Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
By Raquel Rutledge Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Monday, November 19, 2007
* dailycamera . com /news/2007/nov/19/most-flu-shots-contain-mercury-but-few-know-it/
A record 130 million Americans are expected to get a flu shot this season in
hopes of ducking the nasty virus, but as the needle pierces the skin, more
than 80 percent will also get what some say is a hefty and dangerous dose of
mercury.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that almost
everyone - including pregnant women - get the injection, despite written
warnings from the vaccine manufacturers.
Citing an estimated 36,000 deaths a year from the flu and flu-related
illness, the mainstream medical community, including the American Academy of
Pediatrics and American Lung Association, says the benefits far exceed any
risk from the shot.
In a typical year, between 5 percent and 10 percent of the population will
get the flu virus, resulting in roughly 200,000 hospitalizations, according
to the CDC. The flu can be especially dangerous for very young children and
people 65 and older. Elderly people account for about 90 percent of all
flu-related deaths.
Simply stated: The flu shot saves lives, the CDC says.
Yet a growing number of doctors, scientists and citizen organizations, such
as Safe Minds, the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs and Moms Against
Mercury, say mercury in flu shots has not been proved to be safe and can be
linked to neurological disorders and other serious problems. They push for
mercury-free shots that are available in limited quantities but that few
know about.
"Mercury causes tremendous damage to the brain," said Paul King, scientific
adviser for the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs.
Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison the
central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other systems in
the body.
About 80 percent of all flu shots distributed in the United States contain a
mercury-based preservative called thimerosal. Thimerosal consists of 49.6
percent ethyl mercury, an anti-bacterial, anti-fungal that allows
manufacturers to sell the vaccine in large, multi-dose containers without
fear of contamination.
The Environmental Protection Agency and federal Food and Drug Administration
have not set an exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
The federal agencies have, however, set exposure limits for another organic
and closely related form of mercury, methyl mercury - the type that comes
from coal-fired power plants and is found in fish. They use that standard
when estimating the safety of ethyl mercury.
Doctors and scientists debate the differences of the two forms in terms of
how they affect the brain and body, but all agree: Both are toxins.
A typical 0.5 milliliter flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts
per billion - of mercury.
The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
Using the standards set for methyl mercury consumption - the kind that's in
fish - an average 130-pound person getting the flu shot would exceed the
daily limit by more than four times. A 22-pound baby would get more than 25
times the amount of mercury considered safe. And doctors are recommending
that many babies and children get two flu shots this season.
A material safety data sheet from Eli Lilly and Co., which no longer makes a
flu vaccine, says effects of exposure to thimerosal may include "fetal
changes, decreased offspring survival and lung tissue changes. ... Exposure
in utero and in children may cause mild to severe mental retardation and
mild to severe motor coordination impairment."
It does not state at what levels of exposure these consequences could occur.
The CDC and National Institutes of Health have commissioned a number of
studies looking at vaccine safety and any links vaccines might have with
autism. In 2001 the Institute of Medicine reported that the evidence was
inadequate to say whether thimerosal caused autism or other disorders. The
issue warranted further investigation, the report stated.
Several other studies followed. In 2004, the Institute of Medicine reported
that it couldn't find a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing
vaccines and autism.
This September, another study published in the New England Journal of
Medicine was unable to prove a causal relationship between early exposure to
thimerosal and neuropsychological outcomes in children ages 7 to 10. It did
not address possible links with autism.
Amid all the uncertainty, and considering that mercury is a known
neurotoxin, several states, such as California, Illinois and New York, have
banned thimerosal in vaccines - including the flu shot - given to young
children and pregnant women.
Yet every day, in grocery stores, fast-food restaurants, pharmacies, at work
and elsewhere, people are bombarded with the message to "Shoo the flu" and
are repeatedly told "the best way to beat the flu is to get a flu shot."
Nothing is ever mentioned about thimerosal.
Nothing is ever said about the manufacturers' warnings for pregnant women.
In late October the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
reminded all pregnant women to get the flu shot.
Yet the country's largest maker of the flu vaccine, Sanofi Pasteur, in its
own literature distributed in package inserts with the vaccine, specifically
states:
"Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza Virus
Vaccine. It is also not known whether Influenza Virus Vaccine can cause
fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction
capacity. Influenza Virus Vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only
if clearly needed."
Other flu vaccine makers include similar warnings in package inserts for
both types of flu shots.
Novartis, maker of Fluzone, goes on to instruct that the "clinical judgment
of the attending physician should prevail at all times in determining
whether to administer the vaccine to a pregnant woman."
Yet physicians aren't present at most flu clinics. So, many, such as Aurora
Health Care's Visiting Nurse Association, rely on information from the
federal government and medical associations.
"The CDC recommends all pregnant women get them," said Lisa Taylor, a
registered nurse and clinical coordinator for Aurora Health Care's Shoo the
Flu program, which will vaccinate an estimated 90,000 people around
southeastern Wisconsin this season.
The CDC cites one study supporting its claim that the vaccination is safe
for pregnant women - a 1973 study designed primarily to look at tumors in
children up to 1 year old whose mothers received a polio vaccination. It
included a sentence stating that one child of more than 2,000 mothers
vaccinated with the flu vaccine had a spinal cord tumor.
"It's ridiculous," said David Ayoub, a physician and medical director of
Springfield, Ill.-based Prairie Collaborative for Immunization Safety, a
group concerned about mercury in vaccinations. "It's a big, big deception.
"Half the kids could have died, but the study never would have shown that
because they were specifically looking for tumors," said Ayoub, co-author of
"Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the
Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,"
published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in 2006.
Still the CDC defends the study, calling it "relevant" and says other
studies also demonstrate the vaccine's safety during pregnancy.
Vaccine manufacturers such as Sanofi Pasteur, MedImmune and Novartis say
they're ramping up production of thimerosal-free vaccines but don't have
capacity to convert all the flu shots immediately.
Protect yourself
Read the labels and materials that accompany the flu shot
Ask for a preservative-free flu shot
Consult with your physician if you have concerns
To report an adverse reaction to the flu shot, file a report at Vaccine
Adverse Event Reporting System (vaers.hhs.gov) or call 800-822-7967
A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion - of
mercury.
The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
By Raquel Rutledge Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Monday, November 19, 2007
* dailycamera . com /news/2007/nov/19/most-flu-shots-contain-mercury-but-few-know-it/
A record 130 million Americans are expected to get a flu shot this season in
hopes of ducking the nasty virus, but as the needle pierces the skin, more
than 80 percent will also get what some say is a hefty and dangerous dose of
mercury.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that almost
everyone - including pregnant women - get the injection, despite written
warnings from the vaccine manufacturers.
Citing an estimated 36,000 deaths a year from the flu and flu-related
illness, the mainstream medical community, including the American Academy of
Pediatrics and American Lung Association, says the benefits far exceed any
risk from the shot.
In a typical year, between 5 percent and 10 percent of the population will
get the flu virus, resulting in roughly 200,000 hospitalizations, according
to the CDC. The flu can be especially dangerous for very young children and
people 65 and older. Elderly people account for about 90 percent of all
flu-related deaths.
Simply stated: The flu shot saves lives, the CDC says.
Yet a growing number of doctors, scientists and citizen organizations, such
as Safe Minds, the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs and Moms Against
Mercury, say mercury in flu shots has not been proved to be safe and can be
linked to neurological disorders and other serious problems. They push for
mercury-free shots that are available in limited quantities but that few
know about.
"Mercury causes tremendous damage to the brain," said Paul King, scientific
adviser for the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs.
Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison the
central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other systems in
the body.
About 80 percent of all flu shots distributed in the United States contain a
mercury-based preservative called thimerosal. Thimerosal consists of 49.6
percent ethyl mercury, an anti-bacterial, anti-fungal that allows
manufacturers to sell the vaccine in large, multi-dose containers without
fear of contamination.
The Environmental Protection Agency and federal Food and Drug Administration
have not set an exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
The federal agencies have, however, set exposure limits for another organic
and closely related form of mercury, methyl mercury - the type that comes
from coal-fired power plants and is found in fish. They use that standard
when estimating the safety of ethyl mercury.
Doctors and scientists debate the differences of the two forms in terms of
how they affect the brain and body, but all agree: Both are toxins.
A typical 0.5 milliliter flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts
per billion - of mercury.
The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
Using the standards set for methyl mercury consumption - the kind that's in
fish - an average 130-pound person getting the flu shot would exceed the
daily limit by more than four times. A 22-pound baby would get more than 25
times the amount of mercury considered safe. And doctors are recommending
that many babies and children get two flu shots this season.
A material safety data sheet from Eli Lilly and Co., which no longer makes a
flu vaccine, says effects of exposure to thimerosal may include "fetal
changes, decreased offspring survival and lung tissue changes. ... Exposure
in utero and in children may cause mild to severe mental retardation and
mild to severe motor coordination impairment."
It does not state at what levels of exposure these consequences could occur.
The CDC and National Institutes of Health have commissioned a number of
studies looking at vaccine safety and any links vaccines might have with
autism. In 2001 the Institute of Medicine reported that the evidence was
inadequate to say whether thimerosal caused autism or other disorders. The
issue warranted further investigation, the report stated.
Several other studies followed. In 2004, the Institute of Medicine reported
that it couldn't find a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing
vaccines and autism.
This September, another study published in the New England Journal of
Medicine was unable to prove a causal relationship between early exposure to
thimerosal and neuropsychological outcomes in children ages 7 to 10. It did
not address possible links with autism.
Amid all the uncertainty, and considering that mercury is a known
neurotoxin, several states, such as California, Illinois and New York, have
banned thimerosal in vaccines - including the flu shot - given to young
children and pregnant women.
Yet every day, in grocery stores, fast-food restaurants, pharmacies, at work
and elsewhere, people are bombarded with the message to "Shoo the flu" and
are repeatedly told "the best way to beat the flu is to get a flu shot."
Nothing is ever mentioned about thimerosal.
Nothing is ever said about the manufacturers' warnings for pregnant women.
In late October the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
reminded all pregnant women to get the flu shot.
Yet the country's largest maker of the flu vaccine, Sanofi Pasteur, in its
own literature distributed in package inserts with the vaccine, specifically
states:
"Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza Virus
Vaccine. It is also not known whether Influenza Virus Vaccine can cause
fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction
capacity. Influenza Virus Vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only
if clearly needed."
Other flu vaccine makers include similar warnings in package inserts for
both types of flu shots.
Novartis, maker of Fluzone, goes on to instruct that the "clinical judgment
of the attending physician should prevail at all times in determining
whether to administer the vaccine to a pregnant woman."
Yet physicians aren't present at most flu clinics. So, many, such as Aurora
Health Care's Visiting Nurse Association, rely on information from the
federal government and medical associations.
"The CDC recommends all pregnant women get them," said Lisa Taylor, a
registered nurse and clinical coordinator for Aurora Health Care's Shoo the
Flu program, which will vaccinate an estimated 90,000 people around
southeastern Wisconsin this season.
The CDC cites one study supporting its claim that the vaccination is safe
for pregnant women - a 1973 study designed primarily to look at tumors in
children up to 1 year old whose mothers received a polio vaccination. It
included a sentence stating that one child of more than 2,000 mothers
vaccinated with the flu vaccine had a spinal cord tumor.
"It's ridiculous," said David Ayoub, a physician and medical director of
Springfield, Ill.-based Prairie Collaborative for Immunization Safety, a
group concerned about mercury in vaccinations. "It's a big, big deception.
"Half the kids could have died, but the study never would have shown that
because they were specifically looking for tumors," said Ayoub, co-author of
"Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the
Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,"
published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in 2006.
Still the CDC defends the study, calling it "relevant" and says other
studies also demonstrate the vaccine's safety during pregnancy.
Vaccine manufacturers such as Sanofi Pasteur, MedImmune and Novartis say
they're ramping up production of thimerosal-free vaccines but don't have
capacity to convert all the flu shots immediately.
Protect yourself
Read the labels and materials that accompany the flu shot
Ask for a preservative-free flu shot
Consult with your physician if you have concerns
To report an adverse reaction to the flu shot, file a report at Vaccine
Adverse Event Reporting System (vaers.hhs.gov) or call 800-822-7967
A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion - of
mercury.
The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
"JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
news:qsGdnUjvKNTbNNnaRVnyhQA@bt . com ...
>
> Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
> By Raquel Rutledge Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
> Monday, November 19, 2007
> * dailycamera . com /news/2007/nov/19/most-flu-shots-contain-mercury-but-few-know-it/
> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
> of mercury.
Dear, oh dear!
It's 25 millionths of a gram -- a tiny amount. And any that is not be
rapidly excreted in this very water soluble form of mercury, or bound to
plasma proteins, will then be diluted throughout about 50 litres (1litre
=1000 grams = a billion micrograms of water) of body water in an adult. If
my calculations are correct, assuming full equilibration a maximum,
temporary concentration of only *2 parts per billion* will be reached in our
cells .
The frightening, unexplained concentration quoted by this author seems to be
irrelevant to the facts by a factor of 25, 000!
>The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
>hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
So what? Industrial waste is produced in huge amounts and can quickly end
up in drinking water.
And this concentration in drinking water would provide those consuming the
usual three litres of water per day 6 micrograms of mercury *every day* on
top of inevitable exposure from air pollution and fish consumption.
Allowing for the very large margin of safety in such recommendations, they
provide no support at all for the argument that 25 micrograms in a single
dose is likely to be harmful.
In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose of
mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should care
about being dished up such lies and distortions!
PM
> A record 130 million Americans are expected to get a flu shot this season
> in hopes of ducking the nasty virus, but as the needle pierces the skin,
> more than 80 percent will also get what some say is a hefty and dangerous
> dose of mercury.
> The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that almost
> everyone - including pregnant women - get the injection, despite written
> warnings from the vaccine manufacturers.
>
> Citing an estimated 36,000 deaths a year from the flu and flu-related
> illness, the mainstream medical community, including the American Academy
> of Pediatrics and American Lung Association, says the benefits far exceed
> any risk from the shot.
>
> In a typical year, between 5 percent and 10 percent of the population will
> get the flu virus, resulting in roughly 200,000 hospitalizations,
> according to the CDC. The flu can be especially dangerous for very young
> children and people 65 and older. Elderly people account for about 90
> percent of all flu-related deaths.
>
> Simply stated: The flu shot saves lives, the CDC says.
>
> Yet a growing number of doctors, scientists and citizen organizations,
> such as Safe Minds, the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs and Moms Against
> Mercury, say mercury in flu shots has not been proved to be safe and can
> be linked to neurological disorders and other serious problems. They push
> for mercury-free shots that are available in limited quantities but that
> few know about.
>
> "Mercury causes tremendous damage to the brain," said Paul King,
> scientific adviser for the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs.
>
> Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison the
> central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other systems in
> the body.
>
> About 80 percent of all flu shots distributed in the United States contain
> a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal. Thimerosal consists of
> 49.6 percent ethyl mercury, an anti-bacterial, anti-fungal that allows
> manufacturers to sell the vaccine in large, multi-dose containers without
> fear of contamination.
>
> The Environmental Protection Agency and federal Food and Drug
> Administration have not set an exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
>
> The federal agencies have, however, set exposure limits for another
> organic and closely related form of mercury, methyl mercury - the type
> that comes from coal-fired power plants and is found in fish. They use
> that standard when estimating the safety of ethyl mercury.
>
> Doctors and scientists debate the differences of the two forms in terms of
> how they affect the brain and body, but all agree: Both are toxins.
>
> A typical 0.5 milliliter flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts
> per billion - of mercury.
>
> The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
> hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>
> Using the standards set for methyl mercury consumption - the kind that's
> in fish - an average 130-pound person getting the flu shot would exceed
> the daily limit by more than four times. A 22-pound baby would get more
> than 25 times the amount of mercury considered safe. And doctors are
> recommending that many babies and children get two flu shots this season.
>
> A material safety data sheet from Eli Lilly and Co., which no longer makes
> a flu vaccine, says effects of exposure to thimerosal may include "fetal
> changes, decreased offspring survival and lung tissue changes. ...
> Exposure in utero and in children may cause mild to severe mental
> retardation and mild to severe motor coordination impairment."
>
> It does not state at what levels of exposure these consequences could
> occur.
>
> The CDC and National Institutes of Health have commissioned a number of
> studies looking at vaccine safety and any links vaccines might have with
> autism. In 2001 the Institute of Medicine reported that the evidence was
> inadequate to say whether thimerosal caused autism or other disorders. The
> issue warranted further investigation, the report stated.
>
> Several other studies followed. In 2004, the Institute of Medicine
> reported that it couldn't find a causal relationship between
> thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.
>
> This September, another study published in the New England Journal of
> Medicine was unable to prove a causal relationship between early exposure
> to thimerosal and neuropsychological outcomes in children ages 7 to 10. It
> did not address possible links with autism.
>
> Amid all the uncertainty, and considering that mercury is a known
> neurotoxin, several states, such as California, Illinois and New York,
> have banned thimerosal in vaccines - including the flu shot - given to
> young children and pregnant women.
>
> Yet every day, in grocery stores, fast-food restaurants, pharmacies, at
> work and elsewhere, people are bombarded with the message to "Shoo the
> flu" and are repeatedly told "the best way to beat the flu is to get a flu
> shot."
>
> Nothing is ever mentioned about thimerosal.
>
> Nothing is ever said about the manufacturers' warnings for pregnant women.
>
> In late October the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
> reminded all pregnant women to get the flu shot.
>
> Yet the country's largest maker of the flu vaccine, Sanofi Pasteur, in its
> own literature distributed in package inserts with the vaccine,
> specifically states:
>
> "Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza Virus
> Vaccine. It is also not known whether Influenza Virus Vaccine can cause
> fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect
> reproduction capacity. Influenza Virus Vaccine should be given to a
> pregnant woman only if clearly needed."
>
> Other flu vaccine makers include similar warnings in package inserts for
> both types of flu shots.
>
> Novartis, maker of Fluzone, goes on to instruct that the "clinical
> judgment of the attending physician should prevail at all times in
> determining whether to administer the vaccine to a pregnant woman."
>
> Yet physicians aren't present at most flu clinics. So, many, such as
> Aurora Health Care's Visiting Nurse Association, rely on information from
> the federal government and medical associations.
>
> "The CDC recommends all pregnant women get them," said Lisa Taylor, a
> registered nurse and clinical coordinator for Aurora Health Care's Shoo
> the Flu program, which will vaccinate an estimated 90,000 people around
> southeastern Wisconsin this season.
>
> The CDC cites one study supporting its claim that the vaccination is safe
> for pregnant women - a 1973 study designed primarily to look at tumors in
> children up to 1 year old whose mothers received a polio vaccination. It
> included a sentence stating that one child of more than 2,000 mothers
> vaccinated with the flu vaccine had a spinal cord tumor.
>
> "It's ridiculous," said David Ayoub, a physician and medical director of
> Springfield, Ill.-based Prairie Collaborative for Immunization Safety, a
> group concerned about mercury in vaccinations. "It's a big, big deception.
>
> "Half the kids could have died, but the study never would have shown that
> because they were specifically looking for tumors," said Ayoub, co-author
> of "Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the
> Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,"
> published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in 2006.
>
> Still the CDC defends the study, calling it "relevant" and says other
> studies also demonstrate the vaccine's safety during pregnancy.
>
> Vaccine manufacturers such as Sanofi Pasteur, MedImmune and Novartis say
> they're ramping up production of thimerosal-free vaccines but don't have
> capacity to convert all the flu shots immediately.
>
> Protect yourself
>
> Read the labels and materials that accompany the flu shot
>
> Ask for a preservative-free flu shot
>
> Consult with your physician if you have concerns
>
> To report an adverse reaction to the flu shot, file a report at Vaccine
> Adverse Event Reporting System (vaers.hhs.gov) or call 800-822-7967
>
> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
> of mercury.
>
> The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
> hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>
>
"JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
news:qsGdnUjvKNTbNNnaRVnyhQA@bt . com ...
>
> Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
> By Raquel Rutledge Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
> Monday, November 19, 2007
> * dailycamera . com /news/2007/nov/19/most-flu-shots-contain-mercury-but-few-know-it/
> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
> of mercury.
Dear, oh dear!
It's 25 millionths of a gram -- a tiny amount. And any that is not be
rapidly excreted in this very water soluble form of mercury, or bound to
plasma proteins, will then be diluted throughout about 50 litres (1litre
=1000 grams = a billion micrograms of water) of body water in an adult. If
my calculations are correct, assuming full equilibration a maximum,
temporary concentration of only *2 parts per billion* will be reached in our
cells .
The frightening, unexplained concentration quoted by this author seems to be
irrelevant to the facts by a factor of 25, 000!
>The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
>hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
So what? Industrial waste is produced in huge amounts and can quickly end
up in drinking water.
And this concentration in drinking water would provide those consuming the
usual three litres of water per day 6 micrograms of mercury *every day* on
top of inevitable exposure from air pollution and fish consumption.
Allowing for the very large margin of safety in such recommendations, they
provide no support at all for the argument that 25 micrograms in a single
dose is likely to be harmful.
In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose of
mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should care
about being dished up such lies and distortions!
PM
> A record 130 million Americans are expected to get a flu shot this season
> in hopes of ducking the nasty virus, but as the needle pierces the skin,
> more than 80 percent will also get what some say is a hefty and dangerous
> dose of mercury.
> The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that almost
> everyone - including pregnant women - get the injection, despite written
> warnings from the vaccine manufacturers.
>
> Citing an estimated 36,000 deaths a year from the flu and flu-related
> illness, the mainstream medical community, including the American Academy
> of Pediatrics and American Lung Association, says the benefits far exceed
> any risk from the shot.
>
> In a typical year, between 5 percent and 10 percent of the population will
> get the flu virus, resulting in roughly 200,000 hospitalizations,
> according to the CDC. The flu can be especially dangerous for very young
> children and people 65 and older. Elderly people account for about 90
> percent of all flu-related deaths.
>
> Simply stated: The flu shot saves lives, the CDC says.
>
> Yet a growing number of doctors, scientists and citizen organizations,
> such as Safe Minds, the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs and Moms Against
> Mercury, say mercury in flu shots has not been proved to be safe and can
> be linked to neurological disorders and other serious problems. They push
> for mercury-free shots that are available in limited quantities but that
> few know about.
>
> "Mercury causes tremendous damage to the brain," said Paul King,
> scientific adviser for the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs.
>
> Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison the
> central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other systems in
> the body.
>
> About 80 percent of all flu shots distributed in the United States contain
> a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal. Thimerosal consists of
> 49.6 percent ethyl mercury, an anti-bacterial, anti-fungal that allows
> manufacturers to sell the vaccine in large, multi-dose containers without
> fear of contamination.
>
> The Environmental Protection Agency and federal Food and Drug
> Administration have not set an exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
>
> The federal agencies have, however, set exposure limits for another
> organic and closely related form of mercury, methyl mercury - the type
> that comes from coal-fired power plants and is found in fish. They use
> that standard when estimating the safety of ethyl mercury.
>
> Doctors and scientists debate the differences of the two forms in terms of
> how they affect the brain and body, but all agree: Both are toxins.
>
> A typical 0.5 milliliter flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts
> per billion - of mercury.
>
> The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
> hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>
> Using the standards set for methyl mercury consumption - the kind that's
> in fish - an average 130-pound person getting the flu shot would exceed
> the daily limit by more than four times. A 22-pound baby would get more
> than 25 times the amount of mercury considered safe. And doctors are
> recommending that many babies and children get two flu shots this season.
>
> A material safety data sheet from Eli Lilly and Co., which no longer makes
> a flu vaccine, says effects of exposure to thimerosal may include "fetal
> changes, decreased offspring survival and lung tissue changes. ...
> Exposure in utero and in children may cause mild to severe mental
> retardation and mild to severe motor coordination impairment."
>
> It does not state at what levels of exposure these consequences could
> occur.
>
> The CDC and National Institutes of Health have commissioned a number of
> studies looking at vaccine safety and any links vaccines might have with
> autism. In 2001 the Institute of Medicine reported that the evidence was
> inadequate to say whether thimerosal caused autism or other disorders. The
> issue warranted further investigation, the report stated.
>
> Several other studies followed. In 2004, the Institute of Medicine
> reported that it couldn't find a causal relationship between
> thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.
>
> This September, another study published in the New England Journal of
> Medicine was unable to prove a causal relationship between early exposure
> to thimerosal and neuropsychological outcomes in children ages 7 to 10. It
> did not address possible links with autism.
>
> Amid all the uncertainty, and considering that mercury is a known
> neurotoxin, several states, such as California, Illinois and New York,
> have banned thimerosal in vaccines - including the flu shot - given to
> young children and pregnant women.
>
> Yet every day, in grocery stores, fast-food restaurants, pharmacies, at
> work and elsewhere, people are bombarded with the message to "Shoo the
> flu" and are repeatedly told "the best way to beat the flu is to get a flu
> shot."
>
> Nothing is ever mentioned about thimerosal.
>
> Nothing is ever said about the manufacturers' warnings for pregnant women.
>
> In late October the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
> reminded all pregnant women to get the flu shot.
>
> Yet the country's largest maker of the flu vaccine, Sanofi Pasteur, in its
> own literature distributed in package inserts with the vaccine,
> specifically states:
>
> "Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza Virus
> Vaccine. It is also not known whether Influenza Virus Vaccine can cause
> fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect
> reproduction capacity. Influenza Virus Vaccine should be given to a
> pregnant woman only if clearly needed."
>
> Other flu vaccine makers include similar warnings in package inserts for
> both types of flu shots.
>
> Novartis, maker of Fluzone, goes on to instruct that the "clinical
> judgment of the attending physician should prevail at all times in
> determining whether to administer the vaccine to a pregnant woman."
>
> Yet physicians aren't present at most flu clinics. So, many, such as
> Aurora Health Care's Visiting Nurse Association, rely on information from
> the federal government and medical associations.
>
> "The CDC recommends all pregnant women get them," said Lisa Taylor, a
> registered nurse and clinical coordinator for Aurora Health Care's Shoo
> the Flu program, which will vaccinate an estimated 90,000 people around
> southeastern Wisconsin this season.
>
> The CDC cites one study supporting its claim that the vaccination is safe
> for pregnant women - a 1973 study designed primarily to look at tumors in
> children up to 1 year old whose mothers received a polio vaccination. It
> included a sentence stating that one child of more than 2,000 mothers
> vaccinated with the flu vaccine had a spinal cord tumor.
>
> "It's ridiculous," said David Ayoub, a physician and medical director of
> Springfield, Ill.-based Prairie Collaborative for Immunization Safety, a
> group concerned about mercury in vaccinations. "It's a big, big deception.
>
> "Half the kids could have died, but the study never would have shown that
> because they were specifically looking for tumors," said Ayoub, co-author
> of "Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the
> Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,"
> published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in 2006.
>
> Still the CDC defends the study, calling it "relevant" and says other
> studies also demonstrate the vaccine's safety during pregnancy.
>
> Vaccine manufacturers such as Sanofi Pasteur, MedImmune and Novartis say
> they're ramping up production of thimerosal-free vaccines but don't have
> capacity to convert all the flu shots immediately.
>
> Protect yourself
>
> Read the labels and materials that accompany the flu shot
>
> Ask for a preservative-free flu shot
>
> Consult with your physician if you have concerns
>
> To report an adverse reaction to the flu shot, file a report at Vaccine
> Adverse Event Reporting System (vaers.hhs.gov) or call 800-822-7967
>
> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
> of mercury.
>
> The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
> hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>
>
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
news:13k9hvs70q7im8c@corp.supernews . com ...
> "JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
> news:qsGdnUjvKNTbNNnaRVnyhQA@bt . com ...
>>
>> Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
>> By Raquel Rutledge Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
>> Monday, November 19, 2007
>> * dailycamera . com /news/2007/nov/19/most-flu-shots-contain-mercury-but-few-know-it/
>> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
>> of mercury.
>
> Dear, oh dear!
Here you go again, trying to give logic. You know darned well, that doesn't
work here.
When you here the word Mercury, you are required by new group FAQ to run
around screaming.
>
> It's 25 millionths of a gram -- a tiny amount. And any that is not be
> rapidly excreted in this very water soluble form of mercury, or bound to
> plasma proteins, will then be diluted throughout about 50 litres (1litre
> =1000 grams = a billion micrograms of water) of body water in an adult.
> If my calculations are correct, assuming full equilibration a maximum,
> temporary concentration of only *2 parts per billion* will be reached in
> our cells .
>
> The frightening, unexplained concentration quoted by this author seems to
> be irrelevant to the facts by a factor of 25, 000!
>
>>The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
>>hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>
> So what? Industrial waste is produced in huge amounts and can quickly end
> up in drinking water.
>
> And this concentration in drinking water would provide those consuming the
> usual three litres of water per day 6 micrograms of mercury *every day* on
> top of inevitable exposure from air pollution and fish consumption.
> Allowing for the very large margin of safety in such recommendations, they
> provide no support at all for the argument that 25 micrograms in a single
> dose is likely to be harmful.
>
> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose of
> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should care
> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>
> PM
>> A record 130 million Americans are expected to get a flu shot this season
>> in hopes of ducking the nasty virus, but as the needle pierces the skin,
>> more than 80 percent will also get what some say is a hefty and dangerous
>> dose of mercury.
>> The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that
>> almost everyone - including pregnant women - get the injection, despite
>> written warnings from the vaccine manufacturers.
>>
>> Citing an estimated 36,000 deaths a year from the flu and flu-related
>> illness, the mainstream medical community, including the American Academy
>> of Pediatrics and American Lung Association, says the benefits far exceed
>> any risk from the shot.
>>
>> In a typical year, between 5 percent and 10 percent of the population
>> will get the flu virus, resulting in roughly 200,000 hospitalizations,
>> according to the CDC. The flu can be especially dangerous for very young
>> children and people 65 and older. Elderly people account for about 90
>> percent of all flu-related deaths.
>>
>> Simply stated: The flu shot saves lives, the CDC says.
>>
>> Yet a growing number of doctors, scientists and citizen organizations,
>> such as Safe Minds, the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs and Moms Against
>> Mercury, say mercury in flu shots has not been proved to be safe and can
>> be linked to neurological disorders and other serious problems. They push
>> for mercury-free shots that are available in limited quantities but that
>> few know about.
>>
>> "Mercury causes tremendous damage to the brain," said Paul King,
>> scientific adviser for the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs.
>>
>> Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison the
>> central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other systems
>> in the body.
>>
>> About 80 percent of all flu shots distributed in the United States
>> contain a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal. Thimerosal
>> consists of 49.6 percent ethyl mercury, an anti-bacterial, anti-fungal
>> that allows manufacturers to sell the vaccine in large, multi-dose
>> containers without fear of contamination.
>>
>> The Environmental Protection Agency and federal Food and Drug
>> Administration have not set an exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
>>
>> The federal agencies have, however, set exposure limits for another
>> organic and closely related form of mercury, methyl mercury - the type
>> that comes from coal-fired power plants and is found in fish. They use
>> that standard when estimating the safety of ethyl mercury.
>>
>> Doctors and scientists debate the differences of the two forms in terms
>> of how they affect the brain and body, but all agree: Both are toxins.
>>
>> A typical 0.5 milliliter flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000
>> parts per billion - of mercury.
>>
>> The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
>> hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>>
>> Using the standards set for methyl mercury consumption - the kind that's
>> in fish - an average 130-pound person getting the flu shot would exceed
>> the daily limit by more than four times. A 22-pound baby would get more
>> than 25 times the amount of mercury considered safe. And doctors are
>> recommending that many babies and children get two flu shots this season.
>>
>> A material safety data sheet from Eli Lilly and Co., which no longer
>> makes a flu vaccine, says effects of exposure to thimerosal may include
>> "fetal changes, decreased offspring survival and lung tissue changes. ...
>> Exposure in utero and in children may cause mild to severe mental
>> retardation and mild to severe motor coordination impairment."
>>
>> It does not state at what levels of exposure these consequences could
>> occur.
>>
>> The CDC and National Institutes of Health have commissioned a number of
>> studies looking at vaccine safety and any links vaccines might have with
>> autism. In 2001 the Institute of Medicine reported that the evidence was
>> inadequate to say whether thimerosal caused autism or other disorders.
>> The issue warranted further investigation, the report stated.
>>
>> Several other studies followed. In 2004, the Institute of Medicine
>> reported that it couldn't find a causal relationship between
>> thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.
>>
>> This September, another study published in the New England Journal of
>> Medicine was unable to prove a causal relationship between early exposure
>> to thimerosal and neuropsychological outcomes in children ages 7 to 10.
>> It did not address possible links with autism.
>>
>> Amid all the uncertainty, and considering that mercury is a known
>> neurotoxin, several states, such as California, Illinois and New York,
>> have banned thimerosal in vaccines - including the flu shot - given to
>> young children and pregnant women.
>>
>> Yet every day, in grocery stores, fast-food restaurants, pharmacies, at
>> work and elsewhere, people are bombarded with the message to "Shoo the
>> flu" and are repeatedly told "the best way to beat the flu is to get a
>> flu shot."
>>
>> Nothing is ever mentioned about thimerosal.
>>
>> Nothing is ever said about the manufacturers' warnings for pregnant
>> women.
>>
>> In late October the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
>> reminded all pregnant women to get the flu shot.
>>
>> Yet the country's largest maker of the flu vaccine, Sanofi Pasteur, in
>> its own literature distributed in package inserts with the vaccine,
>> specifically states:
>>
>> "Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza Virus
>> Vaccine. It is also not known whether Influenza Virus Vaccine can cause
>> fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect
>> reproduction capacity. Influenza Virus Vaccine should be given to a
>> pregnant woman only if clearly needed."
>>
>> Other flu vaccine makers include similar warnings in package inserts for
>> both types of flu shots.
>>
>> Novartis, maker of Fluzone, goes on to instruct that the "clinical
>> judgment of the attending physician should prevail at all times in
>> determining whether to administer the vaccine to a pregnant woman."
>>
>> Yet physicians aren't present at most flu clinics. So, many, such as
>> Aurora Health Care's Visiting Nurse Association, rely on information from
>> the federal government and medical associations.
>>
>> "The CDC recommends all pregnant women get them," said Lisa Taylor, a
>> registered nurse and clinical coordinator for Aurora Health Care's Shoo
>> the Flu program, which will vaccinate an estimated 90,000 people around
>> southeastern Wisconsin this season.
>>
>> The CDC cites one study supporting its claim that the vaccination is safe
>> for pregnant women - a 1973 study designed primarily to look at tumors in
>> children up to 1 year old whose mothers received a polio vaccination. It
>> included a sentence stating that one child of more than 2,000 mothers
>> vaccinated with the flu vaccine had a spinal cord tumor.
>>
>> "It's ridiculous," said David Ayoub, a physician and medical director of
>> Springfield, Ill.-based Prairie Collaborative for Immunization Safety, a
>> group concerned about mercury in vaccinations. "It's a big, big
>> deception.
>>
>> "Half the kids could have died, but the study never would have shown that
>> because they were specifically looking for tumors," said Ayoub, co-author
>> of "Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the
>> Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,"
>> published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in 2006.
>>
>> Still the CDC defends the study, calling it "relevant" and says other
>> studies also demonstrate the vaccine's safety during pregnancy.
>>
>> Vaccine manufacturers such as Sanofi Pasteur, MedImmune and Novartis say
>> they're ramping up production of thimerosal-free vaccines but don't have
>> capacity to convert all the flu shots immediately.
>>
>> Protect yourself
>>
>> Read the labels and materials that accompany the flu shot
>>
>> Ask for a preservative-free flu shot
>>
>> Consult with your physician if you have concerns
>>
>> To report an adverse reaction to the flu shot, file a report at Vaccine
>> Adverse Event Reporting System (vaers.hhs.gov) or call 800-822-7967
>>
>> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
>> of mercury.
>>
>> The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
>> hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>>
>>
>
>
"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
news:13k9hvs70q7im8c@corp.supernews . com ...
> "JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
> news:qsGdnUjvKNTbNNnaRVnyhQA@bt . com ...
>>
>> Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
>> By Raquel Rutledge Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
>> Monday, November 19, 2007
>> * dailycamera . com /news/2007/nov/19/most-flu-shots-contain-mercury-but-few-know-it/
>> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
>> of mercury.
>
> Dear, oh dear!
Here you go again, trying to give logic. You know darned well, that doesn't
work here.
When you here the word Mercury, you are required by new group FAQ to run
around screaming.
>
> It's 25 millionths of a gram -- a tiny amount. And any that is not be
> rapidly excreted in this very water soluble form of mercury, or bound to
> plasma proteins, will then be diluted throughout about 50 litres (1litre
> =1000 grams = a billion micrograms of water) of body water in an adult.
> If my calculations are correct, assuming full equilibration a maximum,
> temporary concentration of only *2 parts per billion* will be reached in
> our cells .
>
> The frightening, unexplained concentration quoted by this author seems to
> be irrelevant to the facts by a factor of 25, 000!
>
>>The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
>>hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>
> So what? Industrial waste is produced in huge amounts and can quickly end
> up in drinking water.
>
> And this concentration in drinking water would provide those consuming the
> usual three litres of water per day 6 micrograms of mercury *every day* on
> top of inevitable exposure from air pollution and fish consumption.
> Allowing for the very large margin of safety in such recommendations, they
> provide no support at all for the argument that 25 micrograms in a single
> dose is likely to be harmful.
>
> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose of
> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should care
> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>
> PM
>> A record 130 million Americans are expected to get a flu shot this season
>> in hopes of ducking the nasty virus, but as the needle pierces the skin,
>> more than 80 percent will also get what some say is a hefty and dangerous
>> dose of mercury.
>> The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that
>> almost everyone - including pregnant women - get the injection, despite
>> written warnings from the vaccine manufacturers.
>>
>> Citing an estimated 36,000 deaths a year from the flu and flu-related
>> illness, the mainstream medical community, including the American Academy
>> of Pediatrics and American Lung Association, says the benefits far exceed
>> any risk from the shot.
>>
>> In a typical year, between 5 percent and 10 percent of the population
>> will get the flu virus, resulting in roughly 200,000 hospitalizations,
>> according to the CDC. The flu can be especially dangerous for very young
>> children and people 65 and older. Elderly people account for about 90
>> percent of all flu-related deaths.
>>
>> Simply stated: The flu shot saves lives, the CDC says.
>>
>> Yet a growing number of doctors, scientists and citizen organizations,
>> such as Safe Minds, the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs and Moms Against
>> Mercury, say mercury in flu shots has not been proved to be safe and can
>> be linked to neurological disorders and other serious problems. They push
>> for mercury-free shots that are available in limited quantities but that
>> few know about.
>>
>> "Mercury causes tremendous damage to the brain," said Paul King,
>> scientific adviser for the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs.
>>
>> Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison the
>> central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other systems
>> in the body.
>>
>> About 80 percent of all flu shots distributed in the United States
>> contain a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal. Thimerosal
>> consists of 49.6 percent ethyl mercury, an anti-bacterial, anti-fungal
>> that allows manufacturers to sell the vaccine in large, multi-dose
>> containers without fear of contamination.
>>
>> The Environmental Protection Agency and federal Food and Drug
>> Administration have not set an exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
>>
>> The federal agencies have, however, set exposure limits for another
>> organic and closely related form of mercury, methyl mercury - the type
>> that comes from coal-fired power plants and is found in fish. They use
>> that standard when estimating the safety of ethyl mercury.
>>
>> Doctors and scientists debate the differences of the two forms in terms
>> of how they affect the brain and body, but all agree: Both are toxins.
>>
>> A typical 0.5 milliliter flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000
>> parts per billion - of mercury.
>>
>> The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
>> hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>>
>> Using the standards set for methyl mercury consumption - the kind that's
>> in fish - an average 130-pound person getting the flu shot would exceed
>> the daily limit by more than four times. A 22-pound baby would get more
>> than 25 times the amount of mercury considered safe. And doctors are
>> recommending that many babies and children get two flu shots this season.
>>
>> A material safety data sheet from Eli Lilly and Co., which no longer
>> makes a flu vaccine, says effects of exposure to thimerosal may include
>> "fetal changes, decreased offspring survival and lung tissue changes. ...
>> Exposure in utero and in children may cause mild to severe mental
>> retardation and mild to severe motor coordination impairment."
>>
>> It does not state at what levels of exposure these consequences could
>> occur.
>>
>> The CDC and National Institutes of Health have commissioned a number of
>> studies looking at vaccine safety and any links vaccines might have with
>> autism. In 2001 the Institute of Medicine reported that the evidence was
>> inadequate to say whether thimerosal caused autism or other disorders.
>> The issue warranted further investigation, the report stated.
>>
>> Several other studies followed. In 2004, the Institute of Medicine
>> reported that it couldn't find a causal relationship between
>> thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.
>>
>> This September, another study published in the New England Journal of
>> Medicine was unable to prove a causal relationship between early exposure
>> to thimerosal and neuropsychological outcomes in children ages 7 to 10.
>> It did not address possible links with autism.
>>
>> Amid all the uncertainty, and considering that mercury is a known
>> neurotoxin, several states, such as California, Illinois and New York,
>> have banned thimerosal in vaccines - including the flu shot - given to
>> young children and pregnant women.
>>
>> Yet every day, in grocery stores, fast-food restaurants, pharmacies, at
>> work and elsewhere, people are bombarded with the message to "Shoo the
>> flu" and are repeatedly told "the best way to beat the flu is to get a
>> flu shot."
>>
>> Nothing is ever mentioned about thimerosal.
>>
>> Nothing is ever said about the manufacturers' warnings for pregnant
>> women.
>>
>> In late October the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
>> reminded all pregnant women to get the flu shot.
>>
>> Yet the country's largest maker of the flu vaccine, Sanofi Pasteur, in
>> its own literature distributed in package inserts with the vaccine,
>> specifically states:
>>
>> "Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza Virus
>> Vaccine. It is also not known whether Influenza Virus Vaccine can cause
>> fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect
>> reproduction capacity. Influenza Virus Vaccine should be given to a
>> pregnant woman only if clearly needed."
>>
>> Other flu vaccine makers include similar warnings in package inserts for
>> both types of flu shots.
>>
>> Novartis, maker of Fluzone, goes on to instruct that the "clinical
>> judgment of the attending physician should prevail at all times in
>> determining whether to administer the vaccine to a pregnant woman."
>>
>> Yet physicians aren't present at most flu clinics. So, many, such as
>> Aurora Health Care's Visiting Nurse Association, rely on information from
>> the federal government and medical associations.
>>
>> "The CDC recommends all pregnant women get them," said Lisa Taylor, a
>> registered nurse and clinical coordinator for Aurora Health Care's Shoo
>> the Flu program, which will vaccinate an estimated 90,000 people around
>> southeastern Wisconsin this season.
>>
>> The CDC cites one study supporting its claim that the vaccination is safe
>> for pregnant women - a 1973 study designed primarily to look at tumors in
>> children up to 1 year old whose mothers received a polio vaccination. It
>> included a sentence stating that one child of more than 2,000 mothers
>> vaccinated with the flu vaccine had a spinal cord tumor.
>>
>> "It's ridiculous," said David Ayoub, a physician and medical director of
>> Springfield, Ill.-based Prairie Collaborative for Immunization Safety, a
>> group concerned about mercury in vaccinations. "It's a big, big
>> deception.
>>
>> "Half the kids could have died, but the study never would have shown that
>> because they were specifically looking for tumors," said Ayoub, co-author
>> of "Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the
>> Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,"
>> published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in 2006.
>>
>> Still the CDC defends the study, calling it "relevant" and says other
>> studies also demonstrate the vaccine's safety during pregnancy.
>>
>> Vaccine manufacturers such as Sanofi Pasteur, MedImmune and Novartis say
>> they're ramping up production of thimerosal-free vaccines but don't have
>> capacity to convert all the flu shots immediately.
>>
>> Protect yourself
>>
>> Read the labels and materials that accompany the flu shot
>>
>> Ask for a preservative-free flu shot
>>
>> Consult with your physician if you have concerns
>>
>> To report an adverse reaction to the flu shot, file a report at Vaccine
>> Adverse Event Reporting System (vaers.hhs.gov) or call 800-822-7967
>>
>> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
>> of mercury.
>>
>> The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
>> hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
In article <4744cff4$0$26995$7836cce5@newsrazor . net >,
vernono <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
>
>"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
>news:13k9hvs70q7im8c@corp.supernews . com ...
>> "JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
>> news:qsGdnUjvKNTbNNnaRVnyhQA@bt . com ...
>>>
>>> Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
>>> By Raquel Rutledge Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
>>> Monday, November 19, 2007
>>>
> * dailycamera . com /news/2007/nov/19/most-flu-shots-contain-mercury-but-few-know-it/
>>> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
>>> of mercury.
>>
>> Dear, oh dear!
>
>Here you go again, trying to give logic. You know darned well, that doesn't
>work here.
>When you here the word Mercury, you are required by new group FAQ to run
>around screaming.
Don't forget -- the louder you scream and the more times you repeat
yourself, the more valid your claims become!
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy . net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"Saddam Hussein was a bad man, connected with some incredibly dangerous
people: Cheney, Rumsfeld, George Galloway." -- Marcus Brigstocke
In article <4744cff4$0$26995$7836cce5@newsrazor . net >,
vernono <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
>
>"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
>news:13k9hvs70q7im8c@corp.supernews . com ...
>> "JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
>> news:qsGdnUjvKNTbNNnaRVnyhQA@bt . com ...
>>>
>>> Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
>>> By Raquel Rutledge Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
>>> Monday, November 19, 2007
>>>
> * dailycamera . com /news/2007/nov/19/most-flu-shots-contain-mercury-but-few-know-it/
>>> A typical flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion -
>>> of mercury.
>>
>> Dear, oh dear!
>
>Here you go again, trying to give logic. You know darned well, that doesn't
>work here.
>When you here the word Mercury, you are required by new group FAQ to run
>around screaming.
Don't forget -- the louder you scream and the more times you repeat
yourself, the more valid your claims become!
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy . net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"Saddam Hussein was a bad man, connected with some incredibly dangerous
people: Cheney, Rumsfeld, George Galloway." -- Marcus Brigstocke
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
Peter the Moron wrote:
> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose of
> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should care
> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>
> PM
The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
than methy mercury.
Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
are flat out lying.
>
>
> > Citing an estimated 36,000 deaths a year from the flu and flu-related
> > illness, the mainstream medical community, including the American Academy
> > of Pediatrics and American Lung Association, says the benefits far exceed
> > any risk from the shot.
And of these estimated 36,000 deaths, how many are due to the flu
shots themselves? I would also ask, without the flu shots, how many
deaths would occur? Probably 26,000, allowing only 10,000 deaths due
to the vaccines themselves.
> > Simply stated: The flu shot saves lives, the CDC says.
And the CDC lies out its wazoo time and time again. Why do you think
they have to hide their data?
> > "Mercury causes tremendous damage to the brain," said Paul King,
> > scientific adviser for the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs.
Yes it does, and while the damage is dose dependant, damage is still
done.
>
> > Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison the
> > central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other systems in
> > the body.
Not according to Peter the Moron, the FDA, the CDC, the NIH, or the
IOM.
.
>
> > The Environmental Protection Agency and federal Food and Drug
> > Administration have not set an exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
How many more billions do they need to tell us the truth that we
already know?
How is it possible to make the lies and the deceit more obvious?
Clearly, those in government and big pharma cannot allow the truth to
be known or to confess the truth. The results would be
catastrophic. It is far better to continue to lie and decieve than to
allow the truth to be known.
DrCee
Not a pharma shill
Not a member of the medical mafia
Not a member of the church of modern medicine.
On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
Peter the Moron wrote:
> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose of
> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should care
> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>
> PM
The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
than methy mercury.
Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
are flat out lying.
>
>
> > Citing an estimated 36,000 deaths a year from the flu and flu-related
> > illness, the mainstream medical community, including the American Academy
> > of Pediatrics and American Lung Association, says the benefits far exceed
> > any risk from the shot.
And of these estimated 36,000 deaths, how many are due to the flu
shots themselves? I would also ask, without the flu shots, how many
deaths would occur? Probably 26,000, allowing only 10,000 deaths due
to the vaccines themselves.
> > Simply stated: The flu shot saves lives, the CDC says.
And the CDC lies out its wazoo time and time again. Why do you think
they have to hide their data?
> > "Mercury causes tremendous damage to the brain," said Paul King,
> > scientific adviser for the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs.
Yes it does, and while the damage is dose dependant, damage is still
done.
>
> > Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison the
> > central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other systems in
> > the body.
Not according to Peter the Moron, the FDA, the CDC, the NIH, or the
IOM.
.
>
> > The Environmental Protection Agency and federal Food and Drug
> > Administration have not set an exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
How many more billions do they need to tell us the truth that we
already know?
How is it possible to make the lies and the deceit more obvious?
Clearly, those in government and big pharma cannot allow the truth to
be known or to confess the truth. The results would be
catastrophic. It is far better to continue to lie and decieve than to
allow the truth to be known.
DrCee
Not a pharma shill
Not a member of the medical mafia
Not a member of the church of modern medicine.
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
<drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>
> Peter the Moron wrote:
>
>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>> of
>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>> care
>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>
>> PM
>
> The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
> level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
> times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>
> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
> than methy mercury.
>
> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
> are flat out lying.
>>
>>
O.K.
More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
other causes combined.
Of course you are doing something about that.
SURE you are.
Are we to assume that you are at the forefront of atomic energy or of using
the oil available in the U.S. that surpasses any other known resource.
SURE.
You have solar heater, right?
Try an education in the field and do something profitable.
That won't happen.
<drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>
> Peter the Moron wrote:
>
>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>> of
>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>> care
>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>
>> PM
>
> The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
> level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
> times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>
> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
> than methy mercury.
>
> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
> are flat out lying.
>>
>>
O.K.
More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
other causes combined.
Of course you are doing something about that.
SURE you are.
Are we to assume that you are at the forefront of atomic energy or of using
the oil available in the U.S. that surpasses any other known resource.
SURE.
You have solar heater, right?
Try an education in the field and do something profitable.
That won't happen.
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
On Nov 21, 9:58 pm, "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
> <drcee...@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>
> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>
> > Peter the Moron wrote:
>
> >> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
> >> of
> >> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
> >> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
> >> care
> >> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>
> >> PM
>
> > The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
> > level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
> > concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
> > especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
> > times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
> > of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>
> > The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
> > crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
> > than methy mercury.
>
> > Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
> > toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
> > are flat out lying.
>
> O.K.
> More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
> other causes combined.
> Of course you are doing something about that.
Ingestion sounds more like from food, not breathing. I cannot agree
that Hg from coal burning gives me more mercury, or the same type of
mercury, that I get from eating a fish.
> SURE you are.
>
> Are we to assume that you are at the forefront of atomic energy or of using
> the oil available in the U.S. that surpasses any other known resource.
> SURE.
> You have solar heater, right?
Correct.
>
> Try an education in the field and do something profitable.
Sounds to me like the field you are in is filled with cow shit and you
are covered with it.
The field I am in is not profitable. Not nearly as profitable as that
of big pharma and the pharma shills.
> That won't happen.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
DrCee
Not a pharma shill
Not a member of the medical mafia
Not a member of the church of modern medicine.
On Nov 21, 9:58 pm, "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
> <drcee...@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>
> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>
> > Peter the Moron wrote:
>
> >> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
> >> of
> >> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
> >> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
> >> care
> >> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>
> >> PM
>
> > The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
> > level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
> > concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
> > especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
> > times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
> > of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>
> > The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
> > crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
> > than methy mercury.
>
> > Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
> > toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
> > are flat out lying.
>
> O.K.
> More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
> other causes combined.
> Of course you are doing something about that.
Ingestion sounds more like from food, not breathing. I cannot agree
that Hg from coal burning gives me more mercury, or the same type of
mercury, that I get from eating a fish.
> SURE you are.
>
> Are we to assume that you are at the forefront of atomic energy or of using
> the oil available in the U.S. that surpasses any other known resource.
> SURE.
> You have solar heater, right?
Correct.
>
> Try an education in the field and do something profitable.
Sounds to me like the field you are in is filled with cow shit and you
are covered with it.
The field I am in is not profitable. Not nearly as profitable as that
of big pharma and the pharma shills.
> That won't happen.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
DrCee
Not a pharma shill
Not a member of the medical mafia
Not a member of the church of modern medicine.
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
<drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
news:ebf5a96d-a9d5-4d80-a1b8-a7383a55e34f@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups . com ...
> On Nov 21, 9:58 pm, "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
>> <drcee...@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>
O.K.
More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
other causes combined.
Of course you are doing something about that.
SURE you are.
<drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
news:ebf5a96d-a9d5-4d80-a1b8-a7383a55e34f@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups . com ...
> On Nov 21, 9:58 pm, "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
>> <drcee...@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>
O.K.
More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
other causes combined.
Of course you are doing something about that.
SURE you are.
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
In article <ebf5a96d-a9d5-4d80-a1b8-a7383a55e34f@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups . com >,
<drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote:
>On Nov 21, 9:58 pm, "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
>> <drcee...@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>
>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>
>> > On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>
>> > Peter the Moron wrote:
>>
>> >> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>> >> of
>> >> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
>> >> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>> >> care
>> >> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>
>> >> PM
>>
>> > The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
>> > level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
>> > concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>> > especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>> > times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>> > of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>>
>> > The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>> > crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>> > than methy mercury.
>>
>> > Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>> > toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>> > are flat out lying.
>>
>> O.K.
>> More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
>> other causes combined.
>> Of course you are doing something about that.
>
>Ingestion sounds more like from food, not breathing. I cannot agree
>that Hg from coal burning gives me more mercury, or the same type of
>mercury, that I get from eating a fish.
Gee, Cee, it's a good thing I know you're a "scientist" or else I
would have to conclude you are an idiot who can't figure out that
atmospheric mercury might not stay in the atmosphere permanently.
You know, like it might come down in, say, rain.
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy . net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"Saddam Hussein was a bad man, connected with some incredibly dangerous
people: Cheney, Rumsfeld, George Galloway." -- Marcus Brigstocke
In article <ebf5a96d-a9d5-4d80-a1b8-a7383a55e34f@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups . com >,
<drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote:
>On Nov 21, 9:58 pm, "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
>> <drcee...@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>
>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>
>> > On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>
>> > Peter the Moron wrote:
>>
>> >> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>> >> of
>> >> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
>> >> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>> >> care
>> >> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>
>> >> PM
>>
>> > The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
>> > level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
>> > concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>> > especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>> > times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>> > of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>>
>> > The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>> > crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>> > than methy mercury.
>>
>> > Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>> > toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>> > are flat out lying.
>>
>> O.K.
>> More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
>> other causes combined.
>> Of course you are doing something about that.
>
>Ingestion sounds more like from food, not breathing. I cannot agree
>that Hg from coal burning gives me more mercury, or the same type of
>mercury, that I get from eating a fish.
Gee, Cee, it's a good thing I know you're a "scientist" or else I
would have to conclude you are an idiot who can't figure out that
atmospheric mercury might not stay in the atmosphere permanently.
You know, like it might come down in, say, rain.
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy . net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"Saddam Hussein was a bad man, connected with some incredibly dangerous
people: Cheney, Rumsfeld, George Galloway." -- Marcus Brigstocke
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
David Wright wrote:
> In article <ebf5a96d-a9d5-4d80-a1b8-a7383a55e34f@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups . com >,
> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote:
>> On Nov 21, 9:58 pm, "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
>>> <drcee...@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>>
>>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>>>>> of
>>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
>>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>>>> care
>>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>> PM
>>>> The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
>>>> level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
>>>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>>>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>>>> times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>>>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>>>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>>>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>>>> than methy mercury.
>>>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>>>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>>>> are flat out lying.
>>> O.K.
>>> More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
>>> other causes combined.
>>> Of course you are doing something about that.
>> Ingestion sounds more like from food, not breathing. I cannot agree
>> that Hg from coal burning gives me more mercury, or the same type of
>> mercury, that I get from eating a fish.
>
> Gee, Cee, it's a good thing I know you're a "scientist" or else I
> would have to conclude you are an idiot who can't figure out that
> atmospheric mercury might not stay in the atmosphere permanently.
>
> You know, like it might come down in, say, rain.
Rain is the CAUSE of Autism. No question.
You see, a brilliant journalist traveled to the Atacama Desert, the
driest place on Earth, and did not find one single case of Autism.
David Wright wrote:
> In article <ebf5a96d-a9d5-4d80-a1b8-a7383a55e34f@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups . com >,
> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote:
>> On Nov 21, 9:58 pm, "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
>>> <drcee...@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>>
>>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>>>>> of
>>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
>>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>>>> care
>>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>> PM
>>>> The only lies and distortions are yours. Mercury is toxic at any
>>>> level. Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal. Your
>>>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>>>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>>>> times more toxic ). You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>>>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>>>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>>>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>>>> than methy mercury.
>>>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>>>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>>>> are flat out lying.
>>> O.K.
>>> More mercury is ingested by humans in the U.S. from burning coal than all
>>> other causes combined.
>>> Of course you are doing something about that.
>> Ingestion sounds more like from food, not breathing. I cannot agree
>> that Hg from coal burning gives me more mercury, or the same type of
>> mercury, that I get from eating a fish.
>
> Gee, Cee, it's a good thing I know you're a "scientist" or else I
> would have to conclude you are an idiot who can't figure out that
> atmospheric mercury might not stay in the atmosphere permanently.
>
> You know, like it might come down in, say, rain.
Rain is the CAUSE of Autism. No question.
You see, a brilliant journalist traveled to the Atacama Desert, the
driest place on Earth, and did not find one single case of Autism.
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
"vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>
> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>
>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>
>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>>> of
>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>> care
>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>
>>> PM
>>
>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why you
should accuse me of it.
>Mercury is toxic at any level.
Who says? There will be a level of exposure to any poison below which
toxic effects are undetectable, and mercury is no exception. There is a
vast amount of evidence pertaining to this from extensive research into
industrial, dental and food exposure to mercury in all its forms where
researchers have gone looking for the most subtle neuropsychiatric effects
and found no evidence of them below certain levels of even chronic exposure.
>Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal.
Who says? What evidence?
>Your
>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>> times more toxic ).
There is not a scrap of evidence for this, nor any reason to expect it.
>You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
What a ridiculous statement. In the last fifty years of increasing
exposure to mercury life expectancy has been increasing.
>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>> than methy mercury.>>
>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>> are flat out lying.
This is insulting. What makes you think I am not entirely familiar with all
the literature on organis mercury toxicity?
You are referring to the famous study on monkey babies. I have read it,
but I'll bet you haven't. The following is part of a discussion I had
with someone else concerning certain claims that arise from it.
> 2. "There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of
> thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute
> inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed
> infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants."
>
> Based on the references sited in this study, it also appears that
> inorganic mercury in the brain has a much longer half-life, 227-540
> days is what is stated in the paper.
PM I pointed out in another post that this is a very selective reporting of
the study's findings.
What I said ---
I have read the study and think you are quite wrong. At worst it is neutral
concerning the relative risk of mercury from thiomerosal in vaccines and
oral methyl mercury. The authors correctly confine themselves to pointing
out that the differences in handling of the two forms of mercury mean that
you cannot reliably predict the brain toxicity of one from the other (while
ironically comparing the oral administration of one, to intramuscular
administration of the other in drawing these conclusions!!!).
What's more, I can "prove" that thiomerosal is safer than methyl mercury,
using the same study. I only need to choose the bits of text that *I* like.
For example ---
Quote -
A much lower brain concentration of total Hg was observed in the thimerosal
infants compared to the MeHg infants, i.e., a 3- to 4-fold difference for an
equivalent exposure of Hg. Moreover, total Hg is cleared much more rapidly
from the brain after thimerosal than after methymercury exposure (24 vs 60
days).
Unquote.
And, even if there is more mercury in the brain at some time periods with
thiomerosal, it is inorganic mercury, not ethyl mercury. That is thought by
many to be a less toxic form, not that we yet have any idea at all how the
mere presence of any heavy metal in an organ correlates with function.
PM
"vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>
> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>
>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>
>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>>> of
>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much whether
>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>> care
>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>
>>> PM
>>
>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why you
should accuse me of it.
>Mercury is toxic at any level.
Who says? There will be a level of exposure to any poison below which
toxic effects are undetectable, and mercury is no exception. There is a
vast amount of evidence pertaining to this from extensive research into
industrial, dental and food exposure to mercury in all its forms where
researchers have gone looking for the most subtle neuropsychiatric effects
and found no evidence of them below certain levels of even chronic exposure.
>Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal.
Who says? What evidence?
>Your
>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>> times more toxic ).
There is not a scrap of evidence for this, nor any reason to expect it.
>You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
What a ridiculous statement. In the last fifty years of increasing
exposure to mercury life expectancy has been increasing.
>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>> than methy mercury.>>
>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>> are flat out lying.
This is insulting. What makes you think I am not entirely familiar with all
the literature on organis mercury toxicity?
You are referring to the famous study on monkey babies. I have read it,
but I'll bet you haven't. The following is part of a discussion I had
with someone else concerning certain claims that arise from it.
> 2. "There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of
> thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute
> inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed
> infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants."
>
> Based on the references sited in this study, it also appears that
> inorganic mercury in the brain has a much longer half-life, 227-540
> days is what is stated in the paper.
PM I pointed out in another post that this is a very selective reporting of
the study's findings.
What I said ---
I have read the study and think you are quite wrong. At worst it is neutral
concerning the relative risk of mercury from thiomerosal in vaccines and
oral methyl mercury. The authors correctly confine themselves to pointing
out that the differences in handling of the two forms of mercury mean that
you cannot reliably predict the brain toxicity of one from the other (while
ironically comparing the oral administration of one, to intramuscular
administration of the other in drawing these conclusions!!!).
What's more, I can "prove" that thiomerosal is safer than methyl mercury,
using the same study. I only need to choose the bits of text that *I* like.
For example ---
Quote -
A much lower brain concentration of total Hg was observed in the thimerosal
infants compared to the MeHg infants, i.e., a 3- to 4-fold difference for an
equivalent exposure of Hg. Moreover, total Hg is cleared much more rapidly
from the brain after thimerosal than after methymercury exposure (24 vs 60
days).
Unquote.
And, even if there is more mercury in the brain at some time periods with
thiomerosal, it is inorganic mercury, not ethyl mercury. That is thought by
many to be a less toxic form, not that we yet have any idea at all how the
mere presence of any heavy metal in an organ correlates with function.
PM
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
Peter Moran wrote:
> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
> news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>
>> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>
>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>
>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this
>>>> dose of
>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much
>>>> whether
>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all
>>>> should care
>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>
>>>> PM
>>>
>>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
>
> Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
> even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why
> you should accuse me of it.
Chuckie is incapable of serious discussion and needs to call you a liar.
He does not understand your posts, as you use facts, and this gives
him a migraine.
>
>> Mercury is toxic at any level.
>
> Who says? There will be a level of exposure to any poison below which
> toxic effects are undetectable, and mercury is no exception. There is a
> vast amount of evidence pertaining to this from extensive research into
> industrial, dental and food exposure to mercury in all its forms where
> researchers have gone looking for the most subtle neuropsychiatric
> effects and found no evidence of them below certain levels of even
> chronic exposure.
>
>> Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal.
>
> Who says? What evidence?
>
>> Your
>>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>>> times more toxic ).
>
> There is not a scrap of evidence for this, nor any reason to expect it.
>
>> You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>
> What a ridiculous statement. In the last fifty years of increasing
> exposure to mercury life expectancy has been increasing.
>
>>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>>> than methy mercury.>>
>>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>>> are flat out lying.
>
> This is insulting. What makes you think I am not entirely familiar with
> all the literature on organis mercury toxicity?
>
> You are referring to the famous study on monkey babies. I have read
> it, but I'll bet you haven't. The following is part of a discussion
> I had with someone else concerning certain claims that arise from it.
>> 2. "There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of
>
>> thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute
>
>> inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed
>
>> infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants."
>
>>
>
>> Based on the references sited in this study, it also appears that
>
>> inorganic mercury in the brain has a much longer half-life, 227-540
>
>> days is what is stated in the paper.
>
> PM I pointed out in another post that this is a very selective
> reporting of the study's findings.
>
> What I said ---
>
> I have read the study and think you are quite wrong. At worst it is
> neutral concerning the relative risk of mercury from thiomerosal in
> vaccines and oral methyl mercury. The authors correctly confine
> themselves to pointing out that the differences in handling of the two
> forms of mercury mean that you cannot reliably predict the brain
> toxicity of one from the other (while ironically comparing the oral
> administration of one, to intramuscular administration of the other in
> drawing these conclusions!!!).
>
> What's more, I can "prove" that thiomerosal is safer than methyl
> mercury, using the same study. I only need to choose the bits of text
> that *I* like.
>
> For example ---
>
> Quote -
>
> A much lower brain concentration of total Hg was observed in the
> thimerosal infants compared to the MeHg infants, i.e., a 3- to 4-fold
> difference for an equivalent exposure of Hg. Moreover, total Hg is
> cleared much more rapidly from the brain after thimerosal than after
> methymercury exposure (24 vs 60 days).
>
> Unquote.
>
> And, even if there is more mercury in the brain at some time periods
> with thiomerosal, it is inorganic mercury, not ethyl mercury. That is
> thought by many to be a less toxic form, not that we yet have any idea
> at all how the mere presence of any heavy metal in an organ correlates
> with function.
>
> PM
>
Peter Moran wrote:
> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
> news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>
>> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>
>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>
>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this
>>>> dose of
>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much
>>>> whether
>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all
>>>> should care
>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>
>>>> PM
>>>
>>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
>
> Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
> even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why
> you should accuse me of it.
Chuckie is incapable of serious discussion and needs to call you a liar.
He does not understand your posts, as you use facts, and this gives
him a migraine.
>
>> Mercury is toxic at any level.
>
> Who says? There will be a level of exposure to any poison below which
> toxic effects are undetectable, and mercury is no exception. There is a
> vast amount of evidence pertaining to this from extensive research into
> industrial, dental and food exposure to mercury in all its forms where
> researchers have gone looking for the most subtle neuropsychiatric
> effects and found no evidence of them below certain levels of even
> chronic exposure.
>
>> Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal.
>
> Who says? What evidence?
>
>> Your
>>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>>> times more toxic ).
>
> There is not a scrap of evidence for this, nor any reason to expect it.
>
>> You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>
> What a ridiculous statement. In the last fifty years of increasing
> exposure to mercury life expectancy has been increasing.
>
>>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>>> than methy mercury.>>
>>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>>> are flat out lying.
>
> This is insulting. What makes you think I am not entirely familiar with
> all the literature on organis mercury toxicity?
>
> You are referring to the famous study on monkey babies. I have read
> it, but I'll bet you haven't. The following is part of a discussion
> I had with someone else concerning certain claims that arise from it.
>> 2. "There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of
>
>> thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute
>
>> inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed
>
>> infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants."
>
>>
>
>> Based on the references sited in this study, it also appears that
>
>> inorganic mercury in the brain has a much longer half-life, 227-540
>
>> days is what is stated in the paper.
>
> PM I pointed out in another post that this is a very selective
> reporting of the study's findings.
>
> What I said ---
>
> I have read the study and think you are quite wrong. At worst it is
> neutral concerning the relative risk of mercury from thiomerosal in
> vaccines and oral methyl mercury. The authors correctly confine
> themselves to pointing out that the differences in handling of the two
> forms of mercury mean that you cannot reliably predict the brain
> toxicity of one from the other (while ironically comparing the oral
> administration of one, to intramuscular administration of the other in
> drawing these conclusions!!!).
>
> What's more, I can "prove" that thiomerosal is safer than methyl
> mercury, using the same study. I only need to choose the bits of text
> that *I* like.
>
> For example ---
>
> Quote -
>
> A much lower brain concentration of total Hg was observed in the
> thimerosal infants compared to the MeHg infants, i.e., a 3- to 4-fold
> difference for an equivalent exposure of Hg. Moreover, total Hg is
> cleared much more rapidly from the brain after thimerosal than after
> methymercury exposure (24 vs 60 days).
>
> Unquote.
>
> And, even if there is more mercury in the brain at some time periods
> with thiomerosal, it is inorganic mercury, not ethyl mercury. That is
> thought by many to be a less toxic form, not that we yet have any idea
> at all how the mere presence of any heavy metal in an organ correlates
> with function.
>
> PM
>
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
news:13ka7s9l00b6o6b@corp.supernews . com ...
> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
> news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>
>> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>
>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>
>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>>>> of
>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much
>>>> whether
>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>>> care
>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>
>>>> PM
>>>
>>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
>
> Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
> even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why you
> should accuse me of it.
You are answering me. I didn't write the above. Is this an indication or
your ability to follow logic?
>
>>Mercury is toxic at any level.
>
> Who says? There will be a level of exposure to any poison below which
> toxic effects are undetectable, and mercury is no exception. There is a
> vast amount of evidence pertaining to this from extensive research into
> industrial, dental and food exposure to mercury in all its forms where
> researchers have gone looking for the most subtle neuropsychiatric effects
> and found no evidence of them below certain levels of even chronic
> exposure.
>
>>Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal.
>
> Who says? What evidence?
>
>>Your
>>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>>> times more toxic ).
>
> There is not a scrap of evidence for this, nor any reason to expect it.
>
>>You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>
> What a ridiculous statement. In the last fifty years of increasing
> exposure to mercury life expectancy has been increasing.
>
>>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>>> than methy mercury.>>
>>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>>> are flat out lying.
>
> This is insulting. What makes you think I am not entirely familiar with
> all the literature on organis mercury toxicity?
>
> You are referring to the famous study on monkey babies. I have read it,
> but I'll bet you haven't. The following is part of a discussion I had
> with someone else concerning certain claims that arise from it.
>> 2. "There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of
>
>> thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute
>
>> inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed
>
>> infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants."
>
>>
>
>> Based on the references sited in this study, it also appears that
>
>> inorganic mercury in the brain has a much longer half-life, 227-540
>
>> days is what is stated in the paper.
>
> PM I pointed out in another post that this is a very selective reporting
> of the study's findings.
>
> What I said ---
>
> I have read the study and think you are quite wrong. At worst it is
> neutral concerning the relative risk of mercury from thiomerosal in
> vaccines and oral methyl mercury. The authors correctly confine themselves
> to pointing out that the differences in handling of the two forms of
> mercury mean that you cannot reliably predict the brain toxicity of one
> from the other (while ironically comparing the oral administration of one,
> to intramuscular administration of the other in drawing these
> conclusions!!!).
>
> What's more, I can "prove" that thiomerosal is safer than methyl mercury,
> using the same study. I only need to choose the bits of text that *I*
> like.
>
> For example ---
>
> Quote -
>
> A much lower brain concentration of total Hg was observed in the
> thimerosal infants compared to the MeHg infants, i.e., a 3- to 4-fold
> difference for an equivalent exposure of Hg. Moreover, total Hg is cleared
> much more rapidly from the brain after thimerosal than after methymercury
> exposure (24 vs 60 days).
>
> Unquote.
>
> And, even if there is more mercury in the brain at some time periods with
> thiomerosal, it is inorganic mercury, not ethyl mercury. That is thought
> by many to be a less toxic form, not that we yet have any idea at all how
> the mere presence of any heavy metal in an organ correlates with function.
>
> PM
>
"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
news:13ka7s9l00b6o6b@corp.supernews . com ...
> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
> news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>
>> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>
>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>
>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this dose
>>>> of
>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much
>>>> whether
>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>>> care
>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>
>>>> PM
>>>
>>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
>
> Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
> even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why you
> should accuse me of it.
You are answering me. I didn't write the above. Is this an indication or
your ability to follow logic?
>
>>Mercury is toxic at any level.
>
> Who says? There will be a level of exposure to any poison below which
> toxic effects are undetectable, and mercury is no exception. There is a
> vast amount of evidence pertaining to this from extensive research into
> industrial, dental and food exposure to mercury in all its forms where
> researchers have gone looking for the most subtle neuropsychiatric effects
> and found no evidence of them below certain levels of even chronic
> exposure.
>
>>Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal.
>
> Who says? What evidence?
>
>>Your
>>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>>> times more toxic ).
>
> There is not a scrap of evidence for this, nor any reason to expect it.
>
>>You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>
> What a ridiculous statement. In the last fifty years of increasing
> exposure to mercury life expectancy has been increasing.
>
>>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>>> than methy mercury.>>
>>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>>> are flat out lying.
>
> This is insulting. What makes you think I am not entirely familiar with
> all the literature on organis mercury toxicity?
>
> You are referring to the famous study on monkey babies. I have read it,
> but I'll bet you haven't. The following is part of a discussion I had
> with someone else concerning certain claims that arise from it.
>> 2. "There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of
>
>> thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute
>
>> inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed
>
>> infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants."
>
>>
>
>> Based on the references sited in this study, it also appears that
>
>> inorganic mercury in the brain has a much longer half-life, 227-540
>
>> days is what is stated in the paper.
>
> PM I pointed out in another post that this is a very selective reporting
> of the study's findings.
>
> What I said ---
>
> I have read the study and think you are quite wrong. At worst it is
> neutral concerning the relative risk of mercury from thiomerosal in
> vaccines and oral methyl mercury. The authors correctly confine themselves
> to pointing out that the differences in handling of the two forms of
> mercury mean that you cannot reliably predict the brain toxicity of one
> from the other (while ironically comparing the oral administration of one,
> to intramuscular administration of the other in drawing these
> conclusions!!!).
>
> What's more, I can "prove" that thiomerosal is safer than methyl mercury,
> using the same study. I only need to choose the bits of text that *I*
> like.
>
> For example ---
>
> Quote -
>
> A much lower brain concentration of total Hg was observed in the
> thimerosal infants compared to the MeHg infants, i.e., a 3- to 4-fold
> difference for an equivalent exposure of Hg. Moreover, total Hg is cleared
> much more rapidly from the brain after thimerosal than after methymercury
> exposure (24 vs 60 days).
>
> Unquote.
>
> And, even if there is more mercury in the brain at some time periods with
> thiomerosal, it is inorganic mercury, not ethyl mercury. That is thought
> by many to be a less toxic form, not that we yet have any idea at all how
> the mere presence of any heavy metal in an organ correlates with function.
>
> PM
>
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
"vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
news:47462c6e$0$26989$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>
> "Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
> news:13ka7s9l00b6o6b@corp.supernews . com ...
>> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
>> news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>>
>>> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this
>>>>> dose of
>>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much
>>>>> whether
>>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>>>> care
>>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>>
>>>>> PM
>>>>
>>>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
>>
>> Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
>> even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why
>> you should accuse me of it.
>
> You are answering me. I didn't write the above. Is this an indication or
> your ability to follow logic?
No, it is how things are showing up in my browser. I now see "Dr"Cee's
name in there somewhere but I have no newsgroup message showiung for him.
Sorry, anway.
PM
>
>>
>>>Mercury is toxic at any level.
>>
>> Who says? There will be a level of exposure to any poison below which
>> toxic effects are undetectable, and mercury is no exception. There is a
>> vast amount of evidence pertaining to this from extensive research into
>> industrial, dental and food exposure to mercury in all its forms where
>> researchers have gone looking for the most subtle neuropsychiatric
>> effects and found no evidence of them below certain levels of even
>> chronic exposure.
>>
>>>Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal.
>>
>> Who says? What evidence?
>>
>>>Your
>>>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>>>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>>>> times more toxic ).
>>
>> There is not a scrap of evidence for this, nor any reason to expect it.
>>
>>>You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>>>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>>
>> What a ridiculous statement. In the last fifty years of increasing
>> exposure to mercury life expectancy has been increasing.
>>
>>>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>>>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>>>> than methy mercury.>>
>>>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>>>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>>>> are flat out lying.
>>
>> This is insulting. What makes you think I am not entirely familiar with
>> all the literature on organis mercury toxicity?
>>
>> You are referring to the famous study on monkey babies. I have read
>> it, but I'll bet you haven't. The following is part of a discussion I
>> had with someone else concerning certain claims that arise from it.
>>> 2. "There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of
>>
>>> thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute
>>
>>> inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed
>>
>>> infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants."
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Based on the references sited in this study, it also appears that
>>
>>> inorganic mercury in the brain has a much longer half-life, 227-540
>>
>>> days is what is stated in the paper.
>>
>> PM I pointed out in another post that this is a very selective reporting
>> of the study's findings.
>>
>> What I said ---
>>
>> I have read the study and think you are quite wrong. At worst it is
>> neutral concerning the relative risk of mercury from thiomerosal in
>> vaccines and oral methyl mercury. The authors correctly confine
>> themselves to pointing out that the differences in handling of the two
>> forms of mercury mean that you cannot reliably predict the brain toxicity
>> of one from the other (while ironically comparing the oral administration
>> of one, to intramuscular administration of the other in drawing these
>> conclusions!!!).
>>
>> What's more, I can "prove" that thiomerosal is safer than methyl mercury,
>> using the same study. I only need to choose the bits of text that *I*
>> like.
>>
>> For example ---
>>
>> Quote -
>>
>> A much lower brain concentration of total Hg was observed in the
>> thimerosal infants compared to the MeHg infants, i.e., a 3- to 4-fold
>> difference for an equivalent exposure of Hg. Moreover, total Hg is
>> cleared much more rapidly from the brain after thimerosal than after
>> methymercury exposure (24 vs 60 days).
>>
>> Unquote.
>>
>> And, even if there is more mercury in the brain at some time periods with
>> thiomerosal, it is inorganic mercury, not ethyl mercury. That is thought
>> by many to be a less toxic form, not that we yet have any idea at all how
>> the mere presence of any heavy metal in an organ correlates with
>> function.
>>
>> PM
>>
>
>
"vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
news:47462c6e$0$26989$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>
> "Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
> news:13ka7s9l00b6o6b@corp.supernews . com ...
>> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
>> news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>>
>>> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this
>>>>> dose of
>>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much
>>>>> whether
>>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>>>> care
>>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>>
>>>>> PM
>>>>
>>>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
>>
>> Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
>> even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why
>> you should accuse me of it.
>
> You are answering me. I didn't write the above. Is this an indication or
> your ability to follow logic?
No, it is how things are showing up in my browser. I now see "Dr"Cee's
name in there somewhere but I have no newsgroup message showiung for him.
Sorry, anway.
PM
>
>>
>>>Mercury is toxic at any level.
>>
>> Who says? There will be a level of exposure to any poison below which
>> toxic effects are undetectable, and mercury is no exception. There is a
>> vast amount of evidence pertaining to this from extensive research into
>> industrial, dental and food exposure to mercury in all its forms where
>> researchers have gone looking for the most subtle neuropsychiatric
>> effects and found no evidence of them below certain levels of even
>> chronic exposure.
>>
>>>Injecting it into tissue makes it even more lethal.
>>
>> Who says? What evidence?
>>
>>>Your
>>>> concept of the "dose makes the poison" fails when it comes to mercury,
>>>> especially when aluminum is added as an adjuvent ( making the Hg 100
>>>> times more toxic ).
>>
>> There is not a scrap of evidence for this, nor any reason to expect it.
>>
>>>You and your ancestor docs have killed millions
>>>> of patients with mercury. When will you ever stop?
>>
>> What a ridiculous statement. In the last fifty years of increasing
>> exposure to mercury life expectancy has been increasing.
>>
>>>> The scientific data tells us that ethyl mercury from thimerosal
>>>> crosses the blood brain barrier and is concentrated there even more
>>>> than methy mercury.>>
>>>> Did you attend the classes on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and
>>>> toxicology? Based upon your comments you either did not attend or you
>>>> are flat out lying.
>>
>> This is insulting. What makes you think I am not entirely familiar with
>> all the literature on organis mercury toxicity?
>>
>> You are referring to the famous study on monkey babies. I have read
>> it, but I'll bet you haven't. The following is part of a discussion I
>> had with someone else concerning certain claims that arise from it.
>>> 2. "There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of
>>
>>> thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute
>>
>>> inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed
>>
>>> infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants."
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Based on the references sited in this study, it also appears that
>>
>>> inorganic mercury in the brain has a much longer half-life, 227-540
>>
>>> days is what is stated in the paper.
>>
>> PM I pointed out in another post that this is a very selective reporting
>> of the study's findings.
>>
>> What I said ---
>>
>> I have read the study and think you are quite wrong. At worst it is
>> neutral concerning the relative risk of mercury from thiomerosal in
>> vaccines and oral methyl mercury. The authors correctly confine
>> themselves to pointing out that the differences in handling of the two
>> forms of mercury mean that you cannot reliably predict the brain toxicity
>> of one from the other (while ironically comparing the oral administration
>> of one, to intramuscular administration of the other in drawing these
>> conclusions!!!).
>>
>> What's more, I can "prove" that thiomerosal is safer than methyl mercury,
>> using the same study. I only need to choose the bits of text that *I*
>> like.
>>
>> For example ---
>>
>> Quote -
>>
>> A much lower brain concentration of total Hg was observed in the
>> thimerosal infants compared to the MeHg infants, i.e., a 3- to 4-fold
>> difference for an equivalent exposure of Hg. Moreover, total Hg is
>> cleared much more rapidly from the brain after thimerosal than after
>> methymercury exposure (24 vs 60 days).
>>
>> Unquote.
>>
>> And, even if there is more mercury in the brain at some time periods with
>> thiomerosal, it is inorganic mercury, not ethyl mercury. That is thought
>> by many to be a less toxic form, not that we yet have any idea at all how
>> the mere presence of any heavy metal in an organ correlates with
>> function.
>>
>> PM
>>
>
>
Re: Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it
"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
news:13kcq39r8rifvc0@corp.supernews . com ...
> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
> news:47462c6e$0$26989$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>
>> "Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
>> news:13ka7s9l00b6o6b@corp.supernews . com ...
>>> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
>>> news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>>>
>>>> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this
>>>>>> dose of
>>>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much
>>>>>> whether
>>>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>>>>> care
>>>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PM
>>>>>
>>>>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
>>>
>>> Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
>>> even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why
>>> you should accuse me of it.
>>
>> You are answering me. I didn't write the above. Is this an indication
>> or your ability to follow logic?
>
> No, it is how things are showing up in my browser. I now see "Dr"Cee's
> name in there somewhere but I have no newsgroup message showiung for him.
> Sorry, anway.
> PM
Well, just had to give you a hard time.
"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
news:13kcq39r8rifvc0@corp.supernews . com ...
> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
> news:47462c6e$0$26989$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>
>> "Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on . net > wrote in message
>> news:13ka7s9l00b6o6b@corp.supernews . com ...
>>> "vernono" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote in message
>>> news:4744f037$0$27057$7836cce5@newsrazor . net ...
>>>>
>>>> <drceephd@insightbb . com > wrote in message
>>>> news:b4f7e4f1-2a14-4efa-a90b-54cc66279980@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>>>>> On Nov 21, 6:56 pm, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on . net > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter the Moron wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In fact no evidence is supplied anywhere in this article that this
>>>>>> dose of
>>>>>> mercury is harmful in any way. I honestly don't care very much
>>>>>> whether
>>>>>> people other than myself have flu vaccines or not, but you all should
>>>>>> care
>>>>>> about being dished up such lies and distortions!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PM
>>>>>
>>>>> The only lies and distortions are yours.
>>>
>>> Now you have made me angry. I don't accuse you of intentionally lying,
>>> even when you post obviously nonsensical material, and I don't see why
>>> you should accuse me of it.
>>
>> You are answering me. I didn't write the above. Is this an indication
>> or your ability to follow logic?
>
> No, it is how things are showing up in my browser. I now see "Dr"Cee's
> name in there somewhere but I have no newsgroup message showiung for him.
> Sorry, anway.
> PM
Well, just had to give you a hard time.
Next: origins of polio
Previous: The vaccinate your kid or else approach in Maryland is it all about the mon...
