Re: amalgam and resin filling (Amalgam Debate Forum) 1/19/2007 814755

Re: amalgam and resin filling

Energy Awareness Course
Use CureZone kode to get a free session!

Lugol’s Iodine Free S&H
J.Crow’s® Lugol’s Iodine Solution. Restore lost reserves.

Original Dr. Hulda Clark
Hulda Clark Cleanses

Mercury Detox
Dental work and fillings, not a problem.

Energy Awareness Course
Use CureZone kode to get a free session!

Lugol’s Iodine Free S&H
J.Crow’s® Lugol’s Iodine Solution. Restore lost reserves.

Original Dr. Hulda Clark
Hulda Clark Cleanses

Mercury Detox
Dental work and fillings, not a problem.

Aharleygyrl Views: 15,266
Published: 17 y

This is a reply to # 814,634

Re: amalgam and resin filling

Advertisement
Cleanse the Liver in 9 Days
Feel great again!

Keep mercury out of teeth
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 12/23/06
I find the proposed new rule by the state Department of Environmental Protection to require dentists to eliminate mercury waste puzzling. How is it that mercury in any form in any place is poisonous, except in your mouth? A dental amalgam, the most common form of fillings, is a mixture of silver and mercury in a 50/50 mixture.
Take a look at the federal Environmental Protection Agency Web site. There, it states that "Mercury is a neurotoxin." It is poisonous, suppresses the immune system and can cause permanent damage to the brain and central nervous system.

I don't know if anyone can state for sure what effect mercury dental fillings may have on our health. But why take a chance, even if there is only a remote possibility of problems? Alternatives are available. Composite and porcelain fillings are replacements. When a filling is required on a front tooth, either composite or porcelain material is used, as silver is unsightly.

Interesting, too, is that Sweden banned dental amalgams in 1994. Germany has stopped using most forms containing mercury, and Austria, Denmark and Finland plan to outlaw amalgams. Since 1994 in California, dentists have been required to post a warning in their offices about the hazards of amalgam restorations.

We should all be concerned. Just recently, we learned that women who abandoned estrogen replacement therapy had a significant reduction in reported breast cancer. For years, we were told that this therapy safe.
How can we permit dentists to put a known neurotoxin in our mouths when the DEP is requiring them to stop throwing it down the drain? Does this make any sense?
William Baletti

Dentists' aim: Keep mercury out of drains
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 12/17/06
BY TODD B. BATES
ENVIRONMENTAL WRITER
Post Comment
Dentists may eventually have to do more to reduce the amount of mercury from tooth filling wastes that enters sewage treatment plants and winds up in sludge and surface waters.
Most dental facilities would have to buy devices to remove dental amalgam filling wastes and take other steps to prevent pollution to avoid having to obtain a potentially costly wastewater permit, under a state rule proposal.

"We're totally on board," said Dr. Robert Shekitka, president of the approximately 4,700-member New Jersey Dental Association.

The rule proposed by the state Department of Environmental Protection would cover about 3,400 dental facilities in New Jersey. It would remove about 540 pounds of mercury annually from wastewater that flows into sewage treatment plants.

A significant reduction in mercury entering water bodies will eventually lead to lower mercury levels in fish, according to the proposed rule, which was unveiled in September. That, in turn, could lead to relaxed advisories on eating fish with mercury and fishing-related economic benefits.

Dental facilities are the "single-largest unregulated (source) in New Jersey for mercury," said Jim Murphy, supervising environmental engineer in the DEP Bureau of Pretreatment and Residuals.

It would cost billions of dollars to remove mercury at sewage treatment plants versus the $1,000 to $2,000 it might cost to remove mercury at each dental facility, Murphy said.
"We haven't seen anything in the comments (on the proposal) that would significantly alter our . . . thought to go forth with the adoption" of the rule, he said.
Mercury is a toxic heavy metal, and exposure to mercury contamination can cause permanent brain damage to fetuses, infants and young children. It also poses a severe risk to wildlife, according to the rule proposal.
Human exposure to methylmercury — the most toxic form of mercury — stems mainly from eating contaminated fish and shellfish. Methylmercury levels in fish are typically 100,000 times those in the water, the proposed rule says.

Federal data show that about 90 to 95 percent of the mercury entering sewage plants ends up in sludge, Murphy said. An estimated 5 to 10 percent of the mercury entering plants is discharged into waterways.

About 27 percent of the sewage sludge generated in New Jersey is incinerated, releasing mercury into the air, the rule proposal says. Such mercury ultimately enters surface waters.

Dental facilities, such as private dental practices, hospitals, dental schools and community health centers, are the largest source of mercury entering sewage treatment plants, the proposal says.
The mercury is part of dental amalgam, which is used as a filling material to restore teeth, the proposed rule says. Amalgam is formed by the reaction of mercury with amalgam alloy containing silver, tin and copper.
Dental facilities generate wastewater that flows through a chair-side trap and, in most facilities, a filter that protects the vacuum pump, the proposal says.
Amalgam waste not captured by these filters, and waste captured but rinsed down the drain, ends up at sewage plants, according to the proposal.
Installing and properly operating an amalgam separator can prevent at least 96 percent of the amalgam waste from entering office wastewater, the proposal says.
With possible exceptions, dental facilities would not have to get a wastewater discharge permit if they implement "best management practices" and install and properly run an amalgam separator. They also would have to certify to the DEP that they're complying with the rule.
Orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists and some other specialists would be exempt from those requirements.
The minimum DEP permit fee is $5,400 a year, while DEP-delegated local agencies have fees ranging from $50 to $11,000 a year, the rule proposal says.
An amalgam separator would typically cost from $1,000 to $2,000 per facility, on average, according to an American Dental Association-commissioned report cited in the rule proposal. The cost of operating a separator and recycling captured material is an estimated $700 to $1,000 a year.
Best management practices would cost about $300 per facility per year, the proposal says.
Many Northeast states already require amalgam separators, but the DEP would go beyond that requirement, Murphy said.
Eric R. Elmore, New Jersey Dental Association spokesman, said dentists have been using best management practices for "a long time in an unregulated way."

Todd B. Bates: (732) 643-4237 or tbates@app.com

All of my messges on this board All of my messges anywhere

Advertisement
Transformational Tarot Readings
Move stagnated energy into transformation

Add To Favorites!