CureZone   Log On   Join
 

The Doctor Within sez: by John Cullison ..... Amalgam Debate Forum

Date:   2/2/2007 8:24:01 PM ( 17 y ago)
Hits:   4,503
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=826971

3 of 3 (100%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

HOW'D THIS Amalgam BUSINESS ALL GET STARTED?

Looking into the history of Amalgams is most illuminating. In the 1830s there were two groups of dentists in America: those favoring mercury Amalgams and those opposed to it. Those not in favor of Amalgam -- the American Society of Dental Surgeons -- disliked amalgam's tendency to fracture teeth as it expanded in fillings. Nor were they happy with the idea of mercury's side effects, like insanity (Mad Hatter's Disease) and loss of motor function from nerve damage. (Bernard)

So the Society pledged never to use Amalgam for fillings. (Lorscheider) The Society actually referred to those dentists who used mercury as 'quacks' -- short for quackenslaver -- the German word for mercury. And that is the origin of this derogatory medical term. (Hansen, p. 40) The name of that other group, the one using mercury? The American Dental Association.

From the 1830s till the 1850s, the controversy continued. Membership in the Society slowly declined as amalgam became more popular, since it was cheaper and easier to use than other filling materials. Mercury amalgam fillings could be offered at an affordable price for the largest number of people.

By 1859, the Society of American Dental Surgeons had faded out, edged out by the champion of mercury fillings: the American Dental Association. It is worth noting that the ADA's original unifying principle was that amalgam was safe and effective -- the idea is in the ADA's collective DNA. When it was discovered that adding tin solved the expansion problem, that was all she wrote. Since that time, the composition of the amalgam alloy has remained almost exactly the same.

No opposition. This must be why in its 125-year existence, the ADA has never funded one single human safety study of mercury amalgams. They never even tried to find out! (Ziff, p 24) But the ADA's members are pledged never to mention anything about mercury toxicity to patients. And in an ironic reversal, by the 1980s the ADA had worked up the temerity to refer to any dentist who would suggest amalgam removal as a "quack." (Hansen, p 42)

Then in 1990, a very thorough scientific study was completed by F.L. Lorscheider and colleagues. (Hansen, p 46) In their meticulously designed experiment using sheep as subjects, they measured kidney concentrations of mercury following amalgam placement in teeth. A few of their findings:

-- Each amalgam filling releases about 10 mcg of mercury per day into the body

-- Mercury crosses the placenta

-- Mercury causes autoimmunity

-- Mercury can make bacteria resistant to Antibiotics

-- Mercury can impair fertility

-- 12 amalgam fillings impaired kidney function by 50%

-- Some 70,000 kg of Amalgams are placed into the mouths of Americans each year. That's enough for over 100 million fillings.

This landmark experiment laid to rest the ADA's long-standing contention that mercury was somehow magically stable once placed in a filling, and could not leach into the body. Amazingly however, such a claim is still sometimes heard even these days. Their proof? 150 years of use. That's it! Incredibly, they've never made any clinical toxicity studies of mercury amalgams in all that time.

The National Institute for Science, Law, and Public Policy now has an extensive and well researched website in which scientific journal articles have provided abundant research that:

-- Mercury amalgams can impair kidney function (Boyd)

-- Mercury amalgams promote abnormal bacteria in the mouth and in the colon (Summers)

-- Mercury amalgams can promote cardiac dysfunction (Frustaci)

So if mercury can do all this damage, the question then becomes

HOW MUCH IS DANGEROUS?

Mercury comes to humans through seafood, the air, accidental environmental exposure, through vaccines and through mercury amalgams. Fully two-thirds of all that exposure is due to mercury amalgams. (Aposhian)

The World Health Organization came to the same conclusion in Geneva, Switzerland meetings in 1991: mercury from amalgams is the #1 source for human contamination:



source ....... micrograms per day



Amalgams _______  3 - 17

Seafood  _______     2.3

Other food  ____     0.3

Air  ___________  traces

Water  _________  traces


- Environmental Health Criteria 118

Although mercury from vaccines can reach as high as 78 micrograms per day, that's only on the day of the shot. (Bernard) This puts dental amalgams way out ahead for overall lifetime mercury exposure.

The New England Journal of Medicine agreed. In its 18 Oct 90 issue, mercury in amalgams was described as "the chief source of exposure [to mercury] of a large segment of the US population."

These are standard findings corroborated by dozens of other researchers. It is impossible to do the most cursory investigation into mercury without repeatedly running across these same facts. That is why the current stated position on mercury amalgams by the ADA is so fantastically extravagant, and evasive:

"There is no evidence in the scientific literature that minute amounts of mercury vapor that may be released from amalgam restorations cause mercury poisoning. Dental amalgam, which has been used extensively for more than 100 years, has an exemplary record of safety and benefit to the dental patient."

- Journal of the American Dental Association Dec 1987

"The strongest and most convincing support we have for the safety of dental amalgam is the fact that each year more than 100 million amalgam fillings are placed in the United States. And since amalgam has been used for more than 150 years, literally billions of amalgam fillings have been successfully used to restore decayed teeth."

- Journal of the American Dental Association April 1990

Hard to argue with scientific data like that. That's the same line that's been used with every fatal medical drug or procedure that's ever been recalled from use, right up until the day they pulled it. Although they constantly refer to "research" proving the safety of mercury amalgams without ever citing any, the ADA now contents itself with the old "that's the way we've always done it" defense. They ignore all current research on mercury toxicity from hundreds of scientific sources, and try to assure patients that mercury is safe and harmless.

It is equally incomprehensible that the EPA has ruled that mercury and all its compounds are not safe and may not be sold in OTC drugs, and are to be regarded as Hazardous Materials, with the single exception of dental amalgams! In this application, inches from the human brain, mercury is supposedly harmless! (Ziff p. 37) What's wrong with this picture?

In congressional hearings in the spring of 2000, Representative Dan Burton wants to know why, if mercury is such a hazardous material that special cleanup crews are summoned when any is spilled, why do we think it's safe to put in our mouths? (Burton)

Even when they admit the 'rare' cases of damage from mercury amalgams, the ADA employs Orwellian phrasing about 'sensitivity' rather than calling it toxicity or poisoning. See how languaging is everything? If the issue is sensitivity, then the damage or illness is due to some weakness of the patient. It's his fault; it's not that he's being poisoned. Nothing to do with the ADA's responsibilities as guardians of the patient's health.

Blame the patient... blame the patient... where have I heard that before?... Oh well. The rest of the article is here.
 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.03 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=826971