Re: Wake Up Call For Sue


Rich.@. wrote:
> On 24 Oct 2005 19:19:05 -0700, "Clinton" <clintonz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >Furthermore you seem to have overlooked that one of the symptoms
> >of Hg posioning is madness and permanent neruological damage.
> >Your logic would be like me telling a drunk, I don't think you
> >are inebriated, your slur your words so you must be crazy. when
> >you talk to me in a clearheaded and sober manner then i will believe
> >your story about being drunk! You can't have it both
> >ways Sue,
>
> Well if you are as mad as a hatter then we cannot take you seriously
> in any case. Maybe the details of your history are so inaccurate as a
> result of permanent neurological damage that it cannot be trusted. You
> cannot have it both ways either. It is Catch 22

According to your reasoning then, someone who posts calmly over a long
period of time, who claims to suffer from Hg posioning MUST be a fraud
if you can never take a calm poster seriously "in any case"!

Actually chronic Hg is more likely to effect personality and certain
complex cognative skills (which would be difficult to measure on the
internet) than long term memory, so you are showing your unfamiliarity
with the issue. (By the way my spelling was always
bad so that wasn't caused by Hg).

Hg would however probably cause a marked change in the tone and
complexity of a poster, IF you had been familiar with that persons
posts before they were affected by Hg. Hg can also cause someone
to act in a repetative or "circular" manner. Mad hatters could
do the work but they would waste all day arguing with the boss.

Based on my experience, i wouldn't expect someone to
come across as a lunatic because of Hg, unless they were badly
affected. I have seen some people go nearly crazy on some amalgam lists
though, especially if they use DMPS incorrectly.


PS- in another thread you said your aquiantence couldn't be
suffering from Hg toxicty because they had low levels of hg in
the urine from approved labs. That is false. I posted a peer
reviewed article from the bulltien of environmental toxicology
3 or 4 times where they explained that very low values are in
fact INDICATIVE of retention toxiciy so neither the false
positive or the negative tests proved anything.

.

Quantcast