If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
"cathyb" wrote in message oups.com... Jan Drew wrote: Notice how it does not see Mark responding to Jason What are you gibbering on about now, Jan? Remedial reading. Remedial English. snip |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
Jan Drew wrote: "cathyb" wrote in message oups.com... Jan Drew wrote: Notice how it does not see Mark responding to Jason What are you gibbering on about now, Jan? Remedial reading. Remedial English. Now you're getting it! Now go away and write a post that makes sense, Jan. Explain what on earth you were gibbering on about. snip |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
In article .com,
"cathyb" wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , "Vernon" there@atthere wrote: "Jason Johnson" wrote in message ... In article , "Vernon" there@atthere wrote: "Jason Johnson" wrote in message ... In article , Mark Probert wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , Mark Probert wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , Mark Probert wrote: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...gi?artid=3D12= 80342 Abstract Thimerosal is a preservative that has been used in manufacturi= ng vaccines since the 1930s. Reports have indicated that infants = can receive ethylmercury (in the form of thimerosal) at or above t= he U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for methylmercury exposure, depending on the exact vaccinations, schedule, and size of the infant. In this study we compared the systemic disposition and brain distribution of total and inorganic mercury in infant monkeys after thimerosal exposure with those exposed to MeHg. Monkeys were exposed to MeHg (via oral gavage) or vaccines containing thimerosal (via intramuscular injection) at birth and 1, 2, and 3 weeks of age. Total blood Hg levels were determined 2, 4, and 7 days after each exposure. Total and inorganic brain Hg levels were assessed 2, 4, 7, or = 28 days after the last exposure. The initial and terminal half-life of= Hg in blood after thimerosal exposure was 2.1 and 8.6 days, respectively, which are significantly shorter than the elimination half-life= of Hg after MeHg exposure at 21.5 days. Brain concentrations of tota= l Hg were significantly lower by approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared with the MeHg infants, whereas the avera= ge brain-to-blood concentration ratio was slightly higher for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (3.5 =B1 0.5 vs. 2.5 =B1 0.3). A hi= gher percentage of the total Hg in the brain was in the form of inorganic Hg for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (34% vs. 7%). The results indicate that MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg. Knowledge of the toxicokinetics and developmental toxicity of thimerosal is needed to afford a meaningful assessment of the developmental effects of thimerosal-containi= ng vaccines. -------------------- Clearly, the claim by the Mercury Militia that it accumulates after each vaccination is not supported by this research. Ethyl Mercury, = the byproduct of thimerosal metabolism is eliminated rapidly, and = is gone before the next vaccination. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ How was this study funded? Is that the best you can do? Whine about funding. Obviously, you = did not bother to even attempt to read it. You answer is at the link I posted. Do your own homework. Read the study and try to find fault with methodology, etc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mark, I read the study that is posted above and have read other research studies that have had similar conclusions. I have also read other research studies that have had different conclusions. I posted the link since the entire study is available. Now, specify what other *studies*, with references, have different findings? I cannot find fault with this studies methodology. Chemistry does not change. Completely independant of taking any side here, Chemistry (the observation of elemental constructs and reactions) always changes. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vernon, It depends on what Mark meant when he used the term "chemistry". Mark should explain what the meant. Perhaps he was referring to "natural la= ws". No, he was referring to chemistry, which doesn't change. Vernon appears to be incapable of saying that our understanding of chemistry certainly progresses without redefining chemistry. Chemistry, however, does not change. It's been over 25 years since I have taken any science classes but see= m to recall learning that natural laws never change. Jason ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sort of my point. No, not really. Add what I posted to a constant change in what people, especially college professor book writers define as "Natural laws". Add to that the basic = fact that very few professors have a clue about the various elemental (not chemistry) effects on statistics. Good lord, Vern, you're certainly good at saying nothing. Your link MAY be 100% accurate, but still mostly opinion. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vernon, Good points. There weren't any points, Jason. Do try and explain what vern's point's were. Because it certainly looked to me as though our little Walter Mitty was just trying to say that people with more education than him simply don't know anything. Again. Many college science professors are teaching lots of false information to their students. Really? They want to be politically correct so teach students that global warming is caused by pollution. Of course, pollution may play a role. However, anyone that has a degree in natural science knows that global warming happened several times in the history of the earth even before mankind was on the earth. Global warming could very well be the result of those same factors that caused global warming before mankind was on this = earth. Any science professor employed by a state university would be fired (by his politically correct bosses) if he taught his or her students that global warming was NOT caused by pollution. Really? If a science professor in a state university developed a theory that conflicted with evolution theory, that professor would be fired by his politically correct bosses. Only if he couldn't back it up with some evidence, Jason. Which, to date, hasn't been done. Academic freedom is no longer a reality. I'm sorry that you feel that people actually having to back up their hypotheses with evidence indicates a lack of academic freedom, Jason. Or more precisely, I'm sorry for you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And I also feel sorry for you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
Jason Johnson wrote: In article .com, "cathyb" wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , "Vernon" there@atthere wrote: "Jason Johnson" wrote in message ... In article , "Vernon" there@atthere wrote: "Jason Johnson" wrote in message ... In article , Mark Probert wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , Mark Probert wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , Mark Probert wrote: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...gi?artid=3D12= 80342 Abstract Thimerosal is a preservative that has been used in manufacturi= ng vaccines since the 1930s. Reports have indicated that infants = can receive ethylmercury (in the form of thimerosal) at or above t= he U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for methylmercury exposure, depending on the exact vaccinations, schedule, and size of the infant. In this study we compared the systemic disposition and brain distribution of total and inorganic mercury in infant monkeys after thimerosal exposure with those exposed to MeHg. Monkeys were exposed to MeHg (via oral gavage) or vaccines containing thimerosal (via intramuscular injection) at birth and 1, 2, and 3 weeks of age. Total blood Hg levels were determined 2, 4, and 7 days after each exposure. Total and inorganic brain Hg levels were assessed 2, 4, 7, or = 28 days after the last exposure. The initial and terminal half-life of= Hg in blood after thimerosal exposure was 2.1 and 8.6 days, respectively, which are significantly shorter than the elimination half-life= of Hg after MeHg exposure at 21.5 days. Brain concentrations of tota= l Hg were significantly lower by approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared with the MeHg infants, whereas the avera= ge brain-to-blood concentration ratio was slightly higher for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (3.5 =B1 0.5 vs. 2.5 =B1 0.3). A hi= gher percentage of the total Hg in the brain was in the form of inorganic Hg for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (34% vs. 7%). The results indicate that MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg. Knowledge of the toxicokinetics and developmental toxicity of thimerosal is needed to afford a meaningful assessment of the developmental effects of thimerosal-containi= ng vaccines. -------------------- Clearly, the claim by the Mercury Militia that it accumulates after each vaccination is not supported by this research. Ethyl Mercury, = the byproduct of thimerosal metabolism is eliminated rapidly, and = is gone before the next vaccination. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ How was this study funded? Is that the best you can do? Whine about funding. Obviously, you = did not bother to even attempt to read it. You answer is at the link I posted. Do your own homework. Read the study and try to find fault with methodology, etc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mark, I read the study that is posted above and have read other research studies that have had similar conclusions. I have also read other research studies that have had different conclusions. I posted the link since the entire study is available. Now, specify what other *studies*, with references, have different findings? I cannot find fault with this studies methodology. Chemistry does not change. Completely independant of taking any side here, Chemistry (the observation of elemental constructs and reactions) always changes. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vernon, It depends on what Mark meant when he used the term "chemistry". Mark should explain what the meant. Perhaps he was referring to "natural la= ws". No, he was referring to chemistry, which doesn't change. Vernon appears to be incapable of saying that our understanding of chemistry certainly progresses without redefining chemistry. Chemistry, however, does not change. It's been over 25 years since I have taken any science classes but see= m to recall learning that natural laws never change. Jason ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sort of my point. No, not really. Add what I posted to a constant change in what people, especially college professor book writers define as "Natural laws". Add to that the basic = fact that very few professors have a clue about the various elemental (not chemistry) effects on statistics. Good lord, Vern, you're certainly good at saying nothing. Your link MAY be 100% accurate, but still mostly opinion. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vernon, Good points. There weren't any points, Jason. Do try and explain what vern's point's were. Because it certainly looked to me as though our little Walter Mitty was just trying to say that people with more education than him simply don't know anything. Again. Many college science professors are teaching lots of false information to their students. Really? They want to be politically correct so teach students that global warming is caused by pollution. Of course, pollution may play a role. However, anyone that has a degree in natural science knows that global warming happened several times in the history of the earth even before mankind was on the earth. Global warming could very well be the result of those same factors that caused global warming before mankind was on this = earth. Any science professor employed by a state university would be fired (by his politically correct bosses) if he taught his or her students that global warming was NOT caused by pollution. Really? If a science professor in a state university developed a theory that conflicted with evolution theory, that professor would be fired by his politically correct bosses. Only if he couldn't back it up with some evidence, Jason. Which, to date, hasn't been done. Academic freedom is no longer a reality. I'm sorry that you feel that people actually having to back up their hypotheses with evidence indicates a lack of academic freedom, Jason. Or more precisely, I'm sorry for you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And I also feel sorry for you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Well, that's nice, but I note you couldn't explain Vincent's "points", or come up with any examples of alleged lack of academic freedom. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
cathyb wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article .com, "cathyb" wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , "Vernon" there@atthere wrote: "Jason Johnson" wrote in message ... In article , "Vernon" there@atthere wrote: "Jason Johnson" wrote in message ... In article , Mark Probert wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , Mark Probert wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , Mark Probert wrote: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...gi?artid=3D12= 80342 Abstract Thimerosal is a preservative that has been used in manufacturi= ng vaccines since the 1930s. Reports have indicated that infants = can receive ethylmercury (in the form of thimerosal) at or above t= he U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for methylmercury exposure, depending on the exact vaccinations, schedule, and size of the infant. In this study we compared the systemic disposition and brain distribution of total and inorganic mercury in infant monkeys after thimerosal exposure with those exposed to MeHg. Monkeys were exposed to MeHg (via oral gavage) or vaccines containing thimerosal (via intramuscular injection) at birth and 1, 2, and 3 weeks of age. Total blood Hg levels were determined 2, 4, and 7 days after each exposure. Total and inorganic brain Hg levels were assessed 2, 4, 7, or = 28 days after the last exposure. The initial and terminal half-life of= Hg in blood after thimerosal exposure was 2.1 and 8.6 days, respectively, which are significantly shorter than the elimination half-life= of Hg after MeHg exposure at 21.5 days. Brain concentrations of tota= l Hg were significantly lower by approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared with the MeHg infants, whereas the avera= ge brain-to-blood concentration ratio was slightly higher for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (3.5 =B1 0.5 vs. 2.5 =B1 0.3). A hi= gher percentage of the total Hg in the brain was in the form of inorganic Hg for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (34% vs. 7%). The results indicate that MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg. Knowledge of the toxicokinetics and developmental toxicity of thimerosal is needed to afford a meaningful assessment of the developmental effects of thimerosal-containi= ng vaccines. -------------------- Clearly, the claim by the Mercury Militia that it accumulates after each vaccination is not supported by this research. Ethyl Mercury, = the byproduct of thimerosal metabolism is eliminated rapidly, and = is gone before the next vaccination. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ How was this study funded? Is that the best you can do? Whine about funding. Obviously, you = did not bother to even attempt to read it. You answer is at the link I posted. Do your own homework. Read the study and try to find fault with methodology, etc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mark, I read the study that is posted above and have read other research studies that have had similar conclusions. I have also read other research studies that have had different conclusions. I posted the link since the entire study is available. Now, specify what other *studies*, with references, have different findings? I cannot find fault with this studies methodology. Chemistry does not change. Completely independant of taking any side here, Chemistry (the observation of elemental constructs and reactions) always changes. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vernon, It depends on what Mark meant when he used the term "chemistry". Mark should explain what the meant. Perhaps he was referring to "natural la= ws". No, he was referring to chemistry, which doesn't change. Vernon appears to be incapable of saying that our understanding of chemistry certainly progresses without redefining chemistry. Chemistry, however, does not change. It's been over 25 years since I have taken any science classes but see= m to recall learning that natural laws never change. Jason ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sort of my point. No, not really. Add what I posted to a constant change in what people, especially college professor book writers define as "Natural laws". Add to that the basic = fact that very few professors have a clue about the various elemental (not chemistry) effects on statistics. Good lord, Vern, you're certainly good at saying nothing. Your link MAY be 100% accurate, but still mostly opinion. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vernon, Good points. There weren't any points, Jason. Do try and explain what vern's point's were. Because it certainly looked to me as though our little Walter Mitty was just trying to say that people with more education than him simply don't know anything. Again. Many college science professors are teaching lots of false information to their students. Really? They want to be politically correct so teach students that global warming is caused by pollution. Of course, pollution may play a role. However, anyone that has a degree in natural science knows that global warming happened several times in the history of the earth even before mankind was on the earth. Global warming could very well be the result of those same factors that caused global warming before mankind was on this = earth. Any science professor employed by a state university would be fired (by his politically correct bosses) if he taught his or her students that global warming was NOT caused by pollution. Really? If a science professor in a state university developed a theory that conflicted with evolution theory, that professor would be fired by his politically correct bosses. Only if he couldn't back it up with some evidence, Jason. Which, to date, hasn't been done. Academic freedom is no longer a reality. I'm sorry that you feel that people actually having to back up their hypotheses with evidence indicates a lack of academic freedom, Jason. Or more precisely, I'm sorry for you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And I also feel sorry for you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Well, that's nice, but I note you couldn't explain Vincent's "points", or come up with any examples of alleged lack of academic freedom. Oops. Vernon's "points". |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
"cathyb" wrote in message ups.com... Jan Drew wrote: "cathyb" wrote in message oups.com... Jan Drew wrote: Notice how it does not see Mark responding to Jason What are you gibbering on about now, Jan? Remedial reading. Remedial English. Now you're getting it! Yep. Now YOU don't Now go away and write a post that makes sense, Jan. Explain what on earth you were gibbering on about. Notice how it does not see Mark responding to Jason. That doesn't make sense. Poor Rosalind. snip |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
"cathyb" wrote in message ups.com... cathyb wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article .com, "cathyb" wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , "Vernon" there@atthere wrote: "Jason Johnson" wrote in message ... In article , "Vernon" there@atthere wrote: "Jason Johnson" wrote in message ... In article , Mark Probert wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , Mark Probert wrote: Jason Johnson wrote: In article , Mark Probert wrote: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...gi?artid=3D12= 80342 Abstract Thimerosal is a preservative that has been used in manufacturi= ng vaccines since the 1930s. Reports have indicated that infants = can receive ethylmercury (in the form of thimerosal) at or above t= he U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for methylmercury exposure, depending on the exact vaccinations, schedule, and size of the infant. In this study we compared the systemic disposition and brain distribution of total and inorganic mercury in infant monkeys after thimerosal exposure with those exposed to MeHg. Monkeys were exposed to MeHg (via oral gavage) or vaccines containing thimerosal (via intramuscular injection) at birth and 1, 2, and 3 weeks of age. Total blood Hg levels were determined 2, 4, and 7 days after each exposure. Total and inorganic brain Hg levels were assessed 2, 4, 7, or = 28 days after the last exposure. The initial and terminal half-life of= Hg in blood after thimerosal exposure was 2.1 and 8.6 days, respectively, which are significantly shorter than the elimination half-life= of Hg after MeHg exposure at 21.5 days. Brain concentrations of tota= l Hg were significantly lower by approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared with the MeHg infants, whereas the avera= ge brain-to-blood concentration ratio was slightly higher for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (3.5 =B1 0.5 vs. 2.5 =B1 0.3). A hi= gher percentage of the total Hg in the brain was in the form of inorganic Hg for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (34% vs. 7%). The results indicate that MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg. Knowledge of the toxicokinetics and developmental toxicity of thimerosal is needed to afford a meaningful assessment of the developmental effects of thimerosal-containi= ng vaccines. -------------------- Clearly, the claim by the Mercury Militia that it accumulates after each vaccination is not supported by this research. Ethyl Mercury, = the byproduct of thimerosal metabolism is eliminated rapidly, and = is gone before the next vaccination. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ How was this study funded? Is that the best you can do? Whine about funding. Obviously, you = did not bother to even attempt to read it. You answer is at the link I posted. Do your own homework. Read the study and try to find fault with methodology, etc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mark, I read the study that is posted above and have read other research studies that have had similar conclusions. I have also read other research studies that have had different conclusions. I posted the link since the entire study is available. Now, specify what other *studies*, with references, have different findings? I cannot find fault with this studies methodology. Chemistry does not change. Completely independant of taking any side here, Chemistry (the observation of elemental constructs and reactions) always changes. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vernon, It depends on what Mark meant when he used the term "chemistry". Mark should explain what the meant. Perhaps he was referring to "natural la= ws". No, he was referring to chemistry, which doesn't change. Vernon appears to be incapable of saying that our understanding of chemistry certainly progresses without redefining chemistry. Chemistry, however, does not change. It's been over 25 years since I have taken any science classes but see= m to recall learning that natural laws never change. Jason ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sort of my point. No, not really. Add what I posted to a constant change in what people, especially college professor book writers define as "Natural laws". Add to that the basic = fact that very few professors have a clue about the various elemental (not chemistry) effects on statistics. Good lord, Vern, you're certainly good at saying nothing. Your link MAY be 100% accurate, but still mostly opinion. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vernon, Good points. There weren't any points, Jason. Do try and explain what vern's point's were. Because it certainly looked to me as though our little Walter Mitty was just trying to say that people with more education than him simply don't know anything. Again. Many college science professors are teaching lots of false information to their students. Really? They want to be politically correct so teach students that global warming is caused by pollution. Of course, pollution may play a role. However, anyone that has a degree in natural science knows that global warming happened several times in the history of the earth even before mankind was on the earth. Global warming could very well be the result of those same factors that caused global warming before mankind was on this = earth. Any science professor employed by a state university would be fired (by his politically correct bosses) if he taught his or her students that global warming was NOT caused by pollution. Really? If a science professor in a state university developed a theory that conflicted with evolution theory, that professor would be fired by his politically correct bosses. Only if he couldn't back it up with some evidence, Jason. Which, to date, hasn't been done. Academic freedom is no longer a reality. I'm sorry that you feel that people actually having to back up their hypotheses with evidence indicates a lack of academic freedom, Jason. Or more precisely, I'm sorry for you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And I also feel sorry for you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Well, that's nice, but I note you couldn't explain Vincent's "points", or come up with any examples of alleged lack of academic freedom. Oops. Vernon's "points". Like the Oops Jacob........................... |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
In article , john wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... john wrote: LOL. Get the facts http://www.crazyperson.to/IDon'tUnderstandScience.html If by fact you mean the crazy rambling of people who don't understand science, can't form a cogent argument, and address studies that prove them wrong.... then yes there are lots of facts there. Eric It's really very simple Eric, see if you can follow this: Deadly Mercury Courtesy of www.healthmyths.net By Shane Ellison, M.Sc., Ex-Drug Chemist Mercury is a neuro/nephrotoxin. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) insists that the upper limit for mercury exposure is 0.1ug/kg/day and the World Health Organization (WHO) 0.47ug/kg/day. At this exposure humans experience negative central nervous system (CNS) effects such as tremors, mood changes, shyness and slowed sensory and nerve function. Long term damage is possible. Actually, if I read the standards right, the new value is lower than that, 1.6 ug/kg/week., so more like 0.23 ug/kg/day. As of 2003, that was the WHO recommendation, anyway. By the liberal WHO standards, this upper limit equates to 2.13ug (0.45ug by EPA standards) for a 10lb baby. According to the Food and Drug Administration a single vaccine can deliver a whopping 25.0ug of mercury! See if YOU can understand THIS, john-boy: that's the standard for dietary methylmercury. Says nothing about thimerosal. And they are NOT equivalent. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
Hmm. The WHO
Source Average Human Daily Dose of MercuryDental Amalgam 3.0-17.0 ug/day (hgvapor) "David Wright" wrote in message m... In article , john wrote: wrote in message roups.com... john wrote: LOL. Get the facts http://www.crazyperson.to/IDon'tUnderstandScience.html If by fact you mean the crazy rambling of people who don't understand science, can't form a cogent argument, and address studies that prove them wrong.... then yes there are lots of facts there. Eric It's really very simple Eric, see if you can follow this: Deadly Mercury Courtesy of www.healthmyths.net By Shane Ellison, M.Sc., Ex-Drug Chemist Mercury is a neuro/nephrotoxin. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) insists that the upper limit for mercury exposure is 0.1ug/kg/day and the World Health Organization (WHO) 0.47ug/kg/day. At this exposure humans experience negative central nervous system (CNS) effects such as tremors, mood changes, shyness and slowed sensory and nerve function. Long term damage is possible. Actually, if I read the standards right, the new value is lower than that, 1.6 ug/kg/week., so more like 0.23 ug/kg/day. As of 2003, that was the WHO recommendation, anyway. By the liberal WHO standards, this upper limit equates to 2.13ug (0.45ug by EPA standards) for a 10lb baby. According to the Food and Drug Administration a single vaccine can deliver a whopping 25.0ug of mercury! See if YOU can understand THIS, john-boy: that's the standard for dietary methylmercury. Says nothing about thimerosal. And they are NOT equivalent. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
Jan Drew wrote: "cathyb" wrote in message ups.com... Jan Drew wrote: "cathyb" wrote in message oups.com... Jan Drew wrote: Notice how it does not see Mark responding to Jason What are you gibbering on about now, Jan? Remedial reading. Remedial English. Now you're getting it! Yep. Now YOU don't Now go away and write a post that makes sense, Jan. Explain what on earth you were gibbering on about. Notice how it does not see Mark responding to Jason. That doesn't make sense. Poor Rosalind. Oh, dear. You're slipping again, Jan. Please do explain your gibberish. snip |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vaccine quote of the week by Bernard Rimland, PhD | john | Kids Health | 164 | July 28th 06 02:59 PM |
Vaccine quote of the week by Bernard Rimland, PhD | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 12 | July 22nd 06 10:45 PM |
MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS | Bryan Heit | Kids Health | 12 | July 7th 06 12:18 PM |
Combination vaccines safe for children | Mark Probert | Kids Health | 50 | August 19th 05 06:43 PM |
THE REAL SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OF AMALGAM | LadyLollipop | Kids Health | 48 | April 3rd 05 11:18 AM |