Aluminum hydroxide injections lead to motor deficits and motor neuron degeneration

[mhatrw]

Aluminum hydroxide (alum) is a vaccine adjuvant used in

* DTP (diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine)
* DTaP (diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccine)
* Some but not all Hib (Haemophilus influenzae type b) conjugate vaccines
* Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine
* Hepatitis B vaccines
* All combination DTaP, Tdap, Hib, or Hepatitis B vaccines
* Hepatitis A vaccines
* Human Papillomavirus vaccine (Gardasil)
* Anthrax vaccine
* Rabies vaccine

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19740540

Gulf War Syndrome is a multi-system disorder afflicting many veterans of Western armies in the 1990-1991 Gulf War. A number of those afflicted may show neurological deficits including various cognitive dysfunctions and motor neuron disease, the latter expression virtually indistinguishable from classical amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) except for the age of onset. This ALS "cluster" represents the second such ALS cluster described in the literature to date. Possible causes of GWS include several of the adjuvants in the anthrax vaccine and others. The most likely culprit appears to be aluminum hydroxide. In an initial series of experiments, we examined the potential toxicity of aluminum hydroxide in male, outbred CD-1 mice injected subcutaneously in two equivalent-to-human doses. After sacrifice, spinal cord and motor cortex samples were examined by immunohistochemistry. Aluminum-treated mice showed significantly increased apoptosis of motor neurons and increases in reactive astrocytes and microglial proliferation within the spinal cord and cortex. Morin stain detected the presence of aluminum in the cytoplasm of motor neurons with some neurons also testing positive for the presence of hyper-phosphorylated tau protein, a pathological hallmark of various neurological diseases, including Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia. A second series of experiments was conducted on mice injected with six doses of aluminum hydroxide. Behavioural analyses in these mice revealed significant impairments in a number of motor functions as well as diminished spatial memory capacity. The demonstrated neurotoxicity of aluminum hydroxide and its relative ubiquity as an adjuvant suggest that greater scrutiny by the scientific community is warranted.

[Warpy]

1. Keep moving those goalposts!

Did you also know there's an adjuvant made of a poisonous gas and a combustible metal? It's called salt.

Water itself is toxic in large amounts and death due to fluid overload are well known.

However, keep moving those goalposts. You're doing a great job of alarming people over nothing.

[pnwmom]

3. You're comparing the effects on the brain of aluminum and salt?

:rofl:

[Warpy]

4. Ever see anyone overloaded on salt to the point of being hospitalized?

My dear, concentration is everything. The same goes for water.

And it goes triple for antivax scare sites.

[damntexdem]

5. Oh, no! They're putting dihydrogen monoxide in vaccines!

Quick! Panic and tear out your hair!

Meanwhile, get your kids fully vaccinated.

[pnwmom]

9. Now you're comparing the effects of water to aluminum.

There goes any shred of credibility.

[pnwmom]

11. Concentration isn't "everything." Some chemicals, like water,

are necessary to the body -- though too much water can indeed kill. Some chemicals are only toxins - no matter how small the amount.

[mhatrw]

13. So which levels of injected alum are safe and which are dangerous?

I really would like to believe that the safety of injecting alum in infants in the amounts included in these vaccines has been demonstrated scientifically. Could you possibly direct me to the basic toxicological studies that have demonstrated which levels of injected alum are safe and which are dangerous?

[mzmolly]

15. "Young, male colony CD-1 mice were injected with the adjuvants at doses equivalent to those given to

US military service personnel."

Thought given some suggest it's a matter of dosage, I'd add this related info from a follow up study.

See > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17114826

[mzmolly]

18. correction - I should have said from a related study, period.

I said from a follow up study.

[mhatrw]

7. Let's see any toxicological studies that show the safety of injected aluminum hydroxide.

I want to believe alum adjuvants are safe, but I need to see some studies showing that they are.

Can you help me with this?

[pnwmom]

2. And aluminum has been previously linked to Alzheimer's disease.

Great.

[damntexdem]

6. And it has also been linked to strategtic bombers for about 70 years.

And we know how many people have been killed by strategic bombing.

;-)

[mhatrw]

8. Let's see any toxicological studies that show the safety of injected aluminum hydroxide.

Surely, dozens of these studies must have been done before this substance was put in so many mandated vaccinations.

So where are these studies?

[pnwmom]

10. The studies don't exist, since that adjuvant was grandfathered in. n/t

[mhatrw]

12. Exactly. Which is why you will see a lot of hemming and hawing here

but absolutely no actual science demonstrating the safety of injected alum adjuvants.

[pnwmom]

14. It's hard to understand how people can compare a heavy metal

like aluminum, a known toxin, with salt and water -- both of which are essential to life.

I guess schools ARE failing to adequately teach science.

[trotsky]

16. It's hard to understand how people can confuse an elemental metal...

with a compound containing the metal. It's as if they don't understand basic chemistry.

I guess schools ARE failing to adequately teach science.

[Chemisse]

19. Actually, any metal more active than aluminum can displace it in the

compound, leaving elemental aluminum in the blood. That would include metals such as calcium, potassium, sodium and magnesium.

[trotsky]

20. Source for this? n/t

[Chemisse]

45. Oh sorry; I just now saw this reply. No source, just any chemistry

textbook that shows single replacement reactions and the activity series of metals. Anything above aluminum can knock it off the compound and take its spot, leaving aluminum out in its elemental form.

[trotsky]

47. No source.

Got it. Just your assertion.

[mzmolly]

17. .

:rofl:

:hi:

[mhatrw]

21. Mothering.com: Is aluminum the new thimerosal?

http://mothering.com/health/is-aluminum-the-new-thimerosal

The first document I came across discusses the labeling of aluminum content in injected dextrose solutions (the sugar solutions added to intravenous fluids in hospitals): "Aluminum may reach toxic levels with prolonged parenteral administration if kidney function is impaired. Research indicates that patients with impaired kidney function, including premature neonates , who received parenteral levels of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day, accumulate aluminum at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity. Tissue loading may occur at even lower rates of administration." For a tiny newborn, this toxic dose would be 10 to 20 mcg; for an adult, it would be about 350 mcg.

The second document discusses aluminum content in IV feeding solutions, or Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN) solutions. The FDA requires these solutions to contain no more than 25 mcg of aluminum per liter of solution. A typical adult in the hospital would get around 1 liter of TPN each day, thus about 25 mcg of aluminum. The FDA document also states, "Aluminum content in parenteral drug products could result in a toxic accumulation of aluminum in individuals receiving TPN therapy. Research indicates that neonates and patient populations with impaired kidney function may be at high risk of exposure to unsafe amounts of aluminum. Studies show that aluminum may accumulate in the bone, urine, and plasma of infants receiving TPN. Many drug products used routinely in parenteral therapy may contain levels of aluminum sufficiently high to cause clinical manifestations . . . Aluminum toxicity is difficult to identify in infants because few reliable techniques are available to evaluate bone metabolism in premature infants. . . Although aluminum toxicity is not commonly detected clinically, it can be serious in selected patient populations, such as neonates, and may be more common than is recognized." ...

The source of the daily limit of 4 to 5 mcg of aluminum per kilogram of body weight quoted by the ASPEN statement seems to be a study that compared the neurologic development of about 100 premature babies who were fed a standard IV solution that contained aluminum, with the development of 100 premature babies who were fed the same solution with almost all aluminum filtered out. The study was prompted by a number of established facts: that injected aluminum can build up to toxic levels in the bloodstream, bones, and brain; that preemies have decreased kidney function and thus a higher risk of toxicity; that an autopsy performed on one preemie whose sudden death was otherwise unexplained revealed high aluminum concentrations in the brain; and that aluminum toxicity can cause progressive dementia. The infants who were given IV solutions containing aluminum showed impaired neurologic and mental development at 18 months, compared to the babies who were fed much lower amounts of aluminum. Those who got aluminum received an average of 500 mcg of the metal over a period of 10 days, or about 50 mcg per day. The other group received only about 10 mcg of aluminum daily—4 to 5 mcg per kilogram of body weight per day.4 This seems to be the source of this safety level.

However, none of these documents or studies mentions vaccines; they look only at IV solutions and injectable medications. Nor does the FDA require labels on vaccines warning about the dangers of aluminum toxicity, although such labels are required for all other injectable medications.

... much, much more ...

[mhatrw]

22. A condensed and updated version of this same article.

http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/vaccine_faq.asp#aluminum

[trotsky]

23. It certainly seems to be.

Just as thimerosal was the devil du jour and a complete goose chase, so will this be.

For those who are interested in non-sensational and rational information about aluminum in vaccines, please see the following document: http://www.chop.edu/export/download/pdfs/articles/vaccine-education-center/aluminum.pdf

Q. Isn’t it possible that aluminum in vaccines could be harmful to some healthy babies?

A. No. The quantity of aluminum in vaccines is tiny compared with the quantity required to cause harm. Here’s another way to think about this: All babies are either breast-fed or bottle-fed. Because both breast milk and infant formula contain aluminum, all babies have small quantities of aluminum in their bloodstreams all the time. The amount is very small: about 5 nanograms (billionths of a gram) per milliliter of blood (about one-fifth of a teaspoon). Indeed, the quantity of aluminum in vaccines is so small that even after an injection of vaccines, the amount of aluminum in a baby’s blood does not detectably change. In contrast, the amount of aluminum in the bloodstreams of people who suffer health problems from aluminum is at least 100 times greater than the amount found in the bloodstreams of healthy people.

[mhatrw]

24. From your link

During the first 6 months of life, infants could receive about 4 milligrams of aluminum from vaccines. ... During the same period, babies will also receive about 10 milligrams of aluminum in breast milk, about 40 milligrams in infant formula, or about 120 milligrams in soy-based formula.

According to this, a baby fed only breast milk would have an average daily aluminum exposure of about 55 micrograms per day.

Here are the levels of aluminum in the infant vaccines that contain http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/vaccine_faq.asp#aluminum">aluminum adjuvants:

* Hib (PedVaxHib brand only) - 225 micrograms per shot.
* Hepatitis B - 250 micrograms.
* DTaP - depending on the manufacturer, ranges from 170 to 625 micrograms.
* Pneumococcus - 125 micrograms.
* Hepatitis A - 250 micrograms.
* HPV - 225 micrograms.
* Pentacel (DTaP, HIB and Polio combo vaccine) - 330 micrograms.
* Pediarix (DTaP, Hep B and Polio combo vaccine) - 850 micrograms.

OK, I'll do the math for you. A newborn who gets a Hepatitis B injection on day one of life would get 250 micrograms of aluminum. This would be repeated at one month of age with the next Hep B shot. When a baby gets the first big round of shots at 2 months, the total dose of aluminum can vary from 295 micrograms (if a non-aluminum HIB and the lowest aluminum brand of DTaP is used) to a whopping 1225 micrograms if the highest aluminum brands are used and Hep B vaccine is also given. These doses are repeated at 4 and 6 months. A child would continue to get some aluminum throughout the first 2 years with most rounds of shots.

So in the worst case scenario (1225 micrograms at once), an infant would get the equivalent of 22.3 days worth of orally ingested breast milk aluminum injected rather than ingested all in one sitting.

Again from your link:

Though all of the aluminum present in vaccines enters the bloodstream, less than 1 percent of aluminum present in food
is absorbed through the intestines into the blood.

This states the 100% of the aluminum from vaccines gets into the blood, but only 1% of aluminum from breast milk. If this is true, then in the worst case scenario considered above, the blood of infants is exposed to about 2230 days (63 years) worth of breast milk aluminum, all in one sitting. Does the dose make the poison?

Again from your link:

Indeed, the quantity of aluminum in vaccines is so small that even after an injection of vaccines, the amount of aluminum in a baby’s blood does not detectably change.

In light of the other information presented in your link, I find this claim highly suspicious. Do you know which studies demonstrated this?

Here are some excerpts from every abstract of the studies listed at the end of your pdf link that is readily available the internet:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12184359

The calculated body burden of aluminum from vaccinations exceeds that from dietary sources.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9164811

CONCLUSIONS: In preterm infants, prolonged intravenous feeding with solutions containing aluminum is associated with impaired neurologic development.

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/pediatrics;97/3/413">Pediatrics

A number of substances commonly administered intravenously, including calcium and phosphorus salts and albumin, have high levels of aluminum. Premature infants receiving intravenous fluid therapy may accumulate aluminum and show evidence of aluminum toxicity. Efforts are being made to reduce the levels of aluminum in products added to intravenous solutions; these efforts must continue.

Some infant formulas may contain relatively high concentrations of aluminum. The reported concentrations of aluminum in soy formulas and premature infant formulas are higher than those in other infant formulas. The potential impact of these formulas on the aluminum intake of premature infants and infants with impaired renal function should be recognized, although it is not clear that toxic effects result from the use of the formulas in these situations.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1474689

It is proposed that an accumulation may take place at a subcellular level without any significant increase in the corresponding tissue concentration. The possible effects of this accumulation are discussed. As Al3+ is neurotoxic, the brain metabolism is most interesting. The normal and the lethally toxic brain levels of Al3+ are well documented and differ only by a factor of 3-10.

*****

Strange how the slick PR pdf document paints a slightly different picture than that painted by the studies it cites to back up its claims of vaccine aluminum safety.

[trotsky]

26. No, you're completely distorting the math AND quoting out of context.

You quote: "The calculated body burden of aluminum from vaccinations exceeds that from dietary sources."

Why did you put a period there? Because the actual abstract did not. The FULL quote is:

"The calculated body burden of aluminum from vaccinations exceeds that from dietary sources, however, it is below the minimal risk level equivalent curve after the brief period following injection."

Why did you manipulate and falsely represent the quote? Why can't you rely on the truth to support your position?

Let's take a closer look at the other quote you pull, namely: "CONCLUSIONS: In preterm infants, prolonged intravenous feeding with solutions containing aluminum is associated with impaired neurologic development."

Tell me, is a vaccination the equivalent of "prolonged intravenous feeding"? Do you have any idea how those differ? Again, why are you using misleading/false information to present your case?

[HuckleB]

27. This just gets more and more bizarre all the time.

Thank you for your patience in catching these attempted slights of hand.

[mhatrw]

28. LOL. My post stands on its own.

The reason I quoted:

"The calculated body burden of aluminum from vaccinations exceeds that from dietary sources." is because this statement -- that comes from a source that your flyer itself uses as asupporting footnote -- DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS claims made in the flyer you posted!

I did not manipulate the quote OR falsely represent it. I merely excerpted it after clearly representing it as a excerpt. However, the flyer you posted falsely pretended that this source backed up its claims that the aluminum load that comes from diet greatly exceeds that of vaccines!

As far as the second quote goes, the study was not about vaccines. So why would you expect its conclusion to be about vaccines? What about "prolonged intravenous feeding" was difficult for you to understand? Do you really think anybody will be confused and think "prolonged intravenous feeding" refers to vaccines?

I was just pointing out the picture of aluminum that your flyer's own footnotes paint is vastly different from the picture the flyer itself tries to paint. And the fact that you resorted to an "aha, gotcha!" gambit instead of continuing a reasonable discussion proves that I obviously did a bang up job!

From your flyer:

"Indeed, the quantity of aluminum in vaccines is so small that even after an injection of vaccines, the amount of aluminum in a baby’s blood does not detectably change."

I'm still looking for any published study that backs up this dubious claim. Can you help me?

[trotsky]

32. It does indeed stand on its own.

Because it's not supported by any facts. You are selectively skewing statements in order to draw the conclusions you want. You can deny it all day long, but that's exactly what you did.

"The calculated body burden of aluminum"

vs.

"the amount of aluminum in a baby’s blood"

You DO realize that those are two completely different things, right?

RIGHT?

[mhatrw]

36. Is this some new method of getting out of an argument you are losing?

It still has a few kinks, but good luck with it. You definitely needed a new approach.

[trotsky]

37. How could I get out of something that never started?

To argue, you have to have some facts. You have none, so by my accounting, there has been no argument here.

[HuckleB]

25. Mothering magazine: Peddling dangerous health misinformation to new mothers

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=9602

:rofl:

[mhatrw]

29. Why is everything ALWAYS attack the messenger with it comes to any vaccine questions?

If you question vaccines in any way, no matter how balanced, you get attacked.

If you publish someone who questions vaccines in any way, no matter how balanced, you get attacked.

Why? What is with all the attack the messenger and guilt by association nonsense?

What is so bad about Dr. Sears' discussion of aluminum that he should be attacked by anyone?

Here is the same article, but condensed and updated from Sears' own website:

http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/vaccine_faq.asp#aluminum

Is it OK now that it has nothing to do with some other random, completely unrelated article published in "Mothering" magazine?

[HuckleB]

30. Got hogwash?

You chose to post a crap piece from a crap publication, and I offered a piece that shows, very clearly, just how crap that piece is.

Now you're offering another red herring in reply. :eyes:

BTW, there's no guilt by association. The piece I offered is guilt by evidence. Your constant bizarre spin is noted as being off base yet again.

[mhatrw]

31. LOL

Click on this link: http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/vaccine_faq.asp#aluminum

It has nothing to do Mothering Magazine.

Can you or can you not argue against it on its own merits?

[trotsky]

33. Cashing In On Fear: The Danger of Dr. Sears

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=512

Some feel that while they may understand the rationale for vaccinating on a societal level, they are unwilling or afraid to place the burden of potential vaccine risks on their child. Dr. Sears falls for this line of thinking, and leads parents to believe that certain vaccines protect the community but not the individual child. He gives polio as an example, stating that the risk of polio is zero, and that therefore the vaccine does not protect the individual child from disease. This, of course, is untrue. While new cases of polio no longer arise in the United States (thanks to the success of the polio vaccine) they still do in other areas of the world. As is true for many infectious diseases, imported cases and potential outbreaks are a quick airplane flight away. The more unvaccinated children we have, the more likely an imported case will lead to larger outbreaks of disease. So yes, vaccinating protects the individual child as well as the community at large.

...

Dr. Sears’ understanding of epidemiology and vaccine adverse event surveillance is startlingly poor. He purports to break new ground by doing the first ever statistical vaccine risk-benefit analysis for parents. Unfortunately, his calculations are meaningless as he misunderstands the most basic concepts, like cause-and effect, and fails to grasp the significance of vaccination rates in determining the likelihood of contracting a vaccine-preventable disease.

...

But Dr. Sears uses VAERS data to come to the conclusion that “for about every 100,000 doses , one person suffered a severe reaction.” He fails to mention that VAERS data tells us absolutely nothing about the risk of developing a vaccine reaction, severe or not. He then takes this number and, by assuming every vaccine dose has the same risk attached to it of creating a severe reaction, determines that a child has a 1/100,000 chance of developing a severe reaction for each vaccine dose he receives.

...

Not only does he start his statistical sleight-of-hand by inappropriately using VAERS data, he then calculates the risk of acquiring a vaccine preventable disease using current disease incidence rates. What he doesn’t acknowledge is that those rates are predicated on current vaccination rates. The reason a child today is at low risk for contracting these diseases is precisely because our vaccination rates are so high!

Much, much more at the link. Dr. Sears simply does not understand vaccination enough to trust his conclusions about it. Reminds me of someone else I know.

[mhatrw]

35. What does any of this have to do with his eminently reasonable concerns about ALUMINUM?

Somebody said something that questioned something about vaccines!

Quick, somebody alert the Pharmy Army at http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org !

[trotsky]

38. It shows that he's speaking outta his ass and proven to give out false information.

Inquiring minds ought to know.

[mhatrw]

39. Sure it does. Now back to issue at hand.

Can you locate a skepdickal analysis of http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/vaccine_faq.asp#aluminum">this for us?

I am not talking about some slick PR flyer that does not address any issue brought up by Dr. Sears about his very conservatively expressed concerns about the aluminum adjuvants in so many infant vaccines. Surely, somebody over at Science-based Medicine or another of the legion of skepdick blogs and/or message boards has published a point by point rebuttal of http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/vaccine_faq.asp#aluminum">Dr. Sears concerns.

Enquiring minds want to know.

On edit: It was in the link you already supplied! Strange that you did not choose to quote this critique in your previous post!

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=512

Comparison of the aluminum body burden from vaccines to that from ingested breast milk, in relation to the oral MRL for aluminum for infants at the 5th and 50th percentiles for weight, is shown in the figure below (taken from the original article). The analysis assumes injections of vaccines according to the following schedule, with the corresponding aluminum content:

* Birth: Hep B (250 µg)
* 2 months: Hep B + DTaP (1100 µg)
* 4 months: DTaP (850 µg)
* 6 months: Hep B + DTaP (1100 µg)
* 12 months: DTaP (850 µg)

While this leaves out the PCV and Hib vaccines, only one brand of Hib vaccine contains aluminum, and the PCV vaccine contains only 125 µg of aluminum. Thus, this analysis accounts for the bulk of the aluminum that comes from the vaccine series.



Well, I don't know about you, but I am certainly reassured by the above graphic! LOL! No more studies needed! LOL!

[trotsky]

40. First, do you agree with Dr. Sears that an American child faces *no* risk from polio?

Just want to see if you think he is accurate with that fact before we consider him any kind of resource on the issue of vaccination. Thanks.

Secondly, regarding your "analysis" of that graph: :rofl:

My goodness, no wonder no one takes you seriously. Do you know what MRL stands for and how it is calculated? No, wait, I know the answer to that: you do not. The fact that you do not is made clear by your post.

[mhatrw]

41. The graph above left out 2 possible aluminum containing vaccine.

The graph above also made assumptions about the rapid elimination of injected aluminum adjuvants from a study that did not actually measure aluminum adjuvants.

The graph above certainly warrants more experimentation on this critical subject. Wouldn't you agree?

[trotsky]

42. Why won't you answer the question?

Do you agree with Dr. Sears that no American child is at risk from polio? Simple yes or no answer. Just want to find out if you think Dr. Sears is accurate and can be trusted to give out reliable information.

The graph above certainly warrants more experimentation on this critical subject. Wouldn't you agree?

Unlike you, I do not claim to know more than the experts in the field. I do not trust my Google-fu to lead me to better information than researchers have access to.

[HuckleB]

34. Nice try.

You actually think that repeating the same crap that has been debunked over and over has some value, don't you?

Wake up.

[mhatrw]

43. Aluminium-adjuvanted vaccines transiently increase aluminium levels in murine brain tissue.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1608913?dopt=Abstract

Aluminium is widely used as an adjuvant in human vaccines, and children can often receive up to 3.75 mg of parenteral aluminium during the first six months of life. We show that intraperitoneal injection of aluminium adsorbed vaccines into mice causes a transient rise in brain tissue aluminium levels peaking around the second and third day after injection. This rise is not seen in the saline control group of animals or with vaccine not containing aluminium. It is likely that aluminium is transported to the brain by the iron-binding protein transferrin and enters the brain via specific transferrin receptors.

[trotsky]

44. Yep, and the aluminum in breast milk can also end up in the brain.

Guess you are against breastfeeding then? Or, for that matter, any kind of feeding since aluminum is pretty much found in everything?

[mhatrw]

46. From your own pro-aluminum flyer

http://www.chop.edu/export/download/pdfs/articles/vaccine-education-center/aluminum.pdf

Though all of the aluminum present in vaccines enters the bloodstream, less than 1 percent of aluminum present in food
is absorbed through the intestines into the blood.

[trotsky]

48. FFS

If you're going to call someone "pro-aluminum," then we get to call you "pro-disease."

And your quote doesn't disprove what I said at all. Read carefully.

[mhatrw]

49. maybe you should read more carefully

"Though all of the aluminum present in vaccines enters the bloodstream, less than 1 percent of aluminum present in food
is absorbed through the intestines into the blood."

[trotsky]

50. No, I think you're the one who needs to do that.

Does that say that NONE is absorbed? Nope. So SOME is. And SOME will accumulate in the brain. QED. Better luck next time.