Un-named Illness of Maura Tierney

Ms. Maura Tierney is a very attractive lady, person, and actor. She attracts attention by presence alone. In early July 2009, news articles have mentioned that she will be going to be "medically evaluated" for eight weeks. This is very telling to those of us who have had experience with the medical profession.
I can only pass judgment on what I know to be true and can acquire by observation. I don't know Ms. Tierney, we have never met, we have never spoken and I know very little of the environment that she grew and developed in. I have observed her work and from this, I can project certain aspects of her personality.
What I know is that she spent her early years in a neighborhood in Boston, which is one of the oldest communities in the nation. From Boston, she went to New York which is another very old community. Normally that wouldn't mean much but these old communities contain old paints and piping that tend to contain an unhealthy amount of lead.
Ms. Tierney also grew up in an era (1965 - 1985) when dentists were using mercury to fill cavities as a norm. I don't say that she has amalgams, what I say is that the probability is strong that she does.
Many of her routines involved exposures to other metals without knowing that it was occurring. For example, the tap water probably contained fluoride. Vaccines contained mercury, aluminum, and other questionable elements. As a developing actor, she probably tried to save as much money on expenses as she could. This probably extended to her diet, which probably included large amounts of Tuna Fish.
Today, she probably consumes large quantities of soy products that contain fluoride, aluminum, and manganese. This will be especially true if she is a vegetarian or avoids meats.
The outward signs of these exposures are her personality. Like I said, I have never met the lady but what is apparent in her screen appearance is that she is cavalier, nonchalant and less than precise. Most of her success derives from her body language, which is very attractive and appealing. However, it may have an origin in the influence of metals.
According to her biography, she recently filed for divorce which is a socially traumatic event that affects more than a personality posture but will affect every organ of the body, especially when there is a large amount of emotion invested.
In her mid 40's she is at the correct age to assume that the body burden of metals has or will reach a critical mass. This should not be ignored, especially if she has been experiencing minor signs or signals that something is going to or about to go wrong. It's that pre-storm period when there is nothing wrong, it's just that something is not right.
Some of the early signs might have included some unexplained muscle twitches (petit mal seizures), minor numbness in the fingertips or feet, sensitive or sore elbows, minor dizziness (vertigo) or perhaps even some cloudy marks under the fingernails. When these signs and signals progress the move into symptoms that could be annoying as an urgency to urinate to one or both legs collapsing backward (hyper-extending).
These are all observed (anecdotal) by the individual until she complains about them to a doctor and he/she writes them down. It is the act of recording them to the doctor and the noting of them that they become "clinical" and based on the record, can proceed to a diagnosis.
Based on what I have seen, heard, read and concluded, it is my guess that Ms. Tierney will be diagnosed with either MS or Parkinson's or worse. The problem is that these diagnoses are conclusions of exclusion (of other diseases that are worse)and avoidance of metal poisoning.
I sincerely hope that I am wrong and this blog is one of the many times that I have made a fool of myself . . . but I doubt it and time will tell.
Whether I am right or wrong is of no consequence because I have no access to Ms. Tierney (nor do I want any), to influence her choices and decisions. It would be my fondest hope that a blog like this could force all doctors to test and treat for heavy metals before they perform radical surgery (ie; Michael J. Fox) or prescribe very serious medications that alter and mutate the patient (ie; Richard Pryor & Muhammad Ali).

Tom Cruse vs Brooke Shields controversy

Tom Cruse was half wrong and Brooke Shields was half right.
The way I see it, Tom Cruse was right when he talked about phycho-tropic drugs (Paxil) and psychiatrists that don't know what they are doing.
and
Brooke Shields was half right in trusting her doctor with her future when she confided in him/her about her postpartum depression.
What Tom Cruse didn't know, and could not have known was that Brooke Shields had never been tested or treated for any heavy metal body burden. This made him half wrong!
What Brooke Shields did not know or do was demand an assay of metals in her body by her doctor. Her faith was misplaced in her doctor but was appropriate behavior as far a society was concerned. This made her half right!
What would have been completely right of Tom Cruse was to mind his own business and communicate directly with Brooke Shields directly and privately.
What would have been completely right of Brooke Shields was to get an education about the problem before it happened. There are groups and people who would have educated her, for free, about the problem and nobody would have known about her very common problem.