Iodine Misinformation
By Don Bennett, DAS
Just as there's plenty of misinformation regarding the human diet, there's a lot of incorrect notions about iodine. What follows are the main misconceptions. Some exist because of assumptions, miseducation, faulty research, and even because of a hostility to something with proven benefit that stands to dramatically improve the health of the general population, which would obviously be a bad thing for certain industries, and this is what accounts for the disinformation. But whether it's disinformation or misinformation, any incorrect information about iodine is just as bad as incorrect information about the diet that will allow you to be as healthy as your DNA will permit.
|
There's no need to take iodine! So
says the medical doctors
While it's true that since adding iodide to table salt, the incidence of goiter and cretinism – which are the conditions associated with the most severe form of iodine deficiency – have dramatically reduced in number, that doesn't mean that everyone is now okay regarding iodine. There's a big difference between not having a severe deficiency, and having whole body tissue sufficiency of iodine (which is what those organs, glands, and systems that require iodine need for proper function). |
 2001 India postage stamp commemorating Global Iodine Deficiency Disorders Day, October 21st. I guess it's a real thing, but one that you're not supposed to know about. |
And BTW, iodine was removed from use in bread products in the early 1970's and replaced with bromine (a toxic susbtance), and bromine competes with iodine for iodine receptor sites. I guess doctors aren't taught this in medical school.
There's no need to take iodine! So
says those devoted to natural health
There are those who firmly believe that if you
eat the diet we're designed to eat, and if you don't damage those foods
by cooking them, and you're active enough to warrant eating enough food,
you'll get enough of all the nutrients your body requires, including iodine.
And that's a lovely notion, but it's not one that deals with reality.
And since my body exists in reality, I make sure to think in a realistic
way when it comes to my health. Rigidly adhering in a dogmatic fashion
to "perfect world" scenarios is not going to allow for the best
health possible. Fact: We need sufficient iodine. Fact: Iodine is supposed
to come from the foods we eat; our body can't manufacture it, making it
an "essential" nutrient. Fact: Most of the foods we eat are
grown in soils that are iodine poor. Conclusion: We either must figure
out a way to get the iodine we need, or suffer in some respect for the
lack of it. There's simply no way to fantasize our way around this fact.
We can choose to ignore it, but this amounts to ignoring your health.
So we have two options: 1. Adhere to a philosophy
where we rely only on food for our nutrition, and if it doesn't provide
enough of all the nutrients we require, we'll be emotionally okay with
less than maximal health and with less than the best odds of never getting
a diagnosis of something serious. 2. If we only have access to foods that
are lacking in enough of certain nutrients, we look to other ways of obtaining
the nutrients we require, even if the forms of those nutrients are not
optimal. Personally, I'd love to get, for example, my iodine from food.
But that's not happening, yet my body has iodine requirements: one requirement
to prevent the conditions associated with severe iodine deficiency (goiter,
cretinism), and another to prevent the conditions associated with iodine
insufficiency such as disordered health in general, including
sub-optimal functioning of the thyroid, thymus, pancreas, and the other
glands, organs and tissues that concentrate iodine, and conditions such
as fibrocystic breasts, breast cancer and other hormone related cancers,
asthma, PCOS, and abnormal weight, to name some (a more comprehensive
list appears below). I make this case to people, and have yet to see any
credible evidence that would suggest that a fruit and green leafy diet
can provide enough of all the nutrients we require.
It's a lovely notion for sure, and I'd love to believe it, but I can't
because I've found it not to be true.
But Cron-O-Meter says I'm getting enough!
Nutrition charting programs like Cron-O-Meter and Fitday.com must
rely on charts, like the RDIs, and it should be noted that the RDIs are
sometimes not representative of what we really need, so I don't put much
stock in them. And even if accurate, they pertain to those eating the
typical Western diet, and since, for example, dairy products interfere
with iron absorption, that may be taken into account when calculating
the RDI for iron, etc.
There have been research projects where researchers
went around the U.S. taking nutrient samples from specific foods grown
in all different areas. The main take-away point of these studies was
that nutritional content varied widely among the same variety
of a food. For example, when a specific variety of grape was analyzed,
the sodium content varied between 0.3 and 10.5 percent, calcium content
was between 1.7 and 22.6 percent, and iron varied between 0.05 and 1.7
percent (due to different soil qualities). But what caught my eye was
that lots of foods came in under what the popular nutritional content
charts showed these foods to contain. So when someone says that a particular
food has X amount of Y per 100 grams, they should actually say, ...is
supposed to have X amount of Y per 100 grams". And even then, nothing
is really "supposed to have" any specific amount of anything.
In fact, certain foods that are "known" to be good sources of
a particular nutrient are often not. So why do these charts exist? Human
nature being what it is, we simply must quantify everything, even
things that can't be quantified very well. So can we make generalizations
regarding the nutritional content of certain foods? Maybe, but should
we? I say no. Use programs like Cron-O-Meter and Fitday.com for calculating
calorie intake and the carbs-to-fat-to-protein ratio, but not to see if
your diet is meeting your nutritional requirements.
Want a second good reason why those charts are essentially
useless for determining if we're getting enough nutrition? Who said that
150 mcg of iodine is what we need per day? It's the Recommended Daily
Intake, the good ole RDI, which is what those charts are based on. But
what's missing is the qualifier, which should say, "The
RDI for iodine is what we need per day to prevent the conditions associated
with the most severe iodine deficiency". Well isn't that peachy!
Why doesn't the RDI represent the amount of iodine we need per day to
supply the body with enough iodine for whole body tissue
sufficiency? You'd think that since this would help us to be as healthy
as we can be, the RDI would reflect this, but it doesn't. Why? Could it
be $ related? With what's known about iodine today, I find it hard to
simply chalk this up to ignorance.
But the best reason you can't use Cron-O-Meter to assess your iodine intake
is because when you choose some foods to see how much iodine they provide,
you get the message, "Our
food database currently contains very sparse data for iodine".
And that note should continue to say, "...and
this is because the soils are so devoid of iodine that you will always
come up short in iodine unless you use table salt."
And don't bother looking to Fitday.com because it doesn't track iodine
at all.
You've got to get iodine from your food, not from a
supplement!
There are those who maintain that the supplemental form of iodine won't
work because it's not in its natural form like we'd get from food. This
has also been shown to not be true. But it is what some people believe.
Yes, the supplemental form of iodine isn't as bioavailable as the form
found in food, but it is bioavailable to enough of a degree to correct
an iodine insufficiency, and that's the bottom line. If you're growing
your own food, you can add the inorganic form iodine to the soil so your
food will be appropriately iodine rich, but this is not an option for
most people. And let's not forget that what stopped the pandemic of severe
iodine deficiency was the addition of the inorganic form of iodine to
table salt.
And as far as getting enough iodine from sea veggie products, don't count
on it. They are not good sources of iodine, but the sea veggie industry
would like us to believe so. Sea veggies like kelp and dulse do contain
iodine, but iodine is not a mineral, it's an element, and one that readily
turns from a solid to a gas when heated (sublimation). So when fresh seaweed
is dried as part of its processing, much of the iodine is lost. This means
that kelp products are not a reliable source of iodine, and if they do
contain some iodine, it will definitely not be enough to resolve an iodine
deficiency. If you want to try using it to maintain a normal iodine
status once you have one, simply test after a year to see that it's working.
And make sure to get a sea veggie product that's been shown to have no
contaminants (this is getting harder to do).
|
"Hey Don, I wanted to let you know in case
some of your patients wish to get iodine from a whole food vs a
supplement, less than 1/2 cup of cranberries provides the daily
recommend amount!!! www.iodinesupplement.org/iodine-rich-foods/"
This is a good example of iodine misinformation, and is one of the reasons people are miseducated about iodine. And the site is authored by someone who will not give their name, and is someone who has not done their due diligence when it comes to the subject of iodine, so this site may simply be a site created to sell iodine supplements IMO; there are many of those, and they should not be looked to as a credible source of iodine information (you won't find any affiliate links to any nutritional supplement I recommend on my website, guaranteeing that my recommendations are not motivated by profit). First, the crux of the article you cited is based on the RDI's (Recommended Daily Intake), basically, what the government suggests we take, and I spoke to this issue above. These amounts do not provide for optimal health, they are just enough to prevent the worst-case-scenario condition associated with an iodine deficiency – goiter. And even that amount is not protecting the public against goiter as it once did because goiter is on the rise due to increased amounts of exposure to iodide transport inhibitors ("goitrogens") and environmental exposures of iodine antagonists such as bromine that provide for competitive inhibition. But even without that increase, the RDI is not enough to provide the body with sufficient iodine to prevent the other conditions that have insufficient iodine as a contributing factor, such as hypothyroidism and breast cancer to name two of the major ones. And as proof that those foods listed such as strawberries and seaweed do not have enough iodine for optimal health, people who are avid consumers of the vegan items on that list come up short when their iodine level and tissue saturation are tested for adequate iodine. And if the contention is that the iodine tests are subjective, these folks also get conditions associated with insufficient iodine, which are corrected when adequate iodine is added to their diet. This is why information such as this is considered miseducation by those who understand a thing or two about iodine and the conditions caused by consuming insufficient amounts of this essential nutrient that is inadequate due to decreases and increases in the Supply & Demand factors associated with iodine. |
Taking iodine can cause thyroid problems!
In reality, thyroid problems are caused by not enough iodine.
Just because certain thyroid lab test results go slightly out of range
when taking iodine doesn't mean this is a bad scenario. Out-of-range thyroid
test results are an indicator of something being wrong when not
having enough iodine, but many doctors are not trained to recognize that
certain levels can be outside the normal range as a consequence of normalizing
one's whole body tissue sufficiency of iodine. For example, TSH can go
a little "high" when doing iodine therapy, but this is not an
indication that bad things are happening (unless it goes ridiculously
high, but that's an indication that something's not being done right as
far as the iodine therapy protocol). And keep in mind that, in general,
the TSH test is often not a good marker for thyroid malfunction because
it can lag behind the thyroid's decline in health, yet this test is still
relied on – sometimes exclusively – for diagnosing an ailing
thyroid. And speaking of thyroid tests, did you know that the 3 and 4
in T3 and T4 (thyroid hormones) represent atoms of iodine? And T3 and
T4 are part of Thyroid Function Tests, yet iodine isn't! It's clear that
sufficient iodine is necessary for a proper functioning thyroid, but iodine
testing is not part of Thyroid Function Tests. This should be making you
think, "Hmmmm."
The only contraindication for iodine therapy is if you have a "hot"
nodule in your thyroid, which is rare. And if you had one, you'd know
it.
For more information about the "iodine causes problems" regarding
Hashimoto's Thyroiditis, see the article mentioned at the end of this
article. And this topic is discussed in more detail in a moment.
What about the Wolff-Chaikoff effect?
This misrepresentative piece of info is discussed in Lynne Farrow's 20
minute interview (link at bottom).
By recommending iodine, you're practicing medicine
without the education and knowledge of a professional doctor or lettered
professional
It's quite obvious that modern medicine has
abandoned the use of iodine (an over-the-counter supplement) for pharmaceutical
meds. Almost a century ago, iodine was in use by medical doctors, and
they found it to be very helpful for a wide variety of conditions. But
this was before "Big Pharma". So today the sharing of iodine
information is from alternative health practitioners, and from a few medical
doctors brave enough to "buck the system". Why would you go
to a medical professional who knows nothing about iodine for information
about the use of iodine? There are quite a number of health educators
who have no letters after their name, yet are able to help people rid
themselves of so-called "incurable" conditions (like type 2
diabetes and asthma) where many lettered professionals only manage the
symptoms of those conditions (but you can't blame them, they can only
know and believe what they've been taught). So saying that because someone
is not a doctor, they can't have the educational background needed to
be knowledgeable in how to improve thyroid health is absurd. And some
of the people saying this are not even talking about a person needing
to be a medical doctor because they're including in "doctor"
chiropractors and other non-MDs. Isn't that a little disingenuous? But
since chiropractors aren't taught about the use of iodine as part of their
chiropractic studies, how do they come to be qualified to share
such information? Answer: The same way as non-lettered professionals.
There is a criteria to being an "iodine literate" health educator,
and it's obviously not the sole domain of doctors, medical or otherwise.
And yes, there are those who've obtained a PhD in nutrition, but this
doesn't automatically confer nutritional information that squares with
Nature; I've met many degreed nutritionists who have been miseducated.
For most nutritionists, their knowledge can only be as good as their course-of-study,
and if that curriculum contained missing information, or worse, misinformation,
this is not a health practitioner I'd want to rely on for my nutritional
information. It should be noted that some degreed nutritionists, realizing
that their traditional academic studies were lacking, have gone on to
further their studies on their own, but sadly this is the exception and
not the rule.
And it should be noted that there are some laypeople
sharing iodine information, and some of that information is not accurate
and can lead to something other than a positive outcome, but this is where
"Let the Buyer Beware" comes in. The term "educated consumer"
does not just apply to new car buyers. So a person searching for the best,
most helpful health information needs to do their due diligence if they
want information that will be in their best interest, health-wise. There
are many well-intentioned but otherwise miseducated people who are providing
all kinds of health improvement information. It is up to the consumer
to be aware that some of these folks, although well-meaning, have been
miseducated. (And then there are the non-well-intentioned "health
educators", making "Let the Buyer Beware" even more important.)
And FYI, the iodine recommendations I make are not ones I came up with;
they come from medical professionals who bravely think outside-the-box
of mainstream medicine. And there is a large body of people who have benefited
from this information, but you're not going to hear about this on the
nightly news (until it starts making a noticeable dent in public ill-health,
and then you'll be treated to a nationwide iodine smear campaign complete
with discrediting the MDs who are pursuing it, and with dire warnings
to not listen to people like me.)
I don't need an iodine supplement because I feel fine!
If you feel "off" in some respect,
you've no doubt got something going on. But the absence of feeling "off"
does not necessarily mean that you are fine, health-wise. When my Dad
started feeling "off" he got checked out, and a tumor about
the size of my fist was found. The oncologist said it could take anywhere
from 30 to 40 years for a tumor to get that large. So I asked my Dad a
very revealing question, "If five years ago I had asked you how you
were feeling, what would you have said?" And he answered, "I
would have told you I felt fine!" So you can have less than stellar
health and still feel "fine". And it should be noted that there
are people walking around with conditions caused by insufficient iodine
who fall into one of two categories: 1. Those who don't know that their
iodine insufficiency is a primary or secondary cause of their condition,
and who think that the only thing they can do is manage the condition.
2. Those people who are not aware (yet) that they have a condition of
ill-health caused by an insufficiency of iodine. Please see the article
on this subject below.
You don't need to have your iodine level tested, just
take an iodine supplement
Yes, the odds are that you have an iodine insufficiency/deficiency; the
vast majority of people do. But simply taking iodine is unwise. Iodine
testing is not just to see if you're iodine insufficient, it's important
to know the depth of the insufficiency. And it's also important to know
if your sodium-iodide symporters are functioning properly; this is the
body's iodine uptake mechanism, and if it's not working well, the supplementary
iodine you take will pass right out of you unutilized. If your symporters
are not working properly, this can be resolved, but only if you know about
it.
The other important reason for testing is the follow-up testing. There
are two dosages of iodine, one for normalizing your iodine level, and
one for maintaining it. So since there's a big difference between a therapeutic
amount of iodine and a maintenance amount of iodine, it's good to know
when you've reached whole body tissue sufficiency, and this is not something
that can be guessed at, nor should it be. And any practitioner who advocates
iodine supplements but doesn't mention testing is just trying to make
a buck from the increased awareness of iodine deficiency by increasing
his revenue stream with yet another supplement to sell.
If everyone's so low in iodine, how come there aren't
more cases of enlarged thyroid
An enlarged thyroid (goiter) is a condition associated with the most severe
iodine deficiency, so those people who use iodized table salt, or consume
products made with it, can prevent this worst-case scenario condition,
but because of iodine insufficiency they can have other
problems, like adrenal fatigue, heart disease, cancer, autoimmune diseases,
being overweight, fibromyalgia, multiple chemical sensitivities, allergies,
asthma, Alzheimer's, diabetes, and/or opportunistic infections of all
kinds, both with symptoms and without. Bottom line: When you don't have
sufficient iodine, everything in your body functions worse.
I understand the benefits of having a proper iodine
status, and I see that things like kelp won't correct a deficiency, but
the dosages that are being recommended are way higher than the RDI for
iodine, and I've heard they can cause problems.
First, the RDI for iodine is only enough to prevent the two conditions
associated with the severest iodine deficiency, but it doesn't address
all the conditions that have as a contributing factor an iodine insufficiency.
Nutrient inadequacies do not just have two states, like a light bulb controlled
by a wall switch, where it's either on or off. It's more like a light
bulb controlled by a dimmer knob, where there can be an infinite number
of states between "off" (a severe deficiency) and "full
on" (whole body tissue sufficiency). What good is getting enough
iodine to prevent a severe deficiency if you're not getting enough to
prevent an iodine insufficiency, an insufficiency that's a contributing
factor to the diseases and conditions mentioned at the end of this article.
Second, when people who take a therapeutic amount of supplementary iodine
for the purposes of correcting an iodine insufficiency run into problems,
there is always a reason, and it's not because that dose in-and-of-itself
is harmful. It's usually because that dose is being taken without proper
guidance. There are reasons to not start off with the normal therapeutic
dose, and there are reasons that the normal therapeutic dose can cause
issues, like not ensuring that the body has sufficient amounts of all
of iodine's companion nutrients. So I'm not saying that people don't run
into problems when doing iodine therapy, but there is always a reason,
and it's not because these doses are "too high". (And you're
not seeing me define what these doses are for the reasons mentioned at
the end of this article.)
Concerns with using high levels of iodine
There is some concern that the ingestion of
iodine in excess of the RDI will cause adverse effects. Here is David
Brownstein MD, author of Iodine: Why You Can't Live Without It,
to comment:
Allergy
In my experience, an allergic reaction to inorganic iodine/iodide is rare...an
allergy can take any form, including a rash, fatigue, congestion, headache
and a fever. Some of these reactions can be caused by detoxification,
and can be distinguished from an allergic reaction by employing detox
protocols.
Autoimmune thyroid
disease (Hashimoto's thyroiditis)
Some researchers believe that autoimmune thyroid problems are caused by
iodine intake in excess of the RDI. Before the adoption of radioactive
iodine to treat the side effects of autoimmune thyroid illnesses, the
use of higher doses of iodine was the treatment of choice for these illnesses.
If iodine was the cause of autoimmune thyroid illnesses, these illnesses
should have been decreasing over the last 30 years, but the opposite has
occurred. In the U.S., iodine levels have fallen approximately 50% over
the last 30 years while, at the same time, autoimmune thyroid disorders
have been rapidly increasing.
Detoxification reactions
If the body's detoxification pathways are overloaded when the toxic halides
that the iodine is displacing are being released, a detoxification reaction
can be triggered. A detoxification reaction can take the form of fatigue,
muscle aches, fever, diarrhea, and brain fog, among others. Though a detoxification
reaction to iodine usage is rare, it does happen, and it can be minimized
with nutritional support.
Iodine induced hypothyroidism
and goiter
When animals or humans that are iodine deficient are given large doses
of iodine, there is a transient decrease in thyroid hormone production
(approximately 26-40 hours) until the body reestablishes its equilibrium
with iodine. After that, thyroid levels adjust to normal, and signs of
hypothyroidism do not develop.
Iodine-induced hyperthyroidism
The use of iodine in a previously iodine-deficient population may result
in a transient increase in thyroid hormones. Studies have shown that the
increase in thyroid hormones, which could lead to hyperthyroid symptoms
(palpitations, nervousness), will gradually decrease. This can be monitored
with lab tests, and mitigated with adjustments in dosage.
Thyroid cancer
During the last several decades, when iodine levels have declined, the
incidence of thyroid cancer has markedly increased. Perhaps iodine deficiency
is a cause of the elevation in thyroid cancers.
|
MORE IODINE MISINFO This from a UK publication... "In the UK, fish, cows’ milk and other dairy products are the main sources of iodine in our diet." [True, but these don't supply enough or both forms of iodine.] "Iodine can also be found in plant foods, such as cereals and grains, but the levels vary depending on the amount of iodine in the soil where the plants are grown." [If the food products are heat processed in any way, wave bye-bye to the iodine, and most soils are iodine deficient.] "Some seaweed and kelp products contain iodine, but these are not recommended as they can provide very high amounts of iodine, which may be harmful." [If the seaweeds are dried, they provide no meanignful amounts of iodine. This is why it's not good to depend on dried seaweeds for iodine. And even if you ate fresh seaweed, you're not going to get "too much" iodine; it's a water soluble nutrient and the body excretes what it doesn't need. This one piece of misinfo demonstrates how publications simply adopt the current talking points about an issue without doing any research.] "If your baby or child has a vegan diet or a vegetarian diet that does not include dairy, a supplement can provide a reliable source of iodine." [Yes, but this should be done with guidance so that the child also gets enough of iodine's co-factor nutrients, or the child's health can be harmed.] Other iodine misinfo... "If you have too much iodine in your body, you can start overproducing the thyroid hormones, developing an over-active thyroid." [Nope. Iodine is a water soluble nutrient, and since it's impossible to take in exactly the amount of iodine that the body requires, the only two scenarios are: 1) take in less than the body needs, or 2) take in more than the body needs. Which choice do you think the body would choose? So when more is taken in, as with any nutrient, the body will store or excrete the excess. This does not need multiple, peer-reviewed, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies to confirm because it is borne of logic. Plus, the "if you take too much iodine, you're thyroid will overproduce hormones is not borne out by the empirical evidence. There are women battling breast cancer taking 200 mg, which is 1333 times the RDI for iodine, and their thyroids are just fine.] "Some people recommend taking extremely high doses of iodine, because they think that our soils and so the foods we eat are very iodine deficient." [No, wise people take appropriate amounts of iodine because our foods ARE deficient in it. There's a difference between someone thinking the soils are deficient in iodine and the soils actually being deficient in iodine.] "Studies in countries like China, Slovakia and India found that increased iodine intakes above safe levels increases the risk of people developing thyroid diseases like hypo- and hyperthyroidism." [Sorry, no. Flawed studies. And they don't square with the empirical evidence. This nonsense just keeps getting parroted. And I'm not sure how much of the disinformation is courtesy of the AMA and Big Pharma, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they are complicit because of how important sufficient iodine is to optimal health, and how a dearth of it in the gen pop allows for a lot of otherwise preventable but profitable disease. And the sad fact of the matter is that when I die, who will be advocating for testing for and taking iodine as I do? I think about that.] "A recent study found that in Japan their intake of iodine is from 1 to 3 mg per day. These levels are much lower than the extremely high doses of 12 mg and upwards that are recommended by some health promoters who base their recommendations for high iodine intake on floored research." [Do these people not realize there's a difference between the pre-plant form of iodine found in supplements, and the post-plant form of it the foods of the Japanese?!! The pre-plant form is way less bioavailable, and therefore a larger amount must be taken to get the same benefit from a smaller amount found in the fresh seaweed that the Japanese people get to eat.] "Supplementing within the recommended daily allowance might work (150 µg per day), but over-supplementation with iodine can actually damage your health." [This is wrong; 150 mcg is only enough to prevent the worst case scenario of goiter, but not enough for whole body tissue sufficiency.] |
Don's summation...
In the 40 years of researching health issues, I have found more misinformation
and "anti" info among the general public than correct information.
The main reason for this in a nutshell? Human nature. Most people don't
want to change the way they're living their lives, and don't want to believe
there's any reason to do so, and this is understandable. So when information
comes out that, for example, an all-raw diet of fruits and green leafy
vegetables is the diet we're designed to eat, there is a natural aversion
to this notion because it's so different than the way we're currently
eating. And especially if the information has the potential to dramatically
improve the population's health (which would be very bad for various industries),
you will find "research" that says this is nonsense, you will
find experts who will say it isn't so (either because they don't want
to believe it themselves or they're being paid to disprove it), and you
will find business people who will try and make money from telling you
what you want to hear. And the iodine issue is no exception.
Don't get me wrong, I am always looking for information that would disprove something I'm advocating, but it's got to be credible information. It can't be borne of personal biases, personal preferences, and personal philosophies, because people who allow these traits to get in the way of their research will have their judgment colored, and their conclusions can then be faulty. But that doesn't stop them from declaring, "this is not my opinion, it's based on science". But everything that everyone says is an opinion, but what is that opinion based on? To say it's based on science without applying all the tools of the scientific method independently, is not scientific research, it's just using the word "science" to support your contentions. If someone doesn't factor in things like empirical evidence using logic and rational thinking, they are not applying science to the issue. You can't just rely on studies, especially peer-reviewed studies. And by-the-way, relying solely on government or industry research is not good science.
So if you read something about iodine that scares you, don't automatically believe it, and instead try to get to the truth of the matter. I'm a big advocate of the philosophy of "better to be safe than sorry", but if you end up applying that in a way that deprives your body of something it desperately needs, this will end up with you being sorry.
Additional Information About Hashimoto's Thyroiditis
Conditions Associated with Lower Than Normal Iodine Levels
Putting "I feel fine!" in perspective
20 minute interview of Lynne Farrow, author of The Iodine Crisis
Why Don doesn't give out information on dosages, iodine supplement resources, etc.