Mercury

[Guest guest]

TOXIC MERCURY

Mercury in all forms; either the metal,

the inorganic compounds or the organomercury compounds are toxic,

very toxic or exquisitely toxic.

The metal itself is unreactive and so

harm comes from continuous exposures such as mercury fillings, which

we know form mercury sulphide, which makes the surface black, powdery

and liable to erode away into the body causing toxic harm.

Inorganic mercury compounds have a

range of toxicity but can be lethal from 0.01 grams to 3 grams

depending on which salt it is and how it is ingested.

Animal studies are not helpful in many

cases, as they suggest possibly ingestion of 50 grams is possible to

tolerate in humans. Clearly absurd.

Organic mercury compounds are again

much more toxic even than the inorganic salts.

Also in comparison to lead, the mercury

is much more toxic and the elimination of lead from petrol has

produced great benefits to the health of town children. Elimination

of mercury will do the same if we are intelligent enough to give up

ingesting mercury by deliberately and unnecessarily adding it to

babies vaccine.

This elimination of mercury has however

got stuck in a rut with arguments that eating fish is likely to be

the worst mercury toxic insult you face and that the benefits of

eating fish far outweigh the dangers.

We are therfore at the same stumbling

block that faced the scientists struggling to get lead removed. We

see harm in our fish, so we ignore the problems of mercury elsewhere

that are seen as minor in comparison. A dangerous and fatally simple

view. For babies especially!

The inevitability of mercury in fish is

no reason we should not be VERY worried about other avoidable lesser

exposures, especially when the exposures are mostly of concern to

babies only. Adults do not drop dead after vaccines with mercury,

does not mean you give lots of mercury vaccines to babies ten times

less heavy. Levels of mercury everywhere have risen over generations

and today for example, no fish from American rivers are recommended

for consumption simply because of mercury content.

Thousands of tons of mercury are used

every year in dental work; the mercury supply for vaccines has

increased year by year and only by stopping the use of mercury

everywhere can we expect to see the mercury levels in fish decrease.

People arguing over the toxicity of

this mercury compound or that mercury compound or using the argument

that fish provides the worst exposure to mercury is IGNORING harm.

The process to get back to safe levels

is not going to be easy and won't happen overnight, when we see

reason and take POSITIVE action.

The level of concern for organomercury

in 1999 added to the final, ready to use, vaccine more than 12 years

ago was to phase it out. Today, not only has that policy been

reversed but expensive research has been paid for to show the toxic

knowledge of decades ago is faulty. In this respect retired chemists

have been paid more than they ever earned in employment to rewrite

and reverse their own life work on the exquisite harm from mercury.

This finally met with a sharp rebuke

when Bayer tried to get its mercury products regraded to be not so

dangerous as thought. They were reminded of the carcinogenic,

mutagenic, teratogenic nature of ALL mercury compounds in a very

damning document.

The 0.02 gram toxic level for mercury

compounds is that of SUDDEN DEATH, the same mode of death in EVERY

way to SIDS, SUID, Cot Death or whatever pseudonym you like for an

iatrogenic death where no blame is allowed to fall on the medical

profession, regulators or government. Evidently, the repeated

injection of organomercury into babies as little as one day of age

does not cause sudden death, does not cause long term illness, nor

does it cause any adverse effect. Ex heads of CDC now moving into new

government departments at the highest level are on record even in

2011 of proclaiming injecting NEUROTOXIC chemicals into the unborn

child does not elicit harm or ANY adverse effect. Not simply a

political statement but a very stupid one, not entirely believed by

intelligent people but is believed by those certain their regulators,

their government and their doctors would not HARM them.

The concern of industry MUST be based

on the almighty dollar and not ALMIGHTY retribution for their acts.

Many vaccine companies that did have consciences went out of business

a LONG time ago.

The harm from mercury is NORMALLY, not

immediate death. Death has been tested for after as little as three

hours or up to a month or so after mercury exposure. Rarely have

lethal amounts been measured over longer terms because of inherent

difficulty. SIDS is sidestepped as easily as explaining people that

die after their morning cuppa. Simply DAFT.

When looking at non-lethal harm, the

levels are much lower and still disputed. However, the nature of such

actions will be at the molecular level so that there is no lower

level for adverse effects. Levels quoted are just REFERNCE levels as

harm cannot be ruled out and ZERO levels of anything is difficult on

a polluted planet. Fish for example do not have mercury fillings or

mercury vaccines but are massively polluted with mercury even on the

high seas.

The contorsions of vaccine makers,

regulators in devising that organomercury vaccines are safe involves

reducing levels in a new round that began decades ago. You cannot

escape risk unless you go down to ZERO. In 2011, not only is this not

envisaged but the old level of the last half of the 20th

century has been returned to and in addition exposure is to infants

in the womb where even vaccine makers will not guarantee to be free

from harm.

The fetal deaths reported to VAERS

which averaged one per year have risen in the last few years to 179

reports per year. In a complex world, nothing is certain except that

fetal death is not limited to this low number but is at high levels

which cause concern even if not caused by mercury.

Mercury is a very toxic element

dangerous to all forms of life made safe only by arguments of logic

that it is a risk worth taking.

In fact with cremations, the risk is

rising to the levels where it is now monitored all over the planet;

in our air as well as in the sea and land. Its characteristics over

the poles are ENTIRELY consistent with its effect on producing the

OZONE HOLE but to date no one has informed the public that this is a

major role in the production of the hole but explains why after drops

in organofluorine the hole is not only bigger but is now enlarging

year by year the hole over the north pole where there was no hole

before.

Toxins are all around us, are of

industry and government making and while it is possible to design

experiments proving mercury is not harming us, we ignore total

effects of all toxic substances and are facing rises in illness

already financially too much, except to leave people ruined

financially as well as from the health point of view.

Toxic mercury level is only accepted

because we choose to accept it.

There is no reason to allow anyone to

deliberately poison us when it is avoidable but somehow we do ALLOW

it. The idea od prove it is absurd. No one can prove anything to a

100 per cent certainty but to take NEUROTOXINS as being NEUROTOXIC is

a practical, common sense and entirely REASONABLE view.

First they mercury poisoned our babies

in the first SIX MONTHS.

Today, they mercury poison the UNBORN

CHILD.

What Next?

TOXIC MERCURY

December 2011