It can be confusing as a practitioner or an individual interested in HTMA when you begin to look at different pioneers in the space.

The aim of this blog post is to be an organic article exploring the differences and similarities between various labs and experts in the field of Hair Mineral Analysis.

For transparency purposes, it’s important to note that the author (Lewis Moon – Developer of the hairanalysis.report app) was taught HTMA under Dr Wilson and worked as a practitioner on his website for around 6 years. I also healed permanently using Dr Wilson’s program. So naturally I sway toward Dr Wilson.

Differences between Dr Watts and Dr Wilson analysis

1. It’s important to note that Dr David Watts DOES NOT recognize many of Dr Lawrence Wilson patterns. Including patterns such as FOUR LOWS, FOUR HIGHS, THREE LOWS, BOWL PATTERNS, HILL PATTERNS, LIFESTYLE STRESS (AKA SPIRITUAL DEFENSIVENESS) and others. David Watts calls these patterns “philosophical patterns”, they are not really philosophical patterns, they are from an individual who has observed patterns and drawn conclusions, however as a result they can be said to be more anecdotal rather than clinical in nature. However, due to the vast amounts of HTMA data and experiences the anecdotal patterns become much more scientifically solidified over time. For example it is quite easy to cross-examine a four low pattern by asking specific questions to the client relating to specific four low pattern symptoms. If over time they match up consistently and are replicated across a large amount of people they become much more credible. From personal experience the accuracy of many of these patterns is staggering.
   
   Another example of a Dr Wilson pattern is a “bowl pattern”, people often explained that they felt stuck, isolated, and depressed when in the pattern. Whereas people in a “hill pattern” often felt elated, happier, and had a feeling of “turning a corner”. Over time the correlation between the pattern and the symptoms/feelings of the client became so huge the pattern solidified itself as a credible, genuine HTMA pattern.
   
   Dr David Watts is much more clinically based. Meaning to prove a pattern it needs to be clinically tested, which is challenging because as mentioned above patterns are more anecdotal than clinical. Dr Watts clinical approach is based upon observations, tests, and measurements. Whereas Dr Wilson has added on top of the clinical aspect logical reasoning, conceptual analysis, and anecdotal repetition. From personal experience and the experience of others, many of Dr Wilson’s HTMA patterns are extremely accurate when you ask a client how they are feeling. However, for the record, there are several that I have yet to fully see the connections when working with clients.
   
   This can be quite confusing because many people have taken courses by HTMA practitioners who use the Dr David Watts Trace Elements Report and teaching but include many of Dr Wilson Patterns.
   
   One major issue is that when you take one of Dr.Wilson’s common patterns for example a four low pattern, the mineral values the pattern are:
   
   Calcium below 40 mg%
   Magnesium below 6mg%
   Sodium below 25 mg%
   Potassium below 10mg%
   
   If you were to mirror these values over to a trace elements graph, much of the time a person in a four lows pattern as taught by Dr. Wilson are actually within “healthy range” on a trace elements test.
   
   This means that many Trace Elements practitioners have to “shoe-horn” a Four Low pattern into the Trace Elements report. Often assigning a “four lows” pattern into the “low” mineral ranges on the TEI charts. This means a Four Lows pattern on a Trace Elements (TEI) report would be (Sept 23)
   
   Calcium below 22mg%
   Magnesium below 1.3mg%
   Sodium below 3mg%
   Potassium below 2mg%
   
   As you can see this is completely different from the original four low values. However when speaking to many TEI practitioners some will recognize a four lows pattern in the low mineral range on a TEI chart, some will recognize the pattern in a range just above the low range as I have noticed on the “test don’t guess HTMA app” and some recognize it as the TEI middle range where for example the “mean” value for calcium is 61.
   
   This as you can see is terribly confusing. Mainly because Dr. Watts doesn’t even recognize a Four Lows pattern himself so unfortunately practitioners try to “plug-in” Dr Wilson patterns into a TEI report which does neither Watts or Wilson any service.
   
   Another issue that often will arise is that anyone who has worked with a Dr Wilson four-low pattern will vouch for its accuracy. However, if you are given a report from someone who has tried to plug a Dr Wilson four lows onto a TEI chart the four lows’ mineral range cut-off points are often way lower. This means many people who are technically in a four-low pattern as described by Dr. Wilson are not in a four-low pattern on a TEI chart.
   
   Therefore they are often given regular slow or fast oxidation programs. Giving a person a slow oxidation program when in reality they are in a four-low pattern often makes people feel agitated, wound up, and not well. Due to the fact that a person in a four-low pattern should be resting more and essentially putting the “adrenals and thyroid” to bed as Dr Wilson describes. Stimulating these people with a slow oxidation program often makes these people feel worse. Of course, Dr Watts may disagree with this analysis. However, from my experience and the experience of many other practitioners who use the true values for four lows are aware of this problem.
2. Before going further I think it’s important to take note that Dr Wilson and Dr Watts think differently about HTMAs so therefore trying to mix them together won’t work very well and discredits both of them if a person tries to fudge the two together. So instead of trying to mix the two my personal opinion is to either take the Dr Watts approach or take the Dr Wilson approach and use their respective HTMA tests as a result (Dr Wilson prefers ARL). Using Dr Wilson patterns and then applying them to Dr Watts TEI tests will leave you in a world of confusion.
   
   3. Reference ranges vs. ideal values. Possibly the biggest difference between these two thought leaders is how to assess HTMAs.
   Dr David Watts uses reference ranges to show whether certain minerals are in a healthy range or not. Dr Wilson however prefers to work with ideal values, meaning he is always trying to guide the tests towards the ideal value, On the other hand, Dr Watts has a standard deviation “mean” band meaning if the mineral falls between the “healthy band” it is in a good range. This is probably the single most confusing thing about looking at both ways of viewing HTMAs. However it is important to note Dr Watts tends to focus more on mineral ratios, which we will discuss later.
   
   Therefore what this means is that many of Dr Wilson’s patterns simply don’t work on TWO graphs, mainly because they are based around ideal values for minerals, meaning much of the time a pattern that comes up for Dr Wilson simply would not appear most of the time in TEI.
3. Oxidation rate differences. Another major stumbling block with trying to assess Dr Watts and Dr Wilson is that they both use different calculations to calculate the oxidation rates. Dr. Watts uses the phosphorus level to assess the oxidation rate of an individual whereas Dr Wilson does not. This is what Dr. Wilson says about using the calcium/phosphorus ratio.

“Some people use this ratio [calcium/phosphorus] to assess the oxidation rate. Dr. Eck rejected this idea completely. We find the CA/P ratio does not work well and is simply incorrect.

The oxidation rate depends upon adrenal and thyroid activity, which the calcium and phosphorus levels and their ratio do not assess.

Dr. Melvin Page, DDS used the Ca/P ratio in the blood serum to assess the sympathetic and parasympathetic balance. However, this is entirely different from the hair mineral biopsy concept.

Also, many factors can influence the hair levels of calcium and phosphorus, making it unreliable. For example, the hair Ca/P ratio can be impacted by:

1. Three highs/four highs pattern. In this case, a person could be in fast oxidation, but the hair Ca/P ratio will indicate slow oxidation. This is common and very confusing if one uses the hair Ca/P to assess the oxidation rate.
2. Four lows pattern. In this case, a person can be in slow oxidation, but the hair Ca/P ratio will often indicate fast oxidation. This is also terribly confusing and untrue.
3. Pubic hair samples. If pubic hair is used for testing, (which we do not allow), the phosphorus level is often elevated. This will also skew the hair Ca/P ratio.“

I have also found from personal experience that another common Dr Wilson pattern, a step-up pattern which is quite a dangerous pattern according to Dr Wilson can actually show as slow oxidation on a TEI report. Why is this bad? It is bad because according to Dr Wilson if a person is in this pattern they are in a dangerous fast oxidation pattern. This is what he says about a step-up pattern.

“Step up pattern on a hair tissue mineral biopsy is an EXTREMELY important indicator and a critical medical breakthrough. We will make a bold statement that every adult needs hair testing just to identify step up patterns.

Our intent is not to self-promote. The reason for identifying the step up pattern is it is the only way we know of to prevent many fatal heart attacks and strokes that are the leading cause of death in most nations today.

With due respect for the medical, holistic and natural health care professions and acknowledging their many good qualities, they do a horrendous job of preventing most heart attacks and strokes.

DEFINITION

The step up pattern on a hair mineral test is a combination of:

1. A fast oxidation rate
2. A double low ratio pattern (Ca/Mg ratio less than about 4, and the Na/K ratio less than 2.5)“

Therefore if you agree with Dr Wilson and the severity of a step-up pattern using a TEI report to assess this pattern could be dangerous. This is because you could be a slow oxidizer on a TEI report with a step-up pattern using the Dr Wilson references. This means that a person in a step-up pattern could be given a slow oxidation program which can be very dangerous for a person in a step-up pattern.

4. If you like to use Dr Wilson’s patterns many of them are visual patterns when you look at them on an ARL chart. Meaning for example a “bowl pattern” visually looks like a bowl on an ARL chart. Same with a step-up pattern, visually it looks like a diagonal going up from bottom left to top right. Whereas on a TEI report because Dr Watts reports do not use ideal values and have different “mean” values compared to ARL these patterns are pretty much impossible to visually view on an TEI HTMA report.

5. Trace elements generate their graphs and reference ranges using “mean” mineral values of the individuals who have had HTMAs. TEI do state on their reports that the reference ranges have been established by an international population of “healthy” individuals. I don’t personally believe you can get a data set for the current “international population of healthy individuals”. One of the issues with this is that people are generally getting sicker over time and in general people who get HTMAs are often even sicker. Whereas ARL has primarily stuck to the original HTMA mineral values as established back in the 80s. The benefit of this is ideal mineral values have been made and established when individuals were much more healthier.
For example, if you were to work out the ideal (mean average) calcium value on a TEI test you would get to around 61-63 mg%, whereas ARLs ideal level is 40mg%. It makes sense that as time went on and people became sicker you would find higher calcium and calcium shells, meaning if you were to find the “mean” value for calcium 20-30 years later the ideal value would increase, in this instance, it seems from around 40mg% – 60mg% according to TEI reports. But this means that you are trying to find the ideal mineral value for Calcium in “modern-day sicker people”, therefore it’s noteworthy to take account of the original ARL ideal mineral values as established when people were much healthier, rather than changing these over time based on mean averages of modern-day populations.

UPDATE 07/09/23 – This is a Facebook reply from Rick Malter a prominent HTMA advocate and practitioner. Explaining the real reason behind Trace Elements chart design.

“Lewis, over 20 years ago, Dr. Watts had to update his norms for TEI HTMAs after a lab inspection. Since about 80 % of hair samples are slow metabolic types, updating HTMA norms are bound to produce a spuriously high Ca level. This is exactly what happened around 1999or 2000. The new TEI level for calcium jumped from 42 to 60! That also raised the Ca ratios — Ca/Mg and Ca/K. However, on the 2nd page of TEI reports, Dr. Watts still uses the original ratios which are much more clinically valid than newly calculated ratios would have been with a spuriously high Ca level. TEI no longer shows ideal levels for each mineral on page 1 of the reports. TEI only shows ranges of mineral levels which are simply not as valid as ideal biologically meaningful mineral levels that Drs. Eck and Watts used in their research and early HTMA reports.”

The above reply Rick made to me clears alot of things up. Unfortunately for TEI charts they are very confusing and disregard the original and more accurate mineral values. It seams David Watts was forced to change the charts due to an inspection, if you run an average calcium level on a sick population it average value will be way higher than normal!

Some people have asserted to me that the “upgrade” means that the mineral values are more accurate, however this doesn’t make sense, because if they were all of the ratios would also change and they have stayed the same.

6. Dr. Wilson programs take into account many HTMA patterns. Dr. Watts focuses mainly on ratios and disregards Dr Wilson patterns. We find that patterns however present a much more deeper, holistic and sometimes esoteric representation of an individuals health and current situation (however to clinically prove this would be a much more challenging and resource-consuming task, and for some of the more esoteric patterns, impossible) . Although ratios are also extremely important, we find TEI doesn’t have much emphasis on patterns and in fact doesn’t really recognize any of Dr Wilson’s HTMA patterns, probably because scientifically proving them is much more challenging because they are often based upon observing patterns and drawing conclusions. Working closely with clients however you will find these patterns are indeed very accurate and you can get a much deeper understanding of an individual’s situation.

7. Dr Watts doesn’t (as far as I am aware) recommend such protocols are sauna therapy and coffee enemas. Again from personal experience and the experience of other practitioners these are excellent healing modalities and again from experience at times essential for detoxification, especially the detoxification and healing of the liver.