Re: Thimerosal in vaccines reduces incidence of autism

[Bryan Heit]

My credentials and publications have been listed here before, apparently
you've forgotten already. Pubmed for my name, you'll get everything
except for the book chapter I wrote for Advances in Sepsis.

Bryan

[Jason Johnson]

In article >, Bryan Heit
> wrote:

My credentials and publications have been listed here before, apparently
you've forgotten already. Pubmed for my name, you'll get everything
except for the book chapter I wrote for Advances in Sepsis.

Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Thanks for telling us about your credentials. Perhaps you can answer these
questions:

I know that the largest group of drug-metabolizing enzymes is the
cytochrome P450 system which accounts for the vast majority of drug
metabolism. Do you know which cytochrome enzyme is responsible for
metabolizing mercury?

If so, has any research been done to determine if the cytochrome enzyme
responsible for metabolizing mercury is defective in those children
that develop autism?

If not, you may want to do such a research study to rule in or out a
defective cytochrome enzyme as a cause of autism.

Jason,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> In article >, Bryan Heit
> > wrote:
>
> My credentials and publications have been listed here before, apparently
> you've forgotten already. Pubmed for my name, you'll get everything
> except for the book chapter I wrote for Advances in Sepsis.
>
> Bryan
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Bryan,
> Thanks for telling us about your credentials. Perhaps you can answer these
> questions:
>
> I know that the largest group of drug-metabolizing enzymes is the
> cytochrome P450 system which accounts for the vast majority of drug
> metabolism. Do you know which cytochrome enzyme is responsible for
> metabolizing mercury?
>
> If so, has any research been done to determine if the cytochrome enzyme
> responsible for metabolizing mercury is defective in those children
> that develop autism?
>
> If not, you may want to do such a research study to rule in or out a
> defective cytochrome enzyme as a cause of autism.

Can you show why an inability to metabolize mercury would cause autism?
Assuming that it is so, the studies all say that there is no link.

[Jason Johnson]

In article >, Mark Probert
> wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
> In article >, Bryan Heit
> > wrote:
>
> My credentials and publications have been listed here before, apparently
> you've forgotten already. Pubmed for my name, you'll get everything
> except for the book chapter I wrote for Advances in Sepsis.
>
> Bryan
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Bryan,
> Thanks for telling us about your credentials. Perhaps you can answer these
> questions:
>
> I know that the largest group of drug-metabolizing enzymes is the
> cytochrome P450 system which accounts for the vast majority of drug
> metabolism. Do you know which cytochrome enzyme is responsible for
> metabolizing mercury?
>
> If so, has any research been done to determine if the cytochrome enzyme
> responsible for metabolizing mercury is defective in those children
> that develop autism?
>
> If not, you may want to do such a research study to rule in or out a
> defective cytochrome enzyme as a cause of autism.

Can you show why an inability to metabolize mercury would cause autism?
Assuming that it is so, the studies all say that there is no link.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I was asking Bryan if he knew about any research that has been done on
that issue. My memory is not perfect but seem to recall reading an article
on the web on this subject that was written by Dr. Boyd Haley. I wanted
to know if Bryan knew any other information about this interesting
subject. For example, would it be possible to find out about defective
enzymes by conducting blood tests? If so, perhaps articles were written
about the conclusions. Just because Dr. Haley writes something--I don't
believe it unless I determine from other sources that he was correct.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Sdores]

snipped for clarity:
> Mark,
> I was asking Bryan if he knew about any research that has been done on
> that issue. My memory is not perfect but seem to recall reading an article
> on the web on this subject that was written by Dr. Boyd Haley. I wanted
> to know if Bryan knew any other information about this interesting
> subject. For example, would it be possible to find out about defective
> enzymes by conducting blood tests? If so, perhaps articles were written
> about the conclusions. Just because Dr. Haley writes something--I don't
> believe it unless I determine from other sources that he was correct.
> Jason
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jason, I have enjoyed reading this thread but find it difficult at times to
find you responses. Can you snip some, like your previous response to make
it easier? Thanks in advance, and thanks everyone for a pretty good debate
here. UM MOM Susan

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> In article >, Mark Probert
> > wrote:
>
> Jason Johnson wrote:
> > In article >, Bryan Heit
> > > wrote:
> >
> > My credentials and publications have been listed here before, apparently
> > you've forgotten already. Pubmed for my name, you'll get everything
> > except for the book chapter I wrote for Advances in Sepsis.
> >
> > Bryan
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Bryan,
> > Thanks for telling us about your credentials. Perhaps you can answer these
> > questions:
> >
> > I know that the largest group of drug-metabolizing enzymes is the
> > cytochrome P450 system which accounts for the vast majority of drug
> > metabolism. Do you know which cytochrome enzyme is responsible for
> > metabolizing mercury?
> >
> > If so, has any research been done to determine if the cytochrome enzyme
> > responsible for metabolizing mercury is defective in those children
> > that develop autism?
> >
> > If not, you may want to do such a research study to rule in or out a
> > defective cytochrome enzyme as a cause of autism.
>
> Can you show why an inability to metabolize mercury would cause autism?
> Assuming that it is so, the studies all say that there is no link.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Mark,
> I was asking Bryan if he knew about any research that has been done on
> that issue. My memory is not perfect but seem to recall reading an article
> on the web on this subject that was written by Dr. Boyd Haley.

Well, that is a wonderful source. NOT!

Dr. Haley was recently sent packing by the US District Court:

http://www.neurodiversity.com/court/rhogam_decision.pdf

http://www.kevinleitch.co.uk/wp/index.php?p=393

You see, Haley comes up with a theory...and then promotes it as
science...and skips over the important part: PROVING IT HIMSELF.

It is HIS function to show it has merit. He has done nothing in this
regard.

I wanted
> to know if Bryan knew any other information about this interesting
> subject. For example, would it be possible to find out about defective
> enzymes by conducting blood tests? If so, perhaps articles were written
> about the conclusions. Just because Dr. Haley writes something--I don't
> believe it unless I determine from other sources that he was correct.

Good. However, the way you write, it seems otherwise.

[Bryan Heit]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> In article >, Bryan Heit
> > wrote:
>
> My credentials and publications have been listed here before, apparently
> you've forgotten already. Pubmed for my name, you'll get everything
> except for the book chapter I wrote for Advances in Sepsis.
>
> Bryan
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Bryan,
> Thanks for telling us about your credentials. Perhaps you can answer these
> questions:
>
> I know that the largest group of drug-metabolizing enzymes is the
> cytochrome P450 system which accounts for the vast majority of drug
> metabolism. Do you know which cytochrome enzyme is responsible for
> metabolizing mercury?


Mercury is not metabolized; it is excreted. This is one of the reasons
why it is toxic - our bodies have no way to get rid of it other then by
excreting it (hair, feces and urine). The major difference between the
types of mercury is how long they linger in the body - thimerisal and
it's breakdown product (ethyl mercury) are readily excreted. Metallic
mercury and methyl mercury are retained in tissues for very long periods
of time, and thus are more toxic.

Because it is not metabolized the remainder of the questions are moot.

Bryan

[Jason Johnson]

> Bryan,
> Thanks for telling us about your credentials. Perhaps you can answer these
> questions:
>
> I know that the largest group of drug-metabolizing enzymes is the
> cytochrome P450 system which accounts for the vast majority of drug
> metabolism. Do you know which cytochrome enzyme is responsible for
> metabolizing mercury?


Mercury is not metabolized; it is excreted. This is one of the reasons
why it is toxic - our bodies have no way to get rid of it other then by
excreting it (hair, feces and urine). The major difference between the
types of mercury is how long they linger in the body - thimerisal and
it's breakdown product (ethyl mercury) are readily excreted. Metallic
mercury and methyl mercury are retained in tissues for very long periods
of time, and thus are more toxic.

Because it is not metabolized the remainder of the questions are moot.

Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Thanks.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Jason Johnson]

> Mark,
> I was asking Bryan if he knew about any research that has been done on
> that issue. My memory is not perfect but seem to recall reading an article
> on the web on this subject that was written by Dr. Boyd Haley.

Well, that is a wonderful source. NOT!

Dr. Haley was recently sent packing by the US District Court:

http://www.neurodiversity.com/court/rhogam_decision.pdf

http://www.kevinleitch.co.uk/wp/index.php?p=393

You see, Haley comes up with a theory...and then promotes it as
science...and skips over the important part: PROVING IT HIMSELF.

It is HIS function to show it has merit. He has done nothing in this
regard.

I wanted
> to know if Bryan knew any other information about this interesting
> subject. For example, would it be possible to find out about defective
> enzymes by conducting blood tests? If so, perhaps articles were written
> about the conclusions. Just because Dr. Haley writes something--I don't
> believe it unless I determine from other sources that he was correct.

Good. However, the way you write, it seems otherwise.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Robert,
That's a good point. I have to be honest--When I read the article on the
web that was written by Dr. Boyd Haley--it seemed to make sense. However,
I realize that he has an agenda which is the reason I asked Bryan about
one of the points that Dr. Haley made in that article. It's great to know
that thimerosal is much less dangerous than other types of mercury since I
have had lots of vaccines during my life. Is thimerosal the type of
mercury used in dental fillings?--I hope so since I have had about lots of
dental fillings during my life.
I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
me.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Jason Johnson]

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jason, I have enjoyed reading this thread but find it difficult at times to
find you responses. Can you snip some, like your previous response to make
it easier? Thanks in advance, and thanks everyone for a pretty good debate
here. UM MOM Susan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Susan,
I'll try to remember. What should I do if a really large research report
is posted--should I delete it?
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Jason, I have enjoyed reading this thread but find it difficult at times to
> find you responses. Can you snip some, like your previous response to make
> it easier? Thanks in advance, and thanks everyone for a pretty good debate
> here. UM MOM Susan
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Susan,
> I'll try to remember. What should I do if a really large research report
> is posted--should I delete it?

How about getting a newsreader, there are free ones, which can let you
quote and comment in line, and all attributions are preserved.

What you are doing is annoying.

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
>
> > Mark,
> > I was asking Bryan if he knew about any research that has been done on
> > that issue. My memory is not perfect but seem to recall reading an article
> > on the web on this subject that was written by Dr. Boyd Haley.
>
> Well, that is a wonderful source. NOT!
>
> Dr. Haley was recently sent packing by the US District Court:
>
> http://www.neurodiversity.com/court/rhogam_decision.pdf
>
> http://www.kevinleitch.co.uk/wp/index.php?p=393
>
> You see, Haley comes up with a theory...and then promotes it as
> science...and skips over the important part: PROVING IT HIMSELF.
>
> It is HIS function to show it has merit. He has done nothing in this
> regard.
>
> I wanted
> > to know if Bryan knew any other information about this interesting
> > subject. For example, would it be possible to find out about defective
> > enzymes by conducting blood tests? If so, perhaps articles were written
> > about the conclusions. Just because Dr. Haley writes something--I don't
> > believe it unless I determine from other sources that he was correct.
>
> Good. However, the way you write, it seems otherwise.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Robert,

Try Mark...

> That's a good point. I have to be honest--When I read the article on the
> web that was written by Dr. Boyd Haley--it seemed to make sense.

That is what lured the courts into accepting Haley and Geier, until the
defense attorneys wised up and did a proper Daubert hearing. Now, they
do not survive them. As it should be.

However,
> I realize that he has an agenda which is the reason I asked Bryan about
> one of the points that Dr. Haley made in that article. It's great to know
> that thimerosal is much less dangerous than other types of mercury since I
> have had lots of vaccines during my life. Is thimerosal the type of
> mercury used in dental fillings?--I hope so since I have had about lots of
> dental fillings during my life.

Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than
Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam,
which is stable in your teeth.

> I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
> Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
> in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
> Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
> believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
> me.

[Jason Johnson]

Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than
Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam,
which is stable in your teeth.

> I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
> Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
> in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
> Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
> believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
> me.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I have noticed in almost every post related to this subject, that the
issue is thimerosal. Even those people that want thimerosal banned from
vaccines seem to only be concerned with thimerosal. For the sake of the
children, we should be just as concerned with Mercury in fish, wood
preservatives, paints, fungicides, cosmetics, foods and seeds. The types
of mercury in those sources is even more dangerous than the type of
mercury in thimerosal. Mercury poisoning is a known medical problem. Could
you explain why the focus is only related to thimerosal and NOT mercury
from other sources?
Jason

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Peter Bowditch]

(Jason Johnson) wrote:

>
> Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than
> Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam,
> which is stable in your teeth.
>
> > I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
> > Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
> > in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
> > Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
> > believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
> > me.
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>Mark,
>I have noticed in almost every post related to this subject, that the
>issue is thimerosal. Even those people that want thimerosal banned from
>vaccines seem to only be concerned with thimerosal. For the sake of the
>children, we should be just as concerned with Mercury in fish, wood
>preservatives, paints, fungicides, cosmetics, foods and seeds. The types
>of mercury in those sources is even more dangerous than the type of
>mercury in thimerosal. Mercury poisoning is a known medical problem. Could
>you explain why the focus is only related to thimerosal and NOT mercury
>from other sources?
>Jason
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Because most of the commentary is driven by anti-vaccination liars. To
them, all other sources of mercury are irrelevant, as all they want is
the banning of vaccinations. They couldn't care less about children
getting mercury from fish, because they couldn't care less about
children. Their agenda is vaccination, not fish. You can see this by
the way that they refuse to recognise that the form of mercury in fish
is the dangerous kind and the form which used to be in vaccines (but
isn't now) is quickly cleared from the body and has never been shown
to be harmful.
--
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

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than
> Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam,
> which is stable in your teeth.
>
> > I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
> > Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
> > in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
> > Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
> > believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
> > me.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Mark,
> I have noticed in almost every post related to this subject, that the
> issue is thimerosal. Even those people that want thimerosal banned from
> vaccines seem to only be concerned with thimerosal. For the sake of the
> children, we should be just as concerned with Mercury in fish, wood
> preservatives, paints, fungicides, cosmetics, foods and seeds. The types
> of mercury in those sources is even more dangerous than the type of
> mercury in thimerosal. Mercury poisoning is a known medical problem. Could
> you explain why the focus is only related to thimerosal and NOT mercury
> from other sources?

It is called 'political science'. The overwhelming majority of those who
receive vaccinations are children. The government requires them for
school attendance.

Now, in that setting, we find thimerosal. It is a convenient bogeyman
since the issue is not really thimerosal, but vaccinations. The
anti-vacs select a real scary disease, i.e., autism, and find ways to
link it to Thimerosal, to frighten people into questioning, and then
avoiding, vaccination.

What happened in England is instructive. There, some nitwit linked,
though bogus research, the MMR to Autism. Since he was smart enough to
know that the MMR never had thimerosal, he blamed the *triple* jab. IOW,
it was the vaccination overwhelming the child's immune system. It could
not be Thimerosal.

When that notion became popularized in the press, the rates of
immunization dropped, and they are now having serious outbreaks where
there had been none for years. Death of some, disability for others.
Illness for many.

All because it is about vaccination, not thimerosal.

Now, do not ask me why these people are opposed to vaccination. It would
be tantamount to asking me why Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy, et al,
did their nefarious deeds.

Note that the implications of the analogy are intended.

[Jason Johnson]

In article >, Peter Bowditch
> wrote:

(Jason Johnson) wrote:

>
> Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than
> Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam,
> which is stable in your teeth.
>
> > I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
> > Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
> > in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
> > Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
> > believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
> > me.
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>Mark,
>I have noticed in almost every post related to this subject, that the
>issue is thimerosal. Even those people that want thimerosal banned from
>vaccines seem to only be concerned with thimerosal. For the sake of the
>children, we should be just as concerned with Mercury in fish, wood
>preservatives, paints, fungicides, cosmetics, foods and seeds. The types
>of mercury in those sources is even more dangerous than the type of
>mercury in thimerosal. Mercury poisoning is a known medical problem. Could
>you explain why the focus is only related to thimerosal and NOT mercury
>from other sources?
>Jason
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Because most of the commentary is driven by anti-vaccination liars. To
them, all other sources of mercury are irrelevant, as all they want is
the banning of vaccinations. They couldn't care less about children
getting mercury from fish, because they couldn't care less about
children. Their agenda is vaccination, not fish. You can see this by
the way that they refuse to recognise that the form of mercury in fish
is the dangerous kind and the form which used to be in vaccines (but
isn't now) is quickly cleared from the body and has never been shown
to be harmful.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Peter,
Thanks for your post. It was helpful. My concern is for the children and
their concern is the banning of vaccinations. They do not appear to be
concerned with the children since vaccinations save lives.
Jason

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Jason Johnson]

In article >, Mark Probert
> wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
> Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than
> Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam,
> which is stable in your teeth.
>
> > I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
> > Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
> > in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
> > Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
> > believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
> > me.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Mark,
> I have noticed in almost every post related to this subject, that the
> issue is thimerosal. Even those people that want thimerosal banned from
> vaccines seem to only be concerned with thimerosal. For the sake of the
> children, we should be just as concerned with Mercury in fish, wood
> preservatives, paints, fungicides, cosmetics, foods and seeds. The types
> of mercury in those sources is even more dangerous than the type of
> mercury in thimerosal. Mercury poisoning is a known medical problem. Could
> you explain why the focus is only related to thimerosal and NOT mercury
> from other sources?

It is called 'political science'. The overwhelming majority of those who
receive vaccinations are children. The government requires them for
school attendance.

Now, in that setting, we find thimerosal. It is a convenient bogeyman
since the issue is not really thimerosal, but vaccinations. The
anti-vacs select a real scary disease, i.e., autism, and find ways to
link it to Thimerosal, to frighten people into questioning, and then
avoiding, vaccination.

What happened in England is instructive. There, some nitwit linked,
though bogus research, the MMR to Autism. Since he was smart enough to
know that the MMR never had thimerosal, he blamed the *triple* jab. IOW,
it was the vaccination overwhelming the child's immune system. It could
not be Thimerosal.

When that notion became popularized in the press, the rates of
immunization dropped, and they are now having serious outbreaks where
there had been none for years. Death of some, disability for others.
Illness for many.

All because it is about vaccination, not thimerosal.

Now, do not ask me why these people are opposed to vaccination. It would
be tantamount to asking me why Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy, et al,
did their nefarious deeds.

Note that the implications of the analogy are intended.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I believe that vaccinations are in important. I don't know why anyone
would be against vaccinations unless there was medical research indicating
that certain vaccinations were dangerous. Hopefully, once thimerosal is
removed from vaccines throughout the world, most people will turn their
backs on the anti-vac movement. Are there any specific vaccinations that
are deemed to be dangerous?
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> In article >, Peter Bowditch
> > wrote:
>
> (Jason Johnson) wrote:
>
> >
> > Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than
> > Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam,
> > which is stable in your teeth.
> >
> > > I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
> > > Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
> > > in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
> > > Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
> > > believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
> > > me.
> >
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >Mark,
> >I have noticed in almost every post related to this subject, that the
> >issue is thimerosal. Even those people that want thimerosal banned from
> >vaccines seem to only be concerned with thimerosal. For the sake of the
> >children, we should be just as concerned with Mercury in fish, wood
> >preservatives, paints, fungicides, cosmetics, foods and seeds. The types
> >of mercury in those sources is even more dangerous than the type of
> >mercury in thimerosal. Mercury poisoning is a known medical problem. Could
> >you explain why the focus is only related to thimerosal and NOT mercury
> >from other sources?
> >Jason
> >
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Because most of the commentary is driven by anti-vaccination liars. To
> them, all other sources of mercury are irrelevant, as all they want is
> the banning of vaccinations. They couldn't care less about children
> getting mercury from fish, because they couldn't care less about
> children. Their agenda is vaccination, not fish. You can see this by
> the way that they refuse to recognise that the form of mercury in fish
> is the dangerous kind and the form which used to be in vaccines (but
> isn't now) is quickly cleared from the body and has never been shown
> to be harmful.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Peter,
> Thanks for your post. It was helpful. My concern is for the children and
> their concern is the banning of vaccinations. They do not appear to be
> concerned with the children since vaccinations save lives.

You surely do have an uncanny grasp of the obvious (that was a compliment).

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> In article >, Mark Probert
> > wrote:
>
> Jason Johnson wrote:
> > Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than
> > Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam,
> > which is stable in your teeth.
> >
> > > I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of Heavy
> > > Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of mercury
> > > in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in thimersal.
> > > Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
> > > believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA agrees with
> > > me.
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Mark,
> > I have noticed in almost every post related to this subject, that the
> > issue is thimerosal. Even those people that want thimerosal banned from
> > vaccines seem to only be concerned with thimerosal. For the sake of the
> > children, we should be just as concerned with Mercury in fish, wood
> > preservatives, paints, fungicides, cosmetics, foods and seeds. The types
> > of mercury in those sources is even more dangerous than the type of
> > mercury in thimerosal. Mercury poisoning is a known medical problem. Could
> > you explain why the focus is only related to thimerosal and NOT mercury
> > from other sources?
>
> It is called 'political science'. The overwhelming majority of those who
> receive vaccinations are children. The government requires them for
> school attendance.
>
> Now, in that setting, we find thimerosal. It is a convenient bogeyman
> since the issue is not really thimerosal, but vaccinations. The
> anti-vacs select a real scary disease, i.e., autism, and find ways to
> link it to Thimerosal, to frighten people into questioning, and then
> avoiding, vaccination.
>
> What happened in England is instructive. There, some nitwit linked,
> though bogus research, the MMR to Autism. Since he was smart enough to
> know that the MMR never had thimerosal, he blamed the *triple* jab. IOW,
> it was the vaccination overwhelming the child's immune system. It could
> not be Thimerosal.
>
> When that notion became popularized in the press, the rates of
> immunization dropped, and they are now having serious outbreaks where
> there had been none for years. Death of some, disability for others.
> Illness for many.
>
> All because it is about vaccination, not thimerosal.
>
> Now, do not ask me why these people are opposed to vaccination. It would
> be tantamount to asking me why Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy, et al,
> did their nefarious deeds.
>
> Note that the implications of the analogy are intended.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Mark,
> I believe that vaccinations are in important. I don't know why anyone
> would be against vaccinations unless there was medical research indicating
> that certain vaccinations were dangerous.

Join the club. Thimerosal is a smokescreen issue.

Hopefully, once thimerosal is
> removed from vaccines throughout the world,

That is highly unlikely, simply because in third world countries, where
mass vaccination is needed, multidose vials are much more efficient and
they require thimerosal.

most people will turn their
> backs on the anti-vac movement. Are there any specific vaccinations that
> are deemed to be dangerous?

All vaccinations carry a small, but discreet risk. A child could be
allergic to eggs, or whatever. There could be an adverse reaction.

However, when the small risk is weighed against the far greater benefit,
the small risk is worth it.

While I never had the "usual childhood vaccines", as most were developed
subsequent to my childhood, I did have a full complement of adult
vaccines, including such fun ones as the bubonic plague vaccine. I had,
like many do, a site reaction which ached for weeks afterwards. I swore
I would never have it again.

18 months later I walked into a vil in Vietnam while providing security
for a MEDCAP visit. The stench of death was everywhere. One of the
medicos went into a hooch and found six bodies. The most recent one to
die still had visible blotching.

We evacuated the living, and cauterized the entire valley with white
phosphorous and napalm.

I decided that an achy arm was a small price to pay.

Today's military has it easier:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/theorderlyroom/l/blvaccinations.htm

[Jason Johnson]

All vaccinations carry a small, but discreet risk. A child could be
allergic to eggs, or whatever. There could be an adverse reaction.

However, when the small risk is weighed against the far greater benefit,
the small risk is worth it.

While I never had the "usual childhood vaccines", as most were developed
subsequent to my childhood, I did have a full complement of adult
vaccines, including such fun ones as the bubonic plague vaccine. I had,
like many do, a site reaction which ached for weeks afterwards. I swore
I would never have it again.

18 months later I walked into a vil in Vietnam while providing security
for a MEDCAP visit. The stench of death was everywhere. One of the
medicos went into a hooch and found six bodies. The most recent one to
die still had visible blotching.

We evacuated the living, and cauterized the entire valley with white
phosphorous and napalm.

I decided that an achy arm was a small price to pay.

Today's military has it easier:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/theorderlyroom/l/blvaccinations.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
There was an issue about two years ago about one of the newest vaccines.
Some of the members of the military died or developed serious health
problems as a result of taking the required vaccine. Some of the members
of the military refused to take the vaccine and I don't remember if they
were kicked out or won their battle. Since you were in the military--you
already know how difficult it is to refuse an order. Do you remember
anything about that vaccine?
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Jan Drew]

"Mark Probert" > wrote in message
...
> Jason Johnson wrote:
>> In article >, Mark Probert
>> > wrote:
>>
>> Jason Johnson wrote:
>> > Dental fillings use elemental mercury which is far more toxic than >
>> Thimerosal. That mercury is combined with silver, forming an amalgam, >
>> which is stable in your teeth.
>> > > > I should note that my concern related to the harmful effects of
>> Heavy
>> > > Metal Poisoning is for the children. I do believe that the type of
>> mercury
>> > > in fish is much more dangerous than the type of mercury in
>> thimersal.
>> > > Therefore, I have learned something from the various posts. I still
>> > > believe thimerosal should not be used in vaccines and the FDA
>> agrees with
>> > > me. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> > > Mark,
>> > I have noticed in almost every post related to this subject, that the
>> > issue is thimerosal. Even those people that want thimerosal banned
>> from
>> > vaccines seem to only be concerned with thimerosal. For the sake of
>> the
>> > children, we should be just as concerned with Mercury in fish, wood
>> > preservatives, paints, fungicides, cosmetics, foods and seeds. The
>> types
>> > of mercury in those sources is even more dangerous than the type of
>> > mercury in thimerosal. Mercury poisoning is a known medical problem.
>> Could
>> > you explain why the focus is only related to thimerosal and NOT
>> mercury
>> > from other sources?
>> It is called 'political science'. The overwhelming majority of those who
>> receive vaccinations are children. The government requires them for
>> school attendance.
>> Now, in that setting, we find thimerosal. It is a convenient bogeyman
>> since the issue is not really thimerosal, but vaccinations. The anti-vacs
>> select a real scary disease, i.e., autism, and find ways to link it to
>> Thimerosal, to frighten people into questioning, and then avoiding,
>> vaccination.
>> What happened in England is instructive. There, some nitwit linked,
>> though bogus research, the MMR to Autism. Since he was smart enough to
>> know that the MMR never had thimerosal, he blamed the *triple* jab. IOW,
>> it was the vaccination overwhelming the child's immune system. It could
>> not be Thimerosal.
>> When that notion became popularized in the press, the rates of
>> immunization dropped, and they are now having serious outbreaks where
>> there had been none for years. Death of some, disability for others.
>> Illness for many.
>> All because it is about vaccination, not thimerosal.
>> Now, do not ask me why these people are opposed to vaccination. It would
>> be tantamount to asking me why Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy, et al,
>> did their nefarious deeds.
>> Note that the implications of the analogy are intended.
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> Mark,
>> I believe that vaccinations are in important. I don't know why anyone
>> would be against vaccinations unless there was medical research
>> indicating
>> that certain vaccinations were dangerous.
>
> Join the club. Thimerosal is a smokescreen issue.
>
> Hopefully, once thimerosal is
>> removed from vaccines throughout the world,
>
> That is highly unlikely, simply because in third world countries, where
> mass vaccination is needed, multidose vials are much more efficient and
> they require thimerosal.
>
> most people will turn their
>> backs on the anti-vac movement. Are there any specific vaccinations that
>> are deemed to be dangerous?
>
> All vaccinations carry a small, but discreet risk. A child could be
> allergic to eggs, or whatever. There could be an adverse reaction.
>
> However, when the small risk is weighed against the far greater benefit,
> the small risk is worth it.

Like these small risks....

http://www.909shot.com/
>
<snip anecdote>

*Anecdotes can be made up. They teach how in the P.T. Barnum School Of
Internet Marketing, Scamming and MLMing.

Anecdotes are Bull****...

Anecdotes are bull**** and prove nothing.* Mark Probert.

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
>
> All vaccinations carry a small, but discreet risk. A child could be
> allergic to eggs, or whatever. There could be an adverse reaction.
>
> However, when the small risk is weighed against the far greater benefit,
> the small risk is worth it.
>
> While I never had the "usual childhood vaccines", as most were developed
> subsequent to my childhood, I did have a full complement of adult
> vaccines, including such fun ones as the bubonic plague vaccine. I had,
> like many do, a site reaction which ached for weeks afterwards. I swore
> I would never have it again.
>
> 18 months later I walked into a vil in Vietnam while providing security
> for a MEDCAP visit. The stench of death was everywhere. One of the
> medicos went into a hooch and found six bodies. The most recent one to
> die still had visible blotching.
>
> We evacuated the living, and cauterized the entire valley with white
> phosphorous and napalm.
>
> I decided that an achy arm was a small price to pay.
>
> Today's military has it easier:
>
> http://usmilitary.about.com/od/theorderlyroom/l/blvaccinations.htm
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Mark,
> There was an issue about two years ago about one of the newest vaccines.
> Some of the members of the military died or developed serious health
> problems as a result of taking the required vaccine. Some of the members
> of the military refused to take the vaccine and I don't remember if they
> were kicked out or won their battle. Since you were in the military--you
> already know how difficult it is to refuse an order. Do you remember
> anything about that vaccine?

IIRC, it was the anthrax vaccine. Some did have reactions, and, they
were expected, since the vaccine is known to cause reactions. At the
time, there was real concern over whether weaponized anthrax would be
used against our troops in the invasion of Iraq. SH had been shown after
Gulf I to have it, and the capability of making more. IMNSHO, the
military would have been castigated if they allowed the troops to invade
and then get hit with this deadly WMD. Only retrospectively do we know
that the fears were baseless.

That being said, refusing an order in the military is the shortest path
to a court martial, which constitutes a Federal criminal conviction. It
is not easy, and the few times I witnessed a serious refusal, I had
mixed feelings over whether the order should have been issued or not.

In one situation, I was utterly amazed at the order from a captain, and
spoke with the battalion CO about it. He agreed with me, and relieved
the captain. The subject of the order listened to me, and began carrying
it out. He was then told by the BnCO that he did not have to.

In RVN one newbie refused to board a helicopter on his first mission.
Our LT decided to assign him to KP, or something, and see what happened
the next time. The next time he went, and became one of the men you
could rely on. Another newbie, in the same circumstance, killed himself.

It is never easy.

[Jason Johnson]

> Mark,
> There was an issue about two years ago about one of the newest vaccines.
> Some of the members of the military died or developed serious health
> problems as a result of taking the required vaccine. Some of the members
> of the military refused to take the vaccine and I don't remember if they
> were kicked out or won their battle. Since you were in the military--you
> already know how difficult it is to refuse an order. Do you remember
> anything about that vaccine?

IIRC, it was the anthrax vaccine. Some did have reactions, and, they
were expected, since the vaccine is known to cause reactions. At the
time, there was real concern over whether weaponized anthrax would be
used against our troops in the invasion of Iraq. SH had been shown after
Gulf I to have it, and the capability of making more. IMNSHO, the
military would have been castigated if they allowed the troops to invade
and then get hit with this deadly WMD. Only retrospectively do we know
that the fears were baseless.

That being said, refusing an order in the military is the shortest path
to a court martial, which constitutes a Federal criminal conviction. It
is not easy, and the few times I witnessed a serious refusal, I had
mixed feelings over whether the order should have been issued or not.

In one situation, I was utterly amazed at the order from a captain, and
spoke with the battalion CO about it. He agreed with me, and relieved
the captain. The subject of the order listened to me, and began carrying
it out. He was then told by the BnCO that he did not have to.

In RVN one newbie refused to board a helicopter on his first mission.
Our LT decided to assign him to KP, or something, and see what happened
the next time. The next time he went, and became one of the men you
could rely on. Another newbie, in the same circumstance, killed himself.

It is never easy.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
It is agreed--it is never easy. I doubt that will I ever forget the story
of a young man in the military that truly loved his country so he joined
the military. He was ordered to become a member of a U.N. security force
and wear a special uniform. His commander would have been a man from some
country other than U.S.A. He refused to wear that uniform. He was given a
court martial. They interviewed his father on a radio show and I heard the
interview. That young man did not join the U.N. and he should NOT have
been ordered or forced to become a member of a U.N. security force and
serve under a commander from a foreign country. Do you agree that young
man was mis-treated by the military?
Back to the issue: I don't believe that members of the military should
have been ordered to take the anthrax vaccine. Did it contain thimerosal?
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> > Mark,
> > There was an issue about two years ago about one of the newest vaccines.
> > Some of the members of the military died or developed serious health
> > problems as a result of taking the required vaccine. Some of the members
> > of the military refused to take the vaccine and I don't remember if they
> > were kicked out or won their battle. Since you were in the military--you
> > already know how difficult it is to refuse an order. Do you remember
> > anything about that vaccine?
>
> IIRC, it was the anthrax vaccine. Some did have reactions, and, they
> were expected, since the vaccine is known to cause reactions. At the
> time, there was real concern over whether weaponized anthrax would be
> used against our troops in the invasion of Iraq. SH had been shown after
> Gulf I to have it, and the capability of making more. IMNSHO, the
> military would have been castigated if they allowed the troops to invade
> and then get hit with this deadly WMD. Only retrospectively do we know
> that the fears were baseless.
>
> That being said, refusing an order in the military is the shortest path
> to a court martial, which constitutes a Federal criminal conviction. It
> is not easy, and the few times I witnessed a serious refusal, I had
> mixed feelings over whether the order should have been issued or not.
>
> In one situation, I was utterly amazed at the order from a captain, and
> spoke with the battalion CO about it. He agreed with me, and relieved
> the captain. The subject of the order listened to me, and began carrying
> it out. He was then told by the BnCO that he did not have to.
>
> In RVN one newbie refused to board a helicopter on his first mission.
> Our LT decided to assign him to KP, or something, and see what happened
> the next time. The next time he went, and became one of the men you
> could rely on. Another newbie, in the same circumstance, killed himself.
>
> It is never easy.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Mark,
> It is agreed--it is never easy. I doubt that will I ever forget the story
> of a young man in the military that truly loved his country so he joined
> the military. He was ordered to become a member of a U.N. security force
> and wear a special uniform. His commander would have been a man from some
> country other than U.S.A. He refused to wear that uniform. He was given a
> court martial. They interviewed his father on a radio show and I heard the
> interview. That young man did not join the U.N. and he should NOT have
> been ordered or forced to become a member of a U.N. security force and
> serve under a commander from a foreign country. Do you agree that young
> man was mis-treated by the military?

If the story is as you say it was, yes.

> Back to the issue: I don't believe that members of the military should
> have been ordered to take the anthrax vaccine.

Disagree, for the reasons stated.

Did it contain thimerosal?

no idea.

[Jason Johnson]

> Mark,
> It is agreed--it is never easy. I doubt that will I ever forget the story
> of a young man in the military that truly loved his country so he joined
> the military. He was ordered to become a member of a U.N. security force
> and wear a special uniform. His commander would have been a man from some
> country other than U.S.A. He refused to wear that uniform. He was given a
> court martial. They interviewed his father on a radio show and I heard the
> interview. That young man did not join the U.N. and he should NOT have
> been ordered or forced to become a member of a U.N. security force and
> serve under a commander from a foreign country. Do you agree that young
> man was mis-treated by the military?

If the story is as you say it was, yes.

> Back to the issue: I don't believe that members of the military should
> have been ordered to take the anthrax vaccine.

Disagree, for the reasons stated.

>> Did it contain thimerosal?

no idea.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I believe that the risks should have been explained to the troops related
to the dangers of getting anthrax. The troops should have been allowed to
take or not take the vaccine.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
> > Mark,
> > It is agreed--it is never easy. I doubt that will I ever forget the story
> > of a young man in the military that truly loved his country so he joined
> > the military. He was ordered to become a member of a U.N. security force
> > and wear a special uniform. His commander would have been a man from some
> > country other than U.S.A. He refused to wear that uniform. He was given a
> > court martial. They interviewed his father on a radio show and I heard the
> > interview. That young man did not join the U.N. and he should NOT have
> > been ordered or forced to become a member of a U.N. security force and
> > serve under a commander from a foreign country. Do you agree that young
> > man was mis-treated by the military?
>
> If the story is as you say it was, yes.
>
> > Back to the issue: I don't believe that members of the military should
> > have been ordered to take the anthrax vaccine.
>
> Disagree, for the reasons stated.
>
> >> Did it contain thimerosal?
>
> no idea.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Mark,
> I believe that the risks should have been explained to the troops related
> to the dangers of getting anthrax. The troops should have been allowed to
> take or not take the vaccine.

The problem with that is that the first military use of it would have
decimated the units and resulted in making the units unfit for
deployment. The military is NOT civilian life, and has different
priorities.

Refusal is referred to as rendering oneself unfit for combat, and, is
subject to court martial.

BTW, GWB did the same thing, i.e., rendered himself unfit for combat,
and was transferred, not court martialed.

[Jason Johnson]

In article >, Mark Probert
> wrote:


> Mark,
> I believe that the risks should have been explained to the troops related
> to the dangers of getting anthrax. The troops should have been allowed to
> take or not take the vaccine.

The problem with that is that the first military use of it would have
decimated the units and resulted in making the units unfit for
deployment. The military is NOT civilian life, and has different
priorities.

Refusal is referred to as rendering oneself unfit for combat, and, is
subject to court martial.

BTW, GWB did the same thing, i.e., rendered himself unfit for combat,
and was transferred, not court martialed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
I understand the reason why the members of the military were ordered
to take the vaccine. If the vaccine had been tested and proved to not cause
any serious side effects, I doubt if anyone (including myself) would have had
any problems when members of military were ordered to take the anthrax vaccine.
The problem was that the anthrax vaccine was not tested in the same way
that other vaccines were tested. That's the reason that lots of members of
the military refused to take it. I don't blame them for refusing to take
the anthrax vaccine. I seem to recall reading that they won that battle in
court and no longer have to take the anthrax vaccine unless they request
it. I still wonder if those members of the military were used to test the
new vaccine. I hope that I am wrong. Members of our military should not be
used as labortory rats to test out new vaccines and drugs. Were members of
the military used to test LSD? If anyone remembers that story--please
post.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mark Probert]

Jason Johnson wrote:
If anyone remembers that story--please
> post.

Jason, you seem to have an aversion to doing your own research. Work on it.

[Jason Johnson]

In article >, Mark Probert
> wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
If anyone remembers that story--please
> post.

Jason, you seem to have an aversion to doing your own research. Work on it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
You are correct--once again. I have a dial up connection and an old
computer. It takes forever to visit dozens of different websites. I
usually only visit the web to find one site that someone refers me to.
Several days ago, I done a google search for "causes of autism". I must
have visited at least a dozen different websites and never did find an
excellent study on the subject. It must have taken at least 4O minutes.
The scientists still are not 100% sure related to the exact cause of
autism. Now you know why I hate conducting research on the web. I am like
my lazy neighbor that is always trying to get other neighbors to do
projects for him. Just do what I do--say "NO--do your own projects."
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~