OSR --- Miracle Heavy metal chelator?

[mmKay]

I wanted to share this resource for Heavy metal chelation.

It does not have as much back up as the ACC protocol and I do not recommend it, but if it is as effective as it claims to be it may be soon revolutionary.

https://emeramed.com/emeramide-safe-metals-chelator/

It also goes by the name of OSR.

Edited February 16, 2022 by mmKay

[Leo Gura]

Interesting.

Emeramide is absurdly expensive though.

Where you gonna buy it?

[mmKay]

@Leo Gura Got this PDF from a similar FB group to ACC. It has only about 4k people but some seem to be really, really knowledgeable.

FB GROUP LINK

Just sharing this here as a resource. Ill stick just with ACC for now though.

 

Scroll to the bottom of the PDF for sourcing info. From my understanding actual Emeramide  is expensive AF but OSR is cheaper but still the same stuff.

OSR-Emeramide-NMBI- Irminix.pdf

Edited February 16, 2022 by mmKay

[Leo Gura]

But is OSR sold anywhere? I couldn't find it.

And how come it's so cheap relative to Emeramide if it's supposed to be the same thing? Makes me skeptical.

[mmKay]

Besides of the two links at the end of the PDF IDK about any site for now since I dismissed the whole thing as Im focused on just ACC for now.

But Ill ask a few questions on the group maybe there is a straightforward simple way. There is too much resources to skim through on there otherwise.

Im pretty sure you would find all the info you need if you joined the group and sniffed around pretty quickly

[Leo Gura]

@mmKay I would rather have heavy metal poisoning than use Facebook.

[mmKay]

48 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

And how come it's so cheap relative to Emeramide if it's supposed to be the same thing? Makes me skeptical.

https://emeramed.com/warning-counterfeit-irminix/ IDK yet but beware this disclaimer

[Ima Freeman]

@Leo Gura @mmKay

OSR was indended as a supplement, like ALA. But then the Big Pharma-Health Agency-Complex apperently banned it as such.
Now it is in clinical trials to be marketed as a pharmaceutical.

Good information on it, from a translated German health blog:
https://hcfricke-com.translate.goog/2021/12/22/detox-6-ist-irminix-auch-osr-1-nbmi-ein-idealer-quecksilber-chelator-also-besser-als-z-b-dmps-und-ala/?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de
 

Interview with Boyd Haley, CEO of EmeraMed:

https://soundcloud.com/drmercola/boyd-haley-full-audio

 

Edited February 18, 2022 by Ima Freeman

[mmKay]

@Ima Freeman thanks for sharing. I listened to the whole thing and  read the paper. Good to know that the CEO is down to earth, knowledgeable and an actual chemist. His story is another example of how bureaucracy and boomers are holding back the evolution of mankind ?

Also his mind is damn sharp for a 80 year old dude.

I should have taken notes actually, oops.

Synonymous names: Irminix / NBMI / Emeramide / OSR 

From wikipedia :

Until July 2010 CTI Science sold BDTH2 under the name OSR#1 as a nutritional supplement.[6] Since OSR#1 didn't fulfill criteria of a nutritional supplement, its sale was stopped under pressure of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The U.S. FDA in April 2012 also designated the compound as an orphan drug ( " pharmaceutical agent developed to treat medical conditions which, because they are so rare, would not be profitable to produce without government assistance. " ) , ((( therefore claiming that heavy metal toxicity is " extremely rare ". Mmmkay. )))

 

And I remember from the interview that he's trying to get it aprooved in the EU but it's going to take about 10 years.

 

---

Some anwsers from the FB group:

Fandachem ( the provider's website from the PDF I linked )  doesn’t sell Emeramide.. they sell BDTH2. The actual chemical without the fancy name.

OSR and Emeramide are the same molecule. It is now mass-produced in China and therefore the overall cost of production is lower than it used to be.

 

Edited February 18, 2022 by mmKay

[The0Self]

Two thiol groups usually means chelator, but this one has them absurdly far apart, so I’m doubtful it would be as effective as the hook-like structure of ALA, DMSA, and DPMS. The heavy metal gets situated between the two thiol groups. Maybe this still somehow works and perhaps it would be better than single thiol organosulfates but I highly doubt it’s even close to the double thiol structures like the 3 principal chelators I listed above.

Edited February 25, 2022 by The0Self

[mmKay]

ACC on OSR : 

 

The bottom section was added after Andy’s death and contains more recent information. OSR, or whatever someone calls it is not a topic for discussion in the group. This file was written to inform those who wish to know.

This file is not intended as medical advice.

The Compound:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BDTH2

https://emeramed.com/about/

Andy on OSR:
“When this was OSR the typical effect on people was catastrophic. There are various different stories about the half life. I have no idea what it is and don't think anyone else does either. (This of course makes safe dosing impossible. Brian) Also please note there were some parasites who were using this list to sell people "OSR," which they made in their garage. Only it wasn't actually OSR. It was some different related chemical it was easier for them to make that they called OSR and pretended was the same and had the same effect, with no real evidence for that or reason to believe it. How sure are you that the stuff you got is at least "OSR" as described by Boyd Haley? If it is something else 'equivalent,' God knows what it will do to you.”
https://www.facebook.com/groups/acfanatics/permalink/1238743109557425/?match=b3Ny

“Prior results with OSR were generally catastrophic. I received lots of reports of this, no good reports at all from anyone. You can find a lot of these discussions on older yahoo groups from when OSR was available. (Search on onibasu.com in the FDC, AMC, and AM groups for the Yahoo posts.)

The whole 'very stable bond' bit indicates a profound misunderstanding of what is important, how equilibrium works, and what the pharmacokinetic situation is during chelation (your body is not in equilibrium and the chelator never gets near equilibrium). Equilibrium is not a static process. Equlilibrium is simply the point where the rate of the forward and reverse reactions are equal. So even at equilibrium, there can be very fast reactions going back and forth despite "strong bonding," which only means the equilibrium constant is a number you naively think of as "big." In chelation, you don't get anywhere near equilibrium, so it isn't that relevant a concept anyway. (The rate law would be linear for a chelator if chelation was an equilibrium driven phenomenon. It is a bit less than half order in all the chelators measured (I am not aware of relevant rate data for OSR and wouldn't believe it anyway given the very conveniently changing half life claims). A half order rate law could be due to mass transfer limitations, or it could be due to a mobilization step that is rate limiting using only one of the thiols on the chelating agent. Or some combination of those which might make it even less than half order (which it is but there is always some uncertainty whether 0.409 is within experimental error of 0.500 when it's a derived parameter as it is here).) There is no information I am aware of that suggests OSR (or any other chelator) does not break its bond with mercury inside the body.

(Even for those of us with a degree in Chemistry have a time understanding Andy here. I am fine with the big equilibrium constant. It just says that under a steady state most of mercury will be bound to OSR in a simple solution of Hg (mercury) and OSR if there is any free OSR to bind to. Andy points out, chelation is not steady state. The OSR and Hg-OSR get shipped out in bile so there is an up and down in OSR concentrations in the body and through the tissues into cells. Further, in cells there are other (Boyd says weaker) binders of Hg++ (the ion form that gives us the toxicity). Each of these alternate binding sites has its own equilibrium constants. So OSR could pick up Hg++ and move out of a cell into another then drop it and either have it bound to a protein before the mercury is recaptured or OSR moves out of the cell before it rebinds. Boyd showed some binding studies in his talks but none were analogous to living cells and the chanhges in OSR amount over time. So half life dosing would be key to making OSR safe and effective. -Brian)

Conflicting information about half life has been made available by Boyd Haley's group. Given that and the failure to either get it published or really make details available and discuss swhy there were 2 very different results, I would say he and his companies are not credible sources of any information relevant to chelating with OSR/whatever they call it today. (Note that it is also purported to be useful in water purification and to remove mercury from mine tailings. Not necessarily good in vivo. Brian) Boyd Haley has repeatedly stated he is not an expert on chelation, pharmacokinetics, or how to design drug protocols and he is in fact correct in this claim.

So given the uniformly horrible reports, lack of reliable information, and admission of ignorance (demonstrated by discussions like the 'strong bond' one above) regarding chelation, I would strongly recommend nobody ever have anything to do with OSR.”

https://www.facebook.com/groups/acfanatics/permalink/942847795813626/?hc_location=ufi

Andy’s unique qualifications to speak with authority on chelation (and on OSR in particular our topic here) stem from his personal experience with toxicity, his perseverance in pursuing papers even written in Russian, and a broader interest in chemistry than is seen in the typical academic. Here is Andy on Andy:

“Distinctions within the very general field of chemistry as to what specialized knowledge we have. Most people are aware that chemistry breaks down into organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, etc. There are finer subdivisions and I happened to be the guy with exactly the right specialized knowledge who had to figure it out right for my own sake, and who could read (with great difficulty) russian language papers, and who was very used to actually looking up and reading and interpreting journal papers for whether they were actually correct (which is almost never done in academic situations, I learned this as an industrial consultant).

Kinetics is not a common thing for chemists to know and the relevant part of kinetics here actually is considered chemical engineering - but a chemical engineer would never have known enough descriptive chemistry to figure the rest of the relevant material out.

Also a lot of the biochemistry I know is, well, biochemistry, which is again a different field than chemistry and is not common for chemists to know even if they work in areas like Boyd Haley does. I knew it primarily out ofpersonal interest from a fellow postdoc telling me about the life extension foundation and its theories that taking vitamins properly can prolong lifespan.

My personal experience in universities was that people NEVER EVER EVER EVEREVER EVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES NO MATTER WHAT learn material outside their field of specialization after they get their PhD. It is just not done.I was kind of a misfit for doing so. While there is a lot of babbling about interdisciplinary work it is almost never done because people won't evenlearn enough about other specialties to be able to talk to each other and define research projects. So Dr. Haley is not in a professional environment conducive to learning things like chemical engineering kinetics or inorganic descriptive chemistry (which includes how mercury binds to things and what kinds of complexes it forms).

So basically a lot of luck winnowed all the people interested in mercury detox down to me. Hopefully some others with the relevant knowledge will show up. I do honestly think Dr. Haley could figure it out but I'd be surprised if he does. Hopefully he will surprise me. I think there are a lot of people in industry and a reasonable number in academia who also could figure it out pretty quickly or even already know it but they lack the personal experience of getting toxic to motivate them to ask the basic questions necessary to realize that the medical literature is, to put it politely, inaccurate on this issue.”
http://onibasu.com/archives/fdc/42686.html

“ A message purported to be Boyd Haley's response to me is circulating on theinternet. I believe it is appropriate for me to respond to it with some further useful information. “ (for full post click on the link: ) http://onibasu.com/archives/fdc/42561.html

“ One major issue in chelation is that all chelating agents have to be given more or less once a half life (see any standard medical text, e. g. Goodmanand Gilman's Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics). Since kinetic data on OSR is unavailable in the literature it has not been possible for anyone to prescribe it responsibly. Dr. Haley has been so kind as to provide us with a preview of his unpublished studies, below, that allow some reasonableestimate to be made of half life. Do note that when I say "half life," this presumes first order kinetics which are not necessarily the case. Also the range of values he gives doesn't include the number of individuals in the trial so I can't estimate a 95% confidence interval for the range of values in the population. Thus what I am doing below is making reasonable estimates based on unproven assumptions and inadequately detailed data ? notreally enough to base giving OSR to real human beings, but a lot better than nothing. These estimates are a place to start. Hopefully Dr. Haley's very limited permission (from the FDA I believe) to speak about OSR will permit him to answer some questions by providing more detailed data.

Dr. Haley says that OSR levels in blood fall to 4-12% of 2 hour levels by the time of a 24 hour measurement. 2 hours gives time for the OSR to distribute so that simple calculations based on blood level should be reasonable estimates. I'll show this example here and discuss it.

The half life range is between

-22*ln(2)/ln(0.04) and ?22*ln(2)/ln(0.12)

or 4.74 and 7.19 hours.

Most things taken by mouth do have about a 2 hour absorption period that can be added to the half life, so most people should be OK at least with the chelating performance of OSR if it is taken every 6 hours around the clock,a few will actually tolerate 8 hour dosing. Taking it less frequently WILL cause damage in anyone with a clinically significant level of heavy metals and WILL make them harder to help later.

Clearly, all instructions on the use of OSR to date have been inappropriate and potentially harmful. Knowing the stuff is a chelator (regardless of its FDA status) and not knowing the half life the only responsible instructions for use are every 2-3 hours day and night.

I really don't think it is appropriate to rely on a single set of unpublished measurements and say it is going to be OK to use OSR as a chelator every 6 hours, but clearly it is NOT going to be OK for most people to use OSR (for any purpose) and take it less often than every 6 hours by the clock.”

http://onibasu.com/archives/am/273252.html

More Andy on OSR (includes references to no good reports, a number of negative ones):

http://onibasu.com/archives/fdc/35162.html

http://onibasu.com/archives/am/279770.html

http://onibasu.com/archives/am/262623.html

http://onibasu.com/archives/am/231843.html

http://onibasu.com/archives/am/302574.html

https://onibasu.com/archives/am/234249.html

Since when Andy wrote those, there are the rat mercury injection studies. Other data Boyd may not be able to share until it NBMI has been approved by FDA rulings.

On the irreversible nature of the NBMI-Hg complex:
Andy does discuss the concept of irreversible formation of the NBMI-Hg complex and the indistinguishability (on the data we have for NBMI-Hg) from a fast cycling compound. He provides a reference for those seeking to understand this point better in one of those links. Since chemical kinetics were his particular expertise, I suspect we can trust he got that right. A fast cycling will require dosing on the half life.

On it potential toxicity: We see people who can't tolerate zinc or vitamin C, so the most severe MCS people appear to be able to react to almost anything! Yes it has a benzene ring but some amino acids do too! One aspect of NBMI is that unlike the amino acids and acetaminophen and ibuprofen is the 1, 3 rather than 1.4 positions of the attached chains on the benzene ring. That may be the saving grace for NBMI: it may like DMSA and DMPS be secreted intact because it fits no Liver Phase I enzymes to be altered. If so, the benzene ring is not released as benzene. The trials will hopefully include autistic people as that is the target population so if there is a low percentage who react badly to it, that should be uncovered.

(Note that some have reported negative responses were purged both from early tests results and current FB groups. While this is hearsay, it does suggest a degree of caution is needed.)

Hopefully, they do not use it on people with any amalgam present. If that is not recognized, some very bad results could occur.

I wish Andy had quantified the reports he had on OSR. Maybe it is best that it is under proper trials now.

There are Chinese sources of impure (not 100%) OSR produced for animal use. These are not considered properly monitored for pharmaceutical use. There were also home brewed fake OSR as Andy warned about.

There is an early (pre-approval) way to access pharmaceutical grade OSR:
https://emeramed.com/early-access/

Phase II Study of OSR (NBMI) filed December, 2019.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04183595

Their June 2020 newsletter says the study started in May 2020:
https://emeramed.com/newsletters/emeramed-newsletter-june-2020/

[The0Self]

@mmKay One look at the molecular structure of OSR... Yeah, I'd just stick with ALA + DMSA/DMPS.  Even EDTA would be better than OSR.

By the way, even with ALA, when I really set out to find its true half life, it seems there is some evidence that it might actually be even less than 3 hours, as its principle structure has a half life of only 30 minutes. Its active metabolites have variable half lives up to maybe 2.5-4 hours, so that's the only reason it's not dangerous taking it every 3 hours despite the overall dominant half life possibly being a bit shorter than that.

I checked DMSA as well -- its half life might be only 1.9 hours: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8040783/#:~:text=Elimination half-life of total,(2.0 %2B%2F- 0.2 hours).

Definitely got to be careful here. I don't think Andy Cutler mentioned anything conclusive about the half lives possibly being shorter than initially estimated. So there's that.

So if you're chelating, and you want to be extra careful and responsibly take your health into your own hands to the best of your knowledge, I'd consider dosing ALA and DMSA around the clock every 2 hours -- maybe 3-3.5 hours for the mid-sleep dose, but q2h during the day. Too inconvenient? Then your only other options are 1. taking your chances with q3h dosing for ALA or ALA+DMPS, 2. taking your chances with DMSA-only q4h, 3. DMPS-only q6h (the safest possible option, but without mercury chelation, only lead) or q8h.

Fortunately with DMPS, it is highly likely that its true half life is 9 hours (for oral administration). So there's no danger of needing to take it super annoyingly frequently. Every 8 hours is probably fine -- you could probably do that for months without burnout -- but while it may be convenient, it unfortunately only chelates lead, not mercury. But if we're being very conservative, it can be discovered that there may be some evidence that its half life could conditionally be as little as 6 hours... So while Cutler suggests q8h, if you want to take your health into your own hands, it may be prudent to take it every 6 hours 'round the clock -- still super convenient, especially if you don't need more than 6 hours of sleep, but if you absolutely need more than 6 hours sleep, you could do 7 hours for the night time dose + 5 hours for the first of the day + 6 for the other two doses = 24 hours -- or even every 4 hours during the day with a double dose for the pre-bed 8 hour dose.

The most important factor, besides taking the chelators frequently enough (at least once per half life), is taking them at that frequency for long enough -- round length must be no less than 72 hours, and 1 week is vastly better... This is because every time blood levels fall, there is redistribution damage. So to decrease the number of times you have to do that, relative to time spent in healthy chelation mode, your only option is longer rounds, keeping in mind that the healing/damage ratio will not be a positive value until round duration exceeds 72 hours. So at least until 72 hours, don't ever be late for a dose... like your life depends on it.

Edited June 5, 2022 by The0Self

[mmKay]

@The0Self hmm. 

I did ask the ACC admins on long rounds. 

 

My question on ACC FB  group : 

" The day of my second round of chelation is about to come. First round was pretty smooth with very little side effects. It felt like I could go on for at least a whole week if not more. I actually felt kinda cathartic.

Im saying this because the redistribution the following few days sucked. Brain fog, short term memory issues, groginness...

So I'd like to minimize it. I've read somewhere on one of the guides that " The only reason not to keep chelating for longer is that you can't take it ".

TLDR:

I feel healthy overall. Only redistribution sucks. Are there dangers to longer rounds instead of forcing the stop after 3 days? Or is this reckless?

My round was 25 MG DMSA for 4 days. I supplement ACE, artichoke extract, milk thistle, omega 3s , vit A, iodine, vit D and core 4.

Thank you for your time. " 

 

Anwsers from admins : 

 

I use redistribution to guide dose and supportive supplement intake. Understanding the right dose and frequency of supplements has a major impact on my ability to chelate without feeling too horrible. When I take full doses of core 4 with Vitamin C below bowel tolerance, plenty of liver and adrenal support, I just feel better on and off round and redistribution isn’t anywhere near as hard.

I don’t like redistribution to impact more than a half a day or a day at most. We feel better on round because ALA is an amazing universal antioxidant.

Here is what I have found that Dr. Cutler said on the subject of long rounds:

Q: Are there reasons other than disturbed sleep for limiting the length of ALA rounds?

ANDREW HALL CUTLER “Other than side effects? Not too much. In theory if may affect copper and zinc balance, but in practice I haven't seen this yet - something I'm less concerned about now than when I wrote Amalgam Illness.” Re: Ala rounds. (2011). Retrieved June 3, 2022, from http://onibasu.com/archives/fdc/73452.html

Q: On the basis that some re-distribution does normally take place immediately after each round it would presumably make sense for me to extend the length of the rounds? What length of round should I consider and would it be OK and beneficial to continue indefinitely provided no apparent problems arise?

ANDREW HALL CUTLER “Go for it. Continue until you miss a dose, then stop for at least a week. Re: Ala rounds. (2011). Retrieved June 3, 2022, from http://onibasu.com/archives/fdc/73452.html

Please understand that Dr. Cutler wrote that in response to a very healthy person who was experienced in chelation who also felt much better on round. One should reserve long rounds until after they have more experience chelating.

Long Rounds:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/andy-cutler-chelation-safe-mercury-and-heavy-metal-detox/-long-rounds/1839542899477440/

 

Just do 10 or more standard rounds. As you have noticed the rounds teach you. Take care of yourself by following guidelines. In the longer journey you will have plenty of opportunity to do longer rounds.

- - -

Yes. Proceed with caution on the longer rounds thing. And if you are not back to baseline more or less by the time you are ready for your next round, 25 is probably too high. - What is an "  Adrenal Crash "  ? What you experienced was no doubt adrenal stuff. If it gets so bad it is hard to recover then that is a crash

Edited June 6, 2022 by mmKay