Other Adverse Effects

Research has linked mercury from fillings to periodontal disease, inflammation, and boneloss. In addition, research has linked mercury to idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDCM.)[82]

Victims of this disorder may suffer cardiac arrest at an early age. Their hearts have 22,000 times more mercury than comparable hearts that suffered secondary cardiac dysfunction.

Snapp in 1981 carefully removed mercury/silver implants and his experimental subjects experienced a dramatic 90% decline in blood mercury to 10% of baseline.[83] The only logical conclusion is that their mercury/silver implants contributed substantially to their blood mercury. Snapp found a dramatic decline in blood mercury while Molin caused a dramatic increase followed by a slow drop in blood mercury over the next 12 months to 50% of baseline.[84] [85]The petitioners criticized the careless approach to mercury removal so when she repeated her study she provided adequate protections and confirmed Snapp’s earlier finding.[86]

Other adverse health effects associated with mercury exposure are well-documented. Professor Matts Berlin, the World Health Organization’s leading expert on the risks of mercury,recently concluded that: [div3 class=”quote” class2=”quote-l” class3=”quote-r”] “Regarding the risk for retardation of brain development it is not according to science and standard of care to place amalgam fillings in children and fertile women.”[/div3]

Furthermore, there is no question that implanting mercury in teeth saturates jawbone and results in bone loss, produces inflammation and periodontal breakdown.[87] [88] [89] [90] [91][92] Thus, as early as 1973, it was apparent that the presence of dental mercury-amalgam resulted in chronic inflammation and bleeding in the gingival tissue adjacent to it; in other words, in situamalgam produced chronic gingivitis.[93]

In 1984, the year of the NIDR/ADA Workshop, Fisher et al.,[94] reported that at amalgam sites alveolar bone loss was very pronounced and statistically significant as compared to control non-amalgam sites. In other words, in situ amalgam produces chronic periodontitis. Periodontal disease is the principle reason for two-thirds of adult tooth loss in the U.S. and mercury from toothrestorations contributes substantially to this common disease.

In 1995, an important review article summarizing some of the scientific documentation concerning dental amalgam was published in the highly prestigious scientific publication, the FASEB Journal. The authors detailed the scientific data and conclusions from scores of peer reviewed articles documenting the deleterious effects of mercury vapor on the immune, renal, reproductive, and central nervous systems. The authors noted that

“research evidence does not support the notion of amalgam safety.”

In their conclusion, the authors admonished that:

The collective results of numerous research investigations over the past decade clearly demonstrate that the continuous release of Hg° from dental amalgam tooth fillings provides the major contribution to Hg body burden. The experimental evidence indicates that amalgam Hg has the potential to induce cell or organpathophysiology. At the very least, the traditional dental paradigm, that amalgamis a chemically stable tooth restorative material and that the release of Hg from this material is insignificant, is without foundation. One dental authority states that materials are presently available that are suitable alternatives to Hg fillings.

It would seem that now is the time for dentistry to use composite (polymeric andceramic) alternatives and discard the metal alchemy bestowed on its profession from a less enlightened era. Although human experimental evidence is incomplete at the present time, the recent medical research findings presented herein strongly contradict the unsubstantiated opinions pronounced by various dental associations and related trade organizations, who offer assurances of amalgam safety to dental personnel and their patients without providing hard scientific data, including animal, cellular and molecular evidence, to support their claims.[95]

[iframe width=”560″ height=”349″ src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/uZ8AOJkhsws” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen]

About The Author

Leave a Reply