If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination Mark Probert
"Jan Drew" wrote in message ... In the Matter of Mark Probert (Admitted as Mark S. Probert), a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, Petitioner. Let's see. You have no knowledge of mercury or it's effects and thus post comments on words or court cases?????? Got extra time on your hands? |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
In message .com, cathyb
wrote: Jan, I know you are too stupid to see it, but your constant posts accusing others of lying, your unending lies, your incessant misunderstandings of the English language, your vicious bigotry, your inane posts containing nothing, your religious mania coupled with ignorance of your actual religion, your regular plagiarism and your constant violence to the English language do not reflect well on you. That's a value judgment. I'm sure that there are people for whom those are all admirable characteristics. -- begin signature.exe A:*Because*it*messes*up*the*order*in*which*people* normally*read*text. Q:*Why*is*top-posting*such*a*bad*thing? A:*Top-posting. Q:*What*is*the*most*annoying*thing*on*usenet? |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
Mark Probert wrote:
I mention simpletons and you respond. Hmmmm.... Hurling insults must be a form of masturbation for you. I can think of no other reasons why you would do it so much... or why you would seem to enjoy it so much. Many more man made sources...IIRC, as the older messages in this thread have been lost on my server, I was discussing an assertion by you "The issue is that historically, humans had *very little* natural contact with mercury." Let me help you out with that little server issue of yours. Here's my previous *AND FULL* statement regarding mercury. "I suppose I should have worded my question so even the simplest of minds could understand. The issue is that historically, humans had *very little* natural contact with mercury. It has only been over the past 150 years or so that direct exposure to mercury has risen due to industry and medical and dental use thereof. So the real question is, how would humans *naturally* have come in contact with the levels of mercury seen today? " It's great that you're trying to take one sentence out of context of an entire paragraph to feebly try to make a point, but you have yet to address those questions. In fact, you're floundering around even in your attempt to prove me wrong by taking that statement out of context. Why don't you quit your BS and get to the point of what I was asking? I'll repost again: "So the real question is, how would humans *naturally* have come in contact with the levels of mercury seen today?" I demonstrated that humans have had significant environment contact with mercury from non-man made sources. No. You've proven that there are natural sources of environmental mercury. You have presented squat to show the level of mercury exposure humans of centuries past would have had. In fact, you've actually shown that much of the mercury vented from volcanic activity is absorbed by forest plant life... which would reduce human exposure because humans don't eat much of the forest plant life. Now, you move the goal posts. No, you're hiding the ball under your shirt hoping no one will notice what you're doing. The goal posts are cemented in place. You're just unable to score. Read the link. Perhaps your answer is there. At least it addresses the point and shows that there is still significant mercury in the environment from non-human sources. The only one that hasn't read the link is you. You went Googling around the net desperate to find anything that would support your flawed position and came back with half read pages that have ended up biting you on the butt. You should know by now that I read the evidence you post. You shouldn't make it so easy to use your own data against you. Please show me where I said that? You seem to be having a hyper-imagination moment. Then what's your point? Spit it out. I've presented information supporting my position that humans historically had little natural contact with mercury. You provided data that only marginally disagreed with me, but mostly agreed with me. What is it you're trying to say about the current level of mercury exposure humans have? Stop floundering and put your position here in black and white for everyone to see. Even *if* the above statement is true (my above sources say that number is low) that would mean that humans are now causing twice as much mercury pollution as the entire planet was all by itself. TWICE AS MUCH AS AN ENTIRE PLANET! Which is not good. However, it is NOT ethyl mercury. Blah, blah, blah. We've already seen, in information posted by both of us, that environmental factors can change the form mercury is in. Are you saying that ethyl mercury is safe? If so, is there a level of EM that would be considered unsafe? Your vagueness is getting old. You need to state your positions. http://pasture.ecn.purdue.edu/~epado.../src/cycle.htm No mention of sources at all there. http://www.mindfully.org/Air/Mercury-Smoke-Biomass.htm More stuff on forest fires. You seem to not even read your own supporting data. Had you read it, you would understand that the mercury being released by forest fires originates from mercury released into the atmosphere from other sources. Therefore, a forest fire should not be considered the "source" of atmospheric mercury. If humans reduced or eliminated mercury pollution, far less would accumulate in forest plant life, thus lessening the amount of mercury released in a forest fire. Play your semantics games. All mercury comes from somewhere. If it is re-introduced by a forest fire or humans what is the difference? HA! You accuse me of semantics? What a joke. Human release of mercury is an *INTRODUCTION* of mercury to the environment... not a *REINTRODUCTION.* The mercury humans release into the environment wouldn't have been released at that time if not for human interaction. There is a high probability that such mercury would have stayed right where it was if humans hadn't dug it up... and we're digging it up at a rate TWICE that of the Earth's natural release. No semantics. I pointed out that the of the entire environmental mercury load, 1/3rd of it is present due to non-human activity, which refutes your claim. You just do not like that fact. You presented 1 link with no data and an estimate... and did nothing to refute the links I posted. The rest of your links were news articles more than anything... also with no data. You have no credibility. I've posted links that put the number even higher than that. Feel free to see that as no problem if you wish. I feel free to completely disagree with you and think of you as irresponsible. I do not expect you to agree. However, I have proven my point. You've certainly proven *something.* yes, you do not like being made to look wrong. From what you've posted, I haven o need to worry about that. Have a nice day. Max. |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
"Max C." wrote:
"So the real question is, how would humans *naturally* have come in contact with the levels of mercury seen today?" I see the moron is back. I suppose that Max could have done what the rest of us do and look it up in an encyclopedia, but that probably isn't enough for someone who can index and search the web better than Google can. It's a naturally occurring element, Max. All the mercury in or on Earth now has been here since before there were any people to have teeth to be filled. When a forest fire pumps thousands of tons of mercury into the air it is because the mercury was available to the trees through the soil. It's really quite simple for those who can think. Oh, that's right ... -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination Mercury.
Vernon wrote:
Let's see. You have no knowledge of mercury or it's effects and thus post comments on words or court cases?????? Got extra time on your hands? Vern, do learn to restore the subject line. With the subject line like it is, someone would think you have some form of nefarious deed planned. (See your message). |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
Jan Drew wrote: "Mark Probert" wrote in message ... Jason Johnson wrote: In article . com, "Max C." wrote: Mark Probert said: Max C. said: The issue is that historically, humans had *very little* natural contact with mercury. Care to prove it? I wasn't going to reply to this latest garbage of yours at all, since most of it was your typical name-calling and lame opinion-based BS, but I think this little "Care to prove it" line of yours should tell everyone just exactly where you're coming from on this and all other issues you support. If you believe that humans have no more exposure to mercury now than they had historically, you are delusional. Let's name a few ways we're more exposed to mercury now, shall we? Precious metals mining - http://www.facome.uqam.ca/pdf_temp/c...ilhos_1998.pdf Dental amalgams - http://www.amalgam.org/ Coal burning - http://bronze.nescaum.org/airtopics/...104mercury.pdf Crude oil production and refining - http://www.hgtech.com/Basic/EPA%20API%20Project.htm Pesticides - http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/bnsdocs/hgsbook/agr.pdf (this article also discusses other avenues for mercury to come in contact with humans... and DIRECTLY supports my statement that humans have more contact with mercury now than they did historically, at least it spells that out for humans in Wisconsin.) Seafood contaminated from some of the above sources - really, if I have to provide you links for this one, you're just refusing to see the issue for the problem it is. electronic and industrial use - this is another "Well duh!" issue. Mercury has been a key ingredient in computers for decades. I'm actually glad that you've decided to publicly bury your head in the sand on this issue. It's one of the top issues those in the alternative arena take up. The obviousness of the problem is only surpassed by the glaring ignorance displayed by those who refuse to acknowledge it. By hinting that you don't believe what I said, you have diminished your credibility... of course, thinking you have credibility in this group would also be a prime example of your glaring ignorance. Have a nice day. Max. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Max, STOP confusing people with the facts. True, Max is confused: http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm...KEN=62469 501 "Most of the mercury existing in the environment is released through natural processes. These natural processes include surface volcanic eruptions; deep sea vents and volcanic activity; hot springs such as the geyser basins in Yellowstone National Park or those at the bottom of Clear Lake in California; evaporation from the ocean basins, other water bodies, and soils; and erosion. The oceans alone contain millions of tons of naturally occurring mercury. Forest fires and the burning of other types of vegetation also contribute to the world mercury budget. These natural "emissions" contribute approximately 61 percent of the annual emissions that make up the world mercury budget." Try reading the entire article for facts. These facts have been posted many times. Mark KNOWS that. DAMS, Inc.; P.O. Box 7249; Minneapolis, MN 55407-0249 local contact: see page 3 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 19, 2001 New Studies Find Dental Amalgam Fillings to be the Number One Source of Mercury in Most People and Daily Exposure Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic Mercury(vapor). Studies also found adverse health effects in adults and that mercury from amalgam is passed on to infants through mother?s blood and milk , and that developmental effects on infants occur at low levels of mercury exposure. A large National Institute of Dental Research Study has confirmed other previous study results that found that the current type of amalgam dental fillings being used in the U.S. leak significant amounts of the extremely toxic substance mercury into the body and are the number one source of mercury in people. The study measured mercury levels in the blood and urine of over 1000 military personnel and found a high significant correlation to the number of amalgam filling surfaces in the mouth. Like several other recent studies, the study found that amalgam fillings are not stable because of mercury?s low vapor pressure and galvanic electric currents between the different metals in the mouth. For this large military population that had a range of from 0 to 66 amalgam filling surfaces and an average of 20 surfaces, each 10 surfaces added approximately 1 microgram of mercury per liter of urine excreted, meaning total mercury excreted in urine averaged about 4.5 micrograms per day, with soldiers levels with over 49 amalgam surfaces averaging over 8.7 micrograms. The average level for those with fillings was 4.5 times that of the controls without amalgam, and those with over 49 surfaces averaged over 8 times controls. Together with the considerably larger amount of mercury excreted daily through the digestive tract and sweat, the daily mercury excretion would amount to well over 10 micrograms per day on average and much more for some individuals. Over 90 % of the mercury in the urine was inorganic mercury, the kind that comes from fillings, as opposed to organic mercury which comes from fish. For this population, it was determined that the exposure from amalgam fillings was the primary source of mercury exposure, and on average exceeded the levels that would be consistent with U.S. Government Standards(MRL) for daily mercury exposure. The study?s findings were consistent with the findings of many other recent such studies, including a similar study testing 20,000 people at a University Health Clinic in Germany, as well as the findings of the World Health Organization Scientific Panel on mercury. (see references) The U.S.EPA mercury health guideline for elemental mercury exposure(vapor) is 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter of air(0.3 ug/M3). For the average adult breathing 20 M3 of air per day, this amounts to an exposure of 6 micrograms(ug) per day. The U.S. Department of Health, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ASTDR) standard (MRL) -for acute inhalation exposure to mercury vapor is 0.2 micrograms Hg/M3, which translates to approx. 4 ug/day for the average adult(5). The corresponding tolerable daily exposure developed in a report for the Canadian Health Agency, Health Canada, is .014 ug/kg body weight or 1 ug/day for average adult(6). The permissible level for a child would be less. But the levels of the average daily exposures found in the study were above all of these health guidelines for mercury exposure. Other studies that the Government Health Standards were based on have found adverse health effects at very low levels and developmental effects on infants and children at very low levels of exposure, along with finding that mercury vapor from a mother?s fillings is readily transferred through the mother?s blood across the placenta to a fetus and also through mother?s milk. These findings increase the urgency to advise the public of the clear danger in the use of mercury in fillings and to reconsider the policy of using mercury in dental fillings. Based on such studies, several other countries, such as Sweden, Australia, UK, Germany, Norway, Japan, and Canada along with the state of California have already adopted restrictions or warnings on the use of mercury in fillings, such as for children, pregnant women, women of child bearing age, people with damaged kidneys or immune systems, and in the mouth adjacent to other metals. Amalgam manufacturers have also warned against some of the uses currently made of amalgam in dentistry in the U.S. Studies are also available that confirm adverse health effects from amalgam fillings and clinically document that many thousands of people have recovered or had significant improvement in many health conditions including very serious conditions after replacement of amalgam fillings. Fact sheets are available from DAMS with medical study references covering the statements and issues in this press release. (see contact information) DAMS is currently working with very many people in the U.S. dealing with serious health effects caused by exposure to mercury from amalgam and urges everyone to find out more about this major problem and to get involved in resolving these health safety issues. DAMS can provide information and help to anyone who is interested or who thinks they might have health problems related to their amalgam fillings. Available fact sheets with medical study references include: 1. Common Exposure Levels from Amalgam Fillings and Government Health Standards (attached) 2. Transfer of Mercury from Mother?s Amalgams and Breast Milk to the Fetus and developmental effects of mercury on infants. 3. Documentation of recovery from 60,000 clinical cases of serious adverse health effects after replacement of amalgam fillings. 4. Adverse oral health problems related to amalgam fillings. 5. Effect of mercury and other toxic metal exposure on cognitive and behavioral problems of children- including ADD, dyslexia, juvenile delinquency, and crime(over 100 medical study references) 6, Autoimmune conditions: the connection to mercury immune reactivity and amalgam fillings. 7. The battery in your mouth: oral galvanic currents and metals in the mouth, and interactions with EMF 8. Health Effects of amalgam fillings and results of replacement of amalgam filings. Over 600 medical study references(most in Medline) and approx. 60,000 clinical cases of amalgam replacement followed by doctors. Technical contact person: Bernie Windham ph: 850-878-9024 DAMS website: www.amalgam.org All backup technical papers with references available free by email; $5 for copying/mailing cost of hard copy of #3 or #5. $3 for copying/mailing cost of any other hard copy %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Abstract: Kingman A, Albertini T, Brown LJ J Dent Res 1998 Mar;77(3):461-71 Mercury concentrations in urine and whole blood associated with amalgam exposure in a US military population. Oral Health Promotion, Risk Factors and Molecular Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Dental Research, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA. Minute amounts of mercury vapor are released from dental amalgams. Since mercury vapor is known to be associated with adverse health effects from occupationally exposed persons, questions regarding the margin of safety for exposure to mercury vapor in the general population continue to be raised. To address this issue, one needs information regarding exposure to mercury vapor from dental amalgam fillings and its possible consequences for health in the general population. The NIDR Amalgam Study is designed to obtain precise information on amalgam exposure and health outcomes for a non-occupationally-exposed population of US adults. One hypothesis was that in a generally healthy population a significant association between amalgam exposure and Hg levels in urine and/or whole blood could be detected. The cohort investigated was an adult military population of 1127 healthy males. Their average age was 52.8 years, and their ages varied from 40 to 78 years. Ninety-five percent of the study participants were white males, and slightly over 50% had some college education. Five percent were edentulous. The dentate participants, on average, had 25 natural teeth, 36.9 decayed or filled surfaces (DFS), and 19.9 surfaces exposed to amalgam, with amalgam exposure varying from 0 to 66 surfaces. Their average total and inorganic urinary mercury concentrations were 3.09 microg/L and 2.88 microg/L. The average whole-blood total and inorganic mercury concentrations were 2.55 microg/L and 0.54 microg/L. Significant correlations were detected between amalgam exposure and the total (r = 0.34, p 0.001) and inorganic 0.34 (r = 0.34, p 0.001) urinary mercury concentrations on the original scale. Stronger correlations were found for total (r = 0.44, p 0.001) and inorganic (r = 0.41, p 0.001) urinary Hg on the log scale, as well as for creatinine-corrected total (r = 0.43, p 0.001) and inorganic (r = 0.43, p 0.001) urine concentrations. In whole blood, statistically significant, but biologically weak, correlations were detected for total (r = 0.09, p = 0.005) and inorganic (r = 0.15, p 0.001) Hg concentrations, respectively. Based on these cross-sectional data, it is estimated that, on average, each ten-surface increase in amalgam exposure is associated with an increase of 1 microg/L mercury in urine concentration. PMID: 9496919, UI: 98156633 &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Ref. Paper #1 "Dental Amalgam Fillings" is the Number One Source of Mercury in People and Exposure Commonly Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic mercury(vapor) Bernard Windham- Chemical Engineer Government agencies and medical studies have found that the number one source of mercury in people is from dental amalgam fillings(ref 2-20). Exposure from fillings amounts to from 50 to 90 percent of exposure, with the average being about 80 % of total exposure(5-9,12-15,19,20). The studies found that mercury amalgams are unstable due to mercury's low vapor pressure and galvanic action, leaking mercury vapor continuously into the lungs and saliva at levels exceeding health standards. Mercury exposure of most people with fillings was found to exceed government health standards and levels found to cause adverse health effects(see below). The tolerable daily exposure level for mercury developed in a report for Health Canada is .014 micrograms/kilogram body weight(ug/kg) or approximately 1 ug/day for average adult(2). The U.S. EPA Health Standard for elemental mercury exposure(vapor) is 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter of air(1). The U.S. ATSDR health standard(MRL) for mercury vapor is 0.2 ug/ M3 of air, and the MRL for methyl mercury is 0.3 ug/kg body weight/day(4). For the average adult breathing 20 M3 of air per day, this amounts to an exposure of 4 or 6 ug/day for the 2 elemental mercury standards. The EPA health guideline for methyl mercury is 0.1 ug/kg body weight per day or 7 ug for the average adult(1). The range of mercury exposure levels found in people with amalgam fillings by the World Health Organization Scientific Panel on Mercury was 3 to 70 micrograms per day(3), with other medical studies finding up to 500 ug/day in gum chewers or people who grind their teeth(6,11,16,17,18) or some with large numbers of fillings. The average amount absorbed was above 10 ug/day (ref. 3-18). The average mercury exposure for a Canadian adult with amalgam fillings was found in the Health Canada study to be 9 ug/day(2). In a large German study with 20,000 tested subjects at a University Medical Clinic, the average exposure from fillings was over 10 ug/day and over 50 % of all those with 6 or more amalgam fillings had daily exposure exceeding the EPA health guideline(6). Studies have consistently found modern high copper non gamma-two amalgams have greater release of mercury vapor than conventional silver amalgams (21,22,23). Recent studies have concluded that because of the high mercury release levels of modern amalgams, mercury poisoning from amalgam fillings is widespread throughout the population"(17,22,18,6). Common levels found in persons with amalgam fillings are over 10 times the Health Canada TDE, and more than the EPA health standard for mercury vapor. Thus persons with amalgam fillings have levels of intraoral mercury vapor and body exposure levels higher than the level considered to have significant health risk. The studies found that Total mercury intake is proportional to the number and extent of amalgam surfaces, but other factors such as chewing gum and drinking hot liquids influence the intake significantly increasing exposure as much as 500%. ). A World Health Organzation Scientific Panel concluded that a safe level of mercury exposure below which no adverse effects occur has never been established(3) References (1) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), 1996, "Integrated Risk Information System, National Center for Environmental Assessment,Cincinnati, Ohio(& web). (2) Mark Richardson, Environmental Health Directorate,Health Canada, Assessment of Mercury Exposure and Risks from Dental Amalgam, 1995, Final Report. (3) World Health Organization(WHO),1991, Environmental Health criteria 118, Inorganic Mercury, WHO, Geneva; (4)Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service, "Toxicological Profile for Mercury" March, 1999; & Apr 19,1999 Media Advisory, New MRLs for toxic substances, MRL:elemental mercury vapor/ inhalation/chronic & MRL: methyl mercury/ oral/acute; & http://atsdr1.atsdr.cdc.gov:8080/97list.html. (5) A.Kingman et al, National Institute of Dental Research, "Mercury concentrations in urine and blood associated with amalgam exposure in the U.S. military population", Dent Res, 1998, 77(3):461-71. (6) Dr. P.Kraub & M.Deyhle, Universitat Tubingen- Institut fur Organische Chemie, "Field Study on the Mercury Content of Saliva", 1997 (20,000 people tested for mercury level in saliva and health status/symptoms compiled) http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/KRAUSS/amalgam.html; (7) A. Engqvist et al, "Speciation of mercury excreted in feces from individuals with amalgam fillings", Arch Environ Health, 1998, 53(3):205-13; & Dept. of Toxicology & Chemistry, Stockholm Univ., National Institute for Working Life, 1998.(www.niwl.se/ah/1998-02.html) (8) J.A.Weiner et al,"The relationship between mercury concentration in human organs and predictor variables", 138(1-3):101-115,1993; & "An estimation of the uptake of mercury from amalgam fillings", Sci Total Environmet, v168,n3,1995. (9) M.J.Vimy and F.L. Lorscheider, Faculty of Medicine, Univ. Of Calgary, July 1991. (Study findings) & J. Trace Elem. Exper. Med., 1990,3, 111-123. (10) B.Arnold, Eigenschaften und Einsatzgebiete des ChelatbildnersMPS", Z.Umweltmedizin, 1997,5(1):38-; & Diagnostik un Monitorung von Schwermetallbelastungen,I,II,ZWR, 1996,105(10):586-569 & (11):665- (11) L.Barregard et al, "People with high mercury uptake from their own dental amalgam fillings", Occup Envir Med, 1995, 52:124-128. (12) L.Bjorkman et al, "Mercury in saliva and feces after removal of amalgam fillings", Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1997, 144(1): 156-162. (13) Berglund A, Molin M, "Mercury levels in plasma and urine after removal of all amalgam restorations: the effect of using rubber dams", Dent Mater 1997 Sep;13(5):297-304; (14) M.Molin et al, "kinetics of mercury in blood and urine after mercury removal" J Dent Research, 1995, 74:420- (15) J.Begerow et al, "Long Term Mercury Excretion in Urine after Removal of Amalgam Fillings", Int Arch Occup Health 66: 209-212. (16) G.Sallsten et al, "long term use of chewing gum and mercury exposure from dental amalgam", J Dental Research, 1996, 75(1):594-598. (17) I.Skare, "Mass Balance and Systemic Uptake of Mercury Released from Dental Fillings", Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 80(1-4):59-67, 1995. (18) B.Windham, Anotated Bibliography of Exposure and Health Effects from Amalgam Fillings, Dec 2000 (over 600 references & 60,000 clinical replacement cases). (19) Halbach, 1995,"Estimation of mercury dose ..", Int.Archieves of Occupational & Environmental Health, 67:295-300; & G. Sandborgh-Englund, "Pharmacokinetics of mercury from dental amalgam", Gotab(Stockholm), 1998, 1-49. (20) H.V.Aposhian, Envir.Health Perspectives, Vol 106,Supp 4, Aug, 1998; & H.V. Aposhian et al, FASEB J, 6: 2472-2476, 1992. (21) J Pleva, "Mercury- A Public Health Hazard", Reviews on Environmental Health, 1994, 10:1-27. (22) C. Toomvali, "Studies of mercury vapor emission from different dental amalgam alloys", LIU-IFM-Kemi-EX 150,1988; & A.Berglund,"A study of the release of mercury vapor from different types of amalgam alloys", J Dent Res, 1993, 72: 939-946; & D.B.Boyer, "Mercury vaporization from corroded dental amalgam" Dental Materials, 1988, 4:89-93; & V.Psarras et al, " Mercury vapour releases from dental amalgams", Swed Dent J,1994, 18:15-23; & L.E.Moberg, "Long term corrosion studies of amalgams and Casting alloys in contact", Acta Odontal Scand 1985, 43:163-177; (23) H. Lichtenberg, "Mercury vapor in the oral cavity in relation to the number of amalgam fillings and chronic mercury poisoning", Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, 1996, 11:2, 87-94. http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam/ 6. Amalgam Fillings Largest Source of Mercury by Far Based on a number of studies in Sweden, the World Health Organization review of inorganic mercury in 1991 determined that mercury absorption is estimated to be approximately four times higher from amalgam fillings than from fish consumption. Recent studies have confirmed this estimate and shown that the amount absorbed can vary considerably from person to person. 7. Gold Crowns, Gum, Bruxism, Computer Monitors Increase Release of Mercury Significantly Gum chewing, bruxism (grinding of teeth), computer terminal exposure, presence of gold fillings or gold crowns (even if covering mercury fillings), teeth brushing, braces and even chewing food cause the release of significantly increased amounts of mercury from the fillings in one's teeth. 8. Cumulative Poison Builds Up in Organs Mercury released from fillings builds up in the brain, kidneys, liver, pituitary, adrenals and other parts of the body. ======== According to the World Health Organization the general sources of mercury in the body a Breathed Air (.040 micrograms), Fish (2.34 micrograms), Non-fish food (.25 micrograms), Drinking-water .0035 micrograms), mercury vapor from dental amalgams (3 to 17 micrograms). *****The mercury vapor from dental amalgam alone is a bigger source than all the other sources together.******* |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
Jan Drew wrote: "Mark Probert" wrote in message ... Jason Johnson wrote: In article . com, "Max C." wrote: Mark Probert said: Max C. said: The issue is that historically, humans had *very little* natural contact with mercury. Care to prove it? I wasn't going to reply to this latest garbage of yours at all, since most of it was your typical name-calling and lame opinion-based BS, but I think this little "Care to prove it" line of yours should tell everyone just exactly where you're coming from on this and all other issues you support. If you believe that humans have no more exposure to mercury now than they had historically, you are delusional. Let's name a few ways we're more exposed to mercury now, shall we? Precious metals mining - http://www.facome.uqam.ca/pdf_temp/c...ilhos_1998.pdf Dental amalgams - http://www.amalgam.org/ Coal burning - http://bronze.nescaum.org/airtopics/...104mercury.pdf Crude oil production and refining - http://www.hgtech.com/Basic/EPA%20API%20Project.htm Pesticides - http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/bnsdocs/hgsbook/agr.pdf (this article also discusses other avenues for mercury to come in contact with humans... and DIRECTLY supports my statement that humans have more contact with mercury now than they did historically, at least it spells that out for humans in Wisconsin.) Seafood contaminated from some of the above sources - really, if I have to provide you links for this one, you're just refusing to see the issue for the problem it is. electronic and industrial use - this is another "Well duh!" issue. Mercury has been a key ingredient in computers for decades. I'm actually glad that you've decided to publicly bury your head in the sand on this issue. It's one of the top issues those in the alternative arena take up. The obviousness of the problem is only surpassed by the glaring ignorance displayed by those who refuse to acknowledge it. By hinting that you don't believe what I said, you have diminished your credibility... of course, thinking you have credibility in this group would also be a prime example of your glaring ignorance. Have a nice day. Max. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Max, STOP confusing people with the facts. True, Max is confused: http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm...KEN=62469 501 "Most of the mercury existing in the environment is released through natural processes. These natural processes include surface volcanic eruptions; deep sea vents and volcanic activity; hot springs such as the geyser basins in Yellowstone National Park or those at the bottom of Clear Lake in California; evaporation from the ocean basins, other water bodies, and soils; and erosion. The oceans alone contain millions of tons of naturally occurring mercury. Forest fires and the burning of other types of vegetation also contribute to the world mercury budget. These natural "emissions" contribute approximately 61 percent of the annual emissions that make up the world mercury budget." Try reading the entire article for facts. These facts have been posted many times. Mark KNOWS that. DAMS, Inc.; P.O. Box 7249; Minneapolis, MN 55407-0249 local contact: see page 3 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 19, 2001 New Studies Find Dental Amalgam Fillings to be the Number One Source of Mercury in Most People and Daily Exposure Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic Mercury(vapor). Studies also found adverse health effects in adults and that mercury from amalgam is passed on to infants through mother?s blood and milk , and that developmental effects on infants occur at low levels of mercury exposure. A large National Institute of Dental Research Study has confirmed other previous study results that found that the current type of amalgam dental fillings being used in the U.S. leak significant amounts of the extremely toxic substance mercury into the body and are the number one source of mercury in people. The study measured mercury levels in the blood and urine of over 1000 military personnel and found a high significant correlation to the number of amalgam filling surfaces in the mouth. Like several other recent studies, the study found that amalgam fillings are not stable because of mercury?s low vapor pressure and galvanic electric currents between the different metals in the mouth. For this large military population that had a range of from 0 to 66 amalgam filling surfaces and an average of 20 surfaces, each 10 surfaces added approximately 1 microgram of mercury per liter of urine excreted, meaning total mercury excreted in urine averaged about 4.5 micrograms per day, with soldiers levels with over 49 amalgam surfaces averaging over 8.7 micrograms. The average level for those with fillings was 4.5 times that of the controls without amalgam, and those with over 49 surfaces averaged over 8 times controls. Together with the considerably larger amount of mercury excreted daily through the digestive tract and sweat, the daily mercury excretion would amount to well over 10 micrograms per day on average and much more for some individuals. Over 90 % of the mercury in the urine was inorganic mercury, the kind that comes from fillings, as opposed to organic mercury which comes from fish. For this population, it was determined that the exposure from amalgam fillings was the primary source of mercury exposure, and on average exceeded the levels that would be consistent with U.S. Government Standards(MRL) for daily mercury exposure. The study?s findings were consistent with the findings of many other recent such studies, including a similar study testing 20,000 people at a University Health Clinic in Germany, as well as the findings of the World Health Organization Scientific Panel on mercury. (see references) The U.S.EPA mercury health guideline for elemental mercury exposure(vapor) is 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter of air(0.3 ug/M3). For the average adult breathing 20 M3 of air per day, this amounts to an exposure of 6 micrograms(ug) per day. The U.S. Department of Health, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ASTDR) standard (MRL) -for acute inhalation exposure to mercury vapor is 0.2 micrograms Hg/M3, which translates to approx. 4 ug/day for the average adult(5). The corresponding tolerable daily exposure developed in a report for the Canadian Health Agency, Health Canada, is .014 ug/kg body weight or 1 ug/day for average adult(6). The permissible level for a child would be less. But the levels of the average daily exposures found in the study were above all of these health guidelines for mercury exposure. Other studies that the Government Health Standards were based on have found adverse health effects at very low levels and developmental effects on infants and children at very low levels of exposure, along with finding that mercury vapor from a mother?s fillings is readily transferred through the mother?s blood across the placenta to a fetus and also through mother?s milk. These findings increase the urgency to advise the public of the clear danger in the use of mercury in fillings and to reconsider the policy of using mercury in dental fillings. Based on such studies, several other countries, such as Sweden, Australia, UK, Germany, Norway, Japan, and Canada along with the state of California have already adopted restrictions or warnings on the use of mercury in fillings, such as for children, pregnant women, women of child bearing age, people with damaged kidneys or immune systems, and in the mouth adjacent to other metals. Amalgam manufacturers have also warned against some of the uses currently made of amalgam in dentistry in the U.S. Studies are also available that confirm adverse health effects from amalgam fillings and clinically document that many thousands of people have recovered or had significant improvement in many health conditions including very serious conditions after replacement of amalgam fillings. Fact sheets are available from DAMS with medical study references covering the statements and issues in this press release. (see contact information) DAMS is currently working with very many people in the U.S. dealing with serious health effects caused by exposure to mercury from amalgam and urges everyone to find out more about this major problem and to get involved in resolving these health safety issues. DAMS can provide information and help to anyone who is interested or who thinks they might have health problems related to their amalgam fillings. Available fact sheets with medical study references include: 1. Common Exposure Levels from Amalgam Fillings and Government Health Standards (attached) 2. Transfer of Mercury from Mother?s Amalgams and Breast Milk to the Fetus and developmental effects of mercury on infants. 3. Documentation of recovery from 60,000 clinical cases of serious adverse health effects after replacement of amalgam fillings. 4. Adverse oral health problems related to amalgam fillings. 5. Effect of mercury and other toxic metal exposure on cognitive and behavioral problems of children- including ADD, dyslexia, juvenile delinquency, and crime(over 100 medical study references) 6, Autoimmune conditions: the connection to mercury immune reactivity and amalgam fillings. 7. The battery in your mouth: oral galvanic currents and metals in the mouth, and interactions with EMF 8. Health Effects of amalgam fillings and results of replacement of amalgam filings. Over 600 medical study references(most in Medline) and approx. 60,000 clinical cases of amalgam replacement followed by doctors. Technical contact person: Bernie Windham ph: 850-878-9024 DAMS website: www.amalgam.org All backup technical papers with references available free by email; $5 for copying/mailing cost of hard copy of #3 or #5. $3 for copying/mailing cost of any other hard copy %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Abstract: Kingman A, Albertini T, Brown LJ J Dent Res 1998 Mar;77(3):461-71 Mercury concentrations in urine and whole blood associated with amalgam exposure in a US military population. Oral Health Promotion, Risk Factors and Molecular Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Dental Research, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA. Minute amounts of mercury vapor are released from dental amalgams. Since mercury vapor is known to be associated with adverse health effects from occupationally exposed persons, questions regarding the margin of safety for exposure to mercury vapor in the general population continue to be raised. To address this issue, one needs information regarding exposure to mercury vapor from dental amalgam fillings and its possible consequences for health in the general population. The NIDR Amalgam Study is designed to obtain precise information on amalgam exposure and health outcomes for a non-occupationally-exposed population of US adults. One hypothesis was that in a generally healthy population a significant association between amalgam exposure and Hg levels in urine and/or whole blood could be detected. The cohort investigated was an adult military population of 1127 healthy males. Their average age was 52.8 years, and their ages varied from 40 to 78 years. Ninety-five percent of the study participants were white males, and slightly over 50% had some college education. Five percent were edentulous. The dentate participants, on average, had 25 natural teeth, 36.9 decayed or filled surfaces (DFS), and 19.9 surfaces exposed to amalgam, with amalgam exposure varying from 0 to 66 surfaces. Their average total and inorganic urinary mercury concentrations were 3.09 microg/L and 2.88 microg/L. The average whole-blood total and inorganic mercury concentrations were 2.55 microg/L and 0.54 microg/L. Significant correlations were detected between amalgam exposure and the total (r = 0.34, p 0.001) and inorganic 0.34 (r = 0.34, p 0.001) urinary mercury concentrations on the original scale. Stronger correlations were found for total (r = 0.44, p 0.001) and inorganic (r = 0.41, p 0.001) urinary Hg on the log scale, as well as for creatinine-corrected total (r = 0.43, p 0.001) and inorganic (r = 0.43, p 0.001) urine concentrations. In whole blood, statistically significant, but biologically weak, correlations were detected for total (r = 0.09, p = 0.005) and inorganic (r = 0.15, p 0.001) Hg concentrations, respectively. Based on these cross-sectional data, it is estimated that, on average, each ten-surface increase in amalgam exposure is associated with an increase of 1 microg/L mercury in urine concentration. PMID: 9496919, UI: 98156633 &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Ref. Paper #1 "Dental Amalgam Fillings" is the Number One Source of Mercury in People and Exposure Commonly Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic mercury(vapor) Bernard Windham- Chemical Engineer Government agencies and medical studies have found that the number one source of mercury in people is from dental amalgam fillings(ref 2-20). Exposure from fillings amounts to from 50 to 90 percent of exposure, with the average being about 80 % of total exposure(5-9,12-15,19,20). The studies found that mercury amalgams are unstable due to mercury's low vapor pressure and galvanic action, leaking mercury vapor continuously into the lungs and saliva at levels exceeding health standards. Mercury exposure of most people with fillings was found to exceed government health standards and levels found to cause adverse health effects(see below). The tolerable daily exposure level for mercury developed in a report for Health Canada is .014 micrograms/kilogram body weight(ug/kg) or approximately 1 ug/day for average adult(2). The U.S. EPA Health Standard for elemental mercury exposure(vapor) is 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter of air(1). The U.S. ATSDR health standard(MRL) for mercury vapor is 0.2 ug/ M3 of air, and the MRL for methyl mercury is 0.3 ug/kg body weight/day(4). For the average adult breathing 20 M3 of air per day, this amounts to an exposure of 4 or 6 ug/day for the 2 elemental mercury standards. The EPA health guideline for methyl mercury is 0.1 ug/kg body weight per day or 7 ug for the average adult(1). The range of mercury exposure levels found in people with amalgam fillings by the World Health Organization Scientific Panel on Mercury was 3 to 70 micrograms per day(3), with other medical studies finding up to 500 ug/day in gum chewers or people who grind their teeth(6,11,16,17,18) or some with large numbers of fillings. The average amount absorbed was above 10 ug/day (ref. 3-18). The average mercury exposure for a Canadian adult with amalgam fillings was found in the Health Canada study to be 9 ug/day(2). In a large German study with 20,000 tested subjects at a University Medical Clinic, the average exposure from fillings was over 10 ug/day and over 50 % of all those with 6 or more amalgam fillings had daily exposure exceeding the EPA health guideline(6). Studies have consistently found modern high copper non gamma-two amalgams have greater release of mercury vapor than conventional silver amalgams (21,22,23). Recent studies have concluded that because of the high mercury release levels of modern amalgams, mercury poisoning from amalgam fillings is widespread throughout the population"(17,22,18,6). Common levels found in persons with amalgam fillings are over 10 times the Health Canada TDE, and more than the EPA health standard for mercury vapor. Thus persons with amalgam fillings have levels of intraoral mercury vapor and body exposure levels higher than the level considered to have significant health risk. The studies found that Total mercury intake is proportional to the number and extent of amalgam surfaces, but other factors such as chewing gum and drinking hot liquids influence the intake significantly increasing exposure as much as 500%. ). A World Health Organzation Scientific Panel concluded that a safe level of mercury exposure below which no adverse effects occur has never been established(3) References (1) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), 1996, "Integrated Risk Information System, National Center for Environmental Assessment,Cincinnati, Ohio(& web). (2) Mark Richardson, Environmental Health Directorate,Health Canada, Assessment of Mercury Exposure and Risks from Dental Amalgam, 1995, Final Report. (3) World Health Organization(WHO),1991, Environmental Health criteria 118, Inorganic Mercury, WHO, Geneva; (4)Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service, "Toxicological Profile for Mercury" March, 1999; & Apr 19,1999 Media Advisory, New MRLs for toxic substances, MRL:elemental mercury vapor/ inhalation/chronic & MRL: methyl mercury/ oral/acute; & http://atsdr1.atsdr.cdc.gov:8080/97list.html. (5) A.Kingman et al, National Institute of Dental Research, "Mercury concentrations in urine and blood associated with amalgam exposure in the U.S. military population", Dent Res, 1998, 77(3):461-71. (6) Dr. P.Kraub & M.Deyhle, Universitat Tubingen- Institut fur Organische Chemie, "Field Study on the Mercury Content of Saliva", 1997 (20,000 people tested for mercury level in saliva and health status/symptoms compiled) http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/KRAUSS/amalgam.html; (7) A. Engqvist et al, "Speciation of mercury excreted in feces from individuals with amalgam fillings", Arch Environ Health, 1998, 53(3):205-13; & Dept. of Toxicology & Chemistry, Stockholm Univ., National Institute for Working Life, 1998.(www.niwl.se/ah/1998-02.html) (8) J.A.Weiner et al,"The relationship between mercury concentration in human organs and predictor variables", 138(1-3):101-115,1993; & "An estimation of the uptake of mercury from amalgam fillings", Sci Total Environmet, v168,n3,1995. (9) M.J.Vimy and F.L. Lorscheider, Faculty of Medicine, Univ. Of Calgary, July 1991. (Study findings) & J. Trace Elem. Exper. Med., 1990,3, 111-123. (10) B.Arnold, Eigenschaften und Einsatzgebiete des ChelatbildnersMPS", Z.Umweltmedizin, 1997,5(1):38-; & Diagnostik un Monitorung von Schwermetallbelastungen,I,II,ZWR, 1996,105(10):586-569 & (11):665- (11) L.Barregard et al, "People with high mercury uptake from their own dental amalgam fillings", Occup Envir Med, 1995, 52:124-128. (12) L.Bjorkman et al, "Mercury in saliva and feces after removal of amalgam fillings", Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1997, 144(1): 156-162. (13) Berglund A, Molin M, "Mercury levels in plasma and urine after removal of all amalgam restorations: the effect of using rubber dams", Dent Mater 1997 Sep;13(5):297-304; (14) M.Molin et al, "kinetics of mercury in blood and urine after mercury removal" J Dent Research, 1995, 74:420- (15) J.Begerow et al, "Long Term Mercury Excretion in Urine after Removal of Amalgam Fillings", Int Arch Occup Health 66: 209-212. (16) G.Sallsten et al, "long term use of chewing gum and mercury exposure from dental amalgam", J Dental Research, 1996, 75(1):594-598. (17) I.Skare, "Mass Balance and Systemic Uptake of Mercury Released from Dental Fillings", Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 80(1-4):59-67, 1995. (18) B.Windham, Anotated Bibliography of Exposure and Health Effects from Amalgam Fillings, Dec 2000 (over 600 references & 60,000 clinical replacement cases). (19) Halbach, 1995,"Estimation of mercury dose ..", Int.Archieves of Occupational & Environmental Health, 67:295-300; & G. Sandborgh-Englund, "Pharmacokinetics of mercury from dental amalgam", Gotab(Stockholm), 1998, 1-49. (20) H.V.Aposhian, Envir.Health Perspectives, Vol 106,Supp 4, Aug, 1998; & H.V. Aposhian et al, FASEB J, 6: 2472-2476, 1992. (21) J Pleva, "Mercury- A Public Health Hazard", Reviews on Environmental Health, 1994, 10:1-27. (22) C. Toomvali, "Studies of mercury vapor emission from different dental amalgam alloys", LIU-IFM-Kemi-EX 150,1988; & A.Berglund,"A study of the release of mercury vapor from different types of amalgam alloys", J Dent Res, 1993, 72: 939-946; & D.B.Boyer, "Mercury vaporization from corroded dental amalgam" Dental Materials, 1988, 4:89-93; & V.Psarras et al, " Mercury vapour releases from dental amalgams", Swed Dent J,1994, 18:15-23; & L.E.Moberg, "Long term corrosion studies of amalgams and Casting alloys in contact", Acta Odontal Scand 1985, 43:163-177; (23) H. Lichtenberg, "Mercury vapor in the oral cavity in relation to the number of amalgam fillings and chronic mercury poisoning", Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, 1996, 11:2, 87-94. http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam/ 6. Amalgam Fillings Largest Source of Mercury by Far Based on a number of studies in Sweden, the World Health Organization review of inorganic mercury in 1991 determined that mercury absorption is estimated to be approximately four times higher from amalgam fillings than from fish consumption. Recent studies have confirmed this estimate and shown that the amount absorbed can vary considerably from person to person. 7. Gold Crowns, Gum, Bruxism, Computer Monitors Increase Release of Mercury Significantly Gum chewing, bruxism (grinding of teeth), computer terminal exposure, presence of gold fillings or gold crowns (even if covering mercury fillings), teeth brushing, braces and even chewing food cause the release of significantly increased amounts of mercury from the fillings in one's teeth. 8. Cumulative Poison Builds Up in Organs Mercury released from fillings builds up in the brain, kidneys, liver, pituitary, adrenals and other parts of the body. ======== According to the World Health Organization the general sources of mercury in the body a Breathed Air (.040 micrograms), Fish (2.34 micrograms), Non-fish food (.25 micrograms), Drinking-water .0035 micrograms), mercury vapor from dental amalgams (3 to 17 micrograms). *****The mercury vapor from dental amalgam alone is a bigger source than all the other sources together.******* |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
Jan Drew wrote: "Mark Probert" wrote in message ... Jason Johnson wrote: In article . com, "Max C." wrote: Mark Probert said: Max C. said: The issue is that historically, humans had *very little* natural contact with mercury. Care to prove it? I wasn't going to reply to this latest garbage of yours at all, since most of it was your typical name-calling and lame opinion-based BS, but I think this little "Care to prove it" line of yours should tell everyone just exactly where you're coming from on this and all other issues you support. If you believe that humans have no more exposure to mercury now than they had historically, you are delusional. Let's name a few ways we're more exposed to mercury now, shall we? Precious metals mining - http://www.facome.uqam.ca/pdf_temp/c...ilhos_1998.pdf Dental amalgams - http://www.amalgam.org/ Coal burning - http://bronze.nescaum.org/airtopics/...104mercury.pdf Crude oil production and refining - http://www.hgtech.com/Basic/EPA%20API%20Project.htm Pesticides - http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/bnsdocs/hgsbook/agr.pdf (this article also discusses other avenues for mercury to come in contact with humans... and DIRECTLY supports my statement that humans have more contact with mercury now than they did historically, at least it spells that out for humans in Wisconsin.) Seafood contaminated from some of the above sources - really, if I have to provide you links for this one, you're just refusing to see the issue for the problem it is. electronic and industrial use - this is another "Well duh!" issue. Mercury has been a key ingredient in computers for decades. I'm actually glad that you've decided to publicly bury your head in the sand on this issue. It's one of the top issues those in the alternative arena take up. The obviousness of the problem is only surpassed by the glaring ignorance displayed by those who refuse to acknowledge it. By hinting that you don't believe what I said, you have diminished your credibility... of course, thinking you have credibility in this group would also be a prime example of your glaring ignorance. Have a nice day. Max. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Max, STOP confusing people with the facts. True, Max is confused: http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm...KEN=62469 501 "Most of the mercury existing in the environment is released through natural processes. These natural processes include surface volcanic eruptions; deep sea vents and volcanic activity; hot springs such as the geyser basins in Yellowstone National Park or those at the bottom of Clear Lake in California; evaporation from the ocean basins, other water bodies, and soils; and erosion. The oceans alone contain millions of tons of naturally occurring mercury. Forest fires and the burning of other types of vegetation also contribute to the world mercury budget. These natural "emissions" contribute approximately 61 percent of the annual emissions that make up the world mercury budget." Try reading the entire article for facts. These facts have been posted many times. Mark KNOWS that. DAMS, Inc.; P.O. Box 7249; Minneapolis, MN 55407-0249 local contact: see page 3 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 19, 2001 New Studies Find Dental Amalgam Fillings to be the Number One Source of Mercury in Most People and Daily Exposure Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic Mercury(vapor). Studies also found adverse health effects in adults and that mercury from amalgam is passed on to infants through mother?s blood and milk , and that developmental effects on infants occur at low levels of mercury exposure. A large National Institute of Dental Research Study has confirmed other previous study results that found that the current type of amalgam dental fillings being used in the U.S. leak significant amounts of the extremely toxic substance mercury into the body and are the number one source of mercury in people. The study measured mercury levels in the blood and urine of over 1000 military personnel and found a high significant correlation to the number of amalgam filling surfaces in the mouth. Like several other recent studies, the study found that amalgam fillings are not stable because of mercury?s low vapor pressure and galvanic electric currents between the different metals in the mouth. For this large military population that had a range of from 0 to 66 amalgam filling surfaces and an average of 20 surfaces, each 10 surfaces added approximately 1 microgram of mercury per liter of urine excreted, meaning total mercury excreted in urine averaged about 4.5 micrograms per day, with soldiers levels with over 49 amalgam surfaces averaging over 8.7 micrograms. The average level for those with fillings was 4.5 times that of the controls without amalgam, and those with over 49 surfaces averaged over 8 times controls. Together with the considerably larger amount of mercury excreted daily through the digestive tract and sweat, the daily mercury excretion would amount to well over 10 micrograms per day on average and much more for some individuals. Over 90 % of the mercury in the urine was inorganic mercury, the kind that comes from fillings, as opposed to organic mercury which comes from fish. For this population, it was determined that the exposure from amalgam fillings was the primary source of mercury exposure, and on average exceeded the levels that would be consistent with U.S. Government Standards(MRL) for daily mercury exposure. The study?s findings were consistent with the findings of many other recent such studies, including a similar study testing 20,000 people at a University Health Clinic in Germany, as well as the findings of the World Health Organization Scientific Panel on mercury. (see references) The U.S.EPA mercury health guideline for elemental mercury exposure(vapor) is 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter of air(0.3 ug/M3). For the average adult breathing 20 M3 of air per day, this amounts to an exposure of 6 micrograms(ug) per day. The U.S. Department of Health, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ASTDR) standard (MRL) -for acute inhalation exposure to mercury vapor is 0.2 micrograms Hg/M3, which translates to approx. 4 ug/day for the average adult(5). The corresponding tolerable daily exposure developed in a report for the Canadian Health Agency, Health Canada, is .014 ug/kg body weight or 1 ug/day for average adult(6). The permissible level for a child would be less. But the levels of the average daily exposures found in the study were above all of these health guidelines for mercury exposure. Other studies that the Government Health Standards were based on have found adverse health effects at very low levels and developmental effects on infants and children at very low levels of exposure, along with finding that mercury vapor from a mother?s fillings is readily transferred through the mother?s blood across the placenta to a fetus and also through mother?s milk. These findings increase the urgency to advise the public of the clear danger in the use of mercury in fillings and to reconsider the policy of using mercury in dental fillings. Based on such studies, several other countries, such as Sweden, Australia, UK, Germany, Norway, Japan, and Canada along with the state of California have already adopted restrictions or warnings on the use of mercury in fillings, such as for children, pregnant women, women of child bearing age, people with damaged kidneys or immune systems, and in the mouth adjacent to other metals. Amalgam manufacturers have also warned against some of the uses currently made of amalgam in dentistry in the U.S. Studies are also available that confirm adverse health effects from amalgam fillings and clinically document that many thousands of people have recovered or had significant improvement in many health conditions including very serious conditions after replacement of amalgam fillings. Fact sheets are available from DAMS with medical study references covering the statements and issues in this press release. (see contact information) DAMS is currently working with very many people in the U.S. dealing with serious health effects caused by exposure to mercury from amalgam and urges everyone to find out more about this major problem and to get involved in resolving these health safety issues. DAMS can provide information and help to anyone who is interested or who thinks they might have health problems related to their amalgam fillings. Available fact sheets with medical study references include: 1. Common Exposure Levels from Amalgam Fillings and Government Health Standards (attached) 2. Transfer of Mercury from Mother?s Amalgams and Breast Milk to the Fetus and developmental effects of mercury on infants. 3. Documentation of recovery from 60,000 clinical cases of serious adverse health effects after replacement of amalgam fillings. 4. Adverse oral health problems related to amalgam fillings. 5. Effect of mercury and other toxic metal exposure on cognitive and behavioral problems of children- including ADD, dyslexia, juvenile delinquency, and crime(over 100 medical study references) 6, Autoimmune conditions: the connection to mercury immune reactivity and amalgam fillings. 7. The battery in your mouth: oral galvanic currents and metals in the mouth, and interactions with EMF 8. Health Effects of amalgam fillings and results of replacement of amalgam filings. Over 600 medical study references(most in Medline) and approx. 60,000 clinical cases of amalgam replacement followed by doctors. Technical contact person: Bernie Windham ph: 850-878-9024 DAMS website: www.amalgam.org All backup technical papers with references available free by email; $5 for copying/mailing cost of hard copy of #3 or #5. $3 for copying/mailing cost of any other hard copy %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Abstract: Kingman A, Albertini T, Brown LJ J Dent Res 1998 Mar;77(3):461-71 Mercury concentrations in urine and whole blood associated with amalgam exposure in a US military population. Oral Health Promotion, Risk Factors and Molecular Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Dental Research, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA. Minute amounts of mercury vapor are released from dental amalgams. Since mercury vapor is known to be associated with adverse health effects from occupationally exposed persons, questions regarding the margin of safety for exposure to mercury vapor in the general population continue to be raised. To address this issue, one needs information regarding exposure to mercury vapor from dental amalgam fillings and its possible consequences for health in the general population. The NIDR Amalgam Study is designed to obtain precise information on amalgam exposure and health outcomes for a non-occupationally-exposed population of US adults. One hypothesis was that in a generally healthy population a significant association between amalgam exposure and Hg levels in urine and/or whole blood could be detected. The cohort investigated was an adult military population of 1127 healthy males. Their average age was 52.8 years, and their ages varied from 40 to 78 years. Ninety-five percent of the study participants were white males, and slightly over 50% had some college education. Five percent were edentulous. The dentate participants, on average, had 25 natural teeth, 36.9 decayed or filled surfaces (DFS), and 19.9 surfaces exposed to amalgam, with amalgam exposure varying from 0 to 66 surfaces. Their average total and inorganic urinary mercury concentrations were 3.09 microg/L and 2.88 microg/L. The average whole-blood total and inorganic mercury concentrations were 2.55 microg/L and 0.54 microg/L. Significant correlations were detected between amalgam exposure and the total (r = 0.34, p 0.001) and inorganic 0.34 (r = 0.34, p 0.001) urinary mercury concentrations on the original scale. Stronger correlations were found for total (r = 0.44, p 0.001) and inorganic (r = 0.41, p 0.001) urinary Hg on the log scale, as well as for creatinine-corrected total (r = 0.43, p 0.001) and inorganic (r = 0.43, p 0.001) urine concentrations. In whole blood, statistically significant, but biologically weak, correlations were detected for total (r = 0.09, p = 0.005) and inorganic (r = 0.15, p 0.001) Hg concentrations, respectively. Based on these cross-sectional data, it is estimated that, on average, each ten-surface increase in amalgam exposure is associated with an increase of 1 microg/L mercury in urine concentration. PMID: 9496919, UI: 98156633 &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Ref. Paper #1 "Dental Amalgam Fillings" is the Number One Source of Mercury in People and Exposure Commonly Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic mercury(vapor) Bernard Windham- Chemical Engineer Government agencies and medical studies have found that the number one source of mercury in people is from dental amalgam fillings(ref 2-20). Exposure from fillings amounts to from 50 to 90 percent of exposure, with the average being about 80 % of total exposure(5-9,12-15,19,20). The studies found that mercury amalgams are unstable due to mercury's low vapor pressure and galvanic action, leaking mercury vapor continuously into the lungs and saliva at levels exceeding health standards. Mercury exposure of most people with fillings was found to exceed government health standards and levels found to cause adverse health effects(see below). The tolerable daily exposure level for mercury developed in a report for Health Canada is .014 micrograms/kilogram body weight(ug/kg) or approximately 1 ug/day for average adult(2). The U.S. EPA Health Standard for elemental mercury exposure(vapor) is 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter of air(1). The U.S. ATSDR health standard(MRL) for mercury vapor is 0.2 ug/ M3 of air, and the MRL for methyl mercury is 0.3 ug/kg body weight/day(4). For the average adult breathing 20 M3 of air per day, this amounts to an exposure of 4 or 6 ug/day for the 2 elemental mercury standards. The EPA health guideline for methyl mercury is 0.1 ug/kg body weight per day or 7 ug for the average adult(1). The range of mercury exposure levels found in people with amalgam fillings by the World Health Organization Scientific Panel on Mercury was 3 to 70 micrograms per day(3), with other medical studies finding up to 500 ug/day in gum chewers or people who grind their teeth(6,11,16,17,18) or some with large numbers of fillings. The average amount absorbed was above 10 ug/day (ref. 3-18). The average mercury exposure for a Canadian adult with amalgam fillings was found in the Health Canada study to be 9 ug/day(2). In a large German study with 20,000 tested subjects at a University Medical Clinic, the average exposure from fillings was over 10 ug/day and over 50 % of all those with 6 or more amalgam fillings had daily exposure exceeding the EPA health guideline(6). Studies have consistently found modern high copper non gamma-two amalgams have greater release of mercury vapor than conventional silver amalgams (21,22,23). Recent studies have concluded that because of the high mercury release levels of modern amalgams, mercury poisoning from amalgam fillings is widespread throughout the population"(17,22,18,6). Common levels found in persons with amalgam fillings are over 10 times the Health Canada TDE, and more than the EPA health standard for mercury vapor. Thus persons with amalgam fillings have levels of intraoral mercury vapor and body exposure levels higher than the level considered to have significant health risk. The studies found that Total mercury intake is proportional to the number and extent of amalgam surfaces, but other factors such as chewing gum and drinking hot liquids influence the intake significantly increasing exposure as much as 500%. ). A World Health Organzation Scientific Panel concluded that a safe level of mercury exposure below which no adverse effects occur has never been established(3) References (1) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), 1996, "Integrated Risk Information System, National Center for Environmental Assessment,Cincinnati, Ohio(& web). (2) Mark Richardson, Environmental Health Directorate,Health Canada, Assessment of Mercury Exposure and Risks from Dental Amalgam, 1995, Final Report. (3) World Health Organization(WHO),1991, Environmental Health criteria 118, Inorganic Mercury, WHO, Geneva; (4)Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service, "Toxicological Profile for Mercury" March, 1999; & Apr 19,1999 Media Advisory, New MRLs for toxic substances, MRL:elemental mercury vapor/ inhalation/chronic & MRL: methyl mercury/ oral/acute; & http://atsdr1.atsdr.cdc.gov:8080/97list.html. (5) A.Kingman et al, National Institute of Dental Research, "Mercury concentrations in urine and blood associated with amalgam exposure in the U.S. military population", Dent Res, 1998, 77(3):461-71. (6) Dr. P.Kraub & M.Deyhle, Universitat Tubingen- Institut fur Organische Chemie, "Field Study on the Mercury Content of Saliva", 1997 (20,000 people tested for mercury level in saliva and health status/symptoms compiled) http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/KRAUSS/amalgam.html; (7) A. Engqvist et al, "Speciation of mercury excreted in feces from individuals with amalgam fillings", Arch Environ Health, 1998, 53(3):205-13; & Dept. of Toxicology & Chemistry, Stockholm Univ., National Institute for Working Life, 1998.(www.niwl.se/ah/1998-02.html) (8) J.A.Weiner et al,"The relationship between mercury concentration in human organs and predictor variables", 138(1-3):101-115,1993; & "An estimation of the uptake of mercury from amalgam fillings", Sci Total Environmet, v168,n3,1995. (9) M.J.Vimy and F.L. Lorscheider, Faculty of Medicine, Univ. Of Calgary, July 1991. (Study findings) & J. Trace Elem. Exper. Med., 1990,3, 111-123. (10) B.Arnold, Eigenschaften und Einsatzgebiete des ChelatbildnersMPS", Z.Umweltmedizin, 1997,5(1):38-; & Diagnostik un Monitorung von Schwermetallbelastungen,I,II,ZWR, 1996,105(10):586-569 & (11):665- (11) L.Barregard et al, "People with high mercury uptake from their own dental amalgam fillings", Occup Envir Med, 1995, 52:124-128. (12) L.Bjorkman et al, "Mercury in saliva and feces after removal of amalgam fillings", Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1997, 144(1): 156-162. (13) Berglund A, Molin M, "Mercury levels in plasma and urine after removal of all amalgam restorations: the effect of using rubber dams", Dent Mater 1997 Sep;13(5):297-304; (14) M.Molin et al, "kinetics of mercury in blood and urine after mercury removal" J Dent Research, 1995, 74:420- (15) J.Begerow et al, "Long Term Mercury Excretion in Urine after Removal of Amalgam Fillings", Int Arch Occup Health 66: 209-212. (16) G.Sallsten et al, "long term use of chewing gum and mercury exposure from dental amalgam", J Dental Research, 1996, 75(1):594-598. (17) I.Skare, "Mass Balance and Systemic Uptake of Mercury Released from Dental Fillings", Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 80(1-4):59-67, 1995. (18) B.Windham, Anotated Bibliography of Exposure and Health Effects from Amalgam Fillings, Dec 2000 (over 600 references & 60,000 clinical replacement cases). (19) Halbach, 1995,"Estimation of mercury dose ..", Int.Archieves of Occupational & Environmental Health, 67:295-300; & G. Sandborgh-Englund, "Pharmacokinetics of mercury from dental amalgam", Gotab(Stockholm), 1998, 1-49. (20) H.V.Aposhian, Envir.Health Perspectives, Vol 106,Supp 4, Aug, 1998; & H.V. Aposhian et al, FASEB J, 6: 2472-2476, 1992. (21) J Pleva, "Mercury- A Public Health Hazard", Reviews on Environmental Health, 1994, 10:1-27. (22) C. Toomvali, "Studies of mercury vapor emission from different dental amalgam alloys", LIU-IFM-Kemi-EX 150,1988; & A.Berglund,"A study of the release of mercury vapor from different types of amalgam alloys", J Dent Res, 1993, 72: 939-946; & D.B.Boyer, "Mercury vaporization from corroded dental amalgam" Dental Materials, 1988, 4:89-93; & V.Psarras et al, " Mercury vapour releases from dental amalgams", Swed Dent J,1994, 18:15-23; & L.E.Moberg, "Long term corrosion studies of amalgams and Casting alloys in contact", Acta Odontal Scand 1985, 43:163-177; (23) H. Lichtenberg, "Mercury vapor in the oral cavity in relation to the number of amalgam fillings and chronic mercury poisoning", Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, 1996, 11:2, 87-94. http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam/ 6. Amalgam Fillings Largest Source of Mercury by Far Based on a number of studies in Sweden, the World Health Organization review of inorganic mercury in 1991 determined that mercury absorption is estimated to be approximately four times higher from amalgam fillings than from fish consumption. Recent studies have confirmed this estimate and shown that the amount absorbed can vary considerably from person to person. 7. Gold Crowns, Gum, Bruxism, Computer Monitors Increase Release of Mercury Significantly Gum chewing, bruxism (grinding of teeth), computer terminal exposure, presence of gold fillings or gold crowns (even if covering mercury fillings), teeth brushing, braces and even chewing food cause the release of significantly increased amounts of mercury from the fillings in one's teeth. 8. Cumulative Poison Builds Up in Organs Mercury released from fillings builds up in the brain, kidneys, liver, pituitary, adrenals and other parts of the body. ======== According to the World Health Organization the general sources of mercury in the body a Breathed Air (.040 micrograms), Fish (2.34 micrograms), Non-fish food (.25 micrograms), Drinking-water .0035 micrograms), mercury vapor from dental amalgams (3 to 17 micrograms). *****The mercury vapor from dental amalgam alone is a bigger source than all the other sources together.******* |
#159
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination Mercury.
"Mark Probert" wrote in message ... Vernon wrote: Let's see. You have no knowledge of mercury or it's effects and thus post comments on words or court cases?????? Got extra time on your hands? Vern, do learn to restore the subject line. With the subject line like it is, someone would think you have some form of nefarious deed planned. (See your message). "Jan Drew" wrote in message ... In the Matter of Mark Probert (Admitted as Mark S. Probert), a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, Petitioner. Let's see. You have no knowledge of mercury or it's effects and thus post comments on words or court cases?????? Got extra time on your hands? |
#160
|
|||
|
|||
Elimination of mercury
"Peter Bowditch" wrote: "Max C." wrote: "So the real question is, how would humans *naturally* have come in contact with the levels of mercury seen today?" I see the moron is back. Yes, YOU are back and STILL here. LYING and SPAMMING. It's a naturally occurring element, Max. All the mercury in or on Earth now has been here since before there were any people to have teeth to be filled. When a forest fire pumps thousands of tons of mercury into the air it is because the mercury was available to the trees through the soil. Filled WITHOUT MERCURY! The mercury vapor from dental amalgam alone is a bigger source than all the other sources together. http://www.toxicteeth.org/pressRoom_..._polluters.cfm Dentists Biggest Mercury Polluters, New Study Finds Health: The metal is widely used in fillings and ends up in the nation's waste water. == Ruining the environment! It's really quite simple for those who can think. Oh, that's right ... -- Peter Bowditch |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vaccine quote of the week by Bernard Rimland, PhD | john | Kids Health | 164 | July 28th 06 02:59 PM |
Vaccine quote of the week by Bernard Rimland, PhD | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 12 | July 22nd 06 10:45 PM |
MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS | Bryan Heit | Kids Health | 12 | July 7th 06 12:18 PM |
Combination vaccines safe for children | Mark Probert | Kids Health | 50 | August 19th 05 06:43 PM |
THE REAL SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OF AMALGAM | LadyLollipop | Kids Health | 48 | April 3rd 05 11:18 AM |