Resistivity of amalgams still a mystery

"jim beam" wrote in message
...
Bert Hickman wrote:
Keith P Walsh wrote:
On 10 Jun, 04:29, "Don Kelly" wrote:
----------------------------

Rest easy
The units are quite alright. They are an older form dating from the
time
resistivity was expressed as ohms per centimeter cube. This is not
ohms/cm^3
as it is based on the resistance between two faces of a cube which is
1cm on
each side. This was updated to ohms per meter cube with the same
constraint
(between faces of a 1m cube). However the older form is still used
often as
microhm-centimeters.
convert microhm-cm to ohm-m 1 microhm-cm =10^8 ohm-meter so now you
know
that Schnell and Phillips' efforts may be less dubious than your
understanding of electrical concepts.
--


Don,

Thank you for your reply.

Your proposed conversion presumes that Schnell and Phillips applied
the correct calculation to their measured resisitances in the first
place. And there is no way of knowing from the information provided in
the published paper that this is the case.

Do you not find it odd that the ONLY reference we can find giving
resistivity values for dental amalgams is a 40 year old paper where
the values are expressed in archaic units?

Why don't dental materials science textbooks EVER quote this property?
Neither in old units or new?

Keith P Walsh



Perhaps because its not important to the intended function(s) of the
material?


more to the point, wtf does it have to do with toxicology?

Care to cover that?

http://www.icnr.com/uam/hgcourse/M4/SciLit5.html

Physical and mental problems attributed to dental amalgam fillings:
a descriptive study of 99 self-referred patients compared with 272 controls
Malt UF, Nerdrum P, Oppedal B, Gundersen R, Holte M, Lone J (Department of
Psychosomatic and Behavioural Medicine, National Hospital, Oslo, Norway.)

"OBJECTIVE: The physical and mental symptomatology of 99 self-referred
patients complaining of multiple somatic and mental symptoms attributed to
dental amalgam fillings were compared with patients with known chronic
medical disorders seen in alternative (N = 93) and ordinary (N = 99) medical
family practices and patients with dental amalgam fillings (N = 80) seen in
an ordinary dental practice. METHOD: The assessments included written
self-reports, a l 31 -item somatic symptom checklist; Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire, the General Health Questionnaire, and Toronto Alexithymia
Scale. RESULTS: The dental amalgam sample reported significantly more
physical symptoms from all body regions. Self-reports suggested that 62%
suffered from a chronic anxiety disorder (generalized anxiety disorder or
panic). Forty-seven percent suffered from a major depression compared with
14% in the two clinical-comparison samples and none in the dental control
sample. Symptoms suggesting somatization disorder were found in 29% of the
dental amalgam sample compared with only one subject in the 272 comparison
subjects. One third of the dental amalgam patients reported symptoms of
chronic fatigue syndrome compared with none in the dental control sample and
only 2 and 6%, respectively, in the two clinical comparison samples. The
dental amalgam group reported higher mean neuroticism and lower lie scores
than the comparison groups. CONCLUSION: Self-referred patients with health
complaints attributed to dental amalgam are a heterogeneous group of
patients who suffer multiple symptoms and frequently have mental disorders.
There is a striking similarity with the multiple chemical sensitivity
syndrome."

Psychosom Med 1997 Jan;59(1):32-41

A US Government Document Admits That Mercury Vapors From Silver Fillings
Exceeds The Minimum Risk Levels Established By The US Department Of Health &
Human Services!

As always controversies exist when those who are in opposition are ignorant
of the facts. The facts are now clear. Buried in the 351 page document
"Toxicological Profile For Mercury (Update) May 1994 published by the US
Department of Health & Human Services the scientific truth has finally been
divulged. On page 125 of this document it states: "A report from the
Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs (CCEHRP)
of the Department of Health and Human Services determined that "measurement
of mercury in blood among subjects with and without amalgam restorations...
and subjects before and after amalgams were removed... provided the best
estimates of daily intake from amalgam dental restorations. These values are
in the range of 1-5 ug/day (Dept. of Human Health & Services 1993, page
III-29). The chronic inhalation Minimal Risk Level is 0.014 ug/m3....The
proposed acute Minimal Risk Level is 0.02 ug/m3. Thus, both MRL's are below
estimated levels from dental amalgams."

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

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....3ed602 0d47f3

Mercury In Dental Fillings Part 1

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....20d47f3?hl=en&

Apr 29 2005

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....3ed602 0d47f3

Mercury In Dental Fillings Part 2

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....fe5f3ff?hl=en&

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....72d3a0 29df20

Mercury Dental Fillings Summary And Conclusions

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....029df20?hl=en&


http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalno1.html

"Dental Amalgam Fillings" is the Number One Source of Mercury in People and
Exposure Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic mercury(vapor)
Bernard Windham(Ed.) - Chemical Engineer
Government agencies and medical studies have found that the number one
source of mercury in people is from dental amalgam fillings(ref 2-20,26,27).
Exposure from fillings amounts to from 50 to 90 percent of exposure, with
the average being about 80 % of total exposure (5-9,12-15,19,20,26,27). The
studies found that mercury amalgams are unstable due to mercury's low vapor
pressure and galvanic action(24), leaking mercury vapor continuously into
the lungs and saliva at levels exceeding health standards. The amount of
mercury released by a gold alloy bridge over amalgam over a 10 year period
was measured to be approx. 101 milligrams(mg) (60% of total) or 30
micrograms(ug) per day(21b), and other studies have found similar results
for amalgam fillings(21a,12,18,etc.).
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).
Note that the amount of mercury excreted in feces, as opposed to absorbed,
is much higher than most of these estimates of mercury absorbed by the body.
Daily excretion through feces amounted to from 30 to 190 ug of mercury,
being more variable than other paths(7). Other studies had similar
findings(9,12,17-19) . Most with several amalgams had daily fecal excretion
levels over 50 ug/day. The reference average level of mercury in feces(dry
weight) for those tested at Doctors Data Lab with amalgam fillings is .26
mg/kg, compared to the reference average level for those without amalgam
fillings of .02 mg/kg(27). (13 times that of the population w/o amalgam).
Other labs found similar results(27). This level of mercury gives a daily
excretion of over 30 micrograms per day. There is also evidence that amalgam
is also the largest source of methyl mercury in most people with amalgam,
based on studies and medical lab tests of those who have amalgam
replaced(26,27,12). Mercury vapor and inorganic mercury have been documented
to be methylated to methyl mercury by mouth and intestinal bacteria, along
with candida albicans and other methyl donars(28), so that even people who
don't eat fish but do have several amalgam fillings have high levels of
methyl mercury in saliva and blood.
Studies have consistently found modern high copper non gamma-two amalgams
have greater release of mercury vapor than conventional silver amalgams
(21-23,25). 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), 1999, "Integrated Risk
Information System, National Center for Invironmental Assessment,Cincinnati,
Ohio. www.epa.gov/ncea/iris.htm
(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) Kraub P, Deyhle M, Maier KH, Roller HD, "Field Study on the mercury
content of saliva", Heavy Metal Bull, vol.3, issue 1, April '96; & 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;& 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 , 1994, 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: Exposure and Health Effects from
Amalgam Fillings, 2000(over 800 references & 60,000 clinical replacement
cases).
(19) Sandborgh-Englund G, Elinder CG, Langworth S, Schutz A, Ekstrand J.
Mercury in biological fluids after amalgam removal. J Dent Res. 1998
Apr;77(4):615-24.
(20)H.V.Aposhian, Mobilization of mercury and arsenic in humans by sodium
2,3-dimercapto-1-propane sulfonate (DMPS).
Environ Health Perspect. 1998 Aug;106 Suppl 4:1017-25. ; & H.V. Aposhian et
al, FASEB J, 6: 2472-2476, 1992.
(21) (a)J Pleva, "Mercury- A Public Health Hazard", Reviews on Environmental
Health, 1994, 10:1-27, & J. Of Orthomol. Medicine 1989, 4:141- 148; & (b)
Jackson GH, Safety and Review Board of North Carolina, Quantitative analysis
of Hg,Ag,Sn ,Cu,Zn and trace elements in amalgam removed from an abutment
tooth underneeath a gol alloy bridge that had been in vivo for nine plus
years, www.ibiblio.org/amalgam/
(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.
(24) Momoi Y, et al; Measurement of glavanic current and electrical
potential in extracted human teeth", J Dent Res,65(12): 1441-1444; & Holland
RI, Galvanic currents between gold and amalgam. Scand J Dent Res, 1980,
88:269-72; & Wang Chen CP and Greener EH, A galvanic study of different
amalgams, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 1977, 4:23-7; & Lemons JE et al,
Interoral corosion resulting from coupling dental implants and restorative
metallic systems, Implant Dent, 1992, 1(2):107-112.
(25)P.E.Schneider et al, "Mercury release from Dispersalloy amalgam", IADR
Abstrats, #630, 1982; & N.Sarkar, "Amalgamtion reaction of Dispersalloy
Reexamined", IADR Abstracts #217, 1991; & N.K. Sarkar et al, IADR Abstracts
# 895, 1976; & R.S.Mateer et al, IADR Abstracts #240, 1977; & N.K.Sarkar et
al, IADR Abstracts, #358, 1978; & N.W. Rupp et al, IADR Abstracts # 356,
1979; & Kedici SP; Aksut AA; Kilicarslan MA; Bayramoglu G; Gokdemir K.
Corrosion behaviour of dental metals and alloys in different media. J Oral
Rehabil 1998 Oct;25(10):800-8
(26) Leistevuo J et al, Dental amalgam fillings and the amount of organic
mercury in human saliva. Caries Res 2001 May-Jun;35(3):163-6;
(27) Doctors Data Inc.; Fecal Elements Test; P.O.Box 111, West Chicago,
Illinois, 60186-0111; www.doctorsdata.com ; & Biospectron Lab, LMI, Lennart
Mansson International AB, (Medical Labs)
(28) Heintze et al,"Methylation of Mercury from dental amalgam and mercuric
chloride by oral Streptococci".,Scan. J. Dent. Res. 1983, 91:150-152; &
L.I.Liang et al, "Mercury reactions in the human mouth with dental amalgams"
Water, Air, and Soil pollution, 80:103-107.

http://www.satori-5.co.uk/word_artic...ial_of_ei.html

The Medical Denial of Environmental Illnesses

Harold E Buttram, MD

Introduction:

As a matter of personal opinion and observation, there is at present a
dichotomy of almost schizophrenic proportions between ongoing American
scientific research in the medical field, most of which takes place in
academic institutions and medical centers, and the genuine needs of
the American public.

The scope and direction of this research, most of which is funded by
the National Institute of Health (NIH), is of tremendous importance in
that it forms a source of guidelines and a scientific foundation for
the clinical practice of medicine. In other words, the clinical
practice of medicine as it exists today has been largely shaped by
decisions made in the NIH and other government health agencies in the
granting of research money.

This is a system which has existed since the 1930s, but there may be
serious misdirections which are proving to be very costly in terms of
the health and welfare of the American public, especially as applies
to its children.

There are two medical conditions from which it is predictable that
American society and economy will be strained to the breaking points
in coming years by overwhelming numbers of medical indigents unless
these conditions are addressed effectively and decisively in the very
near future.

The two conditions to which I refer are childhood autism and
environmental illness with chemical sensitivity, neither of which are
being recognized for their true nature by mainstream medicine because
of a misdirection of research funding in certain key areas, as will be
reviewed in the following:

Childhood Autism, Predominantly an Environmental Illness

In regards to childhood autism, a condition characterized by severe
mental regression, fifty or so years ago autism was so rare that many
pediatricians had never heard about it. At least this was the
experience of Dr. Bernard Rimland, founding director of Autism
Research Institute. In 1956 Dr. Rimland, whose Ph.D. is in research
psychology, had a son who was later found to be autistic.

In his annual DAN (Defeat Autism Now) conferences Dr. Rimland is fond
of telling the story about the early days with his son during which he
had great difficulty in finding a pediatrician who knew anything about
or who had ever seen a case of autism. How different it is now.
Childhood autism has become so prevalent that there are very few who
do not know of a family with an autistic child. Families with two
autistic children are not uncommon, and I personally have seen a
family in which all three of the family's children were autistic.

Latest statistics estimate that over one half million American
children are autistic, (1) and with numbers steadily growing, there is
no end in sight. It can be expected that treatments will improve the
outlook of these children, but as far as is known at present, many or
most of these will require custodial care for life, at an average cost
to society as much as three million dollars per child. (2)

In the opinion of this observer, the misdiagnoses in childhood autism
come not in the diagnosis of the condition itself, something that is
unmistakable once one has seen a few children with the condition, but
from a failure to recognize autism as predominantly an environmental
illness. (In this instance the term, "environmental illness," is used
to include illnesses brought about by exposures to commercial
chemicals and medical interventions as well infectious microorganisms
and other exposures from the natural environment).

This statement is based on a recent seminar on childhood autism held
in the Washington D.C. area as sponsored by the National Institute of
Health and other health agencies September 6th and 7th, 2001, at which
the largest portion of the meeting was devoted to areas of genetics
and neuropathology of autism. (3)

As related to childhood autism, it should be stressed that the field
of genetics involves a susceptibility to autism but, except in rare
instances, has nothing to do with its causes. The same could be said
about virtually all epidemic-type diseases, in which there will be
variability in genetic susceptibility.

By their very nature, epidemics always arise from environmental
sources of one type or another and not from genetic causes. Genetic
changes take place very slowly in an evolutionary scale over a period
of millennia and never with the rapid increases as seen today with
autism.

Major areas now under suspicion as being causally related to childhood
autism include childhood immunizations, (4) toxic environmental
chemicals, (5) commercial food processing, (6) and the overuse of
antibiotics. (7) The only possible way of salvaging the situation is
to find and modify the causes while at the same time doing the very
best we can to develop effective treatments for those already
afflicted with this condition.

Childhood Immunizations - Deficiencies in Basic Science and Safety
Guidelines

As reflected in a series of U.S. Congressional Hearings concerning
issues of vaccine safety which have taken place annually since 1999,
(4) there is now growing awareness of major deficiencies in safety
testing for current childhood immunizations.

A few examples will be given he

(a) Safety studies on vaccinations are limited to short time periods
only: several days to several weeks. There are no (none) long-term
(months or years) safety studies on any vaccination or immunization.

(b) In 1994 a special committee of the National Academy of Sciences
(Institute of Medicine) published a comprehensive review of the safety
of the hepatitis B vaccine. When the committee, which carries the
responsibility for determining the safety of vaccines by Congressional
mandate, investigated five possible and plausible adverse effects,
they were unable to come to conclusion for four of them because they
found that relevant safety research had not been done.

Furthermore, they found that serious "gaps and limitations" exist in
both the knowledge and infrastructure needed to study vaccine adverse
events. Among the 76 types of vaccine adverse events reviewed by the
IOM, the basic scientific evidence was inadequate to assess definitive
vaccine causality for 50 (66%). The IOM also noted that "if research
.... (is) not improved, future reviews of vaccine safety will be
similarly handicapped. (8)

(c) In an article published in Adverse Drug Reaction & Toxicology
Review, (9) researchers Andrew Wakefield and Scott Montgomery, who
have been investigating a possible causal relationship between the MMR
vaccine (measles-mumps-rubella) and the autism enterocolitis syndrome,
carefully reviewed inadequacies of the early pre-licensing trials of
the MMR vaccine with a maximum follow up of 28 days and even shorter
periods in some of the studies.

They stressed that such short periods of observation following the
vaccine were totally inadequate to detect delayed reactions, including
pervasive developmental delay (autism), immune deficiencies, and
inflammatory bowel disease, which are known from earlier published
reports to occur following both the natural measles infection and the
measles vaccine.

The most interesting feature of the Wakefield/Montgomery article was
that it was reviewed by four leading British authorities, all of whom
had previously held positions in the regulation and licensing of
medicines in the United Kingdom. (10) Taken as a whole, the reviewers
were supportive of the article, three highly so. Peter Fletcher,
formerly a senior professional medical officer for the Department of
Health wrote, "being extremely generous, evidence on safety (of the
MMR vaccine) was very thin."

Noting that single vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella already
existed, he argued, "caution should have ruled the day ... the
granting of a product license was definitely premature." Professor
Duncan Vere, former member of the Committee on the Safety of
Medicines, agreed that the periods for tests were too short. "In
almost every case," he wrote, "observation periods were too short to
include the onset of delayed neurological or other adverse events."

(d) In 1984 an intriguing study was reported in a little noted
letter-to-the-editor in the New England Journal of Medicine in which a
significant though temporary drop in T-helper lymphocytes was found in
11 healthy adults following routine tetanus booster immunizations.
(11) Special concern rests in the fact that, in 4 of the subjects, the
T-helper lymphocytes fell to levels seen in active AIDS patients.

If this was the result of a single vaccine in healthy adults, it is
sobering to think of the possible consequences of multiple vaccines
(19) within the first 6 or so months of life at latest count) given to
infants with their immature and vulnerable immune systems.
Unfortunately, other than clinical observation, we can only speculate
at these consequences, as the test has never been repeated.

Environmental Illness - Deficiencies in Basic Science and Safety
Measures

In my opinion, the second area of misdiagnosis is the common approach
of mainstream medicine in dealing with environmental illness and its
related condition of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS). In contrast
to the American Medical Association, which denies the existence of MCS
as a valid diagnosis, there is a group of physicians in the field of
environmental medicine who believe that millions of Americans are
being made ill and sensitized in various degrees to toxic airborne
chemicals from a class of chemicals known as volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).

(12) Illnesses brought about by breathing these chemicals inside
buildings are referred to as "The Sick Building Syndrome." A number of
official government and health agency publications have been issued on
this subject. (13-18) However, the major thrust of most of these
publications is to stress how little we actually know about the
effects of these chemicals and emphasize the over-riding need for
further safety research in this area.

As pointed out in the text, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, (National
Research Counsel, 1989), "about 70,000 chemicals are used in commerce,
of which several hundred are known to be neurotoxic. However, except
for pharmaceuticals, only 10% have had any testing at all for
neurotoxicity, and only a handful of these have been evaluated
thoroughly." (19)

Since the publication of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, the situation
has changed in one respect: There is now a substantial body of
literature dealing with occupational exposures to solvent-type
chemicals or VOCs, prominent among which are publications by Lisa
Morrow and coworkers at the University of Pittsburgh, several of which
are sited here. (20-23)

For the issue of multiple chemical sensitivity, on the other hand, it
is far different. Once again we are faced with major deficiencies in
safety-oriented studies on the effects of potentially toxic
environmental chemicals on the human system and of safety measures
that would have followed, had these studies been done. Basic science
in this area, at very best, has been fragmentary.

For this reason and this reason alone, evidence for support of the
diagnosis of MCS has not yet reached standards of scientific proof.
However, the fact that adequate research has not yet been done to
prove its existence, it does not follow that MCS has been disproved or
that it does not exist. Yet, this is the practical conclusion one
generally finds in mainstream medicine.

Based on my own experiences in many workman's compensation cases
involving airborne chemical exposures, the near universal response of
mainstream medicine has been to deny its existence.

As a result, many patients with more advanced forms of chemical
sensitivity are becoming like the lepers of ancient times, disabled
outcasts of society, and their numbers are growing larger by the day.
(24)

However, we are not entirely barren in this area. Though small in
number and preliminary in nature, there are a number of publications
tending to confirm a widespread presence of MCS in our population,
publications which can form a nucleus for further study. A few of
these are enumerated below:

(a) Two publications involving studies with SPECT brain scans have
shown impairments in brain functions resulting from chemical
exposures. (20,25)

(b) In a recent study of a group of veterans with the Persian Gulf War
Illness, an activated coagulation system was found with platelet
activation and fibrin deposits on the endothelial surfaces of blood
vessels, which resulted in a constriction of blood flow. The authors
concluded that heavy exposures to toxic chemicals during the Gulf War
in all probability were the underlying cause of the pro-coagulant
state, although other possible causes were also mentioned in the
article. (26)

(c) Studies of patients with chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia at the
Electron Microscopy Unit at the Adelaide Institute of Medical and
Veterinary Science, Australia demonstrated deformities in the red
blood cells (RBCs) of these patients described as dimpled spherocytes
(rather than the normal oval shapes of RBCs) along with increased
rigidity of the RBC membranes, these changes resulting in reduced flow
of the RBCs as a result of their deformities.

The article went on to point out that a great majority of these
patients had been exposed to environmental chemicals, some working in
chemical factories, others in wheat fields or orchards subject to
periodic pesticide/herbicide sprayings, many patients noting
deterioration following these exposures. (27)

(d) In an article by P Beaune and coworkers, the term "suicide
inactivation" was used to describe the mechanism whereby foreign toxic
chemicals may damage and cripple the enzyme systems necessary for
detoxification and elimination of toxic chemicals. (28) This now
thought or suspected of being a major factor in the pathogenesis of
MCS.

(e) Among those working in the field of environmental medicine, (12)
The Environmental Health Center in Dallas, Texas has always been
considered a major center of research in this field. Authored by
William J. Rea, M.D., much of the work of this center has been
recorded in a four-volume set of books with the simple title, Chemical
Sensitivity. (29)

Many of those familiar with this center believe it will in time be
accredited with being one of the earliest centers to fully recognize
the increasing impact of foreign chemicals on human health and to do
meaningful, systematic study in this area.

With reports such as these now in the scientific literature, further
documentation and confirmation of environmental illness and MCS as
valid diagnoses cannot be long in following, along with a more
realistic appraisal of their prevalence.

Finally, no treatment of environmental illness would be complete
without mention of possible ongoing damage being done to the
reproductive systems of both men and women when exposed to toxic
airborne chemicals during their reproductive years, (30) or of fetal
damage when women work in such conditions during their pregnancies.
(5) Although as yet largely theoretical, sooner or later these are
issues which must be addressed.

Conclusions:

In the late 1800s and early 1900s there was a time now referred to as
the golden age of medical diagnosis. Those were the times of Sir
William Osler of Johns Hopkins University, remembered as the father of
internal medicine, and of other stellar names of the times. In those
days doctors took time to listen to their patients, and equally
important, took very seriously the information given by the patient.

It was a time of clinical observation, when doctors believed what
their eyes told them and deduced diagnoses based on these
observations. It is no small coincidence that the mythical master of
observation and deduction, Sherlock Holmes, the creation of Sir A
Conan Doyle, was based on a physician that Doyle had known in his
student days.

How does this compare with today? Based on personal experience, very
few doctors listen to parents of autistic children, or if they listen
to them, very few believe what they are told by the parents. (31)

This is even truer for patients with environmental illness who, in a
majority of cases in my experience, are commonly referred to
psychiatrists or psychologists by their physicians, their physicians
telling them that their symptoms are psychosomatic or imagined.

However, in defense of doctors directly involved in care of the
public, it is doubtful that there has ever been a time with greater
demands on their time combined with greater economic/political
pressures intervening in the care of their patients than at present.
Most of them are doing the best they can under the circumstances.

I take great pride in being a medical doctor. I would not change
places with anyone in the world. But I also fear for the future of my
profession. Whether in the realm of nature or human affairs, all
things must remain relevant to survive. In the natural world all life
forms must adjust to their environment or perish.

In the healing professions, these professions must both recognize and
address the genuine needs of the public or stand in danger of passing
into the limbo of forgotten things. Actually I believe the medical
profession will survive, but to do so will require a higher level of
vision with issues surrounding childhood autism and environmental
illness than has been the norm until now.

For practicing physicians to recognize the nature of their patients'
problems and treat them properly, the physicians must be provided with
valid science by those engaged in research, science realistically
directed at the genuine health needs of the public.

http://www.rense.com/general32/mmr.htm

http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam

Amalgam / Mercury Dental Filling Toxicity

===

http://www.valleyadvocate.com/*articles/dental.html

[no longer available--see below]


Autopsy studies in Sweden, Germany and the United States have also
established
that people with amalgams have significantly more mercury in their brains
and
kidneys than those without, and the mercury concentration increases with the
number of amalgams. Furthermore, the World Health Organization has stated
that
amalgam fillings constitute the majority of mercury exposure for people with
amalgams -- more than every other mercury source combined. This finding has
been independently verified by the national insurance program Health Canada
and
by the National Institutes of Dental Research.

http://www.acnem.org/journal/12-2_de...afe-part_1.htm

http://www.jouglimlag.co.za/Journal%...0article .pdf

===

http://altmedangel.com/mercury.htm

13. Both Health Canada (1996) and the World Health Organization (1991)
consider dental amalgam to be the single largest source of mercury exposure
for the general public, with amalgam potentially contributing up to 84%
(WHO, 1991) of total daily intake of all forms of mercury from all sources.
Therefore, the level of exposure resulting from amalgam is not an issue of
contention. The WHO also noted that for mercury vapor, a specific
no-observed-effects level (NOEL) cannot be established i.e. no level of
mercury vapor has been found that can be considered harmless.

http://www.toxicteeth.org/lautenberg-letter.pdf

http://www.hallvtox.dircon.co.uk/amalgam.html

[That's for starters I have over 300 more].

That's because I was poisoned from amalgams!


this is just ignorant trolling. move along. nothing to see here.

"Jan Drew" wrote in message
t...

"jim beam" wrote in message
...
Bert Hickman wrote:
Keith P Walsh wrote:
On 10 Jun, 04:29, "Don Kelly" wrote:
----------------------------

Rest easy
The units are quite alright. They are an older form dating from the
time
resistivity was expressed as ohms per centimeter cube. This is not
ohms/cm^3
as it is based on the resistance between two faces of a cube which is
1cm on
each side. This was updated to ohms per meter cube with the same
constraint
(between faces of a 1m cube). However the older form is still used
often as
microhm-centimeters.
convert microhm-cm to ohm-m 1 microhm-cm =10^8 ohm-meter so now you
know
that Schnell and Phillips' efforts may be less dubious than your
understanding of electrical concepts.
--


Don,

Thank you for your reply.

Your proposed conversion presumes that Schnell and Phillips applied
the correct calculation to their measured resisitances in the first
place. And there is no way of knowing from the information provided in
the published paper that this is the case.

Do you not find it odd that the ONLY reference we can find giving
resistivity values for dental amalgams is a 40 year old paper where
the values are expressed in archaic units?

Why don't dental materials science textbooks EVER quote this property?
Neither in old units or new?

Keith P Walsh



Perhaps because its not important to the intended function(s) of the
material?


more to the point, wtf does it have to do with toxicology?

Care to cover that?

http://www.icnr.com/uam/hgcourse/M4/SciLit5.html

Physical and mental problems attributed to dental amalgam fillings:
a descriptive study of 99 self-referred patients compared with 272
controls
Malt UF, Nerdrum P, Oppedal B, Gundersen R, Holte M, Lone J (Department of
Psychosomatic and Behavioural Medicine, National Hospital, Oslo, Norway.)

"OBJECTIVE: The physical and mental symptomatology of 99 self-referred
patients complaining of multiple somatic and mental symptoms attributed to
dental amalgam fillings were compared with patients with known chronic
medical disorders seen in alternative (N = 93) and ordinary (N = 99)
medical family practices and patients with dental amalgam fillings (N =
80) seen in an ordinary dental practice. METHOD: The assessments included
written self-reports, a l 31 -item somatic symptom checklist; Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire, the General Health Questionnaire, and Toronto
Alexithymia Scale. RESULTS: The dental amalgam sample reported
significantly more physical symptoms from all body regions. Self-reports
suggested that 62% suffered from a chronic anxiety disorder (generalized
anxiety disorder or panic). Forty-seven percent suffered from a major
depression compared with 14% in the two clinical-comparison samples and
none in the dental control sample. Symptoms suggesting somatization
disorder were found in 29% of the dental amalgam sample compared with only
one subject in the 272 comparison subjects. One third of the dental
amalgam patients reported symptoms of chronic fatigue syndrome compared
with none in the dental control sample and only 2 and 6%, respectively, in
the two clinical comparison samples. The dental amalgam group reported
higher mean neuroticism and lower lie scores than the comparison groups.
CONCLUSION: Self-referred patients with health complaints attributed to
dental amalgam are a heterogeneous group of patients who suffer multiple
symptoms and frequently have mental disorders. There is a striking
similarity with the multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome."

Psychosom Med 1997 Jan;59(1):32-41

A US Government Document Admits That Mercury Vapors From Silver Fillings
Exceeds The Minimum Risk Levels Established By The US Department Of Health
& Human Services!

As always controversies exist when those who are in opposition are
ignorant of the facts. The facts are now clear. Buried in the 351 page
document "Toxicological Profile For Mercury (Update) May 1994 published by
the US Department of Health & Human Services the scientific truth has
finally been divulged. On page 125 of this document it states: "A report
from the Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs
(CCEHRP) of the Department of Health and Human Services determined that
"measurement of mercury in blood among subjects with and without amalgam
restorations... and subjects before and after amalgams were removed...
provided the best estimates of daily intake from amalgam dental
restorations. These values are in the range of 1-5 ug/day (Dept. of Human
Health & Services 1993, page III-29). The chronic inhalation Minimal Risk
Level is 0.014 ug/m3....The proposed acute Minimal Risk Level is 0.02
ug/m3. Thus, both MRL's are below estimated levels from dental amalgams."

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

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....3ed602 0d47f3

Mercury In Dental Fillings Part 1

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....20d47f3?hl=en&

Apr 29 2005

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....3ed602 0d47f3

Mercury In Dental Fillings Part 2

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....fe5f3ff?hl=en&

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....72d3a0 29df20

Mercury Dental Fillings Summary And Conclusions

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....029df20?hl=en&


http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalno1.html

"Dental Amalgam Fillings" is the Number One Source of Mercury in People
and
Exposure Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic mercury(vapor)
Bernard Windham(Ed.) - Chemical Engineer
Government agencies and medical studies have found that the number one
source of mercury in people is from dental amalgam fillings(ref
2-20,26,27). Exposure from fillings amounts to from 50 to 90 percent of
exposure, with the average being about 80 % of total exposure
(5-9,12-15,19,20,26,27). The studies found that mercury amalgams are
unstable due to mercury's low vapor pressure and galvanic action(24),
leaking mercury vapor continuously into the lungs and saliva at levels
exceeding health standards. The amount of mercury released by a gold alloy
bridge over amalgam over a 10 year period was measured to be approx. 101
milligrams(mg) (60% of total) or 30 micrograms(ug) per day(21b), and other
studies have found similar results for amalgam fillings(21a,12,18,etc.).
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).
Note that the amount of mercury excreted in feces, as opposed to absorbed,
is much higher than most of these estimates of mercury absorbed by the
body. Daily excretion through feces amounted to from 30 to 190 ug of
mercury, being more variable than other paths(7). Other studies had
similar findings(9,12,17-19) . Most with several amalgams had daily fecal
excretion levels over 50 ug/day. The reference average level of mercury in
feces(dry weight) for those tested at Doctors Data Lab with amalgam
fillings is .26 mg/kg, compared to the reference average level for those
without amalgam fillings of .02 mg/kg(27). (13 times that of the
population w/o amalgam). Other labs found similar results(27). This level
of mercury gives a daily excretion of over 30 micrograms per day. There is
also evidence that amalgam is also the largest source of methyl mercury in
most people with amalgam, based on studies and medical lab tests of those
who have amalgam replaced(26,27,12). Mercury vapor and inorganic mercury
have been documented to be methylated to methyl mercury by mouth and
intestinal bacteria, along with candida albicans and other methyl
donars(28), so that even people who don't eat fish but do have several
amalgam fillings have high levels of methyl mercury in saliva and blood.
Studies have consistently found modern high copper non gamma-two amalgams
have greater release of mercury vapor than conventional silver amalgams
(21-23,25). 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), 1999, "Integrated Risk
Information System, National Center for Invironmental
Assessment,Cincinnati, Ohio. www.epa.gov/ncea/iris.htm
(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) Kraub P, Deyhle M, Maier KH, Roller HD, "Field Study on the mercury
content of saliva", Heavy Metal Bull, vol.3, issue 1, April '96; & 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;& 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 , 1994, 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: Exposure and Health Effects from
Amalgam Fillings, 2000(over 800 references & 60,000 clinical replacement
cases).
(19) Sandborgh-Englund G, Elinder CG, Langworth S, Schutz A, Ekstrand J.
Mercury in biological fluids after amalgam removal. J Dent Res. 1998
Apr;77(4):615-24.
(20)H.V.Aposhian, Mobilization of mercury and arsenic in humans by sodium
2,3-dimercapto-1-propane sulfonate (DMPS).
Environ Health Perspect. 1998 Aug;106 Suppl 4:1017-25. ; & H.V. Aposhian
et al, FASEB J, 6: 2472-2476, 1992.
(21) (a)J Pleva, "Mercury- A Public Health Hazard", Reviews on
Environmental Health, 1994, 10:1-27, & J. Of Orthomol. Medicine 1989,
4:141- 148; & (b) Jackson GH, Safety and Review Board of North Carolina,
Quantitative analysis of Hg,Ag,Sn ,Cu,Zn and trace elements in amalgam
removed from an abutment tooth underneeath a gol alloy bridge that had
been in vivo for nine plus years, www.ibiblio.org/amalgam/
(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.
(24) Momoi Y, et al; Measurement of glavanic current and electrical
potential in extracted human teeth", J Dent Res,65(12): 1441-1444; &
Holland RI, Galvanic currents between gold and amalgam. Scand J Dent Res,
1980, 88:269-72; & Wang Chen CP and Greener EH, A galvanic study of
different amalgams, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 1977, 4:23-7; & Lemons
JE et al, Interoral corosion resulting from coupling dental implants and
restorative metallic systems, Implant Dent, 1992, 1(2):107-112.
(25)P.E.Schneider et al, "Mercury release from Dispersalloy amalgam", IADR
Abstrats, #630, 1982; & N.Sarkar, "Amalgamtion reaction of Dispersalloy
Reexamined", IADR Abstracts #217, 1991; & N.K. Sarkar et al, IADR
Abstracts # 895, 1976; & R.S.Mateer et al, IADR Abstracts #240, 1977; &
N.K.Sarkar et al, IADR Abstracts, #358, 1978; & N.W. Rupp et al, IADR
Abstracts # 356, 1979; & Kedici SP; Aksut AA; Kilicarslan MA; Bayramoglu
G; Gokdemir K. Corrosion behaviour of dental metals and alloys in
different media. J Oral Rehabil 1998 Oct;25(10):800-8
(26) Leistevuo J et al, Dental amalgam fillings and the amount of organic
mercury in human saliva. Caries Res 2001 May-Jun;35(3):163-6;
(27) Doctors Data Inc.; Fecal Elements Test; P.O.Box 111, West Chicago,
Illinois, 60186-0111; www.doctorsdata.com ; & Biospectron Lab, LMI,
Lennart Mansson International AB, (Medical Labs)
(28) Heintze et al,"Methylation of Mercury from dental amalgam and
mercuric chloride by oral Streptococci".,Scan. J. Dent. Res. 1983,
91:150-152; & L.I.Liang et al, "Mercury reactions in the human mouth with
dental amalgams" Water, Air, and Soil pollution, 80:103-107.

http://www.satori-5.co.uk/word_artic...ial_of_ei.html

The Medical Denial of Environmental Illnesses

Harold E Buttram, MD

Introduction:

As a matter of personal opinion and observation, there is at present a
dichotomy of almost schizophrenic proportions between ongoing American
scientific research in the medical field, most of which takes place in
academic institutions and medical centers, and the genuine needs of
the American public.

The scope and direction of this research, most of which is funded by
the National Institute of Health (NIH), is of tremendous importance in
that it forms a source of guidelines and a scientific foundation for
the clinical practice of medicine. In other words, the clinical
practice of medicine as it exists today has been largely shaped by
decisions made in the NIH and other government health agencies in the
granting of research money.

This is a system which has existed since the 1930s, but there may be
serious misdirections which are proving to be very costly in terms of
the health and welfare of the American public, especially as applies
to its children.

There are two medical conditions from which it is predictable that
American society and economy will be strained to the breaking points
in coming years by overwhelming numbers of medical indigents unless
these conditions are addressed effectively and decisively in the very
near future.

The two conditions to which I refer are childhood autism and
environmental illness with chemical sensitivity, neither of which are
being recognized for their true nature by mainstream medicine because
of a misdirection of research funding in certain key areas, as will be
reviewed in the following:

Childhood Autism, Predominantly an Environmental Illness

In regards to childhood autism, a condition characterized by severe
mental regression, fifty or so years ago autism was so rare that many
pediatricians had never heard about it. At least this was the
experience of Dr. Bernard Rimland, founding director of Autism
Research Institute. In 1956 Dr. Rimland, whose Ph.D. is in research
psychology, had a son who was later found to be autistic.

In his annual DAN (Defeat Autism Now) conferences Dr. Rimland is fond
of telling the story about the early days with his son during which he
had great difficulty in finding a pediatrician who knew anything about
or who had ever seen a case of autism. How different it is now.
Childhood autism has become so prevalent that there are very few who
do not know of a family with an autistic child. Families with two
autistic children are not uncommon, and I personally have seen a
family in which all three of the family's children were autistic.

Latest statistics estimate that over one half million American
children are autistic, (1) and with numbers steadily growing, there is
no end in sight. It can be expected that treatments will improve the
outlook of these children, but as far as is known at present, many or
most of these will require custodial care for life, at an average cost
to society as much as three million dollars per child. (2)

In the opinion of this observer, the misdiagnoses in childhood autism
come not in the diagnosis of the condition itself, something that is
unmistakable once one has seen a few children with the condition, but
from a failure to recognize autism as predominantly an environmental
illness. (In this instance the term, "environmental illness," is used
to include illnesses brought about by exposures to commercial
chemicals and medical interventions as well infectious microorganisms
and other exposures from the natural environment).

This statement is based on a recent seminar on childhood autism held
in the Washington D.C. area as sponsored by the National Institute of
Health and other health agencies September 6th and 7th, 2001, at which
the largest portion of the meeting was devoted to areas of genetics
and neuropathology of autism. (3)

As related to childhood autism, it should be stressed that the field
of genetics involves a susceptibility to autism but, except in rare
instances, has nothing to do with its causes. The same could be said
about virtually all epidemic-type diseases, in which there will be
variability in genetic susceptibility.

By their very nature, epidemics always arise from environmental
sources of one type or another and not from genetic causes. Genetic
changes take place very slowly in an evolutionary scale over a period
of millennia and never with the rapid increases as seen today with
autism.

Major areas now under suspicion as being causally related to childhood
autism include childhood immunizations, (4) toxic environmental
chemicals, (5) commercial food processing, (6) and the overuse of
antibiotics. (7) The only possible way of salvaging the situation is
to find and modify the causes while at the same time doing the very
best we can to develop effective treatments for those already
afflicted with this condition.

Childhood Immunizations - Deficiencies in Basic Science and Safety
Guidelines

As reflected in a series of U.S. Congressional Hearings concerning
issues of vaccine safety which have taken place annually since 1999,
(4) there is now growing awareness of major deficiencies in safety
testing for current childhood immunizations.

A few examples will be given he

(a) Safety studies on vaccinations are limited to short time periods
only: several days to several weeks. There are no (none) long-term
(months or years) safety studies on any vaccination or immunization.

(b) In 1994 a special committee of the National Academy of Sciences
(Institute of Medicine) published a comprehensive review of the safety
of the hepatitis B vaccine. When the committee, which carries the
responsibility for determining the safety of vaccines by Congressional
mandate, investigated five possible and plausible adverse effects,
they were unable to come to conclusion for four of them because they
found that relevant safety research had not been done.

Furthermore, they found that serious "gaps and limitations" exist in
both the knowledge and infrastructure needed to study vaccine adverse
events. Among the 76 types of vaccine adverse events reviewed by the
IOM, the basic scientific evidence was inadequate to assess definitive
vaccine causality for 50 (66%). The IOM also noted that "if research
... (is) not improved, future reviews of vaccine safety will be
similarly handicapped. (8)

(c) In an article published in Adverse Drug Reaction & Toxicology
Review, (9) researchers Andrew Wakefield and Scott Montgomery, who
have been investigating a possible causal relationship between the MMR
vaccine (measles-mumps-rubella) and the autism enterocolitis syndrome,
carefully reviewed inadequacies of the early pre-licensing trials of
the MMR vaccine with a maximum follow up of 28 days and even shorter
periods in some of the studies.

They stressed that such short periods of observation following the
vaccine were totally inadequate to detect delayed reactions, including
pervasive developmental delay (autism), immune deficiencies, and
inflammatory bowel disease, which are known from earlier published
reports to occur following both the natural measles infection and the
measles vaccine.

The most interesting feature of the Wakefield/Montgomery article was
that it was reviewed by four leading British authorities, all of whom
had previously held positions in the regulation and licensing of
medicines in the United Kingdom. (10) Taken as a whole, the reviewers
were supportive of the article, three highly so. Peter Fletcher,
formerly a senior professional medical officer for the Department of
Health wrote, "being extremely generous, evidence on safety (of the
MMR vaccine) was very thin."

Noting that single vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella already
existed, he argued, "caution should have ruled the day ... the
granting of a product license was definitely premature." Professor
Duncan Vere, former member of the Committee on the Safety of
Medicines, agreed that the periods for tests were too short. "In
almost every case," he wrote, "observation periods were too short to
include the onset of delayed neurological or other adverse events."

(d) In 1984 an intriguing study was reported in a little noted
letter-to-the-editor in the New England Journal of Medicine in which a
significant though temporary drop in T-helper lymphocytes was found in
11 healthy adults following routine tetanus booster immunizations.
(11) Special concern rests in the fact that, in 4 of the subjects, the
T-helper lymphocytes fell to levels seen in active AIDS patients.

If this was the result of a single vaccine in healthy adults, it is
sobering to think of the possible consequences of multiple vaccines
(19) within the first 6 or so months of life at latest count) given to
infants with their immature and vulnerable immune systems.
Unfortunately, other than clinical observation, we can only speculate
at these consequences, as the test has never been repeated.

Environmental Illness - Deficiencies in Basic Science and Safety
Measures

In my opinion, the second area of misdiagnosis is the common approach
of mainstream medicine in dealing with environmental illness and its
related condition of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS). In contrast
to the American Medical Association, which denies the existence of MCS
as a valid diagnosis, there is a group of physicians in the field of
environmental medicine who believe that millions of Americans are
being made ill and sensitized in various degrees to toxic airborne
chemicals from a class of chemicals known as volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).

(12) Illnesses brought about by breathing these chemicals inside
buildings are referred to as "The Sick Building Syndrome." A number of
official government and health agency publications have been issued on
this subject. (13-18) However, the major thrust of most of these
publications is to stress how little we actually know about the
effects of these chemicals and emphasize the over-riding need for
further safety research in this area.

As pointed out in the text, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, (National
Research Counsel, 1989), "about 70,000 chemicals are used in commerce,
of which several hundred are known to be neurotoxic. However, except
for pharmaceuticals, only 10% have had any testing at all for
neurotoxicity, and only a handful of these have been evaluated
thoroughly." (19)

Since the publication of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, the situation
has changed in one respect: There is now a substantial body of
literature dealing with occupational exposures to solvent-type
chemicals or VOCs, prominent among which are publications by Lisa
Morrow and coworkers at the University of Pittsburgh, several of which
are sited here. (20-23)

For the issue of multiple chemical sensitivity, on the other hand, it
is far different. Once again we are faced with major deficiencies in
safety-oriented studies on the effects of potentially toxic
environmental chemicals on the human system and of safety measures
that would have followed, had these studies been done. Basic science
in this area, at very best, has been fragmentary.

For this reason and this reason alone, evidence for support of the
diagnosis of MCS has not yet reached standards of scientific proof.
However, the fact that adequate research has not yet been done to
prove its existence, it does not follow that MCS has been disproved or
that it does not exist. Yet, this is the practical conclusion one
generally finds in mainstream medicine.

Based on my own experiences in many workman's compensation cases
involving airborne chemical exposures, the near universal response of
mainstream medicine has been to deny its existence.

As a result, many patients with more advanced forms of chemical
sensitivity are becoming like the lepers of ancient times, disabled
outcasts of society, and their numbers are growing larger by the day.
(24)

However, we are not entirely barren in this area. Though small in
number and preliminary in nature, there are a number of publications
tending to confirm a widespread presence of MCS in our population,
publications which can form a nucleus for further study. A few of
these are enumerated below:

(a) Two publications involving studies with SPECT brain scans have
shown impairments in brain functions resulting from chemical
exposures. (20,25)

(b) In a recent study of a group of veterans with the Persian Gulf War
Illness, an activated coagulation system was found with platelet
activation and fibrin deposits on the endothelial surfaces of blood
vessels, which resulted in a constriction of blood flow. The authors
concluded that heavy exposures to toxic chemicals during the Gulf War
in all probability were the underlying cause of the pro-coagulant
state, although other possible causes were also mentioned in the
article. (26)

(c) Studies of patients with chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia at the
Electron Microscopy Unit at the Adelaide Institute of Medical and
Veterinary Science, Australia demonstrated deformities in the red
blood cells (RBCs) of these patients described as dimpled spherocytes
(rather than the normal oval shapes of RBCs) along with increased
rigidity of the RBC membranes, these changes resulting in reduced flow
of the RBCs as a result of their deformities.

The article went on to point out that a great majority of these
patients had been exposed to environmental chemicals, some working in
chemical factories, others in wheat fields or orchards subject to
periodic pesticide/herbicide sprayings, many patients noting
deterioration following these exposures. (27)

(d) In an article by P Beaune and coworkers, the term "suicide
inactivation" was used to describe the mechanism whereby foreign toxic
chemicals may damage and cripple the enzyme systems necessary for
detoxification and elimination of toxic chemicals. (28) This now
thought or suspected of being a major factor in the pathogenesis of
MCS.

(e) Among those working in the field of environmental medicine, (12)
The Environmental Health Center in Dallas, Texas has always been
considered a major center of research in this field. Authored by
William J. Rea, M.D., much of the work of this center has been
recorded in a four-volume set of books with the simple title, Chemical
Sensitivity. (29)

Many of those familiar with this center believe it will in time be
accredited with being one of the earliest centers to fully recognize
the increasing impact of foreign chemicals on human health and to do
meaningful, systematic study in this area.

With reports such as these now in the scientific literature, further
documentation and confirmation of environmental illness and MCS as
valid diagnoses cannot be long in following, along with a more
realistic appraisal of their prevalence.

Finally, no treatment of environmental illness would be complete
without mention of possible ongoing damage being done to the
reproductive systems of both men and women when exposed to toxic
airborne chemicals during their reproductive years, (30) or of fetal
damage when women work in such conditions during their pregnancies.
(5) Although as yet largely theoretical, sooner or later these are
issues which must be addressed.

Conclusions:

In the late 1800s and early 1900s there was a time now referred to as
the golden age of medical diagnosis. Those were the times of Sir
William Osler of Johns Hopkins University, remembered as the father of
internal medicine, and of other stellar names of the times. In those
days doctors took time to listen to their patients, and equally
important, took very seriously the information given by the patient.

It was a time of clinical observation, when doctors believed what
their eyes told them and deduced diagnoses based on these
observations. It is no small coincidence that the mythical master of
observation and deduction, Sherlock Holmes, the creation of Sir A
Conan Doyle, was based on a physician that Doyle had known in his
student days.

How does this compare with today? Based on personal experience, very
few doctors listen to parents of autistic children, or if they listen
to them, very few believe what they are told by the parents. (31)

This is even truer for patients with environmental illness who, in a
majority of cases in my experience, are commonly referred to
psychiatrists or psychologists by their physicians, their physicians
telling them that their symptoms are psychosomatic or imagined.

However, in defense of doctors directly involved in care of the
public, it is doubtful that there has ever been a time with greater
demands on their time combined with greater economic/political
pressures intervening in the care of their patients than at present.
Most of them are doing the best they can under the circumstances.

I take great pride in being a medical doctor. I would not change
places with anyone in the world. But I also fear for the future of my
profession. Whether in the realm of nature or human affairs, all
things must remain relevant to survive. In the natural world all life
forms must adjust to their environment or perish.

In the healing professions, these professions must both recognize and
address the genuine needs of the public or stand in danger of passing
into the limbo of forgotten things. Actually I believe the medical
profession will survive, but to do so will require a higher level of
vision with issues surrounding childhood autism and environmental
illness than has been the norm until now.

For practicing physicians to recognize the nature of their patients'
problems and treat them properly, the physicians must be provided with
valid science by those engaged in research, science realistically
directed at the genuine health needs of the public.

http://www.rense.com/general32/mmr.htm

http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam

Amalgam / Mercury Dental Filling Toxicity

===

http://www.valleyadvocate.com/*articles/dental.html

[no longer available--see below]


Autopsy studies in Sweden, Germany and the United States have also
established
that people with amalgams have significantly more mercury in their brains
and
kidneys than those without, and the mercury concentration increases with
the
number of amalgams. Furthermore, the World Health Organization has stated
that
amalgam fillings constitute the majority of mercury exposure for people
with
amalgams -- more than every other mercury source combined. This finding
has
been independently verified by the national insurance program Health
Canada and
by the National Institutes of Dental Research.

http://www.acnem.org/journal/12-2_de...afe-part_1.htm

http://www.jouglimlag.co.za/Journal%...0article .pdf

===

http://altmedangel.com/mercury.htm

13. Both Health Canada (1996) and the World Health Organization (1991)
consider dental amalgam to be the single largest source of mercury
exposure for the general public, with amalgam potentially contributing up
to 84% (WHO, 1991) of total daily intake of all forms of mercury from all
sources. Therefore, the level of exposure resulting from amalgam is not an
issue of contention. The WHO also noted that for mercury vapor, a specific
no-observed-effects level (NOEL) cannot be established i.e. no level of
mercury vapor has been found that can be considered harmless.

http://www.toxicteeth.org/lautenberg-letter.pdf

http://www.hallvtox.dircon.co.uk/amalgam.html

[That's for starters I have over 300 more].

That's because I was poisoned from amalgams!


this is just ignorant trolling. move along. nothing to see here.

Jan Drew wrote:
"jim beam" wrote in message
...
Bert Hickman wrote:
Keith P Walsh wrote:
On 10 Jun, 04:29, "Don Kelly" wrote:
----------------------------

Rest easy
The units are quite alright. They are an older form dating from the
time
resistivity was expressed as ohms per centimeter cube. This is not
ohms/cm^3
as it is based on the resistance between two faces of a cube which is
1cm on
each side. This was updated to ohms per meter cube with the same
constraint
(between faces of a 1m cube). However the older form is still used
often as
microhm-centimeters.
convert microhm-cm to ohm-m 1 microhm-cm =10^8 ohm-meter so now you
know
that Schnell and Phillips' efforts may be less dubious than your
understanding of electrical concepts.
--

Don,

Thank you for your reply.

Your proposed conversion presumes that Schnell and Phillips applied
the correct calculation to their measured resisitances in the first
place. And there is no way of knowing from the information provided in
the published paper that this is the case.

Do you not find it odd that the ONLY reference we can find giving
resistivity values for dental amalgams is a 40 year old paper where
the values are expressed in archaic units?

Why don't dental materials science textbooks EVER quote this property?
Neither in old units or new?

Keith P Walsh


Perhaps because its not important to the intended function(s) of the
material?

more to the point, wtf does it have to do with toxicology?

Care to cover that?

snip

toxicity hasn't a single damned thing to do with resistivity.

"Jan Drew" wrote:

CONCLUSION: Self-referred patients with health
complaints attributed to dental amalgam are a heterogeneous group of
patients who suffer multiple symptoms and frequently have mental disorders.
There is a striking similarity with the multiple chemical sensitivity
syndrome."

And published in a journal dealing with psychosomatic conditions.

Thanks for the heads-up, Jan. As we suspected, people claiming damage
from tooth fillings "frequently have mental disorders".

Do you ever read what you post?
--
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

Peter Bowditch wrote:
"Jan Drew" wrote:

CONCLUSION: Self-referred patients with health
complaints attributed to dental amalgam are a heterogeneous group of
patients who suffer multiple symptoms and frequently have mental disorders.
There is a striking similarity with the multiple chemical sensitivity
syndrome."

And published in a journal dealing with psychosomatic conditions.

Thanks for the heads-up, Jan. As we suspected, people claiming damage
from tooth fillings "frequently have mental disorders".

funny!



Do you ever read what you post?

In sci.physics.electromag Jan Drew wrote:


Restore the answer to a question.
snip enormous pile of crap

Where in that huge pile of crap did it say anything about RESISTIVITY?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

"jim beam" wrote in message
t...
Jan Drew wrote:
"jim beam" wrote in message
...
Bert Hickman wrote:
Keith P Walsh wrote:
On 10 Jun, 04:29, "Don Kelly" wrote:
----------------------------

Rest easy
The units are quite alright. They are an older form dating from the
time
resistivity was expressed as ohms per centimeter cube. This is not
ohms/cm^3
as it is based on the resistance between two faces of a cube which is
1cm on
each side. This was updated to ohms per meter cube with the same
constraint
(between faces of a 1m cube). However the older form is still used
often as
microhm-centimeters.
convert microhm-cm to ohm-m 1 microhm-cm =10^8 ohm-meter so now you
know
that Schnell and Phillips' efforts may be less dubious than your
understanding of electrical concepts.
--

Don,

Thank you for your reply.

Your proposed conversion presumes that Schnell and Phillips applied
the correct calculation to their measured resisitances in the first
place. And there is no way of knowing from the information provided in
the published paper that this is the case.

Do you not find it odd that the ONLY reference we can find giving
resistivity values for dental amalgams is a 40 year old paper where
the values are expressed in archaic units?

Why don't dental materials science textbooks EVER quote this property?
Neither in old units or new?

Keith P Walsh


Perhaps because its not important to the intended function(s) of the
material?

more to the point, wtf does it have to do with toxicology?

Care to cover that?

snip

Restore the answer to a question.

http://www.icnr.com/uam/hgcourse/M4/SciLit5.html


Physical and mental problems attributed to dental amalgam fillings:
a descriptive study of 99 self-referred patients compared with 272 controls
Malt UF, Nerdrum P, Oppedal B, Gundersen R, Holte M, Lone J (Department of
Psychosomatic and Behavioural Medicine, National Hospital, Oslo, Norway.)


"OBJECTIVE: The physical and mental symptomatology of 99 self-referred
patients complaining of multiple somatic and mental symptoms attributed to
dental amalgam fillings were compared with patients with known chronic
medical disorders seen in alternative (N = 93) and ordinary (N = 99) medical
family practices and patients with dental amalgam fillings (N = 80) seen in
an ordinary dental practice. METHOD: The assessments included written
self-reports, a l 31 -item somatic symptom checklist; Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire, the General Health Questionnaire, and Toronto Alexithymia
Scale. RESULTS: The dental amalgam sample reported significantly more
physical symptoms from all body regions. Self-reports suggested that 62%
suffered from a chronic anxiety disorder (generalized anxiety disorder or
panic). Forty-seven percent suffered from a major depression compared with
14% in the two clinical-comparison samples and none in the dental control
sample. Symptoms suggesting somatization disorder were found in 29% of the
dental amalgam sample compared with only one subject in the 272 comparison
subjects. One third of the dental amalgam patients reported symptoms of
chronic fatigue syndrome compared with none in the dental control sample and
only 2 and 6%, respectively, in the two clinical comparison samples. The
dental amalgam group reported higher mean neuroticism and lower lie scores
than the comparison groups. CONCLUSION: Self-referred patients with health
complaints attributed to dental amalgam are a heterogeneous group of
patients who suffer multiple symptoms and frequently have mental disorders.
There is a striking similarity with the multiple chemical sensitivity
syndrome."


Psychosom Med 1997 Jan;59(1):32-41


A US Government Document Admits That Mercury Vapors From Silver Fillings
Exceeds The Minimum Risk Levels Established By The US Department Of Health &
Human Services!


As always controversies exist when those who are in opposition are ignorant
of the facts. The facts are now clear. Buried in the 351 page document
"Toxicological Profile For Mercury (Update) May 1994 published by the US
Department of Health & Human Services the scientific truth has finally been
divulged. On page 125 of this document it states: "A report from the
Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs (CCEHRP)
of the Department of Health and Human Services determined that "measurement
of mercury in blood among subjects with and without amalgam restorations...
and subjects before and after amalgams were removed... provided the best
estimates of daily intake from amalgam dental restorations. These values are
in the range of 1-5 ug/day (Dept. of Human Health & Services 1993, page
III-29). The chronic inhalation Minimal Risk Level is 0.014 ug/m3....The
proposed acute Minimal Risk Level is 0.02 ug/m3. Thus, both MRL's are below
estimated levels from dental amalgams."


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


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....browse_frm/thr...


Mercury In Dental Fillings Part 1


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....msg/eb7f3ed602...


Apr 29 2005


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....browse_frm/thr...


Mercury In Dental Fillings Part 2


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....msg/b969b4deff...


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....browse_frm/thr...


Mercury Dental Fillings Summary And Conclusions


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....msg/d62f72d3a0...


http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalno1.html


"Dental Amalgam Fillings" is the Number One Source of Mercury in People and
Exposure Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic mercury(vapor)
Bernard Windham(Ed.) - Chemical Engineer
Government agencies and medical studies have found that the number one
source of mercury in people is from dental amalgam fillings(ref 2-20,26,27).
Exposure from fillings amounts to from 50 to 90 percent of exposure, with
the average being about 80 % of total exposure (5-9,12-15,19,20,26,27). The
studies found that mercury amalgams are unstable due to mercury's low vapor
pressure and galvanic action(24), leaking mercury vapor continuously into
the lungs and saliva at levels exceeding health standards. The amount of
mercury released by a gold alloy bridge over amalgam over a 10 year period
was measured to be approx. 101 milligrams(mg) (60% of total) or 30
micrograms(ug) per day(21b), and other studies have found similar results
for amalgam fillings(21a,12,18,etc.).
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).
Note that the amount of mercury excreted in feces, as opposed to absorbed,
is much higher than most of these estimates of mercury absorbed by the body.
Daily excretion through feces amounted to from 30 to 190 ug of mercury,
being more variable than other paths(7). Other studies had similar
findings(9,12,17-19) . Most with several amalgams had daily fecal excretion
levels over 50 ug/day. The reference average level of mercury in feces(dry
weight) for those tested at Doctors Data Lab with amalgam fillings is .26
mg/kg, compared to the reference average level for those without amalgam
fillings of .02 mg/kg(27). (13 times that of the population w/o amalgam).
Other labs found similar results(27). This level of mercury gives a daily
excretion of over 30 micrograms per day. There is also evidence that amalgam
is also the largest source of methyl mercury in most people with amalgam,
based on studies and medical lab tests of those who have amalgam
replaced(26,27,12). Mercury vapor and inorganic mercury have been documented
to be methylated to methyl mercury by mouth and intestinal bacteria, along
with candida albicans and other methyl donars(28), so that even people who
don't eat fish but do have several amalgam fillings have high levels of
methyl mercury in saliva and blood.
Studies have consistently found modern high copper non gamma-two amalgams
have greater release of mercury vapor than conventional silver amalgams
(21-23,25). 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), 1999, "Integrated Risk
Information System, National Center for Invironmental Assessment,Cincinnati,
Ohio. www.epa.gov/ncea/iris.htm
(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) Kraub P, Deyhle M, Maier KH, Roller HD, "Field Study on the mercury
content of saliva", Heavy Metal Bull, vol.3, issue 1, April '96; & 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;& 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 , 1994, 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: Exposure and Health Effects from
Amalgam Fillings, 2000(over 800 references & 60,000 clinical replacement
cases).
(19) Sandborgh-Englund G, Elinder CG, Langworth S, Schutz A, Ekstrand J.
Mercury in biological fluids after amalgam removal. J Dent Res. 1998
Apr;77(4):615-24.
(20)H.V.Aposhian, Mobilization of mercury and arsenic in humans by sodium
2,3-dimercapto-1-propane sulfonate (DMPS).
Environ Health Perspect. 1998 Aug;106 Suppl 4:1017-25. ; & H.V. Aposhian et
al, FASEB J, 6: 2472-2476, 1992.
(21) (a)J Pleva, "Mercury- A Public Health Hazard", Reviews on Environmental
Health, 1994, 10:1-27, & J. Of Orthomol. Medicine 1989, 4:141- 148; & (b)
Jackson GH, Safety and Review Board of North Carolina, Quantitative analysis
of Hg,Ag,Sn ,Cu,Zn and trace elements in amalgam removed from an abutment
tooth underneeath a gol alloy bridge that had been in vivo for nine plus
years, www.ibiblio.org/amalgam/
(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.
(24) Momoi Y, et al; Measurement of glavanic current and electrical
potential in extracted human teeth", J Dent Res,65(12): 1441-1444; & Holland
RI, Galvanic currents between gold and amalgam. Scand J Dent Res, 1980,
88:269-72; & Wang Chen CP and Greener EH, A galvanic study of different
amalgams, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 1977, 4:23-7; & Lemons JE et al,
Interoral corosion resulting from coupling dental implants and restorative
metallic systems, Implant Dent, 1992, 1(2):107-112.
(25)P.E.Schneider et al, "Mercury release from Dispersalloy amalgam", IADR
Abstrats, #630, 1982; & N.Sarkar, "Amalgamtion reaction of Dispersalloy
Reexamined", IADR Abstracts #217, 1991; & N.K. Sarkar et al, IADR Abstracts
# 895, 1976; & R.S.Mateer et al, IADR Abstracts #240, 1977; & N.K.Sarkar et
al, IADR Abstracts, #358, 1978; & N.W. Rupp et al, IADR Abstracts # 356,
1979; & Kedici SP; Aksut AA; Kilicarslan MA; Bayramoglu G; Gokdemir K.
Corrosion behaviour of dental metals and alloys in different media. J Oral
Rehabil 1998 Oct;25(10):800-8
(26) Leistevuo J et al, Dental amalgam fillings and the amount of organic
mercury in human saliva. Caries Res 2001 May-Jun;35(3):163-6;
(27) Doctors Data Inc.; Fecal Elements Test; P.O.Box 111, West Chicago,
Illinois, 60186-0111; www.doctorsdata.com ; & Biospectron Lab, LMI, Lennart
Mansson International AB, (Medical Labs)
(28) Heintze et al,"Methylation of Mercury from dental amalgam and mercuric
chloride by oral Streptococci".,Scan. J. Dent. Res. 1983, 91:150-152; &
L.I.Liang et al, "Mercury reactions in the human mouth with dental amalgams"
Water, Air, and Soil pollution, 80:103-107.


http://www.satori-5.co.uk/word_artic...ial_of_ei.html


The Medical Denial of Environmental Illnesses


Harold E Buttram, MD


Introduction:


As a matter of personal opinion and observation, there is at present a
dichotomy of almost schizophrenic proportions between ongoing American
scientific research in the medical field, most of which takes place in
academic institutions and medical centers, and the genuine needs of
the American public.


The scope and direction of this research, most of which is funded by
the National Institute of Health (NIH), is of tremendous importance in
that it forms a source of guidelines and a scientific foundation for
the clinical practice of medicine. In other words, the clinical
practice of medicine as it exists today has been largely shaped by
decisions made in the NIH and other government health agencies in the
granting of research money.


This is a system which has existed since the 1930s, but there may be
serious misdirections which are proving to be very costly in terms of
the health and welfare of the American public, especially as applies
to its children.


There are two medical conditions from which it is predictable that
American society and economy will be strained to the breaking points
in coming years by overwhelming numbers of medical indigents unless
these conditions are addressed effectively and decisively in the very
near future.


The two conditions to which I refer are childhood autism and
environmental illness with chemical sensitivity, neither of which are
being recognized for their true nature by mainstream medicine because
of a misdirection of research funding in certain key areas, as will be
reviewed in the following:


Childhood Autism, Predominantly an Environmental Illness


In regards to childhood autism, a condition characterized by severe
mental regression, fifty or so years ago autism was so rare that many
pediatricians had never heard about it. At least this was the
experience of Dr. Bernard Rimland, founding director of Autism
Research Institute. In 1956 Dr. Rimland, whose Ph.D. is in research
psychology, had a son who was later found to be autistic.


In his annual DAN (Defeat Autism Now) conferences Dr. Rimland is fond
of telling the story about the early days with his son during which he
had great difficulty in finding a pediatrician who knew anything about
or who had ever seen a case of autism. How different it is now.
Childhood autism has become so prevalent that there are very few who
do not know of a family with an autistic child. Families with two
autistic children are not uncommon, and I personally have seen a
family in which all three of the family's children were autistic.


Latest statistics estimate that over one half million American
children are autistic, (1) and with numbers steadily growing, there is
no end in sight. It can be expected that treatments will improve the
outlook of these children, but as far as is known at present, many or
most of these will require custodial care for life, at an average cost
to society as much as three million dollars per child. (2)


In the opinion of this observer, the misdiagnoses in childhood autism
come not in the diagnosis of the condition itself, something that is
unmistakable once one has seen a few children with the condition, but
from a failure to recognize autism as predominantly an environmental
illness. (In this instance the term, "environmental illness," is used
to include illnesses brought about by exposures to commercial
chemicals and medical interventions as well infectious microorganisms
and other exposures from the natural environment).


This statement is based on a recent seminar on childhood autism held
in the Washington D.C. area as sponsored by the National Institute of
Health and other health agencies September 6th and 7th, 2001, at which
the largest portion of the meeting was devoted to areas of genetics
and neuropathology of autism. (3)


As related to childhood autism, it should be stressed that the field
of genetics involves a susceptibility to autism but, except in rare
instances, has nothing to do with its causes. The same could be said
about virtually all epidemic-type diseases, in which there will be
variability in genetic susceptibility.


By their very nature, epidemics always arise from environmental
sources of one type or another and not from genetic causes. Genetic
changes take place very slowly in an evolutionary scale over a period
of millennia and never with the rapid increases as seen today with
autism.


Major areas now under suspicion as being causally related to childhood
autism include childhood immunizations, (4) toxic environmental
chemicals, (5) commercial food processing, (6) and the overuse of
antibiotics. (7) The only possible way of salvaging the situation is
to find and modify the causes while at the same time doing the very
best we can to develop effective treatments for those already
afflicted with this condition.


Childhood Immunizations - Deficiencies in Basic Science and Safety
Guidelines


As reflected in a series of U.S. Congressional Hearings concerning
issues of vaccine safety which have taken place annually since 1999,
(4) there is now growing awareness of major deficiencies in safety
testing for current childhood immunizations.


A few examples will be given he


(a) Safety studies on vaccinations are limited to short time periods
only: several days to several weeks. There are no (none) long-term
(months or years) safety studies on any vaccination or immunization.


(b) In 1994 a special committee of the National Academy of Sciences
(Institute of Medicine) published a comprehensive review of the safety
of the hepatitis B vaccine. When the committee, which carries the
responsibility for determining the safety of vaccines by Congressional
mandate, investigated five possible and plausible adverse effects,
they were unable to come to conclusion for four of them because they
found that relevant safety research had not been done.


Furthermore, they found that serious "gaps and limitations" exist in
both the knowledge and infrastructure needed to study vaccine adverse
events. Among the 76 types of vaccine adverse events reviewed by the
IOM, the basic scientific evidence was inadequate to assess definitive
vaccine causality for 50 (66%). The IOM also noted that "if research
.... (is) not improved, future reviews of vaccine safety will be
similarly handicapped. (8)


(c) In an article published in Adverse Drug Reaction & Toxicology
Review, (9) researchers Andrew Wakefield and Scott Montgomery, who
have been investigating a possible causal relationship between the MMR
vaccine (measles-mumps-rubella) and the autism enterocolitis syndrome,
carefully reviewed inadequacies of the early pre-licensing trials of
the MMR vaccine with a maximum follow up of 28 days and even shorter
periods in some of the studies.


They stressed that such short periods of observation following the
vaccine were totally inadequate to detect delayed reactions, including
pervasive developmental delay (autism), immune deficiencies, and
inflammatory bowel disease, which are known from earlier published
reports to occur following both the natural measles infection and the
measles vaccine.


The most interesting feature of the Wakefield/Montgomery article was
that it was reviewed by four leading British authorities, all of whom
had previously held positions in the regulation and licensing of
medicines in the United Kingdom. (10) Taken as a whole, the reviewers
were supportive of the article, three highly so. Peter Fletcher,
formerly a senior professional medical officer for the Department of
Health wrote, "being extremely generous, evidence on safety (of the
MMR vaccine) was very thin."


Noting that single vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella already
existed, he argued, "caution should have ruled the day ... the
granting of a product license was definitely premature." Professor
Duncan Vere, former member of the Committee on the Safety of
Medicines, agreed that the periods for tests were too short. "In
almost every case," he wrote, "observation periods were too short to
include the onset of delayed neurological or other adverse events."


(d) In 1984 an intriguing study was reported in a little noted
letter-to-the-editor in the New England Journal of Medicine in which a
significant though temporary drop in T-helper lymphocytes was found in
11 healthy adults following routine tetanus booster immunizations.
(11) Special concern rests in the fact that, in 4 of the subjects, the
T-helper lymphocytes fell to levels seen in active AIDS patients.


If this was the result of a single vaccine in healthy adults, it is
sobering to think of the possible consequences of multiple vaccines
(19) within the first 6 or so months of life at latest count) given to
infants with their immature and vulnerable immune systems.
Unfortunately, other than clinical observation, we can only speculate
at these consequences, as the test has never been repeated.


Environmental Illness - Deficiencies in Basic Science and Safety
Measures


In my opinion, the second area of misdiagnosis is the common approach
of mainstream medicine in dealing with environmental illness and its
related condition of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS). In contrast
to the American Medical Association, which denies the existence of MCS
as a valid diagnosis, there is a group of physicians in the field of
environmental medicine who believe that millions of Americans are
being made ill and sensitized in various degrees to toxic airborne
chemicals from a class of chemicals known as volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).


(12) Illnesses brought about by breathing these chemicals inside
buildings are referred to as "The Sick Building Syndrome." A number of
official government and health agency publications have been issued on
this subject. (13-18) However, the major thrust of most of these
publications is to stress how little we actually know about the
effects of these chemicals and emphasize the over-riding need for
further safety research in this area.


As pointed out in the text, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, (National
Research Counsel, 1989), "about 70,000 chemicals are used in commerce,
of which several hundred are known to be neurotoxic. However, except
for pharmaceuticals, only 10% have had any testing at all for
neurotoxicity, and only a handful of these have been evaluated
thoroughly." (19)


Since the publication of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, the situation
has changed in one respect: There is now a substantial body of
literature dealing with occupational exposures to solvent-type
chemicals or VOCs, prominent among which are publications by Lisa
Morrow and coworkers at the University of Pittsburgh, several of which
are sited here. (20-23)


For the issue of multiple chemical sensitivity, on the other hand, it
is far different. Once again we are faced with major deficiencies in
safety-oriented studies on the effects of potentially toxic
environmental chemicals on the human system and of safety measures
that would have followed, had these studies been done. Basic science
in this area, at very best, has been fragmentary.


For this reason and this reason alone, evidence for support of the
diagnosis of MCS has not yet reached standards of scientific proof.
However, the fact that adequate research has not yet been done to
prove its existence, it does not follow that MCS has been disproved or
that it does not exist. Yet, this is the practical conclusion one
generally finds in mainstream medicine.


Based on my own experiences in many workman's compensation cases
involving airborne chemical exposures, the near universal response of
mainstream medicine has been to deny its existence.


As a result, many patients with more advanced forms of chemical
sensitivity are becoming like the lepers of ancient times, disabled
outcasts of society, and their numbers are growing larger by the day.
(24)


However, we are not entirely barren in this area. Though small in
number and preliminary in nature, there are a number of publications
tending to confirm a widespread presence of MCS in our population,
publications which can form a nucleus for further study. A few of
these are enumerated below:


(a) Two publications involving studies with SPECT brain scans have
shown impairments in brain functions resulting from chemical
exposures. (20,25)


(b) In a recent study of a group of veterans with the Persian Gulf War
Illness, an activated coagulation system was found with platelet
activation and fibrin deposits on the endothelial surfaces of blood
vessels, which resulted in a constriction of blood flow. The authors
concluded that heavy exposures to toxic chemicals during the Gulf War
in all probability were the underlying cause of the pro-coagulant
state, although other possible causes were also mentioned in the
article. (26)


(c) Studies of patients with chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia at the
Electron Microscopy Unit at the Adelaide Institute of Medical and
Veterinary Science, Australia demonstrated deformities in the red
blood cells (RBCs) of these patients described as dimpled spherocytes
(rather than the normal oval shapes of RBCs) along with increased
rigidity of the RBC membranes, these changes resulting in reduced flow
of the RBCs as a result of their deformities.


The article went on to point out that a great majority of these
patients had been exposed to environmental chemicals, some working in
chemical factories, others in wheat fields or orchards subject to
periodic pesticide/herbicide sprayings, many patients noting
deterioration following these exposures. (27)


(d) In an article by P Beaune and coworkers, the term "suicide
inactivation" was used to describe the mechanism whereby foreign toxic
chemicals may damage and cripple the enzyme systems necessary for
detoxification and elimination of toxic chemicals. (28) This now
thought or suspected of being a major factor in the pathogenesis of
MCS.


(e) Among those working in the field of environmental medicine, (12)
The Environmental Health Center in Dallas, Texas has always been
considered a major center of research in this field. Authored by
William J. Rea, M.D., much of the work of this center has been
recorded in a four-volume set of books with the simple title, Chemical
Sensitivity. (29)


Many of those familiar with this center believe it will in time be
accredited with being one of the earliest centers to fully recognize
the increasing impact of foreign chemicals on human health and to do
meaningful, systematic study in this area.


With reports such as these now in the scientific literature, further
documentation and confirmation of environmental illness and MCS as
valid diagnoses cannot be long in following, along with a more
realistic appraisal of their prevalence.


Finally, no treatment of environmental illness would be complete
without mention of possible ongoing damage being done to the
reproductive systems of both men and women when exposed to toxic
airborne chemicals during their reproductive years, (30) or of fetal
damage when women work in such conditions during their pregnancies.
(5) Although as yet largely theoretical, sooner or later these are
issues which must be addressed.


Conclusions:


In the late 1800s and early 1900s there was a time now referred to as
the golden age of medical diagnosis. Those were the times of Sir
William Osler of Johns Hopkins University, remembered as the father of
internal medicine, and of other stellar names of the times. In those
days doctors took time to listen to their patients, and equally
important, took very seriously the information given by the patient.


It was a time of clinical observation, when doctors believed what
their eyes told them and deduced diagnoses based on these
observations. It is no small coincidence that the mythical master of
observation and deduction, Sherlock Holmes, the creation of Sir A
Conan Doyle, was based on a physician that Doyle had known in his
student days.


How does this compare with today? Based on personal experience, very
few doctors listen to parents of autistic children, or if they listen
to them, very few believe what they are told by the parents. (31)


This is even truer for patients with environmental illness who, in a
majority of cases in my experience, are commonly referred to
psychiatrists or psychologists by their physicians, their physicians
telling them that their symptoms are psychosomatic or imagined.


However, in defense of doctors directly involved in care of the
public, it is doubtful that there has ever been a time with greater
demands on their time combined with greater economic/political
pressures intervening in the care of their patients than at present.
Most of them are doing the best they can under the circumstances.


I take great pride in being a medical doctor. I would not change
places with anyone in the world. But I also fear for the future of my
profession. Whether in the realm of nature or human affairs, all
things must remain relevant to survive. In the natural world all life
forms must adjust to their environment or perish.


In the healing professions, these professions must both recognize and
address the genuine needs of the public or stand in danger of passing
into the limbo of forgotten things. Actually I believe the medical
profession will survive, but to do so will require a higher level of
vision with issues surrounding childhood autism and environmental
illness than has been the norm until now.


For practicing physicians to recognize the nature of their patients'
problems and treat them properly, the physicians must be provided with
valid science by those engaged in research, science realistically
directed at the genuine health needs of the public.


http://www.rense.com/general32/mmr.htm


http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam


Amalgam / Mercury Dental Filling Toxicity


===


http://www.valleyadvocate.com/Â*articles/dental.html


[no longer available--see below]


Autopsy studies in Sweden, Germany and the United States have also
established
that people with amalgams have significantly more mercury in their brains
and
kidneys than those without, and the mercury concentration increases with the
number of amalgams. Furthermore, the World Health Organization has stated
that
amalgam fillings constitute the majority of mercury exposure for people with
amalgams -- more than every other mercury source combined. This finding has
been independently verified by the national insurance program Health Canada
and
by the National Institutes of Dental Research.


http://www.acnem.org/journal/12-2_de...al_amalgam_saf...


http://www.jouglimlag.co.za/Journal%...alth%20Dental%...


===


http://altmedangel.com/mercury.htm


13. Both Health Canada (1996) and the World Health Organization (1991)
consider dental amalgam to be the single largest source of mercury exposure
for the general public, with amalgam potentially contributing up to 84%
(WHO, 1991) of total daily intake of all forms of mercury from all sources.
Therefore, the level of exposure resulting from amalgam is not an issue of
contention. The WHO also noted that for mercury vapor, a specific
no-observed-effects level (NOEL) cannot be established i.e. no level of
mercury vapor has been found that can be considered harmless.


http://www.toxicteeth.org/lautenberg-letter.pdf


http://www.hallvtox.dircon.co.uk/amalgam.html


[That's for starters I have over 300 more].


That's because I was poisoned from amalgams!




toxicity hasn't a single damned thing to do with resistivity.

American Dental Association, Mercury and Health Fraud.

http://www.yourhealthbase.com/amalgams.html

Amalgam (Silver) Fillings

Summaries of the latest research concerning amalgam fillings
By Hans R. Larsen MSc ChE




Mercury sources and toxicity
ROCHESTER, NEW YORK. Mercury is a highly toxic metal associated with damage
to the kidneys and central nervous system. Mercury vapour is emitted from
volcanoes, coal-burning power stations, and municipal incinerators and
returns to the earth through rain contaminated with metallic mercury.
Metallic mercury is methylated to methyl mercury in oceans and lakes and
enters the food chain via fish and other seafood. Long-lived predator fish
such as shark, swordfish, tilefish, king mackerel, and pike and bass in
fresh water are the main sources of methyl mercury. Dental amalgams are an
important source of mercury vapour and the vaccine preservative thimerosal
is a significant source of ethyl mercury.

Researchers at the University of Rochester School of Medicine recently
published a review of what is currently known about mercury toxicity. Among
the highlights:


Mercury vapour, methyl mercury and ethyl mercury all target the central
nervous system and mercury vapour and ethyl mercury also target the kidneys.
Inorganic (metallic) mercury primarily targets the kidneys and stomach.
Chelators such as DMSA are effective in removing all forms of mercury from
the body, but cannot reverse central nervous system damage.
The allowable or safe intake of mercury has recently been reduced to 0.1
microgram/day per kilogram of body weight.
The concentration of mercury in the brain, blood and urine correlates with
the number of amalgam fillings in one's mouth. The concentration increases
markedly with increased chewing. Long-term use of nicotine gum by people
with amalgam (silver) fillings may increase levels by a factor of 10, thus
approaching occupational safety limits.
There is concern, but no clear evidence, that mercury emitted from amalgam
fillings may cause or worsen degenerative diseases such as ALS, Alzheimer's
disease, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson's disease.
Ethyl mercury (thimerosal) is used as a preservative in vaccines. Recent
concerns about its toxicity have caused US authorities to take steps to
remove it by switching from multi-dose vials to single-dose vials that do
not require a preservative.
A recent move by power companies to replace mercury containing
pressure-control devices for domestic gas supplies has led to numerous
spills of mercury in homes. Some 200,000 homes were affected in one recent
incident. The liquid mercury is difficult to remove and gives off highly
toxic vapours, which are particularly harmful to infants and children.
Several studies have found an association between mercury exposure and
cardiovascular disease, but other studies have failed to confirm the
connection.
Clarkson, Thomas W., et al. The toxicology of mercury – current exposures
and clinical manifestations. New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 349,
October 30, 2003, pp. 1731-37
Editor's comment: The review makes it clear that exposure to mercury is
detrimental, but hard to avoid. Nevertheless, avoiding the placement of new
amalgam dental fillings and gradually replacing old ones with composite
fillings, avoiding gum chewing if amalgam fillings are present, and limiting
the intake of fish with high mercury levels are all steps that can be taken
by everyone. It is important to realize that consuming just one 7 oz (198
grams) can of tuna per week translates into a mercury intake of 0.1
microgram/day of mercury per kilogram of body weight – equivalent to the
currently recommended maximum daily intake.

ADA fighting the mercury battle
GAITHERSBURG, MARYLAND. The American Dental Association (ADA) has launched
an advertising campaign to discourage patients from having their amalgam
(silver) fillings removed. Many patients and sometimes even their physicians
believe that mercury, the main component of amalgams, plays a role in
promoting such varied diseases as Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, and
autism. The ADA says the evidence is not there and their Code of Ethics
forbids dentists from advising their patients that there could be a link.
Scientists at the University of Milan disagree with the ADA and point out
that several studies have confirmed that mercury from amalgam dental
fillings does enter tissues and that the mercury content of brain, thyroid,
kidney, and pituitary gland tissue is proportional to the number of amalgam
fillings. They conclude that the health effects of amalgam fillings are not
at all clear and need further investigation. German researchers point out
that some of the composite materials used in the replacement of amalgam
fillings may in themselves be toxic.
Larkin, M. Don't remove amalgam fillings, urges American Dental Association.
The Lancet, Vol. 360, August 3, 2002, p. 393
Guzzi, G, et al. Should amalgam fillings be removed? The Lancet, Vol. 360,
December 21/28, 2002, p. 2081
Editor's comment: Mercury and removed amalgam fillings are classified as
hazardous materials and require extreme caution in disposal. Why they would
be hazardous outside the mouth, but not inside defies comprehension. It is
also a scientifically proven fact that the blood level of mercury is twice
as high in dentists as in non-dentists. This fact and the fact that savvy
patients don't want mercury in their mouths is no doubt what is leading many
dentists to put a, albeit discrete, sign in their waiting rooms
"Mercury-free practice"!

Fish, mercury, and heart disease
BALTIMORE, MARYLAND. Several studies have shown that regular fish
consumption protects against cardiovascular disease. Other studies have
shown that consuming mercury-contaminated fish increases the risk of
coronary heart disease. The beneficial effect of fish consumption is
believed to be due to the presence of the omega-3 fatty acids,
eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in the tissue of
fish and shellfish. Two recent studies have attempted to answer the question
"Are the beneficial effects of fish oils (EPA and DHA) outweighed by the
negative effects of mercury"?

The first study, carried out by a team of researchers from eight European
countries, Israel and the United States, involved 684 men who had suffered a
first non-fatal heart attack and 724 matched controls. All participants had
their mercury level measured in toenail clippings and their level of DHA
measured in a fat tissue sample taken from the buttock. Participants with a
mercury level of 0.66 mcg/gram were found to have twice (odds ratio of 2.16)
the risk of having a first heart attack when compared with participants
having a mercury level of 0.11 mcg/gram. This risk assessment was arrived at
after adjusting for age, DHA level in adipose tissue, body-mass index,
waist:hip ratio, smoking status, alcohol intake, HDL cholesterol level,
diabetes, history of hypertension, family history of heart attack, blood
levels of vitamin E and beta-carotene, and toenail level of selenium.
The research team also found that participants with a high (0.44% of total
fatty acids) fat tissue content of DHA had a 41% lower risk of having a
first heart attack than did those with a low (0.10% of total fatty acids)
fat tissue level of DHA. This risk assessment was arrived after adjusting
for all other known risk factors including toenail mercury level.
The researchers point out that the main sources of mercury are occupational
exposure (dentists), exposure to silver-mercury amalgam in dental fillings,
and fish consumption. They conclude that the health benefit of fish
consumption is significantly diminished if the fish is high in mercury. They
also confirm the cardioprotective effect of fish oils (DHA).

The second study was part of the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study begun
in 1986 as a cooperative venture between the Harvard School of Public
Health, the Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School. The
study involved 33,737 male health professionals who had toenail clippings
analyzed for mercury in 1987. After 5 years of follow-up 470 participants
had been diagnosed with coronary heart disease. The researchers observed
that dentists, who are habitually exposed to mercury, had toenail mercury
levels (0.91 mcg/gram) that were twice as high as the levels found in
non-dentists (0.45 mcg/gram). They also found a direct relationship between
fish consumption and mercury level with participants consuming an average of
357 grams (3/4 lb) of fish per week having a level of 0.75 mcg/gram while
those who consuming 145 grams (1/3 lb) per week had a level of 0.29
mcg/gram. After adjusting for age, smoking and other risk factors for heart
disease the researchers conclude that there is no clear association between
total mercury exposure and the risk of coronary heart disease, but that a
weak relation cannot be ruled out.
Guallar, E, et al. Mercury, fish oils, and the risk of myocardial
infarction. New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 347, November 28, 2002,
pp. 1747-54
Yoshizawa, K, et al. Mercury and the risk of coronary heart disease in men.
New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 347, November 28, 2002, pp. 1755-60
Bolger, PM and Schwetz, BA. Mercury and health. New England Journal of
Medicine, Vol. 347, November 28, 2002, pp. 1735-36


Editor's comment: The two studies clearly do not agree as to whether high
mercury levels are associated with an increased risk of coronary heart
disease. I am inclined to believe that they are. Furthermore, there is
compelling evidence of significant associations between high mercury levels
and Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, congestive heart failure,
kidney damage, hearing loss, and high blood pressure. So definitely,
mercury, from whatever source, is a very bad actor and should be avoided.
The joint European/Israeli/US study clearly confirms that DHA (fish oil) is
protective against a first heart attack, so regular consumption of
low-mercury-level fish is still a healthy option. An alternative approach to
obtaining DHA (and EPA) on a regular basis is to supplement with 1 gram/day
of a high quality, molecular distilled, non-rancid fish oil containing a
minimum of 220 mg EPA and 220 mg DHA. Reliable sources of such fish oils can
be found at www.consumerlab.com/results/omega3.asp and at www.coromega.com
To be on the safe side it is best to eat fish and shellfish with an average
mercury content of less than 0.10 ppm. Unfortunately, there are not too many
species left that fulfill this requirement. King crab, scallops, catfish,
salmon (fresh, frozen and canned), oysters, shrimp, clams, sal****er perch,
flounder, and sole are all good choices. Salmon is my favourite because of
its combination of a low mercury content with a high level of beneficial EPA
and DHA. The following fish species should be avoided: tilefish, swordfish,
king mackerel, shark, grouper, tuna, American lobster, halibut, pollock,
sablefish, and Dungeness and blue crab. Limited sampling of the following
also indicated high mercury levels: red snapper, marlin, orange roughy,
sal****er bass. Atlantic cod, haddock, mahi mahi, and ocean perch have
mercury levels around 0.18 ppm, so should be eaten in moderation. For more
on mercury content of fish see www.cfsan.fda.gov/~frf/sea-mehg.html

Amalgam dental fillings are a health hazard
NEW YORK, NY. Dr. Gary Null, PhD and Dr. Martin Feldman, MD have just
released a major report concerning the health hazards of dental amalgam
(silver) fillings. They point to incontrovertible evidence that mercury
continually leaches from amalgam fillings at a rate of about 10-50 times the
safe limit (0.28 microgram/day) set by the US Public Health Service. Mercury
has been linked to birth defects, multiple sclerosis, fatigue, Alzheimer's
disease, depression, anxiety, reduced immune function, antibiotic
resistance, and impaired kidney function. Researchers have found that
mercury is a potent killer of white blood cells and that proper removal of
amalgam fillings will restore white blood cell counts to healthy levels.
There is also evidence that the number of T-cells (an important part of
immune defenses) decreases substantially when amalgam fillings are placed in
the mouth, but increases again once the fillings are removed.
The American Dental Association (ADA) maintains that amalgam fillings are
safe – a position made completely untenable by the fact that the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has declared amalgam to be a hazardous
material. It is interesting that the ADA, when confronted by a lawsuit
regarding the use of amalgam fillings, made the following statement in its
defense, "The ADA owes no legal duty of care to protect the public from
allegedly dangerous products used by dentists."
Several studies have found that chewing markedly increases the amount of
mercury released from amalgam fillings into the mouth and that these mercury
vapours easily find their way into the pituitary gland and the brain.
Autopsies performed at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden revealed that
people with amalgam fillings had three times more mercury in the brain and
nine times more in the kidneys than did people with no amalgam fillings.
Common bacteria found in the mouth and intestines can convert mercury to
methylmercury, a compound that is 100 times more toxic than is elemental
mercury. Methylmercury passes both the blood-brain and placental barriers
and following a large exposure can remain in the brain for 10 years or more.
Considering that dentists still place about one million amalgam fillings in
the mouths of American citizens every day it is clear that disorders caused
by amalgam toxicity is a horrendous problem. Not everyone is sensitive to
mercury, but various studies estimate the percentage that are to be
somewhere between 10 and 44 per cent. Fortunately, a few governments are
beginning to wake up to the dangers and are passing laws restricting or
outright banning the use of amalgam fillings. The German, Norwegian,
Swedish, Canadian and British governments have advised dentists not to
install or remove amalgam fillings in pregnant women. Since November 2000
the following sign has been posted in all dental offices in California,
"WARNING – Amalgam fillings contain a chemical element known to the State of
California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm". The
California Dental Association apparently lobbied successfully to ensure that
the word mercury did not appear in the warning.
The Australian Society of Oral Medicine and Toxicology has concluded that
mercury in amalgam fillings is continuously released from the fillings and
accumulates in tissues throughout the body where it interferes with many
physiological functions.
Null, Gary and Feldman, Martin. Mercury dental amalgams: the controversy
continues. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2nd Quarter
2002, pp. 85-110 [180 references]
Editor's comment: There is no question in my mind that amalgam fillings pose
a serious health risk to everyone whether or not they actually exhibit
symptoms of mercury toxicity at this time. New amalgam fillings should be
avoided and old ones replaced with composite fillings under safe conditions
when it becomes necessary.

Mercury linked to heart disease
ROME, ITALY. Medical researchers at the Catholic University in Rome report
that patients with congestive heart failure (idiopathic dilated
cardiomyopathy or IDCM) have vastly elevated concentrations of mercury and
antimony in their heart tissue. They compared trace element concentrations
in biopsy samples from the left ventricle among patients with IDCM and
patients with valvular disorders or no heart disease at all. The IDCM
patients had mercury concentrations 22,000 times higher than in the
controls. Antimony concentrations were 12,000 times higher and silver, gold,
chromium and arsenic levels were also highly elevated. Holter monitoring
revealed frequent ectopic (premature) beats in all the IDCM patients and
ventricular tachycardias in six of the 13 patients. None of the patients had
had occupational exposure to the trace elements. Researchers at the
University of Calgary point out that dental amalgams would be the most
likely source of the mercury.
Frustaci, Andrea, et al. Marked elevation of myocardial trace elements in
idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy compared with secondary cardiac
dysfunction. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 33, May
1999, pp. 1578-83 [32 references]
Lorscheider, Fritz and Vimy, Murray. Mercury and idiopathic dilated
cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 35,
March 1, 2000, p. 819 (letter to the editor)

Trigeminal neuralgia linked to amalgam fillings
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. Dr. William Cheshire, a physician at the Mayo Clinic,
reports on a case where a woman's trigeminal neuralgia (tic douloureux) was
traced to a galvanic reaction between an amalgam filling and an adjacent
gold-alloy crown. Consumption of tomatoes and other acidic foods produced
intense jolts described as being like those of an "electrical battery". The
jolts in turn resulted in excruciating pain in the trigeminal nerve.
Replacing the amalgam filling with a composite resolved the problem. Dr.
Cheshire points out that dissimilar metals in contact with saliva can form a
galvanic cell which can generate electrical currents with several hundred
millivolts of potential. He points out that many patients with trigeminal
neuralgia describe their pain in terms of "electrical" jolts and concludes
that his patient's neuralgia may well have been triggered by the galvanic
reaction between the amalgam filling and the gold crown.
Cheshire, William P., Jr. The shocking tooth about trigeminal neuralgia. New
England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 342, June 29, 2000, p. 2003
(correspondence)

Dental alloys affect cellular energy production
NOTE: We usually do not report test tube or animal experiments, but thought
we would make an exception in this case. The findings that commonly used
dental alloys may interrupt the normal function of human cells is a first
and could have wide-ranging effects.

BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA. Although nickel is known to be carcinogenic in humans
it is still widely used in certain dental alloys. Researchers at the
University of Alabama now report that other components of dental alloys
(beryllium, chromium, and molybdenum) as well as nickel affect the very
basic function of human cells - the production of energy (ATP). ATP is
produced in the mitochondria of cells and involves highly oxidative
processes. It is becoming increasingly clear that abnormalities in the
mitochondrial processes are important causes of human disease. Some
researchers believe that a slowing down of these processes actually heralds
the very first stage in the proliferation of abnormal cells and cancer.
The Alabama researchers exposed cultures of human gingival (gum) cells to
solutions of nickel, beryllium, chromium (tri- and hexavalent) and
molybdenum (hexavalent) for periods of 24 and 72 hours. They then measured
the energy production and oxygen consumption of the cells' mitochondria in
the various solutions. Cells in contact with nickel or hexavalent chromium
were most affected and showed decreased ATP (energy) production as well as a
decrease in oxygen consumption. The effects of beryllium, molybdenum, and
trivalent chromium were similar, but less pronounced. The researchers
conclude that their findings may be the first indication that some
components of common dental alloys may be detrimental to human health. They
urge further research to establish possible synergisms between mixtures of
these different metals on mitochondrial energy production. [54 references]
Messer, R.L.W., et al. An investigation of fibroblast mitochondria enzyme
activity and respiration in response to metallic ions released from dental
alloys. J Biomed Mater Res, Vol. 50, 2000, pp. 598- 604

Dental amalgams come under fire - again!
TAURANGA, NEW ZEALAND. The New Zealand Ministry of Health is reviewing its
policy on the use of mercury-containing amalgams for tooth fillings. This
review comes hard on the heels of a precautionary advice from the UK
Department of Health which warns pregnant women not to have amalgam fillings
installed. Dr. Mike Godfrey, a leading environmental physician, points out
that several major amalgam manufacturers have issued Material Safety Data
Sheets and Directions for Use which clearly warns of the many dangers of
amalgam fillings. Among the restrictions - amalgam fillings should not be
used next to fillings or crowns containing other metals, they should not be
used under crowns, they should not be used in patients with kidney disease,
in pregnant women or in children aged six years or younger. The
manufacturers also warn that mercury vapours from amalgam fillings can
induce psychiatric symptoms in extremely low concentrations. Depression,
mental deterioration, and irritability are among the symptoms listed.
Amalagam fillings are banned in Sweden and Health Canada has proposed a
limit of one (two surfaces) amalgam fillings in a child and four (eight
surfaces) in an adult. Dr. Godfrey points out that his chronic fatigue
syndrome patients have an average of 15 amalgam fillings each and exhibit
many of the symptoms that the amalgam manufacturers are warning against.
Godfrey, M.E. and Feek, Colin. Dental amalgam. New Zealand Medical Journal,
Vol. 111, August 28, 1998, p. 326 (letters to the editor)

Depression and amalgam fillings
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO. There is some evidence that people with dental
amalgam fillings are more likely to suffer from depression than are people
without such fillings. Now researchers at the Rocky Mountain Research
Institute report that removal of amalgam fillings can markedly improve the
symptoms of manic-depressive illness (bipolar disorder). Their study
involved 20 patients who had been diagnosed with manic-depressive illness.
All the patients had amalgam fillings (an average of 10 fillings each). The
concentration of mercury in the mouth was measured at the start of the study
and was found to increase almost 300 per cent after chewing gum for 10
minutes. Other research has shown that 75 per cent or more of the mercury
vapor released by chewing is inhaled into the lungs where it enters the
blood stream and subsequently passes into the brain. Eleven of the patients
were assigned to have all their mercury fillings removed and were also given
multi-vitamins and antioxidants to help chelate and remove the mercury
released during the dental work. The remaining nine patients had a sealant
placed over their fillings and were told that this sealant would prevent
mercury from being released from their fillings. In actual fact there was no
evidence that it would do so. The control group patients were given a
supplemental vitamin and mineral tablet. The patients all completed various
questionnaires designed to evaluate their mental health before and six to
eight months after treatment. It was very clear that the patients who had
had their amalgam fillings removed had improved very significantly in such
important parameters as anxiety, depression, paranoia, hostility, and
obsessive compulsive behaviour. Some of the patients were able to
discontinue their lithium medication after amalgam removal. The researchers
caution that their study was relatively small and urge large scale clinical
trials to validate their findings.
Siblerud, Robert L., et al. Psychometric evidence that dental amalgam
mercury may be an etiological factor in manic depression. Journal of
Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol. 13, No. 1, First Quarter 1998, pp. 31- 40

Amalgam fillings may damage kidneys.
NEWSBRIEF. Amalgam fillings and skin-lightening creams both contain
significant amounts of mercury. Researchers at the King Faisal Hospital in
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia have just completed a study aimed at determining
whether the mercury actually gets into the blood stream. The study involved
225 women (aged 17 to 58 years) who had their urine measured for mercury,
creatinine, urea, uric acid, phosphorus, magnesium, calcium, and glucose.
The urinary mercury level varied between 0 and 204.8 micrograms per liter
and was directly related to the number of dental amalgam fillings present in
the women's mouths. The researchers conclude that chronic exposure to
mercury may be associated with deterioration of renal (kidney) function.
Biometals, Vol. 10, October 1997, pp. 315-23

Amalgam fillings and hearing loss
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO. The leaching of toxic mercury from amalgam fillings
has been implicated in hearing loss. Mercury toxicity has also been linked
to multiple sclerosis (MS). It is believed that the toxic effects of mercury
cause damage to the blood brain barrier, demyelination (damage to the
nerves' myelin sheaths) and slowing of the nerve conduction velocity. Now
researchers at the Rocky Mountain Research Institute provide convincing
proof that dental amalgam fillings may be responsible for the hearing loss
often experienced by multiple sclerosis patients. Their experiment involved
seven women aged 32-46 years who had been diagnosed with MS. The women
underwent a standard hearing test in a sound booth and then had all their
amalgam fillings replaced with composites. Six to eight months later they
were again given the hearing test. Six of the seven patients had
significantly improved hearing in the right ear and five of the seven showed
improvement in the left ear. Overall, hearing improved an average of eight
decibels. The researchers conclude that amalgam fillings may be a
significant factor in hearing loss experienced by MS patients and could be a
factor in hearing loss in other people as well.
Siblerud, Robert L. and Kienholz, Eldon. Evidence that mercury from dental
amalgam may cause hearing loss in multiple sclerosis patients. Journal of
Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol. 12, No. 4, Fourth Quarter, 1997, pp. 240-44

Chronic mercury poisoning is widespread
HILLEROED, DENMARK. A Danish dentist, Dr. H. Lichtenberg, reports that most
of his patients with amalgam fillings suffer from chronic mercury poisoning.
Dr. Lichtenberg measured the actual concentration of mercury vapour in the
mouths of his patients and found that it varied between 3 micrograms of
mercury vapour per cubic meter of air and 329 mcg/m3 with an average of 54.6
mcg/m3. This compares to a maximum permitted level in the workplace of 50
mcg/m3 for people working eight hours a day five days a week. NOTE: This
level applies to Denmark; the maximum level permitted in Switzerland is 10
mcg/m3 and in the USA it is 100 mcg/m3. A recent conference in Canada
proposed a Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) for mercury vapour of 0.014 mcg/kg
of body weight per day; this corresponds to a maximum tolerable daily intake
of 1.0 mcg for a person weighing 70 kilograms. Most of Dr. Lichtenberg's
patients were thus exposed to 50 times the TDI. More than half of Dr.
Lichtenberg's patients exhibited one or more of the following symptoms of
chronic mercury poisoning - fatigue, poor concentration, poor memory,
bloating, joint pain, muscle fatigue, cold hands and feet, irritability, and
headache. Mercury poisoning from dental fillings has also been implicated in
Alzheimer's disease and heart disease.
Lichtenberg, H. Mercury vapour in the oral cavity in relation to number of
amalgam surfaces and the classic symptoms of chronic mercury poisoning.
Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol. 11, No. 2, Second Quarter 1996, pp.
87-94


Mercury linked to heart disease
HELSINKI, FINLAND. Researchers at the University of Kuopio in Finland have
just completed a major study which clearly implicates mercury as a major
cause of heart attacks and other coronary and cardiovascular diseases. The
researchers set out to discover why men in Eastern Finland who eat lots of
locally caught fish have an exceptionally high mortality from cardiovascular
disease. Their conclusion was that the non-fatty freshwater fish eaten in
Eastern Finland contains large amounts of mercury. The researchers
discovered that men who had a high fish consumption not only had a high
mercury content in their hair and urine, but also had a two-fold higher risk
of having a heart attack and a three-fold higher risk of dying from heart
disease than did men with a lower content of mercury in their hair. Men who
ate fatty, ocean-caught fish such as salmon, herring, and tuna did not have
an increased level of mercury in their hair. The researchers believe that
mercury promotes heart disease in several ways: mercury promotes free
radical generation; it inactivates the body's natural antioxidant
glutathione; and it binds with selenium thus making it unavailable as an
antioxidant and component of glutathione peroxidase. All these mechanisms
would lead to an increased level of lipid peroxidation and subsequent heart
disease. The researchers also point out that earlier studies have discovered
a clear correlation between the number of amalgam tooth fillings and the
risk of heart attack. Selenium and vitamin E have both been found to have a
protective effect against mercury toxicity.
Salonen, Jukka T. et al. Intake of mercury from fish, lipid peroxidation,
and the risk of myocardial infarction and coronary, cardiovascular, and any
death in Eastern Finnish men. Circulation, Vol. 91, No. 3, February 1, 1995,
pp. 645-55


Peer of the Realm questions use of amalgam fillings
LONDON, ENGLAND. Lord Baldwin, joint chairman of the British Parliamentary
Group for Alternative and Complementary Medicine, is questioning the safety
of amalgam dental fillings. In a letter published in the British Medical
Journal Lord Baldwin asserts that it is up to the dental profession to prove
that amalgam fillings are safe and, in Lord Baldwin's opinion, this they
have not done. To point to the fact that amalgam fillings have been used for
a hundred years is not a proof of safety anymore than it is to claim that
tobacco smoking must be safe because people have been doing it for a long
time, says Lord Baldwin.
Baldwin, E.A.A. Controlled trials of dental amalgam are needed. British
Medical Journal, Vol. 309, October 29, 1994, p. 1161

On Jun 11, 4:55?pm, Peter Bowditch wrote:
"Jan Drew" wrote:
CONCLUSION: Self-referred patients with health
complaints attributed to dental amalgam are a heterogeneous group of
patients who suffer multiple symptoms and frequently have mental disorders.
There is a striking similarity with the multiple chemical sensitivity
syndrome."

And published in a journal dealing with psychosomatic conditions.

Thanks for the heads-up, Jan. As we suspected, people claiming damage
from tooth fillings "frequently have mental disorders".

Do you ever read what you post?
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Projecthttp://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraudhttp://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skepticshttp://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

"Peter Bowditch"In his normal capacity of hasarring, he *deceivingly *picked
out, what he could
use to harass. He of course skipped right past........................
Jan Drew" wrote:

Psychosom Med 1997 Jan;59(1):32-41


A US Government Document Admits That Mercury Vapors From Silver Fillings
Exceeds The Minimum Risk Levels Established By The US Department Of Health
&
Human Services!


As always controversies exist when those who are in opposition are
ignorant
of the facts. The facts are now clear. Buried in the 351 page document
"Toxicological Profile For Mercury (Update) May 1994 published by the US
Department of Health & Human Services the scientific truth has finally
been
divulged. On page 125 of this document it states: "A report from the
Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs (CCEHRP)
of the Department of Health and Human Services determined that
"measurement
of mercury in blood among subjects with and without amalgam
restorations...
and subjects before and after amalgams were removed... provided the best
estimates of daily intake from amalgam dental restorations. These values
are
in the range of 1-5 ug/day (Dept. of Human Health & Services 1993, page
III-29). The chronic inhalation Minimal Risk Level is 0.014 ug/m3....The
proposed acute Minimal Risk Level is 0.02 ug/m3. Thus, both MRL's are
below
estimated levels from dental amalgams."


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


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....browse_frm/thr...


Mercury In Dental Fillings Part 1


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....msg/eb7f3ed602...


Apr 29 2005


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....browse_frm/thr...


Mercury In Dental Fillings Part 2


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....msg/b969b4deff...


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....browse_frm/thr...


Mercury Dental Fillings Summary And Conclusions


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....msg/d62f72d3a0...


http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalno1.html


"Dental Amalgam Fillings" is the Number One Source of Mercury in People
and
Exposure Exceeds Government Health Standards for Inorganic mercury(vapor)
Bernard Windham(Ed.) - Chemical Engineer
Government agencies and medical studies have found that the number one
source of mercury in people is from dental amalgam fillings(ref
2-20,26,27).
Exposure from fillings amounts to from 50 to 90 percent of exposure, with
the average being about 80 % of total exposure (5-9,12-15,19,20,26,27).
The
studies found that mercury amalgams are unstable due to mercury's low
vapor
pressure and galvanic action(24), leaking mercury vapor continuously into
the lungs and saliva at levels exceeding health standards. The amount of
mercury released by a gold alloy bridge over amalgam over a 10 year period
was measured to be approx. 101 milligrams(mg) (60% of total) or 30
micrograms(ug) per day(21b), and other studies have found similar results
for amalgam fillings(21a,12,18,etc.).
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).
Note that the amount of mercury excreted in feces, as opposed to absorbed,
is much higher than most of these estimates of mercury absorbed by the
body.
Daily excretion through feces amounted to from 30 to 190 ug of mercury,
being more variable than other paths(7). Other studies had similar
findings(9,12,17-19) . Most with several amalgams had daily fecal
excretion
levels over 50 ug/day. The reference average level of mercury in feces(dry
weight) for those tested at Doctors Data Lab with amalgam fillings is .26
mg/kg, compared to the reference average level for those without amalgam
fillings of .02 mg/kg(27). (13 times that of the population w/o amalgam).
Other labs found similar results(27). This level of mercury gives a daily
excretion of over 30 micrograms per day. There is also evidence that
amalgam
is also the largest source of methyl mercury in most people with amalgam,
based on studies and medical lab tests of those who have amalgam
replaced(26,27,12). Mercury vapor and inorganic mercury have been
documented
to be methylated to methyl mercury by mouth and intestinal bacteria, along
with candida albicans and other methyl donars(28), so that even people who
don't eat fish but do have several amalgam fillings have high levels of
methyl mercury in saliva and blood.
Studies have consistently found modern high copper non gamma-two amalgams
have greater release of mercury vapor than conventional silver amalgams
(21-23,25). 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), 1999, "Integrated Risk
Information System, National Center for Invironmental
Assessment,Cincinnati,
Ohio. www.epa.gov/ncea/iris.htm
(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) Kraub P, Deyhle M, Maier KH, Roller HD, "Field Study on the mercury
content of saliva", Heavy Metal Bull, vol.3, issue 1, April '96; & 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;& 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 , 1994, 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: Exposure and Health Effects from
Amalgam Fillings, 2000(over 800 references & 60,000 clinical replacement
cases).
(19) Sandborgh-Englund G, Elinder CG, Langworth S, Schutz A, Ekstrand J.
Mercury in biological fluids after amalgam removal. J Dent Res. 1998
Apr;77(4):615-24.
(20)H.V.Aposhian, Mobilization of mercury and arsenic in humans by sodium
2,3-dimercapto-1-propane sulfonate (DMPS).
Environ Health Perspect. 1998 Aug;106 Suppl 4:1017-25. ; & H.V. Aposhian
et
al, FASEB J, 6: 2472-2476, 1992.
(21) (a)J Pleva, "Mercury- A Public Health Hazard", Reviews on
Environmental
Health, 1994, 10:1-27, & J. Of Orthomol. Medicine 1989, 4:141- 148; & (b)
Jackson GH, Safety and Review Board of North Carolina, Quantitative
analysis
of Hg,Ag,Sn ,Cu,Zn and trace elements in amalgam removed from an abutment
tooth underneeath a gol alloy bridge that had been in vivo for nine plus
years, www.ibiblio.org/amalgam/
(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.
(24) Momoi Y, et al; Measurement of glavanic current and electrical
potential in extracted human teeth", J Dent Res,65(12): 1441-1444; &
Holland
RI, Galvanic currents between gold and amalgam. Scand J Dent Res, 1980,
88:269-72; & Wang Chen CP and Greener EH, A galvanic study of different
amalgams, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 1977, 4:23-7; & Lemons JE et al,
Interoral corosion resulting from coupling dental implants and restorative
metallic systems, Implant Dent, 1992, 1(2):107-112.
(25)P.E.Schneider et al, "Mercury release from Dispersalloy amalgam", IADR
Abstrats, #630, 1982; & N.Sarkar, "Amalgamtion reaction of Dispersalloy
Reexamined", IADR Abstracts #217, 1991; & N.K. Sarkar et al, IADR
Abstracts
# 895, 1976; & R.S.Mateer et al, IADR Abstracts #240, 1977; & N.K.Sarkar
et
al, IADR Abstracts, #358, 1978; & N.W. Rupp et al, IADR Abstracts # 356,
1979; & Kedici SP; Aksut AA; Kilicarslan MA; Bayramoglu G; Gokdemir K.
Corrosion behaviour of dental metals and alloys in different media. J Oral
Rehabil 1998 Oct;25(10):800-8
(26) Leistevuo J et al, Dental amalgam fillings and the amount of organic
mercury in human saliva. Caries Res 2001 May-Jun;35(3):163-6;
(27) Doctors Data Inc.; Fecal Elements Test; P.O.Box 111, West Chicago,
Illinois, 60186-0111; www.doctorsdata.com ; & Biospectron Lab, LMI,
Lennart
Mansson International AB, (Medical Labs)
(28) Heintze et al,"Methylation of Mercury from dental amalgam and
mercuric
chloride by oral Streptococci".,Scan. J. Dent. Res. 1983, 91:150-152; &
L.I.Liang et al, "Mercury reactions in the human mouth with dental
amalgams"
Water, Air, and Soil pollution, 80:103-107.


http://www.satori-5.co.uk/word_artic...ial_of_ei.html


The Medical Denial of Environmental Illnesses


Harold E Buttram, MD


Introduction:


As a matter of personal opinion and observation, there is at present a
dichotomy of almost schizophrenic proportions between ongoing American
scientific research in the medical field, most of which takes place in
academic institutions and medical centers, and the genuine needs of
the American public.


The scope and direction of this research, most of which is funded by
the National Institute of Health (NIH), is of tremendous importance in
that it forms a source of guidelines and a scientific foundation for
the clinical practice of medicine. In other words, the clinical
practice of medicine as it exists today has been largely shaped by
decisions made in the NIH and other government health agencies in the
granting of research money.


This is a system which has existed since the 1930s, but there may be
serious misdirections which are proving to be very costly in terms of
the health and welfare of the American public, especially as applies
to its children.


There are two medical conditions from which it is predictable that
American society and economy will be strained to the breaking points
in coming years by overwhelming numbers of medical indigents unless
these conditions are addressed effectively and decisively in the very
near future.


The two conditions to which I refer are childhood autism and
environmental illness with chemical sensitivity, neither of which are
being recognized for their true nature by mainstream medicine because
of a misdirection of research funding in certain key areas, as will be
reviewed in the following:


Childhood Autism, Predominantly an Environmental Illness


In regards to childhood autism, a condition characterized by severe
mental regression, fifty or so years ago autism was so rare that many
pediatricians had never heard about it. At least this was the
experience of Dr. Bernard Rimland, founding director of Autism
Research Institute. In 1956 Dr. Rimland, whose Ph.D. is in research
psychology, had a son who was later found to be autistic.


In his annual DAN (Defeat Autism Now) conferences Dr. Rimland is fond
of telling the story about the early days with his son during which he
had great difficulty in finding a pediatrician who knew anything about
or who had ever seen a case of autism. How different it is now.
Childhood autism has become so prevalent that there are very few who
do not know of a family with an autistic child. Families with two
autistic children are not uncommon, and I personally have seen a
family in which all three of the family's children were autistic.


Latest statistics estimate that over one half million American
children are autistic, (1) and with numbers steadily growing, there is
no end in sight. It can be expected that treatments will improve the
outlook of these children, but as far as is known at present, many or
most of these will require custodial care for life, at an average cost
to society as much as three million dollars per child. (2)


In the opinion of this observer, the misdiagnoses in childhood autism
come not in the diagnosis of the condition itself, something that is
unmistakable once one has seen a few children with the condition, but
from a failure to recognize autism as predominantly an environmental
illness. (In this instance the term, "environmental illness," is used
to include illnesses brought about by exposures to commercial
chemicals and medical interventions as well infectious microorganisms
and other exposures from the natural environment).


This statement is based on a recent seminar on childhood autism held
in the Washington D.C. area as sponsored by the National Institute of
Health and other health agencies September 6th and 7th, 2001, at which
the largest portion of the meeting was devoted to areas of genetics
and neuropathology of autism. (3)


As related to childhood autism, it should be stressed that the field
of genetics involves a susceptibility to autism but, except in rare
instances, has nothing to do with its causes. The same could be said
about virtually all epidemic-type diseases, in which there will be
variability in genetic susceptibility.


By their very nature, epidemics always arise from environmental
sources of one type or another and not from genetic causes. Genetic
changes take place very slowly in an evolutionary scale over a period
of millennia and never with the rapid increases as seen today with
autism.


Major areas now under suspicion as being causally related to childhood
autism include childhood immunizations, (4) toxic environmental
chemicals, (5) commercial food processing, (6) and the overuse of
antibiotics. (7) The only possible way of salvaging the situation is
to find and modify the causes while at the same time doing the very
best we can to develop effective treatments for those already
afflicted with this condition.


Childhood Immunizations - Deficiencies in Basic Science and Safety
Guidelines


As reflected in a series of U.S. Congressional Hearings concerning
issues of vaccine safety which have taken place annually since 1999,
(4) there is now growing awareness of major deficiencies in safety
testing for current childhood immunizations.


A few examples will be given he


(a) Safety studies on vaccinations are limited to short time periods
only: several days to several weeks. There are no (none) long-term
(months or years) safety studies on any vaccination or immunization.


(b) In 1994 a special committee of the National Academy of Sciences
(Institute of Medicine) published a comprehensive review of the safety
of the hepatitis B vaccine. When the committee, which carries the
responsibility for determining the safety of vaccines by Congressional
mandate, investigated five possible and plausible adverse effects,
they were unable to come to conclusion for four of them because they
found that relevant safety research had not been done.


Furthermore, they found that serious "gaps and limitations" exist in
both the knowledge and infrastructure needed to study vaccine adverse
events. Among the 76 types of vaccine adverse events reviewed by the
IOM, the basic scientific evidence was inadequate to assess definitive
vaccine causality for 50 (66%). The IOM also noted that "if research
... (is) not improved, future reviews of vaccine safety will be
similarly handicapped. (8)


(c) In an article published in Adverse Drug Reaction & Toxicology
Review, (9) researchers Andrew Wakefield and Scott Montgomery, who
have been investigating a possible causal relationship between the MMR
vaccine (measles-mumps-rubella) and the autism enterocolitis syndrome,
carefully reviewed inadequacies of the early pre-licensing trials of
the MMR vaccine with a maximum follow up of 28 days and even shorter
periods in some of the studies.


They stressed that such short periods of observation following the
vaccine were totally inadequate to detect delayed reactions, including
pervasive developmental delay (autism), immune deficiencies, and
inflammatory bowel disease, which are known from earlier published
reports to occur following both the natural measles infection and the
measles vaccine.


The most interesting feature of the Wakefield/Montgomery article was
that it was reviewed by four leading British authorities, all of whom
had previously held positions in the regulation and licensing of
medicines in the United Kingdom. (10) Taken as a whole, the reviewers
were supportive of the article, three highly so. Peter Fletcher,
formerly a senior professional medical officer for the Department of
Health wrote, "being extremely generous, evidence on safety (of the
MMR vaccine) was very thin."


Noting that single vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella already
existed, he argued, "caution should have ruled the day ... the
granting of a product license was definitely premature." Professor
Duncan Vere, former member of the Committee on the Safety of
Medicines, agreed that the periods for tests were too short. "In
almost every case," he wrote, "observation periods were too short to
include the onset of delayed neurological or other adverse events."


(d) In 1984 an intriguing study was reported in a little noted
letter-to-the-editor in the New England Journal of Medicine in which a
significant though temporary drop in T-helper lymphocytes was found in
11 healthy adults following routine tetanus booster immunizations.
(11) Special concern rests in the fact that, in 4 of the subjects, the
T-helper lymphocytes fell to levels seen in active AIDS patients.


If this was the result of a single vaccine in healthy adults, it is
sobering to think of the possible consequences of multiple vaccines
(19) within the first 6 or so months of life at latest count) given to
infants with their immature and vulnerable immune systems.
Unfortunately, other than clinical observation, we can only speculate
at these consequences, as the test has never been repeated.


Environmental Illness - Deficiencies in Basic Science and Safety
Measures


In my opinion, the second area of misdiagnosis is the common approach
of mainstream medicine in dealing with environmental illness and its
related condition of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS). In contrast
to the American Medical Association, which denies the existence of MCS
as a valid diagnosis, there is a group of physicians in the field of
environmental medicine who believe that millions of Americans are
being made ill and sensitized in various degrees to toxic airborne
chemicals from a class of chemicals known as volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).


(12) Illnesses brought about by breathing these chemicals inside
buildings are referred to as "The Sick Building Syndrome." A number of
official government and health agency publications have been issued on
this subject. (13-18) However, the major thrust of most of these
publications is to stress how little we actually know about the
effects of these chemicals and emphasize the over-riding need for
further safety research in this area.


As pointed out in the text, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, (National
Research Counsel, 1989), "about 70,000 chemicals are used in commerce,
of which several hundred are known to be neurotoxic. However, except
for pharmaceuticals, only 10% have had any testing at all for
neurotoxicity, and only a handful of these have been evaluated
thoroughly." (19)


Since the publication of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, the situation
has changed in one respect: There is now a substantial body of
literature dealing with occupational exposures to solvent-type
chemicals or VOCs, prominent among which are publications by Lisa
Morrow and coworkers at the University of Pittsburgh, several of which
are sited here. (20-23)


For the issue of multiple chemical sensitivity, on the other hand, it
is far different. Once again we are faced with major deficiencies in
safety-oriented studies on the effects of potentially toxic
environmental chemicals on the human system and of safety measures
that would have followed, had these studies been done. Basic science
in this area, at very best, has been fragmentary.


For this reason and this reason alone, evidence for support of the
diagnosis of MCS has not yet reached standards of scientific proof.
However, the fact that adequate research has not yet been done to
prove its existence, it does not follow that MCS has been disproved or
that it does not exist. Yet, this is the practical conclusion one
generally finds in mainstream medicine.


Based on my own experiences in many workman's compensation cases
involving airborne chemical exposures, the near universal response of
mainstream medicine has been to deny its existence.


As a result, many patients with more advanced forms of chemical
sensitivity are becoming like the lepers of ancient times, disabled
outcasts of society, and their numbers are growing larger by the day.
(24)


However, we are not entirely barren in this area. Though small in
number and preliminary in nature, there are a number of publications
tending to confirm a widespread presence of MCS in our population,
publications which can form a nucleus for further study. A few of
these are enumerated below:


(a) Two publications involving studies with SPECT brain scans have
shown impairments in brain functions resulting from chemical
exposures. (20,25)


(b) In a recent study of a group of veterans with the Persian Gulf War
Illness, an activated coagulation system was found with platelet
activation and fibrin deposits on the endothelial surfaces of blood
vessels, which resulted in a constriction of blood flow. The authors
concluded that heavy exposures to toxic chemicals during the Gulf War
in all probability were the underlying cause of the pro-coagulant
state, although other possible causes were also mentioned in the
article. (26)


(c) Studies of patients with chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia at the
Electron Microscopy Unit at the Adelaide Institute of Medical and
Veterinary Science, Australia demonstrated deformities in the red
blood cells (RBCs) of these patients described as dimpled spherocytes
(rather than the normal oval shapes of RBCs) along with increased
rigidity of the RBC membranes, these changes resulting in reduced flow
of the RBCs as a result of their deformities.


The article went on to point out that a great majority of these
patients had been exposed to environmental chemicals, some working in
chemical factories, others in wheat fields or orchards subject to
periodic pesticide/herbicide sprayings, many patients noting
deterioration following these exposures. (27)


(d) In an article by P Beaune and coworkers, the term "suicide
inactivation" was used to describe the mechanism whereby foreign toxic
chemicals may damage and cripple the enzyme systems necessary for
detoxification and elimination of toxic chemicals. (28) This now
thought or suspected of being a major factor in the pathogenesis of
MCS.


(e) Among those working in the field of environmental medicine, (12)
The Environmental Health Center in Dallas, Texas has always been
considered a major center of research in this field. Authored by
William J. Rea, M.D., much of the work of this center has been
recorded in a four-volume set of books with the simple title, Chemical
Sensitivity. (29)


Many of those familiar with this center believe it will in time be
accredited with being one of the earliest centers to fully recognize
the increasing impact of foreign chemicals on human health and to do
meaningful, systematic study in this area.


With reports such as these now in the scientific literature, further
documentation and confirmation of environmental illness and MCS as
valid diagnoses cannot be long in following, along with a more
realistic appraisal of their prevalence.


Finally, no treatment of environmental illness would be complete
without mention of possible ongoing damage being done to the
reproductive systems of both men and women when exposed to toxic
airborne chemicals during their reproductive years, (30) or of fetal
damage when women work in such conditions during their pregnancies.
(5) Although as yet largely theoretical, sooner or later these are
issues which must be addressed.


Conclusions:


In the late 1800s and early 1900s there was a time now referred to as
the golden age of medical diagnosis. Those were the times of Sir
William Osler of Johns Hopkins University, remembered as the father of
internal medicine, and of other stellar names of the times. In those
days doctors took time to listen to their patients, and equally
important, took very seriously the information given by the patient.


It was a time of clinical observation, when doctors believed what
their eyes told them and deduced diagnoses based on these
observations. It is no small coincidence that the mythical master of
observation and deduction, Sherlock Holmes, the creation of Sir A
Conan Doyle, was based on a physician that Doyle had known in his
student days.


How does this compare with today? Based on personal experience, very
few doctors listen to parents of autistic children, or if they listen
to them, very few believe what they are told by the parents. (31)


This is even truer for patients with environmental illness who, in a
majority of cases in my experience, are commonly referred to
psychiatrists or psychologists by their physicians, their physicians
telling them that their symptoms are psychosomatic or imagined.


However, in defense of doctors directly involved in care of the
public, it is doubtful that there has ever been a time with greater
demands on their time combined with greater economic/political
pressures intervening in the care of their patients than at present.
Most of them are doing the best they can under the circumstances.


I take great pride in being a medical doctor. I would not change
places with anyone in the world. But I also fear for the future of my
profession. Whether in the realm of nature or human affairs, all
things must remain relevant to survive. In the natural world all life
forms must adjust to their environment or perish.


In the healing professions, these professions must both recognize and
address the genuine needs of the public or stand in danger of passing
into the limbo of forgotten things. Actually I believe the medical
profession will survive, but to do so will require a higher level of
vision with issues surrounding childhood autism and environmental
illness than has been the norm until now.


For practicing physicians to recognize the nature of their patients'
problems and treat them properly, the physicians must be provided with
valid science by those engaged in research, science realistically
directed at the genuine health needs of the public.


http://www.rense.com/general32/mmr.htm


http://www.holisticmed.com/dental/amalgam


Amalgam / Mercury Dental Filling Toxicity


===


http://www.valleyadvocate.com/*articles/dental.html


[no longer available--see below]


Autopsy studies in Sweden, Germany and the United States have also
established
that people with amalgams have significantly more mercury in their brains
and
kidneys than those without, and the mercury concentration increases with
the
number of amalgams. Furthermore, the World Health Organization has stated
that
amalgam fillings constitute the majority of mercury exposure for people
with
amalgams -- more than every other mercury source combined. This finding
has
been independently verified by the national insurance program Health
Canada
and
by the National Institutes of Dental Research.


http://www.acnem.org/journal/12-2_de...al_amalgam_saf...


http://www.jouglimlag.co.za/Journal%...alth%20Dental%...


===


http://altmedangel.com/mercury.htm


13. Both Health Canada (1996) and the World Health Organization (1991)
consider dental amalgam to be the single largest source of mercury
exposure
for the general public, with amalgam potentially contributing up to 84%
(WHO, 1991) of total daily intake of all forms of mercury from all
sources.
Therefore, the level of exposure resulting from amalgam is not an issue of
contention. The WHO also noted that for mercury vapor, a specific
no-observed-effects level (NOEL) cannot be established i.e. no level of
mercury vapor has been found that can be considered harmless.


http://www.toxicteeth.org/lautenberg-letter.pdf


http://www.hallvtox.dircon.co.uk/amalgam.html


[That's for starters I have over 300 more].


That's because I was poisoned from amalgams!