Are antidepressant drugs an accomplice in the Virginia Tech shootings?

In article .com,
bigvince wrote:
On Apr 23, 10:21 pm, (David Wright) wrote:
In article . com,

bigvince wrote:
If thimerosal is not harmful why does the EPA set a max. safe amount
for it .It is in fact a toxic substance mercury and is regulated as
such.

If water is safe, how come you can drown in it? How come drinking too
much of it too fast will kill you?

Dave that comment makes no sense. Why would you compare drowning in
water to mecury induced damage. I'm afraid you have finally lost me.

That's a shame. I was pointing out that anything can be dangerous in
sufficient quantity, even though it is not dangerous is lesser
amounts.

Vince Of course as youcontinuraly deny the health hazards of mercury
perhaps you feel they are compatible please make sense out of your
statement " If water is safe ,how come you can drown in it" Thanks
Vince

I don't deny that there *are* health hazards of mercury. I *do* deny
that vaccines are one such hazard.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"HPV shots don't cause promiscuity. Tequila shots do." -- Bill Maher

On Apr 23, 7:45 pm, Mark Probert wrote:
bigvince wrote:
On Apr 21, 7:06 am, Mark Probert wrote:
bigvince wrote:
On Apr 20, 11:55 pm, (David Wright) wrote:
In article om,
bigvince wrote:
On Apr 19, 12:23 pm, (David Wright) wrote:
In article ,
JOHN wrote:
Certain brain activities trigger people on Prozac to become homicidal or
suicidal. Thanks to research by Illuminati controlled companies, the Network
knows exactly how to used ELF waves vectored on a particular person by 3
separate towers to stimulate the Prozac controlled brain to murder. This is
being used to increase acts of anarchy and violence in order to help insure
anti-gun legislation. If a slave doesn't comply or needs to be thrown from
the Freedom Train they can become a useable statistic. Simply trigger them
to murder and then watch the police gun them down. The NWO gains one more
statistic and another case to scare the public into accepting gun control.
The Illuminati Formula 6. The Use of Electricity & Electronics
I'd like anyone who thinks that either John or whale.to are useful
sources of information to keep this posting in mind, 'kay?
David you are far to intelligent to think that is logical. John latest
posting seems irrational.
It doesn't seem irrational, it is irrational.
To say that that means anything he quoted
from the whale cite lacks validity. Whould be like saying anything he
quoted from any source even the constitution calls the constitution
into question.
In principle, it seems as though you should have a point. In fact,
you don't, because John's quoted nuttiness above is simply a typical
example of the folderol that makes up 98% [I'm being generous here] of
whale.to.
I still want someone to explain to me why injecting
mercury into infants was a good idea. Thanks vince
Thimerosal was used as a preservative, to keep harmful bacteria from
growing in the vaccines. The thimerosal itself isn't harmful.
That's why it's a good idea.
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"HPV shots don't cause promiscuity. Tequila shots do." -- Bill Maher- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If thimerosal is not harmful why does the EPA set a max. safe amount
for it
A basic concept of toxicology is that dose makes the poison.

.It is in fact a toxic substance mercury and is regulated as

such.
Dihydrogen monoxide in sufficient quanties can kill you.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It is true that dose makes the poison. Then why do you say that
thimerosal a toxic substance regulated by the EPA at a maximun safe
dose of .1mcg/k is the most frequently applied standert.

Methinks that you are confused. That standard applies to MeHg, NOT Ethyl
Mercury. Am I correct that you are aware of the significance of this and
know the difference between the two?

So? What is the significance of the standard? Are you claiming that
vaccines USED TO exceed that amount? If so, it is a surprise to the EPA:

"At concentrations found in vaccines, thimerosal meets the requirements
for a preservative as set forth by the United States Pharmacopeia; that
is, it kills the specified challenge organisms and is able to prevent
the growth of the challenge fungi (U.S. Pharmacopeia 2004). Thimerosal
in concentrations of 0.001% (1 part in 100,000) to 0.01% (1 part in
10,000) has been shown to be effective in clearing a broad spectrum of
pathogens. A vaccine containing 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative
contains 50 micrograms of thimerosal per 0.5 mL dose or approximately 25
micrograms of mercury per 0.5 mL dose. "

http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimerosal.htm

From that page:

"One final piece of data regarding thimerosal is worth noting. At the
initial National Vaccine Advisory Committee-sponsored meeting on
thimerosal in 1999, concerns were expressed that infants may lack the
ability to eliminate mercury. More recent NIAID-supported studies at the
University of Rochester and National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda,
MD examined levels of mercury in blood and other samples from infants
who had received routine immunizations with thimerosal-containing
vaccines. [Pichichero ME, et al. Lancet 360:1737-1741 (2002)] Blood
levels of mercury did not exceed safety guidelines for methyl mercury
for all infants in these studies. Further, mercury was cleared from the
blood in infants exposed to thimerosal faster than would be predicted
for methyl mercury; infants excreted significant amounts of mercury in
stool after thimerosal exposure, thus removing mercury from their
bodies. These results suggest that there are differences in the way that
thimerosal and methyl mercury are distributed, metabolized, and
excreted. Thimerosal appears to be removed from the blood and body more
rapidly than methyl mercury. NIAID is sponsoring a follow-up study with
larger numbers of infants in Buenos Aires where thimerosal-containing
vaccines are still administered to children. See the NIH/NIAID
vaccines/thimerosal web sitehttp://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/thimerosalqa.htm."

Why do you

think it safe to administer more than that in one days dose of
vaccine 30x more.

Your math, etc is off.

You are right most drugs can be poison -we consider

them toxic when the amount needed to cause damage is very small.
Mercury is a very effective poison it takes a very small to do
damange. The amount injected into infants before it was removed
exceeded the level considered to be safe by a substantial amount. It
was removed for that reason . To compare it to water is a little
silly. Thanks vince

If you read the EPA page, and do remember, YOU cited them as
authoritative, you would learn that you are wrong.



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No Mark methinks you are confused. The .1mcg/k standart applies to
both forms of
mercury
The various mercury guidelines are based on epidemiological and
laboratory studies of methyl mercury, whereas thimerosal is a
derivative of ethyl mercury. Because they are different chemical
entities - ethyl- versus methylmercury - different toxicological
profiles are expected. There is, therefore, an uncertainty that arises
in applying the methylmercury-based guidelines to thimerosal. Lacking
definitive data on the comparative toxicities of ethyl- versus
methylmercury, FDA considered ethyl- and methyl-mercury as equivalent
in its risk evaluation. There are some data and studies bearing
directly on thimerosal toxicity and these are summarized in this
Section. source http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimerosal.htm#tox
Notice the word equivalent this is your document just alittle further
down the page odd you missed it. Then again same
document
Various agencies have developed guidelines for safe exposure to
methylmercury, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(Mahaffey et al. 1997), U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (ATSDR 1999), the FDA (Federal Register 1979)1, and the World
Health Organization (WHO 1996). These exposure levels range from 0.1
µg/kg body weight/day (EPA) to 0.47 µg/kg body weight/day (WHO)2. The
range of recommendations is due to varying safety margins, differing
emphasis placed on various sources of data, the different missions of
the agencies and the population that the guideline is intended to
protect. All guidelines, however, fall within the same order of
magnitude. While these guidelines

So by the document you quoted ethyl and methyl-mercury are equivalent
in risk a evaluation and the joint standart is 1mgc/k. It is a 2 step
process . Thanks Vince