Comparing Mold Toxin Binders

Many thinking patients who learn about biotoxins, and especially mold toxins wonder what is the best binder. After modest research they become aware of these binders: cholestyramine, activated carbon, bentonite and celite. So how do they compare? In one study they were compared in their ability to bind fumonisin. Fumonisin B₁ is the most prevalent member of a family of toxins produced by several species of Fusarium molds, which occur mainly in different varieties of corn.

Fumonisin is well known to cause many insults to mammals. For example, induced cancers in lab animals have included: liver adenomas and carcinomas, skin cancer, kidney tubule carcinomas, Simply, Fumonisin B1 is highly toxic to both livers and kidneys. It kills cells. It induces DNA damage. It undermines key reactions in lab animals and humans: sphingolipid, phospholipid and fatty acid metabolism is disturbed in and outside the body in all animals and in a single human study. Disruption of sphingolipids by fumonisin B₁ causes cell death.

Comparing the Mold Toxin Binders

• Cholestyramine showed the best adsorption capacity. It was quite effective at 85% absorption.
• Activated Carbon had the second best mold toxin absorption at 62%.
• Bentonite clay adsorbed minimally. Even when the amount of toxin load in the water was reduced to a low load of only 13 microg/ml, the Bentonite clay still only bound 12% of the toxin.
• Celite was not effective even at the lowest tested FB1 concentration of 3.2 microg/ml.

Cholestyramine was tested in lab rats fed food with fumonisin toxins. Some of the rats had a diet with 20-mg/g cholestyramine. The addition of cholestyramine to the toxin-contaminated diets consistently reduced the effect of fumonisin toxins as tested by their urinary excretion tests.

My Best Wish For Your Health,

Dr. J

Sources:

Solfrizzo M, Visconti A, Avantaggiato G, Torres A, Chulze S. In vitro and in vivo studies to assess the effectiveness of cholestyramine as a binding agent for fumonisins. Mycopathologia. 2001;151:147-53.

www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol82/82-05.html