|
Post by Isabella Jimenez on Sept 4, 2014 19:51:17 GMT
In the article "What is Mercury Poisoning" the writer states,"just because you're exposed to the a toxin doesn't mean you get poisoned." The writer is trying to show the differences between being exposed and being poisoned. One of the differences is that if you have gotten exposed you don't have a physical or chemical change but when you get poisoned you do. In the article they never said that Piven had a physical or chemical change on his body so that is why he is not poisoned. I agree with you that the author try's to point out the difference between the exposure and actually being poisoned. In Jeremy's case he did not have symptoms and that's true because there were no change physically or chemically in him.
|
|
|
Post by Cristian Bayona on Sept 4, 2014 19:51:29 GMT
I would assume that Jeremy is fine, sense there is no specific details on the illness that he had expect that he had high levels of mercury. In the article, it said," if the symptoms just started and you haven't been exposed for years and years, it is very possible that those symptoms will dissipate." The article had never said anything about Jeremy having been exposed for long periods of time. Only that the symptoms occurred and had never ever, at once forever say that he was damaged physically nor chemically. The article also states that if you were exposed for years then you would have been damage ether physically or chemically. So yea.
|
|
|
Post by Mary Jane Hurtado on Sept 4, 2014 19:52:32 GMT
Jeremy Piven doesn't have mercury poison he has mercury exposure. In the article it states, "A person with no symptoms, no changes physically or chemically, we just say they've been exposed and have a high mercury level." The article didn't mention if Piven had shown any symptoms so we can assume that he had none and only he high levels proving that it wasn't poisoning but instead exposure. Because Piven had a "mercury-rich sushi diet" he could've been exposed that way. The article wasn't clear of Piven's symptoms so one can assume that he only had mercury exposure. I agree with Jordan and Ariana because they both said that Jeremy Piven didn't really show any symptoms and that when symptoms aren't present then it may just be exposure and not poinsining.
|
|
|
Post by Miguel Barreto on Sept 4, 2014 22:07:29 GMT
I wouldn't necessarily state that the author, Jeremy Pivin, has had mercury poisoning or has not; we can say that he is well informed. He covers all topics on mercury poisoning and exposure from what is mercury, to how we get it, symptoms, and solutions. He knows what he is talking about, which is why he desired to organize it all into different subsections describing different aspects of this issue. He also know the difference between exposure and poisoning as well as "safe" levels. He wants to address to those who have possibly been exposed or poisoned and how much creates the difference of exposure to poisoning.
|
|
|
Post by Angel Pelayo on Sept 4, 2014 22:10:34 GMT
Judging by the given information from the article, Jeremy Pivins case is not mercury poisoning. He never went through chemical nor physical changes. From the sushi and herbal medicine, it really doesn't matter, because he never experienced "Mercury Salt Poisoning". In Jeremy's case he had mercury exposure,"A person with no symptoms,no changes physically or chemically, we just. Say they've been exposed and have a high mercury level.". I just saw this description of his condition with the exact same words "test have revealed Piven has mercury levels 5-6 times higher than normal" so basically he's been exposed not poisoned. If Jeremy was poisoned he would've experienced issues with urinating, being fatigue, getting the flu, and getting damage in his respiratory system. So if Jeremy was actually poisoned he would've experienced those symptoms but the article never stated he did. Overall,Jeremy and his doctors read the data wrong and should know Jeremy does not have mercury poisoning.
|
|
|
Post by Miguel Barreto. on Sept 4, 2014 22:11:54 GMT
I would assume that Jeremy is fine, sense there is no specific details on the illness that he had expect that he had high levels of mercury. In the article, it said," if the symptoms just started and you haven't been exposed for years and years, it is very possible that those symptoms will dissipate." The article had never said anything about Jeremy having been exposed for long periods of time. Only that the symptoms occurred and had never ever, at once forever say that he was damaged physically nor chemically. The article also states that if you were exposed for years then you would have been damage ether physically or chemically. So yea. I agree with you, it does not blatantly state whether he has had it or not. One cannot simply assume that he has, or has not, had it. He could have been assigned the topic, and he could have done research on said topic. He could also have been poisoned, and is attempting to warn others of what he has been through.
|
|
|
Post by Ismael Jimenez on Sept 4, 2014 22:13:39 GMT
The author is trying to tell the people about mercury poison so that people actually know the difference between being exposed and being poisoned. For instance in Mercury Exposure vs. Mercury Poisoning the author wrote, "A person with no symptoms , no changes physically or chemically, we just say they've been exposed... It doesn't become poisoning under the true definition unless someone has had physical or chemical changes in his or her body." The author tells the audience the difference between being exposed and being poisoned so that the people now know about it. Another example would be when he says, " ...even if you're exposed at low levels, the symptoms my not manifest until weeks or months later." This means that the symptoms may come after a long time of exposure because after being exposed at low levels then over time levels of mercury will cause problems in your body.
|
|
|
Post by Kimberly Gallardo on Sept 4, 2014 22:14:32 GMT
In the article "What is Mercury Poisoning?", the author claims that actor Jeremy Piven had mercury poison. The article revealed "Piven has mercury levels five to six times higher than normal...". However, the article did not reveal that Pivet had any physical or chemical changes in his body. Pivet's diet consisted of fish and Chinese herbs, in which case both may contain toxic levels of mercury. It is possible that Pivet had an exposure to mercury, but not that he had mercury poisoning because in order to be poisoned you must show symptoms. There is not enough information given in the article to be able to draw a clear conclusion, but on the given facts, it is safe to say that Pivet had no mercury poisoning.
|
|
|
Post by Angel Pelayo on Sept 4, 2014 22:15:37 GMT
Jeremy Piven doesn't have mercury poison he has mercury exposure. In the article it states, "A person with no symptoms, no changes physically or chemically, we just say they've been exposed and have a high mercury level." The article didn't mention if Piven had shown any symptoms so we can assume that he had none and only he high levels proving that it wasn't poisoning but instead exposure. Because Piven had a "mercury-rich sushi diet" he could've been exposed that way. The article wasn't clear of Piven's symptoms so one can assume that he only had mercury exposure. I agree with Jordan and Ariana because they both said that Jeremy Piven didn't really show any symptoms and that when symptoms aren't present then it may just be exposure and not poinsining. I agree with you that he does have mercury exposure, also that Jeremy did not experience a chemical nor a physical change.
|
|
|
Post by Ricky Jimenez on Sept 4, 2014 22:17:48 GMT
Did Jeremy pivin get mercury poisoning? On page 2 mercury Exposure vs mercury poisoning it explains the difference between both and the side effects to both as will. Jeremy couldn't have been poisoned bc "A person with no symptoms,no changes physically or chemically" This shows that she was simply exposed to high levels of mercury and not poisoned.Jeremy was on a "rich sushi diet and possibly of herbal medicine" Both of this things have high mercury level in them. Jeremy was simply exposed to mercury and mot poisoned.
|
|
|
Post by Thea Quiton on Sept 4, 2014 22:17:59 GMT
In the article "What is Mercury Poisoning", the author tries to state that Jeremy Piven doesn't have mercury poisoning. In the paragraph "Mercury Exposure vs. Mercury Poisoning" it states, "a person with no symptoms, no changes physically or chemically... Been exposed and have a high mercury level." Although Piven was showing high levels of mercury, he didn't show any symptoms or changes in any physical or chemical way.
|
|
|
Post by Heidi Hernandez on Sept 4, 2014 22:18:39 GMT
The author claimed that mercury exposure and mercury poisining is very different from each other. The author states, " just because you're exposed to a toxin doesn't mean you get poisoned." This supports his claim because it shows that if your exposed to mercury doesn't mean that you will automatically get poisoned by the mercury that was exposed to you. The author also states, "you can build up a blood or tissue level but not yet manifest symptoms related to positioning." This connects back to the claim the another gave because it shows that you could have been exposed top mercury or any type of toxins for a long period of time and still not show any symptoms of being poisoned by the mercury and/or toxins that were in your body.
|
|
|
Post by Miguel Barreto on Sept 4, 2014 22:19:09 GMT
I think Jeremy Piven did not have mercury poisoning, instead he was simply exposed to it. He has had been eating a sushi diet. Some fish have higher levels of mercury than others, therefore he was exposed to mercury. It was stated that all he needs is restrictions in diet and rest, that he would get better. People who have been poisoned have much severe symptoms, some which are permanent, that impede with the person's everyday life, to Jeremy, this is simply something to learn about, and hopefully he is more carefull.
|
|
|
Post by Daisy Gonzalez on Sept 4, 2014 22:19:08 GMT
I believe that Jeremy Priven did not have Mercury poisoning because there is a difference between mercury poisoning and mercury exposure. In the article it is stated that "his level of mercury was uncharacteristically high, one of the highest we have seen". Doctors confirmed that Priven did show high levels of Mercury in his body, but no where did they state any symptoms of the Mercury making any changes to his body. Which makes me think that he was not poisoned by the mercury, but rather just exposed to it. The article also states that " payout can build out to a blood or tissue level but nit yet manifest symptoms related to poisoning... It doesn't become poisoning under the true definition unless someone has had a physical or chemical change in his or her body." This makes me conclude that Priven was not poisoned by any of the three Mercury types( Elemental, Salts, or Organic), because if he was poisoned, he would had showed symptoms such as problems with his Kidney, trouble seeing or hearing, or any other symptoms of the common flu.
|
|
|
Post by Angel Pelayo on Sept 4, 2014 22:19:27 GMT
The author wants to make sure the reader knows what the mercury poisoning is and how someone might know if it is mercury poisoning. An evidence that the author makes is he puts a actor named Jeremy Piven. He talks about how he might have mercury poisoning inside him. Pivens Doctor Colker says, " we are not sure if this is from his diet which is high in fish, or Chinese herbs , which he's been a fan of in the past." Will there are some fish that do have a high level of mercury. Piven might eat any kind of fish without knowing what that kind of fish has. The author explains that their a different kind of fishes that have high levels he says, "there are certain types of fish that can accumulate higher levels of mercury than others. If you exist on a diet of that fish, you can mount some very high levels. Pivens was going through a diet as well which might have caused him to get mercury poisoning. That author shows different reasons of how the someone might have mercury poisoning and I believe that Pivens does have that problem for eating to much fish. I can't figure out what your argument was, that if he is poisoned or not? Anyways your analysis of the article is correct but can you go more in depth On your last sentence? What is his problem and I don't really think you're getting the full understanding of the Jeremy Piven part and why it was used there.
|
|