Refuting Dr. Christianson on Iodine

If you enjoy a thorough refutation and rebuke of a deceiver who might be self-deceived, then this article is for you. If you enjoy reading about iodine, double bonus. This is about 9000 words, reading time, about 32 minutes. Settle in.

Dr. Christianson (hereafter, Dr. C) attempts to refute the “high iodine protocol” as published at by Doctors Abraham, Brownstein, and Flechas. I listened to Dr. C’s hour and 20 minute long video, and took the time to read his notes along the way, as posted here:

His arguments sounded familiar. After a quick search, I found that he wrote another similar article against the iodine doctors that I remember reading a few years ago:

We pronounce the word “halides” differently. I say “Hal-ides” and he says “hay-lides”.

Iodine is a halide.

Dr. C mentions, “thyroid complications” from “iodine treatments”.

Both of his concepts are vague. Admittedly the issues are complex. We will get into it.

First, the anti iodine mainstream doctors often use the words “subclinical” and “asymptomatic” to describe the so-called complications of people on iodine, both of which imply a person is actually healthy, with no symptoms.

Second, “iodine treatments” can be a widely diverse range, not limited to “Lugol’s 2%” iodine supplementation, and could include all sorts of toxic drugs that include iodine. Lumping these all together is not helpful to the discussion, nor would a toxic drug that includes iodine that creates problems mean that Lugol’s 2% would create that same problem. In fact, a quick search of his page shows he uses the word “lugol’s” only once, which is highly suspicious. That is, indeed, the topic of discussion, is it not? Supplementation with iodine, specifically, the Lugol’s forumla?

Dr. C’s first example of “toxic iodine” is its use in hand sanitizers, banned by the FDA. Well, hand sanitizers contain toxic antibiotics and toxic alcohol, so that is no proof that iodine, mixed with those toxins, is itself toxic. But that is his implication!

Next, how much iodine is safe? He refers to the totally discredited (and now defunded by Trump) World Health Organization, which is basically a vaccine pusher; they push toxic aluminum and mercury in vaccines. Forget the WHO. While we are on the subject of the WHO and vaccines, why is 4 mg of toxic aluminum in the first year of the vaccine schedule “safe” but iodine has to be limited to no more than 1.1 mg? Aluminum is always toxic to all tissues in all animals with no known biological function, except as a poison. In contrast, iodine is used by hundreds of cellular processes in all cells. In fact, there are many other nutrients that are recommended at less than 1 mg, including selenium, molybdenum, chromium, and others.

There is a government source that says iodine is safe in amounts up to 130 mg, which is 130,000 mcg, taken all at once.

He touches on this subject later, but he never mentions the amount. Why not? Because it refutes his argument. This high amount, over 100 times the WHO amount, is used to protect against radiation poisoning from nuclear fallout.

Next, RE: The Iodine Project. Dr. C writes, “They were the sole source of ideas like high dose iodine helps thyroid disease… These ideas alone contradicted the last century’s worth of research on iodine.”

This is a multi part slander. The iodine project’s articles referenced that Lugol’s iodine has been used historically for well over 100 years.

“Abraham, G.E., The historical background of the iodine project. The Original Internist, 12(2):57-66, 2005”

“During the first half of the 20th century, almost every US physician used Lugol solution for iodine supplementation in his/her practice for both hypo- and hyperthyroidism,1 and for many other medical conditions.2”

1) Abraham GE. “The safe and effective implementation of orthoiodosupplementation in medical practice.” The Original Internist, 2004; 11(1):17-36.
2) Kelly FC. “Iodine in medicine and pharmacy since its discovery
– 1811-1961.” Proc R Soc Med, 1961; 54:831-836.

Abraham, G.E., The safe and effective implementation of orthoiodosupplementation in medical practice. The Original Internist, 11:17-36, 2004

“After the discovery of iodine from seaweed, a Swiss physician, J.F. Coindet, who previously used successfully burnt sponge and seaweed for goiter, reasoned that iodine could be the active ingredient in seaweed. In 1819, he tested tincture of iodine at 250 mg/day, an excessive amount by today’s standard, in 150 goiter patients with great success.”

“However, not all physicians abandoned iodine/iodide, and many continued up to the present day to use Lugol solution and potassium iodide in the treatment of iodine deficiency and simple goiter.”

“Today, this is called alternative medicine, but 100 years ago it was mainstream medicine. In 1921, S.P. Beebe stated, “We may say that medical treatment of simple goiter is contained in this one word — iodine.”49”

49) Beebe SP. “Iodine in the treatment of goiter.” M Rec, 1921;

I could not find that reference. But this is what I did find, from the same era, same article number 5 at optimox:

“Even after iodine was recognized as an essential element in the 1920s, mainly due to Marine’s studies, 7,8 no attempt was made to assess the optimal daily requirement of this nutrient for sufficiency of the whole human body. Marine 8 used a daily average of 9 mg iodide in the prevention of goiter in adolescent
girls, an amount 60 times the current RDA for iodine. “

From the NY Times, 1976: An obituary on the same David Marine, iodine researcher and advocate, who died at a healthy age of 96!

“To establish his premise, Dr. Marine, then in his late 20’s, conducted one of the earliest large‐scale experiments ever attempted on humans.

He persuaded the authorities in Akron to permit him to give minute doses of iodine to 2,000 students, while 2,000 others in a control group not receiving the dosage would be closely monitored. Students in both groups were free of any thyroid problems when the test got under way.

Of the 2,000 receiving the iodine, five developed some form of thyroid condition, while 475 in the other group developed symptoms.

In 1917, his book, “The Prevention of Simple Goiter in Man,” was published. This was to remain a hallmark of his 40‐year‐long research and teaching career.”

Me again, done quoting the NY Times.

Thus, Dr. Abraham’s articles at are NOT the sole source, and no, they did not contradict the last 100 years worth of research on iodine. The anti iodine bias started around 1945, which is only 75 years ago now.

It is hard to ascribe to Dr. C good intentions after reading such slander and lies and lack of actual research. Let’s continue.

Next, Why has the idea of high iodine spread?

Dr. C gives three opinions. I see no need to refute those opinions. I have my own. Is high iodine becoming popular because people are getting healthy on iodine? That’s been my experience, and the experience of many people who talk about iodine. Could it be that truth takes on a life of its own?

Next, Dr. C says he noted iodine from around 2005-2007. I first heard of iodine in 1990 as a freshman in college, but I foolishly did not take any then. I started taking iodine on Feb 7th, 2016.

Dr. C mentions he saw patients who took iodine, and then got “thyroid disease” and had “very real effects”. Ok. What effects?

Patient 1: “The doctor told him that he needed the iodine, that they were lucky to have caught it, and that if he took enough of it, the toxic nodular goiter that he had may go away. … But, I knew that this type of issue was likely to come about after high exposure to iodine.”

So, historically, iodine cures goiters. Dr. Flechas addresses this at the beginning of his lecture. Historically, iodine cures goiters, it does not cause them, like modern doctors think. This is why iodine was added to the salt in 1924. But also, the amount needed to cure a goiter is listed as about 3-9 mg a day. Furthermore, the nodules are very tiny. A goiter is a huge growth. If iodine can fix a huge growth, why would tiny nodules even matter in comparison?

Points of omission. What were the symptoms of Patient #1? Not listed. He is described as healthy! “In his mid-70’s, he was a flawless physical specimen.” How is that bad?

This patient story sounded familiar to me. Sure enough, this “Richard” sounds a lot like “Tim” from his previous article. The “snowbird” reference, the older man reference. What were the symptoms? Diarrhea and Tremor. The man is 70. A test revealed “suppressed TSH”. This is important. Dr. C later claims that iodine increases TSH. So, which is it? And iodine nodules. And heart rate over 100 bpm. The patient had been on an iodine pill, 50 mg, for 5 months. Why did the man start iodine? He never said. Maybe he never even asked the patient?

There is zero mention of the man taking any companion nutrients, such as, selenium, salt, magnesium, B vitamins, Vitamin C, or anything else. Zero mention of the man taking any drugs.

(It has been reported by Brian Haviland in the iodine forums on facebook that the iodine pills from are mostly potassium iodide, and do not contain any free iodine, as in Lugol’s formula, which has both kinds. The body can free up iodine from potassium iodide. The potassium iodide is supposedly the safer kind, as iodine itself is a bit caustic, and harder on the stomach. Personally, I used potassium iodide to be able to take over 300 mg of iodine.)

There is also zero discussion of the treatment offered, or the outcome!

Next, Dr. C writes he saw many other patients on high iodine, and this phrase sticks out: “I have seen many other patients taking high dose iodine with no apparent adverse effects.” In other words, healthy. Like the 70 year old. Dr. C refutes himself!

Back to the first more recent article: Patient #2, Jenny.

From taking high iodine, she got palpitations, hair loss, mood shifts. Admittedly, these are things some people continue to report in the high iodine forums to this day.

Again, no indication that she took or did not take, any companion nutrients. Just that she stopped the iodine, and was fine. “Thankfully her thyroid disease went into remission after stopping the iodine supplement.” Well, if that’s the case, what is the danger?

I will note that palpitations can be from fluoride (which iodine can detox), low copper (which iodine may block), and low calcium. Hair loss can be from toxins being mobilized by the iodine. Mood “shifts” is vague wording. Iodine boosted my mood. That is also a shift, but in a good way.

It sounds to me like Jenny did not have “thyroid disease” but had a few detox symptoms, got scared, and quit. It happens.

Next, Dr. C says the work of Dr. Abraham was “not accurate”. He does not specify. Sounds like vague slander.

Dr. C characterizes Dr. Abraham’s work as falling into 3 main categories.

“Old – Many citations were from the 1920s to the 1940s.”

This is hypocrisy. And reveals lies. Remember when Dr. C said that Dr. Abraham was the “sole source”? Turns out, that is not true. Abraham’s work was written in the late 1990’s early 2000’s, and includes citations from the 20’s and 40’s, then therefore, Dr. Abraham is NOT the sole source. So, Dr. C lied earlier, and he reveals his own lie here. And here is another lie. While many citations are from the 20’s and 40’s, the use of Lugol’s iodine dates to when? Wiki can reveal this simple fact.

“Lugol’s iodine was first made in 1829 by the French physician Jean Lugol.[7][8]”. So, really, Dr. Abraham sourced things back to 1829, not just the 1920’s and 1940s. Another lie.

But as we already saw, Abraham’s historical research dated back to 1819!

Further, Dr. Abraham is not the sole modern source either, as there were two co authors, Brownstein and Flechas.

Again, I heard of iodine in 1993. That predated Abraham’s work. Again, Abraham is not the “sole source” as I hereby testify.

I will note what Dr. C omitted. Dr. Abraham notes that people used gram doses of iodine in the distant past to cure all sorts of things. In milligrams, that’s 1000’s. In micrograms, that’s millions. Suddenly, around 1945, anything over a few hundred micrograms was not safe. What changed? Dr. C never answers this key question.

My question is this. MRSA kills 50,000 people each year. All kinds of infection related death, such as sepsis, which is a blood infection, rise to about 300,000 deaths each year. Why don’t doctors use iodine? It’s the original antibiotic. Because of a fear of a hypothetical low thyroid? Why is low thyroid, with no symptoms, feared more than death? Dr. C does not say. Maybe doctors do not fear low thyroid in their patients, maybe they fear loss of profits, and maybe they fear healthy people. Extremly damning answers to questions Dr. C never even gets to.

Dr. C never discusses iodine as an antibiotic!

Dr. C’s “second category” of Abraham’s work: “Animal-based – Many other references were to findings that were not derived from humans.” I see this as slander. It was the Wolf-Chakoff effect, that Abraham refutes, that was done on rats.

Third mischaracterization and lie: “Circular – The majority of his references were to his own work.” It is not circular reasoning to refer to your own work. It do it all the time. I already did it above, (a link to my article on 4mg aluminum vs 1mg iodine) and I’ll do it below (linking to all sorts of problems with fluoride, and linking to my articles on copper). It’s called building on your own base of work. I’ve done it in several fields; Bible Prophecy, Gold Market commentary, and now also in studying vitamins and minerals. Linking to your own work is not “circular”. It’s simply how the internet works.

Circular reasoning is when your argument contains an assumption, but you need to prove it, but you just assume it’s true. Like Vaccine theory contains many circular assumptions. For example, are vaccines double blind tested like other drugs to prove their effectiveness? They answer, “Well, no, because we would have to deny “life saving” vaccines in order to so that, which would be unethical.” But they are assuming that vaccines are life saving, prior to proving that with that double blind study. That is circular reasoning, and Dr. C does it quite a bit.

Finally, I have to note what was omitted. Dr. C characterizes Dr. Abraham’s work in those three categories. All three are lies and mischaracterizations. The iodine doctors also have the clinical experience of working with thousands of patients. The “old” citations from 1830 to 1945 is actually a 115 year period when iodine was not vilified, but used successfully and routinely, all around the nation by people and doctors regularly.

So, regarding patient testimonies, the iodine doctors have thousands of modern success cases, and Dr. C presents 2 quasi maybe problem cases. The weight of the evidence regarding cases is resoundly in favor of the iodine doctors.

If you can read between the lines, if you can see Dr. C knows he is losing that argument on evidence, so Dr. C next brazenly says… the evidence is on his side:

“The current evidence showed that medicine moved away from the use of iodine because its harms became more apparent with better research. Over the years evidence kept showing that iodine could be harmful at doses lower than previously suspected. The safe range kept getting narrower and narrower.”

Note the weasel words, “could be”. In other words, where is the proof of harm?

And actually, the iodine research did explain why iodine was vilified starting in 1945; it was the development of penicillin based antibiotics that were used to replace the use of iodine as an antibiotic, because they were prescription based, and more profitable.

Most antibiotics today are based on either fungus or fluoride. I do not think that is a coincidence. Iodine is an antibiotic, and antifungal and it detoxes fluoride. It seems the industry went directly to the poisons that iodine cures, and used them to replace iodine, to intentionally cause harm.

Also, perhaps not coincidentally, 1945 was the same year that fluoride was introduced to the water supply in the United States. It was also the year of the end of WWII, when we conquored Germany, and took their research on how fluoride is used to keep prisoners docile.

“Penicillin was discovered in 1928 by Scottish scientist Alexander Fleming.[4] People began using it to treat infections in 1942.[5]”

Dr. C has a pill of his own he wants us to swallow, so to speak: “Key Insight: The new model is that iodine has the narrowest safe range of any known nutrients. In that sense, it can be known as the “goldilocks mineral.””

See, his view requires admitting this statement. Not that this statement is true. This is evidence of Dr. C’s circular reasoning!

I feel now is a good time to point out that I took 2000 mg of iodine every day for over a year. That’s 2 million micrograms as Dr. C would put it. I did feel that it led to a bit of copper deficiency, and maybe calcium deficiency, too. I have since lowered my iodine dose to about 300 mg, and increased the copper.

I have no known thyroid disease. I refuse to visit doctors. They have nothing to offer, except poison, and the slander of actual nutrients that threaten to put them out of business.

Is it plausible that iodine has the narrowest safe range of any nutrient? Iodine is very water soluble. Like Vitamin C. Or the B vitamins. In other words, it gets flushed out quickly and easily. That sounds safe to me.

I think if iodine was toxic above 200 mcg, then how am I even alive having taken 2 million mcg daily for a year? I should be dead. My very existence proves Dr. C’s circular reasoning postulate assumption “key insight” of a very narrow safe range for iodine, that he never proves, is incorrect.

In fact, the opposite is true. The fact that people can safely take gram doses of iodine means that the safe range for iodine is the widest of any nutrient as the range is nearly 100,000 times, going from 100 mcg to 10 grams! 10,000 mg / .1 mg = 100,000. (While I never took over 3 grams, a historic high dose is up to ten grams).

As an aside, the modern medical establishment used this same tactic to vilify copper, as well as iodine! Copper deficiency was historically known to cause liver damage. Today, they blame “high copper” of 0.8 mg of causing liver damage.

So, what is actually low copper is called high copper, and then they blame copper for causing liver damage, but it’s really low copper causing liver damage as always.

Taking 121 mg zinc with only 2mg copper for 5 years caused copper deficiency.

This seems exactly what they are doing with iodine. Mischaracterizing 300 mcg of iodine as “high iodine” but it’s really super low iodine. See my two articles:

Dr. C: “The best daily intake only has a range of about 50 mcg before you start to get too much or too little!” That’s just insanity, and beyond foolish. The fact that he says this, knowing that healthy people take 50,000 mcg, and live, and stay healthy, and he actually claims to have seen one such person in real life, is really amazing.

Next, Dr. C says iodine intake varies wildly. And after that, he discusses pregnant women. And how iodine deficiency can cause cretinism, which is an old word for retardation and stunted growth. Ah, an unusually true statement.

The reality is that iodine is great for pregant women, especially their babies. Here is my article on this, where I showcase 8 scientific studies.

Iodine Deficiency Causes Retardation (Autism). High Iodine Causes Geniuses.

His next statement, although sourced, with an 8, that leads nowhere, is absurd:

“In the modern world, pregnant women with what was considered a mild to moderate iodine deficiency no longer have infants with developmental delays 8.”

“pregnant women with… iodine deficiency no longer have infants with developmental delays”???!!! Hello? McFly? Ever heard of Autism? And see my link above to 5 scientific articles saying low iodine leads to Autism, a developmental delay, and/or brain damage!

Personally, I hate the CDC as a source, and I think they lie in numerous ways. However, they state:

“Developmental disabilities occur among all racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. Recent estimates in the United States show that about one in six, or about 17%, of children aged 3 through 17 years have one or more developmental disabilities”

The CDC says that 1 in 6 kids, or 17%, have developmental delays. Dr. C says we no longer have them? Seriously?

Next, RE: “A review, known as the Cochrane review, pulled together all of the current data over the last decade”. That is clearly not true. The Cochrane review could not possibly have evaluated the data in the 8 studies I shared on how iodine deficiency leads to autism, and iodine supplementation leads to genius babies. I found it. And it does not.

I found the Cochrane review:

In the Cochrane review summary of iodine studies on pregnant women, they never listed the amount of iodine studied in all the studies listed, but they did conclude there were no differences in hypothyroid status, as follows:

“The number of women with an underactive thyroid gland (hypothyroidism) was not clearly different either during pregnancy (one trial involving 365 women) or after giving birth (three trials involving 540 women) when iodine supplements were given.”

Thus, the Cochrane review of iodine given to pregnant women, cited by Dr. C, completely refutes Dr. C’s entire argument that iodine is dangerous or causes hypothyroidism.

Now is a good time for me to mention that I was an iodine baby. My mother did not take 50 mg, but took about 1 mg iodine/day during her pregancy with me. This is an amount at the top end of the WHO safe range, which Dr. C cites, but then works so hard to claim is too high. My IQ is usually about 130 to 135 on tests.

Dr. C concludes his argument saying that a source claims that there is no longer any “severe” iodine deficiency. So moderate to mild iodine deficiency does not count, only “severe” counts? And what is the definition of deficiency? Clearly, there is a major misunderstanding here, or confusion, or he is trying to confuse the reader on purpose. As I understand it, Dr. C is arguing that there are no longer very many people getting under about 50-150 micrograms of iodine a day. The “iodine doctors” recommend 50,000 micrograms a day. If the definition of deficiency varies so wildly, then so will the numbers of people at each range vary wildly.

Next main topic: Dr. C: “2. Claim: The RDA of Iodine Is Inadequate”

His population study graph only studies people up to about 300 mcg iodine a day. They did not even study people on the high iodine protocol of 50,000 mcg, so how can they have anything to say about it?

This would be like studying the harmful effects of marathon running and trying to apply it to sprinters. It’s foolish and insanity and not applicable. Or it is lies.

As indicated by the iodine doctors in many ways, the RDA for iodine of 150 mcg is not enough to clear out disease. They point out the historic dose for curing goiter was 3000 mcg, or 3mg to 9mg, as I previously noted. The amount to cure cancer ranges from 300 mg to 800 mg, or 300,000 mcg to 800,000 mcg.

Again, let’s note what Dr. C is not commenting on. He does not talk about the concept of cleansing, detoxification reactions or Herxheimer reactions, which are in the iodine papers he is supposedly trying to refute.

But no comment? Ok. I’ll comment. Iodine detoxes about 5-6 other major metal toxins, noted as fluoride, aluminum, mercury, arsenic, and maybe lead and one other I can’t remember. It may well also help detoxify unstudied substances, such as the 300-500 man-made environmental toxins that we are all exposed to in the modern world. It also kills yeast, like candida. When they die, they release toxins, and this is called the “herx” reaction. The detoxification process often manifests as illness, coughing, pimples, and toxins coming out in ways other than the urinating. This can be an uncomfortable process. Most people who persist on the high iodine program report going through it, and feeling much better afterwards. I did. After about 5 months on iodine, I had a mild cough that lasted a month. It was the most mild sickness. After that, my lungs cleared up, and I have not had a lung congestion nor nasal congestion illness in the last 4 years, and I used to get sick with nasal and lung congestion multiple times a year.

Next topic. Dr C: “3. Claim: Iodine Is Essentially Non-Toxic”

Exactly. This is why I’m still here, after taking 2 million mcg of iodine a day for a year.

Oh, there it is. His one and only reference to Lugol’s.

He says, “A tragic example of iodine’s toxicity In fact that ingesting it was once the most common means of suicide.”

This is NOT true. I may have read the study he references. There was once a study of 300 people who tried to kill themselves with iodine. Only about 1-3 succeeded. In most of these cases, people drank the entire bottle, of Lugol’s 2%, which would amount to about 1.5 grams of iodine, or 1500 mg, which is 30 times higher than the 50 mg that the high iodine doctors recommend, and it still did not work. Of course it would not work. I took 2 grams a day, daily for a year. And I was NOT trying to kill myself. There are about 40,000 suicides each year today. This old study noted only 1-3 successful suicides. How could it be the most common means of suicide if so few succeeded?

People in india also try to kill themselves with copper sulfide. And again, at doses at tens of thousands of times higher than copper supplements. 3 mg is a copper supplement. 20 grams, or 20,000 mg is a typical dose of copper sulfide used in suicide attempts. Very few succeed to kill themselves with copper also. Because minerals are safe.

The U.S. National Poison Data System reports there are no deaths from vitamins, no deaths from herbs, no deaths from minerals. None.

Dr. C quickly mentions pregnant women who had kids with “birth defects”. I suspect this is not true and an overstatement. Usually, with “birth defects” we think of mis-shapen kids, or kids without fully formed fingers or limbs. This is not what was reported. It was reported that a few kids whose moms took iodine, had “subclinical hypothyroid”, which resolved when iodine was stopped. In other words, they only had abnormally low levels of thyroid hormone. But did iodine cause it? 3 Babies is not enough to know!

Next, Dr. C: “4. Claim: Urine Challenge Tests Are Best For Evaluating Iodine Levels”

“The researchers (Dr. Abraham, et al.) here are assuming that, whatever you didn’t urinate out in a day, your body must have wanted or needed.”

Ok, so he never gets into the details of their claim, and therefore can’t refute it, but has to dance around it.

The actual claim is that people with typical iodine levels from only getting that 150 mcg, will typically absorb and hold onto about 50% of a high iodine dose of a 50,000 mcg challenge dose. However, a person on iodine long term, when they finally reach “iodine sufficiency” typically excretes 90% of the iodine in 24 hours on a challenge test, showing that their bodies are no longer absorbing so much, because they have been taking enough iodine for a long enough time. How long? There are two basic answers.

At 12.5 mg a day of iodine, it takes a year to reach saturation, the point at which one will excrete 90%.

They theorized that a higher dose would get someone to saturation more quickly. After all, why wait for good health? Sure enough, a 4x high dose of 50 mg got there 4 times as quickly. That’s where the 50,000 mcg comes from.

At 50 mg a day of iodine, it takes 3 months to reach saturation, again, as measured by excreting 90% of that much iodine in a 24 hour urine sample.

So, it’s NOT an assumption that the body will hold on to more iodine when it has not gotten enough iodine. Rather, it’s a conclusion drawn from repeated testing. You know, conclusions drawn from testing, and evidence. Science. A person on high iodine for a while, excretes 90% of it. A person new to iodine typically excretes only half of it. Repeated testing across thousands of clinical patients shows this to be true. So it’s no longer an assumption, it’s a well-tested observation.

As an aside, how much iodine does it take to reach saturation? 90 days of 50 mg is 4,500 mg or 4.5 grams.

Dr. C never mentions these details and never attempts to test them, nor refute them, or even address them. This is the essential reason why he saw patients, or one patient, take 50,000 mcg, and he never mentions it. Wow. The entire idea of science is that you review another person’s work. Then try to confirm it by replicating it. Dr. C never makes this attempt.

Instead, Dr. C challenges the “validity” of the iodine challenge test itself. He does not claim that the test does not work, nor does he prove the test does not work. Instead, he dives into his own confusion, as follows:

Next, Dr. C misinterprets his own graph. It says, right on the graph, that people took iodine at the 24 hour mark. It does not say they took iodine at the 0 hour mark. Dr. C thinks that people took iodine at the 0 hour mark, and did not excrete massive iodine until 24 hours later. No. People began excreting large amounts of iodine right at the time they took iodine. The first 24 hours are the baseline reading before taking iodine. It’s a weird mistake.

I appreciate his following insight. People with kidney problems do not excrete iodine as well. Sui Chen on facebook notes that too much iodine can also harm the kidneys. So can Vitamin D supplements, which calcify the kidneys, and too much calcium, and too much ice cream.

My top kidney cleanses include baking soda, Vitamin C, magnesium, Vitamin K, and green smoothies.

Next, Dr. C: “5. Claim: the Wolff Chaikoff Effect Isn’t Real”

Dr. C: “Researchers have observed since the 1940s that a high dose of iodine can stop the thyroid. Basically your thyroid has a safety switch. If too much iodine comes in, rather than make lethal amounts of thyroid hormone, your thyroid shuts off. It is a great example of homeostasis and has been used as a way to slow the thyroid when it is overactive.”

So, in other words, Dr. C just said the body knows how to prevent death from iodine, and or he is admitting iodine is not deadly, even though, he made the claim that iodine is potentially deadly, without providing evidence of that. Note the contradiction. Liars expose themselves when you get into the details.

Here is my take on this topic. First, the Cochrane Review said there is NO DIFFERENCE of hypothyroidism between women who do, or do not take iodine! Next, there is no switch, and the thyroid never “shuts off”, that’s idiotic robot language, but it does go to show the extremely limited thinking of the mainstream medical establishment. So the T3 hormone has 3 iodine atoms in it, and the T4 hormone has 4 iodine atoms in it. That’s why they are called T3 and T4. Obviously, it should go without saying, but I’ll say it: these hormones are obviously a way to distribute iodine throughout the body.

As proof that iodine does NOT shut off the thyroid, I will mention that Doctors today use radioactive iodine to “kill” or “ablate” an overactive thyroid. Well, if regular iodine did that, then why would they turn to a radioactive iodine to kill the thyroid with radiation? Why not just use iodine to kill it? But they don’t. So this idea that iodine shuts down the thyroid, is all lies.

So does iodine cause the body to make less T3 and T4 hormones? Well… The Chochran review shows that this does not happen. IF it does happen at very high iodine levels… here’s the theory of the iodine doctors, as I understand it: If the body has a large enough amount of iodine circulating throughout the body, then it has less of a need for the T3 and T4 hormones. Furthermore, iodine increases the sensitivity of the T3 and T4 hormone receptors, including the testosterone receptors, and thus, the body simply needs less of all of those hormones to get the jobs done. This, in no way, indicates disease. It is a marker of biological efficiency and innate biological wisdom. The body does not need to make as much of what it does not need. The thyroid is not “off” it’s just making less, and being more efficient. Just as a stronger healthy muscle is more efficient.

For example. It is said that too much insulin, that the body loses sensitivity to, is bad. Here is another example. Low blood pressure is not bad. Too low can be bad, but low is not always bad. Low chloesterol is not always bad. Too low can be bad. Sometimes low is good. It is no proof of disease, just because a T3 test comes back on the low range of “average” or “normal” across a population of people who may be deficient. And his use of the word “stop” is excessive. No, the thyroid does not “stop”. And that’s not what the Wolff Chaikoff Effect is even about.

The Wolff Chaikoff Effect is the theory or idea that high iodine causes low thyroid hormones or hypothyroid. Which the Cochrane Review refuted. But high iodine can also cause hyperthyroid, according to Dr. C and his research. Which is it, Dr. C? He contradicted himself again.

According to the high iodine doctors, high iodine is the CURE for both hypothyroid and hyperthyroid.

So, how could high iodine both appear to cause and cure the same conditions of both low thyroid and high thyroid function? Sounds like either the doctors are all confused, or someone is lying, or someone studied iodine at vastly different amounts and duration. For example, 300 mcg of iodine for 3 weeks is not the same as 2,000,000 mcg of iodine a day for a year. But the low iodine doctors would call the lower amount, “high” and “dangerous”. They seem to be completely ignorant of anything at 50,000 mcg, let alone 2 million. According to them, I must be suicidally dead. They are just clueless.

We finally get to the case report of 3 infants whose mothers took iodine. Please remember my 8 studies; iodine deficiency causes autism, iodine supplements cause genius babies. And the Cochran review which said there is no difference in hypothyroidism across hundreds of mothers in two studies whether they took iodine or not.

Congenital Hypothyroidism Caused by Excess Prenatal Maternal Iodine Ingestion

Search for the following line of text in the study: “infants recover normal thyroid function after the exposure ceases.”

In other words, no harm done. It’s only theoretical harm as measured by lower T4 hormones, and there was not even a goiter. “He did not have a goiter on examination.”. Patients 2 and 3? “Neither of the twins had a goiter; thyroid ultrasound performed at 11 days of age in both infants revealed a thyroid gland of normal size and location.”. They all had “hypothyroidism” (did they really?) by diagnosis of low T4 and elevated TSH, no other symptoms!

If they had never taken any T4 blood tests, they would never have noticed anything abnormal at all!

First line of the study: “We report the cases of 3 infants with congenital hypothyroidism detected with the use of our newborn screening program”.

This is why they also call it “subclinical”, because there are no clinical symptoms, and this is why they call it “asymptomatic” because there are no symptoms. How can there be a disease with no symptoms, unless you are living in fantasy land, and trying really really hard to slander iodine? If that’s the best they have, they have nothing. Besides, these are case studies. Where is that double blind placebo test that is what science is supposed to be all about? Oh, that’s right, it was done in the 1920’s. Showed iodine prevented thyroid problems!

Earlier, Dr. C refered to babies born to mothers on iodine with the term “birth defects”. At the end of point three he writes, “I will come back and talk about this, but the research shows that there are many pregnant women who did this and tragically had many birth defects come about in the process.”

Many birth defects? No. It was 3 infants who were so well, they never would have detected anything if not for T4 blood tests.

We now see that Dr. C’s words, “tragically had many birth defects” was a lie. He also said the words “potentially deadly” with regard to the subject of babies born to mothers taking iodine. In other words, no baby died either, and he was lying about this case study.

What is tragic is not that these babies were born to mothers who took iodine. But that these babies were started on thyroid medication, for no reason, for the first 3 years of life.

And again, the Cochran review said there is no difference between hypothyroidism rates, between groups who did and did not take iodine!

Three babies born to two mothers is not enough to “prove causation”! Maybe the mothers were taking iodine,to specifically try to cure their own pre existing hypothryoidism, but did not take enough for long enough. After all, it takes a year to reach saturation at 12.5 mg which is what the women were taking. We simply don’t know the details to know anything in these case studies, as presented.

I can’t even believe the stupidity of his next “bottom line”:

Dr. C: “Bottom Line: Just because a risk didn’t happen, does not mean it didn’t exist in the first place”

So, we had babies that were totally fine. But it was risky. Ok! I feel sorry for his lack of reasoning ability and all who listen to such faulty reasoning. But is it lack of reasoning ability, or was he intentionally deceptive?

The reality is that there is a risk of not taking iodine, too! It’s called deficiency, and it leads to thyroid problems!

Next point: Dr. C: “6. Claim: Halides Block The Effects Of Iodine”

Now this is getting tedious. I really don’t like this guy at this point. It’s been lie after lie, of one kind or another, even lies of omission, on every point he makes. And even studies he cites, refute him.

Dr. C: “In the Iodine Project, they argue that any possible apparent side effects from iodine are really effects from iodine pushing out halides from your body.”

Where before, he dismissed this as not plausible, here, he contradicts himself, and agrees with it.

And he gets it again: Dr. C: “The one truth here is that fluoride is a halide, and it does compete with iodine for that sodium-iodide transporter. It keeps iodine from getting in by using up space.”

It is amazing when you see a liar admit the truth. But this is how they lure you in.

Next, he says: “Key Insight: Thankfully, the amounts of fluoride we are exposed to are far too low to have effects on thyroid function. We don’t get exposed in our day-to-day lives 30.”

So that’s it. No proof. No reference. Well, it looks like a reference. 30. What does that go to? There is no link. No collection of reference at the bottom. Maybe he is sourcing another liar, but forgot to include his footnotes.

Before I get to my references, let’s just examine the amounts of fluoride in tap water. It ranges from .7 mg to 1 mg per liter. That’s more fluoride than Dr. C recommends that we get of iodine, which, I suspect is only about 150 mcg, or 0.15 mg. So, he is literally recommending we get about 4.5 times more fluoride than iodine? And fluoride blocks iodine, he admits. Interesting. But getting more fluoride than iodine will have no effect on the body’s ability to use iodine? Does he seriously think anyone should agree with him?

If we consider the half life of fluoride, which is 20 years, this should be seriously disturbing to everyone. The half life of one iodine medication was 58 days, and that was disturbingly long enough to Dr. C. He also wrongly tried to apply that half life to iodine itself, which is far shorter. Ninty percent of “high iodine” appears to be well excreted within 24 hours, once a person reaches “saturation”. I have to conclude he is simply totally ignorant of fluoride; because he says so little about it.

Here’s my references. One web link that links to 175 scientific articles that all link fluoride toxicity to iodine deficiency. And the symptoms are the same in each.

Iodine helps and cures 182 identifiable conditions of iodine deficiency which are all the same symptoms and conditions that show up with fluoride poisoning, as listed here, in 175 scientific papers and references: This is an absolutely amazing and very thorough list.


So yes, fluoride does block iodine, and it causes all these 182 problems:

Abnormal Sweating, Acne, ADHD/Learning Disorders, Allergies, Alopecia (Hair-loss), Alzheimer’s Disease, Anaphylactic Shock, Anemia, Apnea (Cessation of breath), Aorta Calcification, Asthenia (Weakness), Asthma, Atherosclerosis, Arthralgia, Arthritis, Ataxia, Autism, Back Pain, Behavioural Problems, Birth Defects, Blind Spots, Body temperature disturbances, Breast Cancer, Cachexia (wasting away), Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, Cataracts, Change in blood pressure, Chest pain, Cholelithiasis (Gallstones), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Collagen breakdown, Cold Shivers, Coma, Concentration Inability, Constipation, Convulsions, Crying easily for no apparent reason, Death, Decrease in Testosterone, Dementia, Demyelinizing Diseases, Dental Abnormalities, Dental Arch smaller, Dentral Crowding, Dental enamel more porous, Dentral Fluorosis (Mottling of teeth), Delayed Eruption of Teeth, Depression, Diabetes Insipidus, Diabetes Mellitus, Diarrhea, Dizziness, Down Syndrome, Dry Mouth, Dyspepsia, Dystrophy, Early/Delayed Onset of Puberty, Eczema, Edema, Epilepsy, Eosinophilia, Excessive Sleepiness, Eye, ear and nose disorders, Fatigue, Fearfulness, Fever, Fibromyalgia, Fibrosarcoma, Fibrosis, Fingernails:Lines/Grooves, Fingernails:Brittle, Forgetfulness, Gastro-disturbances, Gastric Ulcers, Giant Cell Formation, Gingivitis, Glaucoma, Goitre, Growth Disturbances, Headache, Hearing Loss, Heart Disorders, Heart Failure, Heart Palpitations, Hepatitis, Hemorrhage, Hives, Hoarseness, Hyperparathyroidism, Hypertension, Hypoplasia, Immunosuppression, Impotence, Incoherence, Infertility, Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Inner Ear Disorders, Irritability, Joint Pains, Kidney Failure, Lack of Energy, Lack of Co-ordination, Loss of Appetite, Loss of Consciousness, Loss of IQ, Loss of Spermatogenesis, Low Birth Weight, Lung Cancer, Lupus, Magnesium Deficiency, Memory Loss, Mental Confusion, Migraine, Monisiliasis (Candidasis), More fluorosis/high altitudes, More hypothyroidism/high altitudes, Mouth Sores, Myalgia (Muscle Pain), Myotrophy (Muscle wasting), Multiple Sclerosis, Muscle Cramps, Muscle Stiffness, Muscle Weakness, Muscoskeletal Disease, Nausea, Osteoarthritis, Osteoporosis, Osteosarcoma, Optic Neuritis, Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma, Otosclerosis, Parkinson’s Disease, Pins & Needles, Polydipsia, Polyneuropathy, Polyurea, Pyelocystitis, Premature Delivery, Pruritis (Itchy Skin), Pulminary Edema, Recurring Colds, Respiratory Complications, Restlessness, Retinitis, Rhinitis, Schizophrenia, Sceroderma, Skin Pigmentation, Secondary teeth erupt later, Sensitive to light, Seizures, Shortness of Breath, SIDS, Sinus Infections, Skeletal Changes, Sleep Disorders, Slipped Epiphysis, Sluggishness, Skin Irritations, Spondylitis, ankylosing, Stillbirths, Swallowing Difficulties (Dysphagia), Swelling in Face (Angioedema), Telangiectasia, Testicular Growth/Alteration, Thirst, Thrombosis, Thyroid Cancer, Tinnitus, Tingling Sensations, Visual disturbances, Ulcerative Colitis, Urticaria (Hives), Uterine Bleeding, Uterine Cancer, Vaginal Bleeding, Vas Deferens Alterations, Vertigo, Vitiligo (white spots/skin), Weak Pulse, Weight Disturbances, Zinc Deficiency

I will also reference Hidden Cause of Acne.

Melissa Gallico blames acne on fluoride. From Melissa, my wife learned, and taught me, the following, which I have confirmed as true through my own research:

We all get exposure to fluoride from many unexpected sources. It’s not just in the tap water at 7 ppm. It’s also in chicken feed at 130 ppm, and thus in chicken. It’s also used as a pesticide on grapes, and thus found in raisins and wines, and other dried fruits. Also it’s in teflon pans, goretex fabrics, and glide dental floss. It’s also in restaurants in foods prepared with tap water, such as rice and pasta. And in prepared foods in supermarkets. And also in fountain drinks made with CO2 added to tap water, if fluoride is in that tap water. Also in swimming pools, showers, etc.

Next, Dr. C dismisses Chlorine with two lines:

“Chlorine is another halide that many people talk about. … In the amounts that we are exposed to, from drinking water or swimming pools, chlorine does not affect our iodine metabolism31,32.”

Chlorine is a componant of sodium chloride, or table salt, and also magnesium chloride, another health supplement. The chlorine is good as it helps to detox the bromine.

RE: bromine. Dr. Flechas, one of the original 3 iodine doctors, calls bromine a toxin. He blamed it for causing schizophrenia. My ex wife’s eldest son loved to drink Mountain Dew, which has brominated vegetable oil, and he developed schizophrenia.

Maybe there is a difference between bromine and brominated vegetable oil being a particularly bad form of it. I don’t know enough to comment on the good things Dr. C says about bromine.

I found his study of reference:

“Bromine is an essential trace element for assembly of collagen IV scaffolds in tissue development and architecture”

According to the study, bromine is needed by fruit flies for collagen IV formation to avoid mutations.

Hypocrisy and slander alert! I thought animal studies were inapplicable according to Dr. C? And the iodine doctors did not do any animal studies (his slander), they refuted the W-C effect which was an animal study that Dr. C relies on!

Dr. C did not say anything about fruit flies. Dr. C appeared so genuine in his video. I’m really beginning to dislike him.

Next topic. Dr. C: “7. Iodine Does Cause High TSH (But It Is Not Relevant)”

Interesting. Earlier, Dr. C said high iodine caused low TSH, not high TSH.

Source: Going back to Dr. C’s earlier page again:

Source: “Normally in excellent health, ‘Tim’ joked about getting old and his body falling apart. He had his screening tests completed before I heard about this. They were normal besides a suppressed TSH.” … “He told me he … he was taking an iodine pill for five months. Apparently he was tested and found to be low in iodine and was now taking 1 tablet of Iodoral daily providing 50,000 mcg of iodine.”

So. Which is it? Does iodine cause high TSH, or low TSH? It’s getting dizzy and hypocritical up in here…

I do not know whether or not high iodine causes low TSH or high TSH or whether that is important. Dr. C says it’s important. But I think he lacked providing enough proof… and he contradicted himself, which is a key trait of a liar.

I will admit that my wife, who, like me, took 2 million mcg of iodine daily for a year, nearly a year ago now, recently tested high TSH. And yes, that happens. And she had previously been diagnosed hypothyroid, and she took prozac, a fluoride, for 7 years, ten years ago now. She, like me, is in super great health. She took enough iodine to get off of thyroid meds, and she never had the predicted “thyroid storm”.

Next, the “other claims” section.

Iodine quickly forms iodides with other substances, I agree.

Next claim: iodine stores in the body: One claims the body stores 1.5 to 2 grams of iodine. Dr. C references a claims the body holds no more than about 26 mg of iodine. Competing claims do not refute each other. There is not enough information to know who is right. I will repeat myself. I took 2 grams of iodine daily for a year. I’m still here.

Iodine and breast cancer.

Before I get into it, I’ll reference the site, advocates of iodine for breast cancer:

Dr. C claims this claim came from the study of the Japanese, because they consume more iodine and have less breast cancer.

He then shows a study that he claims shows that those who excrete more iodine have more breast cancer. That is NOT what the study said. The study looked at 24 people with breast cancer, and showed that those with breast cancer tended to have more people who excreted “a lot” of iodine. But was it a lot? No.

But that study does NOT prove that high iodine causes breast cancer. The amounts being excreted, too, as said to be high, are actually very low, too. The study’s “high range” is in the 200 ug/Liter range. ug is micograms.

That is not an intervention study, where people took iodine and got cancer. And it’s not a study looking at people on “the high iodine protocol” either. It’s looking at people with breast cancer, and some of them excreted a tiny amount of iodine, like less than 1/10th of a drop of Lugol’s 2%, which is 2.5 mg, which is “said” to be high, but from our perspective, is still orders of magnitude very low. For comparison, a person taking 50 mg of iodine with Lugol’s 2% would be taking 20 drops. Why would excreting 1/200th of the iodine on the high iodine program, implicate the high iodine program itself, which predicts that those taking high iodine would excrete half to 90% of their iodine, not 1/200th of it?

Finally of his group of 24 people with breast cancer, more of them were low iodine excreters (there were 11), than high iodine excreters (there were 8) (and the high was still very low).

It’s like nothing he has to say is remotely relevant to the high iodine protocol. Tedious.

Going further to show his utterly backward mentality… I’ll let him speak in his own words, “there is also research underway to see if radioactive iodine could be used to treat it”. Ah. radioactive iodine. radiation. Radiation that causes cancer. You are going to try to treat cancer with a cancer causing agent. Wow. Run from this guy like he is a plague on steroids. He is more dangerous than MRSA. That’s ok. Iodine kills MRSA in seconds.

Povidone-iodine (Betadine) solution was maximally effective at the 1:100 dilution, killing all the MRSA within 15 s

I made an iodine joke, and a good point about iodine!

The entire point of the CDC’s recommendation to take 130 mg of iodine is to protect from radioactive iodine from being absorbed, because that’s what primarily kills people from nuclear fallout! And these guys want to give radioactive iodine?

How can he, and mainstream medicine, argue with a straight face that raidioactive iodine is somehow less dangerous than non radioactive iodine?

It’s almost like he’s suffering from mental retardation because of a refusal to take iodine.

Next: Dr. C: “Claim: The Japanese Have High Iodine Intake and Good Health”

I note, with a simple google search:
Japanese longevity is 87.9 years.
USA longevity is 78.6 yers.
Difference is 9.3 years.

Dr. C fails to mention the longevity. Or the difference.

Instead, he says the Japanese death rate from thyroid cancer is nearly triple that of the USA. But it is so low, at 1.3 per 100,000. And that does not detract from the increased longevity, which is the essential issue.

He also claims that they “controlled for radiation exposure”. I don’t buy it. Again, not relevant. Even with the radiation exposure, they still outlive us by 9.3 years!

Next, Dr. C: “Claim: Iodine Makes Compounds Protecting The Body”

I know nothing about this claim. It’s called knowing when to admit your ignorance. Dr. C should try it far more often.

Next, Dr. C: “How Can They Make These Claims?
If you make a claim that is contrary to nearly all of the world’s biomedical literature, it would demand robust amounts of evidence. The first step would be tracking outcomes in a peer-reviewed case review paper. This is hard to claim when there are numerous published case reports of complications from high dose iodine supplementation.”

Hypocrisy alert. He cited case studies of 3 babies on high iodine, all of which were fine, cited them as “birth defects” and “potentially deadly”… And that flew in contrast to the 8 studies I cited that showed low iodine causes Autism, and high iodine causes genius babies. His claim is also refuted by the Cochrane study, showing no difference in hypothyroidism among pregnant women on some amount of iodine. And remember the historical study of 9mg iodine given to students; 5/2000 on iodine developed thyroid problems, whereas nearly 500/2000 not taking any supplement developed thyroid problems. And this is about the rate we still see today:

“More than 12 percent of the U.S. population will develop a thyroid condition during their lifetime.”

Hypocrisy alert. He claimed nobody is harmed by fluoride, and cited one source. There is such a thing as fluorosis, which is getting so much fluoride, that it rots the teeth. Prevalence? Now 41% among the youth!

I cited 175 studies on how fluoride toxicity and iodine deficiency are related.

Hypocrisy alert. The iodine doctors made claims consistent with 115 years of literature supporting the use of iodine as medicine for nearly everything.

Hypocrisy alert. The iodine doctors Brownstein and Flechas have thousands of patients they are actively treating with success. Brownstein was recently so successful he had a staff of 30, and was not taking any new clients.

Hypocrisy alert. Tracking outcomes is what the drug establishment is required to do for toxic drugs that will only be available via prescription. It is not required for basic minerals that have been available over the counter since 1829.

Hypocrisy alert. The complications are called detoxification reactions, (which Dr. C noted) and people get past them, if they continue on iodine and the co supplements.

Dr. C claims he does not want to question motives. I have no problem questioning his.

I believe his motives are not pure. Almost everything he said was a lie, a mistake, or not relevant.

Iodine, if it helps people get healthy, can put doctors like him out of business.

Iodine, if it helps people stay healthy, can put pharmaceutical companies out of business.

Iodine is a growing threat to the establishment.

In his bio, Dr. C boasts of being on CNN one of the world’s most corrupt networks.

“Would you believe that a small-town obese kid from Minnesota with epileptic seizures could be on Dr. Oz, The Doctors, Inside Edition, CNN Headline News, (and more)….as a health expert?”

I would like to thank Dr. C for mentioning that maybe iodine is not cleared very well in people with kidney issues.

“The only time in all of the medical literature that an iodine challenge test was ever used was once in 1992. Researchers were checking to see how well people with kidney disease could eliminate iodine. They were given a challenge dose of iodine and their results were compared to those with normal kidney function. They eliminated less iodine in the following 24 hours than the control group. Yet the interpretation was not that they did so because they were iodine deficient, they did so because they had an impaired ability to regulate iodine23.”

Sui Chen, a facebook friend of mine, has said the same thing. This bears watching out for. Iodine is, indeed, said by the high iodine doctors to rapidly clear through the kidneys and go mostly into the urine. Yes, iodine can also be lost in the sweat and feces.

But if iodine is also cleansing out toxins, it could be those toxins causing kidney problems, more than the iodine.

In addition, I noted earlier that Vitamin D can cause kidney damage. Vitamin D is not a companion nutrient on the high iodine protocol.

In conclusion, this guy was tedious. Thanks for reading or listening to the end, I hope you enjoyed it.

Here is my key essay on iodine:


  1. Great article, thanks! As a fun note, I appreciate how you include the suggested reading times, and in past examples with times of say 20 minutes or so, I can end up reading in say 10 minutes or about half the time. Here, with ’32 mins’, it took nearly an hour haha, but I did enjoy it all and found it useful 🙂

    1. Speed depends on how important the information is to you… and on how deep the material goes. heh.

  2. Hi, I recently purchased iodine prills USP grade but after mixing it leaves a residue that looks like metal at the bottom of the mixture… Is this normal? Thanks

Comments are closed.