Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Alternative / January 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No Answers

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jan Drew - 12 Jan 2008 22:59 GMT
Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
Answers
January 8, 2008
With yet another epidemiological study reeking with conflicts of interest,
thimerosal containing vaccines are declared safe by the immunization branch
of the California Department of Public Health. Unfortunately,
epidemiological studies done by people who are part of the immunization
program have a major credibility problem. This of course does not stop the
mainstream press from hopping all over these studies without even thinking
of asking any questions.

The study claims that "some" flu shots still contain thimerosal. Actually,
out of 132 million doses of flu vaccine for the 2007-08 flu season, 8
million doses are thimerosal free. That means 94% contain the full amount of
thimerosal. Stating that "some" contain thimerosal is a very deceptive
statement at best.

Critics will say that California has banned thimerosal containing flu shots
for pregnant women and infants. This ban took effect in 2006. Last year they
lifted the ban because they could not find an adequate supply of thimerosal
free shots. If a pregnant woman got a flu shot in 2001 and her child
followed the flu shot recommendations, the baby/fetus would have received
six flu shots with the full amount of thimerosal by the year 2005. This
hardly represents the claim that no thimerosal containing vaccines were
given after 2001. Besides, with no government agency testing vaccines for
mercury, who really knows if mercury has been removed from vaccines.

Vaccines with "trace" amounts of thimerosal are supposed to contain less
than 1 microgram of mercury per 0.5 ml dose. This is equal to a
concentration of 2000 micrograms per liter. When looked at this way, this
hardly seems like a "trace" amount of mercury.

We constantly hear that rates of autism have increased due to earlier
intervention, changes in diagnostic criteria and diagnostic substitution.
Were these co-factors considered? Have rates of autism in California really
continued to climb? They can't have it both ways.

Before we declare thimerosal containing vaccines safe, consider these
numbers:

0.5 parts per billion (ppb) mercury = Kills human neuroblastoma cells
(Parran et al., Toxicol Sci 2005; 86: 132-140).

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48356

Again Studies about Vaccines and Thimerosal are misleading

When will these authors of studies stop claiming that all but a few vaccines
contain the mercury additive Thimerosal? 80% of all flu vaccines contain
this preservative. As of June in 2005 many other vaccines that are
recommended for children still contained normal or trace amounts of
Thimerosal. Many mothers and children still had mercury amalgams. Some foods
such as Tuna contain mercury. We still eat and breath this highly toxic
substance. When you include the many other chemicals and heavy metals that
have been found to cause developmental delays that are in fact on the
increase it's not to hard to figure out why numbers have not dropped.
There are many questions about this latest study from the California State
Public Health Department that remain unanswered. What are the ages? Are they
including all ASD disorders or just regressive Autism? Why do they still
falsely claim that Thimerosal is not in any other vaccine and only some Flu
vaccines? This statement just is simply not true. And why isn't there an age
criteria for diagnoses such as five years old when school aged children can
be truly observed on a daily basis? And when using this age it shows that
what little reduction there is in the use of thimerosal these children still
fall under the excessive amount.

Are they finding these infants up to let's say 3 years old unable to
interact with their peers? Do these youngsters show signs of learning
disabilities? C'mon you can't claim that mercury in any form is safe and
with increased exposures of this toxin combined with others you will find
that the numbers will remain or climb. This is being touted as a disorder
that is untreatable and unavoidable. And that is sad as the medical
community claims success in many other diseases and disorders.

You can't mark mercury off the list as its toxic strength is much too
strong. We are still hearing about lead that was banned 20 plus years ago as
we find it everywhere. Mercury was used in paint also but that is rarely
mentioned. The fact is it was used in kitchen and bathroom paints along with
other areas susceptible to mold. We scream if products from China contain
lead but buy food and are told to use lights that contain mercury.

Of course we are seeing genetic mutations you always do when there are
poisonings going on. We are witnessing children hitting puberty at younger
ages, Obesity, Diabetes II, Heart Disease and many psychological and
neurological disorders are on the increase along with Autism or ASD, ADD
included. To give Thimerosal a no contribution label is not only dangerous
but criminal when you look at what role mercury has played with those
exposed to it over the years.

We need to put a stop to this continuous claim that mercury in any form is
somehow safe when it has been known for hundreds of years to be very
dangerous and even lethal. Why did the Romans only use slaves to mine for
it? Why does the manufacturer of the specific compound Thimerosal warn of
its toxicity? Why was it banned in most applications except as a vaccine
preservative injected directly into our blood stream? Why is it still being
used in any vaccine and during the manufacture of other vaccines? And why do
upwards of 85% of those tested that suffer from ASD show marked spikes when
chelating heavy metals for mercury? Still too many questions abound with no
serious answers that the powers that be except.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48301
The One True Zhen Jue - 12 Jan 2008 23:26 GMT
> Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism:

Well, duh!  That is old news, but it is refreshing to see you take
your head out of the bucket long enough to learn something.
Jan Drew - 14 Jan 2008 06:18 GMT
<Andrew_Kingoff@yahoo.com> wrote
On Jan 12, 5:59 pm, "Jan Drew" <jdrew1...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism:

Well, duh!  That is old news,

Poor, Andy.  Jan. 8th, 2008 is old news...........................

> you

Off topic.
The One True Zhen Jue - 14 Jan 2008 12:57 GMT
>  <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote
> On Jan 12, 5:59 pm, "Jan Drew" <jdrew1...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> Off topic.

It is old news, Jan.  The article may be recent, but the facts have
been known for years.  Vaccinaton and Thimerosal have nothing to do
with autism.  At any rate, its nice to see that after all this time
you getting on the bandwagon of scientific fact.
Peter Moran - 13 Jan 2008 06:29 GMT
> Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
> Answers
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> concentration of 2000 micrograms per liter. When looked at this way, this
> hardly seems like a "trace" amount of mercury.

Scaremongering idiots!  It is still only 1 microgram.   Fish fillets contain
between 5-50 micrograms per kilogram in Australia.   Our favourite fish,
Barramundi contains up to 310 micrograms per kilogram and Snapper up to 520.
So a single fish meal of 100 G may supply far more than 1 microgram of
methyl mercury -- and fish may be eaten several times a week!   Why not make
sure people are aware of this *real* risk?

The theory always was that increasing rates of autism were due to the
increased amount of mercury being adminstered to children in vaccines.
There are at least six studies from different countries showing that taking
most of the thiomerosal out of vaccines has not reduced the incidence.  This
last study clinched the case so far as American children are concerned.

PM

> We constantly hear that rates of autism have increased due to earlier
> intervention, changes in diagnostic criteria and diagnostic substitution.
[quoted text clipped - 67 lines]
>
> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48301
Myrl - 13 Jan 2008 13:57 GMT
> > Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
> > Answers
[quoted text clipped - 119 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

I believe this is a perfect example of how litigation based science
sidelined research into other causes of autism for a number of years.
Hopefully now, the focus will become more broad as to cause, and
especially on possible effective treatment of these children.

Myrl
http://www.webstarmagic.com/wisletter.htm
Mark Probert - 14 Jan 2008 04:21 GMT
>>> Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
>>> Answers
[quoted text clipped - 109 lines]
> Hopefully now, the focus will become more broad as to cause, and
> especially on possible effective treatment of these children.

Don't get your hopes up. The scarfemongering idiots, like Imus' dingbat
wife are spinning it away. They are desperate.

Read Respectful Insolence for more:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/01/deirdre_imus_delivers_a_hunk_a_hunk_o_
bu.php


> Myrl
> http://www.webstarmagic.com/wisletter.htm
Jan Drew - 14 Jan 2008 06:36 GMT
> Myrl wrote:
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 155 lines]
> Don't get your hopes up. The scarfemongering idiots, like Imus' dingbat
> wife are spinning it away. They are desperate.

You still trying to ignore the constant abuse for the sake of those who wish
to learn
something, eh. PM?

Don't be afraid to answer.

> Read Respectful Insolence for more:

You mean Orac nose nuttin...................

>> Myrl
Kevysmom - 13 Jan 2008 17:35 GMT
> Scaremongering idiots!  It is still only 1 microgram.   Fish fillets contain
> between 5-50 micrograms per kilogram in Australia.   Our favourite fish,
> Barramundi contains up to 310 micrograms per kilogram and Snapper up to 520.
> So a single fish meal of 100 G

Scaremongering is your first name! I think you forgot to add the
decimal point before your numbers!

HOW MUCH MERCURY IS IN 6 OUNCES OF CHUNK WHITE TUNA?

Multiply amount of fish by average mercury level for chunk white
albacore.
Convert 6 ounces to grams = 170 grams 170 grams X .31 ppm  (or
micrograms per gram)**
MERCURY INGESTED = 52.7 micrograms per gram

http://www.pbs.org/now/science/mercuryinfish.html

> > Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
> > Answers
[quoted text clipped - 119 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
vernon O - 13 Jan 2008 19:29 GMT
> Scaremongering idiots!  It is still only 1 microgram.   Fish fillets
> contain
> between 5-50 micrograms per kilogram in Australia.   Our favourite fish,
> Barramundi contains up to 310 micrograms per kilogram and Snapper up to
> 520.
> So a single fish meal of 100 G

Scaremongering is your first name! I think you forgot to add the
decimal point before your numbers!

HOW MUCH MERCURY IS IN 6 OUNCES OF CHUNK WHITE TUNA?

Multiply amount of fish by average mercury level for chunk white
albacore.
Convert 6 ounces to grams = 170 grams 170 grams X .31 ppm  (or
micrograms per gram)**
MERCURY INGESTED = 52.7 micrograms per gram

> > Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
> > Answers
[quoted text clipped - 149 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Bottom line: Eating Tuna or Salmon is good for you.
It's been shown, over and over again without regard to mercury.
Is mercury bad, probably, but it doesn't counteract the positive in the
fish.
Kevysmom - 16 Jan 2008 22:33 GMT
> Bottom line: Eating Tuna or Salmon is good for you.
> It's been shown, over and over again without regard to mercury.
> Is mercury bad, probably, but it doesn't counteract the positive in the
> fish

The reason fish is good for you is because of the Omega.  Which is
very heealthy for
everyone. But the mercury in the fish, does cause major harm to your
organs, Brain, Liver, Heart and Kidneys.

Tuna is one of the worst offenders, Salmon is a good choice. Unless
you are one of the pesky Pharma shills, Then I say go with the
Tuna! :o)

> > Scaremongering idiots!  It is still only 1 microgram.   Fish fillets
> > contain
[quoted text clipped - 174 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
vernon O - 18 Jan 2008 02:11 GMT
> Bottom line: Eating Tuna or Salmon is good for you.
> It's been shown, over and over again without regard to mercury.
> Is mercury bad, probably, but it doesn't counteract the positive in the
> fish

The reason fish is good for you is because of the Omega.  Which is
very heealthy for
everyone. But the mercury in the fish, does cause major harm to your
organs, Brain, Liver, Heart and Kidneys.

Tuna is one of the worst offenders, Salmon is a good choice. Unless
you are one of the pesky Pharma shills, Then I say go with the
Tuna! :o)

Tuna worst? yes. Still not some major poison..

Jan 13, 2:29 pm, "vernon O" <vernono@hereandthere> wrote:
> "Kevysmom" <bluebun...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 198 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
Peter Moran - 14 Jan 2008 05:33 GMT
> Scaremongering idiots!  It is still only 1 microgram.   Fish fillets
> contain
> between 5-50 micrograms per kilogram in Australia.   Our favourite fish,
> Barramundi contains up to 310 micrograms per kilogram and Snapper up to
> 520.
> So a single fish meal of 100 G

>Scaremongering is your first name! I think you forgot to add the
>decimal point before your numbers!

No.  .31 ppm is the same as .31 micrograms per gram which is the same as 310
micrograms per kilogram.

>HOW MUCH MERCURY IS IN 6 OUNCES OF CHUNK WHITE TUNA?

>Multiply amount of fish by average mercury level for chunk white
>albacore.
>Convert 6 ounces to grams = 170 grams 170 grams X .31 ppm  (or
>micrograms per gram)**
>MERCURY INGESTED = 52.7 micrograms per gram

Sloppy.  That figure is not "52.7 micorgrams per gram" , it is 52.7
micrograms per 170 gram serving, which is perfectly in accord with the
figures I was quoting where 100G of Barramundi would supply 31 micrograms.
It shows that 1 microgram in  a rarely vaccine is a trivial mercury
exposure.

PM

http://www.pbs.org/now/science/mercuryinfish.html

On Jan 13, 1:29 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
> "Jan Drew" <jdrew1...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 153 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
Kevysmom - 16 Jan 2008 22:30 GMT
> Sloppy.  That figure is not "52.7 micorgrams per gram" , it is 52.7
> micrograms per 170 gram serving, which is perfectly in accord with the
> figures I was quoting where 100G of Barramundi would supply 31 micrograms.
> It shows that 1 microgram in  a rarely vaccine is a trivial mercury
> exposure.

Sloppier! Try again.

> > Scaremongering idiots!  It is still only 1 microgram.   Fish fillets
> > contain
[quoted text clipped - 187 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
drceephd@insightbb.com - 13 Jan 2008 19:49 GMT
Petey the Moron is at it again.

Let's see.  Let's do some math.

5-50 microgram/KILOGRAM. That is, say, 25 microgram in 2000gm.
I cannot eat 2000 gm of fish in a meal.
Let's use my usual portion, 120 gm.

120/2000 X 25 = 1.5 microgram of methyl mercury in the RAW FISH.

Now let's cook the fish.  How much of the volatile methyl mercury will
evaporate and leave the fish?  Anybody have that data, that is , the
amount of mercury in raw fish compared to  its cooked counterpart?

Let's guess that half is lost.  Now we have 0.75 microgram of methyl
mercury.

The human gut will not absorb mercury well.  Maybe 1% is absorbed.
This gives us 0.0075 micrograms of mercury absorbed.

Yet, this amount of injested mercury is toxic.
How much more toxic would INJECTED mercury be? Maybe 100 to 1000X as
toxic?
And, what if we added Al to the mix  as an "adjuvant" to heighten the
poisoning effect as is done in vaccines?

DrCee
Not a pharma shill ( I am not here to lie or deceive you )
drceephd@insightbb.com - 13 Jan 2008 23:17 GMT
On Jan 13, 2:49 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
> On Jan 13, 1:29 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:> "Jan Drew" <jdrew1...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> DrCee
> Not a pharma shill ( I am not here to lie or deceive you )

Well crap, please excuse my error.
A kilogram is 1000 grams.
Increase my calulations by 2X.
Still, the concentrations of ingested versus injected mercury is still
huge.

DrCee
Peter Moran - 14 Jan 2008 08:36 GMT
On Jan 13, 2:49 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
> On Jan 13, 1:29 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:> "Jan
> Drew" <jdrew1...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> DrCee
> Not a pharma shill ( I am not here to lie or deceive you )

>Well crap, please excuse my error.
>A kilogram is 1000 grams.
>Increase my calulations by 2X.
>Still, the concentrations of ingested versus injected mercury is still
>huge.

I don't quite know what you are saying but the figures clealry show that 1
microgram of mercury in an occasionally adminstered vaccine is a
ridiculously low exposure when compared to anyone who eats fish regularly.

Again, the monkey infant studies showed that methyl mercury orally is just
as easily absorbed as thiomerosal in a vaccine.  Also fish is a well-known
source of mercury poisoning despite cooking (some Chinese children in
Australia have been found to have very high levels of mercury from being
weaned on fish congee ).

PM.

PM
Jan Drew - 14 Jan 2008 06:27 GMT
>> Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
>> Answers
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
>
> Scaremongering idiots!  PM

Glad to see you *Trying to ignore constant abuse for the sake of those who
wish to learn
something* ..

>> We constantly hear that rates of autism have increased due to earlier
>> intervention, changes in diagnostic criteria and diagnostic substitution.
[quoted text clipped - 67 lines]
>>
>> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48301
Peter Moran - 14 Jan 2008 08:26 GMT
>>> Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
>>> Answers
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
> wish to learn
> something* ..

My comment was not directed at anyone on this list and was fully justified
by the absurdity and deceptiveness of the case.

PM

>>> We constantly hear that rates of autism have increased due to earlier
>>> intervention, changes in diagnostic criteria and diagnostic
[quoted text clipped - 69 lines]
>>>
>>> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48301
drceephd@insightbb.com - 14 Jan 2008 18:48 GMT
You seem to think that even 1 microgram of a substance is so tiny that
you can inject it into a host with no repercussions.

Let us condider thimerosal.  1 microgram of thimerosal would represent
1,200 atoms of thimerosal per affected cell in the adult human body.
This compound would be even more toxic to a developing fetus and
infant.  Based upon the smaller size of the infant, the number of
atoms per affected cell may well be more nearly 5,000 or more.

    Convince us that cells exposed to 1200 to 5,000 atoms of mercury
that the cells cannot detoxify will not alter that cells internal
biochemistry, its genetic thinking, or its enzyme capabilities.  Then
multiply the number of atoms by 25 per each shot containing
thimerosal.  Remember, in the cell, the mercury is converted to the
mercuric ion, Hg++.

1 microgram may sound small, but for such a potent killer, it may be
more than enough to alter and kill.

DrCee
David Wright - 14 Jan 2008 19:35 GMT
>You seem to think that even 1 microgram of a substance is so tiny that
>you can inject it into a host with no repercussions.
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>1 microgram may sound small, but for such a potent killer, it may be
>more than enough to alter and kill.

Your calculations are, as usual, stupid, because they assume that all
the thimerosal will be retained within the body.  

It won't.  It will be rapidly excreted.

If a microgram of mercury was enough to harm us, we'd be dead after
one tuna sandwich.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?"
                                                       -- Bill Maher
Jan Drew - 15 Jan 2008 00:05 GMT
> In article
> <11b80961-8d14-4ad7-b4ff-73c4f362586a@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> It won't.  It will be rapidly excreted.

Proven to be wrong.

> If a microgram of mercury was enough to harm us, we'd be dead after
> one tuna sandwich.

Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
Answers
January 8, 2008
With yet another epidemiological study reeking with conflicts of interest,
thimerosal containing vaccines are declared safe by the immunization branch
of the California Department of Public Health. Unfortunately,
epidemiological studies done by people who are part of the immunization
program have a major credibility problem. This of course does not stop the
mainstream press from hopping all over these studies without even thinking
of asking any questions.

The study claims that "some" flu shots still contain thimerosal. Actually,
out of 132 million doses of flu vaccine for the 2007-08 flu season, 8
million doses are thimerosal free. That means 94% contain the full amount of
thimerosal. Stating that "some" contain thimerosal is a very deceptive
statement at best.

Critics will say that California has banned thimerosal containing flu shots
for pregnant women and infants. This ban took effect in 2006. Last year they
lifted the ban because they could not find an adequate supply of thimerosal
free shots. If a pregnant woman got a flu shot in 2001 and her child
followed the flu shot recommendations, the baby/fetus would have received
six flu shots with the full amount of thimerosal by the year 2005. This
hardly represents the claim that no thimerosal containing vaccines were
given after 2001. Besides, with no government agency testing vaccines for
mercury, who really knows if mercury has been removed from vaccines.

Vaccines with "trace" amounts of thimerosal are supposed to contain less
than 1 microgram of mercury per 0.5 ml dose. This is equal to a
concentration of 2000 micrograms per liter. When looked at this way, this
hardly seems like a "trace" amount of mercury.

We constantly hear that rates of autism have increased due to earlier
intervention, changes in diagnostic criteria and diagnostic substitution.
Were these co-factors considered? Have rates of autism in California really
continued to climb? They can't have it both ways.

Before we declare thimerosal containing vaccines safe, consider these
numbers:

0.5 parts per billion (ppb) mercury = Kills human neuroblastoma cells
(Parran et al., Toxicol Sci 2005; 86: 132-140).

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48356

Again Studies about Vaccines and Thimerosal are misleading

When will these authors of studies stop claiming that all but a few vaccines
contain the mercury additive Thimerosal? 80% of all flu vaccines contain
this preservative. As of June in 2005 many other vaccines that are
recommended for children still contained normal or trace amounts of
Thimerosal. Many mothers and children still had mercury amalgams. Some foods
such as Tuna contain mercury. We still eat and breath this highly toxic
substance. When you include the many other chemicals and heavy metals that
have been found to cause developmental delays that are in fact on the
increase it's not to hard to figure out why numbers have not dropped.
There are many questions about this latest study from the California State
Public Health Department that remain unanswered. What are the ages? Are they
including all ASD disorders or just regressive Autism? Why do they still
falsely claim that Thimerosal is not in any other vaccine and only some Flu
vaccines? This statement just is simply not true. And why isn't there an age
criteria for diagnoses such as five years old when school aged children can
be truly observed on a daily basis? And when using this age it shows that
what little reduction there is in the use of thimerosal these children still
fall under the excessive amount.

Are they finding these infants up to let's say 3 years old unable to
interact with their peers? Do these youngsters show signs of learning
disabilities? C'mon you can't claim that mercury in any form is safe and
with increased exposures of this toxin combined with others you will find
that the numbers will remain or climb. This is being touted as a disorder
that is untreatable and unavoidable. And that is sad as the medical
community claims success in many other diseases and disorders.

You can't mark mercury off the list as its toxic strength is much too
strong. We are still hearing about lead that was banned 20 plus years ago as
we find it everywhere. Mercury was used in paint also but that is rarely
mentioned. The fact is it was used in kitchen and bathroom paints along with
other areas susceptible to mold. We scream if products from China contain
lead but buy food and are told to use lights that contain mercury.

Of course we are seeing genetic mutations you always do when there are
poisonings going on. We are witnessing children hitting puberty at younger
ages, Obesity, Diabetes II, Heart Disease and many psychological and
neurological disorders are on the increase along with Autism or ASD, ADD
included. To give Thimerosal a no contribution label is not only dangerous
but criminal when you look at what role mercury has played with those
exposed to it over the years.

We need to put a stop to this continuous claim that mercury in any form is
somehow safe when it has been known for hundreds of years to be very
dangerous and even lethal. Why did the Romans only use slaves to mine for
it? Why does the manufacturer of the specific compound Thimerosal warn of
its toxicity? Why was it banned in most applications except as a vaccine
preservative injected directly into our blood stream? Why is it still being
used in any vaccine and during the manufacture of other vaccines? And why do
upwards of 85% of those tested that suffer from ASD show marked spikes when
chelating heavy metals for mercury? Still too many questions abound with no
serious answers that the powers that be except.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48301

>  -- David Wright
The One True Zhen Jue - 14 Jan 2008 21:19 GMT
On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:

> You seem to think that even 1 microgram of a substance is so tiny that
> you can inject it into a host with no repercussions.
>
> Let us condider thimerosal.  1 microgram of thimerosal would represent
> 1,200 atoms of thimerosal per affected cell in the adult human body.

1,200 _atoms_ of thimerosal?  That is pretty odd coming from someone
who claims to have a PhD in chemistry.
The word you didn't know was "molecules" and, your hypothesis is
really more of a feces.

> This compound would be even more toxic to a developing fetus and
> infant.  Based upon the smaller size of the infant, the number of
> atoms per affected cell may well be more nearly 5,000 or more.

Nope.  You're building on a false assumption and are neglecting the
amount excreted.

>      Convince us that cells exposed to 1200 to 5,000 atoms of mercury
> that the cells cannot detoxify will not alter that cells internal
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> DrCee

Fact: Children weren't getting mercury poisoning from vaccinations
when they had thimerosal.
Fact: Mercury poisoning & autism rates were unchanged by removing
thimerosal from vaccines.

Fact: You don't know much about chemistry, don't know much biology
SumBuny - 14 Jan 2008 22:25 GMT
On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Let us condider thimerosal. 1 microgram of thimerosal would represent
> 1,200 atoms of thimerosal per affected cell in the adult human body.

Fact: Children weren't getting mercury poisoning from vaccinations
when they had thimerosal.
Fact: Mercury poisoning & autism rates were unchanged by removing
thimerosal from vaccines.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When they "removed" the thimerisol from the vaccines...I noticed that there
was no recall of those vaccines--that would have admitted wrongdoing and
opened up companies for lawsuits.

No, what happened was that companies stopped putting thimerisol in *new*
doses of vaccines...but they did not remove it from *existing* supplies....

I wonder.....how many thousands--perhaps millions--of doses were already
sitting on shelves, waiting to be adminsitered?

I wonder--could *that* be why the rates were unchanged?

Signature

Buny
--Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal." ~ Albert Camus

Peter Moran - 14 Jan 2008 23:33 GMT
> On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> I wonder--could *that* be why the rates were unchanged?

Well, I am sure without even going to look  that this will have been taken
into consideration.    If a theory requires that medical authorities are
either entirely stupid or entirely corrupt  (as nearly all "alt" and antivax
theories do)   does that make it more likely to be the truth, or less
likely?

PM
SumBuny - 15 Jan 2008 15:17 GMT
>> On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>
> PM

"Truth" is what one defines it to be....

Signature

Buny
--Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal." ~ Albert Camus

D. C. Sessions - 15 Jan 2008 17:30 GMT
> "Truth" is what one defines it to be....

Ah, solipsism!

Taking the above definition, there's no point in discussing anything
on this board since the "truth" is different for all of us and there
is no objective reality that we can approach.

| Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable       |
| e-mail address.  Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel.    |
| There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com.      |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+
Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe - 16 Jan 2008 13:25 GMT
I'm changing the subject.  hehehe

<snipped>

> "Truth" is what one defines it to be....

Most certainly.  My truth and your truth may vary.  My truth and
Chewy's truth most definitely vary.  (Me:  "People can change, if they
want to."  Chewy:  "I'll never change.")  C'est la vie, n'est pas?

> --
> Buny
> --Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
> normal." ~ Albert Camus-

Now, for the real reason I decided to respond to your post.  :-)

Your sig line has struck true for me since you began using it.  Thank
you for choosing this quote.  It concisely explains much of my life.
It seems that these days, the less I try to fit everyone else's
version of "normal," the more energy I have to actually *LIVE* life.
I like that.

Kitten
SumBuny - 16 Jan 2008 15:23 GMT
I'm changing the subject.  hehehe

On Jan 15, 9:17 am, "SumBuny" <Sumb...@NOBODYHEREcox.net> wrote:
<snipped>

> "Truth" is what one defines it to be....

Most certainly.  My truth and your truth may vary.  My truth and
Chewy's truth most definitely vary.  (Me:  "People can change, if they
want to."  Chewy:  "I'll never change.")  C'est la vie, n'est pas?

> --
> Buny
> --Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
> normal." ~ Albert Camus-

Now, for the real reason I decided to respond to your post.  :-)

Your sig line has struck true for me since you began using it.  Thank
you for choosing this quote.  It concisely explains much of my life.
It seems that these days, the less I try to fit everyone else's
version of "normal," the more energy I have to actually *LIVE* life.
I like that.

Kitten
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

<G> I am still trying to define what my own "normal" is, after all this
time....
Signature

Buny
--Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal." ~ Albert Camus

David Wright - 15 Jan 2008 02:30 GMT
>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
>I wonder--could *that* be why the rates were unchanged?

No.  Even by 2002, virtually all the thimerosal-containing vaccines
were gone from the shelves.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?"
                                                       -- Bill Maher
SumBuny - 15 Jan 2008 15:20 GMT
>>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>     "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down
> on?"

Reallly ? Then why was it that I *still* had to request it for my son?  I
*still* had to verify that they were thimerisol-free, at least at the last
time my son had to take a school-mandated vaccination (which was around the
turn of the century...)

Signature

Buny
--Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal." ~ Albert Camus

Mark Probert - 15 Jan 2008 22:11 GMT
> > In article <hjRij.20412$hO4.8...@newsfe19.lga>,
>
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
> time my son had to take a school-mandated vaccination (which was around the
> turn of the century...)

That is when the stocks were being used up.

Now, you cannot even get a Thimerosal containing vaccine for a routine
vaccination if you asked for it.
Jan Drew - 16 Jan 2008 04:26 GMT
DTABOR wrote:

On Jan 15, 10:20 am, "SumBuny" <Sumb...@NOBODYHEREcox.net> wrote:
> "David Wright" <wri...@l1000.prodigy.net> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
> the
> turn of the century...)

That is when the stocks were being used up.

Now, you cannot even get a Thimerosal containing vaccine for a routine
vaccination if you asked for it.

LOL!  Who..other than a DTABOR's would ask one?
Jan Drew - 16 Jan 2008 07:23 GMT
On Jan 15, 10:20 am, "SumBuny" <Sumb...@NOBODYHEREcox.net> wrote:
> "David Wright" <wri...@l1000.prodigy.net> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
> the
> turn of the century...)

That is when the stocks were being used up.

Another blatant lie.

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2005/08/still-finding-thimerosal-in-docto
rs.html


2005

And, still, its use in vaccines went unexamined. Thimerosal also continued
..... 10.5 micrograms of mercury per dose were on the shelves until April
2003, ...

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/03/02_354.html

Now, you cannot even get a Thimerosal containing vaccine for a routine
vaccination if you asked for it.

Proof please.
David Wright - 17 Jan 2008 03:46 GMT
>>>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>time my son had to take a school-mandated vaccination (which was around the
>turn of the century...)

It was about 95% by the time a survey was done in 2002.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?"
                                                       -- Bill Maher
SumBuny - 17 Jan 2008 04:02 GMT
>>>>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>
> It was about 95% by the time a survey was done in 2002.

"It was about 95% by the time a survey was done in 2002."

?

*What* was about 95% by the time a survey was done in 2002?  The amount of
vaccines containing thimerisol *on the shelf*were at 95%?  The amount of
vaccines *on the shelf* that no longer had thimerisol were at 95%?

The amount of vaccines *in production* were at 95%?

What are you describing?

Signature

Buny
--Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal." ~ Albert Camus

Mark Probert - 17 Jan 2008 05:21 GMT
>>>>> On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
>
> What are you describing?

95% gone by then. I cannot find the reference, but this was studied.
SumBuny - 17 Jan 2008 19:16 GMT
>>>>>> On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 54 lines]
>>
> 95% gone by then. I cannot find the reference, but this was studied.

You can understand a gal that is being cautious, though...and that is, at
times, frustrated...I never *could* understand why we had "stuff" that was
not needed in the things we were injecting into our kids in the first place
<sigh>
Signature

Buny
--Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal." ~ Albert Camus

Mark Probert - 18 Jan 2008 04:28 GMT
>>>>>>> On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 57 lines]
> not needed in the things we were injecting into our kids in the first place
> <sigh>

But it was needed when the doctors used multi dose vials. Thimerosal
prevented contamination. Other additives also had their purposes.
David Wright - 19 Jan 2008 04:36 GMT
>>>>>>> On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 58 lines]
>times, frustrated...I never *could* understand why we had "stuff" that was
>not needed in the things we were injecting into our kids in the first place

Oh, but it *was* needed.  It wasn't just there for the hell of it.
It was there to prevent bacterial growth in the vaccine.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?"
                                                       -- Bill Maher
MothWrangler - 19 Jan 2008 20:07 GMT
>>>>>>>>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 64 lines]
> Oh, but it *was* needed.  It wasn't just there for the hell of it.
> It was there to prevent bacterial growth in the vaccine.

And, although developed countries have another means of preventing
bacterial growth, refrigeration, third world countries don't have that
luxury commonly available. I don't know what impact removing thimerisol
will have on the vaccination programs in third world countries.

Nancy
Unique, like everyone else

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

David Wright - 18 Jan 2008 04:46 GMT
>>>>>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
>
>What are you describing?

Sorry, the thimerosal-containing vaccines were 95% gone (from the
shelves) by 2002.  That is to say, you only had about a 5% chance
of receiving such a vaccine.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?"
                                                       -- Bill Maher
Jan Drew - 19 Jan 2008 05:07 GMT
>>>>>>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 58 lines]
> shelves) by 2002.  That is to say, you only had about a 5% chance
> of receiving such a vaccine.

Let's lay that lie to rest.

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2005/08/still-finding-thimerosal-in-docto
rs.html


2005

And, still, its use in vaccines went unexamined. Thimerosal also continued
..... 10.5 micrograms of mercury per dose were on the shelves until April
2003, ...

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/03/02_354.html

>  -- David Wright
Jan Drew - 16 Jan 2008 06:58 GMT
>>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
>  -- David Wright

Repeating that absolute lie.
Mark Probert - 15 Jan 2008 12:38 GMT
> On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> I wonder--could *that* be why the rates were unchanged?

No. The existing stocks rapidly decreased. By now, there should have
been a drop in the CDDS numbers, but there isn't.
Jan Drew - 15 Jan 2008 00:09 GMT
<Andrew_Kingoff@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
> On Jan 14, 3:26 am, "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Let us condider thimerosal. 1 microgram of thimerosal would represent
> 1,200 atoms of thimerosal per affected cell in the adult human body.

1,200 _atoms_ of thimerosal?  That is pretty odd coming from someone
who claims to have a PhD in chemistry.
The word you didn't know was "molecules" and, your hypothesis is
really more of a feces.

> This compound would be even more toxic to a developing fetus and
> infant. Based upon the smaller size of the infant, the number of
> atoms per affected cell may well be more nearly 5,000 or more.

Nope.  You're building on a false assumption and are neglecting the
amount excreted.

> Convince us that cells exposed to 1200 to 5,000 atoms of mercury
> that the cells cannot detoxify will not alter that cells internal
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> DrCee

Fact: Children weren't getting mercury poisoning from vaccinations
when they had thimerosal.
Fact: Mercury poisoning & autism rates were unchanged by removing
thimerosal from vaccines.

FACTS:

Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
Answers
January 8, 2008
With yet another epidemiological study reeking with conflicts of interest,
thimerosal containing vaccines are declared safe by the immunization branch
of the California Department of Public Health. Unfortunately,
epidemiological studies done by people who are part of the immunization
program have a major credibility problem. This of course does not stop the
mainstream press from hopping all over these studies without even thinking
of asking any questions.

The study claims that "some" flu shots still contain thimerosal. Actually,
out of 132 million doses of flu vaccine for the 2007-08 flu season, 8
million doses are thimerosal free. That means 94% contain the full amount of
thimerosal. Stating that "some" contain thimerosal is a very deceptive
statement at best.

Critics will say that California has banned thimerosal containing flu shots
for pregnant women and infants. This ban took effect in 2006. Last year they
lifted the ban because they could not find an adequate supply of thimerosal
free shots. If a pregnant woman got a flu shot in 2001 and her child
followed the flu shot recommendations, the baby/fetus would have received
six flu shots with the full amount of thimerosal by the year 2005. This
hardly represents the claim that no thimerosal containing vaccines were
given after 2001. Besides, with no government agency testing vaccines for
mercury, who really knows if mercury has been removed from vaccines.

Vaccines with "trace" amounts of thimerosal are supposed to contain less
than 1 microgram of mercury per 0.5 ml dose. This is equal to a
concentration of 2000 micrograms per liter. When looked at this way, this
hardly seems like a "trace" amount of mercury.

We constantly hear that rates of autism have increased due to earlier
intervention, changes in diagnostic criteria and diagnostic substitution.
Were these co-factors considered? Have rates of autism in California really
continued to climb? They can't have it both ways.

Before we declare thimerosal containing vaccines safe, consider these
numbers:

0.5 parts per billion (ppb) mercury = Kills human neuroblastoma cells
(Parran et al., Toxicol Sci 2005; 86: 132-140).

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48356

Again Studies about Vaccines and Thimerosal are misleading

When will these authors of studies stop claiming that all but a few vaccines
contain the mercury additive Thimerosal? 80% of all flu vaccines contain
this preservative. As of June in 2005 many other vaccines that are
recommended for children still contained normal or trace amounts of
Thimerosal. Many mothers and children still had mercury amalgams. Some foods
such as Tuna contain mercury. We still eat and breath this highly toxic
substance. When you include the many other chemicals and heavy metals that
have been found to cause developmental delays that are in fact on the
increase it's not to hard to figure out why numbers have not dropped.
There are many questions about this latest study from the California State
Public Health Department that remain unanswered. What are the ages? Are they
including all ASD disorders or just regressive Autism? Why do they still
falsely claim that Thimerosal is not in any other vaccine and only some Flu
vaccines? This statement just is simply not true. And why isn't there an age
criteria for diagnoses such as five years old when school aged children can
be truly observed on a daily basis? And when using this age it shows that
what little reduction there is in the use of thimerosal these children still
fall under the excessive amount.

Are they finding these infants up to let's say 3 years old unable to
interact with their peers? Do these youngsters show signs of learning
disabilities? C'mon you can't claim that mercury in any form is safe and
with increased exposures of this toxin combined with others you will find
that the numbers will remain or climb. This is being touted as a disorder
that is untreatable and unavoidable. And that is sad as the medical
community claims success in many other diseases and disorders.

You can't mark mercury off the list as its toxic strength is much too
strong. We are still hearing about lead that was banned 20 plus years ago as
we find it everywhere. Mercury was used in paint also but that is rarely
mentioned. The fact is it was used in kitchen and bathroom paints along with
other areas susceptible to mold. We scream if products from China contain
lead but buy food and are told to use lights that contain mercury.

Of course we are seeing genetic mutations you always do when there are
poisonings going on. We are witnessing children hitting puberty at younger
ages, Obesity, Diabetes II, Heart Disease and many psychological and
neurological disorders are on the increase along with Autism or ASD, ADD
included. To give Thimerosal a no contribution label is not only dangerous
but criminal when you look at what role mercury has played with those
exposed to it over the years.

We need to put a stop to this continuous claim that mercury in any form is
somehow safe when it has been known for hundreds of years to be very
dangerous and even lethal. Why did the Romans only use slaves to mine for
it? Why does the manufacturer of the specific compound Thimerosal warn of
its toxicity? Why was it banned in most applications except as a vaccine
preservative injected directly into our blood stream? Why is it still being
used in any vaccine and during the manufacture of other vaccines? And why do
upwards of 85% of those tested that suffer from ASD show marked spikes when
chelating heavy metals for mercury? Still too many questions abound with no
serious answers that the powers that be except.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48301
Peter Bowditch - 15 Jan 2008 01:53 GMT
>On Jan 14, 1:48 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
>
>Fact: You don't know much about chemistry, don't know much biology

I'll bet he doesn't know much about trigonometry or what a slide rule
is for either.

Signature

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

Jan Drew - 15 Jan 2008 00:00 GMT
>>>> Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
>>>> Answers
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>
> PM

Your comment followed Dr Cee's post.

Did you pick up this *fully justified* from your ilk member Mark Probert?

You are mighty selective with *the absurdity and deceptiveness of the case.*
No surprise there.  Care to address *each* question below?

>>>> We constantly hear that rates of autism have increased due to earlier
>>>> intervention, changes in diagnostic criteria and diagnostic
[quoted text clipped - 70 lines]
>>>>
>>>> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=48301
Citizen Jimserac - 16 Jan 2008 16:01 GMT
> Thimerosal Vindicated as Cause of Autism: More Questions and Still No
> Answers

Thanks for posting.

I foolishly and stupidly accepted the "news" item
about  research on thimerosal supposedly
being exonerated from
having causality in the upsurge of youth autism.

I withdraw my comment about scoring one point
for the pro-vaccinators.

Next time I will do a bit more research before accepting
ANY MORE pro vaccination disinformation.

Thanks
Citizen Jimserac
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.