Originally posted by TaupeDragon
Hey Riley

Hello TaupeDragon.

I did read the link - it was a rebuttal written by someone who tests for mercury toxicity,

Among other things. I also asked my doctor, the diagnostic place handeling my blood tests if what 'quackwatch' said was correct and my response from both was "If the tests were not reliable they would not be used."

but to be fair, Quackwatch is listed at the top of this forum section as being a useful information source. I don't think it completely invalidates the points raised in the original article.

It does invalidate them [like the last page you submitted from there which cited a study of the WRONG age group of children] and IMO should be removed from ATS as a credible source of information. This place is meant to deny ignorance and should not promote sites that have a mixture of half truths, facts and fiction.. 'quackwatch' has proven itself to be innacurate and therefore not in keeping with what I understand to be the philosphy of ATS. I guess you could always argue the article I provided but I don't like your chances considering they actually work in the field in question. I'm also annoyed at Quackwatch as they're pretending that they are working for the common good yet a discouraging parents of autistics from getting them tested by calling it pointless. What could this lead to? Parents assuming their kids have mercury poisoning anyway and getting them treated for it with potentially deadly drugs without medical supervision.

I think all I was really asking for was a level playing field. PLEASE - U2U me with a population study supporting an anti-vacccination viewpoint - I can't see any this thread, although it's getting so big I could well have missed it.

I'm fairly certain adequate studies/comparisons have already been provided and have yet to be fully addressed. Thimerosal is not safe, this is why it was recommended for removal.. even the vaccination sites do not dispute this.

BSL,

I think children born with glutathione deificiencies may very well be more vulnerable to the ethyl mercury in vaccines, but it is not enough to cause neurologic disorders. When compounded with environmental heavy metals, maybe.

I suspect these are the kids that are testing positive to mercury poisoning; their bodies are not properly equipped to filter it out. They have enough in their sytems to test positive.. so why wouldn't this be enough to cause neurological disorders/damage? Their brains are at a very crucial stage of development.. that is why they are 'vulnerable'. Even the adolescent brain is suseptable to schitzophrenia and bipolar if they ingest the wrong things.. why would you assume a baby's brain can cope with unsafe levels of heavy metals?

Hey Riley

I've lost your post/link from the guy rebutting the Quackwatch article on mercury testing! Or at least I can't find it in the 14 pages here! This is what happens when threads get too long! Could you repost it or U2U me it?


Thanks - have a good evening!

TD

TaupeDragon

You know I hate to admit it, but you maybe right about the site I linked to. I have sent a letter to the CDC to inform them of the claim and to ask them to verify or deny it, and if they do verify the claim I asked for reports from them directly. I doubt I'll find out any info that way, but you never know.

I am still thumbing through the many pages of reports listed on the *credited* sites and should have some more postings (so long as I can keep it all organized).



[edit on 11-2-2006 by dirty_underground]

Byrd

Why aren't the children of people who eat fish having a high rate of autism? Why don't countries where the principle protein source is fish have a high rate of autism?

I wasn't going to keep posting this thread, because my angle is kind of off topic and people were getting nasty anyway, but the question you posed drew me back.

Mercury can be metabolized and eliminated in heroic quantities by healthy individuals, right?

Autism is predicted by an inability to metabolize mercury, right?

Countries with a history of eating shellfish and ocean fish high in mercury would presumably be less likely to produce people unaccustomed to processing the toxic metal. After all, if their ancestors retained mercury in an environment where shellfish and predatory ocean fish constitute a significant portion of the diet, there wouldn't be any descendants to speak of, right?

I would wager that native Americans who can trace their lineage to a coastal tribe suffer markedly fewer cases of autism than those who descended form the plains dwellers - the latter group faced no evolutionary pressure to de-select poor mercury metabolism, since a child with poor mercury metabolism could probably live a normal life and breed as long as their diet was low in mercury. A coastal tribe would have more incidents because of their diet, but each successive generation would be less likely to exhibit mercury intolerance, right?

The Japanese have a diet very high in Mercury, but their diet hasn't changed a great deal over the course of history, so they've been under constant, steady pressure to develop a metabolism capable of handling the load.

We know diet plays a huge role in preventing illness, and diet in synch with our genetic predispositions seems to be a safe bet for staying healthy. I'm thinking of the Irish right now. Something like 10% of America is Irish, right? On the order of 30 million people I think.

They come from a tradition of Potassium rich potatoes, and small game, pheasants and hares and such - their body chemistry is presumably geared accordingly. Now, the Irish living in America have diets dangerously low in potassium, but dangerously high in sodium (and mercury). Is it any wonder heart disease and high blood pressure are serious problems in that group?

Anyway, just some thoughts on the issue you raised with the Japanese diet.

BSL,
quote: I think children born with glutathione deificiencies may very well be more vulnerable to the ethyl mercury in vaccines, but it is not enough to cause neurologic disorders. When compounded with environmental heavy metals, maybe.

I suspect these are the kids that are testing positive to mercury poisoning; their bodies are not properly equipped to filter it out. They have enough in their sytems to test positive.. so why wouldn't this be enough to cause neurological disorders/damage? Their brains are at a very crucial stage of development.. that is why they are 'vulnerable'. Even the adolescent brain is suseptable to schitzophrenia and bipolar if they ingest the wrong things.. why would you assume a baby's brain can cope with unsafe levels of heavy metals?

Hey, sorry if my wording may have been a bit weird, it can do that at times. I wasn't trying to say children who test as having large amounts of mercury can't tie that to neurologic disorders. What I was was saying was that these high levels may possibly be due to glutathione deficiencies This could explain why only 3-6 children per 1000 develop autism. That sounds like a good rate for a genetic glutathione deficiency, and thus an inability to bind mercury to urea.

~MFP

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Hey, sorry if my wording may have been a bit weird, it can do that at times. I wasn't trying to say children who test as having large amounts of mercury can't tie that to neurologic disorders. What I was was saying was that these high levels may possibly be due to glutathione deficiencies This could explain why only 3-6 children per 1000 develop autism.

We agree?!
The theory is that those deficiencies cause the membranes in the body [specifically the blood/brain barrier in the case of autism] to become weakened and vulnerable to damage [and continued] while developing. This would account as to why there has been such jump in diagnosis from apx 1 in ten thousand 15 years ago [earlier vaccinations now and much more toxins overall in the enviroment] and why most kids seem relatively uneffected. No doubt there are varying degrees of 'toxin immunity' in everybody and autism may be an extreme result while other things manifest as asthma and other auto immune diseases like lupus.

[edit on 11-2-2006 by riley]

We agree?!

It would seem that way. Shocking, I know, hehe.

The theory is that those deficiencies cause the membranes in the body [specifically the blood/brain barrier in the case of autism] to become weakened and vulnerable to damage [and continued] while developing. This would account as to why there has been such jump in diagnosis from apx 1 in ten thousand 15 years ago [earlier vaccinations now and much more toxins overall in the enviroment] and why most kids seem relatively uneffected. No doubt there are varying degrees of 'toxin immunity' in everybody and autism may be an extreme result while other things manifest as asthma and other auto immune diseases like lupus.

Eh, that's one theory. That's not the exact deficiency I'm thinking of, however. Glutathione plays a role in helping mercury bind to urea and fecal matter. Although, I suppose it could play a role in formation of certain neural tissues. It's a fairly commonly occuring amino acid. I'll have to look into this.

As to your comments on toxin immunity, I think you're dead on and we agree completely. These genetic deficiencies may lead to an inability to process heavy metals to varying degrees, thus aiding in creating certain conditions in the human body. This mechanism can be seen in various other pathogens in the human body.

~MFP

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Eh, that's one theory. That's not the exact deficiency I'm thinking of, however. Glutathione plays a role in helping mercury bind to urea and fecal matter.

Yes.. so it can be expelled from the body. I think that has something to do with the small intestines.. [something to do with the production of bicarbonate?] if mercury can't be adequately filtered what I mentioned earlier would compound the problem [even though it's connected] and it therefore stays in the body.

Although, I suppose it could play a role in formation of certain neural tissues. It's a fairly commonly occuring amino acid. I'll have to look into this.

I've been have been look into tryptophan of late as well.. I can't exactly explain why this interests me but you could add it into your cross referencing and hopefully get more of an idea of what I'm getting at.

These genetic deficiencies may lead to an inability to process heavy metals to varying degrees, thus aiding in creating certain conditions in the human body. This mechanism can be seen in various other pathogens in the human body.

Well said.

yanno
if we are going to question the integrity of the Doc who released info without the approval of the ethic's committee well I think its best to consider everything on the subject.

so the guy went off and did what he did without approval...

reminds me of the woman translating in the Ukraine elections...what a brave woman...and what a brave Doctor to challenge the lies of the medical profession.

Hi everyone!

It's been a long time. My new baby is now four months old and has had both sets of shots. The first set seemed to go just fine. The second set however, had some drawbacks. He seemed to regress with his developmental skills he had mastered (rolling over, grabbing objects, etc...) he also seemed to be very lethargic (even after 2 weeks had past). He also seemed to have developed a "tic" so we scheduled a visit to the doc, to which he said everything was normal not to worry. Sometimes babies loose skills they have developed but that he should get them back. Has anyone ever heard of this happening and is it normal? Also, what about the tic, it's been 3 weeks and the tic is still there. I am concerned about this issue. Also, just a question for the docs (and anyone else who might actually know the answer to this). Let's say you never received any shots from your childhood (and escaped the dreaded diseases that they protect us from), then as you got into adolescent or adulthood decided to get the vaccinations. Would that work, and how would that go.

I know I haven't posted in a couple of years because I have now have two children and they keep me pretty busy when I get home from work. One of my children was recently diagnosed with PDD and my wife and I think that it was the ethyl mercury in the vaccinations was the cause.

Here is why:

EPA says that the allowable limit is .1 mcg of mercury per kilogram of weight. if a child is 20 pounds when they receive the second round of vaccinations, their safe dosage would be .8 mcg of mercury.

If the vaccine has 25 mcg of mercury on the dosage, that means that the child just received a dose 35 times the safe limit.

Sadly, when a child goes into get vaccinated during the second round, they will get more than one vaccination. Let's theorize that only three of the vaccinations have 25 mcg of thimerosal (ethyl mercury). That means that the dosage is now 75 mcg of ethyl mercury and has just received 93 times the safe dosage. Ask yourself how many vaccinations a child gets when they go to the doctor. My son just received 15 in one day including the flu vaccine which does indeed contain 25mcg thimerosal.

I fail to understand how anyone could be arguing about whether or not thimerosal is causing problems. The proof is in front of everyone and no one wants to pay attention. They get caught up in the small details which mean nothing.

The mercury dosage is actually higher with newborn children and first round vaccinations due to their weight, but I am sure you get the point.

Fact:
mercury is a neurotoxin.

Fact:
thimerosal contains mercury (most vaccines with thimerosal contain 25 mcg)

Fact:
tuna contains approx 20 mcg per 6oz can

Fact:
FDA/EPA/CDC states that pregnant women, women who are nursing, and children should not eat tuna due to mercury toxicity. They also state that mercury poisoning causes language and information processing disorders.

Why then is it okay to inject 25mcg mercury into an infants blood when using the same guidelines, that same infant shouldn't eat 20 mcg found in tuna?

How do the facts change when it is in a vaccine? How do the facts change when someone says that you should vaccinate your kids to keep them safe? how do the facts change when the pediatrician says that vaccinations are safe because it has the same amount of mercury as a can of tuna? Well, my child isn't supposed to eat tuna because of the mercury.

I feel I have let my children down by not protecting them from a government and policies gone amok. I should have done the math myself and just said no. I will never forgive myself for letting this happen.

Sadly, it is too late to prevent this for my children, but by me putting this on here, hopefully it will not be too late for YOUR children.

This is not rocket science. This is basic math and logic.

Show me one parent who would be willing to take a syringe of 25 mcg of mercury and inject it into their child and I will show you a parent who doesn't care about their child. The argument vanishes when you state it this way.

Remove the mercury from the vaccines. Destroy the vaccine stockpiles which contain it. Stop arguing for proof that mercury causes autism. Sure it may, but the point is that we should stop injecting children with mercury at levels way beyond what is considered safe.

STOP INJECTING CHILDREN WITH MERCURY!

If you are a pediatrician, GP, RN, red cross worker...

STOP INJECTING CHILDREN WITH MERCURY!

Wake Up! I will repeat it again for those who may not have gotten the point:

STOP INJECTING CHILDREN WITH MERCURY!