Vaccine quote of the week by Bernard Rimland, PhD

In article , Bryan Heit
wrote:

john wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...


If so, they know that they would be fired if they approved articles that
mentioned the dangerous side effects and newly discovered side effects of
statins or other drugs made by the companies that were advertisers.

But they are not paid, so it's a non-issue.

Bryan


Oh yeah, not paid to review but you can bet your last dose of mercury that
they get funded by vaccine makers, after all the only people who review
vaccine articles are vaccine people


Nope, as I've pointed out to your repetitively, I've reviewed papers but
not once ever received or spent a single penny which came from any
pharmaceutical company. About the only money paid to academic
institutions by pharma is contract fees, as in when they pay us to run
some experiments for us.

Closest I've come was some free T-shirts for my slow-pitch (beer-ball)
team, courtesy of one of our local suppliers. Not exactly a big
present, given that we buy close to a half-million dollars of reagents
from them every year.


They did an investigation about how the pharmaceutical companies are funding
all the research and spinning the trial results, so you can no longer really
trust what you read in scientific journals.


"They" being who? The voices in your head?


They pointed out that when they
tried to get an expert to review the scientific literature related to
antidepressants, they basically couldn't find someone who hadn't taken money
from the drug companies.


I can think of several people at my uni who'd fit the bill. I guess
"they" didn't look very hard.


Psychiatric Drugs: An Assault on the Human
Condition Street Spirit Interview with Robert Whitaker


Who's "they"?

Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Since you have done lots of research related to autism, I hope that you
can answer a question for me.
This is the report that caused me to become interested in this issue:

There was a mercury catastrophe in Minamata Bay, Japan, involving ingestion
of methymercury-contaminated fish--it led to neurologic defects.

I have seen other reports indicating that when they test the blood of
children that have autism--it (in most cases) reveals that the children
have high levels of mercury.

When I read reports like the two reports mentioned above, it appears to me
to indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism.

When you read those same sorts of reports, why do you discount them? You
already know that some people that have had mercury poisoning for several
years develop mental problems. If this is true, is it possible that when
an infant or small child has been exposed to mercury that it could cause
autism.

Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Bryan Heit
wrote:

john wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...


If so, they know that they would be fired if they approved articles that
mentioned the dangerous side effects and newly discovered side effects of
statins or other drugs made by the companies that were advertisers.

But they are not paid, so it's a non-issue.

Bryan


Oh yeah, not paid to review but you can bet your last dose of mercury that
they get funded by vaccine makers, after all the only people who review
vaccine articles are vaccine people


Nope, as I've pointed out to your repetitively, I've reviewed papers but
not once ever received or spent a single penny which came from any
pharmaceutical company. About the only money paid to academic
institutions by pharma is contract fees, as in when they pay us to run
some experiments for us.

Closest I've come was some free T-shirts for my slow-pitch (beer-ball)
team, courtesy of one of our local suppliers. Not exactly a big
present, given that we buy close to a half-million dollars of reagents
from them every year.


They did an investigation about how the pharmaceutical companies are funding
all the research and spinning the trial results, so you can no longer really
trust what you read in scientific journals.


"They" being who? The voices in your head?


They pointed out that when they
tried to get an expert to review the scientific literature related to
antidepressants, they basically couldn't find someone who hadn't taken money
from the drug companies.


I can think of several people at my uni who'd fit the bill. I guess
"they" didn't look very hard.


Psychiatric Drugs: An Assault on the Human
Condition Street Spirit Interview with Robert Whitaker


Who's "they"?

Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Since you have done lots of research related to autism, I hope that you
can answer a question for me.
This is the report that caused me to become interested in this issue:

There was a mercury catastrophe in Minamata Bay, Japan, involving ingestion
of methymercury-contaminated fish--it led to neurologic defects.

http://www.american.edu/TED/MINAMATA.HTM

It was methyl mercury, which is recognized to be much more toxic than
ethyl mercury, and is retained far more easily.


I have seen other reports indicating that when they test the blood of
children that have autism--it (in most cases) reveals that the children
have high levels of mercury.

Much of the testing is of rather dubious merit. Spend some time and
learn about it.

When I read reports like the two reports mentioned above, it appears to me
to indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism.

When you read those same sorts of reports, why do you discount them? You
already know that some people that have had mercury poisoning for several
years develop mental problems. If this is true, is it possible that when
an infant or small child has been exposed to mercury that it could cause
autism.

They are discounted because the epidemiological studies of large and
diverse populations fails to show a link.

You have been told this over and over, and you seem to refuse to
understand that point.

In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Bryan Heit
wrote:

john wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...


If so, they know that they would be fired if they approved articles that
mentioned the dangerous side effects and newly discovered side effects of
statins or other drugs made by the companies that were advertisers.

But they are not paid, so it's a non-issue.

Bryan


Oh yeah, not paid to review but you can bet your last dose of
mercury that
they get funded by vaccine makers, after all the only people who review
vaccine articles are vaccine people


Nope, as I've pointed out to your repetitively, I've reviewed papers but
not once ever received or spent a single penny which came from any
pharmaceutical company. About the only money paid to academic
institutions by pharma is contract fees, as in when they pay us to run
some experiments for us.

Closest I've come was some free T-shirts for my slow-pitch (beer-ball)
team, courtesy of one of our local suppliers. Not exactly a big
present, given that we buy close to a half-million dollars of reagents
from them every year.


They did an investigation about how the pharmaceutical companies are
funding
all the research and spinning the trial results, so you can no
longer really
trust what you read in scientific journals.


"They" being who? The voices in your head?


They pointed out that when they
tried to get an expert to review the scientific literature related to
antidepressants, they basically couldn't find someone who hadn't
taken money
from the drug companies.


I can think of several people at my uni who'd fit the bill. I guess
"they" didn't look very hard.


Psychiatric Drugs: An Assault on the Human
Condition Street Spirit Interview with Robert Whitaker


Who's "they"?

Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Since you have done lots of research related to autism, I hope that you
can answer a question for me.
This is the report that caused me to become interested in this issue:

There was a mercury catastrophe in Minamata Bay, Japan, involving ingestion
of methymercury-contaminated fish--it led to metal deficits.

http://www.american.edu/TED/MINAMATA.HTM

It was methyl mercury, which is recognized to be much more toxic than
ethyl mercury, and is retained far more easily.


I have seen other reports indicating that when they test the blood of
children that have autism--it (in most cases) reveals that the children
have high levels of mercury.

Much of the testing is of rather dubious merit. Spend some time and
learn about it.

When I read reports like the two reports mentioned above, it appears to me
to indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism.

When you read those same sorts of reports, why do you discount them? You
already know that some people that have had mercury poisoning for several
years develop mental problems. If this is true, is it possible that when
an infant or small child has been exposed to mercury that it could cause
autism.

They are discounted because the epidemiological studies of large and
diverse populations fails to show a link.

You have been told this over and over, and you seem to refuse to
understand that point.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I have read studies on both sides of this issue. It appears to me (and I
hope I wrong) that you instantly discount any studies or reports which
indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism. Am I wrong? I hope so.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Bryan Heit
wrote:

john wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...


If so, they know that they would be fired if they approved articles that
mentioned the dangerous side effects and newly discovered side effects of
statins or other drugs made by the companies that were advertisers.

But they are not paid, so it's a non-issue.

Bryan


Oh yeah, not paid to review but you can bet your last dose of
mercury that
they get funded by vaccine makers, after all the only people who review
vaccine articles are vaccine people


Nope, as I've pointed out to your repetitively, I've reviewed papers but
not once ever received or spent a single penny which came from any
pharmaceutical company. About the only money paid to academic
institutions by pharma is contract fees, as in when they pay us to run
some experiments for us.

Closest I've come was some free T-shirts for my slow-pitch (beer-ball)
team, courtesy of one of our local suppliers. Not exactly a big
present, given that we buy close to a half-million dollars of reagents
from them every year.


They did an investigation about how the pharmaceutical companies are
funding
all the research and spinning the trial results, so you can no
longer really
trust what you read in scientific journals.


"They" being who? The voices in your head?


They pointed out that when they
tried to get an expert to review the scientific literature related to
antidepressants, they basically couldn't find someone who hadn't
taken money
from the drug companies.


I can think of several people at my uni who'd fit the bill. I guess
"they" didn't look very hard.


Psychiatric Drugs: An Assault on the Human
Condition Street Spirit Interview with Robert Whitaker


Who's "they"?

Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Since you have done lots of research related to autism, I hope that you
can answer a question for me.
This is the report that caused me to become interested in this issue:

There was a mercury catastrophe in Minamata Bay, Japan, involving ingestion
of methymercury-contaminated fish--it led to metal deficits.

http://www.american.edu/TED/MINAMATA.HTM

It was methyl mercury, which is recognized to be much more toxic than
ethyl mercury, and is retained far more easily.


I have seen other reports indicating that when they test the blood of
children that have autism--it (in most cases) reveals that the children
have high levels of mercury.

Much of the testing is of rather dubious merit. Spend some time and
learn about it.

When I read reports like the two reports mentioned above, it appears to me
to indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism.

When you read those same sorts of reports, why do you discount them? You
already know that some people that have had mercury poisoning for several
years develop mental problems. If this is true, is it possible that when
an infant or small child has been exposed to mercury that it could cause
autism.

They are discounted because the epidemiological studies of large and
diverse populations fails to show a link.

You have been told this over and over, and you seem to refuse to
understand that point.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I have read studies on both sides of this issue. It appears to me (and I
hope I wrong) that you instantly discount any studies or reports which
indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism. Am I wrong? I hope so.

Read my fingers....there are NO epidemiological studies showing a
link...eight studies on diverse populations all show that there is no
link....keep reading...

Replication of findings is one of the "checks and balances" in the world
of scientific research. You may recall the cold fusion debacle several
years ago...or the Korean scientist on cloning whose findings could not
be reproduced....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I have read studies on both sides of this issue. It appears to me (and I
hope I wrong) that you instantly discount any studies or reports which
indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism. Am I wrong? I hope so.

Read my fingers....there are NO epidemiological studies showing a
link...eight studies on diverse populations all show that there is no
link....keep reading...

Replication of findings is one of the "checks and balances" in the world
of scientific research. You may recall the cold fusion debacle several
years ago...or the Korean scientist on cloning whose findings could not
be reproduced....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
For the sake of this discussion, let's assume that you had 10 blood tests
of 10 children that had autism in front of you and they all indicated that
the children had dangerous levels of mercury. Would you discount those
blood tests or assume that autism MAY be caused by mercury?
I would assume that the autism MAY have been caused by mercury.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jason Johnson wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I have read studies on both sides of this issue. It appears to me (and I
hope I wrong) that you instantly discount any studies or reports which
indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism. Am I wrong? I hope so.

Read my fingers....there are NO epidemiological studies showing a
link...eight studies on diverse populations all show that there is no
link....keep reading...

Replication of findings is one of the "checks and balances" in the world
of scientific research. You may recall the cold fusion debacle several
years ago...or the Korean scientist on cloning whose findings could not
be reproduced....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
For the sake of this discussion, let's assume that you had 10 blood tests
of 10 children that had autism in front of you and they all indicated that
the children had dangerous levels of mercury. Would you discount those
blood tests or assume that autism MAY be caused by mercury?
I would assume that the autism MAY have been caused by mercury.

You assumption is absurd. Did the children have high levels of mercury
at birth? If not, the current blood test is useless.

Even so, since I feel that autism is 99% genetic, there would be no
issue for me.

I would want the mercury levels for the kids addressed, to prevent
future problems.

In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I have read studies on both sides of this issue. It appears to me (and I
hope I wrong) that you instantly discount any studies or reports which
indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism. Am I wrong? I hope so.

Read my fingers....there are NO epidemiological studies showing a
link...eight studies on diverse populations all show that there is no
link....keep reading...

Replication of findings is one of the "checks and balances" in the world
of scientific research. You may recall the cold fusion debacle several
years ago...or the Korean scientist on cloning whose findings could not
be reproduced....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
For the sake of this discussion, let's assume that you had 10 blood tests
of 10 children that had autism in front of you and they all indicated that
the children had dangerous levels of mercury. Would you discount those
blood tests or assume that autism MAY be caused by mercury?
I would assume that the autism MAY have been caused by mercury.

You assumption is absurd. Did the children have high levels of mercury
at birth? If not, the current blood test is useless.

Even so, since I feel that autism is 99% genetic, there would be no
issue for me.

I would want the mercury levels for the kids addressed, to prevent
future problems.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
The children did NOT have high levels of mercury at birth. Let's make it
10,000 children instead of 10 children.
The same question:
Would you discount the 10,000 blood tests that showed high levels of
mercury or assume that mercury MAY have caused the autism.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...

(...)

You assumption is absurd. Did the children have high levels of mercury at
birth? If not, the current blood test is useless.

Even so, since I feel that autism is 99% genetic, there would be no issue
for me.

The problem is that the data do not indicate that autism is 99% genetic.
There are clearly a lot of environment factors involved as well.

I should point out that the data, coming from different sources, indicate
that neither mercury nor organomercury pounds (e.g., ethyl- and
methylmercury) are not causes of autism.

Jeff

I would want the mercury levels for the kids addressed, to prevent future
problems.

Jason Johnson wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I have read studies on both sides of this issue. It appears to me (and I
hope I wrong) that you instantly discount any studies or reports which
indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism. Am I wrong? I hope so.

Read my fingers....there are NO epidemiological studies showing a
link...eight studies on diverse populations all show that there is no
link....keep reading...

Replication of findings is one of the "checks and balances" in the world
of scientific research. You may recall the cold fusion debacle several
years ago...or the Korean scientist on cloning whose findings could not
be reproduced....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
For the sake of this discussion, let's assume that you had 10 blood tests
of 10 children that had autism in front of you and they all indicated that
the children had dangerous levels of mercury. Would you discount those
blood tests or assume that autism MAY be caused by mercury?

Like I said, the epidemiological studies refute any possible connection
between mercury and autism. Eight studies, LARGE diverse populations,
all showing the same thing.

Furthermore, how do we know that 10 non-autistic kids don't have equally
high levels of mercury? If you want to use that model, all I need to do
is to bring one kid with the same levels who does not have autism.

I would assume that the autism MAY have been caused by mercury.
Jason

You would assume wrong.

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Bryan Heit
wrote:

john wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
If so, they know that they would be fired if they approved
articles that
mentioned the dangerous side effects and newly discovered side
effects of
statins or other drugs made by the companies that were advertisers.

But they are not paid, so it's a non-issue.

Bryan
Oh yeah, not paid to review but you can bet your last dose of
mercury that they get funded by vaccine makers, after all the only
people who review vaccine articles are vaccine people
Nope, as I've pointed out to your repetitively, I've reviewed papers but
not once ever received or spent a single penny which came from any
pharmaceutical company. About the only money paid to academic
institutions by pharma is contract fees, as in when they pay us to run
some experiments for us.
Closest I've come was some free T-shirts for my slow-pitch (beer-ball)
team, courtesy of one of our local suppliers. Not exactly a big present,
given that we buy close to a half-million dollars of reagents from them
every year.
They did an investigation about how the pharmaceutical companies are
funding all the research and spinning the trial results, so you can no
longer really trust what you read in scientific journals. "They" being
who? The voices in your head?
They pointed out that when they tried to get an expert to review the
scientific literature related to antidepressants, they basically
couldn't find someone who hadn't taken money from the drug companies. I
can think of several people at my uni who'd fit the bill. I guess "they"
didn't look very hard.
Psychiatric Drugs: An Assault on the Human Condition Street Spirit
Interview with Robert Whitaker
Who's "they"?
Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Since you have done lots of research related to autism, I hope that you
can answer a question for me. This is the report that caused me to become
interested in this issue:

There was a mercury catastrophe in Minamata Bay, Japan, involving
ingestion
of methymercury-contaminated fish--it led to neurologic defects.

http://www.american.edu/TED/MINAMATA.HTM

It was methyl mercury, which is recognized to be much more toxic than
ethyl mercury, and is retained far more easily.


I have seen other reports indicating that when they test the blood of
children that have autism--it (in most cases) reveals that the children
have high levels of mercury.

Much of the testing is of rather dubious merit. Spend some time and learn
about it.

Right backatcha



When I read reports like the two reports mentioned above, it appears to
me
to indicate that mercury MAY be the cause of autism.

When you read those same sorts of reports, why do you discount them? You
already know that some people that have had mercury poisoning for several
years develop mental problems. If this is true, is it possible that when
an infant or small child has been exposed to mercury that it could cause
autism.

They are discounted because the epidemiological studies of large and
diverse populations fails to show a link.

You have been told this over and over, and you seem to refuse to
understand that point.

pt. 1 predetermined - denying of link between autism and vaccines

".......Meanwhile in Texas, after receiving an internal transcript that
allegedly
proves the Institutes of Medicine's report denying a link between
childhood
vaccines and autism last year was "predetermined", a US District Court
judge
has ordered the worlds' "big five" vaccine manufacturers to "produce
any and
all documents relating to payments made to, or stock ownership" by the
seventeen members of the IOM's Immunization and Safety Review
Committee...."

A Byronchild world exclusive report Release: March 7, 2005

Contact: Naomi Radunski,
Marketing and Strategy Byron Publications P/L

7 Palm Avenue

Mullumbimby,
Australia 61 02 6684 4353

"This article may be freely posted, reproduced and distributed with
acknowledgement to both Lisa Reagan (author) and byronchild magazine
(also
list http://www.byronchild.com). If you do so, please notify byronchild
magazine through Naomi Radunski and forward all copies (electronic and
printed) to or the above postal address.

Click here to download this article in .pdf format:
http://www.byronchild.com/Dragon.pdf

"A Dragon By The Tail"

On the eve of an historic, billion-dollar world vaccination campaign, a
leaked transcript ignites questions of vaccine safety and research
corruption. Meanwhile, US senators fast-track a bill to protect vaccine
manufacturers from litigation. With millions of lives at stake, and
billions
of dollars to loose, will a merger of philanthropy, big business and
compromised science win an epic race between corporate agendas and
medical
ethics? In this world exclusive report, byronchild exposes how the most
powerful medical research bodies in the United States compromise their
vaccine safety research for vested interests, as they assist in a
global
vaccine policy, while a bill looms in the background to protect it all.

By Lisa Reagan

On January 24, 2005 -- the same day the Global Alliance for Vaccines
and
Immunization (GAVI) announced the receipt of $750 million for its
historic
world vaccination campaign -- seven US Senators introduced Senate Bill
3 .
The bill is an unprecedented act giving comprehensive liability
protections
to vaccine manufacturers , restricting Freedom of Information Acts on
drug/vaccine safety, and pre-empting states' rights to ban mercury from
children's vaccines, all under the bill's official title: ''Protecting
America in the War on Terror Act of 2005''.

Meanwhile in Texas, after receiving an internal transcript that
allegedly
proves the Institutes of Medicine's report denying a link between
childhood
vaccines and autism last year was "predetermined", a US District Court
judge
has ordered the worlds' "big five" vaccine manufacturers to "produce
any and
all documents relating to payments made to, or stock ownership" by the
seventeen members of the IOM's Immunization and Safety Review
Committee.

A court document submitting the IOM's leaked transcript as an exhibit
in the
first civil juried lawsuit against the vaccine manufacturers states the
transcript proves the IOM committee, "predetermined the necessity of
not
finding causality between vaccines and autism and/or neurological
injury" in
its official reports on the issue.

Judge T. John Ward also ordered the vaccine manufacturers to produce
all
communications with "members of the World Health Organization, the
Center
for Disease Control, the Food and Drug Administration, the Institute of
Medicine, the Brighton Collaboration, or the Global Alliance for
Vaccines
and Immunization relating to the issue whether the thimerosal contained
in
pediatric vaccines causes autism or other neurological disorders."

When the defendant's legal counsel balked at the amount of expense
involved
in producing such extensive documentation for the court, Judge Ward
reassured the defense that the useful for both defendants and
plaintiffs of
the more than 300 pending lawsuits " involving claims related to the
use of
thimerosal in pediatric vaccines" waiting to be tried in the US.

Vaccine manufacturers Aventis Pasteur, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Wyeth
and Eli
Lilly and Co. are cited as defendants in the lawsuit brought by the
parents
of a child who developed autism after receiving mandatory routine
childhood
immunizations.

The same IOM reports denying a link between vaccines and the country's
autism epidemic have been used:

.. to endorse standardized case definitions for Adverse Events
Following
Immunizations for "global dissemination";

.. as justification for Senate Bill 3's sweeping provisions and
protections;

.. as a cause for no further federal monies to be spent on research of
the
potential vaccine/autism link;

.. as a reason to silence media inquiries into vaccine safety issues;

.. and as a defense for dismissing over 4,500 petitions for vaccine
injuries
in a federal court.

Is it possible that a closed meeting transcript alleged as proof of a
ploy
to ignore vaccine risks, a near billion dollar grant for a global
vaccination campaign, emerging lawsuits for vaccine injuries and a
sweeping
federal bill to protect vaccine manufacturers are unrelated?

Is it possible that in spite of US Congressional hearings and reports
citing
widespread conflicts of interest between federal policy makers and the
vaccine industry that Senate Bill 3 will defy the US Constitution's
provisions for state and civil rights in order to shield vaccine
manufacturers from liability?

And finally, how will a world vaccine policy influenced by allegedly
"predetermined" safety reports implemented through a global alliance of
international governments and vaccine manufacturers with a fund of
billions
headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, support or protect the health and
human rights of targeted Third-World country peoples?

History of the IOM's Immunization and Safety Review Committee

Insight to these questions may lie in the pivotal year of 1999, a year
preceded by a decade of declining vaccine sales, major breakups within
the
manufacturing industry, increased requirements for routine childhood
vaccines, a growing autism epidemic, and researchers and media reports
questioning the safety of vaccines and their possible link to autism.

In 1999, as a US Congressional Government Reform Committee initiated an
investigation into the rampant conflicts of interest between federal
vaccine
policy makers and manufacturers, a global rescue effort of the sinking
vaccine industry began with the formation of GAVI.

Originally funded by Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates through his
Seattle-based Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI's partnership of
international governments and vaccine manufacturers salvaged lagging
sales
through an overhauled world vaccination campaign that placed GAVI,
headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, at the center of the reorganized
alliance.

Also formed in 1999 were the international Brighton Collaboration and
the
WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety.

Brighton's sole purpose was to create standardized case definitions for
Adverse Events Following Immunizations for "global dissemination".
Brighton's steering committee members currently hail from the US FDA,
CDC,
and Aventis Pasteur, a vaccine manufacturer and federal lawsuit
defendant.

Brighton's website does not include autism among its listed adverse
events.

The WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety has " concluded
that
there is currently no evidence of mercury toxicity in infants,
children, or
adults exposed to thimerosal in vaccines" and "that current WHO
immunization
policy with respect to thimerosal containing vaccines should not be
changed."

The Brighton Collaboration has been cited as being "fraught with
pitfalls
and merges regulators and the regulated into an indistinguishable
group."

" I am very concerned about the development of the Brighton
Collaboration,"
stated US Congressional Representative Dave Weldon, MD, (R-FL) at an
Autism
One Conference in May 2004. "Particularly troubling is the fact that
serving
on the panels defining what constitutes an adverse reaction to a
vaccine,
are vaccine manufacturers. What is even worse is the fact that some of
these
committees are chaired by vaccine manufacturers. It is totally
inappropriate
for a manufacturer of vaccines to be put in the position of determining
what
is and is not an adverse reaction to their product. Do we allow GM,
Ford and
Chrysler to define the safety of their automobiles?"

In 1999, w with GAVI's international partnership and Bill Gates'
billions on
the way to rescue the industry, the CDC hired the IOM's Immunizations
and
Safety Review Committee to examine multiple "vaccine safety
challenges".

In its public report, the CDC specifically sited a 1998 British Lancet
study
recommending more research into a potential link between the Measles,
Mumps,
Rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism, negative press, public information
vaccine
conferences, the Rotavirus vaccine recall and seven congressional
hearings
questioning vaccine safety as impetus to employ the IOM.

However, the CDC's ability to objectively and fairly evaluate vaccine
risks
has been denounced by a three year long US congressional investigation:
"To
date, studies conducted or funded by the CDC that purportedly dispute
any
correlation between autism and vaccine injury have been of poor design,
under-powered, and fatally flawed. The CDC's rush to support and
promote
such research is reflective of a philosophical conflict in looking
fairly at
emerging theories and clinical data related to adverse reactions from
vaccinations.

"The CDC in general and the National Immunization Program in particular
are
conflicted in their duties to monitor the safety of vaccines, while
also
charged with the responsibility of purchasing vaccines for resale as
well as
promoting increased immunization rates," states the congressional
report.
(View the report at
http://www.nomercury.org/science/doc...RC_6-15-00.pdf )

"They serve as their own watchdog -- neither common nor desirable when
seeking unbiased research," Weldon has stated in describing the CDC.
"An
association between vaccines and autism would force CDC officials to
admit
that their policies irreparably damaged thousands of children. Who
among us
would easily accept such a conclusion about ourselves? Yet, this is
what the
CDC is asked to do," Weldon said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thimerosal

http://www.vaccinetruth.org/click_here.htm

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feat...03/02_354.html

http://www.talkinternational.com/haley-congress.html

Report on Mercury Toxicity from Dental Amalgams and Thimerosal
Presented to Congressional Hearing - May 8, 2003


Presented By Boyd E. Haley, Ph.D.
Professor and Chairman of the Department of Chemistry
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY 50606-005


In developing an opinion on mercury toxicity from exposures to dental
amalgam and thimerosal I have reviewed toxicologic data relevant to animal
and human studies to environmental mercury, methylmercury, thimerosal and
exposure to mercury from amalgam fillings. I have reviewed literature
searches conducted on various computerized databases; evaluated published
literature on primary studies as referenced in part herein. I have reviewed
relevant unpublished reports, consulted review articles, where appropriate,
and held working meetings with experts in the field. I have also conducted
experiments in my laboratory at the University of Kentucky with regards to
the enzyme and cellular toxicity of both dental amalgams and thimerosal,
including vaccine with and without thimerosal added as a preservative. In
addition, I have reviewed evaluations and conclusions of various
governmental agencies, including the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC), the World Health Organization (WHO), the National Institute
of Health (NIH), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
and other groups regarding this issue. I have come to the following
conclusions.

1. Mercury is the most toxic, non-redioactive elements known to man.
Virtually every industry has either reduced or banned the use of mercury
with the exception of dentistry. Dental amalgam is approximately 50% mercury
by weight. Each amalgam typically has between half of a gram to a gram of
mercury. A typical person having between 5 and 15 amalgams, would have
several grams of mercury implanted in his or her mouth. This amount is
colossal using any standard. I am aware of no other situation today where
grams of mercury are implanted in any human being. In fact, in the
healthcare industry, mercury has been all but banned.

2. The concentration of thimerosal in vaccines that contain this agent as
a preservative is approximately 125,000 nanomolar. In our studies pure
thimerosal shows toxicity to neurons in culture at 10 to 20 nanomolar, a
12,500 to 6,250 dilution factor. Calculations, using a conservative
approach, demonstrate that vaccinations of infants exposed them to
concentrations of thimerosal that could biologically injure them, especially
if they were exceptionally susceptible to mercury toxicity due to genetic
predisposition, other concurrent toxic exposures (e.g. to lead, elemental
mercury, cadmium, etc.) further, our research has shown that thimerosal,
which releases the toxic agent ethylmercury, inhibits the same brain enzymes
as does Hg2+. Therefore, multiple exposures from dental amalgams, food, and
vaccines are all capable of adding to the toxic load of these infants.

3. Further, we need to emphasize that humans are not rats in a pristine
cage, being fed chow that is tested to be free of other toxic agents. Humans
are exposed to numerous toxic agents that may act in a synergistic fashion
to enhance the toxicity of other toxicants. That is, and this is well
established, low levels of lead will greatly enhance the toxicity of
mercury. It is well known that levels of lead previously thought to be
non-toxic are now associated with decreased mental abilities in children.
Could it be that this lead is enhancing the toxicity of mercury exposures
from dental amalgams and vaccines?

4. The position of organized dentistry, primarily the American Dental
Association (ADA), that "no valid scientific evidence exists that dental
amalgam poses any health risk-other than rare, localized allergic
reactions," is, in my opinion, indefensible in the light of huge amounts of
published science. The major basis I have heard for the ADA stand is the
finding of "expert committees" within the dental branch of the FDA and WHO.
I looked up the members of these committees and have serious concerns about
who the ADA classifies as "expert" that served on these committees. In my
opinion, there was a severe paucity of relevant research publications on
mercury toxicity by members of these committees. The ADA stand is especially
weak if one considers the recent National Academy of Sciences and EPA
reports implying that 8 to 10% of American women of child bearing age have
blood levels of mercury that put any child they give birth to at risk for
having neurological problems. Also, a plethora of peer reviewed, published,
scientific studies and articles completely refute the evaluation of the ADA
regarding amalgam safety. Frankly, outside of the Journal of the American
Dental Association or JADA, the ADA's trade journal, which is not a refereed
scientific journal, but solely a trade journal, scientific consensus is
completely contrary to the ADA's position (note that the ADA escapes
adjudication by claiming to be a trade organization with no responsibility
to public health.) The fact is that there are no solid, refereed
publications showing that mercury is not significantly emitted from dental
amalgams. On the contrary, there are several showing significant emissions
of mercury from dental amalgams. In the one JADA article (Saxe, et al. JADA
Alzheimer's Disease, Dental Amalgam and Mercury, V130, p191, 1999) it is
claimed that amalgams are not related to brain Hg levels. I have several
design and scientific criticism of this paper, which I will not go into
here. However, in this same paper there is a histogram that shows that about
6% of the subjects had mercury brain levels above 1 micromolar levels and
about 15% had brain levels above 0.5 micromolar levels. Therefore, roughly 6
to 15% of Americans, on the day they die, have what any competent
neurologist or neurochemists or toxicologist would call severely toxic
levels of mercury. These levels are about 1,000 times that needed to cause
neurons to die in culture. Therefore, one needs to ask the questions "where
does this mercury come from and why does it exist in brain tissues at such
high levels." I seriously doubt that the major cause is eating seafood for
85 year old AD subjects. The cause is obvious exposures from known sources
(amalgams, food and vaccines) and the reason it collects in certain
individuals is because they cannot effectively excrete mercury due to
genetic susceptibilities or presence of other toxicants (lead, pesticides,
etc.) or loss of cellular protection due to advanced age or disease. Perhaps
this same phenomena accounts for the 22,000 times normal level of mercury in
the heart tissues of children who die with Idiopathic Dilated Cardiomyopathy
(Frustaci et al., J. American College of Cardiology, v33#6, p1578, 1000.)
This latter issue alone should make Congress consider a ban on mercury in
dentistry and medicine.

5. Dental amalgam emits dangerous levels of mercury. In fact, according to
a 1991 WHO report, dental amalgam constitutes the major human exposure to
mercury.1 Grams of mercury are in the mouth of individuals with several
amalgam fillings. Also, the level of blood and urine mercury positively
correlates with the number of amalgam fillings.2 It would be quite
informative to require that the American Medical Association (AMA) be
required to evaluate the state of mercury toxicity caused by dental amalgams
and make a report regarding this issue. The lack of AMA support for the ADA
contention on amalgam safety says something.

6. Careful evaluation of the amount of mercury emitted from a commonly
used dental amalgam in a test tube with 10 ml of water was presented in an
article entitled "Long-term Dissolution of Mercury from a
Non-Mercury-Releasing Amalgam."3 This study showed that "the overall mean
release of mercury was 43.5 ± 3.2 micrograms per cm2 /day, and the amount
remained fairly constant during the duration of the experiments (2 years.)"
This was without pressure, heat or galvanism as would have occurred if the
amalgams were in a human mouth. To be fair, this amalgam contained about 66%
mercury compared to about 50% in most amalgams in use. The importance of
this publication is that the discovery of the tremendous amount of mercury
released from this amalgam material was not discovered by NIDCR, FDA, ADA,
CDC or any other American research group. It came from the University of
Singapore. Why hasn't the ADA or FDA or DCD done similar studies on every
amalgam preparation used in the USA today? In my laboratory we have done
this on several aged amalgams made from one conventional, widely used
amalgam company. The results indicated that about 4.5 micrograms Hg/cm2/ day
was released without abrasion, but this increased to about 47
micrograms/cm2/day with two 30 second brushings with a toothbrush.
Therefore, the question remains, who is protecting the American public from
adverse exposures to mercury? It appears as if those who should be doing
this job are failing to do so. Having an unbiased research group repeat the
study above on all ADA approved amalgam materials would be very informative
and I strongly recommend that this be done even though doing this is was not
supported by the ADA spokesperson at a past Congressional hearing on this
issue.

Recent research has shown that the birth hair of normal children increase
in mercury content with increasing dental amalgams in the birth mother (A.
Holmes, M. Blaxill and B. Haley, Reduced Levels of Mercury in the First Baby
Haircuts of Autistic Children, in press, International J. Toxicology v22#4,
2003.) In contrast, autistic children have much lower levels of mercury in
their birth hair, yet due to numerous reports have elevated mercury in their
bodies on mercury challenge testing. This strongly indicates that a subset
of the population does not have the ability to excrete mercury even if it is
from low chronic daily exposure from dental amalgam.

7. Furthermore, due to the substantial amounts of mercury in amalgams, it
is the number of amalgams that controls the amount of mercury exposure and
this is likely not significantly affected by the length of time each amalgam
is in the mouth.4 Put another way, since each large amalgam (i.e. those with
0.5 and 1.0 grams of mercury) contains between 500,000 to 1,000,000
micrograms of mercury, and if mercury were estimated to be released at a
high rate of 10 micrograms a day from each amalgam, it would take between
137 and 274 years before any individual amalgam is completely depleted of
its mercury content. A small amalgam with 0.1 grams of mercury would take
27.4 years for depletion at this rate. Also, there is a high variance which
is influenced by the surface area of the amalgam, its copper content, its
location and the individual's eating and grinding habits, and rate of
acidity, as noted herein. However, even at very conservative estimates,
these figures equate to a substantial amount of chronic (continuous, daily)
mercury exposure over a sustained, prolonged period of time. I think it is
imperative that the ADA provide detailed research that demonstrates that
amalgams MADE OUTSIDE THE MOUTH DO NOT RELEASE MERCURY ON REASONABLE
ABRASION AS WOULD BE EXPECTED ON CHEWING FOOD OR DRINKING HOT DRINKS. The
ADA and other supporters of amalgam refuse to do these studies or fund these
studies even though several refereed journal reports list solutions in which
amalgams have been soaked as "severely cytotoxic."

8. About 80% of the mercury vapor from amalgams is readily taken up by the
human body and distributed to various organs. Very little, if any, of the
mercury vapors are exhaled; the vapors as well as mercury particles are
absorbed into the lungs and body tissues. Through the lungs, for instance,
mercury enters the bloodstream where it has access to all of the major
organs; of particular concern are the kidneys and the central nervous
system.5 For example, studies have been performed where amalgams containing
radioactive mercury were placed in sheep and monkeys, showed the
radioactivity collecting in all body tissues and especially high in the jaw
and facial bones.6 Human studies are also supportive.7

9. Even more concerning is the synergistic toxicity effects of other
elements in amalgams, which increase the toxicity of mercury. For example,
Zinc (or Zn) is a needed element for body health and is found in very low
percentages in dental amalgams when compared to mercury. However, Zn+2 is a
synergist that enhances mercury toxicity. Studies have shown that solutions
in which amalgams have been soaked were "severely cytoxic initially when Zn
release was highest."8 (see also, Lobner & Asrari, Neurotoxicity of Dental
Amalgam is Mediated by Zinc. J. Dental Research v82#3, 243, 2003.) We have
repeated similar amalgam soaking experiments in my laboratory. Cadmium (from
smoking), lead, zinc and other heavy metals enhanced mercury toxicity as
expected. This is a well know phenomena in toxicology as it has been
reported many years ago in a study on determining the lethal dose (LD) that
"the administration of an essentially no-response level (LD-1) of a mercury
salt together with a 1/20 of the LD-1 of a lead salt killed all of the
animals." If the toxicity were additive only 1 to 2 rats of 100 should have
died, instead 100% died. (J. Shubert, E. Riley & S. Tyler. Combined Effects
in Toxicology--A Rapid Systemic Testing Procedu Cadmium, Mercury and
Lead. J.Toxicology and Environmental Health v4, p763, 1978.) What the data
from several studies clearly shows is that no one can state what is a "safe"
level of mercury exposure without knowing the concentration of all other
factors that may synergistically exacerbate mercury toxicity.

10. Synergistic effects on ethylmercury is demonstrated by the dramatic
enhancements of thimersosal toxicity against neurons in culture by aluminum
cation (Al3+), antibiotics and testosterone. Al3+ is another component of
vaccines and dramatically increases the killing of neurons by thimerosal.
Testosterone, at low nanomolar levels is not noticeably toxic to neurons.
However, if testosterone is present with low nanomolar levels of thimerosal
the rate of neuron death is greatly enhanced, more so than with Al3+. This
likely explains the 4 to 1 ratio of boys to girls that become autistic and
the fact that most of the severe cases of autism are boys. This involvement
of testosterone in autism is further supported by the work of Dr. Baron
Cohen of England who studied the amniotic fluid of mothers who gave birth to
autistic children. The only abnormality he found was that their amniotic
fluid contained elevated testosterone. It is likely that this early elevated
testosterone level rendered these children at enhanced risk for ethylmercury
neurotoxicity.

11. There are two common misconceptions fostered by pro-amalgam supporters
concerning mercury amalgam filings: (1) that the mercury in dental amalgam
is all chemically bound and not released at significant rates; and (2) that
amalgam mercury is in a form that is biologically inactive. We have tested
this in a direct fashion in my laboratory by soaking amalgams in distilled
water and then testing these solutions for toxicity in a manner similar to
our testing of solutions known to contain specific amounts of Hg2+. The
results were unequivocal, solutions in which amalgams were soaked for only
one hour gave very similar effects on inhibiting the activity of tubulin and
creatine kinase, two enzymes previously reported to be greatly inhibited in
Alzheimer's diseased brain as compared to age-matched normal brain (B.
Haley, The Relationship of the Toxic Effects of Mercury to Exacerbation of
the Medical Conditions Classified as Alzheimer's Disease, Nordisk Tidsskrift
for Biologisk Medisin, 2003.) Therefore, amalgams likely created a cytotoxic
environment in situ as report by others also.

12. By definition, an amalgam is a mixture of uncharged metal powders in
elemental form that is mixed with liquid mercury to form an emulsion that
hardens with time. Amalgams are not an alloy similar to steel or bronze.
Furthermore, in the case of dental amalgam, all of the elements that are
used to form amalgam have totally filled electron shells and form what is
known as metallic bonds. Mercury is a liquid because it makes very weak
metallic bonds, even with other metals, and this bonding is reversible
allowing bound mercury to become unbound and escape as a vaporous atom, Hg0,
at a rate that is significant. As such, there does not exist an irreversible
covalent bond between mercury and the other metals that is caused by two
elements binding to fill in shells with missing electrons. This means that,
unlike most chemically bound molecules, the elements that are mixed in an
amalgam do not lose their individual elemental properties on release from
the amalgam, unless this release is caused by electro-galvanism. Simply put,
mercury vapor emitting from amalgams does not lose any of its toxicity
because it was at one time inside of a dental amalgam. As shown in study
after study, mercury vapor is emitted from amalgams at substantial and toxic
amounts, and is then distributed within the human body. The claims made by
ADA spokesperson, even by one past director for the NIDCR, that mercury in
amalgams is like sodium in table salt, or like hydrogen in water, represent
what would be considered as preposterous by anyone knowledgeable in freshman
level general chemistry.

13. As to the second misconception, all of the metal elements in amalgam,
including mercury, are not biologically inactive. As noted in numerous
studies, some of which are cited herein, mercury emits from amalgams on a 24
hour a day basis.9 The emissions are increased based on the introduction of
hot substances, such as beverages (coffee and the sort), with chewing (such
as chewing gum or food) and with galvanism as Hg (the simple electrical
current set up between different metals in the mouth and ionic saliva.)
Additionally, numerous interactions cause the scratching of the amalgams,
again causing an increase in mercury vapor emissions. This includes the
grinding of teeth. Once the mercury vapor is emitted it enters the body and
is converted to toxic Hg2+ inside of cells by a specific enzyme (catalyase).
In the blood it is carried to various organs, including, but not limited to,
the brain as supported by various studies, some of which are cited herein.
Based on this, mercury vapor from dental amalgams cannot be said to be
biologically inactive as it is rapidly converted to a toxic form once inside
a cell.

14. Equally unsupportable, scientifically, is any "estimate" that amalgams
emit mercury at minute amounts under a tenth of a microgram per day as
suggested by an ADA pro-amalgam spokesperson at the last congressional
Hearing. Applying simple math to this "estimate" of 0.1
micrograms/day/amalgam confirms this inaccuracy. If one would divide the 0.1
microgram/day amount by 8, 640 (24 hours/day X 60 minutes/hour X 6 ten
second intervals/minute) to calculate the amount of mercury in micrograms
available for a ten second mercury vapor analysis. This equals 1.16 X 10-5
micrograms total. Assume the oral cavity is somewhere between 10cm3 to 100
cm3 volume (note that 1 milliliter equals 1 cm3) then 1.16 X 10-6
micrograms/cm3 or 1.16 X 10-7micrograms/cm3 would be obtained from a single
amalgam. Note that the conventional vapor sniffer reads at its lowest
setting about 10 micrograms/meter3 or 10 micrograms/ 1,000,000 cm3 or
0.000001 or 10-6 micrograms/cm3. Therefore, the readings from 0.1 microgram
mercury released/day/amalgam in a 10 second reading would give values in a
10 cm3 oral volume that are barely if at all detectable. In a 100 cm3 oral
volume it would take about 8-9 fillings to get a minimal reading on a vapor
sniffer. This indicates that it would almost be impossible to detect mercury
emitting from one amalgam or several if the "estimate" of the ADA
spokesperson were accurate.

However, the mercury vapor sniffer has been used by numerous individuals
to detect mercury vapor in a human mouth or oral volume, and in my opinion
the levels reported would underestimate the amount of mercury emitting from
a single amalgam because of the following. Consider that somewhere between
one-half to five-sixths of the mercury released would enter the body through
the tooth (that area of the amalgam that exists below the visibly exposed
amalgam surface) and not into the oral air. While the margins between a
tooth and an amalgam filling are small they are large compared to an atom of
mercury vapor. So mercury does enter readily through this route. In
addition, some mercury in the oral air would be rapidly absorbed from the
air into the saliva and oral mucosa since mercury is a lipophilic (or
hydrophobic) vapor. This mercury would not be measured by the mercury
analyzer and yet would enter the body. Further, as the mercury analyzer
pulls mercury containing oral air into the analysis chamber, mercury free
ambient air rushes into the oral cavity decreasing the mercury
concentration.

Taking all of this into account one can calculate that most mercury
analyzers could not detect this "estimated" 0.10 micrograms/day level of
mercury even if the test subject had several amalgams. However, it is quite
easy to detect mercury emitting from one amalgam using these analyzers.
Therefore, it is impossible for daily emissions from amalgam to be anything
less than the detection limits of an analyzer in a 10 second test.
Separately, if amalgam is gently rubbed with a toothbrush the amount of
mercury emitted, as measured by a commercial mercury vapor sniffer,
increases dramatically. As I have cited herein, mercury emissions from
amalgams increase substantially when hot liquids are introduced or when the
individual is chewing.10

15. Additionally, it is also important to note that measurement of mercury
emissions by a mercury vapor analyzer in the human mouth tends to greatly
underestimatethe amount of mercury exiting the amalgam as it does not
measure much of the mercury that is rapidly absorbed in saliva and oral
mucosa. Also, as the analyzer pulls mercury contaminated air out of the
mouth, mercury concentrations are also decreased as mercury free ambient air
rushes in the oral cavity.

16. It is also important to note that when it comes to amalgam fillings,
the concern is chronic, not acute, exposures. Basically, in the case of an
acute exposure, one would be exposed to a large amount of mercury in a
single dosage that, in and of itself, may or may not be toxic. In the case
of chronic exposures, while an individual exposure may not be toxic, the
concern is the sum of the exposures. With amalgams, the exposure is
constant, 24 hours a day (chronic), and increases with the introduction of
various elements, such as chewing and the like, and also the introduction of
other chemicals which may act synergistically with mercury. Furthermore,
mercury accumulates within the human body in various organs and remains
there for prolonged periods of time as a "retention toxicity." A "retention
toxicity" from mercury differs from most conventional toxicities as the
toxin is not removed, but remains and builds up. For example, getting drunk
or alcohol toxic one night, the toxicity is cleared by the body as it
metabolizes the alcohol to other compounds. Mercury, being an element cannot
be metabolically changed and, most importantly, forms a long-term attachment
(or covalent bond) with proteins inside of cells and organelles, causing
what is called retention toxicity as the level of mercury can build up with
continuous chronic exposure.

In fact, mercury has been shown to remain in human organs for years after
initial exposure accumulating in the brain, kidney, and lung.11 Specific to
amalgam and the central nervous system, low doses of mercury vapor enter and
remain within motor neurons for prolonged periods of time. According to
various studies, these are levels well within the WHO guidelines for
occupational exposure.12 Simply put, these published studies show that
amounts of mercury that are considered within safe limits reaches the
central nervous system, and accumulates to toxic levels via "retention
toxicity." Mercury can be lodged in various organs causing toxicity for a
prolonged period of time. This is of particular concern with amalgams, as
mercury continuously accumulates in a given subject for years, adding up to
potentially toxic levels in many individuals, including, as noted below, the
developing fetus.

17. Any claim on the part of the ADA or established dental organizations
that a zinc oxide layer is formed on the amalgams that decreases mercury
release can only be true if an individual is not using his or her teeth.
Note that zinc is listed at "trace levels" in amalgams. How can trace levels
cover the 50% mercury? However, in the real world, any zinc oxide layer is
easily removed by slight abrasion such as chewing food or brushing the
teeth. Further, my laboratory has confirmed that solutions in which amalgams
have been soaked can cause the inhibition of brain proteins that are
inhibited by adding mercury chloride, and these are the same enzymes
inhibited in AD brain samples.

18. Even more concerning is that at least some of the inorganic mercury
that is emitted from amalgams is converted to methylmercury, a more toxic,
organic form of mercury.13 This strongly indicates that "organo mercury
species" are indeed capable of being made in the human body and likely
explains the appearance of methylmercury in the blood and urine of
individuals who do not eat seafood, but do have amalgam fillings.

19. The bottom line is that amalgams emit significant levels of neurotoxic
mercury that are injurious to human health and would exacerbate the medical
condition of those individuals with neurological diseases such as
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis ("ALS" or "Lou Gehrig's Disease") 14 ,
Multiple Sclerosis ("MS"), Parkinson's, autism and Alzheimer's Disease
("AD"). For example, mercury inhibits the same enzymes in normal brain
tissues as are inhibited in Alzheimer's Disease.15 AD is pathologically
confirmed post-mortem by the appearance of neuro-fibillary tangles (NFTs)
and amyloid plaques in brain tissue. Published research, within the past
year, has shown that exposure of neurons in culture to sub-lethal doses of
mercury (much less than is observed in human brain tissue) causes the
formations of NFTs,16 the increased secretion of beta-amyloid protein and
the hyper-phosphorylation of a protein called Tau.17All three of these
mercury-induced aberrancies are regularly identified by world class scholars
as the major diagnostic markers for AD. Yet the ADA states there is no
scientific data published to indicate that mercury from amalgams could
contribute to these diseases.

20. Furthermore, mercury from amalgams is transferred from a pregnant
mother to the developing fetus, causing increased mercury body burden in
children solely based on the presence of amalgams in the mother.18 Mercury
exposure is even more devastating to the developing brain than to an adult
brain. This has been shown in study after study culminating with the recent
publication by Dr. Lorscheider, et al., showing brain neuron degeneration
from small amounts of mercury and conclusively proving that such
degeneration does not occur with the introduction of any other element,
including lead.19 The research mentioned above on the levels of mercury in
the birth-hair of children increasing with the mother's amalgam clearly
demonstrates that mercury from dental amalgams enters the child in utero as
has been previously reported.

21. Also, low level exposures like those associated with amalgam fillings
and the resultant increase in the mercury body burden are toxic to the
central nervous system.20 These can cause from severe to subtle
neuropsychological functions such as depression of performance, intellectual
functioning, impairments of attention, impairment of short-term memory
function, visual judgment of angles and directions, psychomotor retardation
and personality changes. As further proof that these are mercury related,
scientists have shown that in some cases, the effects can be reversed simply
by removal of the source of mercury intoxication, together with proper
medical treatment. 21 Mercury from fillings also leads to "considerable
concentrations of [mercury] in the olfactory bulbs."22 This may also explain
the phenomena of Alzheimer's patients losing their sense of smell in the
early stages of the disease. (Kovacs, T., Cairns, N.J., Lantos, P.L.
Olfactory Centres in Alzheimer's disease: Olfactory bulb is Involved in
Early Braak's Stages. Neuroreport 12(2): 285-288, 2001 and Gray, A.J.,
Staples, V., Murren, K., Dahariwal, A. and Benthan, P. Olfactory
Identification is Impaired in Clinic-Based Patients with Vascular Dementia
and Senile Dementia of Alzheimer's type. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 16 (5):
513-517, 2001.)

22. Mercury from dental fillings has also been associated with adverse
effects in the cardiovascular system, including high blood pressure, low
heart rate, low hemoglobin, and low hematocrit. 23

23. Many of the experiments that show mercury emission and exposure from
dental amalgams are so simple and inexpensive to do that they could have
should have been completed many years ago, in the 1950's and 60's. Yet, they
have not been done, or at least not reported on, despite numerous requests
by concerned citizens by the agencies and bureaucracies that today testify
that amalgams are safe. This includes the ADA and dental branch of the FDA.
It is important to note that I do not hold the entire FDA responsible for
the actions of the dental branch of the FDA. Other researchers also doing
these tests do not find amalgams safe based on the continuous, chronic
release of mercury. The fact that both the national Academy of sciences and
the EPA warn the government of the dangers of the level of mercury found in
Americans and the NIH and WHO studies that amalgams are the major
contributor to the mercury body burden of humans. Couple this with the
certain fact that mercury, and only mercury of the toxic metals, can mimic
the aberrant biochemistry and produce the components of the widely accepted
diagnostic hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease and it should be obvious that
all exposures to mercury should be held to the lowest levels.

24. Finally, science has produced compelling evidence at the biological
level that mercury can cause the aberrancies found in Alzheimer's disease.
Recent research has shown both strong biological plausibility and
epidemiological studies regarding ethylmercury exposure from thimerosal in
vaccinations being the cause of the devastating disease of autism and
related disorder. Yet, our organizations and bureaucracies formed to protect
us deny even the possibility that mercury or organic mercury is involved in
the causation or exacerbation of these diseases. One only needs to know the
history of Pink disease (acyrodynia) to understand that proving mercury
involvement in disease is quite difficult due to genetic susceptibility.
However, all of the scientific and biomedical facts together emphasizes the
need for congressional action to stop the exposure of Americans to mercury
and organic mercury compounds.