Article example

Here's a quote of what's titled as "the Truth in Medicine" forum, from this link: http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1945035#i


"So what does the actual research say":

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17767927


Blood and urine mercury levels in adult amalgam patients of a randomized controlled trial: interaction of Hg species in erythrocytes.

"The integrated daily Hg dose absorbed from amalgam was estimated up to 3 microg for an average number of fillings and at 7.4 for a high amalgam load"
_______

OK, did you notice the word "estimated" in the cited article ? Its not hard numbers, its only an ESTIMATE , not a measured quantity ! What assumptions is the estimate based on ? The authors do not say. Would you rely on an estimate as "evidence" ??

Think about estimates you've experienced in your life first hand. Are they usually accurate ?? Cui bono as to what if the estimates are low ? Cui bono as to if the estimates are high ?

Moreover, the article discussed "inorganic mercury" and organic mercury from dietary sources, but appears to have totally ignored inorganic mercury from amalgams that has been transformed by the body into organic mercury - another gaping hole. As for phytates in food..... where ? I have seen no hard evidence showing any significant dietary phytate intake for all persons having amalgams, so its an unproven proposition, possibly a myth, given that phytates are typically removed during food refining.

Under the Conclusions section of the cited article, this appears:

"The unexpected postremoval increase in erythrocyte organic Hg, which is associated with the depletion of cellular inorganic Hg, might result from binding of organic Hg to cellular sites previously occupied by inorganic Hg."


Did you see the word "might" ? What value is a "conclusion" that says "might" ??? Its a non-concrete statement and is not a conclusion at all. Its like saying that I conclude that you "might" get lucky if you play the lottery. You might !!

What a joke, and article that uses the word "might" in its conclusions. Tells me the article is essentially worthless, if they did all that work and can't say anything concrete from it, only vagaries.


Also under "conclusions" is this : "This is the first study on adult amalgam patients which continuously monitored the postremoval decline of inorganic Hg and the coexposure from dietary organic Hg in a randomized-controlled-trial design."

What kind of conclusion is that ? Not a conclusion at all, just a statement that they believe it to be the first whatever.


Also under "conclusions" is this: "The integrated daily dose of 7.4 microg absorbed from a high amalgam load is well below the tolerable dose of 30 microg (WHO, 1990). "

But wait..... the 7.4 number is an estimate !!!!!!! It says so in the sentence that comes right before the word "conclusions". So they've included an estimate in the conclusions section.

lol

Is it reasonable to rely on statements that recite "might" and numbers that are stated as estimates, as valid conclusions ?


"In physical science the first essential step in the direction of learning any subject is to find principles of numerical reckoning and practicable methods for measuring some quality connected with it. I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely in your thoughts advanced to the state of Science, whatever the matter may be." - William Thomson, a.k.a. Lord Kelvin [PLA, vol. 1, "Electrical Units of Measurement", 1883-05-03]

Alert Webmaster & Moderators Already alerted!  Already alerted!

1 readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?
How do you feel about this message?     Agree     Disagree       Hide this question