He was every bit as slippery as his nick name implies and before I could even blink Quicksilver was gone. Very interesting stuff! Roustem and I have added Quick Silver integration to 1Passwd Īnd Now For Something Completely Different
#Quck silver screen how to#
I just finished watching this interesting video by David Chartier on how to use Quick Silver to add events and todos to your iCal calendar. I was going through my paintings the other day and this one really makes me miss painting plein air! It's been cold, icy, snowy, you name itplus I can't decide whether to
Quantify excretion capabilities for those two forms.Summer Creek, plein air Originally uploaded by graphicartepsi.Identify different sources of mercury by measuring the relative amounts of the two main forms of mercury in the body-methylmercury and inorganic mercury.Now is the time for adoption of better tools!Īt Quicksilver Scientific, we have developed advanced mercury test kits that: The simplification and deification of the challenge test are no longer serving the evolution of the field of clinical metals toxicology. The measurement of mercury in the body and extrapolation to body burden and toxic conditions is a very complicated field, requiring acute clinical discernment, including integration of patient history, current exposures, symptomology, and effect of co-morbidities. – Use of adjuncts such as EDTA, glutathione, and glycine vastly changes the dynamics of the test and its output. The lack of standardization of the challenge conditions:.The use of a non-challenged reference range to compare the challenge test this is probably the biggest problem from a regulatory standpoint since there is such obvious potential for over-treatment.The propagation of the myth of a special relevance of the pool identified by the challenge, i.e., “body burden,” and the yes/no interpretation, i.e., “I found mercury in the patient.”.There are many practitioners who use the data from challenge tests in scientifically and clinically valid ways, but in general use, the challenge test has three main flaws: Instead, the problem is the way they are generally used and interpreted. The problem is not really that the challenge tests have no use (especially in the case of lead, where EDTA challenge testing is documented to have slightly better correlations with bone lead than do blood lead measurements or the case of gadolinium where levels in blood and urine are undetectable without EDTA provocation). Recently, challenge tests have come under fire from federal authorities as a diagnostic tool. The literature examining the challenge tests ranges from the years 1991 through 2001 and has thus far failed to find any evidence of the challenge tests revealing any more than recent exposures, and in some instances (Frumkin et al, 2001) failing to see exposures made clear by ambient testing. The diagnostic premise of the testing is that it shows the “body burden” of the individual–that pool of deeply held metals that represents our lifetime accumulation of un-excreted metals. Challenge results can be skewed in individuals with renal insufficiency (common in Hgll toxicity).įor over two decades now, many clinicians have been relying on “challenge tests,” also called provocation tests, to diagnose mercury and other metal toxicities.Challenge does not elucidate elimination abilities of the patient.Challenge does not measure ambient mercury burden.Challenge may cause redistribution of mercury into organs, including the brain.Challenge exposes individual to a large dose of exogenous substance.– Challenge does not reflect long-term exposure as proven by clinical trial* reference.
– Challenge does not reflect long-term exposure as proven by clinical trial* reference p.120.
– Use of adjuncts such as EDTA, glutathione, and glycine notably changes the dynamics of the test and its output. oral administration has vastly different pharmacokinetics. – DMPS has a very different strength and specificity than DMSA. There is no “non-challenged” reference range to compare the Challenge Test from a regulatory standpoint, there is an obvious potential for over-treatment.The Challenge Test does not reflect the “pool” of mercury premise.Only Total mercury level is represented (HgT). The Challenge Test does not differentiate between MeHg and Hgll.
0 kommentar(er)
