News

Articles
Topics
Q&A

Torrent(Info)
Magnet

Recipes at healthfully.ai
Mirror at aajon.us

Create an Article


          Why Mercury Is Not Absorbed When We Eat Raw Fish (Theory)

===========================================================================

| I was interested in Aajonus' theory that we do not absorb the mercury
| from raw fish, but do with cooked fish. Why do fish which have eaten
| fish (raw) test high for mercury? Also, I have read stories of big
| sushi eaters complaining of mercury issues.

As I mentioned in my Spring 2007 newsletter, there could be several
reasons that mercury is not absorbed when we eat it raw. Usually, I do
not like to theorize on reality because my theory could be wrong. Many
people think because a theory is wrong, reality is also. Because the
"roosters'-crowing-caused-sunrise" theory was wrong, the sun did not
stop rising. With that said, here is my theory:

Little fish eat substances containing mercury. The bodies of those fish
try their best to prevent damage from that mercury by depositing it
in fat. Each fish that eats those fish further isolates and controls
contamination and injury by producing more complex fats. By the time
it gets to our plate, it is so contained in that fat that our bodies
either cannot digest it or our bodies are able to identify the mass and
choose not to digest it. Either way, we do not absorb very much, if any,
of the mercury.

When laboratories test anything, first they use solvents to dissolve the
substance tested. When fish have been dissolved and tested, tests reveal
the amount of mercury contained in that fish, but it does not evaluate how
much damage the mercury may have done to the fish prior to fat-isolation.

As I said in my Spring 2007 issue, cooking completely fractionates
those fat molecules and releases the mercury. Our bodies absorb
the mercury. Therefore, eating cooked fish that is high in mercury
contaminates us with mercury.

Your final statement that seems to give foundation to the probability that
sushi eaters absorb mercury may not be such evidence. Consider that most
human mercury-poisoning in our modern advanced society originates from
vaccines, other injections and applying Mercurochrome and Merthiolate
(liquid mercury used as "medicinal" antiseptics). Until recently, the
mercury from one injection equates to the mercury found in about 4,000
pounds of cooked swordfish. Most vaccines and other injections have the
equivalent of the mercury found in 3,300 pounds of fish. I believe that
our government blames fish-eating for most mercury-poisoning because they
are trying to distract us from the real cause: medication. The government
is protecting the pharmaceutical and medical industries, not us. Is it
intentional harm for profit and to maintain the status quo or is there
a reason more sinister? That is for everyone concerned to investigate.