A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Garry Gordon

have perfectly healthy bones, nice soft arteries, and they are still practicing. They are still able to show up and enjoy working. Anti-aging is part of the chelation treatment. So there’s a big difference.

So, because nobody could understand everything I just said, we have largely now switched to the calcium EDTA. Calcium EDTA gives you calcium when we give you the EDTA, and it makes it a painless treatment, taking three to five minutes. This cuts down the cost of the treatment from $120 to around $60, making it available to everybody, because it doesn’t interfere with their day’s productivity. People can swing by the doctor’s office, be there in five minutes, and have the treatment. The treatment is given rapidly, because it’s painless, and it will take out as much as ten or twenty times more lead per treatment than we get out of the old treatment. But it doesn’t do that interesting thing that I’ve talked about of lowering the level of calcium in your arteries, and enhancing the uptake of calcium in your bone, which is done under the parathyroid hormone influence. In fact, if you are a world expert on parathyroid hormone, you’ll know that disodium EDTA infusions are called parathyroid tropic hormones.

The old treatment, that we’ve treated ten million people safely with–without a known death–is the treatment used in the Trial to Access Chelation Therapy (TACT) study done by the National Institute of Health. The TACT study, funded for twenty-nine million dollars, is studying the old treatment that I brought to the world. Ten million people have had the benefits of that therapy, and about eighty-five percent of them said they saw enough improvement in their circulation that allowed them to avoid a proposed amputation of an extremity, a placement in a nursing home because of loss of vision or memory, or the proposed bypass that some hospital was telling them they needed.

We do not do bypass surgeries. I’ve done no bypasses on any patient in twenty years. I don’t do stents. I cancel all of that surgery based on a simple rule. I ask patients the following question: What are the benefits of the proposed surgery that the hospital or the doctor wants to do, and what are the risks? Once people understand that the benefit is extremely weak, and the risks are extremely large, then they can choose to bet their life on what I’m telling them. There has not yet been a single known fatality in twenty years among people who are simply taking EDTA, and I canceled surgery on people who have eighty to ninety percent blocked vessels.

David: Why isn’t oral EDTA chelation recommended by more physicians?

Dr. Gordon: I think this is because the standard policy of doctors is to be down on what they’re not up on. You see, the scientific literature in this country is entirely controlled. The net result is that if you have a real breakthrough, something that’s really going to cure cancer or heart disease, it’s not going to be in the New England Journal of Medicine or Lancet because of the game that is played in this world. We’ve known from the beginning that this was too big a revolution. If every doctor did what I’m promoting, there would be no huge hospitals, with huge mills. Every year about four to five hundred thousand people have bypass surgery. That’s a huge part of our budget. There’s a lot of people dependent on that income, so it’s hard to make a big change suddenly, because of the economic ramifications. These changes don’t happen suddenly. They happen when people start asking questions. But we’ve treated ten million people. Those people know, and they’ve told their families that this actually made them able to go back and run their business, or that this got them out of the nursing home. We have documented so many success stories that it’s incredible.
David: What do you think are the primary causes of aging?

Dr. Gordon: We have so many different aspects that we talk about today. One of my interests has been the whole problem of the calcium accumulation, because death occurs when the calcium really builds up rapidly. Here’s a simple example. In a normal cell you have ten thousand times more calcium outside of the cell than inside of the cell. It takes energy–in the form of ATP molecules–to be able to have that calcium pump pushing that calcium out all of the time. When a cell dies, and it loses ATP, that gradient is suddenly lost.

So instead of there being a huge amount of calcium outside and very little calcium inside the cell, it now becomes the same on both sides. When death occurs that calcium pours across that membrane, and the energy pump stops, because that energy pump is created when the mitochondria are producing ATP. But in the moment that those high-energy phosphate bonds get saturated with this huge intake of calcium, they turn to stone essentially.

So this is one of about fifteen phases of ant-aging. There’s the hormonal implication. There’s the problem of pituitary failure, and there’s all the problems from what we call the Free Radical Theory. There’s the Cross-Linkage Theory. There are so many different theories. I have had the privilege of being part of a medical group called the American College of Advancement for Medicine (ACAM), and I’ve been able to observe that those doctors who practiced what they preached were the ones that still look remarkably young. I became convinced over thirty years ago, when I formed the American College of Advancement for Medicine, along with a few other doctors that we had a basic anti-aging therapy. But at that time, thirty years ago, I had no idea that lead would turn out to be so important.

Thirty years ago no one was explaining to me that everybody walking around had approximately a thousand times more lead in their bones than we had four hundred years ago, and that that lead gets released when a woman starts to go through change of life, and starts to lose her bone strength. That’s why women at change of life often start to develop hypertension, because the lead has been “safely” in storage in the bones, and now it starts to kill them.

But what I’m finding that’s really exciting is the cover of Scientific American that’s on the streets today. The cover story talks about the DNA and the known genes that can influence longevity. In research for stopping aging, we can take a simple worm called C. elegans and make it live six times longer than its ever lived before by playing around with the genes like TOR, SIR, and DAF. There’s about seven more of them that we have now, and they’re identified in the Scientific American cover story. We now live in a day and age where we can actually modulate those genes at will. We can do this with nutrients–called Ribonucleic Acid NutriSwitch formulas–that allow us to upregulate the SIR, or downregulate the TOR or the DAF. By doing this, we get these dramatic benefits that result from the body doing what it does when it thinks there’s a drought or a major change coming, and it switches over to a more economical form of metabolism.
We’ve been able to play with these gene-modulating foods and see, for example, that patients no longer needed Lipitor, they were no longer borderline diabetic, or they no longer had elevated levels of triglyceride. We also use this same product on animals, like a dog that’s on its last legs and has got complete renal failure. The doctor said that the dog will die in days, and we’d simply give the dog one of these Ribonucleic Acid NutriSwitch formulas, and in two days the dog goes back to functioning. In human beings the kidney function goes back to normal, and they don’t need dialysis.

So the most exciting thing for me today is what I would call gene therapy, which, for me, would be to modulate genes using foods. And you can’t really successfully do that without measuring genes on people who are doing that today. What’s really exciting then is once you get people optimized, then to look into the stem cell revolution, which is here. We’re doing stem cells successfully on patients. We’ve restored vision. We’ve restored functioning in people time after time, and we can turn on stem cells in your own body using magnetic field therapy, using a converted MRI, or we can inject stem cells. But my position is related in the following story.

Several years ago somebody called me and they said this eighteen month old child is blue, his heart is filling the lung, and we’re going to have to do an emergency heart transplant. I said, why would the new heart last any longer than the old one unless we find out what was wrong with the child? Did that heart fail because there was a carnotine deficiency? What was the underlining cause? If I treat the underlying cause first, then putting a new heart in might be more appropriate because it would have chance survive. And I’ve successfully done this. But what’s interesting is that when we corrected all those defects that can one can measure, then the child was no longer blue and the heart went back to normal size. So I didn’t need to do a heart transplant.

But with stem cells, I will need to do stem cell therapy on seventy and eighty year old people who are not functioning well. However, the stem cell therapy would be a lot more successful if I first optimized all the defects. One of the most important areas of defect today is called methylation–which includes glucuronidation, acetylation, and all the different methods by which we do our detoxification. Methylation is also the key factor in the body for the production of things like carnotine and coenzyme Q-10, but even more importantly methylation is the way that we keep all of our infections under

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply