wavepruner

Correct. Although, instead of saying a "significant percentage" I would just say "some", because there is no way of knowing if mercury is the sole cause at this point.

I think mercury is a major factor in many illnesses, and the root cause of mine. I did have some serious memory issues for a while, and my ability to focus was so bad that I could not watch a TV show. There are tens of thousands discussing the same kinds of symptoms and how they disappear with chelation.

I think the source of mercury exposure, duration of exposure, intensity of exposure, where the toxicity eventually settles in the body, and genetic factors all play a role in the symptoms that an individual suffers from. That is why one toxin can cause such a wide range of illnesses. The "radium girls" who were poisoned working with radium in factories is a good example of this.

I posted the videos because they are easier to understand. The underlying mechanism of how mercury can induce β‐amyloid production and tau phosphorylation has been discovered. Here's a paper that discusses the same ideas: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1471-4159...

And I'm not sure why you describe Boyd Hayley's work as low quality. The man has published a huge amount of work, much of which was funded by the NIH.

Ultimately I think the highest quality evidence is the actual curing of sick people. I know my claims of being cured and of others being cured are hard to believe. If you saw first-hand the transformation we went through then you would know we are on the right track.

There's a lot more to it than that. Did you watch the series of videos? The underlying mechanism of how mercury can induce β‐amyloid production and tau phosphorylation has been discovered.

Perhaps this paper would be better than the videos. I posted the videos because they are easier to understand. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1471-4159...

Thank you for the feedback regarding how I come across. Next time I will try to include more specific detail in the OP that hopefully does not upset people. I've found that a vague introduction protects me from down-votes, but perhaps there is a way to talk about some details without that happening.

The illness is chronic mercury toxicity and the treatment is chelation therapy. I know a man who reversed his dementia with chelation therapy. He's an older guy that would get lost in his own neighborhood.

Steven Fowkes, a chemist, has done a lot of work in presenting the some of the latest research regarding Alzheimer's and how it relates to mercury toxicity. A good start is his Quora answer here: https://www.quora.com/Why-havent-we-made-progress-in-a-cure-...

Some other good scientific literature is the work of Boyd Hayley with the chelator emeramide. He's in the process of getting it approved through the FDA for treatment of acute mercury toxicity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3346673/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29444690?dopt=Abstract

Thanks for the summary. (edit: although I do not think CFS is an appropriate diagnosis as it doesn't even come close to describing all the symptoms.)

I led with the details on a different account. My karma was destroyed and afaict my posting privileges were revoked for posting too frequently with explanations. I don't think you understand the huge amount of anger that some people have towards people like me saying mercury caused this illness.

Leading vaguely and easing people into the details prevents my karma from being destroyed. I'm not sure how else to handle this except by not talking about it at all, but the only way I can make meaning out of my experience is to help others with the same illness, so I will continue to do so. I found the cure from posts like the one's I make now. I'm paying it forward.

Lyme may be a complicating factor, but I do not believe it is the root cause. I won't go into details because it will just invite more down votes. You can look at my older posts if you really want to know more. I talked about it a bit when I first created this account.

Going into details will just invite more down votes. You can look through my older posts if you really want to know. I talked about it a bit when I first created this account.

I don't think they benefit. It's just a complicated issue and change takes time.

"I suspect this dynamic is not limited to Alzheimer’s research."

Agreed, I think it is a universal problem in science.

I have an illness that has been curable for decades now, but this cure is treated with hostility by the medical establishment. I look forward to the day when the cabal of my illness collapses. Hopefully then I will be able to talk about what happened without people getting angry.

It's very difficult to effectively use some natural remedies at scale for a variety of reasons:

(1) They have a large number of active ingredients that are not cost effective to manufacture synthetically or isolate

(2) They have an active ingredient that is not yet possible to manufacture synthetically or isolate

(3) The active ingredient(s) are not shelf stable once isolated from the parent product

Lastly, and most importantly, natural remedies are not patentable. This means there is not enough money to get them approved for marketing as a cure for disease.

Where would the incentive to reduce emissions come from then? If you divide your tax of increase in emissions by 300+ million people, your effective tax increase will be low compared to the money you could make by increasing emissions.

Assuming the trillion dollar claim is true, there would still be a huge amount of disagreement on how it is best to spend it.

The radical function over form design is an artistic statement. The art world continually has movements that critique and respond to restrictive conventions imposed by previous movements. Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain" comes to mind.

I think this design is supposed to challenge our concept of what we think is ugly and beautiful. It's intentionally shocking, and it's brilliant.

I wish I could down-vote this incredibly rude and presumptuous post.

Did you read my entire post? Universal health care does not solve the problem. Canadians that have my illness have just as much difficulty as I do. I swear you kinds of healthy people do not even read/listen to the words that I and other crippled people say.

Your analogy is not even remotely appropriate.

And how is open pricing incompatible with universal health care? Is your ideology so important to you that you will fight such an innocuous change?

There are lots of sick people who want to know how much their treatment options cost. Not just Americans, but Canadians as well (I know some).

When you have a poorly understood illness that is killing you you have two choices: pay out of pocket or die. It doesn't matter if your country has universal health care or not because treatments will not be covered until they go through a lengthy (decades) approval process. If your illness is controversial then it will be even longer.

It doesn't harm anyone to publish real healthcare prices. Please do not fight something that will harm no one. This will benefit some of the most neglected people in society.

What are the good contacts you're using now? I gave up on contacts years ago, but I've never done any research and experimenting to find if there was anything better than the usual Acuvue stuff.

By preventing large numbers of people from working at all.

Joining unions is impossible for many. I once lost a job because the union insisted that I be let go rather than let me join. It was not a performance issue.

I'm a man and I have a condition that is poorly understood by the medical community. The lack of respect is glaringly obvious when I interact with nurses and doctors. I have discussed this phenomenon with hundreds of men and woman, so I do not think it's gender/sex based discrimination.

Yes that change has been a literal lifesaver for me. That $3000 I save a year can now be put towards healthcare that actually works instead of going from doctor to doctor as they shrug their shoulders while telling me there's nothing they can do.

I understand that there are many who believe the gutting of Obamacare is a universally bad thing, but it does put more money in the pockets of hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of sick people who the healthcare system completely neglects. I'm not talking about moderate illnesses either, I'm talking about illness that completely destroys every aspect of your life. Many of the most seriously ill commit suicide because the other option is withering away in excruciating pain while people accuse them of being crazy.

I don't think you appreciate the choice I've had to make. I'd rather take the risk and go without insurance. The other choice is death from not being able to afford the treatment I need right now.

Thank you for this post. I really resonate with it, although I have drawn perhaps a different conclusion.

Due to my limited ability to type/dictate and the controversial nature of my experience, I am not going to go into detail. I just want to give another data point to people claiming that more welfare programs will make these problems go away.

I have completely given up on the traditional health care system. It is so unbelievably bad when it comes to my illness that I am better off becoming my own doctor and paying for everything out of pocket. Because of this, I am a strong proponent of reducing welfare programs(except UBI) and making healthcare participation an option. I am battling a crippling illness. Almost no one has moral high-ground to insist that I give them my money for their health care. I am so so much sicker than easily 99% of the population. I should qualify for disability, but I don't because my illness is poorly understood by slow-moving government bureaucrats.

But I am fortunate to have identified the cure, and in a few years perhaps I will be back to normal. At that point I will be happy to pay health insurance premiums to help those sicker than I, but right now, my survival depends on the ability to not pay. $3000/year is the difference between life and death for me.

Those interested in this issue will definitely want to check out Grassland. It's basically a blockchain project to democratize video surveillance. http://grassland.network

"Grassland is a self-organizing , self-sustaining and self-correcting, anonymous network of AI software that quickly and cheaply turns any 2D video feed from any single-perspective camera into live 3D models and can organize data captured from millions of cameras around the world into a real-time, secure, global simulation. It lets humans view the world in a manner like the games SimCity® or Civilization®[1] and lets machines internalize, understand and interact intuitively with the real world."

Previous Hacker News discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19529921

Yes, definitely. I would view that as restricting choice.

I think the best way to increase wages is more and more jobs so that workers have bargaining power. I've used Uber as a fall-back and it dramatically increases my bargaining power.

I can make very good money driving for Uber up to 25 hours per week in my city. This is after maintenance, gas, and depreciation costs. Lots of breweries here and people who like to have a good time and tip well.

Rideshare insurance is an extra $10/month. Basically nothing.

I have to pay for my own healthcare when I have a regular job too. Buying on the exchange is pretty much the same thing with more choice.

It's all relative. To me anyone who can work full time is not that poor. But I understand why many would view that as poverty.

My point is that it's impossible for us to keep up and fix everyone's problem for them. We need to empower people to make their own choices. That's the best way to help.

I hear this argument a lot, and I wonder, would anyone who has gone through an extended period of poverty agree with it? I went through this myself, and all the worker "protection" laws just made it that much harder to get back on my feet because they limited how much I could work. Or forced me to allocate some of my pay to benefits I didn't need rather than the expensive treatment I desperately needed to stay alive in the short-term.

I drove for Uber and it was seriously the only job I could get and it saved my life. I know of many other drivers who are battling disabling conditions who drive for Uber as well. Jobs that are as flexible as Uber are non-existent.

I find it really disappointing how many people debate this issue without ever actually listening to the people in poverty. That means talking to real people doing the job. Not just the protestors in the streets. And frankly, if you have time to protest, you're probably not that poor. The poorest of the poor work whenever they can and do not spend time on things that don't earn them money.

Dr. Martin Pall's work on the effects of EMF on Voltage-Gated Calcium Channels (VGCC's) is the most compelling critique of non-ionizing EMF I've seen.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3780531/

I don't think it's true to say that the rebranding to "climate change" came from the right.

It came from academics who realized that saying "global warming" was confusing to people when the climate swung wildly from unusually hot to unusually cold. It takes some time and a willing listener to explain that "warming" means increased energy in the climate system, and therefore more dramatic swings between hot and cold weather.

Saying "global warming" also does nothing to communicate things like change in precipitation patterns.

Using the phrase "climate change" does a much better job of encompassing these phenomenon.

What's surprising is that doctors are legally required to order lab tests when they are non-invasive and have 0 risk of harm. They do not need a doctor's approval and could be much cheaper by cutting them out of the loop entirely.