Ok this is the part I don't get. You keep saying there in a massive
cohort of subjects walking around with amalgams and how come we aren't
seeing a problem, and I'm telling you there's a massive cohort of
subjects and we are seeing problems. I can't prove it is the amalgam
and you can't prove it's not. And it has nothing to do with a coverup
or conspiracy by the medical association cause they don't know for sure
either.( but there is the precautionary principle right?) At the time
amalgams were first used they seemed like a wonderful solution. Trans
fat was going to be the solution to a problem as well remember? All I'm
saying is that one day when you say to yourself 'crap, I just found out
that I should wear gloves when I change the engine oil on my car cause
there's stuff in there that can harm me if I get it on my skin' then
you wear gloves right? You don't go on getting motor oil all over your
hands. But maybe if you're an unscrupulous garage owner you don't
bother to tell your mechanics about the issue because then you have to
do something for them and it might cut into your profits. Unfortunately
I'm just as skeptical of UV cure epoxies as I am now of the amalgam I
have in my head. Epoxy is the new wonderful solution but it has even
less of a track record. Gold is probably fine but then I have to be
careful next time I go to the third world walking around with that gold
flashing in my mouth. If I go porcelain my buds will accuse me of
having a glass jaw and what can I say? Ahh you can't win. Stay away
from candy kiddies!
Joe
robert and benita rabello wrote:
Joe Street wrote:
Hi Robert;
Yeah I got your point. My point was that people are making claims (
please for the moment don't pull a 'show me the data' .... just for
argument's sake allow me this for a moment) they are making claims that
just maybe a large upswing in the occurrance of certain diseases may be
related to long term effects of low level exposure to certain toxins,
mercury being one of the suspects. Sure it's complicated by rising
levels of all kinds of unhealthy things in trace concentrations in our
environment, the air we breathe and the water we drink, the food
supply.
The overall impact of environmental insults is very difficult to
determine. As Keith pointed out, the SYNERGY of these chemicals may be
related to a host of human ills, and our methods for identifying cause
/ effect relationships remains weak in many cases. But saying a
negative correlation exists simply because I THINK it exists smacks of
superstition.
I grew up in Los Angeles during the 1960's, and I remember how
TERRIBLE the air was back then. It burned my eyes and made me short of
breath. It killed the trees in the Angeles National Forest and caused
serious trouble for kids and elderly folk with asthma. Yet the auto
makers refused to accept the correlation between car exhaust and smog.
There were scientific studies and public hearings, court cases and a
flurry of media attention before the state finally FORCED auto makers
to address the issue.
Without evidence, however, nothing would have changed.
The same type of problem exists on your end of the continent with
respect to pollution from factories and refineries. We have a huge
backlog of investigating to do with respect to the garbage we're
putting into our air, water, food and environment. But labeling a
whole host of health problems on dental fillings serves no purpose but
to make concerns over environmental problems sound like the rantings of
Inquisitors hunting witches.
Maybe that's the big picture here. Check with fisheries on the
guidelines for those fish you are pulling out of the Fraser for
example. So maybe the body of evidence is massive and right there in
front of us. Questionmark.
Check out what this SFU paper has to say about mercury levels in the
Fraser watershed and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) the ones
that can slip into your DNA helix and have fun with your cellular
reproduction.
http://www.rem.sfu.ca/FRAP/aquae.pdf
Ugh! Now I'm not going to be able sleep tonight! (insert
sarcastic tone) Thanks a lot, Joe . . . : - )
Adult salmon don't eat on their way back to spawn, but their
offspring are certainly exposed to toxins in the water as they grow and
move out to the sea. Moreover, the problem of biomagnification ensures
that whatever it is we're dumping into the air and water will come back
to haunt us in our food.
All of these things play a role I am certain but the real world is not
a closed carefully controlled lab environment so what can be said in a
scientific manner?
Indeed, it's not. That's one reason to avoid putting unnatural
substances into the environment, or increasing the concentrations of
substances known to cause us harm.
I am reminded of post docs here in my lab who run
plasma processes that have several variables that are wildly out of
control and while they tweak one of those variables and they get one
device on their wafer out of a hundred at the end which has a
desireable characteristic they then assume it is due to their matrix of
values for this one variable and not to some chance confluence of
uncontrolled parameters. They realize it later ( after they have
published) that they have the devils own time trying to reproduce it!
ROFL. Are you going to put a bunch of humans in a cage and control
everything they are exposed to over their lifetime? When you hear that
something you have been eating, drinking, or smoking is potentially
harmful do you stop consuming it, or do you wait to get sick so you
have your own personal data? How fanatic do you need to be in your
adherence to the dogma of the church of reason?
Ah, but I've been attending that church for so long, it's habitual
now! It's very hard to escape the influence of education and
environment.
(impact of mercury exposure)
ISOLATED? No, not beyond a reasonable doubt, not out
here in the real,
complicated world. Maybe in a 50 year lab experiment with real human
subjects, or maybe with rats that have an 80 year life expectancy if
they existed.
We've got several generations of human beings exposed to mercury
amalgams now. It's a HUGE population sample. If there was a direct,
causal relationship between amalgams and health problems, it should be
showing up by this point. I simply don't buy the conspiracy theory
that the dental associations are trying to cover up some heinous truth
and suppress data concerning amalgam fillings. There are other
materials used to fill holes in teeth, including porcelain and gold,
which are inert, and are used worldwide. The reason dentists fill
holes with amalgam is that it's easy to work with, it's less expensive
than gold, and (like real tooth material) it has a certain amount of
"give", which is not true of porcelain.
But see my comments above. What is isolated in the real
world? Read up on the mental health effects of exposure to mercury
vapour. Is there a correlation? Perhaps? Ever heard the _expression_ "mad
as a hatter"? Felt hats used to be made with mercury. Is contemplating
suicide a form of madness?
Next time my neighbors complain that I'm crazy, I'll tell them it's
because of my amalgam fillings! : - )
robert luis rabello
"The Edge of Justice"
Adventure for Your Mind
http://www.newadventure.ca
Ranger Supercharger Project Page
http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
|
