Re: Mercury Risk?

From: Ian Goddard (
Date: Wed Mar 07 2001 - 09:29:35 MST

Sorry Eugene, I think I misread your intent. I read it at
first to imply that if mouth flora methylates Hg, this would
de-toxify it, but now I think you mean to say the opposite.

I wrote:

>At 10:30 AM 03/07/2001 +0100, Eugene Leitl wrote:
>> > IAN: 300 mcg = 0.3 mg, or not? Or is that your point?
>> >
>> > If I was in a room where air Hg0 was 0.3 mg/m3 and
>> > an Hg0 meter was placed in my mouth, measuring the
>> > Hg0 content of in-drawn air (assuming that I have
>> > no amalgam fillings), what would the measure read?
>>The point of amalgam mercury is whether mouth flora can methylate it (so
>>brush your teeth, and don't gargle with methyliodide too frequently, ok?).
>>Age and personal susceptibility is another major factor.
> IAN: But methylmercury is even more toxic:
>"METHYLMERCURY is one of the most toxic forms of mercury
>due to its solubility in fatty tissues, ability to readily
>penetrate membranes in living organisms, and slowness to
>be excreted. Methylmercury is strongly held in brain tissue,
>while metallic mercury has little effect. Methylmercury is
>5 to 20 times more toxic than inorganic mercury..."

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:59:39 MDT