FDA admits Mercury in dentistry MIGHT indeed be HARMFUL

Clinton wrote:
PeterB wrote:
I could care less how people make a living, Markey. The issue is
whether a product or medical procedure puts the public at undue risk.
Forensic studies have linked mercury exposure to increased secretion of
amyloid protein and hyper-phosphorylation of a protein referred to as
Tau (1), which means mercury amalgam may be an undue risk for a small
percentage of people.


There is even a more basic problem. All amalgams look the same but
they are not of the same quality. A poorly constructed amalgam can
"come apart" over time giving off much more Hg. Some also interact
galvanically with nearby amalgams, or other dental metals which greatly
increases the Hg release.

Finally bacteria on the surface of amalgam can and do methylate the
Hg in some cases. A poorly constructed amalgam is actually porous and
can be invaded by bacteria which can undergo electrochemical reactions
with the amalgam. Methyl Hg is more more toxic

Right, and that exposure may be linked to neurological diseases. I
can't think of any reason to continue using mercury in dentistry, since
other materials are available.

PeterB

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

I fully believe that there is a subset of human beings who react very
strongly to the mercury in fillings ...









On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 16:08:45 -0600, Ilena Rose wrote:

Note from Ilena Rosenthal: Another one of the Healthfrauds theories
falling apart. Quackwatch has been behind the propaganda disseminated
on the internet for years regarding this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060907/...dental_mercury

By ANDREW BRIDGES, Associated Press Writer
48 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Government health advisers rejected a federal report that
concluded dental fillings used by millions of patients are safe,
saying further study of the mercury-laden amalgam is needed.

ADVERTISEMENT

A joint panel of Food and Drug Administration advisers did not
declare the so-called "silver fillings" unsafe. But in a 13-7 vote
Thursday, the advisers said the federal report didn't objectively and
clearly present the current state of knowledge about the fillings.

In a second 13-7 vote, the panelists said the report's conclusions
about safety weren't reasonable, given the quantity and quality of
information currently available.

The FDA had asked the panel of outside advisers to weigh the report, a
review of 34 recent research studies.

The report had found "no significant new information" that would
change the FDA's earlier determination that mercury-based fillings
don't harm patients, except in rare cases where they have allergic
reactions.

But panelists said remaining uncertainties about the risk of so-called
silver fillings demanded further study. In particular, research is
needed on the effect of mercury-laden fillings on children and the
fetuses of pregnant women with fillings.

"There are too many things we don't know, too many things that were
excluded," said Michael Aschner, a professor of pediatrics and
pharmacology at Vanderbilt University and a panel consultant. He cast
two "no" votes.

Panelists also said more study was needed on whether mercury fillings
give off more vapors when they're being placed or removed.

Dr. Ralph Sacco, of Columbia University, said consumers shouldn't
panic and that there was no need to have their amalgam fillings
removed.

The votes were a "start" to sparking greater dialogue and awareness of
the issue, said consumer activist Sara Moore-Hines, 57.

"If we don't want it in our fish, we don't want it in our
thermometers, what is it doing in our heads?" said Moore-Hines, a
Pennsylvania counselor.

She and other activists had pressed the panel to recommend the FDA ban
mercury fillings.

"Do the right, decent, honorable and God-loving thing: There needs to
be an immediate embargo on mercury fillings for everyone, or at least
pregnant women and children, because they are our future," said
Michael Burke, who blamed mercury fillings for the early onset
Alzheimer's disease diagnosed in his wife, Phyllis, in 2004.

Dr. Michael Fleming, a Durham, N.C., dentist and the consumer
representative on the panel, asked the FDA to consider restricting the
use of amalgam in children younger than 6 and in pregnant women. The
activists - dozens attended the two-day meeting - met his proposal
with applause.

"We are going to take the recommendations, your comments, and we will
start evaluating the next steps, with the white paper and this whole
issue of dental amalgam," Dr. Norris Alderson, the FDA's associate
commissioner for science, told the panel.

Amalgam fillings by weight are about 50 percent mercury, joined with
silver, copper and tin. Dentists have used amalgam to fill cavities -
and have argued about their safety - since the 1800s. Today, tens of
millions of Americans receive mercury fillings each year. Amalgam use
has begun to taper off, though, with many doctors switching to resin
composite fillings that blend better with the natural coloring of
teeth.

With amalgam fillings, mercury vapor is released when patients chew
and when they brush their teeth. Significant levels of mercury
exposure can cause permanent damage to the brain and kidneys. Fetuses
and children are especially sensitive.

Scientists have found that mercury levels in the blood, urine and body
tissues rise in conjunction with mercury fillings. However, even among
people with numerous fillings, exposure levels are well below those
known to be harmful, the FDA report said

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...87c1bc3daaf4e4

Subject: Jan Drew Was Chairwoman of the Panel

Posted by: Joel344

Posted only to smd.

Sep 7 2006 9:12 pm

Health advisers reject mercury reportANDREW BRIDGES
Associated Press

Which was AFTER you posted (on smd) at:

Sep 7 2006 5:08 pm

Some things never change.

Maybe Joel is working on loosing another account??

Listen up Joel Eichen!

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Robert wrote:
"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Note from Ilena Rosenthal: Another one of the Healthfrauds theories
falling apart. Quackwatch has been behind the propaganda disseminated
on the internet for years regarding this.

And there went Mark's UDP again!!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060907/...dental_mercury

By ANDREW BRIDGES, Associated Press Writer
48 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Government health advisers rejected a federal report that
concluded dental fillings used by millions of patients are safe,
saying further study of the mercury-laden amalgam is needed.

ADVERTISEMENT

A joint panel of Food and Drug Administration advisers did not
declare the so-called "silver fillings" unsafe. But in a 13-7 vote
Thursday, the advisers said the federal report didn't objectively and
clearly present the current state of knowledge about the fillings.

In a second 13-7 vote, the panelists said the report's conclusions
about safety weren't reasonable, given the quantity and quality of
information currently available.

The FDA had asked the panel of outside advisers to weigh the report, a
review of 34 recent research studies.

The report had found "no significant new information" that would
change the FDA's earlier determination that mercury-based fillings
don't harm patients, except in rare cases where they have allergic
reactions.

But panelists said remaining uncertainties about the risk of so-called
silver fillings demanded further study. In particular, research is
needed on the effect of mercury-laden fillings on children and the
fetuses of pregnant women with fillings.

"There are too many things we don't know, too many things that were
excluded," said Michael Aschner, a professor of pediatrics and
pharmacology at Vanderbilt University and a panel consultant. He cast
two "no" votes.

Panelists also said more study was needed on whether mercury fillings
give off more vapors when they're being placed or removed.

Dr. Ralph Sacco, of Columbia University, said consumers shouldn't
panic and that there was no need to have their amalgam fillings
removed.

The votes were a "start" to sparking greater dialogue and awareness of
the issue, said consumer activist Sara Moore-Hines, 57.

"If we don't want it in our fish, we don't want it in our
thermometers, what is it doing in our heads?" said Moore-Hines, a
Pennsylvania counselor.

She and other activists had pressed the panel to recommend the FDA ban
mercury fillings.

"Do the right, decent, honorable and God-loving thing: There needs to
be an immediate embargo on mercury fillings for everyone, or at least
pregnant women and children, because they are our future," said
Michael Burke, who blamed mercury fillings for the early onset
Alzheimer's disease diagnosed in his wife, Phyllis, in 2004.

Dr. Michael Fleming, a Durham, N.C., dentist and the consumer
representative on the panel, asked the FDA to consider restricting the
use of amalgam in children younger than 6 and in pregnant women. The
activists - dozens attended the two-day meeting - met his proposal
with applause.

"We are going to take the recommendations, your comments, and we will
start evaluating the next steps, with the white paper and this whole
issue of dental amalgam," Dr. Norris Alderson, the FDA's associate
commissioner for science, told the panel.

Amalgam fillings by weight are about 50 percent mercury, joined with
silver, copper and tin. Dentists have used amalgam to fill cavities -
and have argued about their safety - since the 1800s. Today, tens of
millions of Americans receive mercury fillings each year. Amalgam use
has begun to taper off, though, with many doctors switching to resin
composite fillings that blend better with the natural coloring of
teeth.

With amalgam fillings, mercury vapor is released when patients chew
and when they brush their teeth. Significant levels of mercury
exposure can cause permanent damage to the brain and kidneys. Fetuses
and children are especially sensitive.

Scientists have found that mercury levels in the blood, urine and body
tissues rise in conjunction with mercury fillings. However, even among
people with numerous fillings, exposure levels are well below those
known to be harmful, the FDA report said
I missed this earlier, Illena, thanks for posting. If this were
encapsulated tobacco, the practice would have stopped long ago. Just
another example of industry dragging its feet while enlisting the
support of its lackey bureacrats.

PeterB

If thousands if not millions of us have had amalgams for many years,
where
all the sick and dying people? A recent study says if you have 7
fillings,
your body can handle 460 times more Mercury than you absorb every day
from
the fillings. There are many more serious things about your body to worry
about.

Petey is worried about it because people make money placing amalgams into
teeth.

If they did it for free, I suspect that the issue would be over.

In article om,
PeterB wrote:

Clinton wrote:
PeterB wrote:
I could care less how people make a living, Markey. The issue is
whether a product or medical procedure puts the public at undue risk.
Forensic studies have linked mercury exposure to increased secretion of
amyloid protein and hyper-phosphorylation of a protein referred to as
Tau (1), which means mercury amalgam may be an undue risk for a small
percentage of people.

There is even a more basic problem. All amalgams look the same but
they are not of the same quality. A poorly constructed amalgam can
"come apart" over time giving off much more Hg. Some also interact
galvanically with nearby amalgams, or other dental metals which greatly
increases the Hg release.

Finally bacteria on the surface of amalgam can and do methylate the
Hg in some cases. A poorly constructed amalgam is actually porous and
can be invaded by bacteria which can undergo electrochemical reactions
with the amalgam. Methyl Hg is more more toxic

Right, and that exposure may be linked to neurological diseases. I
can't think of any reason to continue using mercury in dentistry, since
other materials are available.

I can. Some people are allergic to the other materials, and amalgam
is cheap and durable. Shucks, I have two amalgam fillings.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
I used to think that spammers should be hanged, but I've
changed my mind. They should be tortured first.

"PeterB" wrote in message
ps.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
Robert wrote:
"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Note from Ilena Rosenthal: Another one of the Healthfrauds theories
falling apart. Quackwatch has been behind the propaganda disseminated
on the internet for years regarding this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060907/...dental_mercury

By ANDREW BRIDGES, Associated Press Writer
48 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Government health advisers rejected a federal report
that
concluded dental fillings used by millions of patients are safe,
saying further study of the mercury-laden amalgam is needed.

ADVERTISEMENT

A joint panel of Food and Drug Administration advisers did not
declare the so-called "silver fillings" unsafe. But in a 13-7 vote
Thursday, the advisers said the federal report didn't objectively and
clearly present the current state of knowledge about the fillings.

In a second 13-7 vote, the panelists said the report's conclusions
about safety weren't reasonable, given the quantity and quality of
information currently available.

The FDA had asked the panel of outside advisers to weigh the report,
a
review of 34 recent research studies.

The report had found "no significant new information" that would
change the FDA's earlier determination that mercury-based fillings
don't harm patients, except in rare cases where they have allergic
reactions.

But panelists said remaining uncertainties about the risk of
so-called
silver fillings demanded further study. In particular, research is
needed on the effect of mercury-laden fillings on children and the
fetuses of pregnant women with fillings.

"There are too many things we don't know, too many things that were
excluded," said Michael Aschner, a professor of pediatrics and
pharmacology at Vanderbilt University and a panel consultant. He cast
two "no" votes.

Panelists also said more study was needed on whether mercury fillings
give off more vapors when they're being placed or removed.

Dr. Ralph Sacco, of Columbia University, said consumers shouldn't
panic and that there was no need to have their amalgam fillings
removed.

The votes were a "start" to sparking greater dialogue and awareness
of
the issue, said consumer activist Sara Moore-Hines, 57.

"If we don't want it in our fish, we don't want it in our
thermometers, what is it doing in our heads?" said Moore-Hines, a
Pennsylvania counselor.

She and other activists had pressed the panel to recommend the FDA
ban
mercury fillings.

"Do the right, decent, honorable and God-loving thing: There needs to
be an immediate embargo on mercury fillings for everyone, or at least
pregnant women and children, because they are our future," said
Michael Burke, who blamed mercury fillings for the early onset
Alzheimer's disease diagnosed in his wife, Phyllis, in 2004.

Dr. Michael Fleming, a Durham, N.C., dentist and the consumer
representative on the panel, asked the FDA to consider restricting
the
use of amalgam in children younger than 6 and in pregnant women. The
activists - dozens attended the two-day meeting - met his proposal
with applause.

"We are going to take the recommendations, your comments, and we will
start evaluating the next steps, with the white paper and this whole
issue of dental amalgam," Dr. Norris Alderson, the FDA's associate
commissioner for science, told the panel.

Amalgam fillings by weight are about 50 percent mercury, joined with
silver, copper and tin. Dentists have used amalgam to fill cavities -
and have argued about their safety - since the 1800s. Today, tens of
millions of Americans receive mercury fillings each year. Amalgam use
has begun to taper off, though, with many doctors switching to resin
composite fillings that blend better with the natural coloring of
teeth.

With amalgam fillings, mercury vapor is released when patients chew
and when they brush their teeth. Significant levels of mercury
exposure can cause permanent damage to the brain and kidneys. Fetuses
and children are especially sensitive.

Scientists have found that mercury levels in the blood, urine and
body
tissues rise in conjunction with mercury fillings. However, even
among
people with numerous fillings, exposure levels are well below those
known to be harmful, the FDA report said
I missed this earlier, Illena, thanks for posting. If this were
encapsulated tobacco, the practice would have stopped long ago. Just
another example of industry dragging its feet while enlisting the
support of its lackey bureacrats.

PeterB

If thousands if not millions of us have had amalgams for many years,
where
all the sick and dying people? A recent study says if you have 7
fillings,
your body can handle 460 times more Mercury than you absorb every day
from
the fillings. There are many more serious things about your body to
worry
about.

Petey is worried about it because people make money placing amalgams
into teeth.

If they did it for free, I suspect that the issue would be over.

I could care less how people make a living, Markey. The issue is
whether a product or medical procedure puts the public at undue risk.
Forensic studies have linked mercury exposure to increased secretion of
amyloid protein and hyper-phosphorylation of a protein referred to as
Tau (1), which means mercury amalgam may be an undue risk for a small
percentage of people. Since you can't know which group you will fall
into before the fact, by the time you do find out, it will be too late.
At a minimum, regulatory oversight should require disclosure that
mercury in amalgam has not been proven safe beyond question. The BDHF
says that "if amalgam were to be presented as a new material today, it
would not be approved by any food and drug administration, on the
precautionary principle."

PeterB

(1) Olivieri, G., Brack, Ch., Muller-Spahn, F., Stahelin, H.B.,
Herrmann, M., Renard, P; Brockhaus, M. and Hock, C. Mercury Induces
Cell Cytotoxicity and Oxidative Stress and Increases b-amyloid
Secretion and Tau Phosphorylation in SHSY5Y Neuroblastoma Cells. J.
Neurochemistry 74, 231-231, 2000.

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:...&cd=6&ie=UTF-8

http://tinyurl.com/pzk53

See Page 3.

Better yet--read it all.

Jan

David Wright wrote:
In article om,
PeterB wrote:

Clinton wrote:
PeterB wrote:
I could care less how people make a living, Markey. The issue is
whether a product or medical procedure puts the public at undue risk.
Forensic studies have linked mercury exposure to increased secretion of
amyloid protein and hyper-phosphorylation of a protein referred to as
Tau (1), which means mercury amalgam may be an undue risk for a small
percentage of people.

There is even a more basic problem. All amalgams look the same but
they are not of the same quality. A poorly constructed amalgam can
"come apart" over time giving off much more Hg. Some also interact
galvanically with nearby amalgams, or other dental metals which greatly
increases the Hg release.

Finally bacteria on the surface of amalgam can and do methylate the
Hg in some cases. A poorly constructed amalgam is actually porous and
can be invaded by bacteria which can undergo electrochemical reactions
with the amalgam. Methyl Hg is more more toxic

Right, and that exposure may be linked to neurological diseases. I
can't think of any reason to continue using mercury in dentistry, since
other materials are available.

I can. Some people are allergic to the other materials, and amalgam
is cheap and durable. Shucks, I have two amalgam fillings.

Ok, let's ask everyone who knows they are allergic to the other
materials to choose something with mercury in it, in case the risk of
alzheimers, multiple sclerosis, or early death is more appealing to
them. [ref. Bates MN, Fawcett J, Garrett N, Cutress T, Kjellstrom T.
The beneficial effect of amalgam replacement on health in patients with
autoimmunity. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2004 Jun;25(3):211-8. PMID
15349088.]

PeterB

In article .com,
PeterB wrote:

David Wright wrote:
In article om,
PeterB wrote:

Clinton wrote:
PeterB wrote:
I could care less how people make a living, Markey. The issue is
whether a product or medical procedure puts the public at undue risk.
Forensic studies have linked mercury exposure to increased secretion of
amyloid protein and hyper-phosphorylation of a protein referred to as
Tau (1), which means mercury amalgam may be an undue risk for a small
percentage of people.

There is even a more basic problem. All amalgams look the same but
they are not of the same quality. A poorly constructed amalgam can
"come apart" over time giving off much more Hg. Some also interact
galvanically with nearby amalgams, or other dental metals which greatly
increases the Hg release.

Finally bacteria on the surface of amalgam can and do methylate the
Hg in some cases. A poorly constructed amalgam is actually porous and
can be invaded by bacteria which can undergo electrochemical reactions
with the amalgam. Methyl Hg is more more toxic

Right, and that exposure may be linked to neurological diseases. I
can't think of any reason to continue using mercury in dentistry, since
other materials are available.

I can. Some people are allergic to the other materials, and amalgam
is cheap and durable. Shucks, I have two amalgam fillings.

Ok, let's ask everyone who knows they are allergic to the other
materials to choose something with mercury in it, in case the risk of
alzheimers, multiple sclerosis, or early death is more appealing to
them. [ref. Bates MN, Fawcett J, Garrett N, Cutress T, Kjellstrom T.
The beneficial effect of amalgam replacement on health in patients with
autoimmunity. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2004 Jun;25(3):211-8. PMID
15349088.]

Not that the risk is anything to worry about. If it were, I would
have gotten some other material for my own fillings.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
I used to think that spammers should be hanged, but I've
changed my mind. They should be tortured first.

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

David Wright wrote:
In article om,
PeterB wrote:

Clinton wrote:
PeterB wrote:
I could care less how people make a living, Markey. The issue is
whether a product or medical procedure puts the public at undue risk.
Forensic studies have linked mercury exposure to increased secretion of
amyloid protein and hyper-phosphorylation of a protein referred to as
Tau (1), which means mercury amalgam may be an undue risk for a small
percentage of people.

There is even a more basic problem. All amalgams look the same but
they are not of the same quality. A poorly constructed amalgam can
"come apart" over time giving off much more Hg. Some also interact
galvanically with nearby amalgams, or other dental metals which greatly
increases the Hg release.

Finally bacteria on the surface of amalgam can and do methylate the
Hg in some cases. A poorly constructed amalgam is actually porous and
can be invaded by bacteria which can undergo electrochemical reactions
with the amalgam. Methyl Hg is more more toxic

Right, and that exposure may be linked to neurological diseases. I
can't think of any reason to continue using mercury in dentistry, since
other materials are available.

I can. Some people are allergic to the other materials, and amalgam
is cheap and durable. Shucks, I have two amalgam fillings.

Ok, let's ask everyone who knows they are allergic to the other
materials to choose something with mercury in it, in case the risk of
alzheimers, multiple sclerosis, or early death is more appealing to
them. [ref. Bates MN, Fawcett J, Garrett N, Cutress T, Kjellstrom T.
The beneficial effect of amalgam replacement on health in patients with
autoimmunity. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2004 Jun;25(3):211-8. PMID
15349088.]

Not that the risk is anything to worry about. If it were, I would
have gotten some other material for my own fillings.

If you were a pregnant female, would you choose mercury amalgam?

PeterB

In article .com,
wrote:

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

David Wright wrote:
In article om,
PeterB wrote:

Clinton wrote:
PeterB wrote:
I could care less how people make a living, Markey. The issue is
whether a product or medical procedure puts the public at undue risk.
Forensic studies have linked mercury exposure to increased
secretion of
amyloid protein and hyper-phosphorylation of a protein referred to as
Tau (1), which means mercury amalgam may be an undue risk for a small
percentage of people.

There is even a more basic problem. All amalgams look the same but
they are not of the same quality. A poorly constructed amalgam can
"come apart" over time giving off much more Hg. Some also interact
galvanically with nearby amalgams, or other dental metals which greatly
increases the Hg release.

Finally bacteria on the surface of amalgam can and do methylate the
Hg in some cases. A poorly constructed amalgam is actually porous and
can be invaded by bacteria which can undergo electrochemical reactions
with the amalgam. Methyl Hg is more more toxic

Right, and that exposure may be linked to neurological diseases. I
can't think of any reason to continue using mercury in dentistry, since
other materials are available.

I can. Some people are allergic to the other materials, and amalgam
is cheap and durable. Shucks, I have two amalgam fillings.

Ok, let's ask everyone who knows they are allergic to the other
materials to choose something with mercury in it, in case the risk of
alzheimers, multiple sclerosis, or early death is more appealing to
them. [ref. Bates MN, Fawcett J, Garrett N, Cutress T, Kjellstrom T.
The beneficial effect of amalgam replacement on health in patients with
autoimmunity. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2004 Jun;25(3):211-8. PMID
15349088.]

Not that the risk is anything to worry about. If it were, I would
have gotten some other material for my own fillings.

If you were a pregnant female, would you choose mercury amalgam?

There's no such thing as mercury amalgam.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
I used to think that spammers should be hanged, but I've
changed my mind. They should be tortured first.

"David Wright" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
wrote:

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

David Wright wrote:
In article om,
PeterB wrote:

Clinton wrote:
PeterB wrote:
I could care less how people make a living, Markey. The issue
is
whether a product or medical procedure puts the public at undue
risk.
Forensic studies have linked mercury exposure to increased
secretion of
amyloid protein and hyper-phosphorylation of a protein referred
to as
Tau (1), which means mercury amalgam may be an undue risk for a
small
percentage of people.

There is even a more basic problem. All amalgams look the same but
they are not of the same quality. A poorly constructed amalgam can
"come apart" over time giving off much more Hg. Some also interact
galvanically with nearby amalgams, or other dental metals which
greatly
increases the Hg release.

Finally bacteria on the surface of amalgam can and do methylate
the
Hg in some cases. A poorly constructed amalgam is actually porous
and
can be invaded by bacteria which can undergo electrochemical
reactions
with the amalgam. Methyl Hg is more more toxic

Right, and that exposure may be linked to neurological diseases. I
can't think of any reason to continue using mercury in dentistry,
since
other materials are available.

I can. Some people are allergic to the other materials, and amalgam
is cheap and durable. Shucks, I have two amalgam fillings.

Ok, let's ask everyone who knows they are allergic to the other
materials to choose something with mercury in it, in case the risk of
alzheimers, multiple sclerosis, or early death is more appealing to
them. [ref. Bates MN, Fawcett J, Garrett N, Cutress T, Kjellstrom T.
The beneficial effect of amalgam replacement on health in patients with
autoimmunity. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2004 Jun;25(3):211-8. PMID
15349088.]

Not that the risk is anything to worry about. If it were, I would
have gotten some other material for my own fillings.

If you were a pregnant female, would you choose mercury amalgam?

There's no such thing as mercury amalgam.

Wronger that Wright.

235 on Medline *mercury amalgam*

Some on Pub med, also.



-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
I used to think that spammers should be hanged, but I've
changed my mind. They should be tortured first.

Like Rich Shewmaker and Peter Bowditch. Spammers.