I hope I am not taking over this forum. There are just so many good articles out there!

This is from a newsletter from [www.hugginsappliedhealing.com].

Some good points in the article are:

* mercury fillings contain 50% of the most toxic poison known that is not radioactive
* The FDA could reclassify mercury from Class I (of no health significance, where it is now) to either Class II, which calls for record keeping of who had mercury placed in their mouth, or to Class III which would constitute a total ban in dentistry due to its toxicity. The ADA is hoping for Class II, the public pushing for Class III. - can you believe it is still Class I right now?
* The ADA just paid for a study on "the economic impact of mercury-free dentistry". - the all-mighty dollar is the most important to them, of course, not the health of US citizens.

Oh, check out the last sentence in the article too. Wow.

ADA Takes Bold Protective Step


Dentistry has rehashed the same argument about, should dentistry place mercury fillings because they are cheap, or ban them because they contain 50% of the most toxic poison known that is not radioactive?

Last year's Congressional hearing on "how safe mercury is in the mouth" as presented by the FDA – lost by a vote of 13 to 7. Nearly 2 to 1. A committee of scientists evaluated the presentation as well as those by several "witnesses". Dr. Boyd Haley and Dr. Hal Huggins presented scientific data refuting mercury safety.

After mulling the presentations over for a year, the FDA has stated in writing that they will present new standards for the use of mercury fillings by the end of the year 2007. Based on that, the ADA sent communications to all dentists telling them to immediately start informing their patients that mercury was in "silver" fillings. Especially discuss this with pregnant women and parents of children in order to reduce the number of law suits.

As stated in a letter from Charles G. Brown, National Counsel, Consumers for Dental Choice:

"In the July edition of Dental Practice Report, the long-time general counsel of the A.D.A., Peter Sfikas (who stepped down eight months ago) advised dentists that FDA would likely contraindicate amalgam to classes of patients, and dentists must begin immediately protect their legal position by (1) asking patients if have mercury hypersensitivity, and (2) giving precise warnings about mercury exposure to pregnant women and parents of young children."

The FDA could reclassify mercury from Class I (of no health significance, where it is now) to either Class II, which calls for record keeping of who had mercury placed in their mouth, or to Class III which would constitute a total ban in dentistry due to its toxicity. The ADA is hoping for Class II, the public pushing for Class III.

The ADA just paid for a study on "the economic impact of mercury-free dentistry". This may indicate their fear factor. Another item that may be related is that dentists have just been targeted as high income people with little litigation, so a ripe terrain for new lawyers. This as a result of the fact that there are more students in law schools now than lawyers in practice in all 50 states put together. Attorneys are just now finding out that almost all dentists have malpractice insurance, but that placement of amalgam may or may not qualify for insurance coverage. The dentists actually mix mercury with metallic powder to form amalgam. This constitutes manufacturing a "product". Do dentists have product liability insurance? No. That opens Pandora's box for litigation from both the malpractice aspect, since dentistry has been aware of its toxicity since 1840, and dentists are also wide open for personal loss from the product liability aspect.

The ADA held its national meeting in San Francisco September 28 through October 2, 2007. In addressing the issue of mercury toxicity, the ADA decided to mandate dentists using mercury scrubbers to remove mercury from their suction devices before dumping it into the sewage system.

Thus, the ADA is protecting the sewage, and ignoring human health that it is sworn to protect. How bold.

great posting, karen!

as you know, i was formerly a dental hygienist. and i could not agree more that mercury fillings are harmful.

i worked for a periodontist, (gum specialist), for 5 years. so i never had to worry about mercury in my work environment. but i knew many hygienist that refused to work in offices that did mercury fillings. not so much because of the danger to the patients, but mainly for the danger to the people that work in those offices.

in fact, in the past dentistry was the profession with the most suicides because of the mercury fillings. it poisons the brain as well as the rest of the body.

the most horrible thing i ever saw, personally, that was associated with amalgams was the "amalgum tatto". a blue or black spot on the cheek or gums adjacent to an amalgum. most dentist tell patient that this is harmless. i find that very hard to believe.

Thanks, Camille, it is great to hear feedback from someone who worked in the profession.

I agree that the high suicide rates among dentist was probably caused by the mercury they ingested. I bet hygienists' health and emotional states in offices that used mercury were affected also. The hygienists you knew were smart not to work in those offices. I didn't know about the amalgum tattoo, wow.

One other indication of how poisonous mercury is, is the saying 'Mad as a hatter'. Hatters used to use mercury to stiffen the hatbands, and it eventually always drove them mad...

oh wow. i didnt know that was where that saying came from.

yeah, the tattoo is scarey. people would notice it sometimes and call us because they thought it meant they had gum disease. we always recommended they have the amalgums removed. but then they would go back to their dentist, who they had been seeing for years, and he or she would say its nothing to worry about. and since the patient did not feel sick and their teeth did not hurt, they felt like their dentist was right. and these dentist are not bad people. they are just "old school". they truely believe that they are doing and saying the right thing. even with all the new research.

another thing that used to boggle my mind in dentistry was the fact that the patients had no problem with their dentist putting amalgum in their mouths permanently but they would freak out for us to do one xray.

a full series of xrays (18) give less radiation than 1 hour of direct sunlight. and the newest digital xrays give less radiation than 15 minutes of direct sunlight.

not saying that xrays are safe. they are not. but, they are necessary diagnostic tools.

amalgums are unnecessary. and permanent.

Good point. Yeah, go ahead and put mercury in my mouth but don't you dare xray me!

I agree that the xrays are necessary, they have found things that needed taken care of for me...

hehe yes yes we are very comical species we are .. yep