CSK:

You said...

---
Lets just say, that why is it that almost all the names you provided have been discreditted in courts of law and amongst the scientific community.
---

It is true that a few have (not "almost all", as you stated), but what does that have to do with the integrity of their papers and their scientific work which you seem to be determined not to read?

Courts are often poor judges of science and are used to promote political issues in medicine and in other disciplines. (Please read the book entitled Racketeering in Medicine and you'll understand the scope of this issue, which is another huge issue in and of itself.)

Mercury and vaccines are a very *political* (money-making) issues, and that's why they've been in the courts with any frequency.

Again, if you're familiar with history, numerous predominant figures of change were crucified by law until there views eventually became "accepted as self-evident". This is an age-old pattern and a study of history will reveal this to you.

***
It is often the true charlatans that persecute the heros.
***

This is why the following saying holds such truth:

---
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

—Arthur Schopenhauer,
19th Century Philosopher
---

You can say all you wish about the people but have you read the research? If so, exactly what about them is wrong?

I'm trying to help people and I put in time doing it. I need to know which are the flawed studies? Please.


You said...

---
Do you want me to start posting these links in there entirety not just snipets of people who still have their licenses. Or will you look for it yourself.
---

Again, a moot point, although exaggerated—probably for emotional effect—makes poor scientific arguments.

Why don't you just read the research for yourself?


You said...

---
Since amalgam has been used for over 150 years Im still waitning on the epidemic to occur.
---

Is this your idea of scientific evidence?

This is a favorite statistic of the ADA, but is this the kind of evidence you use to come to conclusions? I most certainly hope not.

The ADA obviously uses it to invoke emotional confidence in their position, and they need it because position cannot be backed up scientifically, except by a few special-interest papers. Certainly not by the majority literature; not by a log shot.

Do you know how the incidence of mercury placement has increased over the years; That the placement was not linear, nor was the increase in diseases of certain type. You see, it's more complex than these anecdotal statements you make can bear.

Do you know the mechanisms that cause boys to have 4-times more autism than girls?

Do you know how mercury affects homocysteine? And do you know what high homocysteine leads to?

Do you know what mercury does to DHT (dihydrotestosterone) levels and in turn, how that affects humans?

I really hope you don't rely on the ADA's blatently misleading statistic about 150 years as evidence for placing mercury in the mouths of people.

That's simply poor and devisive emotionalism and the ADA should be ashamed of it's tactics. Furthermore, you should not be quoting it until you understand more about the history of amalgam. You're going to end up looking foolish.


You said...

---
Although I do find it funny that one of your so called researchers on their website who says that vaccines are bad says that if there happens to be an epidemic well then hey maybe you should get the vaccine then.
---

Again, you're grossely oversimplifying the doctor's position. Of course, you really don't even know what that position is.

Honestly, you're drawing very hasty conclusions and would do well to hear the doctor out.

I can only serve as a witness to you—and I have—that the information that the doctor draws out of the research from your peers is outstanding. What you decide to do with the information I've provided helps determine how much you really know or don't know about what your peers are saying.

Truly, if you heard the doctor out, you would be ashamed of your current position (unless your pride prevented it).

The vaccine issue is like the mercury issue, it is complex, but there are simple solutions that are being denied and resisted by the mainstream. The reasons for this become apparent when the positions and papers from various organizations are studied, and numerous people are doing just that.

In a very short time, you'll be standing with a vast minority.