FDA reconsidering safety of mercury fillings
Article on the FDA re-investigating the safety of merciry fillings. It's about time. I love this part of the article:
Article on the FDA re-investigating the safety of merciry fillings. It's about time. I love this part of the article:
Here's a quick note to the FDA that I sent today. I'm not really expecting a reply, since its more of a rhetorical question, I think. Also, here's an interesting article from Fox about someone suing a tuna company over mercury...
Hi,
I'm wondering, why hasn't the FDA done anything about the fact that all canned tuna fish seems to contain levels of mercury that, if enough tuna is consumed, the consumer is likely to contract mercury poisoning? No warnings or regulations or anything. I've noticed that its just sort of an understood fact that, if you eat tuna, you expect to get some sort of mercury in your body from the tuna - so why hasn't this set off any alarms with the FDA? Mercury is ALWAYS bad in the human body, be it from tuna fish, dental fillings or from thimerasol in vaccines, so why aren't there any warnings from the FDA (either for the fish, or the fillings, or vaccines?)
It seems like the potential is there for people to get very sick from mercury, and the FDA should do more to warn people about this dangerous toxin in food, drugs, and dental fillings.

The FDA approving the marketing of genetically engineered salmon seems like an all-around bad idea. Farmed salmon is already bad to begin with (I try to buy wild when I can afford it) and now the idea of having to avoid modified/engineered salmon is another thing to be concerned about.
Another good article on NaturalNews about hydrolized protein in food. I've long puzzled over the similarity between MSG, autolyzed & hydrolized protein and yeast extract, and this article helps offer a little more insight into this.
I thought that this was an interesting article on the dangers of WiFi. I'm around wireless radiation constantly through the day, so this is the start of a topic that I've been researching. Just because the FDA gives it's good blessing on the safety of WiFi and radio frequency radiation, doesn't mean I'm convinced it's completely safe. But then again, these days WiFi is nearly inescapable, and even if you had no wireless broadband/cell radiation in your house, your neighbors are sure to. And look outside the window and there's bound to be a cell tower not far from view.
Even living in remote places in the country you can't escape some sort of satellite radiation. Maybe it's harmless, but my thinking is, the technology is so new, how can they know for sure at this point?

I sampled some Vitaminwater 10 the other day, and found the flavor absolutely repugnant. This thing is going back to the store. Routinely artificial sweeteners have an awful taste to me (considered safe by the FDA, considered repulsive by me) but this drink doesn't have any of the usual culprits like aspartame, sucralose, splenda, etc. Rather, it's got something in it called "erythritol" (a "natural" sweetener, which I doubt is natural at all) and the flavor is just a wallop of chemical aftertaste. Artificial sweeteners usually dry out my mouth and throat, and if I drink enough, I get a headache, so I avoid this FDA-approved-to-be-safe additive, so I'm not sure what to think about erythritol, because it looks like this is the new artifical sweetener on the block and there's not a lot of information out there about this (here's one link on it on Mercola... good site but I can live without obnoxious pop ups asking for my email. Look, I want information - not a newsletter.)
No real surprise here. In fact, nothing in the article that I didn't really already know, but still interesting to see this surfacing on a censored internet site...
FDA Complicit in Pushing Pharmaceutical Drugs