Troll's view on mercury

Once again the trolls want to fight over something they know nothing about.  One troll in particular has been following me around Curezone attacking me on various forums.  His recent games have involved mercury, which he is claiming is the most common cause of various diseases/disorders including adrenal dysfunction, hyper and hypothyroidism, etc.  I have copied his latest text below because I am not going to engage in long debates on someone else's forum.  It is not very respectful to them to do so.
 

Hveragerthi: LOL!!!  Mercury does not increase estrogen 

Troll:  Of course it does. And in many ways: (a) accumulation in the endocrine system; (b) specific cytotoxicity in endocrine tissues; (c) changes in hormone concentrations; (d) interactions with sex hormones; and (e) up-regulation or down-regulation of enzymes within the steroidogenesis pathway. 

"The endocrine effects of mercury in humans and wildlife"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19280433

Clearly you did not understand what that abstract said.  Not only does it not back your claims their are parts of it that can interpreted as being the exact opposite of your claims.  Copying words from the internet and posting them does not mean you have provided evidence to anything.  You need to actually understand what you posted so you know if it backs your claims or not.  In this case it DOES NOT.

For example, there is this study, which shows mercury is actually an anti-estrogen, just the opposite of your claims:

http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info:doi/10.1289/ehp.1003284

"Mercury was not consistently associated with changes in direction of estradiol mean, although increasing exposure was associated with delayed rises of estradiol of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.01 to –0.29) and 0.18 (95% CI, 0.03 to –0.33) equivalent to approximately 3–4 hr."

And again, your link above can also be presented as evidence to this fact.  Which again is why you need to actually understand what you present as "evidence".  Big fancy words such as "steroidogenesis" in a link does not evidence to your claim make.

Hveragerthi: Not even close!!!  Again, you really need to learn some basic chemistry and how the body really works.  Adrenal dysfunction also has a number of causes, none of which are mercury.

Troll: Mercury is the number 1 cause of adrenal dysfunction, directly localising and affecting the gland and indirectly through the steroidogenesis pathways. Read again:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19280433

LOL!!!  Again, you really need to understand what you are submitting as "evidence".  What the statement says in total is "up-regulation or down-regulation of enzymes within the steroidogenesis pathway".   What you just posted as "evidence" does not say anywhere that the mercury causes adrenal dysfunction.  It says that the mercury according to the author can cause changes in adrenal dysfunction.  The "upregulation" of enzymes they mention can just as easily create adrenal over activity instead of suppression.  This is one of the reasons it is so important to actually understand what you are posting as evidence!  In addition, understanding what you posted as "evidence" would also have helped you to know that the abstract says nothing about what kind of changes in the endocrine system are occurring nor to what extent.  You are simply assuming whatever fits your needs.

Hveragerthi: chronic stress leading to elevated rT3 and poor T4 to T3 conversion,

Troll: stress caused by Mercury & dealing with your ignorance

Hveragerthi: See my last comment because mercury DOES NOT cause these either.

Troll: Mostly your ignorance then.

Hveragerthi: low iodine

Troll: Duh. Take iodine. But I referred to HYPER thyroidism to begin with, not hypo, genius.

Hveragerthi: ROTFLMAO!!!!   You really should read what you wrote before making such statements.  Here is your quote again:

"It is absolutely unfounded and ridiculous. Hypo, as well as Hyperthyroidism is caused by heavy metals like Mercury and pseudo-iodines like fluorine and bromine that occupying and block the cellular receptor sites normally reserved for iodine."

That is the problem with your making up lies MichaelB.  There are always people willing to expose your lies.

Troll: Learn to comprehend, fool. The thread is asking about hyperthyroidism. And you claimed iodine supplementation won't cure it, which is BS.

Funny how you left out your quote above so I had to go retrieve it so everyone could see that you were lying again to give you an excuse to attack.  Once again you said hypothyroidism and well as hyperthyroidism.  So it was not only about hyperthyroidism.

As for your claim that I said iodine will not cure hyperthyroidism that is just another of your MANY lies.  Here is my quote again "Would supplementing iodine be good for someone with hyperthyroidism?  No. ".  Why did I say this?  Because excess iodine can throw the thyroid in to an even higher state of hyperthyroidism.  That is not the same as saying it will not cure the problem.  That part is questionable.  Some doctors have increased thyroid activity even higher as a treatment for hypothyroidism relying on negative feedback to slow the thyroid down.  Will this permanently stop the hyperthyroidism?  Not likely.  Is this practice safe?  Not in my opinion.  To me this practice is as stupid as using carcinogenic radiation and chemotherapy drugs to "treat" cancer.

Hveragerthi: LOL!!!  Slow down for a second and think really hard about this "genius".  In order to block the receptor is has to occupy that receptor!!! 

Troll: You are truly dumber than the boards give you credit for. Mercury can block 1 or more of the 4 iodine receptor sites. It does not mean it "occupies" the specific chemical bond that iodine is meant to have.

You clearly do not understand the concept of receptors nor how they work.  Then again you did not have any understanding of the abstract you tried to use as "evidence" either.

Hveragerthi: "The thyroid is not a primary target of mercury.

Troll: Of course it is, Doofus. 

http://www.flcv.com/ASDendo.html

This is a good example as to why people should not rely on opinion sites as "evidence".  You clearly did not read the studies he cites as "evidence".  I read several of the studies he cited and they are not backing his claims. He primarily cites animal studies that do not correlate to humans.  As an example, here is an animal study on the effects of mercury on the thyroid:

http://ecophys.fishwild.vt.edu/publications/Wada%20et%20al%202011EnvSciTechno...

Dietary Mercury Has No Observable Effects on Thyroid-Mediated Processes and Fitness-Related Traits in Wood Frogs

"MeHg in wood frogs was high and whole-body Hg concentrations exceeded those associated with increased mortality, malformation, and/or delayed development in two other amphibian species, we did not observe any adverse effects of Hg on development,survival, performance, or whole-body thyroid hormone concentrations in wood frogs."

If we want to go with animal studies we can conclude from this study that mercury is not harmful. Of course we know mercury is harmful, but the point is that animal studies cannot always be applied to humans.

In fact, he cites this study as part of his "evidence" that mercury suppresses thyroid function:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1128033/

"Apart from inhibition of the deiodination of T4 to T3, the endocrine functions studied seem not to be affected by exposure to Hg vapour at the exposure levels of the present study."

Does not sound like a major target to me.

Now, let's look at a study regarding mercury and autoimmune thyroid issues:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16804512

"Compared to levels at the beginning of the study, only patients with mercury hypersensitivity who underwent amalgam replacement (Group IIA) showed a significant decrease in the levels of both anti-Tg (p=0.001) and anti-TPO (p=0.0007) autoantibodies. The levels of autoantibodies in patients with or without mercury hypersensitivity (Group I and Group IIB) who did not replace amalgam did not change."

So antibody levels only increased in those with mercury sensitivities, but no change when amalgams were removed in the other people.  So what constitutes mercury sensitivity?  Try researching the role of low selenium in the presence of mercury.

Hveragerthi: Again, you keep referencing opinion sites that have not backed up their claims with any real evidence.  Do you have any real evidence?"

Troll: You are pathetic! Stop wasting my time with this "no evidence" crap. The 'real studies' showing 'real evidence' are all referenced in that website: over 50 of them.

And again, you should read them.  Many do not back his claims.  This is what opinion sites rely on.  They expect people to take their claims at face value since they know that the majority of people will never check the references and the ones that do rarely understand them.

Hveragerthi: Once again you have absolutely NO clue of what you are talking about.  Most autoimmune conditions have been linked to pathogens.  

Troll: Pathogens can only proliferate with an impaired immune system. Mercury directly kills immune cells through fragmenting the nuclei and damaging the cell membrane integrity. Cells that are not killed are significantly damaged. Polymorphonuclear leukocyte functions such as phagocytosis and adherence are negatively impaired. Mercury also inhibits mitogen-induced proliferative responses in lymphocytes. 

LOL!!!  There you go again with the big fancy words that you have no clue what they mean.  

You are also overlooking the fact that many things suppress the immune system.  For example, a person can harbor herpes viruses that do not pop up until they are under so much mental stress that it suppresses their immune system and the virus activates.  No mercury involved.

I have addressed the real causes of autoimmunity numerous times in previous posts and my Autoimmunity write up.

But since you think you are such an expert on autoimmunity please explain to everyone here what autoantibodies are, why they form and what their role is in autoimmune conditions.  If you can answer these then you will also know why mercury is not involved.

Mercury binds directly to the major-histocompatibility-complex peptide as well as T cell receptors, thereby chemically altering them and acting as a mechanism for producing MHC-dependant autoantibodies. It also binds B and T cells together.  

I love when you post stuff you have no clue about what you are saying.  How do you explain the findings in this study in relation to your claim above?:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9376071

Or this one that also shows differences to your claims:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/l0t69nvvkeqavlqu/

I especially like this one:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0192056193900495

"In summary, both CdCl₂ and HgCl₂ exert early, inhibitory effects on B-cell activation. This is manifested by the inhibition of RNA, DNA and antibody synthesis."

Troll: It has long been known scientifically that metals like zinc, mercury, nickel and beryllium activate lymphocytes to proliferation in the absence of mitogenic lectins. It is known as "metal induced lymphoproliferation".

So you are now claiming that these metals are increasing immunity by increasing the number of immune cells called lymphocytes?  Or are you saying that you are desperate again for evidence and so you are still posting claims that you have no clue as to what they mean?

Troll: Not only does Mercury proliferate B and T-lmyphocytes, it also increases the interleukin expression, the expression of class 1 and class 2 major histocompatibility complex molecule of various cell types, leads to hypergammaglobulinemia with increases in serum immuniglobulins Ig G and E, and increases the expression of polyclonal antibodies into self-antigens as well as non-self-antigens.

And again I bet you have no clue what that means, LOL!!!

Troll: Once again- You are obviously the one who needs to do some research.

I do a lot of research.  The difference is I research credible sources, not pseudoscientific, make up the facts as they go along propaganda sites like you do.

Troll: There is nothing 'pseudoscientific' about reality, or the endless volumes of research done by intelligent and ligitimate teams of scientists and doctors to demonstrate the nature of that reality. You are just a jackass, that's all.

Funny how with all that research you still cannot present anything to prove the claims I have questioned.  All you did was throw around some big words you did not understand.  Meanwhile, I presented actual evidence against your claims such as proving mercury has shown to have anti-estrogenic properties.

Troll quoting me: (bitching truncated) ... shut me up.

Troll: I just did!

No, you simply showed more of your ignorance.

 

 

Tweet