A good site for truth on the amalgam issue.

[trotsky]

This is written by a very knowledgable dentist. Anti-amalgamists should note that he even states he doesn't use amalgam anymore - it's his opinion that today's composites are a superior material (primarily for cosmetic reasons). But he didn't reject amalgam for any of the reasons anti-amalgamists do, and he put together a special page to specifically address the misinformation on this issue.

http://www.doctorspiller.com/mercury.htm

How to read a web page published by anti-amalgamists

If you do a Google search for "dental amalgam mercury" you will be presented with literally thousands of results, almost all of them pointing to pages warning of the toxicity of dental amalgam. The people who write them are mostly good, honest folks. They are simply misguided in their beliefs concerning the dangers of dental amalgam. Most believe that anyone who does not hold their beliefs is involved in a huge conspiracy to poison people for financial gain. Since there is SO MUCH misinformation concerning this subject, I provide some common sense guidelines to help you, the reader, to evaluate their claims...

Here's something I've been wondering about during these discussions - how does the mercury level in someone with amalgams compare to someone without, and what's the effect on mercury level from amalgams vs. that of consuming even a small amount of fish?

In spite of attempts to demonstrate a direct relationship between the presence of dental amalgams and elevated blood levels of mercury, none has been found. The average mercury level in the blood of subjects with amalgams was 0.7 ng/ mL (coefficient of variation = 78%), whereas the level in subjects without amalgams was 0.3 ng/mL (coefficient of variation = 77%). In comparison, other investigators reported that ingestion of one saltwater seafood meal per week raised the average blood mercury level from 2.3 to 5.1 ng/mL. Thus, one saltwater seafood meal per week can be expected to contribute seven times more mercury to blood levels than the presence of multiple dental amalgam restorations. The lowest level of total blood mercury at which the earliest nonspecific symptoms occur is 35 ng/mL (after long-term exposures). Thus, the widespread removal of amalgams is unwarranted.

He also raises the important distinction between types of mercury - elemental mercury (the type that is in dental amalgam, and which is extremely poorly absorbed by the body) versus mercury salts or mercury compounds, like methyl mercury (the type that's in seafood, and which is readily absorbed). So what about the mercury vapor from amalgams that gets inhaled?

There is no evidence that the extremely small amounts of mercury that may be released into the mouth from dental fillings presents any danger of mercury poisoning. The mercury that is ingested and inhaled is easily excreted from the body through the kidneys. Studies show that the average daily intake of mercury from ordinary food and water is between 4 and 15 times the amount that is ingested due to the presence of a mouthful of dental amalgam restorations.

So, if you're really looking for the facts and not distortions, I suggest you take a look at this page. You'll learn about the history of amalgam opposition (which is enlightening - and totally opposite of the movement today) as well as explanations about the roles of the EPA and FDA. And on the rest of his pages, he has a LOT of really cool and interesting information about teeth and dentistry in general.

[ret5hd]

1. just a question from someone without an opinion on this subject:

how can he claim that there is no elevation in those with these fillings when it shows right there (in your post) that those with these fillings have over twicce as much (0.7 ng/ mL vs. 0.3 ng/ mL) in their system.

i know, i know...those levels are supposedly way below any threshold for ill effects, but still...

just sayin...

[Celebration]

4. shhhhhh

You are going to get tagged as being anti-amalgam if you don't quote the company line here........how dare you question the math!!!!!!!

[trotsky]

6. I believe it's because the difference is statistically indistinguishable,

especially when the elevation from doing just about anything in life (eating & drinking) raises the level so much more than amalgam does.

[philb]

11. Why do you keep saying this?? Here are Gov't agency sources

I've supplied documentation from medical labs and medical studies. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr1.html
People get virtually no mercury from drinking water,etc.

The World Health Organization and the main Gov't Health agencies have confirmed the fact that amalgam is by far the largest
source of mercury in most who have several fillings- just like the millions of medical lab tests

1. ATSDR/EPA Priority List for 2005: Top 20 Hazardous Substances, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, www.atsdr.cdc.gov/clist.html
2. Mark Richardson, Environmental Health Directorate, Health Canada, Assessment of Mercury Exposure and Risks from Dental Amalgam, 1995, Final Report.
3. World Health Organization(WHO),1991, Environmental Health criteria 118, Inorganic Mercury, WHO, Geneva;
4. (a) Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service, "Toxicological Profile for Mercury” March, 1999; page 7 & (b)Jan 2003 Media Advisory, New MRLs for toxic substances, MRL:elemental mercury vapor/inhalation/chronic & MRL: methyl mercury/ oral/acute; & www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls.html
5. Kingman A, Albertini T, Brown LJ, Mercury concentrations in urine and whole blood associated with amalgam exposure in a US military population., J Dent Res 1998 Mar;77(3):461-71 (population of over 1000 Air Force personnel; found each 10 amalgam surfaces increased mercury in urine by approx. 1 microgram per liter)
6. Dr. P.Kraub & M.Deyhle, Universitat Tubingen- Institut fur Organische Chemie, “Field Study on the Mercury Content of Saliva”, 1997 ; (tests at Tuebingen Univ. Health Clinic of over 20,000 people, amount of mercury in saliva increased on average approx. 1.5 micrograms per day per amalgam filling; 10% had mercury level greater than 100 micrograms; higher mercury levels were correlated with more chronic health conditions) www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/AMALGAM/EN/SCIENCE/tubingen.html

[samplegirl]

2. Seems every dentist has a different take on this subject.

I worked for a Dentist for a number of years and
he quit using Amalgam. There is a reason they
classify it "Toxic Waste".
Therefore I had all mine removed.

[trotsky]

5. Interesting.

That particular objection is addressed on the page. EPA vs. FDA.

[philb]

12. Dentists who still use amalgam commonly have signif. neurological problems

and more reproductive problems and all the common problems caused by mercury

http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/dental.html

But the majority of dentists in most developed countries no longer use amalgam- a lot because is clear
doing so has major effects on dental staff- and some on their kids.

an example of one of the hundreds of studies documenting this which can be found in NLM Medline:


The association between a genetic polymorphism of coproporphyrinogen oxidase, dental mercury exposure and neurobehavioral response in humans. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2006 Jan-Feb;28(1):39-48. Epub 2005 Dec 15; Echeverria D, Woods JS, et al.
Echeverria D, Woods JS, Heyer NJ, Rohlman D, Farin FM, Li T, Garabedian CE.

Battelle Centers for Public Health Research and Evaluation, 1100 Dexter Avenue North, Suite 400, Seattle, WA 98109, United States; Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.

We previously described a polymorphism in exon 4 of the gene encoding the heme biosynthetic pathway enzyme, coproporphyrinogen oxidase (CPOX4), which significantly modifies the effect of mercury exposure on urinary porphyrin excretion in humans. Here, we examined potential consequences of this polymorphism ("CPOX4") on performance within neurobehavioral domains, symptoms, and mood that are known to be affected by elemental mercury (Hg degrees ) exposure in human subjects. A behavioral test battery was administered on the day of urine and buccal cell collections for 194 male dentists (DDs) and 233 female dental assistants (DAs) occupationally exposed to Hg degrees for an average of 19 and 10 years, respectively. Subjects had no history of health disorders and were employed for a minimum of 5 years in the dental profession. Respective mean urinary mercury (HgU) levels in DDs and DAs were 3.32 (4.87) mug/l and 1.98 (2.29) mug/l. Corresponding indices of chronic occupational Hg degrees exposure, weighted for historical exposure, were 27.1 (20.6) and 15.2 (12.3). The frequencies of the homogygous common (A/A), heterozygous (A/C), and homozygous polymorphic (C/C) genotypes were 75%, 23% and 2% for DDs and 73%, 25%, and 2% for DAs, respectively. DDs and DAs were evaluated separately. Regression analyses controlled for age, premorbid intelligence, alcohol consumption, and education. Statistically significant associations with HgU (p<0.05) were found for nine measures among DDs (BEES Digit Span(Forward and Backward), WMS-R Visual Reproduction(N Correct), BEES Symbol Digit(Rate), BEES Finger Tapping(Dom/Non-dom), (and Alternate Partialed), Hand Steadiness(Factor1), and BEES Tracking), and eight measures among DAs (BEES Digit Span(Forward), BEES Symbol Digit(Rate), BEES Pattern Discrimination (Rate), BEES Trailmaking B, BEES Finger Tapping(Dom/Non-dom, and Alternate Partialed), Hand Steadiness(Factor1), and Vibration Sensitivity(Hits)). CPOX4 status was associated with four measures in DDs (BEES Spatial Span(Forward), BEES Pattern Memory(N Correct), BEES Symbol Digit(Rate), and BEES Vigilance(Hit)) and five measures in DAs (BEES Digit Span(Forward), WMS-R Visual Reproductions(N Correct), BEES Symbol Digit(Rate), BEES Simple and Choice Reaction Time(Move). Both groups experienced an additive effect (no interaction term) for HgU and the CPOX4 polymorphisms on the Digit(Rate) whereas DAs also had additive effects for BEES Digit Span(Forward) and for Beck's Depression factor 'Worthlessness'. These exploratory findings suggest that the CPOX4 polymorphism may affect susceptibility for specific neurobehavioral functions associated with mercury exposure in human subjects.


ps: given the orientation of the web site suggested here by Trotsky, its likely where the dentist in question falls on the mercury exposure scale and note the type of effects common that might influence his site info
I think he should get some tests and protect himself and his staff from these effects common to such dental staff's
there are things you can do to reduce effects

The chair of the WHO Mercury Panel on my reference list was quoted as saying there has never been found any evidence that there is a
level of mercury exposure that is safe to all, or where there can't be found measureable effects. Many other researchers have said
similar.

[RedOnce]

3. Thank you for this balanced post.

[FM Arouet666]

7. Great find

I hope this puts the issue to rest, I suspect not. Interesting, I had two fillings removed recently, prompted not from fear of amalgam, but because my dentist concluded that the fillings were not optimal. He drilled them out and filled them in with some white composite material. Looks better and I don't get that electric shock when I hit the filling with a fork.

The distinction between elemental mercury and amalgam metals versus mercuric compounds is critical to understanding the toxic risks. Sadly, those pushing the amalgam debate have little interest in the science behind the debate. Loads of anecdotal testimonial, pseudoscience and hysteria.

As an aside I noted the following on Yahoo News today.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060306/hl_nm/sushi_dc
Which prompted me to do a search, I found this page.
http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/mercury/sushi.asp

Great, my favorites are Saba, Katsuo, Hamachi and Toro. I will have to limit my intake. I hope those reading our posts about amalgams do not get the wrong impression that mercury poses no risk. Mercury is highly toxic especially organic mercuric compounds and exposure to these compounds must be taken seriously.

Again, great post, though I still hate dentists. "This will hurt just a little bit....." As a surgeon it would seem that my hypocrisy knows no bounds. :evilgrin:

[trotsky]

8. I got a filling replaced too, just about a year ago.

It had actually been filled and then re-filled, so the tooth structure was very weak. My current dentist suggested I get a crown, so I finally did. I went with gold instead of porcelain because A) gold is more durable, and B) I wanted some bling in my mouth! Of course I didn't have any chronic diseases while I had that big hunk of mercury in my mouth, so I can't say that everything cleared up when it was removed.

Wait a minute, you're saying that one can accept the science that indicates amalgam fillings are completely safe and ALSO acknowledge that certain forms of mercury can be a dangerous poison? Whoa! No way!

[philb]

9. Seems you are the one who doesn't understand mercury basics

Amalgam has elemental mercury; most exposure is from mercury vapor from oral air as I've documented previously,
and mercury in saliva which is mostly methylated to methyl mercury by mouth bacteria and bacteria, yeasts,etc. in the intestines.
All forms of mercury are extremely toxic, as seen from the EPA and DOH(ATSDR) safety limits and web sites I've posted.
But mercury vapor(from amalgam and dental offices) is documented to cause developmental effects to the fetus/infants at lower levels of exposure than the other types http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr13.html

But Amalgam is documented to be the largest source of both inorganic and methyl mercury, so what ever type you think is the most dangerous, amalgam is the largest source in most who have several amalgams http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr1.html

Dental amalgam fillings and the amount of organic mercury in human saliva. Caries Res. 2001 May-Jun;35(3):163-6.
Leistevuo J, Leistevuo T, Helenius H, Pyy L, Osterblad M, Huovinen P, Tenovuo J.
The National Public Health Institute, Antimicrobial Research Laboratory, Turku University, Turku, Finland.

We studied differences in the amounts of organic and inorganic mercury in saliva samples between amalgam and nonamalgam human study groups. The amount of organic and inorganic mercury in whole saliva was measured in 187 adult study subjects. The mercury contents were determined by cold-vapor atomic absorption spectrometry. The amount of organic and inorganic mercury in paraffin-stimulated saliva was significantly higher (p<0.001) in subjects with dental amalgam fillings (n = 88) compared to the nonamalgam study groups (n = 43 and n = 56): log(e) (organic mercury) was linearly related to log(e) (inorganic mercury, r(2) = 0.52). Spearman correlation coefficients of inorganic and organic mercury concentrations with the number of amalgam-filled tooth surfaces were 0.46 and 0.27, respectively.
In the study of a group with amalgams, a group without amalgams, and a group that had undergone amalgam replacement- using saliva mercury measurements, it was concluded that amalgam is the main source of organic mercury in most people. Those with amalgams on average had more than 4 times as much organic mercury as either group without amalgam. Those with amalgam had over 10 times the total mercury as those without. And mercury from fish was controlled for in the study and not a factor in these results. Our results are compatible with the hypothesis that amalgam fillings may be a continuous source of organic mercury, which is more toxic than inorganic mercury, and almost completely absorbed by the human intestine.

Mercury in saliva and feces after removal of amalgam fillings.

Bjorkman L, Sandborgh-Englund G, Ekstrand J. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1997 May;144(1):156-62.

Department of Basic Oral Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

The toxicological consequences of exposure to mercury (Hg) from dental amalgam fillings is a matter of debate in several countries. The purpose of this study was to obtain data on Hg concentrations in saliva and feces before and after removal of dental amalgam fillings. In addition Hg concentrations in urine, blood, and plasma were determined. Ten subjects had all amalgam fillings removed at one dental session. Before removal, the median Hg concentration in feces was more than 10 times higher than in samples from an amalgam free reference group consisting of 10 individuals (2.7 vs 0.23 mumol Hg/kg dry weight, p < 0.001). A considerable increase of the Hg concentration in feces 2 days after amalgam removal (median 280 mumol Hg/kg dry weight) was followed by a significant decrease. Sixty days after removal the median Hg concentration was still slightly higher than in samples from the reference group(85% decline)

Note: as I've stated before, those with amalgams get mercury exposure 10 times those without on average;
and as much as 100 times more;

and the type of mercury that they get is both mercury vapor and methyl mercury- both extremely toxic

actually most damage is done in the body by inorganic mercury, which is as toxic as the other types
some who don't understand mercury toxicoloty think its less toxic due to the fact it doesn't cross cell membranes as
readily as the other types. Which does mean that exposure to external inorganic mercury doesn't get into the
brain and nervous system as readily. However the other types readily cross the brain BBB and cell membranes and once there form
inorganic mercury compounds which no longer can cross cell membranes readily- thus get stuck there- meaning mercury has an
extremely long half life in the brain and accumulates there, as well as in the heart, liver, kidneys, hormone glands, where it commonly causes major adverse health effects
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/indexa.html (citing 4000 peer-reviewed studies documenting common harm
and that most with many conditions recover after amalgam replacment)

[philb]

10. No truth here; no science, no tests- see my posts for actual science and

test results- http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr1.html


see my other posts of abstracts from the above summary fact sheet documenting that amalgam is the largest source of
both inorganic and methyl mercury in most with several amalgams

I've posted URLS and abstracts of peer-reviewed studies documenting recovery of 60,000 people from over 40 chronic health
conditions after amaglam replacement
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/hgremove.html
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/hgrecovp.html

And I've posted URLs to clinics treating thousands of mercury toxic people, who do tests at the medical labs and
many of the case histories at the clinics I posted info and test info for.
such as http://www.flcv.com/autismc.html

see the other thread for a lot more such

[Massacure]

13. Earthlink?

Rofl, anybody can make those websites. Your going to need to come up with a better source than THAT. :rofl: