. The mercury in amalgam, it turns out, is not free, but mixed with
silver, tin and copper, metals to which it bonds chemically to form a
crystalline metallic — and safe — alloy.

Wrong

An obvious analogy, says Dr. Robert Baratz, president of the National
Council against Health Fraud, can be made with water, a chemical
combination of hydrogen, a gas that

Baratz!

can explode, and oxygen, which supports combustion. Yet, like those in
water, amalgam's components are tightly bonded to each other. "Saying
that amalgam will poison you," Baratz insists, "is like saying that
drinking water will make you explode and burst into flames."

Total lie.

Take my advice. Don't rely on an outdated article by a senile time
correspondent
with no understanding of science that thinks amalgam issues are the
"flavor
of the week."

<snip Joel's baltherings>

An obvious analogy, says Dr. Robert Baratz president of the National Council
against Health Fraud

Review of Robert Baratz testimony before the Florida Dental Board by 2
distinguished Chemistry Professors and Researchers

******************************************************************************

snip from review of Dr. Baratz testimony before the Florida Dental Board by Dr.
Ralph Dougherty, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Florida State Univ.

850-644-5725

"I have qualified as an expert witness in chemistry and toxicology in both
federal and state courts. I have conducted extensive research in analytical
toxicology. I have more than 100 papers published in refereed journals."

"To allege that there is no mercury in mercury amalgam as Dr. Baratz has done
in his sworn testimony before the Florida Dental Board is either a reflection
of ignorence, or intent to deceive."

Sincerely,

Ralph Dougherty

******************************************************************************

Dr. Boyd E. Haley

Chair, Department of Chemistry

University of Kentucky

www.altcorp.com

3 January 2002

The following is my comments on the content and specific statements made in the
Sept. 29th Florida Dental Board where the FDA presented "Amalgam Related
Material" to support their proposed rule. Please feel free to share it with
whomever you wish and especially the Florida Dental Board (FDA). Sincerely,
Boyd Haley

With regards to statements made by Dr. Baratz. First, to be an esteemed
academic as claimed one should hold an academic position and publish articles
in refereed journals on his subject of expertise. I have been unable to find a
single research article on mercury or amalgams or about anything authored by
Dr. Baratz. I further could not find any source of academic appointments in
tenure leading positions. With my personal knowledge of numerous outstanding
and productive academic research scientists available to the FDA for
consultation I am somewhat perplexed that they would select someone with such
weak credentials---unless they were searching for someone who would adamantly
support their preconceived position of amalgams being totally safe. Dr. Baratz
is evidently well known for taking that position. Finally, statements made by
Dr. Baratz concerning amalgams and chemistry in general are so pathetic that
they almost defy sensible analysis. I WOULD CHALLENGE THE FDA TO TRY TO GET THE
DEPARTMENT CHAIRS OF CHEMISTY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA AND FLORIDA STATE
UNIVERSITY TO AGREE WITH DR. BARATZ'S COMMENTS REGARDING THE CHEMISTRY OF
AMALGAMS AND MERCURY. However, knowing this is unlikely I will deal as best I
can with Dr. Baratz's statements one at a time in order of presentation.

Page 6, line 27-28. Dr. Baratz has no published basis for making this
statement. Absence of proof is not proof of absence. How can Dr. Baratz say
that a patient on a kidney dialysis program is not further injured by
additional mercury (a potent kidney toxicant) exposure from their amalgams? I
don't think such a study has ever been undertaken. When exposing a person to
years of a chronic level of toxic mercury it is the responsibility of the
pro-amalgam group to prove it does no harm, not vice-versa. Can Dr. Baratz or
the FDA confirm that the 22,000-fold increased mercury levels in the hearts of
inter-city young men who die of Idiopathic Dialated Cardiomyopthy did not come
from dental amalgams? { Frustaci, A., Magnavita, N., Chimenti, C., Caldarulo,
M., Sabbioni, E., Pietra, R., Cellini. C., Possati, G. F. and Maseri, A. Marked
Elevation of Myocardial Trace Elements in Idiopathic Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Compared With Secondary Dysfunction. J. of the American College Cardiology
v33(6) 1578-1583, 1999,}

Page 6, lines 31-32. One grain of standard sucrose does not weigh near one
milligram. Therefore his visual aid is totally misleading and indicates that he
has not, or does not, remember experiments where weighing small amounts was
involved.

Page 6, lines 37-41. Sodium metal when added to water burns violently, but it
does not explode when added to a glass of water. I have done this as a
demonstration so I know the results first-hand. No one would be killed or even
injured unless they touched the burning metallic sodium. Yes, chlorine gas is
toxic and is a man-made material (as is metallic sodium) that does not exist
naturally. Dr. Baratz wants to claim that metallic sodium and chlorine gas are
toxic but become non-toxic on conversion to a compound, sodium chloride, and
therefore, mercury in an amalgam is not toxic because it is surrounded by other
(toxic) metals that he feels produces something that is not mercury. This is
banal.

Reactivity and biological compatibility is the essence of the amalgam issue.
Human blood contains about 140 millimolar chloride anion and 124 millimolar
sodium cation. This ions are not toxic because they are not very reactive with
biomolecules. These ions are used to perform many biological functions
necessary for life, including maintaining the ionic gradient and electrical
potential across cell membranes. However, mercury is not found to serve any
useful purpose in human tissues and is a well known inhibitor of many enzymes,
including the enzyme that transports sodium across cell membranes. In contrast
to sodium cation, mercury cation, produced from mercury vapor by a blood
enzyme, is very reactive and inhibits almost every biological pathway or enzyme
driven function in man. To compare amalgam material to sodium chloride in the
manner Dr. Baratz has chosen to reveals a total misunderstanding of chemistry
and biochemistry of heavy metal toxicity.

Page 6 line 42 to page 7 line 2. Since all of the metal components of amalgam
are basic metallic elements with no charge how can someone make the inept
statement that there is no mercury in amalgams. It is an "element" and the fact
that elements cannot be broken down or changed is a basic tenant of chemistry.
The metals in amalgams have no net charge and therefore form only metallic
bonds. Mercury is a liquid at room temperature and quite volatile because it
forms weak metallic bonds with itself. This makes mercury unlike all other
metals. The metallic bonds formed between mercury and other metals in amalgams
are stronger and a solid phase is produced---but the bonds between mercury and,
say silver, are weaker than silver-silver metal bonds and therefore break
easier releasing elemental mercury vapor at a regular rate. This is why you can
heat a gold ring covered with mercury and rapidly make it gold again and why
dimes made silvery with mercury soon resort to their old form. The bottom line
is that inclusion of mercury into an amalgam reduces its vapor pressure but it
does not reduce it to the point that mercury cannot be significantly emitted.

Dr. Baratz states that if you detect traces of mercury from amalgams it is
because that material has been decomposed by heat and friction. How does he
explain the observations of the release of 43.5 micrograms mercury per cm2
surface area per day for two years straight in a test tube without additional
heat and no friction? {Chew, C. L., Soh, G., Lee, A. S. and Yeoh, T. S.
Long-term Dissolution of Mercury from a Non-Mercury-Releasing Amalgam. Clinical
Preventive Dentistry 13(3): 5-7, May-June (1991).} Bottom line is that it is
quite easy to demonstrate mercury release from a dental amalgam. I suggest the
FDA not believe either Dr. Baratz or myself but instead make 20-30 amalgams and
send them to the state universities in Florida and have them determine how long
a single amalgam must be in a gallon of water before the water is considered
unsafe to drink by OSHA or EPA standards. Then the FDA can then make a decent
decision on the mercury release and toxicity of amalgams using data from an
unbiased source.

Page 7, lines 10-13. Sodium chloride intake is necessary for life. Mercury is
toxic to every type of cell. Dr. Baratz's comparison amalgams to sodium
chloride is ridiculous. Amino acids contain carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen and
so does cyanide but the difference is how these molecules react in the
body---one is a food and the other a lethal toxin. Amalgams release mercury and
other metal ions and solutions in which amalgams are soaked are cytotoxic! {
Wataha, J. C., Nakajima, H., Hanks, C. T., and Okabe, T. Correlation of
Cytotoxicity with Element Release from Mercury and Gallium-based Dental Alloys
in vitro. Dental Materials 10(5) 298-303, Sept. (1994)}

Page 7, lines 15-18. Yes, everything is toxic if an overdose is obtained---that
is common sense. However, mercury has no food or biological function and is
toxic at concentrations much lower than even most other toxicants. Low levels
of mercury have been shown to inhibit the same enzymes/proteins that are found
inhibited in Alzheimer's diseased brain. { Pendergrass, J.C. and Haley, B.E.
Mercury-EDTA Complex Specifically Blocks Brain -Tubulin-GTP Interactions:
Similarity to Observations in Alzheimer"s Disease. pp98-105 in Status Quo and
Perspective of Amalgam and Other Dental Materials (International Symposium
Proceedings ed. by L. T. Friberg and G. N. Schrauzer) Georg Thieme Verlag,
Stuttgart-New York (1995). Pendergrass, J. C., Haley, B.E., Vimy, M. J.,
Winfield, S.A. and Lorscheider, F.L. Mercury Vapor Inhalation Inhibits Binding
of GTP to Tubulin in Rat Brain: Similarity to a Molecular Lesion in Alzheimer's
Disease Brain. Neurotoxicology 18(2), 315-324 (1997). Pendergrass, J.C. and
Haley, B.E. Inhibition of Brain Tubulin-Guanosine 5'-Triphosphate Interactions
by Mercury: Similarity to Observations in Alzheimer's Diseased Brain. In Metal
Ions in Biological Systems V34, pp 461-478. Mercury and Its Effects on
Environment and Biology, Chapter 16. Edited by H. Sigel and A. Sigel. Marcel
Dekker, Inc. 270 Madison Ave., N.Y., N.Y. 10016 (1996)}

Later research with neurons in culture nanomolar (10-9M) levels of mercury
caused cell destruction and formation of three of the widely accepted
diagnostic hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease. { Olivieri, G., Brack, Ch.,
Muller-Spahn, F., Stahelin, H.B., Herrmann, M., Renard, P; Brockhaus, M. and
Hock, C. Mercury Induces Cell Cytotoxicity and Oxidative Stress and Increases
-amyloid Secretion and Tau Phosphorylation in SHSY5Y Neuroblastoma Cells. J.
Neurochemistry 74, 231-231, 2000. Leong, CCW, Syed, N.I., and Lorscheider, F.L.
Retrograde Degeneration of Neurite Membrane Structural Integrity and Formation
of Neruofibillary Tangles at Nerve Growth Cones Following In Vitro Exposure to
Mercury. NeuroReports 12 (4):733-737, 2001.} Therefore, being unnecessarily
exposed to continuous low doses of mercury for scores of years is an unhealthy
situation. Does the FDA operate with the mantra of allowing itself to do this
and eliminate any disagreement by posturing that no one has proven mercury
toxic when indeed this has been done over and over. Due to the overall
difficulty and complexity there is not one epidemiological study showing any
major negative effects of mercury from amalgams, but there are none showing it
to be safe either. With all of the data on animal cell culture studies showing
mercury toxicity showing concern and eliminating all long-term exposures to
mercury is justified.

Page 7 lines 15-34. This paragraph should convince everyone that Dr. Baratz is
way off base. I had to replace all of the mercury thermometers in the teaching
labs in our department of chemistry because of the OSHA/EPA restrictions where
the spill of one thermometer could create a toxic in-building situation and the
possible wash-out into the sewage stream caused an unacceptable environmental
hazard. Dr. Baratz seems unaware of the long-term affects of mercury
accumulation. Sure, he could ingest liquid mercury a single time and walk away
but how many industrial workers have been seriously injured by less severe but
continuous mercury exposures? Also, if he did ingest liquid mercury then he
could pay a severe price later on in his life but he doesn't seem to know this.
Why does he think the government has outlawed the sale of mercury thermometers
to the general public?

In this paragraph Dr. Baratz states that mercury is not absorbed from the gut.
This is totally incorrect. Mercury vapor is rapidly absorbed into all
hydrophobic areas of the body. Where is the publication to support his absurd
contention? He is further incorrect in his statement that the amount that comes
off of an amalgam is equivalent to the amount you get every day by breathing
air, drinking water and eating food. In a 1998 NIH study on 1,127 US military
personnel it was shown that the blood/urine mercury levels were much higher in
individuals with dental amalgams and the amount of mercury was correlated with
the number of amalgams surfaces. The average amalgam bearer had 4.5 times the
urine mercury level of individuals who were amalgam free. { Kingman, A.,
Albertini, T. and Brown, L.J. Mercury Concentrations in Urine and Whole Blood
Associated with Amalgam Exposure in a US Military Population. J. of Dental
Research v77(3): 461-471, 1998.}

Dr. Baratz states that even the most ardent anti-amalgamist have virtually the
same amount of mercury in their bodies as does the members of the Florida Board
of Dentistry. That would be true only if all of them are free of amalgams. In a
published report removing amalgam fillings dropped the level of mercury in the
urine in the patients by about 5-fold at a subsequent date. { Begerow, J.,
Zander, D., Freier, I. And Dunemann, L. Long-term Mercury Excretion in Urine
after Removal of Amalgam Fillings. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health v66 (3),
209-212, 1994.}

Neither Dr. Baratz nor I have the right to make sweeping statements without
providing the scientific literature on the subject that backs up our
statements. Under adjudication many of his statements, now on record, such as
given on page 7 line 19, "So to say that dental amalgam has mercury in it is
false. It has what used to be mercury." will provide a feast for the opposing
lawyers. I am very surprised that Dr. Baratz has chosen to pass himself off as
an amalgam expert with no publications in the area and this is compounded by
what appears to be total ignorance of the relevant literature.

Page 8 lines 1 to 10. My comment is that the EPA and OSHA government units
don't think the amount of mercury released from amalgams is safe. If indeed the
groups listed by Dr. Baratz say amalgams are safe (are amalgams listed on the
Food and Drug Administration list of safe dental materials?) where are the
scientific studies that back their claims. Who represents the NIH and says
amalgams are safe? I challenge Dr. Baratz to find a single research article
where experimental protocols are used that provide proof of safety of dental
amalgams. It is easy to compose a "committee mainly pro-amalgam dentists" and
have them proclaim amalgams safe, but have them show the relevant basic
research that proves this is another thing. Does he really have publications
from the Multiple Sclerosis and Alzheimer's Associations that claim amalgams
are safe? I would really like to see him produce these documents.

Page 8, line 30. Keeping or bringing science into the dental profession is my
goal also. This means both Dr. Baratz and I have to back our statements with
refereed scientific publications, not wild, unjustified claims or opinions. I
would like to challenge Dr. Baratz to produce the research papers that back his
many claims.

They have goods on the corruption of organized medicine.

The finger points to the facts.

http://amalgamillness.com/Text_DCAct.html


The Politics of Mercury

 The text on this page is a statement by Congresswoman Diane Watson
(Los-Angeles) who is proposing legislation to phase out mercury in dentistry in
California. Her words echo the common sense that we so long to hear from a
government neck-deep in systematic half-truths and carefully cloaked
corruption.  




   
 Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act
Los Angeles, California 11/5/2001

In times like these, there are toxins that we don’t know much about — how
to control them, their source, and their impact. But there are toxins that we
DO know about — toxins that we know do not belong in our bodies, toxins that
we can do something about. My bill addresses that very problem.

Mercury is an acute neuro-toxin. It is the most toxic non-radioactive element
and the most volatile heavy metal. In recent years, it has been, or is being,
removed from all health care uses, save one. Antibiotics have replaced oral
doses of Mercury. The disinfectant Mercurochrome is banned. Recently, the
Centers for Disease Control ordered Mercury preservatives removed from
childhood vaccines. Mercury preservatives are no longer used in contact lens
solutions. This year, legislatures in California and several other states
banned Mercury thermometers. When Governor Gray Davis signed bills addressing
Mercury in thermometers and in dental fillings, he said, “Mercury is a
persistent and toxic pollutant that bioaccumulates in the environment.” In
recent years, the American Public Health Association, the California Medical
Association, and Health Care Without Harm have all called for the elimination
of putting any Mercury in the human body.

Today, I am announcing legislation to disclose and phase-out the last major use
of Mercury in the human body. The fillings that organized dentistry wrongly
calls “silver” are mainly Mercury, not “silver.”

Mercury is the major ingredient in each filling, about one-half gram per. In
the words of Professor Boyd Haley of the University of Kentucky, that is a
“colossal” amount of Mercury in scientific terms — as much, in fact, as
is in a thermometer. A teenager with six fillings has six Mercury thermometers
worth of Mercury in his or her mouth.

*****The Mercury in the fillings is volatile, such that — as all authorities
concede — poisonous vapors are constantly being emitted from the fillings,
more so when one chews or passes hot liquid over the teeth. The Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry of the United States Public Healthy
Service reports that those poisonous vapors go first to the brain and kidneys.
For the developing brain — and by that I mean a child’s brain — a major
health risk exists.*****

***It is, in fact, children who are at greatest risk from these fillings. The
government of Canada recommended back in 1996 that dentists not place fillings
in the mouths of children or pregnant women. The 1999 report on Mercury by the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry says Mercury passes through
the placenta into the developing child’s brain. In 1997, a major manufacturer
of dental amalgam, Dentsply, said that amalgam is CONTRAINDICATED (translation:
DO NOT USE) for children and pregnant women, as well as for those with braces,
Mercury hypersensitivities, or kidney problems. Another manufacturer, Vivadent,
added a contraindication for nursing mothers. (That 1999 government reports
says the Mercury goes through the mother’s breast milk into the baby.)*****

Why don’t consumers already know this? The answer is a disappointing one.
Organized dentistry is extremely divided on this issue. My bill, in fact, is
supported by the American Academy of Biological Dentistry. But the American
Dental Association (ADA) tells the public that the fillings are safe. The ADA
does not tell the public that it accepts payments from the amalgam manufacturer
while it pronounces their product safe. I wish to note that the American
Medical Association has a policy prohibiting the organization from taking money
for product endorsements. The ADA, by contract, accepts money from the
manufacturer of the products it endorses, which certainly hurts its credibility
in my mind.

88888The public does not know about the presence of Mercury and its risks for
two
reasons. First, the fillings are falsely called “silver.” This term is
deceptive, because there is much more Mercury than silver in the product.
It’s time to call it what it is, and quit hiding the large presence of
Mercury.*****

Second, the ADA has a rule that gags dentists from talking about the risks of
Mercury amalgam, a rule that some dental boards enforce against dentists who
call for the elimination of Mercury in dental fillings. I understand that rule
is being challenged by dentists in federal court in Maryland based on the First
Amendment.

Developments in this area have been quite encouraging this year in my state. In
1992, as a state Senator, I wrote a law that required the Dental Board of
California to write a “Fact Sheet” about the “risks and efficacies” of
dental fillings. My goal was to ensure the public could make informed choices
about Mercury dental amalgam. But the Dental board continued to ignore the law
and, in recent years, defy the Davis Administration’s insistence that it
comply with this law. After an impasse, including the Board refusing to show up
for a hearing in Los Angeles on this issue, the Legislature stepped in and shut
down the Board. I am told that never before has the California Legislature shut
down a board before its Sunset date expired. In January, a new Dental Board
will come into existence.

A major environmental issue exists here. When removed from a patient’s mouth,
Mercury amalgam is a hazardous waste, and it is often improperly disposed of
(it normally goes into the city sewer system). The more Mercury that goes into
people’s teeth, the more of it that will end up in our water supply. I am
delighted, therefore, that San Francisco-based Clean Water Action is supporting
my bill, and I look forward to other environmental groups joining us in this
effort.

The occupational risk is significant. Dental employees are constantly exposed
to the vapors. Women in dental offices have lower fecundity (pregnancy) rates,
more miscarriages, and more problem births; Mercury exposure is the likely
reason. Dentists have the highest suicide rate of any profession; depression
leading to suicide in consistent with a diagnosis of Mercury toxicity.

****Mercury amalgam is dangerous before it is put in the mouth — and dental
journal will tell you that — and it is considered hazardous waste after it
has been removed. Who can conclusively say it’s safe in between, when it is
in our bodies?*****

A major social justice, or environmental justice, use exists here. While the
public lacks informed choice, low- and moderate-income people have it worse:
they have no choice at all! For families on Medi-Cal, the children get Mercury
— or nothing. It is outrageous that low-income Americans are forced to have
such a toxic material put in their mouths. I understand that the Rhode Island
legislature adopted a law this year to provide choice in insurance plans and
that the state of Maine permits Medicaid children to get alternative to amalgam
— so yes, we can do it differently.

****Mercury, and all other poisons in the body, hurt the body’s immune system
—
it’s ability to withstand diseases and biologically harmful agents. If at any
time in our nation’s history we need strong immune systems, it is now. The
stronger our bodies, the more able we are to fend off biological agents that
have so tragically been placed in our midst.*****

My bill will protect children, pregnant women, and nursing mothers immediately
— regardless of their income. Henceforth, amalgam will bear warnings that
they not be placed in the most vulnerable people. And there will be health
warnings for all consumers of amalgam, also immediately. Then, there is a
five-year phase out of Mercury amalgam. That will give dentistry plenty of time
to shift to alternatives that exist in today’s market — resin, porcelain,
and gold — or to develop new materials.

Dentistry says amalgam is fine because it has been in use for 150 years. This
statement makes no scientific sense. We have abandoned other remnants of
pre-Civil War medicine, and we have abandoned all other uses of Mercury. It is
no longer a question of if, but when, Mercury dental fillings will be history.
I say five more years is time enough.

###

Thank You

We sincerely, hope you find this information helpful. If you have amalgam
("silver") dental fillings, we hope you will consider purchasing the book
"Amalgam Illness" as it could very well be the answer you or someone cose to
you is searching for. As for us... Educating ourselves and having our fillings
replaced (with a safer substance) changed our lives and health dramatically...
From a doomed downward spiral to a steady upward adventure.

Whether you decide to purchase "Amalgam Illness" or not, we are truly glad
you've stopped by our website. We hope the information you've seen here will
make you aware of the dangers of mercury from amalgam ("silver") fillings and
will prevent suffering for yourself or someone you know in the future.

Please feel free to visit our Mercury/Amalgam forum at this location:

Mercury Amalgam Forum

We welcome your questions and comments and wish you the best of health.