G'day all >Hi Joe, > >You are absolutely right in suggesting that there are problems with mercury >and other toxins that we are exposed to but todays society presents them as >a minor problem and therefore we should not worry about them. >Actully new studies suggest that there are approximately 100,000 toxic >chemicals that we are exposed to that were unknown to our grand parents. It >sometimes takes many years before health problems show up from these toxins. >The average food cart at the super market contains 60 to 80 toxic chemicals.
From a previous message: >>Moreover, processing enhances shelf life and limits microbial toxins. >>See the references below for some background. > >Processing, or the kind of processing you're talking about, might >"help" to instil some sort of keepability in the thoroughly >denatured industrialized crap some people call food (emotional? - >yes! AND true!) but it'd be more accurate to call it embalming than >"life". > >More than 5,000 additives are used in food processing, the average >consumer eats the equivalent of 13 aspirin-sized tablets per day of >food additives. Many of them are naturally occurring substances, but >such rates of consumption are in no way "natural". All perfectly >safe of course, they've all had the same safety tests as thalidomide >did. Um, except that, as Thor said, nothing is known about their >synergistic effects. For instance, some are safe when taken >individually, but can pair up with other "safe" substances to form >co-carcinogens. > >The following is about the environment, not the human body, but it applies: > > >We do not and can not test for all the combinations of toxic >synthetic chemicals and how they affect the environment. Example: >The herbicide Dicamba is characterized as "slightly toxic" or >"practically nontoxic" to fish. It has been found that this is >widely variable. If Dicamba is absorbed by vermiculite (a common >ingredient in potting soils) its toxicity increases by 30 times. No >effects were observed on yearling coho salmon at 100 ppm. However, >it has now been found that doses as small as 0.25 ppm can kill coho >salmon as they migrate from seawater to fresh water for spawning. > > > >Researchers at the University of Florida and Tulane University >have found that endosulfan, toxaphene, dieldrin and chlordane when >tested by themselves had a weak estrogen response. However, when >combine the response increased dramatically. For example when >endosulfan and dieldrin were combined the estrogenic potency >increased up to 1,600 times over the individual chemicals! Reported >in Journal Science, National Wildlife Oct./Nov. 1996. > > > >Research with mice found that combinations of herbicides such as >atrazine and aldicarb and fertilizers such as nitrate can alter >thyroid hormones, suppress immune systems and affect nervous system >functions, resulting in increased aggressive behavior among the >young mice. This University of Wisconsin study headed by >toxicologist Dr. Warren Porter was published in the mid-March issue >of Toxicology and Industrial Health, 2002. > >A further awkwardness is that many of these chemicals were tested in >the 1970s and early 80s by a US company called Industrial Biotests. >Strangely, it's now quite hard to find information on Industrial >Biotests. Anyway, the company was visited unexpectedly by tax >inspectors suspecting tax evasion, but what they found instead was >evidence of widespread falsification of test data. That wasn't their >remit, so they left and called the feds. When the feds arrived it >was to find the directors furiously shredding the evidence, most of >which was destroyed. But not all. They were convicted, but in a very >odd decision, considering the record of the chemical industry (and >subsequent such cases), the court ruled that there was no reason to >suspect that the chemical companies which had sent their chemicals >to IBT for safety testing (virtually all of them) had any knowledge >of the falsification. Why then were the tests being falsified? It >was also ruled that the test results would be allowed to stand for >those chemicals for which the records had been destroyed. > >With safety like that, who needs risks? :-( Best Keith >Terry Dyck > > > >From: Joe Street <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org > >To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org > >Subject: Re: [Biofuel] mercury was Imaginal Cells by Deepak Chopra > >Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 09:31:33 -0500 > > > >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/
