Is dental mercury a threat to health?

's article on dental amalgam portrayed this restorative material . The article mentioned that there is little scientific evidence to support Moms Against Mercury's claims about the dangers of mercury in ...

[Joe]

Is the loony left once again crossing the political-Science interface?

The objective being to enact more government legislation on all of us, based on their junk science/opinions!

[Darrell]

Here is something that very few consumer advocates understand about dental materials. If one elects to have the mercury-silver alloy fillings replaced, the only alternative material is composite resin. Composite fillings leach bisphenol-A.

Congresswoman Diane Watson from California is pushing to have amalgam outlawed. At the same time, Senator Chuck Schumer from New York wants to ban BPA.

This means that within a short amount of time, it could be illegal for dentists to fill teeth. Are we incredibly stupid or what? Darrell Pruitt DDS

[Dr Y S SAEED]

I beleive dental mercury cause some damage over a long period of time in the neural tissues of a dental operator which then can be attributed to such a large number of suicides in dentist among other proffesional people.

[Dorice]

Incredibly stupid? Imagine positing a position that mercury fillings are safe if the public was actually given the information that that appears on the manufacturer's label. Why would a manufacturer place such cautionary information for such a safe product?
see http://www.bcd.com.au/AmalgamDocs/ManufacWarn...
excerpt:
Dispersalloy®
http://www.caulk.com/MSDSDFU/DispersDFU.html (This site no longer exists)
Contraindication
The use of amalgam is contraindicated;
1. In proximal or occlusal contact to dissimilar metal restorations.
2. In patients with severe renal deficiency.
3. In patients with known allergies to amalgam.
4. For retrograde or endodontic filling.
5. As a filling material for cast crown.
6. In children 6 and under.
7. In expectant mothers.
Side Effects/Warning
Prior to use, read the MSDS information and product instructions for this item.
Exposure to mercury may cause irritation to skin, eyes, respiratory tract and mucous membrane. In individual cases, hypersensitivity reactions, allergies, or electrochemically caused local reactions have been observed. Due to electrochemical processes, the lichen planus of the mucosa may develop.
Mercury may also be a skin sensitizer, pulmonary sensitizer, nephrotoxin and neurotoxin.
After placement or removal of amalgam restorations, there is a temporary increase of the mercury concentration in the blood and urine.
Mercury expressed during condensation and unset amalgam may cause amalgamation or galvanic effect if in contact with other metal restorations. If symptoms persist, the amalgam should be replaced by a different material.
Removal of clinically acceptable amalgam restorations should be avoided to minimize mercury exposure, especially in expectant mothers.
Precautions
The number of amalgam restorations for one patient should be kept to a minimum.
Inhalation of mercury vapor by dental staff may be avoided by proper handling of the amalgam, the use of masks, along with adequate ventilation.
Avoid contact with skin and wear safety glasses and gloves.
Store amalgam scrap in well sealed containers. Regulations for disposal must be observed.
http://www.caulk.com ./MSDSDFU/DispersalloyMSDS.htm l

[Joe]

Darrell wrote:

Here is something that very few consumer advocates understand about dental materials. If one elects to have the mercury-silver alloy fillings replaced, the only alternative material is composite resin. Composite fillings leach bisphenol-A.
Congresswoman Diane Watson from California is pushing to have amalgam outlawed. At the same time, Senator Chuck Schumer from New York wants to ban BPA.
This means that within a short amount of time, it could be illegal for dentists to fill teeth. Are we incredibly stupid or what? Darrell Pruitt DDS

The loony Democratic liberal left spending our tax dollars!

[J in the county]

Andrew's letter points out the unintended consequences of preventing people from getting inexpensive care and ending up with far worse dental problems. In the end, every thing you do has a risk associated with it and an alternative. Take the car or the plane, have an xray or skip it, etc. What we don't do real well is quantify and disclose the risks involved. Special interest groups don't want you to know the actual numbers because it may not help their agenda, and yes this is about an agenda.

In this country we let very small risks be the tail that wags the dog.

[Darrell]

OK, Dorice. You win. Amalgams are bad.

Now. What would you have dentists use instead?

[Dorice]

The collateral damage in using mercury in fillings without advising patients of contraindications versus inexpensive care is not just about "far worse dental problems", it is about overall health and its degradation when exposed to a highly toxic metal such as mercury. The collateral damage is further increased by characterizing a discussion between a dentist and her or his patient about the potential harmful effects of mercury in fillings as unethical. At what point is a patient advised of the contraindications and warnings on the label of the product being placed in a patient's tooth?
The story about "silver" fillings and its cheap benefits has been the mantra since before the Civil War. Full disclosure of safety is another matter. Repeated findings of review panels reveal a lack of data to support contentions of mercury filling safety. In 2006 the message of the scientific review panel was very clear [13:7] rebuking FDA findings on safety.
A major problem is that we are still faced with greatly misinformed dental students and patients, which is very troubling.

[Darrell]

Enough already about mercury fillings, Dorice. You have accomplished your goal. You are incredibly persuasive and seem to have better knowledge of dentistry than any dentists I know. I am certain that everyone who has read your warnings will have their silver fillings removed as soon as possible, no matter what the price or even how much it damages the teeth to have fillings replaced.

But now what, Dorice? It really sounds like you know what you are talking about. Please tell us, your fans, what materials you would suggest dentists use to replace the those silver fillings. In our discussions in the past, this is when you fail to respond, and I am always left disappointed. We are all waiting for you to share your vast knowledge of dentistry with us. Please don’t leave us with empty holes in our teeth. Darrell Pruitt DDS

[Freya Koss PA Coalition]

Dr. Pruitt,
Have you conveyed Amalgam label and MSDS warnings to your patients prior to implanting mercury fillings? Especially to a pregnant or nursing woman, a mother of a young child, or informed your patients of the contraindications of amalgam fillings?

When is the last time you read the ADA Code of Professional Conduct?

1.A. Patient Involvement
The dentist should inform the patient of the proposed treatment, and any reasonable alternatives, in a manner that allows the patient to become involved in treatment decisions.

Principle: Nonmaleficence ("do no harm"). The dentist has a duty to refrain from harming the patient.
This principle expresses the concept that professionals have a duty to protect the patient from harm. Under this principle, the dentist's primary obligations include keeping knowledge and skills current.....

2.A. Education.
..... All dentists, therefore, have the obligation of keeping their knowledge and skill current.

Section 5 — Principle: Veracity
Principle: Veracity ("truthfulness"). The dentist has a duty to communicate truthfully.
This principle expresses the concept that professionals have a duty to be honest and trustworthy in their dealings with people. Under this principle, the dentist's primary obligations include respecting the position of trust inherent in the dentist-patient relationship, communicating truthfully and without deception, and maintaining intellectual integrity

Amalgam Label
Each capsule contains: 600 mg Ally, 600 mg MERCURY
POISON SIGN, Corrosive
WARNINGS
Ingestion: May cause Neurotoxic nephrotoxic effects,
Inhalation: May cause bronchiolitis pneumonitis pulonary edema.

Eyes & Skin: May cause redness and irritation to eyes and skin.

Acute exposure: May cause sensitization dermatitis and possible visual disturbances.

California Prop 65 Warning: This product contains mercury, a chemical known the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.

The public cannot rely on the ADA’s Seal of Acceptance for safety, which appears on amalgam labels, as ADA admittedly has not proven it safe and neither has the FDA.

As a dentist who has taken an oath of protect his patients, I would certainly think that you should question the use of amalgam fillings and the risks of mercury exposure to patients yourself and dental staff.
Certainly, composite fillings are the safer choice! They have been taught in dental schools since the early 70's - more than 50% of dentists in the U.S. don't use amalgams any longer.

Freya Koss
PA Coalition for Mercury-Free Dentistry
www.toxicteeth.org

[Freya Koss PA Coalition]

Dr. Pruitt,

If you want to know what to place in your patients' teeth instead of amalgam, contact dental filling manufacturers. Most of them manufacture white composite fillings. In fact, any manufactureres who were only manufacturing amalgam, now produce composites. Dentists are supposed to keep up with modern dentistry....it's part of the ADA Code of Ethics.

Freya Koss

[Darrell]

Freya,

White composite fillings leach BPA.

[Dorice]

Dentist Pruitt, it would seem that your turmoil lies more with your
dis-ease or discomfort in leaving the decision process of determing product stndards for BPA to those whom so greatly shaped the morass of details about mercury in "silver" fillings.
Check the many references posted on your trade organization's web site http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/topics/bisp...
Included is the recent conclusion in testimony by FDA http://www.fda.gov/ola/2008/bpa051408.html
CONCLUSION
Although the Agency’s review of the newly available reports is continuing, a large body of available evidence indicates that currently-marketed food contact materials containing BPA are safe, and that exposure to BPA from food contact materials, including exposures for infants and children, are below the levels that may cause health effects.

We are actively reviewing the data on BPA and will continue to consider the relevance of new data and studies as they appear. FDA’s work in assessing the safety of these products is never truly final, and if our continuing review of all available data leads us to a determination that the current levels of exposure to BPA are not safe, we will take appropriate action to protect the public health. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I would be happy to answer any questions.

[Darrell]

Dorice, I couldn’t agree with you more about the proven safety of composites. I think the informative link to ADA research that you provided clearly shows that BPA is safe at the exposure levels from BPA fillings. As a matter of fact, a little over a month ago, an article was posted in the ADA, written by Craig Palmer titled,“Evidence indicates dental materials not a Bisphenol A exposure risk.”
http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/pubs/adanew...
The ADA firmly supports your argument that composites are safe.

Of course the ADA says the same about dental amalgam.
http://www.ada.org/prof/advocacy/issues/amalg...

I think you already know that in the excitement of advocacy, sometimes ambition overrules one’s sense of reason. For example, I have read the unrestrained and reckless, but enthusiastic words of anti-BPA activists. There are some of them whose dedication to ridding the nation of BPA rivals anti-amalgamists’, like yours.

Here is what I think could happen if we continue to judge toxicity according to an applause meter. The anti-amalgamists will succeed in outlawing amalgam in the US. Then business will get slow for anti-amalgam advocates. A few of them will become bored. Restless. Ultimately some will turn their attention, and dedication to BPA fillings - just like old times before amalgams were outlawed. Someone with ambition will eventually point out that BPA is not only in composites, but it is also used to help hold orthodontic brackets, as well as veneers to teeth. It is in sealants, dentures. Nightguards. Orthodontic retainers. Bleaching trays - in other words, if it is not metal or porcelain, it is plastic and it contains BPA. It is even in the handle of your toothbrush, as well as the bristles.

Passionate anti-BPA advocates will probably discover that there are even more ways to nit-pick plastic fillings than amalgam ones. For instance, a dedicated follower may point out that dental plastics are in contact with a person 24 hours a day and immersed in saliva that contain enzymes. Also, the plastic is sometimes doused with alcohol and heated with hot liquids and gasses, not to mention the occasional flush with gastric juices. Furthermore, every time one brings their teeth together, they swallow microscopic chunks of BPA plastic. I emailed Consumers for Dental Choice (www.toxicteeth.org) for their opinion of this matter, but the person who responded said that they could not comment on it. What do you think is going on there? Darrell Pruitt DDS
cc: spamgroup

[Freya Koss PA Coalition]

Darrell,

Diamond Crown composites do not have BPA.
Freya

Dorice wrote:

Dentist Pruitt, it would seem that your turmoil lies more with your
dis-ease or discomfort in leaving the decision process of determing product stndards for BPA to those whom so greatly shaped the morass of details about mercury in "silver" fillings.
Check the many references posted on your trade organization's web site http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/topics/bisp...
Included is the recent conclusion in testimony by FDA http://www.fda.gov/ola/2008/bpa051408.html
CONCLUSION
Although the Agency’s review of the newly available reports is continuing, a large body of available evidence indicates that currently-marketed food contact materials containing BPA are safe, and that exposure to BPA from food contact materials, including exposures for infants and children, are below the levels that may cause health effects.
We are actively reviewing the data on BPA and will continue to consider the relevance of new data and studies as they appear. FDA’s work in assessing the safety of these products is never truly final, and if our continuing review of all available data leads us to a determination that the current levels of exposure to BPA are not safe, we will take appropriate action to protect the public health. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I would be happy to answer any questions.

[Darrell]

I have never heard of them.

Who makes them, and what are they made of?

[Darrell]

I googlesearched "Diamond Crown composites." You may not have realized, Freya, that this is not a filling material. It is a crown and bridge composite.

I think the ADA still offers novices a glossary of terms if you find that you need help. Darrell

[Darrell]

Dear Freya,

I have wondered why you are so committed to causing fear about amalgam dental fillings. I think I may have discovered your true motivation. Please don’t leave yet. Hang with me long enough this time to tell me if I am wrong. Otherwise your silence will speak for you in a loud way like it always does.

I understand that you are an affiliate of toxicteeth.org - an organization that profits from advertising “detox materials,” chelation therapy and mercury-free dentists.

Do you share in any of the profits, are or you just another hanger-on?

I make my living saving teeth. How do you help people?

[Andrew]

I'd like to include some of the scientific, non-anecdotal, peer- reviewed evidence (something which the anti-amalgamists do not have) that was edited out of my editorial:
1)In one study comparing children with amalgam fillings (an average of 7.7-10.7 surfaces per child over a seven year study), there was no noted difference in neurologic findings between children with and without amalgam. The researchers concluded that “potential neurobehavioral or neurological effects from dental amalgam mercury exposure in children are inconsequential”
2)The WHO that urine mercury levels are raised eight times as much when someone eats seafood once a week when compared to mercury vapor released from amalgam restorations
3)The amount of mercury that is released from nine amalgam surfaces in the mouth is only 1% of the amount OSHA allows to be inhaled in the workplace
4)Even the National Multiple Sclerosis Society says there is no scientific evidence linking amalgam restorations with neurological diseases, despite the claims by MS patients that once their amalgam was removed, their symptoms improved. The claims by these patients make even less sense since studies show mercury levels are the highest, during the removal of amalgam, nearly twice the amount upon placement of the material. So it is odd how symptoms could improve when amalgam is removed, since mercury levels would go up compared to previous levels of in tact restorations (also since MS is a disease with peaks and valleys associated with its symptoms, coincidence may also be playing a role in these self reported findings)

Of course there are more studies that support the safety of amalgam out there, and they far out number the contrary view. And when people criticize the data that states amalgams are safe, they seem to be at a loss for presenting the data that says amalgams are not safe.

And to respond to the snide comment of "misinformed dental students" I would like to point out that we are informed of the controversy that exists. The other side of the argument is presented to us. However, being a member of a profession (the health care field in general) that relies on scientific findings, not stories, to provide solid information to patients, we use what is researched, tested, peer reviewed, and supported to keep our patients informed on dental amalgams.

[Darrell]

Well said.