Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24975075/ But don't worry, it is perfectly ok to inject it directly into infants and young childrens bloodstreams! :doh: Second most toxic metal known to man behind Plutonium. :doh: The FDA just became a "Conspiracy Theorist).... :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 For those who missed Ken's reference to giving mercury to kids, I'm assuming he's talking about its use as a preservative in vaccines. Two things. First, the FDA was bullied on this. The science still doesn't show that mercury is harmful. Second, look up dose-response relationship. Just about anything is toxic in large enough amounts. Conversely, if you don't get a high enough dose of a known toxin, you won't suffer adverse effects unless you're getting a decent load of mercury from elsewhere. Be careful Ken. I hear that tinfoil is toxic too. Maybe you need to start putting a layer of wax paper between your hat and your head. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Be careful Ken. I hear that tinfoil is toxic too. Maybe you need to start putting a layer of wax paper between your hat and your head. :laugh: zing! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 I also hear lead is extremely dangerous if you drop it on a baby's head. You shouldn't put heavy metals in your body. A big NO **** award goes out for that one. Really Ken, injecting it directly into an infant? Just a bit of hyperbole there, no? Ever met an infant with fillings? Giving a pregnant woman a filling is not "injecting it directly into an infant" and since most dentists don't even use mercury anymore, it's hardly appropriate. Ken's Klaxon. Ringing it's head off yet again. What's next? We going to find out drinking gasoline is potentially unsafe? Heavens! Why didn't they TELL us? ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 I also hear lead is extremely dangerous if you drop it on a baby's head.You shouldn't put heavy metals in your body. A big NO **** award goes out for that one. Really Ken, injecting it directly into an infant? Just a bit of hyperbole there, no? Ever met an infant with fillings? Giving a pregnant woman a filling is not "injecting it directly into an infant" and since most dentists don't even use mercury anymore, it's hardly appropriate. Ken's Klaxon. Ringing it's head off yet again. What's next? We going to find out drinking gasoline is potentially unsafe? Heavens! Why didn't they TELL us? ~Bang No Hyperbole at all. Flu shots have a mercury preservative and are mandated for all children 6 months and older in NJ and soon to be everywhere else. And if you believe that the rest of the vaccines do not have mercury....well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 For those who missed Ken's reference to giving mercury to kids, I'm assuming he's talking about its use as a preservative in vaccines.Two things. First, the FDA was bullied on this. The science still doesn't show that mercury is harmful. Second, look up dose-response relationship. Just about anything is toxic in large enough amounts. Conversely, if you don't get a high enough dose of a known toxin, you won't suffer adverse effects unless you're getting a decent load of mercury from elsewhere. Be careful Ken. I hear that tinfoil is toxic too. Maybe you need to start putting a layer of wax paper between your hat and your head. :laugh: The FDA was bullied? Looks like they settled a case because they knew they were going to lose, kinda like the vaccine/autism case a few months ago. Do you know what mercury is? I suggest you look it up on the EPA's website if you don't. If you do, then why would you question its toxicity? For the record, 1 drop of mercury could have serious health ailments just breathing the vapors in the same room. What part of the 2nd MOST TOXIC metal known to man do you not understand. Repeat that last sentence over until it sinks in.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 mmmm... mercury :hungry: :hungry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 My wife is pregnant and just had some fillings put in... not sure if they had mercury or not but her teeth are screwed up and she needed them fixed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Be careful Ken. I hear that tinfoil is toxic too. Maybe you need to start putting a layer of wax paper between your hat and your head. :laugh: I also hear lead is extremely dangerous if you drop it on a baby's head. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Good job boys! Okay Ken, we get it. You don't like vaccines. So don't have your kids vaccinated...all but 2 states allow for religious/philosophical objections, so you're probably good to go. I suggest you think about the fact that EVERYTHING is toxic at a a certain dose, even water, gasp. It's called risk to benefit ratio in medicine and public health. Small risk with vaccines, but major benefits to public health and welfare. By the way, good article in TIME magazine out this month regarding vaccinations and the ethical considerations in the debate against the individual's rights vs. common welfare. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1808438,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 The FDA was bullied? Looks like they settled a case because they knew they were going to lose, kinda like the vaccine/autism case a few months ago. Do you know what mercury is? I suggest you look it up on the EPA's website if you don't. If you do, then why would you question its toxicity? For the record, 1 drop of mercury could have serious health ailments just breathing the vapors in the same room. What part of the 2nd MOST TOXIC metal known to man do you not understand. Repeat that last sentence over until it sinks in.... I'm a public health major. Trust me, I've heard of mercury a few times here and there. Since doing a quick google search was too difficult for you, how about a little Toxicology 101 eh? INTRODUCTION The science of toxicology is based on the principle that there is a relationship between a toxic reaction (the response) and the amount of poison received (the dose). An important assumption in this relationship is that there is almost always a dose below which no response occurs or can be measured. A second assumption is that once a maximum response is reached any further increases in the dose will not result in any increased effect.... ...For all other types of toxicity, knowing the dose-response relationship is a necessary part of understanding the cause and effect relationship between chemical exposure and illness. As Paracelsus once wrote, "The right dose differentiates a poison from a remedy." Keep in mind that the toxicity of a chemical is an inherent quality of the chemical and cannot be changed without changing the chemical to another form. The toxic effects on an organism are related to the amount of exposure. DOSE-EFFECT RELATIONSHIPS The dose of a poison is going to determine the degree of effect it produces. The following example illustrates this principle. Suppose ten goldfish are in a ten-gallon tank and we add one ounce of 100-proof whiskey to the water every five minutes until all the fish get drunk and swim upside down. Probably none would swim upside down after the first two or three shots. After four or five, a very sensitive fish might. After six or eight shots another one or two might. With a dose of ten shots, five of the ten fish might be swimming upside down. After fifteen shots, there might be only one fish swimming properly and it too would turn over after seventeen or eighteen shots. The effect measured in this example is swimming upside down. Individual sensitivity to alcohol varies, as does individual sensitivity to other poisons. There is a dose level at which none of the fish swim upside down (no observed effect). There is also a dose level at which all of the fish swim upside down. The dose level at which 50 percent of the fish have turned over is known as the ED50, which means effective dose for 50 percent of the fish tested. The ED50 of any poison varies depending on the effect measured. In general, the less severe the effect measured, the lower the ED50 for that particular effect. Obviously poisons are not tested in humans in such a fashion. Instead, animals are used to predict the toxicity that may occur in humans. Most lay people don't get this relationship and figure any amount of any toxin is bad so zero exposure is what you want. However, for pretty much every toxin that exists, there's always small background amounts floating around in the atmosphere. Furthermore, even if it was possible to get to zero exposure levels, it's impossible to know when you get there because no equipment exists (and never will) with that degree of sensitivity. Therefore, the best you can do based on the science is look at the dose level at which no effect is observed and then make recommendations based on a reasonable "cushion". As Zoony points out, there's significant amounts of mercury in fish, depending on where it's caught. Why isn't there a similar uproar about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 I'm a public health major. Trust me, I've heard of mercury a few times here and there. Since doing a quick google search was too difficult for you, how about a little Toxicology 101 eh? Most lay people don't get this relationship and figure any amount of any toxin is bad so zero exposure is what you want. However, for pretty much every toxin that exists, there's always small background amounts floating around in the atmosphere. Furthermore, even if it was possible to get to zero exposure levels, it's impossible to know when you get there because no equipment exists (and never will) with that degree of sensitivity. Therefore, the best you can do based on the science is look at the dose level at which no effect is observed and then make recommendations based on a reasonable "cushion". As Zoony points out, there's significant amounts of mercury in fish, depending on where it's caught. Why isn't there a similar uproar about that? No offense or anything, but the fact that you are a "public health major" does 0 to impress me or even take you anymore seriously than anyone else. The fact is, you are as brainwashed as the rest of the public when it comes to simple terms like "toxic" and "blood/brain barrier". Your little "toxicology 101" course also means little when you throw in the fact that mercury accumulates in your body (especially the brain). So, if your getting it from fish, vaccines, and amalgams, and "background amounts"-when have we reached the ridiculous threshold you speak of? Who decides when a little baby has had their dose of toxic poison? Just amazing to me that you can rationalize something as basic and simple as this. We are not talking about the toxic effects of ibuprofen or something....that is eliminated from the body and has specific "safe" doses. A toxic poison has no safe dose..... Since you are a "public health major", here is some of your peers thoughts on the subject... :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 My wife is pregnant and just had some fillings put in... not sure if they had mercury or not but her teeth are screwed up and she needed them fixed... If they are silver, then they have mercury. A few years ago, my daughter needed a filling. I had NO IDEA these things were still used. Back when I lived in NJ, my wife took my daughter to get the filling. To my shock and amazement and anger, he put in mercury fillings. I couldn't believe they were still used. My father in law is actually a dentist and uses Porcelien fillings. He knows that mercury is toxic, that is why he switched. Unfortunately, he moved his practice to the Caymen Islands and i don't have that luxery anymore. Anyway, fast forward to a few months ago, my daughters mercury filling fell out. I was VERY happy about this as we could now get an alternative. Unfortunately, I was on the road working when this occured, and even though I CAREFULLY instructed my wife NOT to get another mercury filling, she was sweet talked by the dentist to get a "silver" amalgam. So she did. Needless to say I was beyond pissed and now am looking into having it removed. Go figure, one of the most staunch opponents to this, has had his own daughter get the friggin slop twice!! So, whoever said they were hardly used anymore, may need to look at my own example as proof that they are still used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Good job boys!Okay Ken, we get it. You don't like vaccines. So don't have your kids vaccinated...all but 2 states allow for religious/philosophical objections, so you're probably good to go. I suggest you think about the fact that EVERYTHING is toxic at a a certain dose, even water, gasp. It's called risk to benefit ratio in medicine and public health. Small risk with vaccines, but major benefits to public health and welfare. By the way, good article in TIME magazine out this month regarding vaccinations and the ethical considerations in the debate against the individual's rights vs. common welfare. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1808438,00.html I get the fact that I can protect my kids, and i do. I am just trying to help other people who may not know of the risks associated with the nutritious vaccine. That is all. I hardly think that 1 in 50 kids with Autism is a "small" risk to the reward of getting diseases that won't kill you....like Measels, mumps, chickenpox, the FLUE ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Since you are a "public health major", here is some of your peers thoughts on the subject... :doh: OMG...nothing like throwing up a friggin YouTube link to prove a scientific point.... Question: Would you rather take the tiny risk of a possible side effect (side note: to date there is NO study that confirms direct link between vaccination and autism) of vaccinations, or would you prefer to take the risk of a communicable disease reemergence and a possible epidemic or pandemic occurring? YUSUF: What area in public health are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 OMG...nothing like throwing up a friggin YouTube link to prove a scientific point....Question: Would you rather take the tiny risk of a possible side effect (side note: to date there is NO study that confirms direct link between vaccination and autism) of vaccinations, or would you prefer to take the risk of a communicable disease reemergence and a possible epidemic or pandemic occurring? YUSUF: What area in public health are you? The "Friggin You Tube link" was posted by the University of Calgary. How is that any different than "I'm a public health major" other than the fact that I showed you exactly what happens to brain neurons when a small amount of mercury is added near them? Here's your "tiny" risk... http://www.nationalautismassociation.org/press032808.php I'll take the risk every time and sunday, thanks. You can sit there and worry about something that is not going to happen along with terrorists attacking you at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 Another "you tube" video.... This one says it all though.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Cool. My wife just told me she got "white gold". Previously she had silver and it wasn't good, and also her Dr. is pretty smart... I hope this "white gold" doesn't have any mercury... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 Cool. My wife just told me she got "white gold". Previously she had silver and it wasn't good, and also her Dr. is pretty smart... I hope this "white gold" doesn't have any mercury... That should be ok....I wish I was that lucky with my daughter. Another great source for information regarding mercury amalgams is www.iaomt.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 The "Friggin You Tube link" was posted by the University of Calgary.How is that any different than "I'm a public health major" other than the fact that I showed you exactly what happens to brain neurons when a small amount of mercury is added near them? Here's your "tiny" risk... http://www.nationalautismassociation.org/press032808.php I'll take the risk every time and sunday, thanks. You can sit there and worry about something that is not going to happen along with terrorists attacking you at home. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1808438,00.html I would love for you to just read that TIME article regarding the "actual" risks of these vaccines as versus the MASSIVE risks to public health should people refuse taken them. There are a lot of interesting data and trends they've included in the report. I know you are a "everything's going to kill us dude" but maybe if you read up on what TIME is saying, I've found it to be quite in line with how most of us public Health percieve the issue... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 For those who missed Ken's reference to giving mercury to kids, I'm assuming he's talking about its use as a preservative in vaccines.Two things. First, the FDA was bullied on this. The science still doesn't show that mercury is harmful. Second, look up dose-response relationship. Just about anything is toxic in large enough amounts. Conversely, if you don't get a high enough dose of a known toxin, you won't suffer adverse effects unless you're getting a decent load of mercury from elsewhere. Be careful Ken. I hear that tinfoil is toxic too. Maybe you need to start putting a layer of wax paper between your hat and your head. :laugh: Mercury is considered harmful, because of its nature. It bio-accumulates. meaning it NEVER leaves your system. I just read you are a health major? hmm I would think you would have known that. Mercury is attributed with a few diseases...one being "Mad-Hatter" Yes there is mercury in silver fillings, but its not the harmful form. On that note...Mercury is being phased out of use in almost everything I do believe. Labs are even starting to be restricted in buying Mercury containing thermometers. Dentists have to have special filtration systems to filter out mercury (gold-filter traps). There are VERY stringent regs that are being put into place by the EPA to lower the release of Mercury into the environment...the legal limit is now 0.7 parts per trillion, but for now since that level is unattainable it is 30 parts per trillion for many new permits. I believe the limit now for drinking water is 700 parts per trillion. Oh I should note these are for NY, each state is different, but, I'm sure will be going to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Here's the immunization schedule. http://www.cispimmunize.org/IZSchedule_Childhood.pdf No matter what you believe, there is no infant at risk for Hepatitis B. They aren't using IV drugs and they aren't having unprotected sex. There is no risk. If you are getting your kids vaccinated, and are on the fence, you can feel free to delay that one until adolescence. It is very interesting to note that the Amish population has essentially no autism. There are some cases of adoption, but the ones born and raised in the US (and none of them get vaccinations) simply don't have autism. With the younger population beginning to get vaccinated , the rate is climbing actually. (casual? perhaps) It is 1 in 15000. The rest of the population? 1 in 166. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Here's the immunization schedule.http://www.cispimmunize.org/IZSchedule_Childhood.pdf No matter what you believe, there is no infant at risk for Hepatitis B. They aren't using IV drugs and they aren't having unprotected sex. There is no risk. If you are getting your kids vaccinated, and are on the fence, you can feel free to delay that one until adolescence. It is very interesting to note that the Amish population has essentially no autism. There are some cases of adoption, but the ones born and raised in the US (and none of them get vaccinations) simply don't have autism. With the younger population beginning to get vaccinated , the rate is climbing actually. (casual? perhaps) It is 1 in 15000. The rest of the population? 1 in 166. I'll respond to this post, but a couple of different topics: 1. Vaccines do contain Mercury (Hg), but they do so in a molecule called thermosol. Being part of a molecule changes the chemistry of elements. Sodium (Na) is an explosive metal when mixed with water. Without NaCl (table salt) you'd be dead (It wouldn't surprise me if some Hg leached from the thermosal and ended up in the body, but a quick search failed to find any numbers, and I have other things to do this morning). 2. Despite the fact that thermasol has been eliminted from most vaccines in the last 10 plus years (it is only left in the flu vaccine), the rate of autism is increasing. Obviously, if their was a simple relationships between autism and thermasol that isn't what you'd expect. http://acidreflux.newsvine.com/_news/2008/01/08/1212671-calif-autism-rate-grows-despite-mercury-free-vaccines-the-boston-globe 3. Nobody doubts that Hg (and therefore to some extent thermosal) is bad for you. One problem is that you've gone from bad for you, to causing autism. Essentially, you are making a link to a specific desease w/ no evidence. 4. Lastly, this post. There are many societal changes that have occured that the Amish are pretty much "immune" to so to select this one as being important is overly simplistic. The clearest link between autism is the age of the father. The older the father, the more likely the child will be autistic. The age of the parents in the general US population has steadily increased, but I'll bet it has been pretty flat for the Amish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGreenistheBest Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 I always thought the problem with mercury was that it never leaves your system. So, if you're getting very tiny amounts, it adds up over your whole life and can be bad for you later. The whole vaccines-causing-autism thing sounds baseless to me though. The numbers I've seen show that the number of kids being diagnosed with mental retardation is decreasing at about the same rate that autism diagnoses are increasing. Therefore, the logical conclusion would be that doctors are getting better at diagnosing autism when it would have simply been grouped under mental retardation in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 I always thought the problem with mercury was that it never leaves your system. So, if you're getting very tiny amounts, it adds up over your whole life and can be bad for you later.The whole vaccines-causing-autism thing sounds baseless to me though. The numbers I've seen show that the number of kids being diagnosed with mental retardation is decreasing at about the same rate that autism diagnoses are increasing. Therefore, the logical conclusion would be that doctors are getting better at diagnosing autism when it would have simply been grouped under mental retardation in the past. yup...thats the issue. As I stated before, it bioaccumulates. This is why fish can be bad for you. The bigger and older a fish is, the more mercury in their system, causing more mercury in your system. The health effects that I am aware of...is dementia, or "Mad Hatters" disease which is named for the amount of mercury that used to be in hats made with fur. Also...this is what was believed to have been the problem with the Mad Hatter from Alice in Wonderland (OK, I don't know if that last part is true...something I was told in Chem class....YEARS ago) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 3. Nobody doubts that Hg (and therefore to some extent thermosal) is bad for you. One problem is that you've gone from bad for you, to causing autism. Essentially, you are making a link to a specific desease w/ no evidence. "No evidence" is a bit strong. Its under heavy investigation from the FDA right now, and there are conflicting studies going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.