Bill for Banning Amalgam Reintroduced

In article .com,
Clinton wrote:

David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:

Mark Probert wrote:
David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:
jill999999 wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
jill999999 wrote:

Another reason amalgam fillings fracture teeth is that as they age
thecrystal structure brea ks down ,causing an increase in volume
despite a decrease in weight from the huge amt of hg vaporizing off.
Care to document that?
I have lots of fractured teeth. None of my teeth without fillings are
fractured.Almost everyone with amalgam has fractured teeth.

I have amalgam fillings and no fractured teeth.

By the way ,Igot well over 650 on the math SAT. I scored in the top one
% of the population.

Whoopee. I got an 800.

Of my 720 classmates, 91 got an 800. The lowest score was just under 700
If you took the SAT before 1995,less than one percent got 700 in math
.Less than one percent got a perfect 1600 so you are lying again.

Nobody mentioned a perfect 1600. Are you living in the same reality
as the rest of the readership?

ARe you? For reference the claimed average Math SAT scores of the
quackwatch team is now higher than that of the Freshman class of
MIT (on the old SAT) and way above the incoming class of Harvard.

If you want to drop by, I may still have my old SAT scores in a
box somewhere. However, I didn't claim to have gotten a 1600
combined score, nor did I get that score. An 800 on the math SAT
was not all *that* unusual. On the verbal, yes, unusual.

Statistically, the distribution claimed could occur in a magnet type
school if everyone in the school was in the top 1% of the population.
But what relevance would that have to most schools where an 800 would
occur far less than 1 in 100 which would roughly correspond to 700,

As for Mark Probert's school, it's possible if it were the High School
of Science or some such. My own high school sported some high scores,
but nothing like what he was talking about.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If George Bush were my dad, I'd be drunk in public so often that
James Baker would have me killed." -- Bill Maher on the Bush twins

David Wright wrote:


By the way ,Igot well over 650 on the math SAT. I scored in the
Of my 720 classmates, 91 got an 800. The lowest score was just
If you took the SAT before 1995,less than one percent got 700 in math
.Less than one percent got a perfect 1600 so you are lying again.
Nobody mentioned a perfect 1600. Are you living in the same reality
as the rest of the readership?
ARe you? For reference the claimed average Math SAT scores of the
quackwatch team is now higher than that of the Freshman class of
MIT (on the old SAT) and way above the incoming class of Harvard.

If you want to drop by, I may still have my old SAT scores in a
box somewhere. However, I didn't claim to have gotten a 1600
combined score, nor did I get that score. An 800 on the math SAT
was not all *that* unusual. On the verbal, yes, unusual.

I agree that a 650 is not an earth shattering score, while many large
high
schools will have (would have had) 2 or 3 people who would recieve an
800 on their SAT out of all classes (Many wouldn't). I also agree that
an 800 on the verbal would be much less frequent. However, notice that
Jilly only claimed to have scored well above 650. I.E she did not say
what her score was. It could have been 790. What is interesting is that
Mark Probert claimed in his high school class the lowest score was a
690. Assuming he didn't have the lowest score in his class, which we
have deduced must have been the Bronx high school of science or a
similar type school and you scored an 800 which is your claim, your
average quackwatch team score would be 750 or , while the incoming
average on the (old SAt) at MIT was only 740, and Harvard was below 700

The question of how many people scored an 800 is an interesting one
however and I have a good idea. An 800 on the old SAT corresponded with
about a 5 on the AIME, a 15 question test introduced in the 80's which
was the pre-qualifier to the USAMO, the selector for the US mathematics
olympic team. Statistically I can see that about 2000 or fewer students
scored a 5 or greater on the AIME while about 2 million took the SAT's
each year. So the frequency would be about 2000/2000000 or about 1 in
1000 who scored an 800.


Statistically, the distribution claimed could occur in a magnet type
school if everyone in the school was in the top 1% of the population.
But what relevance would that have to most schools where an 800 would
occur far less than 1 in 100 which would roughly correspond to 700,

As for Mark Probert's school, it's possible if it were the High School
of Science or some such. My own high school sported some high scores,
but nothing like what he was talking about.

My high school class was pretty big and in an area with a lot of
educated
professionals. In my class excluding myself, there was one 800 and
about 8 scores ranging between 700-760.

So going back to Jilly's original claim a score of 700 or "well above
650" on the old SAT would certainly be excellent and indeed, relatively
speaking, an "exceptional" score in many schools.

David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
Clinton wrote:
David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:
jill999999 wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
jill999999 wrote:

Another reason amalgam fillings fracture teeth is that as they age
thecrystal structure brea ks down ,causing an increase in volume
despite a decrease in weight from the huge amt of hg vaporizing off.
Care to document that?
I have lots of fractured teeth. None of my teeth without fillings are
fractured.Almost everyone with amalgam has fractured teeth.
I have amalgam fillings and no fractured teeth.

By the way ,Igot well over 650 on the math SAT. I scored in the top one
% of the population.
Whoopee. I got an 800.
Of my 720 classmates, 91 got an 800. The lowest score was just under 700
If you took the SAT before 1995,less than one percent got 700 in math
.Less than one percent got a perfect 1600 so you are lying again.
Nobody mentioned a perfect 1600. Are you living in the same reality
as the rest of the readership?
ARe you? For reference the claimed average Math SAT scores of the
quackwatch team is now higher than that of the Freshman class of
MIT (on the old SAT) and way above the incoming class of Harvard.

If you want to drop by, I may still have my old SAT scores in a
box somewhere. However, I didn't claim to have gotten a 1600
combined score, nor did I get that score. An 800 on the math SAT
was not all *that* unusual. On the verbal, yes, unusual.

Statistically, the distribution claimed could occur in a magnet type
school if everyone in the school was in the top 1% of the population.
But what relevance would that have to most schools where an 800 would
occur far less than 1 in 100 which would roughly correspond to 700,

As for Mark Probert's school, it's possible if it were the High School
of Science or some such. My own high school sported some high scores,
but nothing like what he was talking about.

Wrong borough.

Clinton wrote:
David Wright wrote:


By the way ,Igot well over 650 on the math SAT. I scored in the
Of my 720 classmates, 91 got an 800. The lowest score was just
If you took the SAT before 1995,less than one percent got 700 in math
.Less than one percent got a perfect 1600 so you are lying again.
Nobody mentioned a perfect 1600. Are you living in the same reality
as the rest of the readership?
ARe you? For reference the claimed average Math SAT scores of the
quackwatch team is now higher than that of the Freshman class of
MIT (on the old SAT) and way above the incoming class of Harvard.
If you want to drop by, I may still have my old SAT scores in a
box somewhere. However, I didn't claim to have gotten a 1600
combined score, nor did I get that score. An 800 on the math SAT
was not all *that* unusual. On the verbal, yes, unusual.

I agree that a 650 is not an earth shattering score, while many large
high
schools will have (would have had) 2 or 3 people who would recieve an
800 on their SAT out of all classes (Many wouldn't). I also agree that
an 800 on the verbal would be much less frequent. However, notice that
Jilly only claimed to have scored well above 650. I.E she did not say
what her score was. It could have been 790. What is interesting is that
Mark Probert claimed in his high school class the lowest score was a
690. Assuming he didn't have the lowest score in his class, which we
have deduced must have been the Bronx high school of science

No way BHS.

or a
similar type school and you scored an 800 which is your claim, your
average quackwatch team score would be 750 or , while the incoming
average on the (old SAt) at MIT was only 740, and Harvard was below 700

Several went to those schools, along with Yale, Dartmouth and others.
Back then, money made a big difference, even for those who had very high
scores. And, scores were not the only thing. Many classmates worked (as
I did) and could not spend the uncountable hours studying that others did.

The question of how many people scored an 800 is an interesting one
however and I have a good idea. An 800 on the old SAT corresponded with
about a 5 on the AIME, a 15 question test introduced in the 80's which
was the pre-qualifier to the USAMO, the selector for the US mathematics
olympic team. Statistically I can see that about 2000 or fewer students
scored a 5 or greater on the AIME while about 2 million took the SAT's
each year. So the frequency would be about 2000/2000000 or about 1 in
1000 who scored an 800.

Statistically, the distribution claimed could occur in a magnet type
school if everyone in the school was in the top 1% of the population.
But what relevance would that have to most schools where an 800 would
occur far less than 1 in 100 which would roughly correspond to 700,
As for Mark Probert's school, it's possible if it were the High School
of Science or some such. My own high school sported some high scores,
but nothing like what he was talking about.

My high school class was pretty big and in an area with a lot of
educated
professionals. In my class excluding myself, there was one 800 and
about 8 scores ranging between 700-760.

So going back to Jilly's original claim a score of 700 or "well above
650" on the old SAT would certainly be excellent and indeed, relatively
speaking, an "exceptional" score in many schools.

I'll agree with that.

Clinton wrote:
David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:

David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:

jill999999 wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
jill999999 wrote:

Another reason amalgam fillings fracture teeth is that as they age
thecrystal structure brea ks down ,causing an increase in volume
despite a decrease in weight from the huge amt of hg vaporizing off.

Care to document that?
I have lots of fractured teeth. None of my teeth without fillings are
fractured.Almost everyone with amalgam has fractured teeth.

I have amalgam fillings and no fractured teeth.
Many of the fractures are hairline fractures that are only detectable
after extraction unless they expand over time.Peter Bornfeld DDs said
that there are fractures in teeth with amalgam ,with composites and
even teeth with no fillings. He neglected to give stastics re chance of
fracture as a function of restoration.Also indirect composites are far
less likely to fracture teeth than direct composites. The chance of
fracture with amalgam is probably 100x the chance of fracture with
gold.

Not clear. The coefficients of expansion of silver and gold aren't
that far apart, though mercury's is somewhat higher. The question is
whether it's enough to make any difference.

Would you rather have a thermometer made of gold or mercury?
Gold thermometers would be inefficient since gold does not expand and
contract significantly in the relevant temperature range.
Why are we debating whether hg fillings fracture teeth since this is an
accepted fact among dentists?

Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote:
jill999999 wrote:

David Wright wrote:

In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:

jill999999 wrote:

Mark Probert wrote:

jill999999 wrote:


Another reason amalgam fillings fracture teeth is that as they age
thecrystal structure brea ks down ,causing an increase in volume
despite a decrease in weight from the huge amt of hg vaporizing off.

Care to document that?

I have lots of fractured teeth. None of my teeth without fillings are
fractured.Almost everyone with amalgam has fractured teeth.

I have amalgam fillings and no fractured teeth.

Many of the fractures are hairline fractures that are only detectable
after extraction unless they expand over time.Peter Bornfeld DDs said
that there are fractures in teeth with amalgam ,with composites and
even teeth with no fillings. He neglected to give stastics re chance of
fracture as a function of restoration.

I assume you mean the restoration material. This is an interesting
question, and it's probably been investigated. However, the
restorations would have to be matche for size and category.
Besides the fact that I have not done a literature review, there is no
doubt in my mind that preparation, esp. with regard to covering the
cusps is a far more important determinant of fracture than is the
restorative. I've seen large 50-year old amalgams that are in great shape.
Old fillings may appear to be in good shape on xrays.Is'nt it true however that they all have secondary decay under the filling because the pH is around 2 in the crevices due to galvanic effects? Gold fillings dont result in enamel destroying low pH s.

Also indirect composites are far
less likely to fracture teeth than direct composites.

This makes sense intuitively, since there is not a hugh mass of resin
shrinking on polymerization (just the luting medium). However, I
haven't seen any studies demonstrating this. Again, the restorations
would have to be matched for size and category.


The chance of
fracture with amalgam is probably 100x the chance of fracture with
gold.

Again, depends. There is no doubt that gold is a superior restorative
in many ways--except for the two obvious ones--appearance and cost.

Steve






By the way ,Igot well over 650 on the math SAT. I scored in the top one
% of the population.

Whoopee. I got an 800.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If George Bush were my dad, I'd be drunk in public so often that
James Baker would have me killed." -- Bill Maher on the Bush twins




--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

Dartos wrote:
Kind of difficult to have a discussion when statements are
made that have nothing to do with the previous post.

I wrote nothing in defense of amalgam. As I have told you
several years ago, I haven't used amalgam since 1985. I
have no great love for the stuff. I just haven't seen any
health problems could be attributed to amalgam.
You havent seen any health problems related to hg because people dont usually connect health problems with dental work. My body temperature is 96.6 when I wake up, a classic sign of hypothyroid and common among people with many fillings.My white cell count is low and I have had pneumonia,staph and other serious infections.There is research showing that hg fillings lower immunity.How many people would think their infection was caused by their fillings?According to Siblerud and others hg fillings cause depression .Who makes a causal connection between their depression and their fillings. Talk show host Rosie O'donnel often talks about her extensive dental work. She had a life threatening infection at age 38 that started out as a small cut on her hand.She also suffers from chronic severe depression.Maybe her health problems are caused by hg.Yes I do realize that two is not a statistically significant sample size.
My comments were in defense of direct composites compared
to indirect composites. I don't feel that indirect composite
restorations offer much of an advantage over direct composite
restorations.

I disagree with the 100X fracture comparison in that there
is no correlation or designation as to size and type of
restoration. A small buccal pit amalgam has no greater
chance of fracture than a small gold inlay in the same
application. That is not a statement defending amalgam.

A class II restoration is a different story. Especially if
it is wide.

It is also unfair to compare a gold 'onlay' to a 'filling'.

If you wanted to say, "An MOD gold onlay has a significant
advantage in fracture resistance compared to an MOD amalgam",
I would agree completely.

Joel agreed that amalgam releases *large* amounts of Hg?
Hmmmm....guess you need to define "large".

D

Clinton wrote:

Dartos wrote:

Also indirect composites are far

less likely to fracture teeth than direct composites. The chance of
fracture with amalgam is probably 100x the chance of fracture with
gold.


Absolutely false as a wide generalization.


How about a narrow generalization.
You yourself make a lot of generalizations about amalgam without any
proof.
Not surpising, considering the lack of long term research on amalgam.
Is your only agenda to trash anyone who says anything negative about
amalgam?
According to you its a wonder material that doesn't have a significant
expansion
coefficent and doesn't release any Hg.

Even Joel Eichen admitted that amalgam expands and releases large
amounts
of Hg. These are also published facts in the scientific literature.
Just because you are a dentist and make "Godly" prouncemounts about
the behaviour of amalgam (which you admit you don't even use) doesn't
really amount to a hill a beans.

David Wright wrote:
In article om,
Clinton wrote:

David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:

David Wright wrote:
In article .com,
jill999999 wrote:

jill999999 wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
jill999999 wrote:

Another reason amalgam fillings fracture teeth is that as they age
thecrystal structure brea ks down ,causing an increase in volume
despite a decrease in weight from the huge amt of hg
vaporizing off.

Care to document that?
I have lots of fractured teeth. None of my teeth without fillings are
fractured.Almost everyone with amalgam has fractured teeth.

I have amalgam fillings and no fractured teeth.
Many of the fractures are hairline fractures that are only detectable
after extraction unless they expand over time.Peter Bornfeld DDs said
that there are fractures in teeth with amalgam ,with composites and
even teeth with no fillings. He neglected to give stastics re chance of
fracture as a function of restoration.Also indirect composites are far
less likely to fracture teeth than direct composites. The chance of
fracture with amalgam is probably 100x the chance of fracture with
gold.

Not clear. The coefficients of expansion of silver and gold aren't
that far apart, though mercury's is somewhat higher. The question is
whether it's enough to make any difference.

Would you rather have a thermometer made of gold or mercury?

Gold, since it's a lot more costly per ounce. As far as fillings, I'd
prefer gold, since it lasts the longest, but I don't have the budget
and my amalgam fillings are doing fine so far.
A gram of 24 k gold costs around twenty dollars,an insignificant amount.
But thanks for asking.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If George Bush were my dad, I'd be drunk in public so often that
James Baker would have me killed." -- Bill Maher on the Bush twins

Clinton wrote:
jill999999 wrote:

Keep in mind that the SAT test was changed in 92 to make it much
easier (as a result of declining scores) and many posters are
old-timers. On the old version of the SAT's a perfect 1600 was
extremely rare, usually obtained by less than a dozen students in the
country each year. Nowadays' perfect 1600's are not uncommon I hear.
The SAT waschanged in 1995. Is everyone over 27 an old timer?

I guess I'm an old timer. You are right that a score of 670-680 would
be the top 1%. Let's see, I happen to have an old college book

In the 80's average Berkely Math SAT -618
Santa Cruz (562)

At Berkely, Math
12% Below 500
24% 500-600
41% 600-700
23% above 700

Lets look at MIT

Verbal 630 Math 740
Math
20% 600-700
80% above 700

Stanford Math

8% 500-600
35% 600-700
56% above 700

Harvard Math

15% 500-600
50% 600-700
35% over 700
Idont have any books from the 80s. I do know people who went to Harvard
and Standford in the 80s. At Stanford in the 80s ,about half the class
got an A in chemistry whereas at Berkeley only 12 % got A s.At Harvard
more than half got an A. Also 40% of Berkeley admissions were
affirmative action and not many of those people took chemistry or
physics.

jill999999 wrote:
Clinton wrote:
jill999999 wrote:
Idont have any books from the 80s. I do know people who went to Harvard
and Standford in the 80s. At Stanford in the 80s ,about half the class
got an A in chemistry whereas at Berkeley only 12 % got A s.At Harvard
more than half got an A. Also 40% of Berkeley admissions were
affirmative action and not many of those people took chemistry or
physics.

Of course at a large school like Berkley the average SAT would be lower
than
schools with smaller enrollment like Harvard, but within the schools of

science the average would be high. It's also true that the academic
programs at the IVy's were easy compared to many state schools.
Stanford in fact let students who failed courses re-take the classes
and nearly half the class at Harvard graduated with Honors, MIT is
pass/fail the first year etc..they don't want to offend any alumni who
may make contributions in the future,especially if they can afford the
$50 K per
year price tag.

I see above you said you had suffered symptoms you attritbute to
amalgam toxicity. Did you have you amalgams removed? How did
you determine that your health was being affected by your amalgams?