Re: Is Ethyl Mercury Compounded Mercury?

[Guest guest]

Mercury is mercury

and a duck is a duck

and a spade is a spade

or do we have ro re-invent the wheel..

Donna, he's a head of department...he needs grants and subsidies to keep

going.....and he needs to keep the donors happy.. what more can I say....

;.)

[ ] Is Ethyl Mercury Compounded Mercury?

> Over a year ago, I called one of our state universities to try to

determine if mercury was the second or third most dangerous elements known

to man. I'd read both but only read of plutonium as being identified as the

most dangerous and wanted to know what was in second and third place. We

were in the process of fighting the construction of a coal-fired power plant

two miles from our home and I wanted to be accurate in our assertions of its

level of toxicity. I spoke with the head of the chemistry department of

this university - which, by the way, had a chemistry professor who had just

won a Nobel prize. After explaining the nature of my call, the head of the

chemistry department informed me that you could not describe all forms of

mercury as being dangerous and that elemental mercury is perfectly safe

contrary to public opinion and hysteria. He even said you could safely

drink it with no repercussions. (No, I did not ask for a demonstration.)

He said mercury is harmful, however, in compounded forms and in vapor form.

I asked him if ethyl mercury was compounded and he replied yes, that it was

very dangerous and could be found in fish. I told him it was my

understanding that methyl mercury is what is found in fish so then he said

that it was methyl and not ethyl then that was highly toxic and he didn't

know about ethyl mercury.

>

> Because this is what chemistry students are being taught in my state of

Virginia, I need to know if ethyl mercury is considered to be compounded

mercury. I am working on letters to the editor regarding the recent IOM

report and want to be able to represent this accurately. I know there is

plenty to debunk the IOM findings absent this distinction and will hit on

those issues also but I really want to know the answer to this question.

>

> Thanks

> DJ

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

It should be noted that this research study compared equal doses of

methylmercury and thimerosal. However, thimerosal is only 1/2 mercury

(ethylmercury), so the authors should have compared 1/2 dose

thimerosal

with 1 dose methylmercury. The conclusion would then be that

ethylmercury is equally potent to methylmercury in increasing Ca2++.

The

study also says that unlike methylmercury (which is usually bound to

cysteine in a cell) thimerosal's potency is unaffected by presence of

L-cysteine in the neuron, so under in vivo conditions the effects of

ethylmercury are likely greater (by a factor or 2) than methyl.

Finally,

the study shows that thimerosal is more potent than methyl in

decreasing

glutathione levels in the cell, which is what other researchers

have/are

finding as well.

wrote:

> Methyl-mercury, usually from contaminated food, is very dangerous

to

> pregnant women. Methyl-mercury causes profound mental retardation,

> cerebral

> palsy, seizures, spasticity, tremors, and incoordination, along

with

> eye and

> hearing damage in the unborn baby as a result of the mother's

> exposure.

> Organic mercury passes into the breast milk as well.

>

>

>

> The effect of thimerosal, an organomercurial preservative in

> vaccines, on cerebellar neurons dissociated from 2-week-old rats

was

> compared with those of methylmercury using a flow cytometer with

> appropriate fluorescent dyes. Thimerosal and methylmercury at

> concentrations ranging from 0.3 to 10 microM increased the

> intracellular concentration of Ca2+ ([Ca2+]i) in a concentration-

> dependent manner. The potency of 10 microM thimerosal to increase

> the [Ca2+]i was less than that of 10 microM methylmercury. Their

> effects on the [Ca2+]i were greatly attenuated, but not completely

> suppressed, under external Ca(2+)-free condition, suggesting a

> possibility that both agents increase membrane Ca2+ permeability

and

> release Ca2+ from intracellular calcium stores. The effect of 10

> microM thimerosal was not affected by simultaneous application of

30

> microM L-cysteine whereas that of 10 microM methylmercury was

> significantly suppressed. The potency of thimerosal was similar to

> that of methylmercury in the presence of L-cysteine. Both agents

at

> 1 microM or more similarly decreased the cellular content of

> glutathione in a concentration-dependent manner, suggesting an

> increase in oxidative stress. Results indicate that thimerosal

> exerts some cytotoxic actions on cerebellar granule neurons

> dissociated from 2-week-old rats and its potency is almost similar

> to that of methylmercury.

> Over a year ago, I called one of our state universities to try to

determine if mercury was the second or third most dangerous elements

known to man. I'd read both but only read of plutonium as being

identified as the most dangerous and wanted to know what was in

second and third place. We were in the process of fighting the

construction of a coal-fired power plant two miles from our home and

I wanted to be accurate in our assertions of its level of toxicity.

I spoke with the head of the chemistry department of this

university - which, by the way, had a chemistry professor who had

just won a Nobel prize. After explaining the nature of my call, the

head of the chemistry department informed me that you could not

describe all forms of mercury as being dangerous and that elemental

mercury is perfectly safe contrary to public opinion and hysteria.

He even said you could safely drink it with no repercussions. (No,

I did not ask for a demonstration.) He said mercury is harmful,

however, in compounded forms and in vapor form. I asked him if

ethyl mercury was compounded and he replied yes, that it was very

dangerous and could be found in fish. I told him it was my

understanding that methyl mercury is what is found in fish so then

he said that it was methyl and not ethyl then that was highly toxic

and he didn't know about ethyl mercury.

>

> Because this is what chemistry students are being taught in my

state of Virginia, I need to know if ethyl mercury is considered to

be compounded mercury. I am working on letters to the editor

regarding the recent IOM report and want to be able to represent

this accurately. I know there is plenty to debunk the IOM findings

absent this distinction and will hit on those issues also but I

really want to know the answer to this question.

>

> Thanks

> DJ

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I was just wondering what part of VA you are in. I am considering a move to VA

to get out of an area of AL which has a cholorine plant, a coal powered utility

plant, and a ceramic tile manufacture (which has been cited before for lead and

various other things). I don't want to go into the frying pan out of the fire

so to speak.

Thanks,

Barbara

Moppett@... wrote:

Mercury is mercury

and a duck is a duck

and a spade is a spade

or do we have ro re-invent the wheel..

Donna, he's a head of department...he needs grants and subsidies to keep

going.....and he needs to keep the donors happy.. what more can I say....

;.)

[ ] Is Ethyl Mercury Compounded Mercury?

> Over a year ago, I called one of our state universities to try to

determine if mercury was the second or third most dangerous elements known

to man. I'd read both but only read of plutonium as being identified as the

most dangerous and wanted to know what was in second and third place. We

were in the process of fighting the construction of a coal-fired power plant

two miles from our home and I wanted to be accurate in our assertions of its

level of toxicity. I spoke with the head of the chemistry department of

this university - which, by the way, had a chemistry professor who had just

won a Nobel prize. After explaining the nature of my call, the head of the

chemistry department informed me that you could not describe all forms of

mercury as being dangerous and that elemental mercury is perfectly safe

contrary to public opinion and hysteria. He even said you could safely

drink it with no repercussions. (No, I did not ask for a demonstration.)

He said mercury is harmful, however, in compounded forms and in vapor form.

I asked him if ethyl mercury was compounded and he replied yes, that it was

very dangerous and could be found in fish. I told him it was my

understanding that methyl mercury is what is found in fish so then he said

that it was methyl and not ethyl then that was highly toxic and he didn't

know about ethyl mercury.

>

> Because this is what chemistry students are being taught in my state of

Virginia, I need to know if ethyl mercury is considered to be compounded

mercury. I am working on letters to the editor regarding the recent IOM

report and want to be able to represent this accurately. I know there is

plenty to debunk the IOM findings absent this distinction and will hit on

those issues also but I really want to know the answer to this question.

>

> Thanks

> DJ

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Ethyl mercury is compounded. Amazing how ingnorant so many physicians are on

this material (Thimersol). They get to charge lots of $ and don't have to be

aware of all findings in their industry like the rest of us. The hippocritic

oath.

[ ] Is Ethyl Mercury Compounded Mercury?

> Over a year ago, I called one of our state universities to try to

determine if mercury was the second or third most dangerous elements known

to man. I'd read both but only read of plutonium as being identified as the

most dangerous and wanted to know what was in second and third place. We

were in the process of fighting the construction of a coal-fired power plant

two miles from our home and I wanted to be accurate in our assertions of its

level of toxicity. I spoke with the head of the chemistry department of

this university - which, by the way, had a chemistry professor who had just

won a Nobel prize. After explaining the nature of my call, the head of the

chemistry department informed me that you could not describe all forms of

mercury as being dangerous and that elemental mercury is perfectly safe

contrary to public opinion and hysteria. He even said you could safely

drink it with no repercussions. (No, I did not ask for a demonstration.)

He said mercury is harmful, however, in compounded forms and in vapor form.

I asked him if ethyl mercury was compounded and he replied yes, that it was

very dangerous and could be found in fish. I told him it was my

understanding that methyl mercury is what is found in fish so then he said

that it was methyl and not ethyl then that was highly toxic and he didn't

know about ethyl mercury.

>

> Because this is what chemistry students are being taught in my state of

Virginia, I need to know if ethyl mercury is considered to be compounded

mercury. I am working on letters to the editor regarding the recent IOM

report and want to be able to represent this accurately. I know there is

plenty to debunk the IOM findings absent this distinction and will hit on

those issues also but I really want to know the answer to this question.

>

> Thanks

> DJ

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

This was written to me by a chemist.

Mercury compounds are much more toxic than the metal, because they

are

much more reactive, especially the more volatile compounds like

dimethylmercury. The metal itself is rather inert chemically - it

dissolves only in strong oxidizing acids like HNO3 - and has its most

dangerous toxic effects only on prolonged contact with the body,

e.g. if

it is ingested or the vapor inhaled, because of the time it takes for

microbial action to convert it to organometallic compounds like

dimethylmercury.

As for an antidote for mercury poisoning, if ingested: the most

effective ones are probably those containing -SH or -S-S- groups,

i.e.

organic mercaptans and disulfides, and elemental sulfur, because of

the

strong affinity that sulfur (also selenium) as the element or in its

lowest oxidation state has for mercury. Such compounds include garlic

oil (mostly allyl mercaptan and sulfide), and proteins containing a

high

propotion of cystine and cysteine e.g. hair protein.

> Ethyl mercury is compounded. Amazing how ingnorant so many

physicians are on this material (Thimersol). They get to charge

lots of $ and don't have to be aware of all findings in their

industry like the rest of us. The hippocritic oath.

> [ ] Is Ethyl Mercury Compounded Mercury?

>

>

> > Over a year ago, I called one of our state universities to try

to

> determine if mercury was the second or third most dangerous

elements known

> to man. I'd read both but only read of plutonium as being

identified as the

> most dangerous and wanted to know what was in second and third

place. We

> were in the process of fighting the construction of a coal-fired

power plant

> two miles from our home and I wanted to be accurate in our

assertions of its

> level of toxicity. I spoke with the head of the chemistry

department of

> this university - which, by the way, had a chemistry professor

who had just

> won a Nobel prize. After explaining the nature of my call, the

head of the

> chemistry department informed me that you could not describe all

forms of

> mercury as being dangerous and that elemental mercury is

perfectly safe

> contrary to public opinion and hysteria. He even said you could

safely

> drink it with no repercussions. (No, I did not ask for a

demonstration.)

> He said mercury is harmful, however, in compounded forms and in

vapor form.

> I asked him if ethyl mercury was compounded and he replied yes,

that it was

> very dangerous and could be found in fish. I told him it was my

> understanding that methyl mercury is what is found in fish so

then he said

> that it was methyl and not ethyl then that was highly toxic and

he didn't

> know about ethyl mercury.

> >

> > Because this is what chemistry students are being taught in my

state of

> Virginia, I need to know if ethyl mercury is considered to be

compounded

> mercury. I am working on letters to the editor regarding the

recent IOM

> report and want to be able to represent this accurately. I know

there is

> plenty to debunk the IOM findings absent this distinction and

will hit on

> those issues also but I really want to know the answer to this

question.

> >

> > Thanks

> > DJ

> >

> >

> >