Cite that trace amounts of aluminum (not processes aluminum metal, but aluminum element particles in other compounds) would cause electrical pulses. Cite that these electrical pulses would be detectable by any human monitoring devices if used.
False. Sound is mechanical vibration. Now you are perhaps equating the electromagnetic forces at the atomic level with “electricity”. If so, you are mistaken.
Cite please. Cite there are frequencies. Cite that they would be equivalent to cell phone frequencies. Also, you should probably talk about signal amplitudes as well. That would correspond to strength, or volume of the signal. Frequency corresponds to a low hum vs a high squeal. You need both frequency and amplitude to determine energy level transferred.
Cite that nerves can be affected by electromagnetic waves.
Yes, a dentist can get in trouble for recommending to patients that amalgam is not safe. A dentist can get in trouble for suggesting to patients they need to replace their amalgam with other, more expensive materials, just because the fillings have mercury in them, if there are no other issues. Of course, a dentist will not get in trouble for discussing alternatives before installation (as long as they don’t declare amalgam unsafe), and will probably not get in trouble for replacing amalgam fillings if the patient comes to them and requests it. The ADA does not want dentists telling patients that amalgam is unsafe, because there is no evidence that it is unsafe in general.
And the ADA does not want dentists fear-mongering to drive up business by replacing perfectly good amalgam fillings with other, more expensive materials, simply to increase profits. However, if a patient expressed concern, the dentist could offer the alternative.
I am unaware of there being such a thing as pure-silver fillings, and if there are, the work would involve at least two visits. Wikipedia mentions silver-palladium alloys, but has no more to say. In normal dental jargon, “silver” means silver amalgam.
There is so much evidence on both sides of the amalgram controversy that I tabled that research about a year ago. There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground in that argument. I got rid of all the amalgrams so it doesn’t effect me anymore.
The health problems I described in Post #7 always had a “vibrational” quality to them, I tried to describe it to several doctors over the years and was basically ignored.
But it felt like painful currents radiating from my jaw down to my neck and up to the top of my head. It was greatly aggravated by SSRI medications to the point where I had to stop taking them. I resumed them after the fillings were replaced, with no side effects.
“Just energy”? So the gravitational potential energy of a bowling ball at the top of a tower == the kinetic energy of a sound wave == the electromagnetic* energy of a radio signal?
I’m sorry but no, just no. I will accept, that mathematically, relationships between those form can be derived. However in the day-to-day macro scaled universe in which we operate they are quite different in effects.
And as for frequency? You are seriously contending that a sound wave of 261.626Hz has similar characteristics to an electromagnetic wave of 1*10[sup]19[/sup]Hz. If so remind me not to attend your piano recital.
The alcoholic* energy of my friday night out has made me forget if there is a more appropriate term.
**Goddamn grapes pushing me to higer levels of excitation.
Am I the only one who, when I saw the thread title, thought at first that it was the result of a spambot text generation algorithm? I mean, seriously, how often do you actually encounter the phrase “amalgam paranoia wrong font”?
You can use a higher frequency or a lower frequency to induce a change in another frequency. This was proved long ago. You can also use different types of energy to induce energy of a different kind. Sometimes you need a catalyst or enzyme. The bowling ball has energy potential that is reliant on gravity and it’s potential is not really an energy unless the conditions are right. The energy of the ball is derived from gravity so potential energy of the ball at rest is not really energy of the ball. The energy we tend to see is always there and the source is the earths gravity minus any inertia created by our spining and the force of pull of our atmosphere’s outer fields on things. Just as a high voltage power wire carries it’s energy outside and away from the wire, the earth creates a set of fields around it. This planet coupled with all living things on it has a great energy. I hope I am explaining this right, I have a hard time trying to explain what I see. This is different than what is now considered the norm by science but I like exploring what isn’t known.
The definition of potential energy is stored energy. The gravitational potential energy of a bowling ball comes not from the ball itself, but from the ball/gravitational system and position within that system. So you are correct that the energy relies on more than the ball. However, the ball has one inherent feature that is a crucial element of that potential energy - mass. Without mass, the ball would not have any gravitational potential energy.
Chemical bonds are stored energy as well, and only energy when conditions are right. An explosive like TNT is reasonably stable and holds the energy trapped until conditions are right, typically an excitation energy. The excitation breaks bonds and that triggers the release of the stored energy, just like letting go of a bowling ball suspended in the air releases the gravitational potential of the bowling ball.
Yes, the cause of “weight” is the combined effect of the pull of gravity and the pull of centrifugal force. Earth’s electromagnetic field does not have much effect on most objects.
Well, with my researching, I try to translate my new knowledge into things I already understand well. I choose to try to relate the knowledge into everyday life so I can learn to apply it to everyday life. Learning a bunch of technical terms without trying to understand how to aply them to the common persons everyday life is a waste of time to me. I know quite a few intellectual people who can’t translate what they know to simple common sense. I know about power lines and static generators fields. I know how to bowl and that a person shouldn’t put a bowlingball on a ladder and definitely not a tower because it may fall.
Well no, this is meaningless unless one can demonstrate harm ensuing from contact with mercury in any quantity down to the smallest fraction of a picogram. Which is not the case.
People who swear their health has been dramatically improved by eliminating all the “toxic” mercury in amalgam fillings, may be unaware that their replacement fillings are not composed of sunshine and lollipops. Contents of alternative resin fillings include:
(I abbreviated the above list of ingredients to minimize panic). :eek:
*"Resin composite components have been shown to cause immunosupression or immunostimulation [21] and to inhibit DNA [22] and RNA synthesis [23]. Resin composite restorative material was shown to be more cytotoxic than amalgam in a comparative in vitro study [24]. Various resin components of dentin bonding agents have been shown to suppress the mitochondrial acitivty of macrophages [25]. Various composite restorative materials implanted into animals have been shown to cause inflammatory responses, including an increase in lymphocytic infiltration as well as fibroblasts and epithelioid cells [26].
There have been several reports of allergy to composite resins and their ingredients [27-31]. It has been suggested that composite resins may be a cause of hand eczema and skin symptoms in dentists [32]. Vinyl, latex, and modified latex gloves are permeable to several resin composite materials [33]. Some resin monomers have been shown to encourage the growth of cariogenic microorganisms [34].
Resin composites [35], sealants [36], and glass ionomers [37] have been shown to release formaldehyde, a possible carcinogen"*
Does this mean that since they’re loaded with “toxic” ingredients, resin fillings are harmful to your health? Nope. But it does seem peculiar to obsess about the minute amounts of mercury released from amalgam fillings and gloss over the potential for harmful chemical exposures from resin fillings.
Pretty much about the same as some articles I read a while back. Yours is a lot simpler than the technical ones I have read jackmanni, I like that . I’de like to add that many dentures have a latex base to them and can trigger latex allergies to those who are allergic.