06 Dec 2008, 5:40 pm
08 Dec 2008, 11:56 am
*bookmarks*
That's interesting. 
Can't really add anything of substance since I know little about the subject, but I'll keep it in mind. xD
familiar_stranger
Veteran
Joined: 5 Nov 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 653
Location: cambridgeshire UK
08 Dec 2008, 12:36 pm
so now we have genetic and environmental risks when it comes to neurological impairments, i'm not claiming to be a scientist but i knew years back that mercury can cause brain damage
does this mean we're all clased as 'brain damaged'?
_________________
most people think i'm a bit strange, even abnormal. normal is the majority, the average, what is most frequent. if you lived around here, you'll see the positive of not being normal
08 Dec 2008, 4:03 pm
Be careful, while mercury is toxic always bear in mind that just becuase someone can be measured does not mean it is harmful to health.
Pyrex glass contains uranium at trace levels, uranium dissolves nicely in carbonate rich systems but if you drink fizzy pop poured from a brand new pyrex glass bottle being used for the first time you will not damage our kidneys with the super small amount of uranium.
Also unpolluted sea water has trace levels of uranium, if you swallow a mouthful of sea water you will not get uranium poisoning.
The same thing applies to other metals, many toxic metals can be found at low (and unthreatening levels in food and drinks) it does not mean that they are a threat to people. On the other hand high levels of mercury in fish is very dangerous to humans, in japan mercury in fish caused a large number of deaths some years ago.
I would say that mercury levels in food should be kept low, but we should not go and ban all fish just becuase there are a few atoms of mercury in a big lump of tuna. I would suggest that we should trust the WHO to set a sensible mercury limit for foodstuffs.
_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity
I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man ! Diagnosed under the DSM5 rules with autism spectrum disorder, under DSM4 psychologist said would have been AS (299.80) but I suspect that I am somewhere between 299.80 and 299.00 (Autism) under DSM4.
