# Lifestyles & Discussion > Personal Health & Well-Being >  FDA Stuns Scientists again, Declares Mercury in Fish to be Safe for Infants, Children

## speech

In a truly astonishing betrayal of public safety (even for the FDA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration today revoked its warning about mercury in fish, saying that eating mercury-contaminated fish no longer poses any health threat to children, pregnant women, nursing mothers and infants.

Last week, the FDA declared trace levels of melamine to be safe in infant formula. A few weeks earlier, it said the plastics chemical Bisphenol-A was safe for infants to drink. Now it says children can eat mercury, too. Is there any toxic substance in the food that the FDA thinks might be dangerous? (Aspartame, MSG, sodium nitrite and now mercury)

This FDA decision on mercury in fish has alarmed EPA scientists who called it scientifically flawed and inadequate, reports the Washington Post. Even better, the Environmental Working Group (www.EWG.org) issued a letter to the EPA, saying Its a commentary on how low FDA has sunk as an agency. It was once a fierce protector of Americas health, and now its nothing more than a patsy for polluters.

Is anyone really surprised? The FDA is a drug-pushing, people-betraying, scientifically illiterate criminal organization that, time and time again, seeks only to protect the profits of powerful corporations whose products poison the people. This statement is no longer a mere opinion. It is an observable fact based on the FDAs own pattern of behavior and its outlandish decisions that predictably betray the American public.

The real reason this is happening

You want to know the REAL reason the FDA is easing up on its warning about mercury in fish? 
http://waronyou.com/2008/12/fda-stun...ctant-mothers/

----------


## RSLudlum

hmmm....interesting.  Maybe that's why I heard about this story (below) on the radio today?? 




> *Broadway Actor's Mercury Poisoning Prevalent Throughout US, New Study Shows*
> 
> source
> 
> WASHINGTON, Dec 18, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Recent publicity of mercury poisoning in Broadway Actor Jeremy Piven from his regular consumption of sushi highlights the prevalence and magnitude of exposure risk associated with eating certain seafood, say advocates. In a report released earlier this week by Mercury Policy Project, reported case studies document a number of similar mercury poisonings experienced by people throughout the US. 
> 
> "Unfortunately, Piven's case is not that unusual," said Michael Bender, director of the Mercury Policy Project. "Our report shares stories of people who each ate enough tuna or other store-bought fish to suffer mercury's effects, according to their physicians. From New Jersey to Wisconsin to California, these stories show that seafood contamination is a very real problem that should not be ignored." 
> 
> Yet late last week it was learned that FDA is currently contemplating removing mercury consumption warnings for all seafood -- including swordfish, shark and tuna -- stating benefits from eating seafood far outweigh the risks of mercury poisoning. 
> ...

----------


## pacelli

The great action starts at 18 seconds in..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZArebYZzdc

Mercury helps kids.

Give me a $#@!ing break.  

They can't do $#@! about it, so they just say it is nutritious and helpful.  

I need a can of tuna.

----------


## speech

> The great action starts at 18 seconds in..
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZArebYZzdc
> 
> Mercury helps kids.
> 
> Give me a $#@!ing break.  
> 
> They can't do $#@! about it, so they just say it is nutritious and helpful.  
> ...


*
Unbelievable!*

----------


## Ex Post Facto

The lies become more and more obvious don't they!

----------


## tmosley

I thought mercury amalgams were already declared to be unsafe.  Also, the vast majority of infant vaccines no longer contain thimerosal (the mercury containing preservative).  The only ones that do are multipacks (used in 3rd world countries because they are cheaper) and flu vaccines (although there is a trace amount in one of the infant vaccines--something like 1/1000th to the toxic amount).

You've got to understand that the world isn't black and white.  Just about everything out there can kill you, but a lot of things can help you grow up big and strong (like fish protein).  Would any of you stop taking vitamins because they contain fragments of pathogens that might trigger an immune reaction (about a 1/1000000 chance)?  Do any of you stop your kids from going outside to play because they might get skin cancer?

There is a risk in every action you take, but there is also risk in doing nothing.  If you don't let your kids go out and play, they'll probably become obese, and they may get a vitamin D deficiency.  That's not even mentioning the increased risk of allergies and autoimmune disease from not exercising their immune systems as children (although I guess that is ).

The FDA, like any government organization, is highly incompetent and bureaucratic (trust me, I've dealt with them before), but the vast majority of people there are genuinely concerned about people's health.  It's a difficult line to walk for anyone.  Someone at the top may be playing politics here, but that is generally the full extent of corruption in these types of organizations.  It's what happens when you put politicians in charge of fundamentally scientific organizations rather than scientists.

----------


## Birdlady

> *I thought mercury amalgams were already declared to be unsafe.*  Also, the vast majority of infant vaccines no longer contain thimerosal (the mercury containing preservative).  The only ones that do are multipacks (used in 3rd world countries because they are cheaper) and flu vaccines (although there is a trace amount in one of the infant vaccines--something like 1/1000th to the toxic amount).
> 
> You've got to understand that the world isn't black and white.  Just about everything out there can kill you, but a lot of things can help you grow up big and strong (like fish protein).  Would any of you stop taking vitamins because they contain fragments of pathogens that might trigger an immune reaction (about a 1/1000000 chance)?  Do any of you stop your kids from going outside to play because they might get skin cancer?
> 
> There is a risk in every action you take, but there is also risk in doing nothing.  If you don't let your kids go out and play, they'll probably become obese, and they may get a vitamin D deficiency.  That's not even mentioning the increased risk of allergies and autoimmune disease from not exercising their immune systems as children (although I guess that is ).
> 
> The FDA, like any government organization, is highly incompetent and bureaucratic (trust me, I've dealt with them before), but the vast majority of people there are genuinely concerned about people's health.  It's a difficult line to walk for anyone.  Someone at the top may be playing politics here, but that is generally the full extent of corruption in these types of organizations.  It's what happens when you put politicians in charge of fundamentally scientific organizations rather than scientists.


You are using really bizarre logic.  Your fake numbers are just downright stupid.  

There is a lot more mercury in vaccines than you are assuming. Mercury is damaging in any amount.  How do you know if your child received a single or multi-dose?  Most doctors don't know anything about the vaccines. They just pump them into kids all day long.  I figure they must have a quota to meet.  Aside from the mercury, there are other toxins in these vaccines.  They are using aluminum, which is now being seen as a possible link to Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.  

Kids aren't going to get skin cancer from playing in the sun. Give me a break...The sun is what protects us from cancer.  Vitamin D is absolutely crucial.  Most skin cancer is likely from a poor diet than exposure to the sun.

----------


## lucius

> The great action starts at 18 seconds in..
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZArebYZzdc
> 
> Mercury helps kids.
> 
> Give me a $#@!ing break.  
> 
> They can't do $#@! about it, so they just say it is nutritious and helpful.  
> ...


Two quotes come to mind:

"*Fichte laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will*, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished, But in his day this was an unattainable ideal: what he regarded as the best system in existence produced Karl Marx. In future such failures are not likely to occur where there is dictatorship. DIET, *INJECTIONS* and INJUNCTIONS *will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so*. A totalitarian government with a scientific bent might do things that to us would seem horrifying. The Nazis were more scientific than the present rulers of Russia, and were more inclined towards the SORT OF ATROCITIES THAN I HAVE IN MIND."

-Nobel Prize winner, Fabian scientist/socialist, Lord Bertrand Russell, of the bloodline, in 1953 *The Impact of Science on Society*

We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false. 

- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

----------


## Uriel999

mercury sucks and all...but I will still eat all the seafood I want. I just don't care. I may die younger from mercury poisening but considering Andrew Jackson took calamel (a medicine back in the day that was highly poisenous and contained a lot of mercury) daily and lived to be old, I won't worry too much. Mmmm tuna...

----------


## angelatc

> mercury sucks and all...but I will still eat all the seafood I want. I just don't care. I may die younger from mercury poisening but considering Andrew Jackson took calamel (a medicine back in the day that was highly poisenous and contained a lot of mercury) daily and lived to be old, I won't worry too much. Mmmm tuna...


My husband is in the seafood business.  The conclusion of the FDA is that the benefits from eating seafood outweighs the risk of accumulating mercury in the system.

We eat seafood quite a bit. 

I wager he knows more about seafood than anybody else in these forums, and I'd be happy to have him post his .02 later when he gets home from his job selling seafood.

----------


## angelatc

> Kids aren't going to get skin cancer from playing in the sun. Give me a break...The sun is what protects us from cancer.


My best friend died at age 32 from malignant melonoma. Her MD said it was a direct result of the sun exposure she received from years of living in Hawaii.

----------


## pinkmandy

> My husband is in the seafood business.  *The conclusion of the FDA* is that the benefits from eating seafood outweighs the risk of accumulating mercury in the system.
> 
> We eat seafood quite a bit. 
> 
> I wager he knows more about seafood than anybody else in these forums, and I'd be happy to have him post his .02 later when he gets home from his job selling seafood.


The FDA? 

Hahahahahahahahahaha! You almost made me shoot my genetically modified juice through my nose!

*catchingmybreath*

Hahahahahahahahahaha! 

And the USDA says growth hormones are fine. They're just as awesome! 

Our govt agencies totally look out for us because they want us all to be healthy and happy. Just like our politicians do.

----------


## dannno

I try to eat wild fish, because farmed fish generally have much higher concentrations of mercury. 

It's also good to go lower on the food chain. Sardines (NOT anchovies, eww salty!!) are packed full of protein and omegas, taste every bit as good as tuna, and you can get them in a can with smoked olive oil, mustard or just water. VERY low concentrations of mercury.

----------


## Mini-Me

> I try to eat wild fish, because farmed fish generally have much higher concentrations of mercury. 
> 
> It's also good to go lower on the food chain. Sardines (NOT anchovies, eww salty!!) are packed full of protein and omegas, taste every bit as good as tuna, and you can get them in a can with smoked olive oil, mustard or just water. VERY low concentrations of mercury.


Good advice!  Adding to that, shark, swordfish, king mackerel, and tilefish are especially high in mercury, so it's good to avoid them or eat them in *extreme* moderation.  If you do like tuna, chunk light tuna generally has less mercury than albacore (but it can depend).

Fish is part of a healthy diet if eaten in moderation, but you definitely want to balance that with wanting to strictly limit your exposure to mercury.  If you look into the issue, it's shocking just how much corruption there has been with the FDA bending over backwards for the tuna lobby...I mean, the contents of their decisions make this pretty apparent anyway, but always remember that the FDA works on behalf of big industry, not consumers.  They significantly understate the dangers of mercury in fish and in general.  The EPA has better guidelines, and they've always been significantly more honest and health-conscious when it comes to mercury exposure for some reason, despite being another government agency.

----------


## youngbuck

Since this stuff is so healthy, I'm gonna go break into an abandoned house, break open the thermostat and take out the mercury veil, and inject it into my bloodstream.  I'll keep you guys updated.

----------


## youngbuck

> My best friend died at age 32 from malignant melonoma. Her MD said it was a direct result of the sun exposure she received from years of living in Hawaii.



I don't care what her "MD" said.  That's what they're taught to say, but it doesn't mean they actually know.

The only way the sun can contribute to skin cancer is by *BURNING*  it.  _OTHERWISE_ the sun drastically reduces the chance of the majority forms of cancer (especially skin cancer) by elevating Vitamin D levels.

So, if she was constantly getting sunburns in Hawaii, then sure, the sun contributed.

There are indigenous people that get insane amounts of sun exposure and cancer is unheard of.  Go figure.

----------


## tmosley

> You are using really bizarre logic.  Your fake numbers are just downright stupid.  
> 
> There is a lot more mercury in vaccines than you are assuming. Mercury is damaging in any amount.  How do you know if your child received a single or multi-dose?  Most doctors don't know anything about the vaccines. They just pump them into kids all day long.  I figure they must have a quota to meet.  Aside from the mercury, there are other toxins in these vaccines.  They are using aluminum, which is now being seen as a possible link to Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.  
> 
> Kids aren't going to get skin cancer from playing in the sun. Give me a break...The sun is what protects us from cancer.  Vitamin D is absolutely crucial.  Most skin cancer is likely from a poor diet than exposure to the sun.


Wow, so you've done research on vaccine preservatives?  No?  Oh wait, that's me.  I've done research on vaccine preservatives, specifically for the purpose of replacing the mercury preservatives with another preservative that my company developed (a naturally occurring amino acid that has the side effect of increasing the immune system).  I've seen the analyses of the contents, including metals analyses, and I never saw anything about aluminum contamination.  That would make approximately zero sense in any event, because aluminum oxidizes in about 10^-12 seconds on exposure to oxygen.  Aluminum compounds are universally insoluble in water, so they would just fall out of solution in a vaccine.  They would have to be in one hell of an acid solution to even dissolve, in which case they would just precipitate out in the injection site (which would have a terrible chemical burn, by the way).  

As to how to know if your child received a vaccine from a multi-dose or now, was your child vaccinated at a free clinic in a 3rd world country?  If so, the answer is probably yes, if not, the answer is certainly no.  Had you actually read my post, you would have seen that.  Instead, your black and white mind set your moral outrage meter to maximum, and you let fly with the insults.  

Believe it or not, this forum actually has a few experts on it in various fields.  My field of expertise is chemistry and the biosciences.  My team has developed a totally unique and unprecedented technique for preventing or curing virtually all infectious disease (viruses, bacteria, protozoa, fungi, fibroblasts, and cancer cells so far).  Our medical products should start hitting the shelves in about ten years.  Our first infection-resistant medical devices (orthodontics) will debut in Texas next month, with a nationwide rollout by the end of 2009.

As to the cancer, yes, the kids don't get cancerwhen they are kids.  By the time they get cancer, they are at least in their thirties.  Sunburns increase the chance of cancer.  If you don't know that, you don't need to be having children.

Life is about balancing risks.  There is no such thing as "safety" in anything you do.  You can die at any time from something as innocuous as a papercut, or as unexpected as a meteor crashing through your roof removing your torso to your basement.  The trick is finding a balance, and not letting your fear rule your life, or that of your children's.  The fact is that a little mercury isn't the end of the world.  Hell, my grandmother played with the stuff in school, despite a mercury allergy.  The only longterm effect she had was the loss of a patch of hair above her temple.  That dose was probably 10,000 times higher than what you get from eating fish.

I would tend to agree that is is probably foolish to remove the warnings from fish, simply because eating a whole lot of it every day will lead to acute or chronic poisoning, and people need to be aware of that.  But people shouldn't be deterred from eating fish altogether.  The lack of good fish protein will have a bigger health impact than the ingestion of a relatively small amount of mercury.  Sort of like when you go to get dental x-rays done, the nurse has to step behind a shielded wall, but you take the full brunt of the xrays.  One dose every year isn't dangerous, but ten doses every day for a year is.  

As Paracelsus said, "All things are poison, and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something to not be poisonous."

----------


## Birdlady

> Wow, so you've done research on vaccine preservatives?  No?  Oh wait, that's me.  I've done research on vaccine preservatives, specifically for the purpose of replacing the mercury preservatives with another preservative that my company developed (a naturally occurring amino acid that has the side effect of increasing the immune system).  I've seen the analyses of the contents, including metals analyses, and I never saw anything about aluminum contamination.  That would make approximately zero sense in any event, because aluminum oxidizes in about 10^-12 seconds on exposure to oxygen.  Aluminum compounds are universally insoluble in water, so they would just fall out of solution in a vaccine.  They would have to be in one hell of an acid solution to even dissolve, in which case they would just precipitate out in the injection site (which would have a terrible chemical burn, by the way).  
> 
> As to how to know if your child received a vaccine from a multi-dose or now, was your child vaccinated at a free clinic in a 3rd world country?  If so, the answer is probably yes, if not, the answer is certainly no.  Had you actually read my post, you would have seen that.  Instead, your black and white mind set your moral outrage meter to maximum, and you let fly with the insults.  
> 
> Believe it or not, this forum actually has a few experts on it in various fields.  My field of expertise is chemistry and the biosciences.  My team has developed a totally unique and unprecedented technique for preventing or curing virtually all infectious disease (viruses, bacteria, protozoa, fungi, fibroblasts, and cancer cells so far).  Our medical products should start hitting the shelves in about ten years.  Our first infection-resistant medical devices (orthodontics) will debut in Texas next month, with a nationwide rollout by the end of 2009.
> 
> As to the cancer, yes, the kids don't get cancerwhen they are kids.  By the time they get cancer, they are at least in their thirties.  Sunburns increase the chance of cancer.  If you don't know that, you don't need to be having children.
> 
> Life is about balancing risks.  There is no such thing as "safety" in anything you do.  You can die at any time from something as innocuous as a papercut, or as unexpected as a meteor crashing through your roof removing your torso to your basement.  The trick is finding a balance, and not letting your fear rule your life, or that of your children's.  The fact is that a little mercury isn't the end of the world.  Hell, my grandmother played with the stuff in school, despite a mercury allergy.  The only longterm effect she had was the loss of a patch of hair above her temple.  That dose was probably 10,000 times higher than what you get from eating fish.
> ...


Vaccines are being suspended in aluminum solutions now.  I've read the inserts.  These vaccines ALSO have thimerosal in them. I am not claiming the aluminum is a preservative, merely that there are other things IN vaccines that are dangerous.  I don't need you to strut your stuff with technical jargon.  I get it, you think you are above all of us.  I would bow before you, but mercury toxicity has made my muscles weak.

To say that children are not receiving multi-dose vaccines unless in a third world country is wishful thinking.  Have you personally called pediatricians and asked them that they aren't? I would not assume this. When were these multi-dose vaccines "phased out"? Are they still on doctor's shelves being used up until the next shipment comes in?

I calculated a few months back that I received 125 mcg of mercury from vaccinations alone before the age of 5.  Add in the Hepatitis shots and I've had over 160mcg of mercury injected into my veins.  Then I've had a ton of dental amalgams put in as a child, removed and more put in their place.  My hair started to fall out over a year ago and it was from mercury toxicity. I don't need a PhD, MD or degree to know that I was mercury poisoned from the vaccinations and the dental amalgams. Once the amalgams were removed and I began to detox for mercury, my hair started to grow back! Imagine that. My dermatologist said that I would have no success in growing my hair back without steroids because autoimmune diseases are permanent and not curable. I guess I must be an anomaly like the thousands of other children and adults detoxing...right.

There is a huge difference between the risks you've used as examples.  The medical community spends millions (billions?) of dollars a year on fake news to get people to get their vaccines.  They lie to people saying that are required for school admissions. They lie telling people that thimerosal is no longer in the vaccines.  It is in the ones they push.

This isn't about a potential risk. This is about the big name agencies lying, fooling people into getting vaccines that they know are hurting children.  Mercury is a known neurotoxin. Period.  It is cumulative in its effects.  Mercury you were exposed to 20+ years from now has worked its way into your brain and organs.  It doesn't just go away.  The entire vaccine industry is a scam and I think they are feeling it in their pocket books.   More and more people aren't buying their fake, paid for news anymore.

Skin cancer is caused by free radicals. When people eat fast food and GMO food it doesn't have the nutrients to protect the body.  They use chemicals in them so they are cheaper to make, preserved for longer periods of time and taste "better". Then people go out in the sun, get burned, which releases free radicals throughout their bodies. That is how the cancer starts.  If our diets were higher in raw vegetables, antioxidants and nutrients, we wouldn't be getting skin cancer at all.

I don't bow down to doctors or scientists, so that won't work on me.  In fact I usually yell at them because they know just enough to mislead or harm people.

----------


## tmosley

> Vaccines are being suspended in aluminum solutions now.  I've read the inserts.  These vaccines ALSO have thimerosal in them. I am not claiming the aluminum is a preservative, merely that there are other things IN vaccines that are dangerous.  I don't need you to strut your stuff with technical jargon.  I get it, you think you are above all of us.  I would bow before you, but mercury toxicity has made my muscles weak.
> 
> To say that children are not receiving multi-dose vaccines unless in a third world country is wishful thinking.  Have you personally called pediatricians and asked them that they aren't? I would not assume this. When were these multi-dose vaccines "phased out"? Are they still on doctor's shelves being used up until the next shipment comes in?
> 
> I calculated a few months back that I received 125 mcg of mercury from vaccinations alone before the age of 5.  Add in the Hepatitis shots and I've had over 160mcg of mercury injected into my veins.  Then I've had a ton of dental amalgams put in as a child, removed and more put in their place.  My hair started to fall out over a year ago and it was from mercury toxicity. I don't need a PhD, MD or degree to know that I was mercury poisoned from the vaccinations and the dental amalgams. Once the amalgams were removed and I began to detox for mercury, my hair started to grow back! Imagine that. My dermatologist said that I would have no success in growing my hair back without steroids because autoimmune diseases are permanent and not curable. I guess I must be an anomaly like the thousands of other children and adults detoxing...right.
> 
> There is a huge difference between the risks you've used as examples.  The medical community spends millions (billions?) of dollars a year on fake news to get people to get their vaccines.  They lie to people saying that are required for school admissions. They lie telling people that thimerosal is no longer in the vaccines.  It is in the ones they push.
> 
> This isn't about a potential risk. This is about the big name agencies lying, fooling people into getting vaccines that they know are hurting children.  Mercury is a known neurotoxin. Period.  It is cumulative in its effects.  Mercury you were exposed to 20+ years from now has worked its way into your brain and organs.  It doesn't just go away.  The entire vaccine industry is a scam and I think they are feeling it in their pocket books.   More and more people aren't buying their fake, paid for news anymore.
> ...


Well, enjoy your premature death then.  I have a busy schedule of baby poisoning to attend to.  Gotta make that quota before Christmas, or I don't get my annual corruption bonus from the Illuminati!

Seriously, you called me stupid, and said that I don't know what I'm talking about, when I clearly do.  The reason I posted all that information about myself was to dispel any illusion that you had that I was just some idiot on the internet.

Yes, I have PERSONALLY gone to pediatrics clinics and PERSONALLY reviewed the vaccine material.  I got the bloody flu while I was there too.  Never sit in a pediatrics waiting room at a university hospital during flu season.  The mercury in childhood vaccines was phased out in 2002.  The flu shot is the main one that still has it, and then only in multipacks (just request a single shot, rather than a multipack to avoid the thimerosal).  Multipacks of childhood vaccinations are not used in the US (again, other than the flu).

A little googling on aluminum in vaccines brought up this page: http://www.mothering.com/articles/gr...himerosal.html which raises your same concerns on aluminum, but notes that there is no evidence of toxicity in healthy infants.  I hadn't thought of aluminum hydroxide being put in vaccines, simply because it isn't soluble in water (no aluminum compounds that I can think of are).  They would have to have it in a pretty severe acid solution to get it into solution.  No wonder it causes so much pain during injections.  I'll have to look into it in detail over the new year.  Thanks for bringing it up.

As to the fake news and the lying about the vaccination requirements, that's preposterous.  False claims are taken very seriously by the FDA (although there are a lot of misleading claims in drug adds, they are all TECHNICALLY true--try reading The Truth About Drug Companies, it's very eye opening).  I know, as they ran us through the ringer with regards to our claims for infection resistant medical devices (mainly that we couldn't prove that we were killing the bugs, only that they weren't growing on the devices).

Next point:  if mercury toxicity is as permanent as you suggest, how did you detox?  I don't know much about mercury, but I do know that fish protein is good for you.  As with most things in life, there is certain to be a tradeoff in its consumption.  Moderation in all things and whatnot.

Final point:  on the skin cancer thing, you kind of blew out your own argument when you admitted that the sun creates free radicals that damage the skin.  This is a fact.  You don't need to have any GMO foods in your body or anything else for this to occur (I'm not sure if you were implying that, if not, you had a bit of a non-sequitur there).  Light waves don't discriminate, they sever any carbon-carbon, or carbon-nitrogen bonds they come across (not to mention any of the hundreds of other types of bonds that can be broken by high-energy light), leaving two free radicals.  If you were a caveman, an ancient Phoenician, or a modern city dweller, your likelihood of getting skin cancer would still rely primarily on the amount of time you spend exposed to the sun.  Of course, a modern person is more likely to see higher levels of other pollutants as well, which will cause a number of different types of cancer, but generally not skin cancer (unless you are having a lot of skin contact with carcinogenic materials, which was the case with a number of occupations until recently).

----------


## H Roark

> I try to eat wild fish, because farmed fish generally have much higher concentrations of mercury. 
> 
> It's also good to go lower on the food chain. Sardines (NOT anchovies, eww salty!!) are packed full of protein and omegas, taste every bit as good as tuna, and you can get them in a can with smoked olive oil, mustard or just water. VERY low concentrations of mercury.


Wouldn't you want to eat fish that was higher up on the food chain?  The fish at the bottom of the food chain such as filter feeders get the most mercury because they feed off their environment.  As opposed to the fish that eat other fish which only get a percentage of that same mercury.

----------


## angelatc

> Since this stuff is so healthy, I'm gonna go break into an abandoned house, break open the thermostat and take out the mercury veil, and inject it into my bloodstream.  I'll keep you guys updated.


Settle down.

It isn't that mercury is healthy, it's just that there's never been a proven link between mercury poisoning and eating seafood. 



> I would tend to agree that is is probably foolish to remove the warnings from fish, simply because eating a whole lot of it every day will lead to acute or chronic poisoning, and people need to be aware of that.


 In fact, Asia and other cultures that eat much more fish, usually every single day,  than the west does typically have much, much lower concentrations of mercury in their systems.

I gotta get Dave here to sit down and type out the truth.

----------


## angelatc

> Wouldn't you want to eat fish that was higher up on the food chain?  The fish at the bottom of the food chain such as filter feeders get the most mercury because they feed off their environment.  As opposed to the fish that eat other fish which only get a percentage of that same mercury.


No, that's wrong.  Big fish eat little fish, so the mercury from all those little fish accumulates in the bigger fish.

----------


## angelatc

> I don't care what her "MD" said.  That's what they're taught to say, but it doesn't mean they actually know.
> 
> The only way the sun can contribute to skin cancer is by *BURNING*  it..


So they don't know, but you do? Go figure indeed!

----------


## Dojo

> Well, enjoy your premature death then.  I have a busy schedule of baby poisoning to attend to.  Gotta make that quota before Christmas, or I don't get my annual corruption bonus from the Illuminati!
> 
> Seriously, you called me stupid, and said that I don't know what I'm talking about, when I clearly do.  The reason I posted all that information about myself was to dispel any illusion that you had that I was just some idiot on the internet.
> 
> Yes, I have PERSONALLY gone to pediatrics clinics and PERSONALLY reviewed the vaccine material.  I got the bloody flu while I was there too.  Never sit in a pediatrics waiting room at a university hospital during flu season.  The mercury in childhood vaccines was phased out in 2002.  The flu shot is the main one that still has it, and then only in multipacks (just request a single shot, rather than a multipack to avoid the thimerosal).  Multipacks of childhood vaccinations are not used in the US (again, other than the flu).
> 
> A little googling on aluminum in vaccines brought up this page: http://www.mothering.com/articles/gr...himerosal.html which raises your same concerns on aluminum, but notes that there is no evidence of toxicity in healthy infants.  I hadn't thought of aluminum hydroxide being put in vaccines, simply because it isn't soluble in water (no aluminum compounds that I can think of are).  They would have to have it in a pretty severe acid solution to get it into solution.  No wonder it causes so much pain during injections.  I'll have to look into it in detail over the new year.  Thanks for bringing it up.
> 
> As to the fake news and the lying about the vaccination requirements, that's preposterous.  False claims are taken very seriously by the FDA (although there are a lot of misleading claims in drug adds, they are all TECHNICALLY true--try reading The Truth About Drug Companies, it's very eye opening).  I know, as they ran us through the ringer with regards to our claims for infection resistant medical devices (mainly that we couldn't prove that we were killing the bugs, only that they weren't growing on the devices).
> ...



 OK Tmosley................be honset, you said you got the flu, my question is, did you take the flu shot?

----------


## angelatc

> The FDA? 
> 
> Hahahahahahahahahaha! You almost made me shoot my genetically modified juice through my nose!
> 
> *catchingmybreath*
> 
> Hahahahahahahahahaha! 
> 
> And the USDA says growth hormones are fine. They're just as awesome! 
> ...


No, I don't believe the FDA either. They're political appointments, after all.  I actually knew this was coming, and we all should be having a good laugh over it because the FDA has pissed off the EPA by not consulting with them first before releasing the update.

I was just explaining what their logic was. 

FDA aside, my husband has been in the seafood for 30+ years. He has traveled the world, meeting just about everybody in every position you can think of in the industry.  He knows more about seafood and the seafood business than anybody else on RPF.  That's just the plain and simple truth.

----------


## angelatc

> As to the cancer, yes, the kids don't get cancerwhen they are kids. By the time they get cancer, they are at least in their thirties. Sunburns increase the chance of cancer. If you don't know that, you don't need to be having children.


WHAT? Kids don't get cancer as kids? That's just not right. Even if you just mean skin cancer, melonoma is indeed on the rise in the under 10 set, despite the fact that parents use sunscreen far more diligently than they did when we were kids.

----------


## Mini-Me

> No, I don't believe the FDA either. They're political appointments, after all.  I actually knew this was coming, and we all should be having a good laugh over it because the FDA has pissed off the EPA by not consulting with them first before releasing the update.
> 
> I was just explaining what their logic was. 
> 
> FDA aside, my husband has been in the seafood for 30+ years. He has traveled the world, meeting just about everybody in every position you can think of in the industry.  He knows more about seafood and the seafood business than anybody else on RPF.  That's just the plain and simple truth.


To be honest, I thought your post about your husband was a subtle joke about conflicts of interest, like, _"Oh, once my husband gets back from selling seafood, he'll be able to tell you how good seafood is for you!  Hey, want to buy some seafood?"_   Seriously though, it really would be difficult for me to take the words of seafood industry professionals at face value.  Even perfectly well-meaning and caring people can turn a blind eye to inconvenient evidence and see only what they want to see.  I'm saying this as a person who loves seafood, too.   I have tons of tuna in the kitchen, etc., and I love the taste of swordfish ( )...but I'm still cautious about eating too much too often as well.

----------


## lucius

"*Is mercury something we need in our diets, or is no amount nutritionally safe or necessary?*

*No level is normal. Zero is normal. It doesnt have a specific reason to be in our body.* As long as we live on this Earth, because it's in Earth's crust and in the atmosphere, we're going to be exposed. But *there is no specific function for that metal in our body*."

*Scientific American: What is Mercury Poisoning*-- http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...cury-poisoning

----------


## youngbuck

> So they don't know, but you do? Go figure indeed!


Well it just so happens that I know a lot about health, and a lot of what I know your typical MD, unless further self educated, won't know.  Most MDs are taught how to treat symptoms, not how to treat the underlying cause of a disease.  If you actually cared enough, you could find out that I'm right by doing about 10 minutes of research, but go ahead and believe what you want.  

Go figure indeed!

----------


## Ian MacLeod

The FDA goes back to Paracelsus, no less.  Everything comes around again. 

Mercury is a poison, period. As with everything else, different people have different levels of tolerance and/or ability to deal with different substances, but still, mercury is a poison.  And when everything we can eat or drink contains industrial poisons?  Some questions answer themselves.

Ian

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

Personally, I would try to NEVER eat anything caught out of the Atlantic Ocean. Just look at the  warning tags on all the seafood from the Atlantic. Next, there's plenty of bacterial problems from the "FARMS" and forget the seafood farms from Vietnam, Indonesia, et al... very bad, cook thoroughly!

Swordfish for some reason has the highest levels of HEAVY METALS contaminates.

FDA, HUH?  They are PURE CORPORATE/BUSINESS SELLOUT WHORES! PERIOD!

Look at:  mercury amalgams... mercury preservative in vaccines, et al.

Then there's the Silent Killer, courtesy of the FDA... Hydrogenate food Products..

Fully or Partiality... injection of hydrogen molecules into foods to make them taste better, creamier, etc.  What the FDA doesn't tell you... Hydrolized food products do to your blood system/cardiovascular system.   

ANALOGY of almost every Cardiologist: inducing hydrogenized products damage your blood system like putting Sand into your oil for your Engine.

Why hasn't the FDA acted?  Because it's in everything, it effects all foods, and 100's of BILLIONS in business.  BANNED IN EUROPE!

You'll see a QUIET and SLOW phaseout of  Hdrogenized products...  courtesy of  Big Business and your Federal Government (FDA) 

Don't trust ANYTHING government publicly "ENSURES YOU" as being so-called safe.

----------


## Birdlady

> snip ....
> 
> As to the fake news and the lying about the vaccination requirements, that's preposterous.  False claims are taken very seriously by the FDA (although there are a lot of misleading claims in drug adds, they are all TECHNICALLY true--try reading The Truth About Drug Companies, it's very eye opening).  I know, as they ran us through the ringer with regards to our claims for infection resistant medical devices (mainly that we couldn't prove that we were killing the bugs, only that they weren't growing on the devices).
> 
> Next point:  if mercury toxicity is as permanent as you suggest, how did you detox?  I don't know much about mercury, but I do know that fish protein is good for you.  As with most things in life, there is certain to be a tradeoff in its consumption.  Moderation in all things and whatnot.
> 
> snip....


Every year right before school begins, the fear mongering about how the vaccinations are required begins.  I am sure there are a ton of news reports on Youtube.  Here's two that I found in 5 seconds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFY6unbKZTs
Listen to the beginning of the report--All Kindergartners and 6ths graders will be REQUIRED to get a chickenpox vaccine. LIES...Distortions!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b6ck7TyTdg
Beginning of the report.--Get your kids vaccinated or GO TO JAIL. That is what people are hearing.

As for detoxing, I was taking oral DMSA every 3 hours, 4 days on 4 days off.  I am taking a break right now because my thyroid isn't working properly. I am waiting to find the results of an ultrasound and blood work, then will start up again.  

Then later on I will be adding ALA to cross the BBB.  It will takes months or even years to get it all out.  

I absolutely hate fish. Good thing there are other animals out there you can eat for good protein. It's not needed.  You can get your omega 3's in a non-contaminated fish oil or hemp oil.

Found another news report:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NjGioBj5Ho
"It's something required for school attendance, it's not the latest book bag or cellphones. It is immunizations. Team 5 has uncovered evidence that some parents may be lying to get around state law".  Then it goes on to say this lady gets the "required" vaccinations for her children.  I don't think its fair for a child to walk around not being vaccinated.

----------


## Wendi

Funny that they would do this about the time that people start wising up to mercury in vaccines being a potential cause of autism.  Seems to me like someone is trying to make darn sure all the kiddos get their dose of mercury one way or the other.

Ya know what a primary characteristic of autism is?  Literal thinking, to a fault.  Would make a nice, easy-to-control population, wouldn't it...

----------


## tmosley

ITT people see the world in black and white.

There is no link between mercury exposure and autism.  Except in some celebrities heads.  The symptoms just happen to start at about the same time that kids get their vaccines.  Of course, it doesn't seem to matter to anyone that childhood vaccinations don't have mercury in them any more (except for the multipacks of the flu vaccine), or that due to fools like you people that terrible diseases that were thought to be relegated to third world countries are now making a comeback in this one because you have allowed the common shield of childhood vaccinations to develop holes.

Also, yes, the government definitely wants a nation full of cripples who can't work in any meaningful way.  They want to spend all their money taking care of them with an ever shrinking base of non-autistic people.  That makes so much sense it's scary.

----------


## M House

Okay that's not accurate, I'm referring to both of you, I just started going thru the lists provided by the CDC and the FDA on vaccinations. They determined in 1999 that removing Thimerosal(mercury containing preservative in vaccines) was something that should be done for every childhood vaccine. Instead of requiring every manufacturer to do this all they have to do is simply provide the option. Fortunately alot chose to remove it entirely. You can actually give your child many different mercury containing vaccines sometimes repeatedly though if you follow their guidelines. These charts are a bitch to go thru and just $#@!ing ridiculous at times, I'll post a new thread when I'm done looking thru them. For example they are now pushing for 4 different inoculations of that amazingly useless HPV vaccine from 0-18. Anyway it'll take some time, I have to look at each damn vaccine and where each manufacturer can come in. But I recommend people kinda shut up about it (I haven't seen much of any correct statements in this area), since nobody wants to do this themselves.

----------


## angelatc

> To be honest, I thought your post about your husband was a subtle joke about conflicts of interest, like, _"Oh, once my husband gets back from selling seafood, he'll be able to tell you how good seafood is for you!  Hey, want to buy some seafood?"_   Seriously though, it really would be difficult for me to take the words of seafood industry professionals at face value.  Even perfectly well-meaning and caring people can turn a blind eye to inconvenient evidence and see only what they want to see.  I'm saying this as a person who loves seafood, too.   I have tons of tuna in the kitchen, etc., and I love the taste of swordfish ( )...but I'm still cautious about eating too much too often as well.


He isn't trying to sell you seafood. It isn't worth his time. You can see how much interest he has in this thread.  

Rest assured he already knows that he isn't going to convince anybody of anything, nor does he care to try. He isn't a zealot, but he does believe that education is valuable.  Also rest assured that he has done far more research, read every report you've read, plus about 1,000 reports you haven't, and visited far more boats, classes, plants, and countries than you have.  It's fine to go with your gut, makes no difference to me, but be aware that you're actually spreading undocumented government propaganda on behalf of the USDA when you go on about the harmful effects of mercury in seafood.

We eat a lot of seafood. We would not eat seafood if he believed it was dangerous in the least.

You can't match his credentials, and you can't produce a single bit of evidence that eating seafood leads to mercury toxicity. 

Look at the FDA - were they wrong then, or are they wrong now? *I am going on the assumption that *everything* the government and the media tell us is a lie, and I am making a case for the fact that theory applies to the "eating fish is bad for you!" is no exception.*

----------


## angelatc

> The FDA goes back to Paracelsus, no less.  Everything comes around again. 
> 
> Mercury is a poison, period. As with everything else, different people have different levels of tolerance and/or ability to deal with different substances, but still, mercury is a poison.  And when everything we can eat or drink contains industrial poisons?  Some questions answer themselves.
> 
> Ian


Mercury is a naturally occurring substance, not an industrial byproduct.  The only two commercially available fish with mercury levels higher than the FDA allowable amount are swordfish and tuna, and they are caught so far out at sea that there is no effect from industrial pollution. The metabolism of tuna even blocks and reduces the mercury toxicity in their tissues. 

Also, samples of fish that were caught in the late 1800's measure the same level of mercury levels as the fish that are caught today.

Here's in interesting study dated September 2008 that makes a case for selenium being a potential binding agent in the system:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...00ce9885a3dd78

Sometimes answers aren't as simple as we think.

----------


## Pennsylvania

All this mercury stuff sounds like meat industry propaganda to me.

----------


## tmosley

> Mercury is a naturally occurring substance, not an industrial byproduct.  The only two commercially available fish with mercury levels higher than the FDA allowable amount are swordfish and tuna, and they are caught so far out at sea that there is no effect from industrial pollution. The metabolism of tuna even blocks and reduces the mercury toxicity in their tissues. 
> 
> Also, samples of fish that were caught in the late 1800's measure the same level of mercury levels as the fish that are caught today.
> 
> Here's in interesting study dated September 2008 that makes a case for selenium being a potential binding agent in the system:
> 
> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...00ce9885a3dd78
> 
> Sometimes answers aren't as simple as we think.


Hey, that's a great article!  Thanks for finding it!

Selenium is the bee's knees as far as I'm concerned.  It is involved in all kinds of beneficial biochemistry, it binds free arsenic, it's involved in immunochemistry, and it catalyzes a compound that helps to regulate sleep.

----------


## angelatc

> All this mercury stuff sounds like meat industry propaganda to me.


 I would love to be able to say that!!! 

I believe in abstracts more than I do subsidized science. I believe the poster who said that individual tolerances vary is probably right. I also believe very strongly in instinct, and that if you believe eating seafood is going to poison you, then perhaps it might. However, it will not poison me.

There has only been 1 documented case of mercury related symptoms as a result of seafood consumption in the USA. It was a woman who ate a pound of swordfish a day, every day, for nearly a year.   I forget the details, because seafood isn't really my forte, but she was misdiagnosed for a couple of months, and then when they figured it out, and she stopped eating seafood, the symptoms went away.

----------


## angelatc

> Hey, that's a great article!  Thanks for finding it!
> 
> Selenium is .... involved in immunochemistry, .


I have a particular and personal interest in that - what do you mean by that statement specifically?

----------


## tmosley

> I have a particular and personal interest in that - what do you mean by that statement specifically?


Selenium is the "tip of the spear" for killer t-cells.  The probe they use to kill bacteria and such is rich in selenium residues, and those selenium sites catalyze the production of superoxide, a reactive oxygen species, which then oxidizes the cell, generally killing them by splitting open the cellular membrane.

My research centers around using the same kill mechanism against any number of bacteria, viruses, and parasites, as well as blocking the accumulation of biofilms on surfaces (like a force field).

----------


## angelatc

> Selenium is the "tip of the spear" for killer t-cells.  The probe they use to kill bacteria and such is rich in selenium residues, and those selenium sites catalyze the production of superoxide, a reactive oxygen species, which then oxidizes the cell, generally killing them by splitting open the cellular membrane.
> 
> My research centers around using the same kill mechanism against any number of bacteria, viruses, and parasites, as well as blocking the accumulation of biofilms on surfaces (like a force field).


So, it acts as a "booster" of sorts for the immune system? 

Interesting. Not sure kicking up my T-Cell activity is a good thing for me though. I already have more than the average person does, and when they get excited they start attacking my organs and joints. 

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2962064 if you're interested.

----------


## tmosley

> So, it acts as a "booster" of sorts for the immune system? 
> 
> Interesting. Not sure kicking up my T-Cell activity is a good thing for me though. I already have more than the average person does, and when they get excited they start attacking my organs and joints. 
> 
> http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2962064 if you're interested.


To some extent.  It is a vital component of T-cells, but I don't think that taking more would cause autoimmune problems.  But then, toxicity from selenium includes symptoms such as hair loss and loss of fingernails, which might be caused by autoimmune issues (I am not a doctor, so my knowledge on that is limited, I only know what I research).  Toxicity only comes in at really high levels, and even then that is the inorganic form, not as an amino acid.

----------


## M House

What exactly does the selenium do for their operation? Does a a particular subset really have a probe like device to check cell membranes?

----------


## angelatc

> To some extent.  It is a vital component of T-cells, but I don't think that taking more would cause autoimmune problems.  But then, toxicity from selenium includes symptoms such as hair loss and loss of fingernails, which might be caused by autoimmune issues (I am not a doctor, so my knowledge on that is limited, I only know what I research).  Toxicity only comes in at really high levels, and even then that is the inorganic form, not as an amino acid.


Interesting that mercury poisoning also has the same symptoms.

----------


## Wendi

> *I am going on the assumption that *everything* the government and the media tell us is a lie, and I am making a case for the fact that theory applies to the "eating fish is bad for you!" is no exception.*


 Neither is the new statement that it isn't bad for you, then

----------


## M House

Whoever has the T-cell issue with attacking things, I'm pretty they might be stoppable. It's complex but I'm pretty sure if any doctor was truly motivated to sit down for a few hours on pubmed central they could go thru and adjust cytokine balance with steroids and derivatives. Most of the time when they try anything like that they just dump a continuous amount of hormonal garbage at your system. Obviously they can test your T-cell, cytokines, and related antibodies. Your endocannabinoid system's VR-1 receptors also play a role in this complex response. You could also ask your doctor about androgel and testosterone bio equivalent pellets (these have been approved for women for along time). Testosterone is a reducer of IL-2 cytokine production which would reduce the ability of T-cells to protract an auto-immune response. Atleast if I'm reading the studies right, I'm pretty sure somebody would just have to try it and check the levels later. But wouldn't really trust to many doctors to play with hormones they like to dump a lot of them which times are not even related synthetic compounds at the issue. Also in your joints and tissue there VR-1 receptors these are endocannabinoid receptors that seem to regulate alot of immune response. They have considered using both your bodies natural endogenous hormone and plant derived cannabis products to target this area. Tests in this area have been positive as well.

----------


## angelatc

> Neither is the new statement that it isn't bad for you, then


But I am basing my assertion that it isn't bad for you from sources outside of the FDA.  Nobody gave a whit about eating seafood until the government started fear-mongering.

----------


## M House

I think there is some validity for concern. Obviously, you wanna limit your mercury intake from as few sources as possible. Occasionally eating seafood won't hurt you neither will getting the occasional vaccine that has a small amount. If you have to repeatedly take the vaccine containing mercury and are eating a mercury containing fish for every meal, why would you not just look yourself for another option?

----------


## angelatc

> Whoever has the T-cell issue with attacking things, I'm pretty they might be stoppable. It's complex but I'm pretty sure if any doctor was truly motivated to sit down for a few hours on pubmed central they could go thru and adjust cytokine balance with steroids and derivatives. Most of the time when they try anything like that they just dump a continuous amount of hormonal garbage at your system. Obviously they can test your T-cell, cytokines, and related antibodies. Your endocannabinoid system's VR-1 receptors also play a role in this complex response. You could also ask your doctor about androgel and testosterone bio equivalent pellets (these have been approved for women for along time). Testosterone is a reducer of IL-2 cytokine production which would reduce the ability of T-cells to protract an auto-immune response. Atleast if I'm reading the studies right, I'm pretty sure somebody would just have to try it and check the levels later. But wouldn't really trust to many doctors to play with hormones they like to dump a lot of them which times are not even related synthetic compounds at the issue. Also in your joints and tissue there VR-1 receptors these are endocannabinoid receptors that seem to regulate alot of immune response. They have considered using both your bodies natural endogenous hormone and plant derived cannabis products to target this area. Tests in this area have been positive as well.


Trust me - I've had more tests than any human should ever have, blood and otherwise.  And I have had some wonderful doctors who were very motivated, brilliant and dedicated, so please do not insult them by insinuating that they weren't, because they literally saved my life when it certainly would have been easier not to, and I was so sick I really didn't even care any more. 

First they were trying to figure out what the heck was wrong, because it's pretty rare. There's no test for it.  It doesn't present with specific set of symptoms or routine pathogenesis. There's no test you can run that will give them a positive result. I can't remember all the specifics now, but it looks like Lupus to them, but the bloodwork comes back all screwy.  

After they figured it out, then they were all excited because they want to study me and write about me because it's rare and doesn't carry a specific set of symptoms nor does it progress the same in all patients.  

I was never treated with hormones, only steroids. People who have it worse than I do sometimes get treated with methatrexate and/or enbrel. Like any other disease, people claim a myriad of treatments have worked for them, including gold injections and antibiotic therapy too.

I am not currently flaring, so I'm not taking anything. It comes and goes as it pleases although extreme stress seems to trigger it.

I'll forward the post to some others who are always looking for their magic bullet though. Maybe one of them can use it.

----------


## lucius

> All this mercury stuff sounds like meat industry propaganda to me.


Don't worry, under CODEX, mercury will probably be labeled as an essential nutriant... 

University of Calgary Medical School, *How Mercury Causes Brain Neuron Degeneration*: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...l+mecury&hl=en

----------


## tmosley

> What exactly does the selenium do for their operation? Does a a particular subset really have a probe like device to check cell membranes?


The t-cells are the part of the immune system that does the killing.  Your body produces antibodies that latch onto foreign objects with certain proteins or carbohydrates on the surface, and display a certain peptide sequence, basically flagging whatever it is attached to for killing.  The T-cell comes in and does the dirty work.  It doesn't know what it's killing (which is why you sometimes get autoimmune diseases--your body produces an antibody for some bug that also happens to catch onto some other type of cell in your body, flagging the innocent cell for destruction), it just sees the flag and lets fly with the superoxide.  The selenium is like a gun.  It fires superoxide at whatever is around it (the range is a half of a cell length) between the selenium rich site and the target.  The bullets are another compound (reduced glutathione), but I won't go into that here.

----------


## M House

Angelatc steroids and hormones are gonna be sorta the same thing. Depends on wether it's a steroidal hormone or not. I read thru a recent endocrine study compilation and summary on pubmed awhile back that was a pretty cool summary of some of the recent research. It's dated 2008 and summed like some 169 endocrine studies. Showed it too my dad awhile back who is actually a doctor and well he's impressed how much has been looked into during the last decade. Wasn't amused enough to read it thru though something about it being for an endocrinologist. I thought it was just a bit on the lame side there cuz these systems effect everything. Anyway I wouldn't get discouraged or lose interest in keeping up with the stuff. 

Okay Tmosley, I understand that much about their operation but I still don't get it. The surface expresses a variety of things on the cell. Proteins, antigens, and stuff get expressed and are tagged by these antibodies. The antibody can do a variety of things and it attaches to the surface. Depending on how the T-cells are stimulated they eliminate the cells tagged. There's also regulatory T types that depress this response as well as cytokines that effect their actions. Is the selenium seriously used like a bullet to compromise and kill a cell. If so which T cell types do this I wanna check it out.

----------


## angelatc

> Don't worry, under CODEX, mercury will probably be labeled as an essential nutriant... 
> 
> University of Calgary Medical School, *How Mercury Causes Brain Neuron Degeneration*: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...l+mecury&hl=en


That's all well and good, and makes it pretty clear that you shouldn't drink the contents of your broken thermometer.But it apparently doesn't effect the development of the fish. And the children of Asia seem to be smarter than the children of America. so clearly the effect of ingesting mercury by eating seafood isn't directly related to neurological degeneration. Show me anything that says the opposite.

The hubby, fish monger that he is, said:




> ....he avoids swordfish from Chile, simply because they grow to be so absolutely huge.  Ironically, they are fished from a region that is practically Antartica, and therefore not exposed to any significant (if any at all) industrial waste.
> 
> ....the EPA set their acceptable limit at .5 ppm, but that is 10% of the level that they decided could do even a miniscule amount of damage.
> 
> .....if the FDA / EPA was serious about the limit, there would be no swordfish sold in the US or Canada, because harvesting them when they are small enough to stay below the .5 ppm would require them to be harvested before sexual maturity and therefore would be unsustainable.


Again, what the FDA said was that the health benefits gleaned from eating seafood (which have been proven to exist) outweighed the small theoretical risk (never proven) of ingesting seafood.

Apparently the selenium in the system of the fish might have something to do with that. Going back to the video, the mercury could be bonding to the selenium and not the cells.

----------


## angelatc

> Angelatc steroids and hormones are gonna be sorta the same thing. Depends on wether it's a steroidal hormone or not. .


Good old fashioned prednisone. Megadosed through an IV for a while then orally after that.

(That stuff scrambled my brain. I used to think a lot clearer than I do now. )

----------


## M House

Prednisone is a bit complicated to explain but it's not one of your bodies own hormones or steroids. It's pretty destructive and suppresses adrenal function. It's negatively effects the metabolism here. You get similar compounds from your bodies own sex hormones. Technically you'd get a very similar compound from adrenal conversion of for example progesterone. In fact you can also get similar derivatives from testosterone too. If they can figure out a dozen different ways to get a birth control back operational, they could probably figure out a mild hormone/derivative mix to regulate these circuits for alot of purposes. Birth control for example uses a very small amount of synthetic hormone to accomplish this. But when they do hormone, steroid, gluco whatever or otherwise therapy it's pretty much dumping a massed amount of endocrine garbage at these systems. Aka the prometrium tablets come in 100mg and 200mg capsules this is pretty damn big, doctors regularly prescribe 600 mg a day. To give some perspective Seasonique an extended cycle birth control operates on less than 1mg of synthetic hormones a day. This isn't exactly a totally fair comparison I'd have to once again look thru each every component but it's gives a good indicator of how sensitive our bodies are and even a small amount can have a very potent controlled effect.

----------


## lucius

> That's all well and good, and makes it pretty clear that you shouldn't drink the contents of your broken thermometer. But it apparently doesn't effect the development of the fish. And the children of Asia seem to be smarter than the children of America. so clearly the effect of ingesting mercury by eating seafood isn't directly related to neurological degeneration. 
> *Show me anything that says the opposite*.


Mercury exists in the environment in three different forms: elemental mercury
(vapors that are breathed), organic mercury (methylmercury), and inorganic mercury
(mercuric mercury). Each form of mercury is toxic to the body but each type is absorbed
at a different rate. *The most toxic form, absorbed in the gut, is organic mercury, or
methylmercury. This is the form that the toxic metal takes in seafood, which is then
consumed by the public.* Elemental mercury is converted into methylmercury mostly by
aquatic micro-organisms found in sediments at the bottom of bodies of water. These
micro-organisms, and their toxins, are consumed by small fish that are then eaten by
larger fish. The mercury works its way up the food chain until humans unknowingly
consume it with their fresh tuna dinner or swordfish platter. Because of its steady trek up
the food chain, much higher levels of mercury are found in larger, predatory fish than in
smaller fish...

*The developing fetus and young children have proven to be the most susceptible
to damage from mercury poisoning. The concentration of methylmercury in the brain of
the unborn fetus has been shown to be 5-7 times higher than in the maternal blood*. Also,
it’s estimated that the fetus is 5-10 times more sensitive to methylmercury than adults.
Acute exposure in the womb can lead to severe intellectual disability, cerebral palsy,
blindness and deafness. The risks go down somewhat for young children, but a young
brain in any stage of development is still more sensitive. A study of women and their
children in the Faroe Islands of Denmark revealed a definite link. By hooking up
electrodes to the children’s heads, researchers were able to measure electrical signaling in
the brain. The results showed delays in the brain signaling of the mercury-affected
children and the higher the level of mercury in the child and in the mother, the more
distinct the irregularities became. The study also found that these neurological changes
led to poorer system control of heart function.

Fish, however, are not all bad. In fact, they still have incredibly positive health
benefits, as long as they’re low in mercury. The long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty
acids present in the fatty tissue of fish greatly help the functioning of the heart and the
brain. Fish still constitute a very important part of a healthy diet. You just have to
choose your seafood more carefully than in the past...

From: *Seafood Consumption and Mercury Poisoning in Humans* _Not the best of studies, but food for thought._ 

*Citations*
Schardt, D. (2003). Fishing for Mercury. Nutrition Action Health Letter, Vol. 30, Issue 2,
9-15
Raines, B., Waldman, A. (2003). Your Deadly Diet. Health, Vol. 17, Issue 5, 120-129
Theobald, H. (2003). Oily Fish and Pregnancy. British Nutrition
Foundation-Nutrition Bulletin, 28, 247-251
Guallar, E., M.D., Sanz-Gallardo, I., M.D., van’t Veer, P., Bode, P., Aro, A., M.D.,
Gomez-Aracena, J., M.D. (2002). Mercury, Fish Oils, and the Risk of Myocardial
Infarction. The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 347, 1747-1754
Oken, E., M.D., Kleinman, K., Berland, W., Simon, S., M.D., Rich-Edwards, J., &
Gillman, M., M.D. (2003). Decline in fish consumption among pregnant women after a
national mercury advisory. Obstetrics & Gynecology, Vol. 102, Issue 2, 346-351
Reuters Health (2004, February). Mercury Study Shows Permanent Damage to
Kids. CNN Online. Retrieved March 21, 2004 from
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/HEALTH/02/06/mercury.reut/
Mercury Homepage. United States Environmental Protection Agency Online.
Retrieved March 21, 2004 from http://www.epa.gov/mercury/
Williams, J. M. (1997, December). Gone Fishing: How the Failure to
Reduce Mercury Emissions Threatens Americans’ Health. California Communities
Against Toxics. Retrieved March 21, 2004 from
http://www.mercurypolicy.org/emissio...ne_fishing.pdf
Burnett, T. A., Joslin, J. D., Parkhurst, W. J. (2002, January).
Mercury Emissions: Power Plant Mercury Emissions and Human Health: What are the
Central Issues? Tennessee Valley Authority Online. Retrieved March 21, 2004 from
http://www.tva.gov/environment/air/o.../merc_emis.htm
(2003, January). Hooked on fish? There might be some catches. The Harvard
Health Letter, Vol. 28, Issue 3, 4-7

*We will agree to disagree. Nobody touched this from upthread:*

"*Is mercury something we need in our diets, or is no amount nutritionally safe or necessary?*

*No level is normal. Zero is normal. It doesn’t have a specific reason to be in our body.* As long as we live on this Earth, because it's in Earth's crust and in the atmosphere, we're going to be exposed. But *there is no specific function for that metal in our body*."

*Scientific American: What is Mercury Poisoning*-- http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...cury-poisoning

_ps: I will take precautions to limit mercury exposure for my family and myself.  Furthermore, I understand that studies inimical to policy agenda are sporadic at best and non-funded, nor do I trust regulatory agencies who in affect are agents of the industries they supposedly regulate. Life is a crap-shoot; we all roll our own dice._

----------


## Birdlady

> That's all well and good, and makes it pretty clear that you shouldn't drink the contents of your broken thermometer.*But it apparently doesn't effect the development of the fish*. And the children of Asia seem to be smarter than the children of America. so clearly the effect of ingesting mercury by eating seafood isn't directly related to neurological degeneration. Show me anything that says the opposite.
> 
> ...


I actually disagree with organic mercury being the MOST dangerous.  It isn't dangerous until it is turned into the inorganic form and this can't be stopped (once in the body).

Actually swallowing the mercury in a thermometer isn't dangerous.  That is the metallic form of mercury.  However the vapor form is extremely dangerous because it immediately gets absorbed into the lungs and goes throughout your body.  This mercury then gets metabolized and turned into the inorganic mercury which is the most deadly.  I know this goes against what some people think.  Mercury goes into the brain in the organic form and then quickly turns into the inorganic form which is deadly and cannot cross the BBB easily.  It gets stuck in your brain where it usually settles into the pituitary gland.

Mercury doesn't affect fish development because they have enzymes that methylate it.  Unfortunately mammals do not have this protection.   

Your statement of Asian children being smarter (so this proves that mercury in fish is safe) just made my brain explode. I really hope you don't actually believe that.  There are many factors into why they may be smarter that goes far beyond mercury and fish consumption.  I'll list a few if you'd like.

----------


## angelatc

> Your statement of Asian children being smarter (so this proves that mercury in fish is safe) just made my brain explode. I really hope you don't actually believe that.  There are many factors into why they may be smarter that goes far beyond mercury and fish consumption.  I'll list a few if you'd like.



You don't have to show me your studies. because a.) I did not say that eating seafood made kids smarter.  I jmplied that their brains were apparently not damaged by consuming seafood and b.) I really won't even bother to look at them because they have nothing to do with this topic.

I did not say mercury was safe. I said eating seafood is safe.  I also said there is a faction of the population who will not believe this. I am not trying to change your mind, I am just trying to counteract the propaganda of  fear-mongers.

If you want to show me a study, show me the one I have been asking for, which is that eating seafood causes mercury related neurological damage.

----------


## angelatc

> [B]. A study of women and their
> children in the Faroe Islands of Denmark revealed a definite link. By hooking up
> electrodes to the children’s heads, researchers were able to measure electrical signaling in
> the brain. The results showed delays in the brain signaling of the mercury-affected
> children and the higher the level of mercury in the child and in the mother, the more
> distinct the irregularities became. The study also found that these neurological changes
> led to poorer system control of heart function.


I already typed this once, so either I lost it or I am double-posting.

Anyway, I asked dear hubby about the the study, and he knew it off the top of his head. He said, and I am paraphrasing with the help of Google because I do not type fast, that the scientist who did this study released a press release refuting the way the media was playing his research.  I found a blogger who reproduced it on-line:




> http://www.papageorgetuna.blogspot.c...a_archive.html
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Molly Heath
> February 10, 2004 617-646-1046
> *Faroe Island Lead Scientist and Physician Says Whale Meat, Not Fish, Cause of Mercury Threat To Children*
> Says Fish Consumption Is Beneficial To Children™s Health
> Boston, MA (February 10, 2004) Œ
> 
> The chief physician for The Faroese Hospital System and the researcher in charge of methylmercury research of children in the Faroe Islands since 1985 corrected information released recently in several major New England newspapers concerning the source of mercury exposure in the Faroe Islands. Pal Weihe provided a statement to the New England Seafood Producers Association stating *that children were exposed to mercury through the consumption of pilot whale meat, not fish. Weihe stated that fish normally consumed in the Faroe
> Islands, including cod and haddock, are low in mercury and in his opinion do not
> ...


Dear hubby also said that the scientist has not allowed any peer review of his raw data, which is always a red flag for me.

All of our public policy references to the Faroe Islands study instead of another mercury study done in the Seychelle Islands which found no harm to children and pregnant women from a diet rich in fish.

I think the title of this thread is misleading. It should be "Science Stuns Liberals Who Hate Fishing Again."  

(note - there are studies that prove that populations that eat more seafood than we do indeed have higher levels of mercury in their system. I am not claming otherwise. )

Note that  Jeremy Piven was probably poisoned by herbs used in Chinese medicine.   The media just tells us, over and over, that it was seafood.

----------


## angelatc

> Prednisone is a bit complicated to explain but it's not one of your bodies own hormones or steroids. It's pretty destructive and suppresses adrenal function. It's negatively effects the metabolism here.


Ah the memories you're bringing back. I remember that the prednisone made the adrenal gland stop producing, and for that reason getting off prednisone was a bitch.

----------


## angelatc

> I actually disagree with organic mercury being the MOST dangerous.  It isn't dangerou
> 
> Mercury doesn't affect fish development because they have enzymes that methylate it. .


What enzymes are those, specifically? Because I jut read that the latest thinking is that the selenium in their environment might be the reason that the mercury doesn't harm them.

----------


## lucius

> ...All of our public policy references to the Faroe Islands study instead of another mercury study done in the *Seychelle Islands* which found no harm to children and pregnant women from a diet rich in fish...


But the *SEYCHELLES CHILD DEVELOPMENT STUDY* noted that males had lower scores on visual recognition and visual attention tests, which would support the findings of the *CANADIAN CREE INDIAN COHORT STUDY*:

In a 1985 study of Cree Indians from communities in North Quebec with known high organic mercury exposure in the diet, over 200 children born in 1975-6 were examined using both neurological and developmental tests. Maternal hair mercury levels were used to estimate the childrens' mercury exposure, and the mean methylmercury level was approximately 6 ppm. Only 6% of the children had exposure levels exceeding 20 ppm. *Abnormality of the tendon reflexes was positively associated with methyl mercury exposure only in boys* (p=0.05), but there was no consistent dose-response relationship. No other positive associations were found.

Once again, we can agree to disagree, but I think your absolute stance is somewhat disingenuous, akin to shades of propaganda, and with the proper funding, your position may become rapidly unattainable. Furthermore, I understand that studies *inimical* to policy agenda are sporadic at best and non-funded, nor do I *trust regulatory agencies* who in affect are *agents* of the *very same industries* they supposedly *regulate*.

I understand from an industrial hygiene aspect that *no* amount of *mercury*,ie. "*0*", is *beneficial* to the human body, and the best response is to play defense and limit total overall exposure. See Davidson, PW, GJ Myers, et al. 1995. Neurotoxicology 16(4):677-688 and Myers, GJ, PW Davidson, et al. 1995. Neurotoxicology 16(4):639-652. 

I am well aware of the link between DHA esters and increase IQ's in a developing fetus. We heavily supplemented during pregnancy and beyond, but with molecularly distilled fish oils--sans mercury. My children are way beyond their peers in development. _Once again, life is a crap-shoot; we all roll our own dice._




> ...I think the title of this thread is misleading. It should be "Science Stuns *Liberals* Who Hate Fishing Again."...


Allow me to play devil's advocate: _how about an example of individuals unwittingly parroting/defending policy agenda..._

----------


## tmosley

> Okay Tmosley, I understand that much about their operation but I still don't get it. The surface expresses a variety of things on the cell. Proteins, antigens, and stuff get expressed and are tagged by these antibodies. The antibody can do a variety of things and it attaches to the surface. Depending on how the T-cells are stimulated they eliminate the cells tagged. There's also regulatory T types that depress this response as well as cytokines that effect their actions. Is the selenium seriously used like a bullet to compromise and kill a cell. If so which T cell types do this I wanna check it out.


I'm told it's the killer T-cells.  I don't know much beyond that.  Sadly, I don't know a whole lot about the immune system.  The professor who heads up our research team (one of the two who originally came up with the idea) told me that  the probe used to lyse the cells was rich in selenium-containing residues.  When I looked it up on Wikipedia, I didn't see anything about a "killer T cell" in the article about on T-cells, so I can't help you there.

I am a chemist, so I know plenty about the kill mechanism of selenium.  Basically, it catalyses the transfer of an electron from glutathione to oxygen, producing superoxide, a free radical.  The superoxide is the "bullet" which impacts the cell and kills it.  The selenium is the "gun" that "fires" it, and the glutathione is the "bullet case".  It's basically a teeny tiny electron gun.  Glutathione is abundant inside the body, which is why this works so well for medicine and implants.

----------


## M House

Wow, Tmosley I kinda thought you were exaggerating about this stuff. Selenoproteins, wtf? CD3s, CD28s I mean those aren't even in text books as T cell subtypes that I can remember. They come from the spleen!? When do we actually get to see something cool like this in a college textbook. Anyway guess I'll have to check em' out later. I spent 6 hours today looking at different ways to hook up guitar pickups as a regulated DC source. Anymore information on something technical and I think I'm going to pass out.

----------


## tmosley

> Wow, Tmosley I kinda thought you were exaggerating about this stuff. Selenoproteins, wtf? CD3s, CD28s I mean those aren't even in text books as T cell subtypes that I can remember. They come from the spleen!? When do we actually get to see something cool like this in a college textbook. Anyway guess I'll have to check em' out later. I spent 6 hours today looking at different ways to hook up guitar pickups as a regulated DC source. Anymore information on something technical and I think I'm going to pass out.


This stuff still isn't well known.  Our group (WAAYYY before I got here) did much of the fundamental research back in the 90's, and published a few papers, but they didn't get much fanfare.  There are only something like 100 experts on selenium in the world, and almost none of them outside of our group even know its catalytic mechanism (using it instead for organic synthesis or for photovoltaics--a field that takes advantage of some of the same electron transport properties that are likely used in its catalysis).

Once the first products start coming onto the market (orthodontics are scheduled for release in Texas in two weeks), you'll probably start seeing a lot more about it in textbooks and in the media.

----------


## angelatc

> But the *SEYCHELLES CHILD DEVELOPMENT STUDY* noted that males had lower scores on visual recognition and visual attention tests, which would support the findings of the *CANADIAN CREE INDIAN COHORT STUDY*:
> 
> In a 1985 study of Cree Indians from communities in North Quebec with known high organic mercury exposure in the diet, over 200 children born in 1975-6 were examined using both neurological and developmental tests. Maternal hair mercury levels were used to estimate the childrens' mercury exposure, and the mean methylmercury level was approximately 6 ppm. Only 6% of the children had exposure levels exceeding 20 ppm. *Abnormality of the tendon reflexes was positively associated with methyl mercury exposure only in boys* (p=0.05), but there was no consistent dose-response relationship. No other positive associations were found.
> 
> Once again, we can agree to disagree, but I think your absolute stance is somewhat disingenuous, akin to shades of propaganda, and with the proper funding, your position may become rapidly unattainable. Furthermore, I understand that studies *inimical* to policy agenda are sporadic at best and non-funded, nor do I *trust regulatory agencies* who in affect are *agents* of the *very same industries* they supposedly *regulate*.
> 
> I understand from an industrial hygiene aspect that *no* amount of *mercury*,ie. "*0*", is *beneficial* to the human body, and the best response is to play defense and limit total overall exposure. See Davidson, PW, GJ Myers, et al. 1995. Neurotoxicology 16(4):677-688 and Myers, GJ, PW Davidson, et al. 1995. Neurotoxicology 16(4):639-652. 
> 
> I am well aware of the link between DHA esters and increase IQ's in a developing fetus. We heavily supplemented during pregnancy and beyond, but with molecularly distilled fish oils--sans mercury. My children are way beyond their peers in development. _Once again, life is a crap-shoot; we all roll our own dice._
> ...




Oh my gosh - are you angry? 

 My stance isn't disingenious - it absolutely begs for more research. My point was that the USDA and the FDA picked a number that is far lower than anything proven remotely dangerous, and spent millions scaring people (including you, apparently) with disinformation. And yet you, with your healthy, non-seafood eating, mercury free intelligence distrust of all that is government, parroted that very study back to me as evidence. Yet you accuse me of promoting "their" agenda? WTF?  

What have I said that isn't true?  I have not said that eating mercury is bad. I have said that there is no evidence that eating seafood causes neurological damage.  

Where in the Cree Study is seafood mentioned? I can't seem to find it online, and the hubby is at work. 

Why are you selectively quoting early indications that eventually disappeared on the Seychelles Study? Did you forget to give me your link?  Because here is the summary of the entire 66 month study:

Last line of the 66 month study:


> *Test results show the expected associations between co-variates and developmental endpoints. No adverse association between prenatal exposure and any developmental endpoint has been found.*


Second quote, from the study results at 9 years of age: 


> *These findings do not support an association between prenatal exposure to MeHg from uncontaminated ocean fish consumption and adverse neurodevelopmental consequences in a population not exposed to other neurotoxins*.


Meaning that neither the beneficial variances (Conner's Teacher Rating Scale, ADHD Index) or the adverse variance (non-dominant hand) are directly attributable to eating seafood.

So again, I am using the study that you gave me, because it states that I am right. Yet my absolute stance is disingenuous. Why is that? 

Besides, I am not even all that absolute! I already mentioned that we do not eat swordfish from Chile because they are too big, and therefore have very high concentrations of mercury. We also don't eat farm-raised fish from anywhere for much the same reason.  

I am saying that if you want the truth about seafood, my husband knows more than you do. And there still isn't a study that indicates neurological damage results from eating seafood.  I readily acknowledge that there is evidence that mercury does cause neurological damage, but I find the conundrum fascinating, not threatening.

Personally I am much more interested in finding out why seafood doesn't poison us than continuing to insist that it might, and the selenium thing is very interesting to me.  Seeing the whale fat link only reinforces in my mind that there is a possibly a link to the mercury selenium bond in the seafood we consume.

 That's a study I would like to see done, because I think it would prove to be a much better use of "proper funding" than pursuing a link that simply doesn't exist.

----------


## lucius

> Oh my gosh - are you angry?...


No, just being direct.




> ... My stance isn't disingenuous - *it absolutely begs for more research*...


We agree; *it absolutely begs for more research*. I would like to see a toxicologist of the caliber of say Phyllis Mullenix, study the effect of mercury in seafood, using advance computer behavioral pattern recognition, but I am not going to hold my breath waiting.




> *...there still isn't a study that indicates neurological damage results from eating seafood...*


Beg to differ...what I found interesting, with these limited studies, even noted in your touted, *The Seychelles Child Development Study: Ocean fish consumption & mercury exposure* that males had lower scores on visual recognition and visual attention tests, which supports the findings of the *CANADIAN CREE INDIAN COHORT STUDY* [citation: Gilbert, SG, KS Grant-Webster. 1995. Environ Health Perspect. 103(Suppl 6):135-142]:

In a 1985 study of Cree Indians from communities in North Quebec with known high organic mercury exposure in the diet, over 200 children born in 1975-6 were examined using both neurological and developmental tests. Maternal hair mercury levels were used to estimate the children's' mercury exposure, and the mean methylmercury level was approximately 6 ppm. Only 6% of the children had exposure levels exceeding 20 ppm. *Abnormality of the tendon reflexes was positively associated with methyl mercury exposure only in boys (p=0.05)*, but there was no consistent dose-response relationship. No other positive associations were found. 

As a layman, an engineer, who has worked with industrial hygiene aspects including coordinating spill control for several decades, this resonated with my studies, because it seems that certain male children are hyper sensitive/susceptible to mercury exposure. 

_Once again, I am going to agree to disagree with you, but I will limit overall mercury burden by eliminating certain seafoods._

----------


## M House

Men and women have very different gray and white matter arrangements in the cortex. Gray matter is used for sensory motor interpretation. Considering men seem to have a much greater gray matter volume in specific processing regions and I believe less in the PFC. Women have a much larger gray matter conc in PFC. Regardless I can see how men would be alot more susceptible to neurotoxins. They'd knock out alot of processing before even getting to the PFC. Also this relates to certain drugs women for example are effected bit differently by cocaine. Also you can look at study's on this but remember brain structure varies highly on the individual. Other than the generic right handed male layout (there's other variations even here too) , females, lefties, etc. have a very diverse brain layout.

----------

