Hi kachina -

Good question. The iodine I started with originally is called Atomidine. It is in the form of iodine trichloride. This was recommended in the Cayce readings. Lugols solution was also available at the time but I don't know right offhand if it was ever mentioned in any readings. The Atomidine is supposed to be a more easily assimilated form of iodine. I used it for about two months before I switched over to Iodoral. My main reason for switching was twofold.

One - Most of the readings were an on/off cycle of Atomidine. That is, take it for a while, stop for a while, take again. The amount of Atomidine would vary depending on what it was being used for. The only reading for MG had that kind of a cycle. The man was to use it for 4-6 months on/off (with other treatments he was to follow) and then come back for a follow up reading.
I was using it every day without taking a break from it. There seems to be very little useful information in the use of iodine trichloride and I never found any studies concerning its use either long or short term. Other than the Cayce readings that is. I had very positive results within maybe two days of starting the Atomidine. I felt better about myself, I slept better (for a while anyway) and sometime later (1-2 months) I noticed my nails were stronger. Didn't know if it was a good idea to continue using it as I was, but as far as I was concerned it was great stuff. No adverse effects or signs associated with excessive iodine intake.

Two - Lugols solution and Iodoral are the same compound but in different forms. Lugols has been around a long time and used in many studies - long and short term. Iodoral has also been used in long and short term studies and in much larger dosages than even I was wanting to take. The tone of your question implies that you have read these studies/trials. So...info available on long term use of Iodoral and Lugols, essentially nothing on iodine trichloride - so I switched.

So......to answer your question - which by now you probably figured I was never going to do - the ONLY negative was that for maybe 3 days or so after I switched to Iodoral I didn't quite feel the same. Not bad, mind you, but I had been making very slow but steady improvement all this time, and when I switched things just seemed to stagnate for 3 days or so. Nothing got worse but progress just seemed to stop for a few days. I cannot say for sure that this had to do with the switchover because as you know, this disease has its gooder days and its badder days. But since it happened at the same time I felt it should be mentioned. After that time I started slowly improving again and here I am. Ta Da!

NO adverse effects of ANY kind from either form of iodine. And here's the kicker. I am allergic to shellfish. Used to have no problem at all with any form of shellfish. All of a sudden about ten years ago my body decided that hives and swellings were the proper response to ingesting said food. After the second time I gave it up for good. So what are we told? Allergic to shellfish = allergic to iodine. Personally I think it's a protein in the shellfish that causes the problem but .... do I know for sure? Nope.

So believe me - I was looking for ANYTHING that would indicate ANY kind of negative reaction to iodine. I had no problem of any kind with either form to this day.

Been taking it for ten+ months and my thyroid profile done at end of May came back just fine. My wife has been taking it for almost as long and her tests came back fine also.

So there it is there. No side effects, no worsening.
Goodness, look at all 'dem words. No wonder my fingers hurt and my eyes are crossed.

I shoulda just said no.

Rob D.