Understanding Methyl Mercury and Mercury Vapor

Posted by
Date:
in: Methyl mercury is more toxic
297 Views

methyl-vaporOne of the most essential arguments in the anti-amalgam movement relates to the issue of human exposure to mercury vapor, which is a side-effect of dental amalgam fillings.1,2 Often euphemistically referred to as “silver,” amalgam fillings are actually 45-55% metallic mercury,3 and as such, mercury vapor is continuously emitted from them.4 The output of mercury vapor can be intensified by the number of fillings present and other activities associated with the human mouth, such as chewing, teeth-grinding and the consumption of hot liquids.5, 6

The first step in understanding this hazardous but often overlooked route of mercury poisoning requires a basic chemistry lesson. Mercury, as in the case of water, can exist in different forms: most notably, it can be found as metallic mercury (referred to as quicksilver or elemental mercury, such as that in amalgam fillings), inorganic mercury compounds (salts), and organic mercury (including methylmercury). Like most respected state and world health groups, the United States Environmental Protection Agency warns that mercury in the form of methylmercury is highly toxic.8 In addition to posting warnings about the methylmercury found in certain types of seafood,9 the EPA offers a basic explanation as to how methylmercury is created:

When mercury falls in rain or snow, it may flow into bodies of water like lakes and streams. When it falls out of the air as dry deposition, it may eventually be washed into those bodies by rain. Bacteria in soils and sediments convert mercury to methylmercury. In this form, it is taken up by tiny aquatic plants and animals. Fish that eat these organisms build up methylmercury in their bodies. As ever-bigger fish eat smaller ones, the methylmercury is concentrated further up the food chain. This process is called ‘bioaccumulation.’10

Thus, if a person digests a fish containing methylmercury, the person is exposed to a more evolved form of the element that has been amassed and built up over time. Based on this premise, the large majority of public health officials concur that methylmercury poses a blatant threat to susceptible parts of the human population.

The most infamous case of methylmercury poisoning from fish happened when a factory leaked a large amount of mercury into Minamata Bay, Japan during the 1950s. According to Dr. Lynn Goldman of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Minamata accident resulted in 41 deaths and over two dozen documented cases of brain injury to infants born to mothers who ate toxic fish from Minamata Bay during their pregnancies.11 Controversy over the accident still remains, and journalist David Sanger reported in an article for The New York Times that the Minamata disaster actually resulted in up to 1,000 deaths and over 8,000 complaints of severe health complications ranging from loss of hearing or sight to brain injury.12 With all of this in mind, numerous state, national, and global environmental groups have been quick to caution the public about the possible presence of methylmercury in certain types of fish and shellfish and to recommend that pregnant women and children restrict these food products in their diet.13, 14, 15, 16 Yet, when one takes the precautions about consuming seafood into account, an ominous question arises: how can one type of mercury be dangerous in fish and shellfish but another type be safe in dental fillings drilled into teeth which are an essential part of processing all air, food, beverages and other foreign substances that are ingested into the human body via the mouth?

First, it should be emphasized again that most health officials and environmentalists agree upon the horrific potential of methylmercury and bio-accumulation as evidenced by the tragedy at Minamata Bay. Consequently, governmental groups and other authorities have been active in attempting to raise public awareness about emissions of mercury into the environment from industries, products and practices that involve mercury such as…

  •  
    • coal-fired power,17, 18, 19
    • thermometers,20 21 22 23
    • compact fluorescent light bulbs,24 25 26 27
    • gold,28
    • batteries,29 30
    • electrical switches,31
    • cosmetics,32
    • chloralkali,33
    • crematoriums,34 35
    • the religious rites of Santeria,36 37 38
    • and dental offices.39 40 41

Even the ADA has taken action to establish proper disposal methods of dental amalgam waste so as not to cause mercury pollution in the environment.42 However, the ADA continues to defend the safety of mercury fillings in the human mouth:

While questions have arisen about the safety of dental amalgam relating to its mercury content, the major U.S. and international scientific and health bodies, including the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization, among others have been satisfied that dental amalgam is a safe, reliable and effective restorative material.43

Unfortunately, this statement disregards the overwhelming evidence provided by organizations and countries around the world about the catastrophic effects that dental amalgam, its waste and its mercury vapor can have on the environment and on human beings.

One reason that these agencies are able to avoid the issue of amalgam is that the vapor discharged by fillings exists in a different form than methylmercury, the universally agreed-upon most toxic state of the element. Nonetheless, various government officials in this country and other parts of the globe have recognized that such lesser-known forms of mercury are likewise objectionable and unsafe. In 2009, 19 members of the United States Congress wrote a letter to the FDA expressing their concern about mercury used in amalgam fillings, with a focus on potential dangers to pregnant women and children.44 Additionally, the governments of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark have banned the use of mercury fillings in dentistry,45 Germany and Canada have limited their use for pregnant women,46 47 and France, Finland and Austria have recommended that alternative dental materials be used for pregnant women.48 The ADA’s official position on amalgam fillings includes remarks insinuating that the World Health Organization considers dental amalgam to be a safe material (see above), but conversely, at least one other document prepared for the WHO warns otherwise by citing over a dozen studies implicating mercury fillings as being a possible culprit in the ill-health of people.49 Hence, information has already been disseminated that amalgam and mercury vapor, like methylmercury, also pose a grave threat to human beings.

Moreover, extensive research and a staggering number of international studies thoroughly document the specific health risks associated with the use of dental mercury. Scientific data from reputable scientists all over the world investigates how the presence of amalgam fillings can relate to

  •  
    • cardiovascular problems,50 51
    • hearing loss,52
    • kidney ailments,53 54 55 56
    • absorption of heavy metals in the brain,57 58
    • dysfunction of the immune system,59 60 61
    • Lou Gehrig’s Disease,62 63
    • multiple sclerosis,64 65 66 67 68
    • allergies,69 70 71 72
    • autism,73
    • chronic fatigue syndrome,74 75 76 77
    • Alzheimer’s Disease,78 79
    • and a myriad of other health problems.80 81 82 83 84 85 86

 

Not surprisingly, concerns have also been raised about the safety of dental personnel who work with amalgam.87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 In spite of these studies and the fact that the American Society of Dental Surgeons, the predecessor to the ADA, made its members pledge not to use mercury because of its known toxicity,95 the ADA, FDA, and other groups still vehemently defend its use in dentistry.

Furthermore, perhaps the most disturbing aspect of mercury fillings is that research has already begun to explore how the mercury in amalgam and its vapor can be altered into methylmercury within the human body. Remember that bacteria in soil and water can convert mercury into methylmercury, a form of the element sometimes consumed by fish and shellfish.96 Remember also that pregnant women and children are advised not to eat certain types of seafood that might contain methylmercury.97 98 99 As shocking as it is, several studies have documented the ability of metallic mercury rooted in the human system (such as that from amalgam fillings) to be transformed into methylmercury in the mouth100, 101, 102, and by specific strains of yeast and bacteria that dwell in the gut,103 104, 105 thus revealing that the problem already addressed in maritime environments is one which even more intimately impacts human health.

Finally, it should be noted that amalgam studies of any sort should only be considered when the capricious nature of mercury is taken into account. The complex element, made even more complicated by its presence in vapor from fillings, influences each individual differently based on a wide-range of co-existing factors. Thoughtful research has explored how

  •  
    • gender,106 107
    • fetal exposure to mercury,108 109 110 111
    • plaque,112
    • various routes of exposure from mercury fillings,113 114 115
    • genetic predisposition,116 117 118 119 120 121
    • the number of amalgam fillings in the mouth,122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130
    • consumption of selenium,131
    • milk,132 133 134
    • or alcohol,135 136 137
    • and other circumstances138 139 140 141

can play a role in each person’s unique reaction to mercury.

It is imperative that consumers, medical professionals, scientists, health care providers, the press and officials of governmental organizations seriously contemplate whether this element of doubt is worth using at all, especially when it comes to pregnant women, fetuses, children and individuals with weakened immune systems. Studies exposing the wider-range of issues related to mercury fillings and the vapor they yield will inevitably continue to prove that the use of this known neurotoxin in dental materials is unhealthy, crippling and sometimes even deadly. In the meantime, informed citizens around the world will continue to wonder how long it will take to ban this cheap but toxic material from being placed into the mouths of an unsuspecting American public who has been separated from crucial knowledge about its debilitating effects by the smokescreen of its vapor.

 

REFERENCES

1 State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. Fillings: The Choices You Have: Mercury Amalgam and Other Filling Materials. (Hartford, CT: Brochure, Revised January 2006), 3. http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/mercury/gen_info/fillings_brochure.pdf

2 Advisory Committee on Mercury Pollution. Dental Amalgam Fillings: Environmental and Health Facts for Dental Patients. (Waterbury, VT: online dental fact sheet, accessed October 27, 2010), 1. http://www.mercvt.org/PDF/DentalAmalgamFactSheet.pdf

3 World Health Organization. Mercury in Health Care. (Geneva, Switzerland: policy paper, August 2005), 1. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/medicalwaste/mercurypolpaper.pdf

4 Health Canada. The Safety of Dental Amalgam. (Ottawa, Ontario: report, 1996), 4. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/alt_formats/hpfb-dgpsa/pdf/md-im/dent_amalgam-eng.pdf

5 Dental Amalgam Fillings: Environmental and Health Facts for Dental Patients, 1. http://www.mercvt.org/PDF/DentalAmalgamFactSheet.pdf

6 Fillings: The Choices You Have: Mercury Amalgam and Other Filling Materials, 3. http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/mercury/gen_info/fillings_brochure.pdf

7 Risher, J.F. for World Health Organization. Elemental Mercury and inorganic mercury compounds: human health aspects (Geneva, Switzerland: Concise International Chemical Assessment Document 50, 2003). http://www.inchem.org/documents/cicads/cicads/cicad50.htm

8 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Mercury: Basic Information. (Washington, D.C: website, accessed October 27, 2010), 2, http://www.epa.gov/mercury/about.htm

9 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Mercury: Human Exposure. (Washington, D.C.: website, accessed October 27, 2010), 1, http://www.epa.gov/hg/exposure.htm

10 Mercury: Human Exposure, 4. http://www.epa.gov/hg/exposure.htm

11 Goldfrank, L et al. Goldfrank’s Toxicologic Emergencies, as cited in Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics. “Technical Report: Mercury in the Environment: Implications for Pediatricians,” Pediatrics 108:1 (2001): 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

12 Sanger, David E. “Japan and the mercury-poisoned sea: a reckoning that won’t go away.” The New York Times, January 16, 1991 (http://www.nytimes.com/1991/01/16/world/japan-and-the-mercury-poisoned-sea-a-reckoning-that-won-t-go-away.html)

13 Mercury: Human Exposure, 1. http://www.epa.gov/hg/exposure.htm

14 State of Connecticut Department of Health. A Woman’s Guide to Eating Fish Safely: Special Advice for Pregnant Women & Young Children. (Hartford, CT: brochure, 2009). http://www.ct.gov/dph/lib/dph/environmental_health/eoha/pdf/womans_guide_-english_2010.pdf

15 United States Food and Drug Administration. What You Need to Know about Mercury in Fish and Shellfish. (Washington, D.C: brochure, March 2004). http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm110591.htm

16 Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 203. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

17 World Health Organization. Exposure to mercury: a Major Public Health Concern. (Geneva, Switzerland: flyer, 2007), 1. http://www.who.int/phe/news/Mercury-flyer.pdf

18 Mercury: Basic Information. http://www.epa.gov/mercury/about.htm

19 Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

20 Exposure to Mercury: a Major Public Health Concern, 2. http://www.who.int/phe/news/Mercury-flyer.pdf

21 State of Tennessee Department of Health. Mercury. (Nashville, TN: website, accessed October 27, 2010), 1. http://health.state.tn.us/environmental/mercury.htm

22 Fillings: The Choices You Have: Mercury Amalgam and Other Filling Materials, 2. http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/mercury/gen_info/fillings_brochure.pdf

23 Goldman, Lynn; Shannon, Michael; and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

24 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Cleanup and Safe Disposal of Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs: Cleaning Up a Broken CFL. (Washington, D.C.: website, accessed October 27, 2010). http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html

26 Fillings: The Choices You Have: Mercury Amalgam and Other Filling Materials, 2. http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/mercury/gen_info/fillings_brochure.pdf

27 Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

28 Exposure to Mercury: a Major Public Health Concern, 1. http://www.who.int/phe/news/Mercury-flyer.pdf

29 Fillings: The Choices You Have: Mercury Amalgam and Other Filling Materials, 2. http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/mercury/gen_info/fillings_brochure.pdf

30 Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

31 Fillings: The Choices You Have: Mercury Amalgam and Other Filling Materials, 2. http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/mercury/gen_info/fillings_brochure.pdf

32 Exposure to Mercury: a Major Public Health Concern, 2. http://www.who.int/phe/news/Mercury-flyer.pdf

33 Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

35 Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

36 Exposure to Mercury: a Major Public Health Concern, 2. http://www.who.int/phe/news/Mercury-flyer.pdf

37 Risher, J.F. for World Health Organization, 12. http://www.inchem.org/documents/cicads/cicads/cicad50.htm

38 Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

39 International Academy of Oral Medical Technology. EPA to Propose Rule on Dental Mercury-A Significant Win for Mercury Environmentalists. (Champion’s Gate, FL: press release, September 27, 2010). http://www.iaomt.org/news/archive.asp?intReleaseID=342

40 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Dental Amalgam Effluent Guide. (Washington, D.C.: guide, updated on September 27, 2007). http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/guide/dental/index.cfm

41 Goldman, Lynn, Shannon, Michael, and Committee on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics, 197. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197

42 Mackert, Jr., J. Rodway on behalf of American Dental Association. “Environmental Risks of and Regulatory Response to Dental Mercury Amalgam,” Domestic Policy Subcommittee Oversight and Government Reform Committee (2154 Rayburn HOB), November 14, 2007, 2-4. http://www.ada.org/sections/advocacy/pdfs/amalgam_testimony_071114_mackert.pdf

43 American Dental Association. Amalgam: Dental Filling Options. (Chicago, IL, website brochure, 2010), 2-3. http://www.ada.org/3094.aspx#amafillings

44 Watson, Diane and 18 other members of Congress. “Dear Acting Commissioner Dr. Joshua Sharfstein…” (Washington, D.C.: Congressional letter, May 14, 2009). Copy of letter available upon request to john.donnelly@mail.house.gov

45 “Dental Mercury Use Banned in Norway, Sweden and Denmark because Composites are Adequate Replacements,” Reuters/PRNewswire-USNewswire Online. January 3, 2008. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS108558+03-Jan-2008+PRN20080103

46 Working Group on Dental Amalgam for the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Dental Amalgam and Restorative Materials: An Update Report to the Environmental Health Policy Committee. (Washington, D.C.: update report, October 1997), 4-6. http://web.health.gov/environment/amalgam2/contents.html

48 Health and Environment Alliance. Mercury and Dental Amalgams. (Brussels, Belgium: fact sheet, May 2007): 3. http://www.env-health.org/IMG/pdf/HEA_009-07.pdf

49 Risher, J.F. for World Health Organization, 11-12. http://www.inchem.org/documents/cicads/cicads/cicad50.htm

50 Mutter, J. et al. “Amalgam risk assessment with coverage of references up to 2005,” Gesundheitswesen 67:3 (Review in German, March 2005): 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

51 Siblerud, RL. “The relationship between mercury from dental amalgam and the cardiovascular system,” Science of the Total Environment 99:1-2 (December 1990): 23-35. Abstract available here 

52 Rothwell, Janet A; Boyd, Paul J. “Amalgam fillings and hearing loss,” International Journal of Audiology 47:12 (London, England, December 1, 2008): 770-776. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19085401

53 Barregard, L. et al. “Cadmium, mercury, and lead in kidney cortex of living kidney donors: impact of different exposure sources,” Environ, Res. 110 (Sweden, 2009): 47-54. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19931045

54 Nylander, M., Friberg, L, Lind, B. “Mercury concentrations in the human brain and kidneys in relation to exposure from dental amalgam fillings,” Swed Dent J 11:5 (1987): 179-187.

55 Mutter, J. et al., 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

56 Mortada, WL et al. “Mercury in dental restoration: is there a risk of nephrotoxity?” J Nephrol 15:2 (March-April 2002): 171-176.

57 Eggleston, DW, Nylander, M. “Correlation of dental amalgam with mercury in brain tissue,” J Prosthet Dent 58:6 (December 1987): 704-707. http://www.nvbt.nl/hot-metalen4.html

58 Nylander, M., Friberg, L., Lind, B., 179-187.

59 Herrstrom, P et al. “Allergic disease, immunoglobulins, exposure to mercury and dental amalgam in Swedish adolescents,” International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 69:5 (1997): 339-342. Abstract available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/t3ugq0d0pkmdevjt/

60 Kratka, Z. et al. “Dental Amalgam as one of the risk factors in autoimmune disease,” Neuro Endocrinol Lett 24:1-2 (February 2003): 65-67. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12743535

61 Enestrom, S and Hultman, P. “Does amalgam affect the immune system? A controversial issue,” International Archives of Allergy and Immunology 106:3 (1995): 180-191. Abstract available at http://karger.yakeworld.ddns.info/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowAbstract&ArtikelNr=236843&Ausgabe=245832&ProduktNr=224161

62 Mutter, J. et al., 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

63 Redhe, O, and Pleva, J. “Recovery of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and from allergy after removal of dental amalgam fillings,” Int J Risk & Safety in Med 4 (1994): 229-236.

64 Siblerud, RL. “A comparison of mental health of multiple sclerosis patients with silver/mercury dental fillings and those with fillings removed,” Psychol Rep., 70: 3pt 2 (Rocky Mountain Research Institute, Colorado, June 1992): 1136-51. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1496084

65 Huggins, HA, Levy, TE. “Cerebrospinal fluid protein changes in multiple sclerosis after dental amalgam removal,” Altern Med Rev. 3:4 (August 1998): 295-300. Abstract available http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9727079

66 Mutter, J. et al., 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

67 Craelius, W., “Comparative epidemiology of multiple sclerosis and dental caries,” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 35 (1978): 155-165. Abstract available at http://jech.bmj.com/content/32/3/155.abstract

68 Siblerud, RL, Kienholz, E. “Evidence that mercury from silver dental fillings may be an etiological factor in multiple sclerosis,” The Science of the Total Environment 142:3 (March 15, 1994): 191-205. Abstract available 

69 Prochazkova, Jarmila et al. “The beneficial effect of amalgam replacement on health in patients with autoimmunity,” Neuroendocrinology Letters 25: 3. (Czech Republic, June 2004). http://www.nel.edu/pdf_/25_3/NEL250304A07_Prochazkova_.pdf.

70 Stejskal, I. et al. “Metal-specific lymphocytes: biomarkers of sensitivity in man,” Neuroendocrinol Lett 20:5 (Prague, Czech Republic, 1999): 289-298. http://i-gap.info/app/dokumente/Melisa%20as%20biomarkerof%20T%20cell%20related%20immunity.pdf

71 Mutter, J. et al., 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

72 Herrstrom, P. et al. Abstract available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/t3ugq0d0pkmdevjt/

73 Mutter, J. et al., 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

74 Malt, UF et al. “Physical and mental problems attributed to dental amalgam fillings: a descriptive study of 99 self-referred patients compared with 272 controls,” Psychosomatic Medicine, 59:1 (American Psychosomatic Society, study conducted in Norway, 1997): 32-41. http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/cgi/content/abstract/59/1/32.

75 Sterzl, I. et al. “Mercury and nickel allergy: risk factors in fatigue and autoimmunity,” Neuroendocrinol Lett 20:3-4 (Prague, Czech Republic, 1999): 221-228. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11462117

77 Wojcik, DP et al. “Mercury toxicity presenting as chronic fatigue, memory impairment and depression: diagnosis, treatment, susceptibility, and outcomes in a New Zealand general practice setting: 1994-2006,” Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 27:4 (August 2006): 415-423. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16891999

78 Mutter, J. et al., 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

79 Godrey, ME, Wojcik, DP, Krone, CA. “Apolipoprotein E genotyping as a potential biomarker for mercury toxicity,” Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease 5 (2003): 189-195. Abstract available at http://iospress.metapress.com/content/2bpp5fdar3r06e11/

81 Fredin, B. “The distribution of mercury in various tissues of guinea-pigs after application of dental amalgam fillings (a pilot study),” Sci Total Environ 66 (October 1987): 263-268.

82 Danscher, G. Horsted-Bindslev, P., Rungby, J., “Traces of mercury in organs from primates with amalgam fillings,” Ex Mol Pathol 52:3 (June 1990): 291-299. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2115006

84 Kidd, RF. “Results of dental amalgam removal and mercury detoxification using DMPS and neural therapy,” Altern Ther Health Med 6:4 (2000): 49-55. http://www.wellcorps.com/files/DentalAmalgamRemovalAndMercuryDetoxification.pdf

85 Hanson, Mats. “Health and amalgam removal: a meta-analysis of 25 studies,” Tf-bladet Bull of the Swedish Association of Dental Mercury Patients Tf-bladet no. 2 2004 and SOU 2003:53 appendix 10, Sw. Dept. of Health. http://iaomt.org/articles/files/files214/Hanson-%20effects%20of%20amal%20removal.pdf

86 Mutter, J. et al., 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

87 Moen, BE, Hollund, BE, Riise, T. “Neurological symptoms among dental assistants: a cross-sectional study,” Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology 3:1 (Bergen, Norway, May 18, 2008): 10. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18485237

88 Ritchie, KA et al. “Health and neuropsychological functioning of dentists exposed to mercury,” Occup Environ Med 59 (2002): 287-293. Abstract available at http://oem.bmj.com/content/59/5/287.abstract

89 Richardson, G. Mark. “Inhalation of mercury-contaminated particulate matter by dentists: an overlooked occupational risk,” Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 9:6 (November 2003): 1519-1531. Abstract available at http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a713989401

90 Nylander, M et al. “Mercury accumulation in tissues from dental staff and controls in relation to exposure,” Swed Dent J 13:6 (1989): 235-236.

91 Herber, R.F., de Gee, A.J., Wibowo, A.A. “Exposure of dentists and assistants to mercury: mercury levels in urine and hair related to conditions of practice,” Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 16:3 (1988): 153-158. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3163962

92 Stonehouse, CA., Newman, AP. “Mercury vapour release from a dental aspirator,” Br Dent J 190: 10 (May 26, 2001): 558-560. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11411891

93 Rojas, M. et al. “Occupational exposure and health effects of metallic mercury among dentists and dental assistants: a preliminary study,” Acta Cient Venez 51:1 (2000): 32-38. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10974705

94 Windham, Bernard. “Health effects on dental personnel of exposure to mercury vapour,” The Natural Recovery Plan. www.thenaturalrecoveryplan.com

96 Mercury: Human Exposure, 4. http://www.epa.gov/hg/exposure.htm

97 Mercury: Human Exposure, 1. http://www.epa.gov/hg/exposure.htm

98 A Woman’s Guide to Eating Fish Safely: Special Advice for Pregnant Women & Young Children, http://www.ct.gov/dph/lib/dph/environmental_health/eoha/pdf/womans_guide_-english_2010.pdf

99 What You Need to Know about Mercury in Fish and Shellfish. http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm110591.htm

100 Sellars, William et al. “Methyl mercury in dental amalgams in the human mouth,” Journal of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine. 6:1 (March 1996): 33-36. Abstract available at http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/13590849608999133?journalCode=cjne

101 Heintze, Ulf et al. “Methylation of mercury from dental amalgam and mercuric chloride by oral streptococci in vitro,” European Journal of Oral Sciences 91:2 (April 1983). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0722.1983.tb00792.x/abstract

102 Wang, J., Liu, Z. “In vitro study of streptococcus mutans in the plaque on the surface of amalgam fillings on the conversion of inorganic mercury to organic mercury,” Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue 9:2 (June 2000): 70-72. Article is in Chinese. Abstract available in English at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15014810

103 Rowland, IR, Grasso, p., Davies, MJ. “The methylization of mercuric chloride by human intestinal bacteria,” Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 31:9 (September 15, 1975): 1064-5. http://www.springerlink.com/content/b677m8k193676v17/

104 Leistevuo, J. et al. “Dental amalgam fillings and the amount of organic mercury in human saliva,” Caries Research 35:3 (ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source, May/June 2001): 163-166.

105 Yannai, S., Berdicevsky, I, and Duek, L. “Transformations of inorganic mercury by candida albicans and saccharomyces cerevisiae,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology 57:1 (January 1991): 245-247. http://aem.asm.org/cgi/reprint/57/1/245

106 Rothwell, Janet A; Boyd, Paul J. “Amalgam fillings and hearing loss,” International Journal of Audiology 47: 12 (December 1, 2008): 771. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19085401

107 Richardson, G. Mark et al. “Mercury vapour: Continuing toxicological uncertainties, and establishing a Canadian reference exposure level,” Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 53. (January 2008): 32. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18992295

108 Geier, David A, Kern, Janet K., Geier, Mark R. “A prospective study of prenatal mercury exposure from dental amalgams and autism severity,” Neurobiolgiae Experimentals Polish Neuroscience Society 69 (2009): 1, 4, 6 & 7. http://www.iaomt.org/news/files/files302/Amalgam_Autism_Geier_2009.pdf

109 Richardson, G. Mark et al., 35. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18992295

110 Mutter, J. et al., 204-216. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15789284

111 Windham, Bernard, “New studies into effect of dental amalgam,” The Natural Recovery Plan. www.thenaturalrecoveryplan.com

112 Lyttle, H.A. and Bowden, G.H. “The level of mercury in human dental plaque and interaction in vitro between biofilms of streptococcus mutans and dental amalgam,” Journal of Dental Research 72:9 (September 1993): 1320-1324. http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/72/9/1320

113 Mercola, Joseph and Klinghardt, Dietrich. “Mercury toxicity and systemic elimination agents,” Journal of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine 11 (2001) 53-62. http://www.scribd.com/doc/32403160/Mercury-Toxicity-and-Systemic-Elimination-Agents

114 Bjorkman, L., Sanborgh-Englund, G., Ekstrand, J. “Mercury in saliva and feces after removal of mercury fillings,” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 144:1 (May 1997): 156-162. Abstract available at http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ap/to/1997/00000144/00000001/art08128

115 Bergerow, J. et al. “Long-term mercury excretion in urine,” International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 66:3 (1994): 209-212. Abstract available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/w5274366726q6020/

116 Zamm, Alfred, M.D. “Dental mercury: a factor that aggravates and induces xenobiotic intolerance,” Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine 6:2 (1991) http://www.orthomolecular.org/library/jom/1991/pdf/1991-v06n02-p067.pdf

117 Richardson, G. Mark et al., 32, 35. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18992295

118 Godrey, ME, Wojcik, DP, Krone, CA, 189-195. Abstract available at http://iospress.metapress.com/content/2bpp5fdar3r06e11/

119 Haley, B. “Mercury toxicity: genetic susceptibility and synergistic effects,” Medical Vertias 2 (2005): 535-542.

120 Wojcik, DP et al., 415-423. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16891999

122 Rothwell, Janet A; Boyd, Paul J., 772, 774, 775. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19085401

123 Geier, David A; Kern, Janet K.; Geier, Mark R., 1, 4 & 7. http://www.iaomt.org/news/files/files302/Amalgam_Autism_Geier_2009.pdf

124 Barregard, L. et al, 47-54. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19931045

125 Richardson, G. Mark et al., 36. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18992295

126 Eggleston, DW, Nylander, M, 704-707. http://www.nvbt.nl/hot-metalen4.html

127 Nylander, M., Friberg, L., Lind, B., 179-187.

128 Kraub, P. and Deyhle, M. “Field study on the mercury content of saliva,” Universitat Tubingen-Institut for Organische Chemie (1997). http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/AMALGAM/EN/SCIENCE/tubingen.html

129 Godrey, ME, Wojcik, DP, Krone, CA, 189-195. Abstract available at http://iospress.metapress.com/content/2bpp5fdar3r06e11/

130 Craelius, W., 155-165. Abstract available at http://jech.bmj.com/content/32/3/155.abstract

131 Raymond, Laura J., Ralston, Nicholas VC. “Mercury: selenium interactions and health complications,” Seychelles Medical and Dental Journal 7:1 (November 2004): 72-77. http://www.wfoa-tuna.org/health/ralstonraymond.pdf

132 Haley, Boyd. Affidavit: An Evaluation of Dental Amalgam and Its Ability to Injure Human Health, 5.

133 Mata, l., Sanchez, L. and Calvo, M. “Interaction of mercury with human and bovine milk proteins,” Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 61:10 (October 1997): 1641-4. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9362112

134 Kostial, Krista. “Effect of milk on mercury absorption and gut retention in rats.” Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 23:1 (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1979): 566-571. Abstract available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/1080867702348071/

135 State of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. Appendix D-Mercury Toxicity: Technical Overview. (Boston, MA: website appendix, accessed on October 27, 2010), 3. http://www.mass.gov/dep/toxics/stypes/appd.htm

136 Grandjean, Philippe, et al. “Neurobehavioral Epidemiology: Application in Risk Assessment,” Environmental Health Perspectives 104:2 (April 1996): 398. http://www.ehp.niehs.nih.gov/realfiles/members/1996/Suppl-2/grandjean.html

137 Nylander, M., Friberg, L., Lind, B., 179-187.

138 Chang, Louis W., Hartmann, Henrik. “Blood-drain barrier dysfunction in experimental mercury intoxication,” Acta Neuropathologica 21:2 (April 4, 1972): 179-184. Abstract available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/m631756162455150/

139 Chang, Louis, Hartmann, Henrik. “Electron microscopic histochemical study of the localization and distribution of mercury in the nervous system after mercury intoxification,” Experimental Neurology 35:1 (April 1972): 122-137.

140 Skare, I. “Mass balance and systemic uptake of mercury released from dental fillings,” Water, Air and Soil Pollution 80:1-4 (1995): 59-67. Abstract available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/h5gr2031316857vt/

141 Barregard, L., Sallsten, G., and Jarvholm, B. “People with high mercury uptake from their own dental fillings,” Occup Envir Med 52 (1995): 124-128. Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1128166/

About The Author

Leave a Reply