View Full Version : Detox program for cyclists?
what exactly are the toxins that these fools think they are cleansing their bodies of?
AnthonyG seems to think that he was poisoned by mercury. But, I'm not sure if he ever had any legitimate lab work done to confirm it (there are plenty of dental quacks who can produce scary looking results for mercury...before recommending an expensive set of procedures to remove and replace all of the existing mercury amalgam fillings in your mouth).
Could you provide a link to such facts? I'd like to know all I can before committing to this...
Nice TCR, btw.:thumb:
this forum is no place for huckster, flat earthers or the gullible.
Do you have any studies which prove less toxins in a body after a so called "cleanse"?
Gunk debunked
Detox cures clean out your wallet - but not your body
Simon Crompton: stories behind the news
DETOX. It’s one of those ill-defined 21st-century words like organic, natural and pure that have become inseparable from the idea of a healthy lifestyle. It’s what we do when, in the midst of busy lives, we aspire to be well and whole again.
Those who want to market books, foods, diets and supplements have twigged that they’re on to a surefire winner. Carol Vorderman’s book, Detox for Life, has sold an astonishing 600,000 copies since it was published in 2001. But in the process, the marketing of the detox idea eroded any meaning that the word ever had.
This week, a new study completely punctured the myth. Experts in toxicology and hormones from the University of Southern California have said that there is no proof that these bodily purges do anything useful. In the journal Food Technology they point out that the benefits people feel after drinking lots of water, eating fruit and vegetables and cutting out caffeine, alcohol and processed foods have nothing to do with helping the body to get rid of toxins.
Our bodies, they point out, are already perfectly capable of removing any toxic products that gather.
“Our lungs, kidneys, liver, gastro-intestinal tract and immune system are effective in removing or neutralising toxic substances within hours of consumption.”
The benefits we feel are the result of living healthily: cutting out the things that shouldn’t be there in the first place, such as alcohol and nicotine; providing the body with sufficient water; and getting enough roughage and nutrients for a healthy diet.
What the marketing people are playing on is our vague understanding of the theory of antioxidants. There is some evidence (although the science is still hazy) that eating foods with lots of antioxidants — such as fruit — mops up the oxidising chemicals that can gather in tissues and possibly cause cell damage. That’s not the same as a magic chemical formula for bodily purification.
Eating healthily and giving up bad habits is always going to be good for you. If calling this “detox” helps, all well and good. But don’t let anyone convince you that they have a product that can flush out your body’s poisons, no matter how psychologically appealing that is.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article531739.ece
If you want to "cleanse" your system, go on the diet I had to be on for about 6 weeks several years ago ... you'll be "clean" as a whistle, and you'll likely lose several pounds in the process.
I knew I had food allergies, but I wasn't sure exactly which foods (although I had a pretty good idea). Upon a medical doctor's suggestion, I started the test to determine which foods I was allergic to. Here's the diet:
Week 1: Eat only chicken, rice, and pears, and I was allowed a bit of salt. That's it. Nothing else. No butter, no sauces, no spices, nothing.
Here in the western world, chicken, rice, and pears are the three things we are least likely to be allergic to, and the most bland so we won't be bringing digestive issues from spicy foods into the situation. Yet they also provide the body with protein, fat, and carbs which we need to survive. (Evidently, in places where they eat a lot of rice, they have to go with potatoes or something, because they have a higher risk of being allergic to the rice.) So 1 week on this diet clears your system of any foods you might have eaten in the week prior.
Week 2: Add in first suspect food (for me it was peanuts). I think I lasted about 3 or 4 days, and I knew!! I returned to chicken, rice, and pears.
Week 3: Chicken, rice, and pears ... to clear out any lingering effects of the peanuts.
Week 4: Add in next suspect food (for me it was milk). A few days later, I knew that was definitely a bad one for me, and I returned to chicken, rice, and pears.
Week 5: Chicken, rice, and pears.
Week 6: Add in next suspect food (citrus fruits). That one wasn't too bad, and I ended the experiment there for two reasons: 1) I couldn't face another week of chicken, rice, and pears; and 2) I had lost 20 lbs and thought it might be good to quit before I disappeared.
So there you go.
AnthonyG
05-14-08, 07:14 PM
AnthonyG seems to think that he was poisoned by mercury. But, I'm not sure if he ever had any legitimate lab work done to confirm it (there are plenty of dental quacks who can produce scary looking results for mercury...before recommending an expensive set of procedures to remove and replace all of the existing mercury amalgam fillings in your mouth).
Fool someone once bad on you. Fool someone forever in the face of evidence bad on them.
Mercury is know to be highly poisonous. We learnt that in high school science. Do you want to challenge this? Why do you think that its safe to put in your mouth? A, because your friendly dentist and doctor told you so. Did you ask for evidence? A, NO, you just had FAITH! Look I was one of those people who had faith otherwise I wouldn't have let it be put in my mouth.
Mercury is no longer put in peoples mouths in most circumstances. They went, oops, our bad and just quietly as possible stopped using it. Have they admitted to anything? Not really but we live in a faith based society where we place mostly unquestioning faith in our medical practitioners (hey, they did 10 years of study right?) and as long as they don't fall on there collective swords then we will continue to have FAITH in them and since FAITH is the currency of our society then having the public loose faith in you is a fate worse than death so it will be avoided at all cost. Truth be dammed.
So how do you get tested for mercury contamination? It requires a specialist right? So you go to your GP (general practitioner) to get a referral but he's (usually a HE) got no idea what the symptoms of mercury poisoning are and he certainly doesn't believe (isn't going to admit) that dental amalgams can cause mercury poisoning so you don't get a referral and don't get tested and if you don't get tested you can't be poisoned.
There we go. Everyone keep their collective heads in the sand and we will be OK!
Its not really a big pharma conspiracy. Its a conspiracy of pride and most of the public play along with it because we WANT to have unquestioning faith in our medical practitioners and we don't want to hear about anything bad.
So how do you know your poisoned by mercury? A, do your own research and learn what the symptoms are. Stop having blind faith in people of status in our community and become a person of science which unfortunately in our current society is a highly subversive thing to do.
Yes I'm a subversive. I'm a believer in scientific principles and its my duty to challenge the religion of science which is the main obstacle to the practice of science in our modern society. Intelligent design is nothing but a tiny distraction (a made up opponent). The real opponent that science needs to address is within.
Regards, Anthony
So how do you get tested for mercury contamination? It requires a specialist right? So you go to your GP (general practitioner) to get a referral but he's (usually a HE) got no idea what the symptoms of mercury poisoning are and he certainly doesn't believe (isn't going to admit) that dental amalgams can cause mercury poisoning so you don't get a referral and don't get tested and if you don't get tested you can't be poisoned.
So how do you know your poisoned by mercury? A, do your own research and learn what the symptoms are.
So in other words, you've never been tested, and you don't really know if you've got mercury contamination or not.
AnthonyG
05-14-08, 07:41 PM
So in other words, you've never been tested, and you don't really know if you've got mercury contamination or not.
I know I'm poisoned. I know how to diagnose myself. I just explained how we live with a FAITH based medical model and the reasons why the mainstream medical community isn't prepared to diagnose ANYONE with something that will bring their own standing into question (that parts just human nature, not a conspiracy). Yet you challenge it. WHY? I don't believe that your part of the conspiracy but what I have done is to challenge your FAITH. Same as if I had insulted Allah or God. Just the same.
Regards, Anthony
mateo44
05-14-08, 07:46 PM
I'm no doctor, but I'm pretty sure the treatment for mercury poisoning would not be lemon juice, cayenne pepper and maple syrup. Is it?
AnthonyG
05-14-08, 07:58 PM
I'm no doctor, but I'm pretty sure the treatment for mercury poisoning would not be lemon juice, cayenne pepper and maple syrup. Is it?
Correct but this wasn't the detox program that I was recommending. I'm using Chlorella, magnesium and sometimes corriander(cilantro). One of the methods used by healthcare professionals to test for mercury poisoning is to do a mercury challenge test. Take a large dose of a chelating agent (cilantro is as good a mercury chelating agent as anything) and see what comes out of you. For me taking a large dose of cilantro absolutely knocks me out of the park and I end up peeing and crapping razor blades.
Regards, Anthony
Someday_RN
05-14-08, 08:05 PM
I'm wanting to undertake at least a week long detox program - you know, start fresh for the summer...get all the nasty stuff out of the system that's accumulated over the course of a stressful semester. I've been feeling like I could use a detox for a while, though I generally don't eat too bad. I know that the consequences of a detox will be low energy for a while, and probably some weight loss.
The only program (that's not selling some schwag product) that I know of and am entertaining: Lemon juice, grade B maple syrup + cayenne pepper. Has anyone tried this method? I ride almost every day and don't want to cut back my riding too drastically, and I also like to run and swim at least a couple times/week. Can I sustain this level of activity through such a detox, and minimize weight loss? Advice? Testimonials? Suggestions?
There are a lot of different things to detox from. Many programmes aim at ridding the body of certain toxins. Although the body is very good at getting rid of toxins it is very good at storing them too. Many toxins tend to be stored in fat and bone. Some radioactive elements are stored in bone. When the body is forming bone it does not know the difference between calcium and other products and will incorporate them into bone. When blood calcium levels fall the body restores levels by puling calcium from bone. Along with this it will it will start putting the toxins that were were incorporated in the bones into circulation. This is part of the reason that radiation exposure can cause problems later in life.
Although the body will get rid of most toxins it can't get to others that are incorporated into bones, fat, hair, organs etc.. This is part of the reason that people carrying too much fat may also be prone to more diseases. Remember that theses things play a part and are not the sole reason for illness. There is far too many interactions to make a sweeping generalisation.
There are toxins that will not leave the body unless they can be put back in the blood stream and carried out of the body somehow. For instance Victor Yushchenko and other poisoned with dioxin have had higher fecal levels of dioxin after eating olestra which the body can't absorb.
So depending on what you are trying to get rid of will determine what you should do, because of where in the body it is stored and what needs to be done to be able to eliminate it from the body.
If you are a believer in scientific principles, then you should probably review why different states of chemicals are more harmful than others and why this makes the amalgam fillings harmless.
Science is not faith; it is self-correcting.
For me taking a large dose of cilantro absolutely knocks me out of the park and I end up peeing and crapping razor blades.
Regards, Anthony
Oh yeah, I have an idea what you mean ... peanuts and lactose do something very similar to me. I'm allergic to them (or at least intolerant).
grail29er
05-14-08, 09:02 PM
detoxing is indeed quackery. sorry, dont mean to be a jerk but for those of you that believe in this practice you need to read some physiology.
andre nickatina
05-15-08, 01:32 AM
Great, FXjohn came into the thread. Didn't he get kicked out of P&R for not playing nicely with others?
are there any studies showing what "toxins" are in the average person's body and how much less "toxins" there are after "detoxifying"?
I know it's a ridiculous question because some people already believe all this stuff without proof. Just asking.
Fool someone once bad on you. Fool someone forever in the face of evidence bad on them.
Mercury is know to be highly poisonous. We learnt that in high school science. Do you want to challenge this? Why do you think that its safe to put in your mouth? A, because your friendly dentist and doctor told you so. Did you ask for evidence? A, NO, you just had FAITH! Look I was one of those people who had faith otherwise I wouldn't have let it be put in my mouth.
Mercury is no longer put in peoples mouths in most circumstances. They went, oops, our bad and just quietly as possible stopped using it. Have they admitted to anything? Not really but we live in a faith based society where we place mostly unquestioning faith in our medical practitioners (hey, they did 10 years of study right?) and as long as they don't fall on there collective swords then we will continue to have FAITH in them and since FAITH is the currency of our society then having the public loose faith in you is a fate worse than death so it will be avoided at all cost. Truth be dammed.
So how do you get tested for mercury contamination? It requires a specialist right? So you go to your GP (general practitioner) to get a referral but he's (usually a HE) got no idea what the symptoms of mercury poisoning are and he certainly doesn't believe (isn't going to admit) that dental amalgams can cause mercury poisoning so you don't get a referral and don't get tested and if you don't get tested you can't be poisoned.
There we go. Everyone keep their collective heads in the sand and we will be OK!
Its not really a big pharma conspiracy. Its a conspiracy of pride and most of the public play along with it because we WANT to have unquestioning faith in our medical practitioners and we don't want to hear about anything bad.
So how do you know your poisoned by mercury? A, do your own research and learn what the symptoms are. Stop having blind faith in people of status in our community and become a person of science which unfortunately in our current society is a highly subversive thing to do.
Yes I'm a subversive. I'm a believer in scientific principles and its my duty to challenge the religion of science which is the main obstacle to the practice of science in our modern society. Intelligent design is nothing but a tiny distraction (a made up opponent). The real opponent that science needs to address is within.
Regards, Anthony
The "Mercury Toxicity" Scam has been well documented:
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mercury.html
"Very sensitive instruments can detect billionths of a gram of mercury vapor in the mouth of a person with amalgam fillings. However, the minuscule amount of mercury the body absorbs from amalgams is far below the level that exerts any adverse health effect [1-6]. One study found that people with symptoms they related to amalgam fillings did not have significant mercury levels. The study compared ten symptomatic patients and eight patients with no reported health complaints. The symptom group had neither a higher estimated daily uptake of inhaled mercury vapor, nor a higher mercury concentration in blood and urine than in the control group. The amounts of mercury detected by the tests were trivial [6]. Some studies have shown that the problems patients attribute to amalgam restorations are psychosomatic in nature and have been exacerbated greatly by information from the media or from a dentist [7-11]
An extensive review published in 1993 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services concluded that "there is scant evidence that the health of the vast majority of people with amalgam is compromised or that removing fillings has a beneficial effect on health." [12] In January 1998, the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs issued a report on dental amalgam safety, with emphasis on studies that had been published since the 1993 review. The report concluded:
"Millions of people have amalgam restorations in their mouths, and millions more will receive amalgam for restoring their carious [decayed] teeth. Over the years, amalgam has been used for dental restorations without evidence of major health problems. Newly developed techniques have demonstrated that minute levels of mercury are released from amalgam restorations, but no health consequences from exposure to such low levels of mercury released from amalgam restorations have been demonstrated. Given the available scientific information and considering the demonstrated benefits of dental amalgams, unless new scientific research dictates otherwise, there currently appears to be no justification for discontinuing the use of dental amalgam [13]."
In the absence of lab tests, it seems reasonable to conclude that your self-diagnosed "mercury poisoning" is unlikely in reality.
Amalgam fillings have been used in hundreds of millions of people worldwide, and are still in widespread use today...if there were any significant health issues associated with them, one would expect many, many more reports of problems. But, most folks seem to get by OK with a mouthful of "toxic mercury" for many decades, without undue suffering...I've had quite a few such fillings in my mouth for 40+ years, and have no chronic health issues whatsoever.
BTW - what did you replace your amalgam fillings with? Porcelain fillings are much more expensive. Resin fillings only last about half as long, and "concerns have been raised about the estrogen-mimicking effects of the plastic chemicals used in composite resins", according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_amalgam_controversy).
AnthonyG
05-15-08, 05:33 PM
Sorry, you cant post quackwatch as a reference. He IS a genuine quack himself. Now I don't usually go for conspiracy theories but he IS paid by big pharmaceutical companies to run propaganda.
Now one thing is right. Simply having the amalgams removed will not cure you of mercury toxicity. I had my fillings removed about 6 years ago but I'm still struggling to remove the mercury from my bones and body fat. Discovering that magnesium was the missing link has moved things along much faster now.
Yes its a big problem. Its SO big that no one will acknowledge it and thats just human nature. Kill one person and they will stick you in jail for a long time. Kill millions and you will be a hero beyond reach.
Regards, Anthony
Sorry, you cant post quackwatch as a reference. He IS a genuine quack himself. Now I don't usually go for conspiracy theories but he IS paid by big pharmaceutical companies to run propaganda.
Now one thing is right. Simply having the amalgams removed will not cure you of mercury toxicity. I had my fillings removed about 6 years ago but I'm still struggling to remove the mercury from my bones and body fat. Discovering that magnesium was the missing link has moved things along much faster now.
Yes its a big problem. Its SO big that no one will acknowledge it and thats just human nature. Kill one person and they will stick you in jail for a long time. Kill millions and you will be a hero beyond reach.
Regards, Anthony
The page on quackwatch.com cited legitimate, peer-reviewed studies to back up its assertions...something you have yet to provide.
Also, do you have any evidence to support your claim that Stephen Barrett, MD (http://www.quackwatch.org/10Bio/bio.html) is supported by "big pharma"? It doesn't look like his website is making him rich. Here are some of his credentials from his website:
"Stephen Barrett, M.D., a retired psychiatrist who resides near Chapel Hill, North Carolina, has achieved national renown as an author, editor, and consumer advocate. In addition to heading Quackwatch, he is vice-president of the National Council Against Health Fraud, a scientific advisor to the American Council on Science and Health, and a Fellow of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP). In 1984, he received an FDA Commissioner's Special Citation Award for Public Service in fighting nutrition quackery. In 1986, he was awarded honorary membership in the American Dietetic Association. From 1987 through 1989, he taught health education at The Pennsylvania State University. He is listed in Marquis Who's Who in America and received the 2001 Distinguished Service to Health Education Award from the American Association for Health Education.
An expert in medical communications, Dr. Barrett operates 23 Web sites; edits Consumer Health Digest (a weekly electronic newsletter); is medical editor of Prometheus Books; and has been a peer-review panelist for several top medical journals. He has written more than 2,000 articles and delivered more than 300 talks at colleges, universities, medical schools, and professional meetings. His 50 books include The Health Robbers: A Close Look at Quackery in America and seven editions of the college textbook Consumer Health: A Guide to Intelligent Decisions."
No offense, but his bona fides trump yours...
And, in the absence of lab tests, how do you know you still have "mercury toxicity" in your "bones and body fat"?
andre nickatina
05-15-08, 06:17 PM
If you think you're getting balanced information from quackwatch, you've failed at reading comprehension 101...
And, in the absence of lab tests, how do you know you still have "mercury toxicity" in your "bones and body fat"?
yes, I want to see the lab reports showing anthony G's mercury levels and levels of toxins in ordinary people before they "detoxify".
If you think you're getting balanced information from quackwatch, you've failed at reading comprehension 101...
Truth is not synonymous with "balanced".
A debate between a Holocaust Survivor and a Holocaust Denier would be "balanced", but only one side would represent the truth.
AnthonyG
05-15-08, 06:52 PM
Hey, if you NEVER go looking for evidence, ie, stick your head in the sand then yes, you come up with "scant" evidence. Its classic propaganda. Just tell people what they want to hear and as long as you don't fall on your sword people will believe you to the end.
Many people have tried to debate Stephen Barrett but when questioned he will not provide answers to anything.
Here's a couple of references, http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/mercury_elimination.htm
Here's another, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9164660
and another, http://www.rense.com/general25/dmd.htm
There's a classic catch 22 going on. If you ask to be tested for mercury the referring doctor will ask what your exposure is. If you say its from dental amalgams they will say you can't get mercury poisoning from amalgams and they won't refer you for testing and so there is never any evidence that dental amalgams cause mercury toxicity.
Regards, Anthony
grail29er
05-15-08, 08:35 PM
anthonyg, if it makes u feel better to believe this malarkey go right ahead but you have chosen to believe some bogus stuff. the article you posted from pubmed does nothing to further your case. the physician that runs quackwatch is a highly regarded individual. as a physician myself i can assure you that there is not a big medicine or big pharma conspiracy to make people unhealthy. if mercury poisoning was as prevalent as you suggest and as easily treatable you would see big pharma capitalize on it. physicians and biomed researchers do what they do because they believe in making people healthy, not the other way around.
And, in the absence of lab tests, how do you know you still have "mercury toxicity" in your "bones and body fat"?
Thats simple. Cause he read so on the internet. Along with all the other 'anti establishment' poisonings of the people, like microwaves, fluoride in the water, pasteurizing milk, etc etc, etc.
He doesnt have proof because he doesnt research and choose his own opinion based on the research. He parrots whatever the 'anti establishment' sites say, which is exactly what he accuses us of doing, just that we parrot the 'establishments' dogma. ;)
Here's another, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9164660
Just go to the doc and say you broke one of those old thermometers. I don't see why they wouldn't let you pay for the test out of pocket.
I suppose you realize you posted an article that supports what other people are telling you?
'These findings suggest that placement and removal of "silver" tooth fillings in pregnant and lactating humans will subject the fetus and neonate to unnecessary risk of Hg exposure.'
The key to understand you are getting scammed is to ask yourself, 'What evidence would I have to be shown in order to change my mind?' Most would mention something, and when said evidence is presented, revert back to their old beliefs. Shifting the goalposts and such....
AnthonyG
05-16-08, 05:49 AM
I suppose you realize you posted an article that supports what other people are telling you?
'These findings suggest that placement and removal of "silver" tooth fillings in pregnant and lactating humans will subject the fetus and neonate to unnecessary risk of Hg exposure.'
This quote isn't contrary to anything I've said and it doesn't support the view that mercury amalgams are safe. Its says that the implant OR removal of amalgams will subject fetus's or breast feeding children to unnecessary Hg exposure. It supports what I've been saying. Yes removal of amalgams isn't without risk.
Again what you can see here in this debate is the politics of faith in action.
I don't believe that any of you are involved in a conspiracy to cover up the harm caused by amalgams but yet you defend them. Your not getting paid so why do you do it?
Well its about what I have done. I've challenged your faith and we live in a faith based world so what I've done isn't insignificant. I'm a heretic fair and square and just like any other time in history heretics will be condemned out of hand by all and sundry.
We've been duped but no one wants to know because the truth is that to admit that we have been duped is to suffer loss of face. This is the human condition. This is why propaganda works. As long as they don't fall on their swords we will most likely believe the most flimsy of explanations to the end.
Regards, Anthony
Anthony, do you have any proof that you have mercury in your system?
AnthonyG
05-16-08, 06:15 AM
Anthony, do you have any proof that you have mercury in your system?
Actually that poses an interesting question. What evidence COULD I show you on this forum that would really satisfy the standards of evidence?
What would cut it is if I said I visited an "expert", I had test done and he said I had mercury toxicity.
Now how would you know if this was true or not? You wouldn't. It would simply come down to how confidently I stated it. This is how propaganda works.
Science came to prominence as our dominant faith promising to NOT make the same mistakes as the faiths that preceded it. Science promised to give it to us straight. If it made a mistake it would be man enough to own up and say sorry. Our faith in science is based on this.
So when "science" makes a mistake does it own up of its own volition?
Not a chance. The spin doctors step in and say you can't admit to anything because it will destroy the publics faith in science and if they lose faith in science they will go back to believing in religion and you can't have that now can you.
So we have a catch 22. We have faith in science to tell us if something was wrong but "science" wont tell us if something is wrong because it risks losing our faith.
The public doesn't care really because we are proud of our faith in science and to lose this faith in science is to suffer loss of face.
The evidence is there. People choose to believe what they want.
I used to believe myself. I was a VERY sick man and came close to dying in my sleep. I found an alternative and I'm slowly but surely getting my health back.
Regards, Anthony
mercury is either in your system or it isn't. I would imagine a biopsy of some sort could prove it.
Are you relying on blind faith? Are you a fairly gullible person?
The beauty of real science is that it is a self-correcting search for truth (your hysterical pronouncements about "faith" notwithstanding).
If there really were significant health issues associated with amalgam fillings:
Ambitious grad students would be doing research to prove the connections and mechanisms of action.
Lawyers would be getting involved, to sue on behalf of injured clients.
And big companies would be lining up to promote cures and alternative therapies for those who have been "poisoned".
But...outside of the small community of "true believers" in "mercury toxicity", we see none of this.
It may sound harsh, but it seems much, much more likely that your self-diagnosed problems are in your head.
AnthonyG
05-16-08, 09:15 AM
Are you relying on blind faith? Are you a fairly gullible person?
You put your finger on it.
I'm saying that others just have faith and I've offended you in doing so. So I get the classic "I know you are but what am I" response.
This is the POWER of faith. I can expose it as much as I like but others just won't get it because the act of exposing it is a serious political mistake. Its powerful stuff is faith.
I'm a proponent of science. I just want to see it being done but the religion of science is in the way.
Look, I have an exposure to mercury through dental amalgams and had EVERY, I mean EVERY symptom of mercury toxicity thats know to man. Its not that hard to figure it out. Doctors don't have some magical powers of comprehension. Its actually not that easy to get definitive proof of mercury toxicity. There was a sheep experiment a number of years ago where they had to add a radioactive component to the amalgams so that later on they could do x-rays of the sheep to see where the mercury had got to.
Regards, Anthony
I don't believe that any of you are involved in a conspiracy to cover up the harm caused by amalgams but yet you defend them. Your not getting paid so why do you do it?
We've been duped but no one wants to know because the truth is that to admit that we have been duped is to suffer loss of face. This is the human condition. This is why propaganda works. As long as they don't fall on their swords we will most likely believe the most flimsy of explanations to the end.
Because you are spreading around incorrect information based on no scientific explanation. I have tried explaining why different states of elements make them more toxic or not with no response. You have yet to explain why these amalgams are dangerous.
To be honest, the dentists putting them in your mouth are in more danger of exposure than you are and considering I haven't heard a ruckus from the ADA as of yet..... I guess they are duping them as well.
Getting a test done would have exposed the truth and it is baffling why you would commit so much time to an exposure that might have been an entirely different disease. You are the one who should think about why you defend your position based on gut feelings and no proof. Symptoms are not the definitive answer to anything.
You put your finger on it.
I'm saying that others just have faith and I've offended you in doing so. So I get the classic "I know you are but what am I" response.
This is the POWER of faith.
so you think for example since science can prove the earth is round, it requires just as much faith to believe it as it does a flat earth. That's pretty weak.
In a world where everyone exercises, eats healthy, gets good rest and takes supplements as needed, doctors are out of business.Doctors don't promote disease to drum up business. In a world where everyone took excellent care of themselves there would still be plenty of disease and illness to keep all the doctors busy. I don't know of a single doctor that wouldn't LOVE to have their workload cut in 1/2 or more. Know any under-worked doctors? I don't.
Besides, medical schools are like a cartel. If there were too many doctors because of a lack of diseases, they would simply cut the number of admissions to medical schools to match the demand. The numbers are adjusted regularly for this very reason.
Dave.
AnthonyG
05-16-08, 07:44 PM
so you think for example since science can prove the earth is round, it requires just as much faith to believe it as it does a flat earth. That's pretty weak.
You've got it in one and in fact I was thinking of the same example at one stage. Now I'm not challenging the fact that the Earth is a globe and not flat but have I gone out and tested the data for myself? No.
I believe what I'm told and thats only human nature. You can't go out re-inventing the wheel every day. Its just TOO painful for everyone involved so for everyones sake we believe in a few basic truths and hopefully work our way on from there. Science however is based on a principle that every now and then someone WILL go out and re-invent the wheel and we MUST be HUMBLE enough of out truths to accept that what was the truth only yesterday just got changed today.
Its an important principle of science to be humble of your truths.
Its important to look at things from someone else's point of view. Followers of religion are just like followers of science. Its just that there truths are different. They are too proud of their truths to accept that they may change and if a follower of science is too proud of their truths then to them science is simply a substitute religion.
What's the answer to this riddle. You must be humble of your truths and look at things from someone else's perspective to gain a true understanding of things.
Regards, Anthony
Its an important principle of science to be humble of your truths.
Its important to look at things from someone else's point of view. Followers of religion are just like followers of science. Its just that there truths are different. They are too proud of their truths to accept that they may change and if a follower of science is too proud of their truths then to them science is simply a substitute religion.
What's the answer to this riddle. You must be humble of your truths and look at things from someone else's perspective to gain a true understanding of things.
Science pretty much does this every day and gets turned on its head. Prions, viruses, micro-RNAs, DNA being responsible for the genetic code.....I can't even list the number of things that have refuted scientific 'dogma'. Because even if they were thought totally insane at the time, reality will always win because it's true. You can go and repeat the experiments under the same conditions and the truth will be known.
Religion stays the same way for 1000s of years and just gets more justification added to it in order to deal with truths. It can't deal with reality. Don't compare them because your pet conspiracy theory isn't real.
Can you please find me information on why dentists accept this mercury exposure?
AnthonyG
05-17-08, 04:50 AM
Here's an interesting link, http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/md-im/applic-demande/pubs/dent_amalgam_e.html from Health Canada. You couldn't say that its supporting my position but it does say some interesting things. Firstly it acknowledges that dental amalgams release Hg into our bodies mostly via vapors. It states that dental amalgams can contribute 50% of our environmental Hg exposure which surprises me. I thought it would be more but it shows that there are other sources of mercury out there. We are dealing with averages though.
It is being conservative and it is the result of a committee but I don't necessarily disagree with that much of it. Yes it is just as hazardous to get amalgams removed as having them implanted and yes I think I have suffered more from them more than most. There is a major caveat that its based on current scientific evidence and if no one has done extensive research then you don't have a lot of evidence by default.
Yes science gets to work sometimes. Just not as often as we are led to believe. There are many, many, many scientists young and old who have made uncomfortable discoveries. Have they been welcomed with open arms? Has the dominant view changed in the face of evidence?
Well no. They just say NO. We don't agree whether its right or wrong. They didn't just fall on their swords so who do you believe?
Regards, Anthony
Dan The Man
05-17-08, 05:08 AM
You sir are a nut case.
AnthonyG
05-17-08, 05:49 AM
You sir are a nut case.
Incorrect. I'm a heretic.
Regards, Anthony
mateo44
05-17-08, 08:22 AM
Both?
RelevantCycling
05-17-08, 04:13 PM
Wow, 4 pages of high passions around a simple cleanse? Man, you guys need to ride more. I haven't done one, know a few pretty good athletes that have/do and swear by them. OP - just to put this in perspective - it won't hurt you, you can stop anytime, it costs nothing and maybe it'll work for you.
Anthony G,
Here (http://www.iaomt.org/articles/category_view.asp?intReleaseID=277&month=6&year=2007&catid=35) is some new info regarding mercury testing. An interesting read at the least.
Also, since the flu vaccine is popular or at least well accepted it is interesting to know five of the seven flu vaccines have Thimerosal in them. Four with close to 25ug and one with trace amounts. To be fair, Pharmaceutical companies do make Thimerosal free flu vaccines. You must specifically request them from your doctor.
It is interesting to note that in 1982 the FDA called for removing all mercury-based preservatives including Thimerosal from OTC topical product such as ear drops, eyedrops, nasal sprays and skin bleaching agents. Apparently, it was ruled that such products should be reclassified as "not generally recognized as safe and effective"(*see ruling below).
Further, our son, born in 2000, when 2 months old recieved 25ug of thimerosal in his DTaP/Tripedia made at the time by PMC. Lot number: UO356BA. That works out to 46.66 times the EPA safe limit for his weight. :thumb:Thankfully, kids born today, under the normal vaccine schedule shouldn't have as much problem avioding this sh!t. However, Thimerosal/mercury has a very long shelf life. So, I would guess some doses still exist on the shelf. Best to request a single dose and look at the label.
These preservatives are used to save money. Sleep tight pharmaceutical ceo's. Wonder if hell is hot or cold. Good night and good luck.
(*Ruling) USFDA, "Mercury-Containing Drug Prfoducts for Topical Antimicrobial Over-The-Counter Human Use; Establishment of a Monograph," proposed rules, Federal Registrar 47/436-01 Jan 5, 1982.
Always a conspiracy!!!!! Of course I have yet to hear anyone explain why different types of mercury are worse than others.....
Considering that vaccines have expiration dates, I doubt there are any vaccines (exception flu) with thimerosal in them. Unless your doctor is trying to save money and use vaccines from 2001. Which I doubt.
I'm glad that you are quoting a document that is hard to get access to since online copies are not available past 1994. Which makes me wonder how you got access to read the article?
AnthonyG
05-17-08, 10:04 PM
Anthony G,
Here (http://www.iaomt.org/articles/category_view.asp?intReleaseID=277&month=6&year=2007&catid=35) is some new info regarding mercury testing. An interesting read at the least.
Thanks for the link.
Regards, Anthony
[QUOTE=Nickel;6714278]Always a conspiracy!!!!! Of course I have yet to hear anyone explain why different types of mercury are worse than others.....
I don't understand the context of this statement. Thimerosal is a mercury based preservative to extend the shelf life of vaccines. Hardly a conspiracy, imho.
Considering that vaccines have expiration dates, I doubt there are any vaccines (exception flu) with thimerosal in them. Unless your doctor is trying to save money and use vaccines from 2001. Which I doubt.
Except, DT (Multi dose Dip/Tetanus), Tetanus Toxoid Adsorbed USP, Adsorbed adult use and Tetanus booster. Meningococcal. Certain DTap and Dt's have trace amounts. From what I've read trace means (<0.3mcg) of mercury post production.
I'm glad that you are quoting a document that is hard to get access to since online copies are not available past 1994. Which makes me wonder how you got access to read the article?
OMG. It's not on line? Probably isn't true then.QUOTE]
Well then where did you get the article? I don't want to expend the energy if it is impossible to find. I am tired of people quote-mining literature so of course I need to read the entire thing myself to put it into context.
I guess I still don't know why having some mercury in the vaccines is a big deal?
I was referencing your BigPharma quote, implying that because it was cheaper, things are used anyway, despite it being a toxic horror.
Well then where did you get the article? I don't want to expend the energy if it is impossible to find. I am tired of people quote-mining literature so of course I need to read the entire thing myself to put it into context.
I guess I still don't know why having some mercury in the vaccines is a big deal?
I was referencing your BigPharma quote, implying that because it was cheaper, things are used anyway, despite it being a toxic horror.
Federal Registrar 47/436-01 found on microfiche and talked about in the book: "Evidence of Harm" by David Kirby. Page 83.
Mercury, being a known neuro toxin may not be a bid deal for you. However, for small children maybe you can see it is a big deal. I mentioned my son's DTaP for example.
Not sure what you are trying to tell me in the last sentence. If you agree with "BigPharma" as you put it using "things" that are a toxic horror, I guess I fail to see that logic.
Your assumption that mercury in the vaccines is the same as mercury in the environment (the actual neurotoxin) is the same as mercury in your teeth, is incorrect.
mateo44
05-18-08, 06:58 PM
This is turning into the best thread ever!
Your assumption that mercury in the vaccines is the same as mercury in the environment (the actual neurotoxin) is the same as mercury in your teeth, is incorrect.
I was referring to vaccine related mercury only. Are you referring to ethyl vs. methyl in your last post?
What studies show that mercury injected into your body is safe? Can you find any studies other than the original study performed in 1930 by Eli Lilly (the company that created Thimerosal).
Further, any studies you can direct us to that show what happens to the ethyl and methyl mercury when it is injected into the body would be enlightening.
You may be unaware of the search engine called Pubmed. This is a listing of all the peer-reviewed research that has been published. I'm not saying that all the research you find in there is good because unfortunately some journals will publish anything, which further confounds the issue.
I would also like to point out that once the mercury hysteria (or anything scientifically contentious) hits the public, a lot of money was thrown by universities at looking into this because if the university could come up with proof, they would be the 'saviors' for the problem. Plus I'm sure some people were generally concerned or something, being scientists and all.
I don't really know what kind of a study you would like but here (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/121/2/e208) is one looking at mercury blood levels in infants. Behavioral (http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2007.00288.x)study. Mice (http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/101/2/294). A review (http://www.expertopin.com/doi/abs/10.1517/14740338.5.1.17). Ethyl v methyl (http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/114281545/abstract)
I'm not sure that they know every step in the ethyl/methyl breakdown. Well, probably know more about methyl than ethyl.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.