and gender of the individual.
  • Normal ranges of hair minerals have not been defined.
  • For most elements, no correlation has been established between hair level and other known indicators of nutrition status. It is possible for hair concentration of an element (zinc, for example) to be high even though deficiency exists in the body.
  • Hair grows slowly (1 cm/month), so even hair closest to the scalp is several weeks old and thus may not reflect current body conditions for purposes of health diagnosis.
  • The use of a single Elements hair analysis test as the sole means of diagnosis violates basic tenets of medical practice that laboratory findings should be considered together with the patient's history and physical examination, and that the practitioner should keep in mind that laboratory errors occur.
For these reasons, Elements analysis of human hair is not a valid technique for identifying an individual's current bodily excesses or deficiencies of essential or nonessential elements. Nor does it provide a valid basis for recommending vitamins, minerals, or other dietary supplements [4,5].
Click to expand...
 
Below is a link to a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation news item about faulty hair analysis in child protection cases. Testing totaled over 35,000 analyses, and was done for over 20 years at a lab affiliated with the renowned Sick Kids Hospital in Toronto.

The lab tested for drug and alcohol use; based on results, children could be removed from their parent's care - sometimes permanently.

One mom featured in the article was accused of chronic alcohol abuse; later it was found her hair spray contained 70% alcohol.

A dad accused of heavy cocaine use had a hair test done at an accredited forensics lab in the US, and was cleared to regain custody of his child.

"It's a tragedy: How the flawed Motherisk hair test helped fracture families across Canada:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/motherisk-hair-testing-families-1.4360577


CBC article excerpts:

" Motherisk scientists were operating without any forensic training or oversight. Its test results, it has now been discovered, were faulty opinions."

The province of Ontario appointed retired justice Susan Lang to investigate this lab; she reported:

"... these results are inadequate and unreliable and no forensic lab in the world conducted tests and interpreted these tests in that manner..."

What was also astonishing, Lang said, was that virtually no one ever challenged Motherisk's tests in court, even when desperate parents were certain the results were dead wrong. The experts were always right." (emphasis added)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom