Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Dentistry / February 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Gabe Knows NOTHING!

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
JanD - 11 Feb 2006 22:00 GMT
amalgam is good and it's gonna be covered by the crown so nothing it could
ever release

http://tinyurl.com/6yyb3

Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 1993 Apr;100(4):179-82. Related Articles, Links

[Amalgam. IV. Metabolism of mercury]

[Article in Dutch]

Gladys S, van Meerbeek B, Vanherle G, Lambrechts P.

Afdeling Conserverende Tandheelkunde en Tandheelkundige Materialen, School
voor Tandheelkunde, Mondziekten en Kaakchirurgie, Katholieke Universiteit te
Leuven, Belgie.

After absorption in the body by four ways, each type of mercury undergoes a
specific metabolism. Elementary mercury as mercury vapour becomes rapidly
oxidized to Hg2+ and, afterwards, is metabolized as an inorganic mercurial
compound. From the blood circulation mercury reaches target organs like the
kidneys, the central nervous system, the liver and the hypophysis, in which
mercury accumulates. The retention time varies by organ and is longest in
the brain. Mercury is mainly eliminated with urine and faeces, to a lesser
degree with transpiration and mother's milk and sometimes by respiration.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial
PMID: 11822127 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

http://www.greenfacts.org/mercury/l-2/mercury-2.htm

.1.2. Elemental mercury is also poisonous to the nervous system. Humans are
mainly exposed by inhaling vapours. These are absorbed into the body via the
lungs and move easily from the bloodstream into the brain. However, when
elemental mercury is ingested, little is absorbed into the body. The
inhalation of elemental mercury vapours can cause neurological and
behavioural disorders, such as tremors, emotional instability, insomnia,
memory loss, neuromuscular changes and headaches. They can also harm the
kidneys and thyroid. High exposures have also led to deaths.
Jim F B - 12 Feb 2006 02:29 GMT
> amalgam is good and it's gonna be covered by the crown so nothing it could
> ever release
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6yyb3

Is there evidence that, even under a crown, mercury can leak into the body?
I found this article about mercury to be interesting:

http://www.nzhealth.net.nz/poisons/mercury2.shtml

This article talks about "acute mercury toxicity" and "chronic exposure to
mercury", but I am not sure whether the amount that may leak from fillings
is necessarily toxic to the body? It seems to me that people should
understand how the body may secrete mercury and help it to do this. The
above article, when talking about selenium says:

"This essential mineral is able to bind to mercury and is able to cause a
redistribution of tissue mercury. It is therefore able to precipitate the
excretion of some mercury from the body."

So knowing the sources of selenium may be helpful:

http://www.lifeclinic.com/focus/nutrition/selenium.asp

http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/selenium.asp

The above article says that: "Observational studies indicate that death from
cancer, including lung, colorectal, and prostate cancers, is lower among
people with higher blood levels or intake of selenium."

Regards, Jim
Clinton - 12 Feb 2006 03:54 GMT
> > amalgam is good and it's gonna be covered by the crown so nothing it could
> > ever release

> Is there evidence that, even under a crown, mercury can leak into the body?

Yes

This topic has been covered before. These dentists never learn.
(I don't think they can).

> Steven Fawks <tuthjoc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message <news:4059D2E3.F681D9E9@earthlink.net>...
> > The best recommendation is just to crown the tooth over the amalgam.
> > Once the amalgam is sealed under a crown, it won't contribute to any
> > imaginary amalgam poisoning.

> Wrong. You can't "seal off amalgam" which produces mercury in liquid
> and vapor form in substatial amounts, by putting a crown over it.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Additionally if gold is in the vicinity or used as a crown disaster
> could strike due to galvanism.

> Here is an interesting paper on amalgam and sealants

>  The paper by JP Dewald et al, Baylor College of Dentistry;
> Journal of Dentistry 1992; 20: 121-127
> "Evaluation of the interactions between amalgam, cement and gold
> castings"

> "If you read the full paper, you will learn that even though the crown
> and  amalgam metals did not directly touch physically, there was corrosion
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> seperated at all
> times."
Jim F B - 12 Feb 2006 06:21 GMT
>> Wrong. You can't "seal off amalgam" which produces mercury in liquid
>> and vapor form in substatial amounts, by putting a crown over it.
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>> seperated at all
>> times."

Thanks very much for this information Clinton, this would definitely put me
off having amalgam as a base under a crown! So are there any other suitable
strong bases that would last at least 10 years that are not going to leak
toxic materials into my body? Because my dentist thinks I need root canal
therapy before I have the tooth crowned, is it better to give up on the
tooth and have it removed? Is it really necessary to have root canal therapy
if the tooth is sore now, particularly when I have hot or cold drinks? The
material Jan produced about the dangers of having root canal therapy has
frightened me off having this done too! I will soon have no teeth left if I
take to heart all of the dentistry pitfalls that I have read recently and
most dentists will go out of business if all patients are scared off like I
am!
Clinton - 12 Feb 2006 07:49 GMT
> "Clinton" <clintonz@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> Thanks very much for this information Clinton, this would definitely put me
> off having amalgam as a base under a crown!

> So are there any other suitable
> strong bases that would last at least 10 years that are not going to leak
> toxic materials into my body?

That's a good question. My main focus is pointing out some of the
unexpected properties of amalgam. i do not really have enough knowledge
to recommend/compare alternative materials but I am sure many people
will have a lot of ideas on this

>Because my dentist thinks I need root canal
> therapy before I have the tooth crowned, is it better to give up on the
> tooth and have it removed?

That is a good question, I'm not a dentist but there has been a lot of
discussion about this topic on this list. I'm not sure what I  would do
in your situation but I can see both sides of the issue. Your best bet
is probably to do more research yourself on this issue so you can make
a more educated choice.
Comparing Haley's altcorp site information on RC with information
provided by the ADA/AAE sites would probably provide a very wide
perspective.
Jim F B - 12 Feb 2006 08:50 GMT
>> "Clinton" <clintonz@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>> Thanks very much for this information Clinton, this would definitely put
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> provided by the ADA/AAE sites would probably provide a very wide
> perspective.

Thanks Clinton for your help with this problem. With a lot of health
matters, we have to take into account the time it takes before the body
experiences serious toxic effects of things we ingest. We also have to
consider the effectiveness of the immune system in coping with toxic
substances and, hopefully, ejecting them from the body (apparently selenium
can help the immune system to cope with mercury problems). We also have to
consider how cautious we want to be to protect ourselves against the many
hazards that we can be exposed to on this planet (such as the effect of too
much sunlight and the possibility of skin cancers, whether we are likely to
be knocked over by the latest bird flu, or whether our aeroplane is likely
to fall out of the sky).

We can also compare ourselves with our animal friends, such as a dog. Now I
don't know of any dogs that have had amalgam fillings, but despite this,
they all seem to die at a very early age, often aged only 12 to 15 years. So
despite having complete freedom from the possible effects of amalgam
fillings, it doesn't help the poor old dogs much, because they die of other
causes after a miserbaly short time on Earth! So I can reassure myself that,
whether I have my amalgam fillings and root canal treated teeth removed or
not, it probably won't make me feel much better or extend my life
considerably, because there are so many other factors at work designed to
ensure that I don't stay on this planet for too long (I'm not sure why this
should be the case, but it seems to be the truth)!

Anyway, after failing to convince my dentist that there may be problems with
amalgam, I talked to him about white fillings. He said these were nowhere as
strong as amalgam and that the "white" material was packed with chemical
nasties that equally rivalled the so-called problems of amalgam. A search on
internet confirmed this to be the case, consider Bisphenol A (BPA) for
example.

http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/NewScience/oncompounds/bisphenola/bpauses.htm

Now that I know that neither amalgam or white fillings or root canal therapy
are safe (and even pulling teeth out has its dangers), I think that dogs
have a considerable advantage over us as they seldom need to have their
teeth filled because their lives are so short.

Just a suggestion though, can the people who tell me that amalgam, white
fillings, and root canal therapy are not safe, please give me some practical
examples of what safe materials / procedures can be used to help me get my
broken and sore tooth fixed as soon as possible.
JanD - 12 Feb 2006 06:56 GMT
http://www.vimy-dentistry.com/gltoc.htm#_Toc497374703

Please read this, Jim.

I am in possession of numberless cases of poisoning from mercury in amalgam
fillings. I will mention but one, and report one case from my practice.

The Dental Register, January, 1872, has the following case of poisoning from
mercury in a tooth filling:

A case in practice: A lady from one of the towns in Illinois came to Chicago
for treatment, having been troubled with dyspepsia and nervous debility for
two years. While under the physician's care she complained constantly of a
peculiar feeling and taste in her mouth. The doctor suspected the trouble
might arise from a rubber plate which she had worn for four years, and
advised her to consult me. Upon examination, I found a full upper plate,
composed of rubber, and on the lower jaw the molars were gone, except the
second and third upon the left side. In the crown of the wisdom tooth was a
large amalgam filling, and also one in the crown and posterior approximal
surface extending to the free margin of the gum in the second molar.

These had been inserted about two years previous. I noticed that the gums
and the mucous lining of the mouth and salivary glands were quite tender.
There was a strong metallic taste in the mouth, and a metallic odor to the
breath. She had a peculiar paralyzed sensation in the left side of the
tongue, which she had experienced for two years. She also informed me that
the saliva flowed so freely that at night her clothing and pillow were
saturated, and estimated the loss of saliva each night to equal one pint. I
suggested the removal of the amalgam fillings and rubber plate, and
substitution of gold. She assented to the proposition, and as early as
possible I undertook the operations.

Upon removing the amalgam fillings and applying the rubber dam, the saliva
flowed in streams, completely saturating several towels. After refilling the
teeth, and inserting a gold plate, the unpleasant sensation in the tongue
and metallic taste disappeared. At the end of two weeks the glands were
greatly improved, and the soreness under the tongue (of which she had
complained at her first visit) was healed.

It is the accepted opinion of physicians generally, that mercury uncombined
has no constitutional effect. Dr. Atkinson said before the meeting of the
American Dental Association in Boston, August, 1880: "You must combine the
molecules of mercury with some other agent before they can have any affinity
for the body at all. One who is familiar with the old method of making
looking-glasses, with tin foil and mercury, knows that the workman would be
literally saturated with it, so that he could not be capable of handling a
gold or silver watch without its becoming amalgamated, and all this, too,
without his health being compromised by the mercury so long as it remains in
a metallic state".

The correctness of this theory may be questioned, as it has been proven that
these workmen have been affected by the vapor of mercury, when not protected
by a veil over the mouth and nose.

Dr. Bartholow, in his work on Therapeutics, p. 177, says: "As used in the
mechanical arts, by gilders and others, the fumes of mercury cause wasting,
ptyalism, necrosis of bones, trembling, impaired intellect, and, in women,
abortion". "Walter Pope mentions a workman who for six months had not
handled mercury; yet he rendered a piece of copper as white as silver by
rubbing it between his fingers". Parish says that long trituration of
calomel increases its power to salivate. This is also applicable to all
preparations of mercury used with an excipient, medicinally.

The homeopaths divide and subdivide particles, according to the required
preparations, some of the radical members of the school claiming best
results from the highest potencies, while the more conservative
practitioners prefer a middle ground. They rub up pure mercury with sugar of
milk into six different grades, the first containing one-tenth gr. of
mercury to one gr. sugar of milk; the second, one one-hundredth gr. of
mercury to one gr. sugar of milk, etc., as before mentioned in this paper.
These are the finest forms in which mercury is prescribed, and yet the
severest cases of salivation and constitutional symptoms have been produced
by these agents, on account of their being so readily taken up by the blood.

Is it not a reasonable supposition that, if poisonous symptoms are produced
in proportion with the subdivision of the particles of mercury, that the
system will be more severely affected by the vapor of mercury, which is
finer than any mechanical subdivision can be? Dr. Somers recalls an instance
of a lady patient becoming completely salivated, the gums and mucous lining
of the mouth inflamed and teeth loosened, by taking a second bath, in which
forty grains of the black oxide of mercury were used. He thinks she could
not have absorbed one-twentieth of the amount in the form of vapor.

As a forcible illustration, I quote the experience of the sailors on board
the man-of-war "Triumph", which, in April, 1810, took from the wreck of a
Spanish ship thirty tons of quicksilver, contained in bags of fifty pounds
each.

In the course of a fortnight some of the bags decayed and burst, the
quick-silver mixing with the bilge water, the emanations from which coated
all the metal about the ship. Nearly all of the crew were salivated.

In order to ascertain the effect of the vapor of mercury, I have employed it
in a series of experiments upon plants and animals.

Experiment No. 1 -- While conducting my experiments in the laboratory I was
frequently visited by a family of roaches, who appeared to take an interest
in my operations. Suddenly they all disappeared, and it immediately
suggested itself to my mind that their sudden departure argued favorably in
the question of utilizing them in my experiments. I took four two-ounce
bottles and put in No. 1 pure mercury; No. 2, amalgam scraps six months old;
No. 3, fillings from two to ten years old; No. 4, fillings sixteen years
old. After placing a roach in each bottle, I tied a piece of cloth over the
mouth in order that the air might circulate. Evidently the bugs were not
fond of mercury, for they clung to the tops of the bottles as long as life
lasted. Roach in No. 1, containing pure mercury, died in three days; roach
in No. 2 was next to follow; roach in No. 3 lived a few days longer; and in
No. 4 outlived them all by several days.

Experiment No. 2 -- I prepared three bottles. The No. 1 contained ten grains
of pure mercury; No. 2 contained an amalgam filling three months old; No. 3
was an empty bottle. In each of the bottles I put two roaches. In two days
one in the bottle containing pure mercury died; the remaining one in the
same bottle lived nine days from the time it was put in. In the bottle
containing the amalgam filling one roach died in four days, while the other
one died in eleven days; while those in the empty bottle lived fifteen and
sixteen days.

Experiment No. 3 -- On February 9th I placed an amalgam filling at the base
of a sensitive plant. On examination, about the fourth day, I discovered
that the extremities of the leaves had changed color and were dry and
brittle, like the leaves in early Autumn; gradually the whole leaf was
affected, and at the end of ten days the plant was dead, notwithstanding the
care and nourishment it received.

Experiment No. 4 -- In a four-quart glass jar I put about four ounces of
mercury, and made a platform of wire gauze, fastening it two inches from the
bottom of the jar. I placed a Guinea pig in the jar, and covered the top
with gauze. Twice each day I removed him for exercise and nourishment. He
thrived well for ten days, but at the end of that time he commenced to
droop, and refused food and water. He became emaciated and trembling; the
body and limbs were cold. He lingered along for two weeks and died.

Experiment No. 5 -- I administered six grains of mercurius vivus, first
trituration, to a dog with his supper, and repeated the dose next morning
with his breakfast. The blood and liver were examined under the microscope
in the evening and found to contain globules of mercury.

It is the opinion of many eminent scientists that mercury inhaled into the
lungs produces a greater effect than when taken into the stomach. Among this
number Prof. Stille in his Therapeutics, Vol. 2, page 789, says: "Of the
several modes by which mercury is made to enter the body, inhalation most
speedily produces the specific influence of the medicine". Claude Bernard,
late Professor in "Le College de France", makes the statement in one of his
lectures. This is readily understood when we consider that the drug taken
into the lungs in the form of vapor is distributed over a large surface and
brought in direct contact with oxygenated blood, and thus carried to all
parts of the body.

Mercury taken into the system in small quantities, long continued, manifests
itself in a variety of ways. One of the first symptoms noticeable is an
increased flow of the secretions of the body -- salivation being the most
striking -- the glands becoming inflamed and the mucous membrane tender. The
gums tumefy and change in color to a dark rose tint; the tongue is swollen;
the patient not only experiences an unpleasant metallic taste, but the
breath becomes impregnated also. Sometimes extensive ulcers attack the
throat, gums and cheeks; oedema of the glottis, with difficulty in breathing
and swallowing.

The digestive apparatus is involved, with loss of appetite, nausea and
vomiting, and frequently pain and tenderness of the stomach; the bowels
loose, and often bloody stools. The fatty constituents are removed, and the
patient becomes emaciated; no part of the body is more affected by mercury
than the nervous system; the body trembles; sometimes one limb, and again
both limbs contract. A sense of coldness and occasional chills are
experienced; often neuralgic pains are felt, particularly around the motor
nerves; mental debility and loss of memory. These are some of the many
symptoms caused by the inhalation of the vapor of mercury.

RESUME

There are in the market many varieties of amalgams. Evaporation does not
depend upon quality or age, but all amalgams will send off the vapor of
mercury. This has been proved conclusively by its destruction of animal and
vegetable life, and by chemical tests. Evaporation is facilitated by an
increase of surface, consequently a greater amount of vapor would arise from
several small fillings than from one large filling.

The facility with which mercury is taken into the lungs by continued
inhalations and the rapidity with which it enters the blood, requires less
mercury to produce systemic effects than when taken into the stomach. In
order to produce systemic effects from metallic mercury, it must be rubbed
up with an excipient,to reduce the particles to a size capable of entering
the capillary system, or it must be taken into the lungs in the form of
vapor.

>> amalgam is good and it's gonna be covered by the crown so nothing it
>> could
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
> Regards, Jim
Jim F B - 12 Feb 2006 07:55 GMT
> http://www.vimy-dentistry.com/gltoc.htm#_Toc497374703
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> The Dental Register, January, 1872, has the following case of poisoning
> from mercury in a tooth filling:

Thanks very much Jan for going to this trouble, I have read the material you
refer to. Although such material certainly cautions me against having
amalgam fillings / crown bases again, I am somewhat reassured by articles
like this one:

http://www.deltadentalins.com/dentist/amalgams.html

It mentions in this article that, "...the mercury in amalgam is mixed with
silver, tin and copper, metals to which it bonds chemically to form a safe
alloy. According to Dr. Baratz, an analogy can be made with water, a
chemical combination of hydrogen, a gas that can explode, and oxygen, which
supports combustion. "Saying that amalgam will poison you," the article
quotes Dr. Baratz as saying, "is like saying that drinking water will make
you explode and burst into flames." More support recently came from the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, which reported that "there is scant
evidence that the health of a vast majority of people with amalgam is
compromised.
Further reassuring material is in this article:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mercury.html

I liked this extract from the above article: "There is overwhelming evidence
that mercury-amalgam fillings are safe. Since 1905, although billions have
been used successfully, fewer than fifty cases of allergy to the amalgam
have been reported in the scientific literature. In 1986, the American
Dental Association Council on Ethics, Bylaws, and Judicial Affairs concluded
that "removal of amalgam restorations solely for the alleged purpose of
removing toxic substances from the body, when such treatment is performed at
the recommendation of the dentist, presents a question of fraud or quackery
in all but an exceedingly limited spectrum of cases." The ruling was
triggered in part by the case of an Iowa dentist who had extracted all 28
teeth of a patient with multiple sclerosis. The dentist received a 9-month
license suspension followed by 51 months of probation."

I also found this on the site of the American Dental Association:

http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/positions/statements/amalgam.asp

Here are a couple of extracts: "Dental amalgam (silver filling) is
considered a safe, affordable and durable material that has been used to
restore the teeth of more than 100 million Americans. It contains a mixture
of metals such as silver, copper and tin, in addition to mercury, which
chemically binds these components into a hard, stable and safe substance.
Dental amalgam has been studied and reviewed extensively, and has
established a record of safety and effectiveness."

"Issued in late 1997, the FDI World Dental Federation and the World Health
Organization consensus statement on dental amalgam stated, "No controlled
studies have been published demonstrating systemic adverse effects from
amalgam restorations." The document also states that, aside from rare
instances of local side effects of allergic reactions, "the small amount of
mercury released from amalgam restorations, especially during placement and
removal, has not been shown to cause any . adverse health effects."

Although I am quite new to this controversy, I appreciate the cautions that
people have given me. So, if I take the cautious approach and decline to
have an amalgam base under a crown, and I decline to have root canal therapy
to remove the nerve and current pain that I have in the tooth (because of
health dangers with this too), how can I save this tooth and remove the pain
I am in using safe materials? Any suggestions welcomed.
JanD - 12 Feb 2006 08:46 GMT
>> http://www.vimy-dentistry.com/gltoc.htm#_Toc497374703
>>
[quoted text clipped - 68 lines]
> (because of health dangers with this too), how can I save this tooth and
> remove the pain I am in using safe materials? Any suggestions welcomed.

I understand you dilemma, Jim. Please, please do not believe Quackwatch, nor
Dr. Baratz. The ADA has lied for
years. This is *organized dentistry and also medicine*, that has misled the
public. Please do your own research. Both Clinton and I have suffered with
mercury poisoning, we are not trying to scare you. We only want you to know
the facts.
Amalgams are a thing of the past. Mercury is being eliminated is all forms
for very good reason. Roots canals can be very dangerous. Many people may
not be bothered, but who knows, if it will be you? It is much better to not
take the chance.
It could wreck your health, Jim.

In MY Opinion, this is the BEST Research.

http://www.altcorp.com/AffinityLaboratory/rcttreatment.htm

Good Luck and Prayers, Jim.
Jim F B - 12 Feb 2006 23:02 GMT
> I understand you dilemma, Jim. Please, please do not believe Quackwatch,
> nor Dr. Baratz. The ADA has lied for
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Good Luck and Prayers, Jim.

Thanks very much for this information Jan. I can see now that the topic of
mercury toxicity is wider than just its use in amalgam fillings, so I have
learned a lot from the information given to me in this thread. We also need
to be aware of the amounts of mercury present in foods such as fish, and to
know the symptoms of mercury poisoning.

I think the use of glass inomer cement may be a good compromise as far as
dental fillings go, but I doubt whether it would be strong enough to be used
as the base for a crown? At least glass inomer cement does not contain
mercury or (I think) Bisphenol A (BPA)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_fillings

Glass inomer cement is described as follows:

"These fillings are a mixture of glass and an organic acid. Although they
are tooth-colored, glass ionomers vary in translucency. Although glass
ionomers can be used to achieve an aesthetic result, their aesthetic
potential does not measure up to that provided by composite resins.
The cavity preparation of a glass ionomer filling is the same as a composite
resin; it is considered a fairly conservative procedure as the bare minimum
of tooth structure should be removed.

Conventional glass ionomers are chemically set via an acid-base reaction.
Upon mixing of the material components, there is no light cure needed to
harden the material once placed in the cavity preparation. After the initial
set, glass ionomers still need time to fully set and harden.

Glass ionomers do have their advantages over composite resins:

1. They are not subject to shrinkage and microleakage, as the bonding
mechanism is an acid-base reaction and not a polymerization reaction.

2. Glass ionomers contain and release fluoride, which is important to
preventing carious lesions. Furthermore, as glass ionomers release their
fluoride, they can be "recharged" by the use of fluoride-containing
toothpaste. Hence, they can be used as a treatment modality for patients who
are at high risk for caries. Newer formulations of glass ionomers that
contain light-cured resins can achieve a greater aesthetic result, but do
not release fluoride as well as conventional glass ionomers.

Glass ionomers are about as expensive as composite resin. The fillings do
not wear as well as composite resin fillings. Still, they are generally
considered good materials to use for root caries and for sealants."

Regards, Jim
Clinton - 12 Feb 2006 17:36 GMT
> Thanks very much Jan for going to this trouble, I have read the material you
> refer to.

AS I said I am not really an expert on RC research however i do have
a good grasp of amalgam materials issues (due to my educational
background and personal experiences). The articles you quote deserve
some comment.

Although such material certainly cautions me against having
> amalgam fillings / crown bases again, I am somewhat reassured by articles
> like this one:
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> silver, tin and copper, metals to which it bonds chemically to form a safe
> alloy.

That is false, an amalgam is not an alloy it is a mixture. Hg is
continually
released from the surface.

According to Dr. Baratz, an analogy can be made with water, a
> chemical combination of hydrogen, a gas that can explode, and oxygen, which
> supports combustion.

Again inappropriate because the hydrogen is tightly bound to the
oxygen. On the other hand a filling continuously changes its chemical
phases releasing elemental Hg.

"Saying that amalgam will poison you," the article
> quotes Dr. Baratz as saying, "is like saying that drinking water will make
> you explode and burst into flames."

That is a shameless and false analogy. many dentists are also found of
comparing amalgam to a salt. let them put both a salt and a high copper
amalgam in a strong acid.

It is true that in most cases amalgam releases relatively low levels of

Hg, but here is the second dilema, is a multiple of environmental
exposure safe, and what is a "typical amalgam". Unlike water amalgams
can and do corrode and show considerable  variability in their physical
properties.

More support recently came from the U.S.
> Department of Health and Human Services, which reported that "there is scant
> evidence that the health of a vast majority of people with amalgam is
> compromised.

Notice that warning are issued for amalgam in Europe and Canada.
The WHO reported that no study capable of determining effects in the
10% most exposed has been done. In other words, watch the wording,
"scant evidence for the vast majority" means "No large reliable study
have been done", but "more than half of people seem okay based on
incomplete
research." And it is blatantly false that no studies show harm. Studies
do
but don't expect the government to protect you from amalgam, cigarettes
etc.

> Further reassuring material is in this article:
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> been used successfully, fewer than fifty cases of allergy to the amalgam
> have been reported in the scientific literature.

Many studies have been done and published showing excessive Hg exposure
tied to amalgam. We posted one study here where the author attritbuted
excessive exposure to tooth grinding. Another study here posted in the
environmental bulletin of toxicology (a scientific journal) documenting
many cases of suspected micromercurialism from amalgam. The tubigen
study has documented many cases of excessive exposure. EVEn  the WhO
report has documented elevated Hg exposrue at or above the "safe level"
in some cases. And FDA has recieved many adverse reactions reports,
that were NOT reported as "allergic reactions". The fact that the ADA
chooses not
to report this fact in their Journals and a bunch unscientific
psycharitrists
at quackwatch choose to ignore published papers and make general
unsupported claims is something which is not under anyones control, nor
is it tied to science.

(And Publising a case of toxicity in the literature would first require
definitive
proof that the amalgam caused the toxcity. If the author states that
the
patients had high level of Hg in the blood which seemed attributable,
does that count? Obviously not according to "somebodies" definition, so
watch the wording, becasue I haven't seen any "definitive cases" of
nonallergic disease
caused by cigarettes either.)

In 1986, the American
> Dental Association Council on Ethics, Bylaws, and Judicial Affairs concluded
> that "removal of amalgam restorations solely for the alleged purpose of
> removing toxic substances from the body, when such treatment is performed at
> the recommendation of the dentist, presents a question of fraud or quackery
> in all but an exceedingly limited spectrum of cases."

The ADA has changed their stance on amalgam and has now argued in
court that they owe no care or responsability for the use of amalgam.
They could say what they want but keep in mind they take no legal
responsability for it.

> I also found this on the site of the American Dental Association:
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> of metals such as silver, copper and tin, in addition to mercury, which
> chemically binds these components into a hard, stable and safe substance.

Again this is false. Anyone who takes a Jerome meter and uses it to
test
their fillings can see this is false. I had an interesting
converstation with
a lady who worked at a facility which rents out Hg meters. They would
get bored and for kicks would chew bubble gum and then compete to
see who would measure the most Hg vapor coming from their fillings when
they took a straw attaced to a jerome meter and stuck it in their
mouth. After that she had her amalgams removed.

> Dental amalgam has been studied and reviewed extensively, and has
> established a record of safety and effectiveness."
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> studies have been published demonstrating systemic adverse effects from
> amalgam restorations."

actually the most recent WHo document said that some indivuduals
measured
had Hg levels corresponding with the threshold for environmental unsafe
levels and stated that NO studies have been done with the statistical
power to measure affects in the top 10%. I can't find the report but it
has
been posted here before. again notice the wording. "No controlled
studies have been published" (we haven't done any reserch comparng
amalgamless and amalgam bearing populations on a large scale)
and demonstrating "systemic adverse effects". I.E we can't rule out
that
it may effect some people, it just doesn't seem to affect most in an
acute
fashion ( which is obvious). Also numerous studies have demonstrated
elevated levels of Hg release in some people. Notice these reports
always
avoid saying what the ceiling is for toxic exposure from amalgam. They
then defer to non-existent large scale studies which supposedly haven't
tied real Hg body burden to toxic affects on a population level
(because
they haven't been done).

The document also states that, aside from rare
> instances of local side effects of allergic reactions, "the small amount of
> mercury released from amalgam restorations, especially during placement and
> removal, has not been shown to cause any . adverse health effects."

Quackwatch is quoting favorable statements put out by organizations
closely tied to dental organizations. (even the who consulted with
dentists i think)
and ignoring other unfavorable statements made by other organizations,
including unfavorable policies in many European countries.
.
Clinton - 12 Feb 2006 20:17 GMT
> > Thanks very much Jan for going to this trouble, I have read the material you
> > refer to.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> background and personal experiences). The articles you quote deserve
> some comment.

PS - i sloppily cut the wrong part of your post becaue I edited my
response
several times, and  i inferred you were speaking to jan and me. However
i am not jan.
Sdores - 12 Feb 2006 20:42 GMT
Are you and Jan suggesting with your posts that Jim FB should extract?
That's about all that is left if he doesn't have the RT or use amalgam or
the other stuff.  I personally think he should try to save his teeth, this
is because I only have 6 bottom teeth and had no choice about the loss of my
other teeth due partially from toxic chemical exposure (which also damaged
my lungs) and crohn's.  My teeth die at the root on up.  I have at least two
more that are going to have to go but due to prednisone use lately I have to
wait again.

Jim I would suggest talking to your dentist or specialist about all of this.
I know you are fearful about this and I understand that.  How much fish,
tuna and so forth do you consume?  They have lots of mercury in them.  Of
course this is just my opinion but I had silver fillings and no problems
from them.  I am not a dentist for the record, lurk occasionally on this
group though.
UM MOM Susan

>> > Thanks very much Jan for going to this trouble, I have read the
>> > material you
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> several times, and  i inferred you were speaking to jan and me. However
> i am not jan.
Jim F B - 12 Feb 2006 22:29 GMT
> Are you and Jan suggesting with your posts that Jim FB should extract?
> That's about all that is left if he doesn't have the RT or use amalgam or
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> on this group though.
> UM MOM Susan

Thanks for this posting, you raise a very good point about fish. I would eat
fish twice a week, and vary the types of fish that I have. One person who
has looked at this problem describes their experiences with mercury
toxicity, and also gives their opinion on amalgam fillings here:

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/rwgully/basics/mercury.htm

Perhaps it would be a good idea to have a mineral analysis done on a hair
sample before having further amalgam fillings? It is stated on this site
that:

"At hair levels above 3 mg/g, Hg can suppress biological selenium function
and may cause or contribute to immune dysregulation in sensitive
individuals. Hallmark symptoms of excess Hg include: loss of appetite,
decreased senses of touch, hearing, and vision, fatigue, depression,
emotional instability, peripheral numbness and tremors, poor memory and
cognitive dysfunction, and neuromuscular disorders. Hair Hg has been
reported to correlate with acute myocardial infarction and on average each 1
mg/g of hair Hg was found to correlate with a 9% increase in AMI risk
(Circulation 1995; 91:645-655)."

To ensure you get enough selenium (which can help the body excrete mercury)
it seems you need to eat plenty of brazil nuts as this food has higher
concentrations of selenium by far than any other:
http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/selenium.asp

It's interesting that lead fillings were used in the 1700s, but became
unpopular in the 1800s because of their softness and because lead poisoning
was understood. In view of this experience, it's a wonder that mercury was
used in dental fillings subsequently!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_fillings

The above page also has a useful summary of the different types of dental
fillings.

Regards, Jim
Clinton - 12 Feb 2006 22:46 GMT
> Are you and Jan suggesting with your posts that Jim FB should extract?
> That's about all that is left if he doesn't have the RT or use amalgam or
> the other stuff.

As far as RC I specifically said that I was not familiar enough with
that issue
to make a recommendation.

As far as amalgam is concerned, I am just saying that some people can
be
exposed to high levels of organic and inorganic hg from amalgam and
local
galvanic/bacterial action.

The situaion for most people is that they recieve about say 30-70% of
their elemental hg exposure from amalgam. If you consider typical
environmental
exposure to be unimportant than this may not be too much of a concern,
especially if removing amalgam can cause you to lose a tooth. On the
other hand some people may be concerned about this. "low level
environmental exposure" toxicology is a complex issue.
Jim F B - 12 Feb 2006 22:44 GMT
Thanks very much Clinton for your valuable comments. I was also interested
to read this from the site: http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam/

Amalgam Fillings Since 1970s Unstable
The type of mercury fillings that began to be used during the last couple of
decades, non-gamma-2 (high copper), releases many times more mercury than
the older style of amalgam fillings. Also, please see the article on the
instability of dental amalgam fillings by Ulf Bengsston.

Regards, Jim

>> Thanks very much Jan for going to this trouble, I have read the material
>> you
[quoted text clipped - 180 lines]
> including unfavorable policies in many European countries.
> .
Sdores - 13 Feb 2006 14:01 GMT
Jim, there were a few dentist that posted here a lot that made there own
site.  Most of them said they didn't use amalgam so maybe signing on to post
on their site might help you with your decision.  the site is
www.scimeddentistry.com/smd  I am not a member for the record.  UM MOM Susan
PS there is a thread telling you about this site below this one.

> Thanks very much Clinton for your valuable comments. I was also interested
> to read this from the site: http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam/
[quoted text clipped - 194 lines]
>> including unfavorable policies in many European countries.
>> .
Jim F B - 14 Feb 2006 02:58 GMT
> Jim, there were a few dentist that posted here a lot that made there own
> site.  Most of them said they didn't use amalgam so maybe signing on to
> post on their site might help you with your decision.  the site is
> www.scimeddentistry.com/smd  I am not a member for the record.  UM MOM
> Susan PS there is a thread telling you about this site below this one.

Thanks Susan for this reference, most interesting. I certainly
(unintentionally) landed myself in the middle of a "spirited" debate didn't
I! To my dentist, the facts are quite clear and simple. Amalgam is the only
base for a crown that will last for more than 3 or 4 years, and he says that
countless millions of people who have amalgam fillings have lived on happily
for dozens of years after getting them. If I want to use material for the
crown base that is not as strong as amalgam, he will do as I say, but he
warns me that I will be back within 3 years, crown in hand! He also says
that root canal therapy is needed. If I don't have this, the already damaged
nerve and structures will continue to give me toothache! Ouch, either have
root canal therapy or have the tooth out!

The problem is that, although Jan is warning people of the dangers of root
canal therapy and amalgam fillings, she does not seem to be coming up with
practical and workable alternatives. If I followed her advice to the letter,
there is no alternative but extraction of the tooth. It all comes down to
risk assessment, take some risks and keep your teeth, or take no risks and
have all your damaged teeth extracted. I think people need to know the risks
of all the things they do, as long as the risks are not exaggerated, are
properly and fairly researched, and are kept in perspective so that people
can a.ses how likely it is that they may run into problems with the things
they do.

Risk assessment applies to just about everything you do. For example, I
appreciate the well intentioned advice given to me about the dangers of
international travel. You might get bird flu, your plane may be hijacked, it
may crash etc. etc., but people still fly all the time and travel to
numerous countries, a process fraught with risk!

I guess that, until the dental profession comes up with materials that
everybody agrees are 100% safe and are strong enough for durable dental
fillings, then you either take some risks and keep your teeth, or you have
all your problem teeth extracted. I'm not sure that I'm ready for the latter
just yet!
JanD - 14 Feb 2006 03:49 GMT
Please, Jim. let's get one thing straight. I am not giving advice. I am just
posting the risks, the websites posted are not written by me.

>> Jim, there were a few dentist that posted here a lot that made there own
>> site.  Most of them said they didn't use amalgam so maybe signing on to
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
> all your problem teeth extracted. I'm not sure that I'm ready for the
> latter just yet!
Gabe - 15 Feb 2006 11:06 GMT
bla bla bla bla bla bla bla and more bla bla bla bla bla bla bla
someone have her a linguotomy!!!
no... wait... it won't work she'll still be able to type, damn!

Cheers!

NotKnowingGabe

> Please, Jim. let's get one thing straight. I am not giving advice. I am
> just posting the risks, the websites posted are not written by me.
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>> have all your problem teeth extracted. I'm not sure that I'm ready for
>> the latter just yet!
dave - 12 Feb 2006 09:57 GMT
Jan,
What's your opinion or what information do you have regarding "white"
fillings? I realize HG is very bad but I would like to be informed of
the alternatives. No crowns considered just directly placed resins etc.
Crowns are far too expensive at 250 ukp a piece.

tnx

> http://www.vimy-dentistry.com/gltoc.htm#_Toc497374703
>
[quoted text clipped - 219 lines]
>>
>> Regards, Jim
JanD - 12 Feb 2006 19:26 GMT
> Jan,
> What's your opinion or what information do you have regarding "white"
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> tnx

There are many different composites. It is recommended one have a
compatibility test done, as you may also react to different composites as
well.

Mine was done here.

http://www.ccrlab.com/

>> http://www.vimy-dentistry.com/gltoc.htm#_Toc497374703
>>
[quoted text clipped - 248 lines]
>>>
>>> Regards, Jim
Gabe - 13 Feb 2006 19:35 GMT
ok so I don't know nothing huh?
ok
don't do rtc
don't do amalgams
what's left?
extractions and denture, if that's ok with you...
I am not the one who's gonna be without treatment, I am not the one who'll
suffer
I don't care about the bla bla bla
it's been like that exactly for the last 5 years (as far a I know from year
2000 I read and post here), Jan's and her ballet have been talking crap and
crap and crap.
I am a dental professional very well recognized in my main field (endo=rtc)
Also a very happy amalgam placer on fillings and on post that receive crowns
afterwards.
Theese people confuse other posters that ask questions to dental
proffesionals and get scared and misguided, of course, everybody has
choices, but there's no comparison from theese trolls.
I am very sorry if you'd believe them instead, but... again... it's YOUR
choice.
my last advise on this tread...
do what I told you on my first post.
Thanks

Cheers!!!

DR. GABE

>> Jan,
>> What's your opinion or what information do you have regarding "white"
[quoted text clipped - 286 lines]
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Jim
Gabe - 13 Feb 2006 19:37 GMT
Ladran Sancho, señal que cabalgamos!

they bark Sancho, it means we're riding!

Don Quijote de la Mancha

Cheers!

DR. GABE

>> Jan,
>> What's your opinion or what information do you have regarding "white"
[quoted text clipped - 286 lines]
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Jim
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.