|
New Study Shows Twice As Much Mercury Trapped In The Brain From Vaccines
Thu, 15 Dec 2005 05:55:48 GMT
misc.kids
previous
JanD...
|
Breakthrough Research: New Study Shows Vaccine Mercury Results In More Than
Twice As Much Mercury Being Trapped In The Brain.
April 2005
JanD...
|
Guess I must havee forgotten that.
cathyb...
|
Yep. By the way, the study not only does *not* show "Vaccine Mercury
Results In More Than
Twice As Much Mercury Being Trapped In The Brain", it actually states:
"Brain concentrations of total Hg were significantly lower by
approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared
with the MeHg infants."
So your headline should have read "Vaccine Mercury Results In More Than
Three Times Less Mercury Being Trapped In The Brain".
|
It does not show what Jan claims
Umm, NO, *I* did NOT claim it, the RESEARCHERS proved it.
cathyb...
|
No they didn't Jan. You've obviously posted this, yet again, without
actually ever reading it. It's a rather embarrassing habit of yours.
What the researchers actually found was that:
"Brain concentrations of total Hg were significantly lower by
approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared
with the MeHg infants, whereas the average brain-to-blood concentration
ratio was slightly higher for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (3.5 +/-
0.5 vs. 2.5 +/- 0.3). A higher percentage of the total Hg in the brain
was in the form of inorganic Hg for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (34%
vs. 7%)."
However this is all irrelevant, since the conclusion the researchers
actually drew from this study was "The results indicate that MeHg is
not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to
thimerosal-derived Hg."
Well, it's irrelevant other than it showing that you either can't read,
don't bother to read, or simply cannot comprehend the stuff that you
post. I mean you actually posted this study with a headline stating the
exact opposite of what the researchers found!
And then claimed that your statement was what the researchers had
proved.
she hasn't read and insulting other posters>
|
(boy, we've had to say that a few times!)
*WE*!!!!
That must mean *WE* DEBUNKERS, the same ones that DENY any number of things,
NOT endorsed by *organized medicine*
(Yes, there is such a thing as *organized medicine*, all repeated remarks
from the *gang* will be ignored)
. The study's only stated
|
JanD...
|
Why am I not surprised?!
Here is the results from the study!
Vaccine Mercury Results In More Than Twice As Much Mercury Being Trapped In
cathyb...
|
Yep. By the way, the study not only does *not* show "Vaccine Mercury
Results In More Than
Twice As Much Mercury Being Trapped In The Brain", it actually states:
"Brain concentrations of total Hg were significantly lower by
approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared
with the MeHg infants."
So your headline should have read "Vaccine Mercury Results In More Than
Three Times Less Mercury Being Trapped In The Brain".
|
cathyb...
|
No they didn't Jan. You've obviously posted this, yet again, without
actually ever reading it. It's a rather embarrassing habit of yours.
What the researchers actually found was that:
"Brain concentrations of total Hg were significantly lower by
approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared
with the MeHg infants, whereas the average brain-to-blood concentration
ratio was slightly higher for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (3.5 +/-
0.5 vs. 2.5 +/- 0.3). A higher percentage of the total Hg in the brain
was in the form of inorganic Hg for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys (34%
vs. 7%)."
However this is all irrelevant, since the conclusion the researchers
actually drew from this study was "The results indicate that MeHg is
not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to
thimerosal-derived Hg."
Well, it's irrelevant other than it showing that you either can't read,
don't bother to read, or simply cannot comprehend the stuff that you
post. I mean you actually posted this study with a headline stating the
exact opposite of what the researchers found!
And then claimed that your statement was what the researchers had
proved.
she hasn't read and insulting other posters>
|
The Brain.
THIS INFORMATION IS CRITICAL *IF* WE ARE TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC CONCERNS
REGARDING THE *SAFETY* OF CHILDHOOD IMMUNIZATIONS.
Helloooooooo. Helloooooo.
It's a bit late, isn't it?!?!
WHY is that?!?!
The CDC and FDA, VESTED INTEREST, and the GRANTED WAIVERS come BEFORE the
best INTEREST of children.
The LOVE of money is the root of ALL EVIL!
Peter Moran
*ENDORSER* OF DOCTOR WHO FILES MISLEADING REPORTS, REPEATEDLY AND
*DELIBERATELY* VIOLATES REGULATIONS, WHICH *KILLS*
Claiming there is no cover ups.
What more does one need to know about Peter Moran?
Rich...
|
Just as I predicted.
JanD...
|
Rich *selectively* snipped
"Peter Moran" blathered as usual
|
JanD...
|
Guess I must havee forgotten that.
It does not show what Jan claims
Umm, NO, *I* did NOT claim it, the RESEARCHERS proved it.
(boy, we've had to say that a few times!)
*WE*!!!!
That must mean *WE* DEBUNKERS, the same ones that DENY any number of things,
NOT endorsed by *organized medicine*
(Yes, there is such a thing as *organized medicine*, all repeated remarks
from the *gang* will be ignored)
. The study's only stated
|
JanD...
|
Why am I not surprised?!
Here is the results from the study!
Vaccine Mercury Results In More Than Twice As Much Mercury Being Trapped In
The Brain.
THIS INFORMATION IS CRITICAL *IF* WE ARE TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC CONCERNS
REGARDING THE *SAFETY* OF CHILDHOOD IMMUNIZATIONS.
Helloooooooo. Helloooooo.
It's a bit late, isn't it?!?!
WHY is that?!?!
The CDC and FDA, VESTED INTEREST, and the GRANTED WAIVERS come BEFORE the
best INTEREST of children.
The LOVE of money is the root of ALL EVIL!
Peter Moran
*ENDORSER* OF DOCTOR WHO FILES MISLEADING REPORTS, REPEATEDLY AND
*DELIBERATELY* VIOLATES REGULATIONS, WHICH *KILLS*
Claiming there is no cover ups.
What more does one need to know about Peter Moran?
|
|
|
mike...
mike...
|
The title is given by safeminds.org, do not attribute to Jan everything
you love to hate so much.
|
mike...
|
The implication is that the Jan gives a misleading title, correct?
But here are more quotes.
"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."
The study mentions that inorganic mercury stays in the brain significantly
longer than organic mercury.
"The estimated half-life of organic Hg in the brain of these adult monkeys
[from a referenced report] was consistent across various brain regions at
approximately 37days (similar to the brain half-life in the present infant
monkeys). The estimated half-life of inorganic Hg in the brain in the same
adult cohort varied greatly across some regions of the brain, from 227
days to 540 days.
That means that inorganic mercury is what really matters regarding long
term brain exposure. After 6 months organic mercury will clear, with ethyl
or methyl mercury, and inorganic mercury will remain. Twice as much with
thimerosal.
So the title is correct. Yes, "methyl mercury may not accurately reflect
what happens with thimerosal". Thimerosal is worse in some respects.
A couple more quotes.
"Stereologic and autometallographic studies on the brains of these adult
monkeys indicated that the persistence of INORGANIC Hg in the brain was
associated with a significant increase in the number of MICROGLIA in the
brain <...> The longer-term effects (greater than 6 months) of inorganic
Hg in the brain have not been examined. <...> It is important to note that
a recent publication has demonstrated an active neuroinflammatory process
in brains of AUTISTIC patients, including a marked activation of
MICROGLIA" (capitalization mine)
"Results from an initial Institute of Medicine (IOM) review of the safety
of vaccines found that there was not sufficient evidence to render an
opinion on the relationship between ethylmercury exposure and
developmental disorders in children (IOM 2001). The IOM review did,
however, note the possibility of such a relationship and recommended
further studies be conducted. A recently published second IOM review (IOM
2004) appears to have abandoned the earlier recommendation as well as back
away from the American Academy of Pediatrics goal. This approach is
difficult to understand, given our current limited knowledge of the
toxicokinetics and developmental neurotoxicity of thimerosal, a compound
that has been (and will continue to be) injected in millions of newborns
and infants."
|
|
|
