FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Medicine forums » nursing
MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3 [35 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  1, 2, 3 Next
Author Message
john
medicine forum addict


Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 92

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 11:18 am    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote in message
news:57uqa2d81qe6mcl43tfchnii1ivict35gf@4ax.com...

Quote:

Not as big an apology as Dr Haley owes to the children who have been
damaged because their parents took his advice.


you do talk a load of bollocks http://www.whale.to/v/haley.html
Back to top
\"Jan Drew\"
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 353

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:40 am    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

"Mark Probert" <markprobert@lumbercartel.com> wrote:

<snipped>
Quote:

That would be Altcorp. He is also a hired gun expert witness in the
Omnibus Autism Proceeding:

This accusation has been repeated.

Do prove it.
Quote:

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/OSM/Autism/PET%20INITIAL%20EXPERT.pdf

EXPERTS!
Quote:

along with Geier (rhymes with LIAR) and Wakefield.

Btw, in regard to your UDP.....

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/e717821a470e5e5d?hl=en&

Jul 19 2005

Richar H Jacobson [proven liar] wrote:
Quote:
I have repeatedly suggested what I believe to be an excellent strategy in
dealing with Jan Drew. Talk *at* or *about* but not with her. Change the
subject when appropriate. If everyone followed this suggestion it would
lead to a much better situation in this newsgroup. It is really too bad
that many of the posters in this group don't take my very reasonable
suggestion.



Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.

[btw, cathyb,Susan Dores, Nana Weedliller and Vashti all agreed]. Ha!


http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/b869e2ffb694656a?hl=en&

Jul 23 2005

LadyLollipop wrote:
Quote:
*Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.*


yes, I am adjusting it..fine tuning it...I do not need much to get iot
better...

That WAS a proven lie!

In the Matter of Mark Probert (Admitted as Mark S. Probert), a
Suspended Attorney, Respondent.
Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, Petitioner.

92-02731

SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT

183 A.D.2d 282; 590 N.Y.S.2d 747

November 9, 1992, Decided

PRIOR HISTORY: [***1]

Disciplinary proceedings instituted by the Grievance Committee for the
Tenth Judicial District. Respondent was admitted to the Bar on
February 15, 1978, at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme
Court in the Second Judicial Department, under the name Mark S.
Probert.

DISPOSITION: Ordered that the petitioner's motion to impose discipline
upon the respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is
granted; and it is further,

HEADNOTES: Attorney and Client - Disciplinary Proceedings

Respondent attorney, who is charged with 22 counts of failing to
cooperate with investigations of alleged misconduct by the Grievance
Committee, and who has failed to answer or appear, is disbarred.

COUNSEL:

Frank A. Finnerty, Jr., Westbury (Muriel L. Gennosa of counsel), for
petitioner.

JUDGES: Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ.,
concur.

Ordered that the petitioner's motion to impose discipline upon the
respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is granted; and
it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately,
the respondent, Mark Probert, is disbarred and his name is stricken
from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent shall continue to comply with this Court's
rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended and resigned
attorneys (22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary [***2] Law § 90, the respondent,
Mark Probert, is commanded to continue to desist and refrain (1) from
practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or
employee of another, (2) from appearing as an attorney or
counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission
or other public authority, (3) from giving to another an opinion as to
the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4)
from holding himself out in any way as an attorney and
counselor-at-law.

OPINIONBY: Per Curiam.

OPINION: [*282]

[**747] By decision and order of this Court dated September 29,
1989, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law until the
further order of this Court based upon his failure to cooperate with
the Grievance Committee. By further order of this Court dated June 4,
1992, the Grievance Committee was authorized to institute and
prosecute a disciplinary proceeding [*283] against the respondent
and the Honorable Moses M. Weinstein was appointed as Special Referee.

[**748] A notice of petition and petition was personally served upon
the respondent on July 2, 1992. No answer was forthcoming. The
petitioner now moves to hold the [***3] respondent in default. The
motion was personally served upon the respondent on August 14, 1992.
The respondent has failed to submit any papers in response to the
default motion.

The charges involve 22 counts of the respondent's failure to cooperate
with the Grievance Committee in its investigations into complaints of
professional misconduct.

The charges, if established, would require the imposition of a
disciplinary sanction against the respondent. Since the respondent has
chosen not to appear or answer in these proceedings, the charges must
be deemed established. The petitioner's motion to hold the respondent
in default and impose discipline is, therefore, granted. Accordingly,
the respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of
attorneys and counselors-at-law, effective immediately

Source:

NY UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM, ATTORNEY REGIST. UNIT

Currency Status:

ARCHIVE RECORD

NAME & PROFESSIONAL INFORMATION

Name:

MARK PROBERT

Date Of Birth:

11/XX/1946

Gender:

MALE

Address:

1698 WEBSTER AVE

MERRICK, NY 11566

County:

NASSAU

Phone:

516-968-5572

EMPLOYER INFORMATION

Employer:

MARK S PROBERT ESQ

Organization:

PERSON

LICENSING INFORMATION

Licensing Agency:

NY STATE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION

License/Certification Type:

ATTORNEY

License Number:

1253889

Issue Date:

00/00/1978

License Status:

DISBARRED

License State:

NY
Back to top
\"Jan Drew\"
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 353

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:13 am    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote:

<snip al insults>

Quote:
"Jan Drew" <jdrew1374@sbcglobal.net> wrote:


"Bryan Heit" <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote in message
news:e8j82n$b3m$1@news.ucalgary.ca...
Peter Bowditch wrote:
Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:


Peter Bowditch wrote:
Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that

ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?

Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a giant
ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan


Members of the Church of Haley reject the table salt story and claim
that it is a diversion from the real situation of chemicals containing
mercury.


I'm well aware of that. But it's an idiotic argument; mercury is just
another element. It's not magical or anything. Hard to believe he's a
chemist...


I tried going the other way with Saint Boyd himself by asking
how three harmless chemicals (carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen) can
become dangerous when combined and he told me that this is different
because nitrogen is not mercury. > Did I mention that saint Boyd
somehow
managed to hold down a professorship in chemistry and was actually
head of the department at his university?


Probably became a quack after he got the professorship. It is
remarkably
hard to get rid of someone once they get into the tenure track. Last I
heard he'd left his uni (by force?) and is now running a company selling
stuff to people silly enough to listen to him...

Bryan

All been discussed previously.

It is noted..not only do you choose to believe Peter Bowditch...YOU also
join him in LYING.

What are those lies, Jan?

All over the place..where YOU write them.


Was Dr Haley a professor of chemistry? Did
Quote:
he write to me saying that the elements making up the hydrogen cyanide
had no bearing on the compound's chemistry?

Peter Bowditch Owes DR Boyd Haley A HUGE Apology

Not as big an apology as Dr Haley owes to the children who have been
damaged because their parents took his advice.


http://www.altcorp.com/DentalI­­­nformation/exposure.htm


III. MECHANISMS, SOURCES & EPIDEMIOLOGY OF EXPOSURE


Sallie Bernard*, Albert Enayati, B.S., Ch.E., M.S.M.E., Heidi Roger,
Teresa Binstock, Lyn Redwood, R.N., M.S.N., C.R.N.P., Woody McGinnis,
M.D.

Binstock? Redwood?

No need to read any further, as there have now been two very big
bullshit flags in the form of names of well-known anti-vaccination
liars.

You ARE the liar.

They ARE not.

http://www.whale.to/a/bernard.html

http://www.whale.to/a/autism7.html

http://www.safeminds.org/home/executive_board.html

http://www.safeminds.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_Minds

http://www.slc.edu/index.php?pageID=3024

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/redwood.html

http://www.altcorp.com/DentalInformation/autismhg.htm

http://www.patsullivan.com/blog/2005/07/lyn_redwood_fro.html

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/RecommendedList/Autism&Mercury.htm

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/binstock1.htm

http://groups.msn.com/TheAutismHomePage/immunological.msnw

[for starters]

Quote:


Given that ethylmercury is equally neurotoxic as methylmercury

I'm sorry, I did read a bit further, but this lie really made me stop.

Good. Your LIES don't need to be heard again.
Quote:
--
Peter Bowditch

http://tinyurl.com/gwkcp

http://tinyurl.com/ojc4e

http://www.altcorp.com/dentalinformation/exposure.htm

http://www.whale.to/a/bernard.html

http://www.whale.to/a/autism7.html

http://www.safeminds.org/home/executive_board.html

http://www.safeminds.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_Minds

http://www.slc.edu/index.php?pageID=3024

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/redwood.html

http://www.altcorp.com/DentalInformation/autismhg.htm

http://www.patsullivan.com/blog/2005/07/lyn_redwood_fro.html

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/RecommendedList/Autism&Mercury.htm

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/binstock1.htm

http://groups.msn.com/TheAutismHomePage/immunological.msnw
Back to top
Mark Probert
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 1720

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:40 pm    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

Bryan Heit wrote:
Quote:
Peter Bowditch wrote:
Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:


Peter Bowditch wrote:
Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that

ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?

Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a
giant ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan


Members of the Church of Haley reject the table salt story and claim
that it is a diversion from the real situation of chemicals containing
mercury.


I'm well aware of that. But it's an idiotic argument; mercury is just
another element. It's not magical or anything. Hard to believe he's a
chemist...

He is a professor of chemistry.

Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach.

He believes that the fact that 50% of the molecular weight of Thimerosal
is Mercury is important.

Quote:
I tried going the other way with Saint Boyd himself by asking
how three harmless chemicals (carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen) can
become dangerous when combined and he told me that this is different
because nitrogen is not mercury. > Did I mention that saint Boyd somehow
managed to hold down a professorship in chemistry and was actually
head of the department at his university?


Probably became a quack after he got the professorship. It is
remarkably hard to get rid of someone once they get into the tenure
track. Last I heard he'd left his uni (by force?) and is now running a
company selling stuff to people silly enough to listen to him...

That would be Altcorp. He is also a hired gun expert witness in the
Omnibus Autism Proceeding:

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/OSM/Autism/PET%20INITIAL%20EXPERT.pdf

along with Geier (rhymes with LIAR) and Wakefield.
Back to top
Peter Bowditch
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 352

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:06 pm    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

"Jan Drew" <jdrew1374@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Quote:

"Bryan Heit" <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote in message
news:e8j82n$b3m$1@news.ucalgary.ca...
Peter Bowditch wrote:
Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:


Peter Bowditch wrote:
Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that

ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?

Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a giant
ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan


Members of the Church of Haley reject the table salt story and claim
that it is a diversion from the real situation of chemicals containing
mercury.


I'm well aware of that. But it's an idiotic argument; mercury is just
another element. It's not magical or anything. Hard to believe he's a
chemist...


I tried going the other way with Saint Boyd himself by asking
how three harmless chemicals (carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen) can
become dangerous when combined and he told me that this is different
because nitrogen is not mercury. > Did I mention that saint Boyd somehow
managed to hold down a professorship in chemistry and was actually
head of the department at his university?


Probably became a quack after he got the professorship. It is remarkably
hard to get rid of someone once they get into the tenure track. Last I
heard he'd left his uni (by force?) and is now running a company selling
stuff to people silly enough to listen to him...

Bryan

All been discussed previously.

And will probably be discussed again. And the appropriate homonym
"disgust" will be used to express the way thinking people feel about
Haley's money-driven idiocy.

Quote:

It is noted..not only do you choose to believe Peter Bowditch...YOU also
join him in LYING.

What are those lies, Jan? Was Dr Haley a professor of chemistry? Did
he write to me saying that the elements making up the hydrogen cyanide
had no bearing on the compound's chemistry?

Quote:
Peter Bowditch Owes DR Boyd Haley A HUGE Apology

Not as big an apology as Dr Haley owes to the children who have been
damaged because their parents took his advice.

Quote:

http://www.altcorp.com/DentalI­­­nformation/exposure.htm


III. MECHANISMS, SOURCES & EPIDEMIOLOGY OF EXPOSURE


Sallie Bernard*, Albert Enayati, B.S., Ch.E., M.S.M.E., Heidi Roger,
Teresa Binstock, Lyn Redwood, R.N., M.S.N., C.R.N.P., Woody McGinnis,
M.D.

Binstock? Redwood?

No need to read any further, as there have now been two very big
bullshit flags in the form of names of well-known anti-vaccination
liars.

Quote:


Given that ethylmercury is equally neurotoxic as methylmercury

I'm sorry, I did read a bit further, but this lie really made me stop.
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
Back to top
\"Jan Drew\"
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 353

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 4:43 pm    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

"Bryan Heit" <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote in message
news:e8j82n$b3m$1@news.ucalgary.ca...
Quote:
Peter Bowditch wrote:
Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:


Peter Bowditch wrote:
Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that

ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?

Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a giant
ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan


Members of the Church of Haley reject the table salt story and claim
that it is a diversion from the real situation of chemicals containing
mercury.


I'm well aware of that. But it's an idiotic argument; mercury is just
another element. It's not magical or anything. Hard to believe he's a
chemist...


I tried going the other way with Saint Boyd himself by asking
how three harmless chemicals (carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen) can
become dangerous when combined and he told me that this is different
because nitrogen is not mercury. > Did I mention that saint Boyd somehow
managed to hold down a professorship in chemistry and was actually
head of the department at his university?


Probably became a quack after he got the professorship. It is remarkably
hard to get rid of someone once they get into the tenure track. Last I
heard he'd left his uni (by force?) and is now running a company selling
stuff to people silly enough to listen to him...

Bryan

All been discussed previously.

It is noted..not only do you choose to believe Peter Bowditch...YOU also
join him in LYING.

Peter Bowditch Owes DR Boyd Haley A HUGE Apology

Quote:
http://www.altcorp.com/DentalI­­­nformation/exposure.htm


Quote:
III. MECHANISMS, SOURCES & EPIDEMIOLOGY OF EXPOSURE


Quote:
Sallie Bernard*, Albert Enayati, B.S., Ch.E., M.S.M.E., Heidi Roger,
Teresa Binstock, Lyn Redwood, R.N., M.S.N., C.R.N.P., Woody McGinnis,
M.D.


Quote:
Given that ethylmercury is equally neurotoxic as methylmercury (Magos et
al, 1985), and that injected mercury is more harmful than ingested
mercury (EPA, 1997, p.3-55; Diner and Brenner, 1998), the amount of
injected ethylmercury given to young children is cause for concern. The
potential for Hg-induced harm is compounded by the special vulnerability
of infants (Gosselin et al, 1984). Mercury, which primarily affects the
central nervous system, is most toxic to the developing brain (Davis et
al, 1994; Grandjean et al, 1999; Yeates and Mortensen, 1994), and
neonates exposed to methyl (organic) mercury have been shown to
accumulate significantly more Hg in the brain relative to other tissues
than do adults ( EPA, 1997, p.4-1). Mercury may also be more likely to
enter the infant brain because the blood-brain barrier has not fully
closed (Wild & Benzel, 1994). In addition, infants under 6 months are
unable to excrete mercury, most likely due to their inability to produce
bile, the main excretion route for organic mercury (Koos and Longo, 1976;
Clarkson, 1993). Bakir et al (1973) have shown that those with the
longest half-time of clearance are most likely to experience adverse
sequelae, while Aschner and Aschner (1990) have demonstrated that the
longer that organic mercury remains in neurons, the more it is converted
to its inorganic irreversibly-bound form, which has greater
neurotoxicity.


Quote:
Peter replied:


Quote:
LadyLollipop" <LadyLolli...@insightbb.com> wrote:
Take a good look at the references here. Peter Bowditch Owes Dr Boyd
Haley A HUGE Apology
http://www.altcorp.com/DentalI­­­nformation/exposure.htm III. MECHANISMS,
SOURCES & EPIDEMIOLOGY OF EXPOSURE Sallie Bernard*, Albert Enayati, B.S.,
Ch.E., M.S.M.E., Heidi Roger, Teresa Binstock, Lyn Redwood, R.N., M.S.N.,
C.R.N.P., Woody McGinnis, M.D.


Quote:
Take a good look at the list of anti-vaccination liars above and then you
can safely ...


Quote:
snip remaining bullshit


Quote:
===


Quote:
Peter skipped right over the***** references of the facts******.


Quote:
The list of people merely put these facts together. They did NOT write
them.


Quote:
Peter calls them anti-vaccination liars.


Quote:
The facts also prove Peter is wrong and DR Boyd Haley is correct.


Quote:
This is an excellent example of exactly how organized medicine and
dentistry works.


Quote:
They LIE and claim others and lying.


Quote:
They trash. They have NO regard for anything except protecting the LIES
that have been believed for years.


Quote:
Causing much SUFFERING.


Quote:
This is E. V. I. L.


Quote:
Jan


http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/06/16/thimerosal/index_np.html

*A professor of chemistry deliberately talks about two different chemical
compounds (ethylmercury and methylmercury) as if they are interchangeable
and have identical properties*.


That is a LIE.


Dr Haley said NO such thing.


He said:


(methylmercury, ethylmercury, thimerosal dental amalgams, Hg vapor, Hg2+,
etc.) have been reported to be extremely toxic.


He is absolutely correct.


Ethylmercury has also been shown, like methylmercury, to accumulate in the
brain and causes tissue damage methylmercury, to accumulate in the brain and
causes tissue damage


Like methylmercury, ethylmercury is toxic to the brain and crosses the
blood-brain barrier. (9) "Higher-dose exposure to ethylmercury from
Thimerosal results in toxicity comparable to that observed after high-dose
exposure to methylmercury."


Dr. Haley wrote:


Ethylmercury is extremely neurotoxic, killing neurons at 10-25 nanomolar
levels. For your information the vaccine is 125,000 nanomolar in thimerosal
and injecting one vaccine (12.5 micrograms) into one 4-6lbs infant would
represent a very toxic exposure. Furhter, unlike many elements (N,O,C, etc.)
Hg has no known usefulness in biological systems, being toxic to them all.
Also, all occurring forms of Hg (methylmercury, ethylmercury, thimerosal
dental amalgams, Hg vapor, Hg2+, etc.) have been reported to be extremely
toxic.


Here is what Peter Said:


A professor of chemistry deliberately talks about two different chemical
compounds (ethylmercury and methylmercury) as if they are interchangeable
and have identical properties.


That is a LIE.


Dr Haley said NO such thing.


He said:


(methylmercury, ethylmercury, thimerosal dental amalgams, Hg vapor, Hg2+,
etc.) have been reported to be extremely toxic.


He is absolutely correct.


Ethylmercury has also been shown, like methylmercury, to accumulate in the
brain and causes tissue damage methylmercury, to accumulate in the brain and
causes tissue damage


Like methylmercury, ethylmercury is toxic to the brain and crosses the
blood-brain barrier. (9) "Higher-dose exposure to ethylmercury from
Thimerosal results in toxicity comparable to that observed after high-dose
exposure to methylmercury."



http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm


Thimerosal is approximately 50% Hg by weight


http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimerosal.htm#thi


Thimerosal, which is approximately 50% mercury by weight


http://www.talkinternational.com/

Report on Mercury Toxicity from Dental Amalgams and Thimerosal
Presented to Congressional Hearing 8 May 2003


Presented By Boyd E. Haley, Ph.D.
Professor and Chairman of the Department of Chemistry
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY 50606-005


In developing an opinion on mercury toxicity from exposures to dental
amalgam and thimerosal I have reviewed toxicologic data relevant to animal
and human studies to environmental mercury, methylmercury, thimerosal and
exposure to mercury from amalgam fillings. I have reviewed literature
searches conducted on various computerized databases; evaluated published
literature on primary studies as referenced in part herein. I have reviewed
relevant unpublished reports, consulted review articles, where appropriate,
and held working meetings with experts in the field. I have also conducted
experiments in my laboratory at the University of Kentucky with regards to
the enzyme and cellular toxicity of both dental amalgams and thimerosal,
including vaccine with and without thimerosal added as a preservative. In
addition, I have reviewed evaluations and conclusions of various
governmental agencies, including the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC), the World Health Organization (WHO), the National Institute
of Health (NIH), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
and other groups regarding this issue. I have come to the following
conclusions.


1. Mercury is the most toxic, non-redioactive elements known to man.
Virtually every industry has either reduced or banned the use of mercury
with the exception of dentistry. Dental amalgam is approximately 50% mercury
by weight. Each amalgam typically has between half of a gram to a gram of
mercury. A typical person having between 5 and 15 amalgams, would have
several grams of mercury implanted in his or her mouth. This amount is
colossal using any standard. I am aware of no other situation today where
grams of mercury are implanted in any human being. In fact, in the
healthcare industry, mercury has been all but banned.


2. The concentration of thimerosal in vaccines that contain this agent
as a preservative is approximately 125,000 nanomolar. In our studies pure
thimerosal shows toxicity to neurons in culture at 10 to 20 nanomolar, a
12,500 to 6,250 dilution factor. Calculations, using a conservative
approach, demonstrate that vaccinations of infants exposed them to
concentrations of thimerosal that could biologically injure them, especially
if they were exceptionally susceptible to mercury toxicity due to genetic
predisposition, other concurrent toxic exposures (e.g. to lead, elemental
mercury, cadmium, etc.) further, our research has shown that thimerosal,
which releases the toxic agent ethylmercury, inhibits the same brain enzymes
as does Hg2+. Therefore, multiple exposures from dental amalgams, food, and
vaccines are all capable of adding to the toxic load of these infants.


3. Further, we need to emphasize that humans are not rats in a
pristine cage, being fed chow that is tested to be free of other toxic
agents. Humans are exposed to numerous toxic agents that may act in a
synergistic fashion to enhance the toxicity of other toxicants. That is, and
this is well established, low levels of lead will greatly enhance the
toxicity of mercury. It is well known that levels of lead previously thought
to be non-toxic are now associated with decreased mental abilities in
children. Could it be that this lead is enhancing the toxicity of mercury
exposures from dental amalgams and vaccines?


4. The position of organized dentistry, primarily the American Dental
Association (ADA), that "no valid scientific evidence exists that dental
amalgam poses any health risk-other than rare, localized allergic
reactions," is, in my opinion, indefensible in the light of huge amounts of
published science. The major basis I have heard for the ADA stand is the
finding of "expert committees" within the dental branch of the FDA and WHO.
I looked up the members of these committees and have serious concerns about
who the ADA classifies as "expert" that served on these committees. In my
opinion, there was a severe paucity of relevant research publications on
mercury toxicity by members of these committees. The ADA stand is especially
weak if one considers the recent National Academy of Sciences and EPA
reports implying that 8 to 10% of American women of child bearing age have
blood levels of mercury that put any child they give birth to at risk for
having neurological problems. Also, a plethora of peer reviewed, published,
scientific studies and articles completely refute the evaluation of the ADA
regarding amalgam safety. Frankly, outside of the Journal of the American
Dental Association or JADA, the ADA's trade journal, which is not a refereed
scientific journal, but solely a trade journal, scientific consensus is
completely contrary to the ADA's position (note that the ADA escapes
adjudication by claiming to be a trade organization with no responsibility
to public health.) The fact is that there are no solid, refereed
publications showing that mercury is not significantly emitted from dental
amalgams. On the contrary, there are several showing significant emissions
of mercury from dental amalgams. In the one JADA article (Saxe, et al. JADA
Alzheimer's Disease, Dental Amalgam and Mercury, V130, p191, 1999) it is
claimed that amalgams are not related to brain Hg levels. I have several
design and scientific criticism of this paper, which I will not go into
here. However, in this same paper there is a histogram that shows that about
6% of the subjects had mercury brain levels above 1 micromolar levels and
about 15% had brain levels above 0.5 micromolar levels. Therefore, roughly 6
to 15% of Americans, on the day they die, have what any competent
neurologist or neurochemists or toxicologist would call severely toxic
levels of mercury. These levels are about 1,000 times that needed to cause
neurons to die in culture. Therefore, one needs to ask the questions "where
does this mercury come from and why does it exist in brain tissues at such
high levels." I seriously doubt that the major cause is eating seafood for
85 year old AD subjects. The cause is obvious exposures from known sources
(amalgams, food and vaccines) and the reason it collects in certain
individuals is because they cannot effectively excrete mercury due to
genetic susceptibilities or presence of other toxicants (lead, pesticides,
etc.) or loss of cellular protection due to advanced age or disease. Perhaps
this same phenomena accounts for the 22,000 times normal level of mercury in
the heart tissues of children who die with Idiopathic Dilated Cardiomyopathy
(Frustaci et al., J. American College of Cardiology, v33#6, p1578, 1000.)
This latter issue alone should make Congress consider a ban on mercury in
dentistry and medicine.


5. Dental amalgam emits dangerous levels of mercury. In fact,
according to a 1991 WHO report, dental amalgam constitutes the major human
exposure to mercury.1 Grams of mercury are in the mouth of individuals with
several amalgam fillings. Also, the level of blood and urine mercury
positively correlates with the number of amalgam fillings.2 It would be
quite informative to require that the American Medical Association (AMA) be
required to evaluate the state of mercury toxicity caused by dental amalgams
and make a report regarding this issue. The lack of AMA support for the ADA
contention on amalgam safety says something.


6. Careful evaluation of the amount of mercury emitted from a commonly
used dental amalgam in a test tube with 10 ml of water was presented in an
article entitled "Long-term Dissolution of Mercury from a
Non-Mercury-Releasing Amalgam."3 This study showed that "the overall mean
release of mercury was 43.5 ± 3.2 micrograms per cm2 /day, and the amount
remained fairly constant during the duration of the experiments (2 years.)"
This was without pressure, heat or galvanism as would have occurred if the
amalgams were in a human mouth. To be fair, this amalgam contained about 66%
mercury compared to about 50% in most amalgams in use. The importance of
this publication is that the discovery of the tremendous amount of mercury
released from this amalgam material was not discovered by NIDCR, FDA, ADA,
CDC or any other American research group. It came from the University of
Singapore. Why hasn't the ADA or FDA or DCD done similar studies on every
amalgam preparation used in the USA today? In my laboratory we have done
this on several aged amalgams made from one conventional, widely used
amalgam company. The results indicated that about 4.5 micrograms Hg/cm2/ day
was released without abrasion, but this increased to about 47
micrograms/cm2/day with two 30 second brushings with a toothbrush.
Therefore, the question remains, who is protecting the American public from
adverse exposures to mercury? It appears as if those who should be doing
this job are failing to do so. Having an unbiased research group repeat the
study above on all ADA approved amalgam materials would be very informative
and I strongly recommend that this be done even though doing this is was not
supported by the ADA spokesperson at a past Congressional hearing on this
issue.


Recent research has shown that the birth hair of normal children
increase in mercury content with increasing dental amalgams in the birth
mother (A. Holmes, M. Blaxill and B. Haley, Reduced Levels of Mercury in the
First Baby Haircuts of Autistic Children, in press, International J.
Toxicology v22#4, 2003.) In contrast, autistic children have much lower
levels of mercury in their birth hair, yet due to numerous reports have
elevated mercury in their bodies on mercury challenge testing. This strongly
indicates that a subset of the population does not have the ability to
excrete mercury even if it is from low chronic daily exposure from dental
amalgam.


7. Furthermore, due to the substantial amounts of mercury in amalgams,
it is the number of amalgams that controls the amount of mercury exposure
and this is likely not significantly affected by the length of time each
amalgam is in the mouth.4 Put another way, since each large amalgam (i.e.
those with 0.5 and 1.0 grams of mercury) contains between 500,000 to
1,000,000 micrograms of mercury, and if mercury were estimated to be
released at a high rate of 10 micrograms a day from each amalgam, it would
take between 137 and 274 years before any individual amalgam is completely
depleted of its mercury content. A small amalgam with 0.1 grams of mercury
would take 27.4 years for depletion at this rate. Also, there is a high
variance which is influenced by the surface area of the amalgam, its copper
content, its location and the individual's eating and grinding habits, and
rate of acidity, as noted herein. However, even at very conservative
estimates, these figures equate to a substantial amount of chronic
(continuous, daily) mercury exposure over a sustained, prolonged period of
time. I think it is imperative that the ADA provide detailed research that
demonstrates that amalgams MADE OUTSIDE THE MOUTH DO NOT RELEASE MERCURY ON
REASONABLE ABRASION AS WOULD BE EXPECTED ON CHEWING FOOD OR DRINKING HOT
DRINKS. The ADA and other supporters of amalgam refuse to do these studies
or fund these studies even though several refereed journal reports list
solutions in which amalgams have been soaked as "severely cytotoxic."


8. About 80% of the mercury vapor from amalgams is readily taken up by
the human body and distributed to various organs. Very little, if any, of
the mercury vapors are exhaled; the vapors as well as mercury particles are
absorbed into the lungs and body tissues. Through the lungs, for instance,
mercury enters the bloodstream where it has access to all of the major
organs; of particular concern are the kidneys and the central nervous
system.5 For example, studies have been performed where amalgams containing
radioactive mercury were placed in sheep and monkeys, showed the
radioactivity collecting in all body tissues and especially high in the jaw
and facial bones.6 Human studies are also supportive.7


9. Even more concerning is the synergistic toxicity effects of other
elements in amalgams, which increase the toxicity of mercury. For example,
Zinc (or Zn) is a needed element for body health and is found in very low
percentages in dental amalgams when compared to mercury. However, Zn+2 is a
synergist that enhances mercury toxicity. Studies have shown that solutions
in which amalgams have been soaked were "severely cytoxic initially when Zn
release was highest."8 (see also, Lobner & Asrari, Neurotoxicity of Dental
Amalgam is Mediated by Zinc. J. Dental Research v82#3, 243, 2003.) We have
repeated similar amalgam soaking experiments in my laboratory. Cadmium (from
smoking), lead, zinc and other heavy metals enhanced mercury toxicity as
expected. This is a well know phenomena in toxicology as it has been
reported many years ago in a study on determining the lethal dose (LD) that
"the administration of an essentially no-response level (LD-1) of a mercury
salt together with a 1/20 of the LD-1 of a lead salt killed all of the
animals." If the toxicity were additive only 1 to 2 rats of 100 should have
died, instead 100% died. (J. Shubert, E. Riley & S. Tyler. Combined Effects
in Toxicology--A Rapid Systemic Testing Procedure: Cadmium, Mercury and
Lead. J.Toxicology and Environmental Health v4, p763, 1978.) What the data
from several studies clearly shows is that no one can state what is a "safe"
level of mercury exposure without knowing the concentration of all other
factors that may synergistically exacerbate mercury toxicity.


10. Synergistic effects on ethylmercury is demonstrated by the
dramatic enhancements of thimersosal toxicity against neurons in culture by
aluminum cation (Al3+), antibiotics and testosterone. Al3+ is another
component of vaccines and dramatically increases the killing of neurons by
thimerosal. Testosterone, at low nanomolar levels is not noticeably toxic to
neurons. However, if testosterone is present with low nanomolar levels of
thimerosal the rate of neuron death is greatly enhanced, more so than with
Al3+. This likely explains the 4 to 1 ratio of boys to girls that become
autistic and the fact that most of the severe cases of autism are boys. This
involvement of testosterone in autism is further supported by the work of
Dr. Baron Cohen of England who studied the amniotic fluid of mothers who
gave birth to autistic children. The only abnormality he found was that
their amniotic fluid contained elevated testosterone. It is likely that this
early elevated testosterone level rendered these children at enhanced risk
for ethylmercury neurotoxicity.


11. There are two common misconceptions fostered by pro-amalgam
supporters concerning mercury amalgam filings: (1) that the mercury in
dental amalgam is all chemically bound and not released at significant
rates; and (2) that amalgam mercury is in a form that is biologically
inactive. We have tested this in a direct fashion in my laboratory by
soaking amalgams in distilled water and then testing these solutions for
toxicity in a manner similar to our testing of solutions known to contain
specific amounts of Hg2+. The results were unequivocal, solutions in which
amalgams were soaked for only one hour gave very similar effects on
inhibiting the activity of tubulin and creatine kinase, two enzymes
previously reported to be greatly inhibited in Alzheimer's diseased brain as
compared to age-matched normal brain (B. Haley, The Relationship of the
Toxic Effects of Mercury to Exacerbation of the Medical Conditions
Classified as Alzheimer's Disease, Nordisk Tidsskrift for Biologisk Medisin,
2003.) Therefore, amalgams likely created a cytotoxic environment in situ as
report by others also.


12. By definition, an amalgam is a mixture of uncharged metal powders
in elemental form that is mixed with liquid mercury to form an emulsion that
hardens with time. Amalgams are not an alloy similar to steel or bronze.
Furthermore, in the case of dental amalgam, all of the elements that are
used to form amalgam have totally filled electron shells and form what is
known as metallic bonds. Mercury is a liquid because it makes very weak
metallic bonds, even with other metals, and this bonding is reversible
allowing bound mercury to become unbound and escape as a vaporous atom, Hg0,
at a rate that is significant. As such, there does not exist an irreversible
covalent bond between mercury and the other metals that is caused by two
elements binding to fill in shells with missing electrons. This means that,
unlike most chemically bound molecules, the elements that are mixed in an
amalgam do not lose their individual elemental properties on release from
the amalgam, unless this release is caused by electro-galvanism. Simply put,
mercury vapor emitting from amalgams does not lose any of its toxicity
because it was at one time inside of a dental amalgam. As shown in study
after study, mercury vapor is emitted from amalgams at substantial and toxic
amounts, and is then distributed within the human body. The claims made by
ADA spokesperson, even by one past director for the NIDCR, that mercury in
amalgams is like sodium in table salt, or like hydrogen in water, represent
what would be considered as preposterous by anyone knowledgeable in freshman
level general chemistry.


13. As to the second misconception, all of the metal elements in
amalgam, including mercury, are not biologically inactive. As noted in
numerous studies, some of which are cited herein, mercury emits from
amalgams on a 24 hour a day basis.9 The emissions are increased based on the
introduction of hot substances, such as beverages (coffee and the sort),
with chewing (such as chewing gum or food) and with galvanism as Hg (the
simple electrical current set up between different metals in the mouth and
ionic saliva.) Additionally, numerous interactions cause the scratching of
the amalgams, again causing an increase in mercury vapor emissions. This
includes the grinding of teeth. Once the mercury vapor is emitted it enters
the body and is converted to toxic Hg2+ inside of cells by a specific enzyme
(catalyase). In the blood it is carried to various organs, including, but
not limited to, the brain as supported by various studies, some of which are
cited herein. Based on this, mercury vapor from dental amalgams cannot be
said to be biologically inactive as it is rapidly converted to a toxic form
once inside a cell.


14. Equally unsupportable, scientifically, is any "estimate" that
amalgams emit mercury at minute amounts under a tenth of a microgram per day
as suggested by an ADA pro-amalgam spokesperson at the last congressional
Hearing. Applying simple math to this "estimate" of 0.1
micrograms/day/amalgam confirms this inaccuracy. If one would divide the 0.1
microgram/day amount by 8, 640 (24 hours/day X 60 minutes/hour X 6 ten
second intervals/minute) to calculate the amount of mercury in micrograms
available for a ten second mercury vapor analysis. This equals 1.16 X 10-5
micrograms total. Assume the oral cavity is somewhere between 10cm3 to 100
cm3 volume (note that 1 milliliter equals 1 cm3) then 1.16 X 10-6
micrograms/cm3 or 1.16 X 10-7micrograms/cm3 would be obtained from a single
amalgam. Note that the conventional vapor sniffer reads at its lowest
setting about 10 micrograms/meter3 or 10 micrograms/ 1,000,000 cm3 or
0.000001 or 10-6 micrograms/cm3. Therefore, the readings from 0.1 microgram
mercury released/day/amalgam in a 10 second reading would give values in a
10 cm3 oral volume that are barely if at all detectable. In a 100 cm3 oral
volume it would take about 8-9 fillings to get a minimal reading on a vapor
sniffer. This indicates that it would almost be impossible to detect mercury
emitting from one amalgam or several if the "estimate" of the ADA
spokesperson were accurate.


However, the mercury vapor sniffer has been used by numerous
individuals to detect mercury vapor in a human mouth or oral volume, and in
my opinion the levels reported would underestimate the amount of mercury
emitting from a single amalgam because of the following. Consider that
somewhere between one-half to five-sixths of the mercury released would
enter the body through the tooth (that area of the amalgam that exists below
the visibly exposed amalgam surface) and not into the oral air. While the
margins between a tooth and an amalgam filling are small they are large
compared to an atom of mercury vapor. So mercury does enter readily through
this route. In addition, some mercury in the oral air would be rapidly
absorbed from the air into the saliva and oral mucosa since mercury is a
lipophilic (or hydrophobic) vapor. This mercury would not be measured by the
mercury analyzer and yet would enter the body. Further, as the mercury
analyzer pulls mercury containing oral air into the analysis chamber,
mercury free ambient air rushes into the oral cavity decreasing the mercury
concentration.


Taking all of this into account one can calculate that most mercury
analyzers could not detect this "estimated" 0.10 micrograms/day level of
mercury even if the test subject had several amalgams. However, it is quite
easy to detect mercury emitting from one amalgam using these analyzers.
Therefore, it is impossible for daily emissions from amalgam to be anything
less than the detection limits of an analyzer in a 10 second test.
Separately, if amalgam is gently rubbed with a toothbrush the amount of
mercury emitted, as measured by a commercial mercury vapor sniffer,
increases dramatically. As I have cited herein, mercury emissions from
amalgams increase substantially when hot liquids are introduced or when the
individual is chewing.10


15. Additionally, it is also important to note that measurement of
mercury emissions by a mercury vapor analyzer in the human mouth tends to
greatly underestimatethe amount of mercury exiting the amalgam as it does
not measure much of the mercury that is rapidly absorbed in saliva and oral
mucosa. Also, as the analyzer pulls mercury contaminated air out of the
mouth, mercury concentrations are also decreased as mercury free ambient air
rushes in the oral cavity.


16. It is also important to note that when it comes to amalgam
fillings, the concern is chronic, not acute, exposures. Basically, in the
case of an acute exposure, one would be exposed to a large amount of mercury
in a single dosage that, in and of itself, may or may not be toxic. In the
case of chronic exposures, while an individual exposure may not be toxic,
the concern is the sum of the exposures. With amalgams, the exposure is
constant, 24 hours a day (chronic), and increases with the introduction of
various elements, such as chewing and the like, and also the introduction of
other chemicals which may act synergistically with mercury. Furthermore,
mercury accumulates within the human body in various organs and remains
there for prolonged periods of time as a "retention toxicity." A "retention
toxicity" from mercury differs from most conventional toxicities as the
toxin is not removed, but remains and builds up. For example, getting drunk
or alcohol toxic one night, the toxicity is cleared by the body as it
metabolizes the alcohol to other compounds. Mercury, being an element cannot
be metabolically changed and, most importantly, forms a long-term attachment
(or covalent bond) with proteins inside of cells and organelles, causing
what is called retention toxicity as the level of mercury can build up with
continuous chronic exposure.


In fact, mercury has been shown to remain in human organs for years
after initial exposure accumulating in the brain, kidney, and lung.11
Specific to amalgam and the central nervous system, low doses of mercury
vapor enter and remain within motor neurons for prolonged periods of time.
According to various studies, these are levels well within the WHO
guidelines for occupational exposure.12 Simply put, these published studies
show that amounts of mercury that are considered within safe limits reaches
the central nervous system, and accumulates to toxic levels via "retention
toxicity." Mercury can be lodged in various organs causing toxicity for a
prolonged period of time. This is of particular concern with amalgams, as
mercury continuously accumulates in a given subject for years, adding up to
potentially toxic levels in many individuals, including, as noted below, the
developing fetus.


17. Any claim on the part of the ADA or established dental
organizations that a zinc oxide layer is formed on the amalgams that
decreases mercury release can only be true if an individual is not using his
or her teeth. Note that zinc is listed at "trace levels" in amalgams. How
can trace levels cover the 50% mercury? However, in the real world, any zinc
oxide layer is easily removed by slight abrasion such as chewing food or
brushing the teeth. Further, my laboratory has confirmed that solutions in
which amalgams have been soaked can cause the inhibition of brain proteins
that are inhibited by adding mercury chloride, and these are the same
enzymes inhibited in AD brain samples.


18. Even more concerning is that at least some of the inorganic
mercury that is emitted from amalgams is converted to methylmercury, a more
toxic, organic form of mercury.13 This strongly indicates that "organo
mercury species" are indeed capable of being made in the human body and
likely explains the appearance of methylmercury in the blood and urine of
individuals who do not eat seafood, but do have amalgam fillings.


19. The bottom line is that amalgams emit significant levels of
neurotoxic mercury that are injurious to human health and would exacerbate
the medical condition of those individuals with neurological diseases such
as Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis ("ALS" or "Lou Gehrig's Disease") 14 ,
Multiple Sclerosis ("MS"), Parkinson's, autism and Alzheimer's Disease
("AD"). For example, mercury inhibits the same enzymes in normal brain
tissues as are inhibited in Alzheimer's Disease.15 AD is pathologically
confirmed post-mortem by the appearance of neuro-fibillary tangles (NFTs)
and amyloid plaques in brain tissue. Published research, within the past
year, has shown that exposure of neurons in culture to sub-lethal doses of
mercury (much less than is observed in human brain tissue) causes the
formations of NFTs,16 the increased secretion of beta-amyloid protein and
the hyper-phosphorylation of a protein called Tau.17All three of these
mercury-induced aberrancies are regularly identified by world class scholars
as the major diagnostic markers for AD. Yet the ADA states there is no
scientific data published to indicate that mercury from amalgams could
contribute to these diseases.


20. Furthermore, mercury from amalgams is transferred from a pregnant
mother to the developing fetus, causing increased mercury body burden in
children solely based on the presence of amalgams in the mother.18 Mercury
exposure is even more devastating to the developing brain than to an adult
brain. This has been shown in study after study culminating with the recent
publication by Dr. Lorscheider, et al., showing brain neuron degeneration
from small amounts of mercury and conclusively proving that such
degeneration does not occur with the introduction of any other element,
including lead.19 The research mentioned above on the levels of mercury in
the birth-hair of children increasing with the mother's amalgam clearly
demonstrates that mercury from dental amalgams enters the child in utero as
has been previously reported.


21. Also, low level exposures like those associated with amalgam
fillings and the resultant increase in the mercury body burden are toxic to
the central nervous system.20 These can cause from severe to subtle
neuropsychological functions such as depression of performance, intellectual
functioning, impairments of attention, impairment of short-term memory
function, visual judgment of angles and directions, psychomotor retardation
and personality changes. As further proof that these are mercury related,
scientists have shown that in some cases, the effects can be reversed simply
by removal of the source of mercury intoxication, together with proper
medical treatment. 21 Mercury from fillings also leads to "considerable
concentrations of [mercury] in the olfactory bulbs."22 This may also explain
the phenomena of Alzheimer's patients losing their sense of smell in the
early stages of the disease. (Kovacs, T., Cairns, N.J., Lantos, P.L.
Olfactory Centres in Alzheimer's disease: Olfactory bulb is Involved in
Early Braak's Stages. Neuroreport 12(2): 285-288, 2001 and Gray, A.J.,
Staples, V., Murren, K., Dahariwal, A. and Benthan, P. Olfactory
Identification is Impaired in Clinic-Based Patients with Vascular Dementia
and Senile Dementia of Alzheimer's type. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 16 (5):
513-517, 2001.)


22. Mercury from dental fillings has also been associated with adverse
effects in the cardiovascular system, including high blood pressure, low
heart rate, low hemoglobin, and low hematocrit. 23


23. Many of the experiments that show mercury emission and exposure
from dental amalgams are so simple and inexpensive to do that they could
have should have been completed many years ago, in the 1950's and 60's. Yet,
they have not been done, or at least not reported on, despite numerous
requests by concerned citizens by the agencies and bureaucracies that today
testify that amalgams are safe. This includes the ADA and dental branch of
the FDA. It is important to note that I do not hold the entire FDA
responsible for the actions of the dental branch of the FDA. Other
researchers also doing these tests do not find amalgams safe based on the
continuous, chronic release of mercury. The fact that both the national
Academy of sciences and the EPA warn the government of the dangers of the
level of mercury found in Americans and the NIH and WHO studies that
amalgams are the major contributor to the mercury body burden of humans.
Couple this with the certain fact that mercury, and only mercury of the
toxic metals, can mimic the aberrant biochemistry and produce the components
of the widely accepted diagnostic hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease and it
should be obvious that all exposures to mercury should be held to the lowest
levels.


24. Finally, science has produced compelling evidence at the
biological level that mercury can cause the aberrancies found in Alzheimer's
disease. Recent research has shown both strong biological plausibility and
epidemiological studies regarding ethylmercury exposure from thimerosal in
vaccinations being the cause of the devastating disease of autism and
related disorder. Yet, our organizations and bureaucracies formed to protect
us deny even the possibility that mercury or organic mercury is involved in
the causation or exacerbation of these diseases. One only needs to know the
history of Pink disease (acyrodynia) to understand that proving mercury
involvement in disease is quite difficult due to genetic susceptibility.
However, all of the scientific and biomedical facts together emphasizes the
need for congressional action to stop the exposure of Americans to mercury
and organic mercury compounds.
Back to top
Bryan Heit
medicine forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 105

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 2:52 pm    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

Peter Bowditch wrote:
Quote:
Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:


Peter Bowditch wrote:
Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that

ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?

Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a giant
ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan


Members of the Church of Haley reject the table salt story and claim
that it is a diversion from the real situation of chemicals containing
mercury.


I'm well aware of that. But it's an idiotic argument; mercury is just
another element. It's not magical or anything. Hard to believe he's a
chemist...


Quote:
I tried going the other way with Saint Boyd himself by asking
how three harmless chemicals (carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen) can
become dangerous when combined and he told me that this is different
because nitrogen is not mercury. > Did I mention that saint Boyd somehow
managed to hold down a professorship in chemistry and was actually
head of the department at his university?


Probably became a quack after he got the professorship. It is
remarkably hard to get rid of someone once they get into the tenure
track. Last I heard he'd left his uni (by force?) and is now running a
company selling stuff to people silly enough to listen to him...

Bryan
Back to top
john
medicine forum addict


Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 92

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:15 am    Post subject: OBGYN Against ACIP HPV Vaccine Decision Reply with quote

OBGYN Against ACIP HPV Vaccine Decision
________________________________

I am a Board Certified Obstetrician Gynecologist and have several objections
to the ACIP "recommendations".

Most of the following is taken directly form the Gardasil package insert.

First, the endpoint is the prevention of "High Grade disease", this
encompasses CIN II-III and adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) which are "immediate
and necessary precursors" for squamous cell and adenocarcinoma of the
cervix. The MAXIMUM of the median follow up in any of their studies is FOUR
years. However, the time course from CIN III to invasive cancer averages
between 8.1 to 12.6 years. Claiming this vaccine "prevents cervical
cancer", with the longest median study subject being 4 years, is ludicrous.

Furthermore, the vast majority of women clear or suppress the virus to
levels not associated with CIN II or III and for most women this occurs
promptly. The duration of HPV positivity (which is directly related to the
likelihood of developing a high grade lesion or cervical cancer) is shorter,
and the likelihood of clearance is higher, in younger women.

Therefore, vaccinating these children against HPV with a vaccine that is of
unknown duration of efficacy will only postpone their exposure to an age
which they are less likely clear the infection on their own and be subject
to more severe disease. This would require an unknown number of boosters
and is a setup for complacency in the older population that is a recipe for
disaster. Furthermore, the likelihood for regression to a normal pap from
CIN II is 40%. This beats Gardasil's "best" reduction of CIN II-III of only
12%. In this case, "first do no harm" rules.

Furthermore the vaccine only "protects" against 4 high risk HPV subtypes.
We are currently screening for 13 "high risk" HPV subtypes. This may lead to
an increase in infection with other and possibly more aggressive subtypes.

The study of the vaccine in children and adolescents is limited to only
measuring the development of antibodies to the HPV subtypes in the vaccine.
There is absolutely no evidence that the vaccine prevents anything when
administered at this young age. Merck expects you to extrapolate their
adult data to the immune response in children. If they were really
interested in vaccine efficacy in children, should it not be studied
properly in children?

Currently, precancerous lesions are readily identifiable and treatable in
the developed world. The only utility of this vaccine may be in third world
countries in which regular screening is not available and cervical cancer is
still a major cause of morbidity and mortality. All of the data reported
and advertised by Merck is based on world wide morbidity and mortality
related to cervical cancer. Nowhere will you find specific data related to
developed nations.

I have personally witnessed the devastation caused by severe vaccine
reaction, including patients, their children, nurses and my own family. To
proceed with mass vaccination against this embellished "threat" is
irresponsible.

Clayton Young, M.D., F.A.C.O.G.
Back to top
Rich
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 585

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:24 am    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

"Jan Drew" <jdrew1374@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:LLIqg.35010$VE1.16198@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
Quote:

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote:

snip repeated lies, plus proven lying website and spam


None of what you snipped is "lies," nor is Peter's website either "lying"
nor "spam." YOU, however, are a PROVEN liar and thief.
--


--Rich

Recommended websites:

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
http://www.acahf.org.au
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.csicop.org/
Back to top
\"Jan Drew\"
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 353

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:12 am    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote:

<snip repeated lies, plus proven lying website and spam>

Quote:
Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:


Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a giant
ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan

--
Peter Bowditch
Back to top
HCN
medicine forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 139

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:47 am    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote in message
news:uk1ma29h09dtutvmhrt17h8oso8qohe7h9@4ax.com...
Quote:
Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:

Peter Bowditch wrote:
Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that
ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?

Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a giant
ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan

Members of the Church of Haley reject the table salt story and claim
that it is a diversion from the real situation of chemicals containing
mercury. I tried going the other way with Saint Boyd himself by asking
how three harmless chemicals (carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen)


Ah! My favorite three elements! ;)


can
Quote:
become dangerous when combined and he told me that this is different
because nitrogen is not mercury. Did I mention that saint Boyd somehow
managed to hold down a professorship in chemistry and was actually
head of the department at his university?
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
Back to top
Peter Bowditch
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 352

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:34 am    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:

Quote:
Peter Bowditch wrote:
Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that
ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?

Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a giant
ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan

Members of the Church of Haley reject the table salt story and claim
that it is a diversion from the real situation of chemicals containing
mercury. I tried going the other way with Saint Boyd himself by asking
how three harmless chemicals (carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen) can
become dangerous when combined and he told me that this is different
because nitrogen is not mercury. Did I mention that saint Boyd somehow
managed to hold down a professorship in chemistry and was actually
head of the department at his university?
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
Back to top
Bryan Heit
medicine forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 105

PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:59 pm    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

You'll excuse me if I have a little trouble believing anything that
comes from a company who claims there is a problem, then offers the
solution. . .

Bryan
Back to top
Bryan Heit
medicine forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 105

PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:21 pm    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

Peter Bowditch wrote:
Quote:
Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that
ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?

Because I've yet to die of chlorine poisoning, or disappear in a giant
ball-o-flame (patent pending) after eating table salt ;-)

Bryan
Back to top
Peter Bowditch
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:01 pm    Post subject: Re: MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS Reply with quote

Bryan Heit <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote:

Quote:
john wrote:
"Bryan Heit" <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote in message
news:e83acc$l3q$1@news.ucalgary.ca...

Mercury is not the same as thermosil; no more then table salt is chlorine
gas. Unfortunately, understanding that extremely simple concept appears
to be beyond you, so we shouldn't be surprised that you are unable to
understand the difference.


lets whack you up with the equivalent dosage given to a baby, and we'll soon
see if it is harmless


Has happened several times in the last decade, with no ill effects.
Hell, when I started the research thing I received over 15 vaccinations,
plus boosters, in less then a 6 month period. It's one of the upsides
of doing medical research for a living - you get exposed to all kinds of
nasty stuff - sick patients, necropsy samples, tissues from infected
people, blood, third world countries, stool samples, and all kinds of
other things. Since universities don't like to get sued they provide
you with every vaccination you want or need.



Hundreds have been done and they all say the same thing - safe.


Bollocks, they don't withdraw things unless they have to

Or unless something better comes out. Competition is as much in play in
pharma as it is in any other industry.



educate yourself, if that is possible
http://www.altcorp.com/DentalInformation/thimerosal.htm


Gee, there's a good source - a company which sells products to treat the
hysteria it creates. Of course THIS company must be reputable - after
all they parrot exactly what you say. But the other companies - like
the ones which make vaccines - are all liars.

But, Bryan ...

Altcorp is run by Saint Boyd of Haley, the man who says that
ethylmercury and methylmercury can be considered to be equivalent
chemicals because one is dangerous and who also says that the chemical
properties of elements are unchanged when those elements are part of
compounds. How could you possibly not believe him?
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3 [35 Posts] Goto page:  1, 2, 3 Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Mon Jan 19, 2015 2:07 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » Medicine forums » nursing
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts Vaccine autism evidence overwhelming john hepatitis 0 Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:22 pm
No new posts Vaccine autism evidence overwhelming john nursing 25 Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:47 am
No new posts Once again, my childhood optometrist is proven correct Wooly vision 8 Mon Jul 10, 2006 3:28 am
No new posts Have You Heard This Vaccine Warning on Your Radio? \"Jan Drew\" dentistry 0 Sat Jul 08, 2006 9:31 pm
No new posts Vaccine quote of the week by Bernard Rimland, PhD john nursing 133 Sat Jul 08, 2006 6:25 pm

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: email marketing campaigns , electronics forum, Science forum, Unix/Linux blog, Unix/Linux documentation, Unix/Linux forums


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.4050s ][ Queries: 16 (0.2898s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]