http://www.mercola.com/2001/jul/18/ada.htm

The ADA Misinformation on Mercury
 
The American Dental Association continues to remain in denial about the
toxicity of mercury. Dr. Murray Vimey is one of the leading mercury researchers
and he has provided a detailed chronology documenting how mercury has been
clearly established as a contributing factor for periodontal disease.

The news release by the American Dental Association (ADA) dated June 13, 2001
contains a very significant error. The ADA President Dr. Robert M. Anderton is
reported as saying,

"There is no sound scientific evidence supporting a link between amalgam
fillings and systemic diseases or chronic illness''.

Yet, it is well known in the published, peer-reviewed dental journals that
mercury leaks directly from amalgam into adjacent oral tissues causing
periodontal disease (gum disease).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------

Critical Fact #1: In 1957, Zander (JADA, 55:11-15) reported "materials used in
restorative dentistry may be a contributing factor in gingival disease."

Critical Fact #2: In 1961, App (J Prosth Dent 11:522-532) suggested that there
was greater chronic inflammation around amalgam sites than non-amalgam areas.

Critical fact #3: In 1964, Trott and Sherkat (J CDA, 30:766-770) showed that
the presence of amalgam correlates with gingival disease. Such disease was not
present at contralateral amalgam-free sites.

Critical fact #4: In 1969, Sanches Sotres et al (J. Periodo. l40: 543-546)
confirmed Trott and Sherkat findings.

Critical fact #5: In 1972, Turgeon et al. (J CDA 37:255-256) reported the
presence of very significant erythema around amalgam restorations that was not
present at control non-amalgam sites.

Critical fact #6: In 1973, Trivedi and Talim (J. Prosth. Dentistry, 29:73-81)
demonstrated that 62.5% of amalgam sites have inflammatory periodontal tissue
reaction.

Thus, as early as 1973, a case can be made that the presence of dental
mercury-amalgam results in chronic inflammation and bleeding in the gingival
tissue adjacent to it; in other words, in situ amalgam produced chronic
Gingivitis.

Critical fact #7: In 1974, Freden et al. (Odontol. Revy, 25: 207-210) showed
that gingival biopsy material from sites not adjacent to amalgam had 1-10 µg
mercury/gram of tissue (mean=3); whereas, gingival biopsy sites near amalgams
contained 19-380 µg mercury/gram of tissue (mean=147).

Critical fact #8: In 1976, Goldschmidt et al (J. Perio. Res., 11:108-115)
demonstrated that amalgam corrosion products were cytotoxic to gingival cells
at concentrations of 10-6; that is, micrograms/gram of tissue.

Critical fact #9: In 1984, the year of the NIDR/ADA Workshop, Fisher et al (J
Oral Rehab, 11:399-405) reported that at amalgam sites alveolar bone loss was
very pronounced and statistically significant as compared to control
non-amalgam sites! In other words, in situ amalgam produces chronic
Periodontitis.

This suggests that placing mercury fillings leads to a dentist-induced disease,
periodontal disease, which the same dentists then treat. This is iatrogenesis.

Thus, for the ADA to conclude "There is no sound scientific evidence supporting
a link between amalgam fillings and systemic diseases or chronic illness'' is
incorrect.

Periodontal disease is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases in Man, and
mercury fillings contribute significantly! Such statements by ADA spokespersons
suggest that the ADA and its advisors may be knowingly disinforming the public
through the media or they lack an understanding of the scientific research
about mercury release from amalgam published in their own journals.

Murray J. Vimy DMD Clinical Associate Professor Faculty of Medicine, University
of Calgary. Calgary, Canada, July 4, 2001