The Battles

This is the detail.  Alas too much!  But I like to make the case as water-tight as possible.

(UPDATE, Dec 2017:  there is “more”!   click on the small grey text (the “category”) above, to generate a thumbnail list of recent postings on this subject.  The story of the whistle-blower at the Centre for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta, on the corruption of data to hide the link between mercury (thimerosal) in vaccinations and developmental problems in children is a significant addition.)

 

Hi Romany,

Here’s the documentation I spoke of.  It’s a paste-together.  In summary:

“ . . .  Because we tend to work in “silos”, we are not putting two and two together.  Mercury poisoning comes from dental amalgams;  this tends to be identified in older people after slow but continuous exposure to, and build-up of mercury in the body over decades.  Mercury poisoning also comes from thimerosal (now largely discontinued in vaccinations for infants in North America, but still exported in vaccinations for youngsters in developing countries.  And still used in North America in vaccinations administered to non-infants.).

We have a situation where we are exposed to mercury in utero (mercury from dental amalgams in the Mother crosses the placental barrier), in infancy (breast milk contains a heavy load of mercury, again from the dental amalgams in the Mother).  Following that, infants have been receiving more and more vaccinations;  vaccinations  did (and some still do) contain mercury (thimerosal).   When they are through that, some children receive their own dental amalgams so the slow poisoning by mercury is added to, and continues.   In older age there is heavy promotion of “the flu shot”, another good dose of mercury in many cases, depending upon the diligence in identifying the ingredients in the vaccine.  (Big Pharma is without conscience; non-disclosure and denial are the game-plan.) … “

A group of us who have had their dental amalgams replaced in order to correct serious health problems are working together to figure out what works now as our bodies start the process of excreting the mercury that has been stored in the body over decades.  I have not included any of that information in the following.

= = = = = = = =  ==  = = == =

Dear Dr. Rajput,

I am referred to you by an ophthalmologist  in relation to symptoms that are often associated with multiple sclerosis.

Since seeing the ophthalmologist I have had the dental amalgams (mercury) removed from my mouth.

I sent an earlier version of the following documentation on mercury poisoning and related disease and developmental outcomes to the Dean of Medicine at the U of S, William Albright, and to others including Dr. Jock Murray (Halifax) who is retired.  You may know of Dr. Murray from his work on MS.

An important recent addition to the collection of information is a research paper out of Sweden which may well have provided direction to the decision to ban dental amalgams in some European countries.

The central question addressed in the appended information:

DID THE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES THAT BANNED DENTAL AMALGAMS MADE WITH MERCURY, BOW TO UNINFORMED PUBLIC PRESSURE OR TO SOUND SCIENCE?

It is claimed that mercury in dental amalgams is one of those internet hoaxes.  It is far from that.  A number of European countries have outlawed dental amalgams.  Also, the information in this email comes from organizations such as the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, the Federation of American  Societies for Experimental Biology, the American Academy of Head, Neck and Facial Pain, numerous doctors, dentists and scientists, etc..  Please see item #3 below, a list of URL’s.

Most of us, including the medical and dental professions, are operating in a state of ignorance.   Mercury is among the top deadly poisons in the world.   We have put it into our mouths in the form of dental amalgams, with bad consequences for many people – – slow and insidious mercury poisoning that comes in the guise of different diseases and disabilities.   Saliva is acidic, it acts as an electrolyte which hastens the off-gassing of the mercury.   Please read on for further detail.

There is a parallel example in the annals of the “Medical Orthodoxy” for mercury poisoning to the “medical orthodoxy” for ulcers.   It took 10 years to bring the medical community for whom ulcers were caused by stress to the understanding that ulcers are caused by a bacterial organism.  Medical researchers originally pooh-poohed the idea altogether.

What did it take to get them to actually see and hear “the science”?    The fellow who understood that ulcers are caused by a bacterial organism finally had to perform an experiment on humans – – himself.  He drank a beaker of water that contained the organism.  It was the only avenue left to him.   In the end, he was successful – – after ten years of presenting the science, the message finally got through.  Today the medical orthodoxy around ulcers has changed.  (ref:  2010-04-08 The Dr. Who Drank Infectious Broth, Gave Himself an Ulcer, and Solved a Medical Mystery, Discover Magazine.

Mercury poisoning is much more widespread and pernicious than ulcers because it is a very slow, invisible poisoning with multiple different effects in different people.

In addition, because we tend to work in “silos”, we are not putting two and two together.  Mercury poisoning comes from dental amalgams;  this tends to be identified in older people after slow but continuous exposure to, and build-up of mercury in the body over decades.  Mercury poisoning also comes from thimerosal (now largely discontinued in vaccinations for infants in North America, but still exported in vaccinations for youngsters in developing countries.  And still used in North America in vaccinations administered to non-infants.).

We have a situation where we are exposed to mercury in utero (mercury from dental amalgams in the Mother crosses the placenta), in infancy (breast milk contains a heavy load of mercury, again from the dental amalgams in the Mother).  Following that, infants have been receiving more and more vaccinations;  vaccinations  did (and some still do) contain mercury (thimerosal).   When they are through that, some children receive their own dental amalgams so the slow poisoning by mercury is added to, and continues.

In older age there is heavy promotion of “the flu shot”, another good dose of mercury in many cases, depending upon the diligence in identifying the ingredients in the vaccine.  (Big Pharma is without conscience; non-disclosure and denial are the game-plan.)

There is controversey over the question of an increase in the incidence of alzheimer’s disease in people who have taken the flu shot for more than ten years.   Big Pharma’s corruption of science makes it difficult to know which “science” to trust and which not to trust.

If the following documentation is wrong in any aspects, I will be most appreciative if you will bring the offending information to my attention.

Thank-you.

Sandra Finley

= = = ==  = == = = = = = = = =  = =

SUBJECT:   Medical Orthodoxy:  mercury in dental amalgams.  Documentation.

Note:  ADA = American Dental Association

CONTENTS   (Scroll down to the content)

(the first part focuses on mercury from dental amalgams, the second part on mercury from vaccinations)

(1)    DID THESE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES BOW TO UNINFORMED PUBLIC PRESSURE OR TO SOUND SCIENCE?

EMAIL TO CBC RADIO, “THE CURRENT”, RE “MEDICAL ORTHODOXY”.   Includes the stories of Joe Bourgault and Grant Schoenroth.

(2)    CORRESPONDENCE WITH A MEDICAL DOCTOR:

THE SCIENCE USED TO DEFEND THE USE OF MERCURY AMALGAMS CONTAINS ERRORS IN LOGIC

(3)    A LIST OF URL’s,  MERCURY IN DENTAL AMALGAMS

(4)    ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF DENTAL AMALGAM

(5)    MERCURY DENTAL AMALGAMS BANNED IN 3 COUNTRIES; FDA, EPA, ADA Still Allow and Encourage Heavy-Metal Fillings,
ORTHOMOLECULAR MEDICINE NEWS SERVICE, NOV 20/2008

(6)    GOVERNMENT OF CANADA WEB-PAGE DOES NOT MENTION DENTAL AMALGAMS AS A SOURCE OF BODY MERCURY, ONLY FISH.

(7)    TONS OF MERCURY SOLD IN DENTAL AMALGAMS, U.S. FIGURES, 2001, 2004, 2007.  DECLINING.

(8)    SALIVA AN ELECTROLYTE, BITE TIN FOIL ON A FILLING AND YOU’LL KNOW!  MEASURE THE ELECTRICAL DISCHARGE WITH A RITA METER.

(9)    MERCURY AMALGAM REMOVAL, QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED

(10) SOME PERSONAL STORIES FROM THE INTERNET

(11) MY OWN STORY

(12)   CHART:  PRO-AMALGAM DENTISTS AND THE ADA ASSERT   /  MERCURY-FREE DENTISTS AND ANTI-MERCURY ACTIVISTS RESPOND   (very useful)

(13)    REBUTTAL TO THE CLAIM THAT THE SMOKING TEETH VIDEO IS NOT SCIENCE

(14)   ADDITION TO ORIGINAL EMAIL.  The first video (Dr. Boyd Haley) explains why there is a higher incidence of autism and attention deficit in boys.

CONTENTS

(1)  FOX NEWS OCT 6^TH, WHY YOU SHOULD NOT VACCINATE YOUR CHILDREN AGAINST THE FLU

(2)  UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY, DEPT OF MEDICINE,  HOW MERCURY CAUSES BRAIN NEURON DEGENERATION

(3)  ROBERT F KENNEDY JR ON LINK BETWEEN VACCINATIONS (THIMEROSAL, MERCURY) AND AUTISM.  WHAT THE PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATIONS AND AMERICAN OFFICIALS KNOW

(4)  PERSPECTIVE ON SWINE FLU, LIKELIHOOD OF DEATH

(5)  DONALD RUMSFIELD’S (BUSH ADMINISTRATION)   FINANCIAL LINK TO THE FLU VACCINE

= = = = = =  = = = = = = = =  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ==

(1)    DID THESE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES BOW TO UNINFORMED PUBLIC PRESSURE OR TO SOUND SCIENCE?

EMAIL TO CBC RADIO, “THE CURRENT”, RE “MEDICAL ORTHODOXY”.   Includes the stories of Joe Bourgault and Grant Schoenroth.

Sent:  September 21, 2010

Hello Neil (Morrison),

In follow-up to your radio-documentary on “The Current”, http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/ ,

Sept 20/10 – Pt 3: Medical Orthodoxy

Many thanks for an excellent presentation of human psychology and the ying and yang of medical research.

Another case that involves the dynamics discussed in your radio documentary:

Norway, Sweden, Denmark, have outlawed mercury (“silver”) dental amalgams.

(Link no longer valid)   http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS108558+03-Jan-2008+PRN20080103

Germany, Austria, and Canada recommend against placing amalgam in pregnant women, children, etc..

QUESTION: Did these European countries bow to uninformed public pressure or to sound science?

What if the decisions to keep mercury out of the mouths of citizens was based on sound science?

Canadians in networks are asking this question.  They are doing their own research, circulating the science and documenting personal stories.   The story of Joe Bourgault  (Bourgault Industries) in St Brieux, SK  ((306) 275  2203) led me to question the wisdom of mercury amalgams.  Five years later, the story of Grant Schoenroth from Radisson, SK  ((306) 827  4727) is a repeat of Joe’s experience.   The increased ease of networking today is adding more to the list.

We are getting blood level mercury readings before and then a few months following removal of mercury amalgams.  (INSERT Oct 26: the research paper from Sweden indicates that urine analysis is valuable.)   In Grant’s case the mercury reading went from 22.9 down to 10,  in 10 weeks, following removal of all the mercury in his mouth.  And he finally got a reversal in the downward spiral of deterioration in his health.   Grant’s Father is 75 and had only two mercury fillings.  Health problems and Grant’s situation caused him to get the fillings removed.  His initial blood level was 23,  six weeks later it was 20; in six more weeks it was 14.  Numerous physiological and metabolic improvements occurred.

Joe Bourgault believed after 8 years of fruitless efforts to discover the cause of his dangerous decline in health, that he was going to die.   He had seen every conceivable doctor, made 3 visits to the Mayo Clinic, and consulted alternative medical practitioners.   Then in 1992 he happened on an article about slow poisoning from mercury amalgams.    He did further research because of the similarities to his situation.  In the end he had the mercury taken out of his mouth.   After 8 years of relentless decline, finding no one who could help, trying everything that might restore his health,  removal of the amalgams started the turn-around for him.  Joe is alive and robust today, thanks to the article in the Alive magazine.

You could say that Joe and Grant are two of the few who are allergic to mercury amalgams, as the ADA (American Dental Assoc) would have you believe.  The problem is that today, through networking, citizens are able to exchange information.  They are building their own reference library and data.  We aren’t interested in leading anyone down the garden path; it’s expensive to replace the amalgams.  So we’d better get it right.

My own story (INSERT: see item # 11 ) in conjunction with the others, and the research that is available compel me to speak up in reply to your documentary, “Medical Orthodoxy”.

Today we have a population of older people most of whom have had mercury in their mouths for decades.   If mercury amalgams do slowly poison people, bringing about different disease outcomes, depending on the weaknesses in the individual’s immune system, we are in a position to find that out.

There is literature, like the book “Uninformed Consent”.  I don’t believe it is quackery, not when you connect it to the research out of the University of Calgary, etc.    I have appended a list of URL’s that contain information on the dental amalgam – mercury poisoning – disease outcomes connection.   (INSERT:  see item # 3 )

I think the same thing is happening as with the chemical corporations, and before that the tobacco and lead (in gasoline).  The industries hire “science” to muddy the waters.   The U of Calgary science has been dissed as being images of water vapor, not mercury vapor.  It sounds convincing, until you read the rebuttal.    (INSERT:  see item # 13 )   It is imperative to know WHO is behind the “research”, are they receiving money or perks from the industry, is there a financial interest that stands to lose?  Is the amalgam industry association represented on the Board of the American Dental Association that takes the position that dental amalgams are relatively benign?   Does the threat of costly court cases and potential multi-million dollar awards in the world’s most sue-happy country motivate to deny culpability?

You interviewed Dr. Jock Murray, retired, a doctor for whom I have a lot of respect.  Dr. Murray was interviewed earlier by CBC Radio on the topic of multiple sclerosis (MS).  On August 4th (2010) I exchanged emails with Dr. Murray, copy appended.   (INSERT:  see item # 2 )

I don’t like to challenge Dr. Murray, but with respect, I think there is an error in the logic (“science”)  used to support the view which absolutely dismisses a link between disease (in this case MS) and long term effects of having mercury in your mouth.   His reply was abbreviated;  presumably it contained the most cogent of the arguments.  (INSERT:  The “best” arguments presented do not meet the test of logic.)

I am saying that the scientific arguments are “right in front of your face” dubious; there is a flaw in the logic that the researchers don’t see.   The flaw is pointed out in my email to Dr. Murray, but I didn’t explain it very well in that email.  I will send him a copy of this email which is hopefully an improvement, because the issue is greater than any one of us individually.   If I am wrong, I want to know.

Being dismissive, not addressing the arguments, is “human nature” in the case of a “deeply held belief”, as you pointed out.  Neural pathways in the brain circumvent to protect the deeply held belief.  The science is clear, the neural pathways have been imaged; we hear but do not actually process the information – – through no conscious fault of our own.  This is true of ANY of our academics and authorities and ourselves.   But if you have been a professor and taught a view-point for decades, if you’ve been a doctor with an impeccable reputation, your career defines who you are to a large extent.  You have a “deeply held belief” in your views which at some point were taught to you by the academy.   You have articulated the views over and over again.  You are a respected authority in the community and in the larger medical community across the country.  Your students are there to get a degree, not to question your wisdom.  So these people have to be extra careful and open to ideas that are new to them.

There is a further bias in our systems:

The Europeans who have banned mercury amalgams are “removing the cause” of disease.

It is usual in North America to centre disease efforts around “Finding the cure” and treating – – as is the case with multiple sclerosis (MS), cancer, Parkinson’s disease, fibromyalgia, etc..

Even at this level, before you get into the actual specifics – – –  how “scientific” or rational is this approach?  (I am reminded of the Terry Fox Run, for example – – 30 years of running to “Find a Cure” and people still don’t get it.  They are too susceptible to the emotional play of the images of Terry Fox  —  too susceptible to professional marketing tactics, otherwise known as propaganda.  Our educational system does not do a good job of developing critical thinkers.  All tolled, it serves to completely avoid the public interest which is removal of the causes of disease and developmental problems.  “Finding a cure” is a fairly inhumane approach which says it is okay to get the disease because we’ll develop drugs to help you.

LONGTERM putting mercury into our mouths, putting carcinogenic and teratogenic chemicals in growing amounts into the environment, – – “in your face” evidence.  Does the “scientific”, medical establishment deal with it? … No.

The Government should be taking the same steps as in other countries, at the very least making it mandatory to use separators that stop the dental mercury from entering the water supply.  (INSERT:  See item #4)

So citizens are now dealing with the amalgam issue because Government and most professionals are not.

If the Government won’t take action, as in the mentioned European countries, people should AT LEAST be aware of the health connections so they can make informed choices.  As Joe, Grant and myself discovered, the dental and medical professions are themselves uninformed about mercury amalgams.  It’s why it took Joe 8 years, and he had to discover the cause himself.  He would otherwise be dead from mercury poisoning.

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley

(3) = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

(4)    ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF DENTAL AMALGAM

http://www.p2pays.org/ref/04/03295.pdf

Reprinted from Advances in Dental Research, September 1992

DENTAL AMALGAM ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS

D. ARENHOLT – BINDSLEY

Royal Dental College

Aarhus, Denmark

Adv Dent Res 6:125-130. September, 1992

“ …  dental clinics appear to be responsible

for the major amount of mercury collected in the sludge generated in purifying plants. If threshold values for heavy metal content, including mercury, are exceeded, the sludge is not allowed to be recycled as fertilizer. Installation of an approved amalgam-separating apparatus in dental clinics is now mandatory in several countries- for example, Switzerland,Germany, Sweden, and Denmark.

“ . . . . Increasing knowledge of the risk of toxic effects to humans from mercury pollution in ecosystems has resulted in growing pressure for the reduction of the discharge of mercury waste. The industrial discharge of mercury has been reduced markedly in several countries. Subsequently. increased attention has been focused on the uncontrolled discharge of mercury waste from dental clinics. In a few countries, including Denmark. the government is considering banning the use of mercury in dentistry for environmental reasons.

– – – – – – – – —

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_amalgam_controversy

“ . . . .  In addition to health and ethics issues, opponents to dental amalgam fillings point to the negative externalities of water contamination and environmental damage of mercury, especially since its use by dentists goes largely unregulated in many places, including the United States.^[16] The WHO reports that mercury from amalgam and laboratory devices accounts for 53% of total mercury emissions.^[17] Separators may dramatically decrease the release of mercury into the public sewer system, where dental amalgams contribute one-third of the mercury waste,^[17] but they are not required in the United States.^{[18] “}

= = = = = = = = = = =  =

(5)    MERCURY DENTAL AMALGAMS BANNED IN 3 COUNTRIES;  FDA, EPA, ADA Still Allow and Encourage Heavy-Metal Fillings,
ORTHOMOLECULAR MEDICINE NEWS SERVICE, NOV 20/2008

http://www.orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v04n24.shtml

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, November 20, 2008

Mercury Dental Amalgams Banned in 3 Countries
FDA, EPA, ADA Still Allow and Encourage Heavy-Metal Fillings

(OMNS, November 20, 2008) Any science teacher encouraging students to put mercury in their mouths would be fired for gross negligence and likely prosecuted for endangering the health of a child. Yet dentists do it every day.

And the US Food and Drug Administration lets them, all the while fully aware that there are serious safety concerns. At its website, FDA says, “Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses. When amalgam fillings are placed in teeth or removed from teeth, they release mercury vapor. Mercury vapor is also released during chewing.” (1) And a considerable amount is released, too. So-called “silver” fillings are 50% mercury.

In January 2008, Norway and Sweden totally banned mercury fillings. In April 2008, Denmark banned mercury fillings. Norwegian Minister of the Environment Erik Solheim said, “Mercury is among the most dangerous environmental toxins.” (2)

You might think that the US Environmental Protection Agency, which restricts most forms of heavy metal pollution, would be concerned since they are very concerned about mercury toxicity from incinerators and coal-fired power plants. EPA lists the symptoms of mercury poisoning: “tremors; emotional changes (e.g., mood swings, irritability, nervousness, excessive shyness); insomnia; neuromuscular changes (such as weakness, muscle atrophy, twitching); headaches; disturbances in sensations; changes in nerve responses; performance deficits on tests of cognitive function.” These detrimental effects are worst “particularly in warm or poorly-ventilated indoor spaces.” The human body is warm. A closed mouth is a poorly-ventilated indoor space. In spite of all this, EPA does nothing to control the level of mercury in your teeth because “dental amalgams are considered medical devices and are regulated by U.S. Food and Drug Administration.” (3)

And the FDA? FDA claims that their “advisory panel believed that there was not enough information to answer this question. Some other countries follow a ‘precautionary principle’ and avoid the use of dental amalgam in pregnant women.” But FDA is grossly misrepresenting the problem. Three western countries have entirely banned mercury amalgams, period. For everyone and every age.

Make no mistake about it: FDA has both the specific responsibility and the authority to restrict amalgam fillings. If there were mercury in other medical devices, such as artificial heart valves or hip prostheses, they would be instantly banned. FDA has the power to stop the use of mercury fillings today.

Why don’t they?

After all, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission tells parents to “Protect children . . . avoid fish with high levels of mercury.” CPSC also says, “Keep children and mercury apart: Replace mercury thermometers with digital ones. Don’t let kids handle or play with mercury.” (4) We will not let a child play with or eat mercury. Should we let them have it drilled into their teeth?

Toys are recalled when they are dangerous. Cars have safety recalls. But not heavy-metal dental fillings, found in the teeth of almost our entire population.  . . . ”

– – – – – – — – – – – – – – – – –

Dental Mercury Use Banned in Norway, Sweden and Denmark Because Composites Are Adequate…

Thu Jan 3, 2008 8:13am EST

Dental Mercury Use Banned in Norway, Sweden and Denmark Because Composites Are Adequate Replacements

OSLO, Norway, Jan. 3 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --Norway recently announced a ban on the use of mercury, including dental amalgam, that took effect on January 1, 2008.   Sweden announced a similar ban and dentists in Denmark will no

longer be allowed to use mercury in fillings after April 1, 2008.

"These bans clearly indicate that amalgam is no longer needed.   There are viable non-mercury filling substitutes that are used everyday in the US," said

Michael Bender, director of the Mercury Policy Project.  "By eliminating amalgam use, which is 50% mercury, we can reduce mercury pollution much more

efficiently than end-of-the-pipeline solutions."

In a prepared statement, Norwegian Minister of the Environment Erik Solheim said that the reason for the ban is the risk that mercury from products may

constitute in the environment.   "Mercury is among the most dangerous environmental toxins. Satisfactory alternatives to mercury in products are available, and it is therefore fitting to introduce a ban," said Solheim.

The Swedish amalgam ban is for both environmental and health issues, according to authorities.  Danish officials indicate that the reason for banning amalgam

is also because composites have become better, and may now be used in many more situations than a few years ago.

Teeth will have to be mended with e.g. plastic or ceramics. Exceptions to use amalgam may be granted for a certain period after the ban, if dentists apply

for it. Composite fillings have now become so strong that the Danish National Board of Health says that we can expand the ban to also include amalgam fillings,"

said the (Danish) Minister of Health Jakob Axel Nielsen to "TV Avisen". Authorities note that when the ban takes effect in Denmark in four months

time, the present subsidy for amalgam will be changed so that it will instead cover dental fillings of composite material.

Since the health insurance stopped paying for amalgam restorations in Sweden in 1999, the use has decreased markedly and is now estimated to be 2-5% of all

fillings.

More  information:

(Link no longer valid: http : // www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=667004

    Norwegian Ministry of the Environment

    Deputy Director General Anne Beate Tangen

    Email: anne.beate.tangen  AT  md.dep.no

    Phone: +47 2224 6033

    Fax: +47 2224 9563

Norwegian press release:

http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/md/Press-Centre/Press-releases/2007/Bans-mercury-in-products.html?id=495138

Norwegian Mercury Ban Regulation:

http://www.regjeringen.no/Upload/MD/Vedlegg/Forskrifter/product_regulation_amendment_071214.pdf

Danish Television link:

http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/article.php/id-9868029.html

Danish Radio link:

http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Indland/2007/12/31/174314.htm?nyheder

Swedish links:

(Link no longer valid: http: // www dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=147&a=728814)

http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/artikel_724369.svd

(Link no longer valid: http: // metro .se/se/article/tt/2007/12/29/kvicksilverstopp/index.xml

Also see:  www.mercurypolicy.org

SOURCE  Mercury Policy Project

Michael Bender of Mercury Policy Project, +1 802 223 9000

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

(6)    GOVERNMENT OF CANADA WEB-PAGE DOES NOT MENTION DENTAL AMALGAMS AS A SOURCE OF BODY MERCURY, ONLY FISH.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100816/dq100816a-eng.htm

Govt of Canada, as at Sept 21, 2010, this page does not mention mercury amalgams as a source of mercury in the body, only fish:

Mercury is found throughout the environment. The general population is exposed primarily through consuming fish and seafood. Chronic exposure to elevated levels may cause a number of health effects, including numbness and tingling in the extremities, blurred vision, deafness and intellectual impairment. Prenatal exposure may cause neurological and developmental delays.

Mercury

The CHMS measured total mercury in blood samples provided by participants aged 6 to 79. From 2007 to 2009, total blood mercury was detected in 88% of Canadians in this age group.

The geometric mean concentration across this population was 0.69 micrograms per litre. Mercury concentrations were lower for children and teens aged 6 to 19 than for adults aged 20 to 79.

(COMMENT:   regarding “total blood mercury was detected in 88% of Canadians”. The figure normally quoted for the percentage of people with mercury amalgams is in this neighbourhood of 88%.)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ==  == = = = =

(7)    TONS OF MERCURY SOLD IN DENTAL AMALGAMS, U.S. FIGURES . . .  DECLINING.

This data suggests that dentists and citizens in the U.S. are moving away from mercury amalgams.

http://www.newmoa.org/prevention/mercury/imerc/factsheets/dental_amalgam.cfm

Table 1: Total Mercury Sold in Dental Amalgam (Pounds)
Product	2001 Total Mercury	2004 Total Mercury	2007 Total Mercury
Dental Amalgam	61,537 (30.8 tons)	53,213 (26.6 tons)	(19.96 tons) (revised number)

Reported use of mercury in dental amalgam sold in the U.S. in 2001 was approximately 30.8 tons, decreasing to 26.6 tons in 2004, or by about 14 percent. . . .

UPDATE MARCH 31, 2019:   From the same source, NEWMOA:

Recommend, go to the more recent report.   By 2010 the U.S. figure was 17.08 tons.  By 2013,  15.97 tons.

http://www.newmoa.org/prevention/mercury/imerc/factsheets/dental_amalgam_2015.pdf

 

BUT,  WHAT’S HAPPENING IN CANADA?   (an important question)

I did a quick search on  “Total Mercury Sold in Dental Amalgam Canada“.   Maybe more time would turn up data from which a trend line could be established.  I found only:

2017-03-07 Environment and Climate Change Canada, Notice of Objection re Dental Amalgam (mercury), Archived page.

EXCERPT:

 

• The importation of mercury into Canada as a component of dental amalgam has increased by almost 3 times since 1999.In 1999, the quantity of mercury imported into Canada, as a component of prepared dental amalgam products, was 1,642 kg (OAEI, 2000; Van Boom et al. 2001). In 2008, total imports of mercury, as a component of dental amalgam, was some 4,700 kg (data detailed in the Canada Gazette notice for which this objection is being submitted). No other Schedule 1 substance has enjoyed a 3 fold increase in importation and use in Canada, in a manner that directly and intentionally exposes millions of Canadians.
• Exemption of dental amalgam from regulation will omit regulatory consideration and control of the single largest source of mercury importation, use and population exposure in Canada.Dental amalgam is recognized by Health Canada as the single greatest source of mercury exposure in the Canadian population (Health Canada 1996). Although Health Canada has not assessed population exposure to all forms of mercury since 1995 (Health Canada, 1995; see also Richardson and Allan 1996), this has been recently re-confirmed for the USpopulation (Richardson 2010).

  Therefore, if dental amalgam is exempted from any form of regulatory exposure control in the Canadian population, all other regulations will have no significant effect in reducing mercury exposure and risks in the Canadian population.

= = = = = == = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

(8)    SALIVA AN ELECTROLYTE, BITE TIN FOIL ON A FILLING AND YOU’LL KNOW!  MEASURE THE ELECTRICAL DISCHARGE WITH A RITA METER.

I went to a dentist who has a “rita” meter.  It measures the amperage and polarity of amalgams.  It’s like the battery tester that measures the strength of the current in a battery.   If you don’t know from experience with tin foil that saliva (acidic) acts as an electrolyte and creates electrical currents in interaction with metals (like mercury) in your mouth, you can see it from the rita meter readings.

What you may know from experience:

“When aluminium foil makes contact with some amalgam fillings, saliva in the mouth can act as an electrolyte. This can generate small electrical currents which are felt through the nerves in the tooth as (often extremely painful) electrical “jolts” or shocks.”

As I say, the rita meter measures the strength of the electrical charges that are coming off each amalgam.  It has been interesting to look at the levels of the readings in comparison to the readings of other people.

Regarding rita readings:

Kelly is my 30-year-old daughter.  Her rita readings were high compared to mine:  -139, -138, -134, -130, -127, (out of 9 readings, the others were lower).

By comparison, my highest number was -110, then -93, -85, -57, etc.  Some of the literature says that one of the newer amalgams off-gases more than the old ones.  Also, in the literature there is a graph of the off-gasing over time which shows a peak and then steady decline.  I would like to know whether there is any relationship between Kelly’s rita numbers and

1. “newer amalgams” with higher off-gasing
2. The fact that she is 30 years younger than I am on the graph (closer to “peak” off-gasing).

She is having a rough time with migraines, another symptom of mercury poisoning.  She is waiting for the results from her blood mercury test.  She is booked for removal of the amalgams in the first quadrant of her mouth.  It will be interesting to see if this provides relief from migraines.

I happened to talk with Judy.  Coincidentally, her sister is going through amalgam removal to see if that might bring relief from migraines.  I will follow-up with Judy later.

= = = = = == = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

(9)    MERCURY AMALGAM REMOVAL, QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED

http://livingnetwork.co.za/dentalnetwork/mercury-amalgam-removal/

“Mercury amalgam removal

Here is a list of questions you should ask your dentists before accepting treatment.”

= = = = = == = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

(10) SOME PERSONAL STORIES FROM THE INTERNET

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OK_dnSxGDY8&feature=related   A young woman, Suzan, is interviewed about her experience.

(Link no longer valid)   http://www.wellsphere.com/healthy-eating-article/mercury-candida-and-me-oh-my-part-1/369684?query=Chronic+Urinary+Tract+Infection

“I was diagnosed with heavy metal toxicity, specifically mercury poisoning. Mercury causes a change in the normal bacterial inhabitants in the gut which explains why I have no good bacteria. . . . ”

(original on http://buellerskitchen.com/?page_id=284 Mercury Girl: My story of recovery from mercury)

http://www.mercurypoisoned.com/burning.html Jan 2007.  A blogger’s personal story and research.

= = = = = == = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

(11) MY OWN STORY

“Uninformed Consent” (Hal Huggins)  and other literature contain lists of the various ways that mercury poisoning manifests itself in different people and at different times in their life.   You will find tuberculosis, fungal colonizations (yeast infections), high blood pressure, multiple sclerosis, problems with vision, etc. on the list.

In 2005 I was very sick, eventual early-diagnosed with an active case of tuberculosis that was not yet contagious.   I went to a naturopathic doctor with the question:  why didn’t my immune system handle the TB (30% of the population is walking around with TB organisms that never become a problem because immune systems hold it in check).   The answer was over-abundant fungal colonizations in my body, that release myco-toxins (which I knew about because of our work on genetically-modified crops (an increase in fusarium, a fungus that must not get into the human or livestock food supply because fungus produces myco-toxins).

Under the supervision of the doctor in charge of TB Control and the naturopathic doctor, I did not take the nausea-creating, toxic drug protocol for TB.  (I had time before the TB would become contagious.)  Instead I was prescribed an anti-fungal agent and went on a diet to starve the fungus of sugar, etc.  I recuperated.

During that time I attended a health conference.  While standing in line to register I struck up a conversation with the gentleman behind me, Joe Bourgault, and heard his story.  On the next visit to a dentist I requested “white” instead of mercury amalgams, and received them.  But was met with “a very small number of people are allergic to amalgams”.   I returned to health and gradually the amalgam story drifted to the recesses of my mind.

In August 2009 I began to experience “pins and needles” in my upper left arm, up into my neck and the left side of my face would sometimes be kind of numb in association.  I thought I had a pinched nerve.  Went for massages to no avail.  The neck pain increased to the point where I sometimes couldn’t sleep at night.  Hot or cold compresses on my neck didn’t do the trick.  I cringed if I felt a sneeze coming on; it would be like all the pins and needles were hitting at once – a surge of pain that thankfully, subsided right away.  I went for chiropractic treatments which also did not change the “pinched nerve”.

The next development involved squatting or lying down and then getting up.  Upon standing there would be momentary loss of vision in my right eye (the one that suffered a detached retina in 1991).   I didn’t like this development and got my butt to the ophthalmologist.  He thought there might be blockage in the carotid artery (that goes to the brain).  But an ultrasound showed that my arteries are clear.

It was during the time of the pins and needles and neck pains that my friend, Grant, showed alarming signs of deterioration in his health.  He went from being “a picture of health” as they say, through unexplained weight loss  to the point where his wedding ring was too large for his finger.  Grant is considerably younger than me.  The doctors  were beginning to write him off as a hypochondriacal nut case.  I told him about fungal colonizations – he tried that, some improvement, but his health kept going down.  He removed the new flooring in his house because of the possibility of formaldehyde-poisoning.  His health was a little better temporarily but overall still kept going down.

Grant then stumbled on the possibility of slow mercury poisoning from dental amalgams.  He did the research, read “Uninformed Consent”, got his blood level mercury reading (22.9)  and had all the amalgams removed from his mouth.  Which was the turning point for his health – – he is getting his health back.  I kicked myself that I had forgotten the experience of Joe Bourgault.  I should have made the connection.

I then read “Uninformed Consent” myself and saw MS on the symptom list.  Hmmm . . . pins and needles?   I googled “MS symptoms”.  The first thing listed was the pins and needles “typically on one side of the body”.  I got a blood mercury level reading;  mine was 6.5  (low).   I got a rita reading for direction on which quadrant of my mouth to address first (the quadrant with the highest electrical activity).

Not long after removal of the first amalgams, the pins and needle sensations stopped altogether and haven’t returned.   Other things like “brain fog” are about gone.  The pains in my neck went away with some minor reoccurrence;  I have not had another night when I could not sleep because of neck pain.

Over a couple of months I’ve now had all the amalgams removed, at considerable expense.  But certainly worth my health!   I then heard Dr. Jock Murray interviewed on CBC Radio about MS.  What stood out for me were statements regarding neck pain associated with MS.  The doctors have not been able to figure out the reasons for the neck pains.  I also heard that it takes years to diagnose MS.  . . .   You see what I’m thinking?  …  it is at least possible that the pins and needles and neck pains I experienced were the pre-cursors to MS.  If I hadn’t had the amalgams removed, it is possible that in the longer run I would have developed MS?   The slow poisoning by mercury.

/Sandra

= ==  = = = = = = = = =

(12)        CHART:  PRO-AMALGAM DENTISTS AND THE ADA ASSERT   /  MERCURY-FREE DENTISTS AND ANTI-MERCURY ACTIVISTS RESPOND

http://www.mercury-free-dentistry.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=27&Itemid=35

ADA and Pro-Amalgam Dentistry vs. Mercury-Free Dentistry

 

ADA and Pro-Amalgam Dentistry vs. Mercury-Free Dentistry By Sandy Duffy, Esq. PRO-AMALGAM DENTISTS AND THE ADA ASSERT THAT: MERCURY-FREE DENTISTS AND ANTI-MERCURY ACTIVISTS RESPOND: 1. Mercury in dental amalgams chemically binds with the alloy metals and results in an inert substance. The ADA also frequently claims that the components of amalgams are analogous to sodium and chlorine which are hazardous in their pure form but combined to form ordinary table salt. 1. An amalgam is a mixture and the properties of the components remain the same, i.e. mercury remains highly toxic and vaporizes and leaches out of the amalgam. Table salt is a compound, i.e. a new product which has different properties from the components. Guzzi, et al, The Lancet, 360:2081, Dec 21/28,2002; David M. Eide (Grant High School chemistry teacher), The Oregonian, Letters to the Editor, Dec. 30, 2000. 2. If mercury is emitted from amalgams, it is only in very minute amounts. 2. The average amalgam weighs 1 gram and is 50% mercury. As much as 50% of the mercury in an amalgam has been found to have vaporized after 5 years, and 80% after 20 years. Pleva J, “Dental mercury – a public health hazard“, Rev Environ Health 10(1):1-27 (1994); Pleva J, Mercury from dental amalgams: exposure and effects, Int J Risk & Safety in Med, 1992, 3: 1-22.An exacting study conducted in 1991 evaluated the amount of mercury emitted from a common amalgam in a test tube with 10 ml of water. This study showed that “the over-all mean release of mercury was 43.5 mcg per cm2/day, and the amount remained fairly constant during the duration of the experiments (2 years).” This was without pressure, heat or galvanism as would have occurred if the amalgams were in a human mouth. Chew, CL, et al, Long-term dissolution of mercury from a non-mercury-releasing amalgam, Clinical Preventative Dentistry, 13(3):5-7, May-June (1991). 3. The small amounts of mercury emitted from amalgams are not bioavailable. 3. Mercury vapor from amalgam is the single largest source of systemic mercury intake for persons with amalgam fillings. Average daily exposure for mercury is 3-17 ug. per day; for fish is 3 ug per day; for air it is .04 ug per day; and, for water .05 ug per day. WHO Document 118, p.36, 1991; A 1998 study by NIDR concluded that amalgams were the primary source of mercury in the urine of military personnel. 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. 4. There is no credible scientific evidence supporting a link between silver fillings and systemic diseases or chronic illnesses. 4. Dr. Murray Vimy, Clinical Associate Professor, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, prepared a document which sets out dental journal articles from 1957 to 1984 which very clearly show that mercury amalgams cause gingivitis and periodontal disease. This document can be downloaded from the website: (Link no longer valid:  www . testfoundation.org/vimyresponds.htm.) In turn, periodontal disease has been linked to cardiovascular disease and pre term, low birthweight babies. Greenwell H, et al, Emerging concepts in periodontal therapy, Drugs, 2002;62(18):2581-7.A 2001 scientific study corroborates the role of mercury in Alzheimer’s. The researchers concluded: “…that this visual evidence [of neurodegeneration] and previous biochemical data strongly implicate mercury as a potential etiological factor in neurodegeneration.” Leong, CW, et al, Retrograde degeneration of neurite membrane structural integrity of nerve growth cones following in vitro exposure to mercury, NeuroReport, 12(4):733-37, March 2001.The “previous data” included a study in which the authors concluded that: “We believe one …[theory of the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s] could be mercury vapor to which the majority of individuals are continuously exposed [from dental amalgam]. By reducing levels of viable brain tubulin, mercury vapor could exacerbate the conditions related to the onset of symptoms identified with Alzheimer’s.” Pendergrass, JC, et al, Mercury vapor inhalation inhibits binding of GTP to tubulin in rat brain: similarity to a molecular lesion in Alzheimer diseased brain, NeuroToxicology 18(2):315-324 (1997).Mercury is a potent neurotoxin and many peer reviewed scientific studies have found evidence that amalgam fillings may play a major role in central nervous system diseases such as depression, schizophrenia, memory problems, ALS and Parkinsons’s, (Link no longer valid: www . home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalg6.html)  A Canadian study found that blood levels of five metals, including mercury, were able to predict with 98% accuracy which children were learning disabled. Other studies found mercury causes learning disabilities and impairment, and lowers IQ. Marlowe, M, et al, “Main and interactive effects of metallic toxins on classroom behavior“, J Abnormal Child Psychol, 1985, 13(2):185-98; Moon C et al, “Main and Interactive Effect of Metallic Pollutants on Cognitive Functioning,” Journal of Learning Disabilities, April, 1985; Pihl, RO et al, “Hair element content in Learning Disabled Children“, Science, Vol 198, 1977, 204-6; Gowdy JM et al, “Whole blood mercury in mental hospital patients“, Am J Psychiatry, 1978, 135(1):115-7. Also see above website.There are 1000’s of other studies showing adverse health effects from mercury in general, and amalgam in particular. www.altcorp.com, www.amalgam.org, www.iaomt.com, 5. If amalgam was bad for you, dentists would be the canary in the mine and, in fact, they have no more health problems than anyone else. 5. A CDSPI Report (supplies malpractice insurance to dentists) was published in the Journal of Canadian Dentists in 1994. It reports that suicide rates among dentists are double those of other professions; 20% of dentists at any given time are on long term disability due to mental or nervous conditions including depression, increased alcohol consumption, fatigue, insomnia, ulcers and heart problems.Female dentists have increased spontaneous abortion rates and increased breast pathology, compared to the general population. Wiksztrajis, Med Pr 24:248 (1967 Lithuania). 6. No other country has banned the use of dental amalgam. 6. Most other developed countries have issued limited bans, or mandated health warnings regarding the use of mercury amalgam including: Canada, Great Britain, France, Austria, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. Swedish National Dept. of Health, Mercury Amalgam Review Panel, 1987; Heavy Metal Bulletin, Dec 2000, Vol 6, Issue 3.A Swedish National Mercury Amalgam Review Panel and a similar Norwegian panel found that “from a toxicological point of view, mercury is too toxic to use as a filling material.” Id.; Press Release, Swedish Council for Planning and Coordinating Research (FRN), Stockholm, 19 February, 1998; Norwegian Board of Health, Report 2652, www.helsetilsynet.no. 7. A few people can be allergic to amalgam, but there are only 50-100 reported cases. 7. In a clinical study, allergy tests performed on fourth year dental students found 44% of them allergic to mercury. E.G. Miller et al, “Prevalence of Mercury Hypersensitivity among Dental Students“, J Dent Res. 64:Abstract 1472, p338,1985; D.Kawahara et al, “Epidemiologic Study of Occupational Contact Dermatitis in the Dental Clinic“, Contact Dermatitis, Vol 28, No.2, pp114-5,1993.The Clifford Immune Reactivity Test is used to test dental patients for biocompatibility with dental materials. A review study of that test showed that 93% of patients tested were immune reactive to mercury. Clifford Consulting & Research, Inc, Dental Materials Reactivity Testing, Colorada Springs, Colo, www.ccrlab.com & Peak Energy Performance, Inc., Dental Materials Biocompatibility Testing, www.peakenergy.com.An important new study from the United Kingdom found that mercury can cause allergic and immunotoxic reactions, but there are no dose-response studies for immunologically sensitive individuals and, therefore, “it has not been possible to set a level for mercury in blood or urine below which mercury related symptoms will not occur.” Kazantzis, G., Mercury exposure and early effects: an overview, Med Lav 2002 May-June;93(3):139-47. 8. The U.S. Public Health Service, including the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization have all concluded that amalgam is a safe and effective restorative material for dental fillings. 8. In 1993 the PHS Director, Dr. James O. Mason, in an introductory letter to the USPHS CCEHRP report states: “Because the possibility of adverse health effects resulting from the use of dental amalgam cannot be fully discounted based on available scientific evidence, I am requesting the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Food and Drug Administration to undertake an expanded and targeted program of research, professional and consumer education and product regulation.”That report, at page 3 states: “In the absence of adequate human studies, the Subcommittee on Risk Assessment could not conclude with certainty whether or not the mercury in amalgam might pose a public health risk.”The USPHS, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry also has a publication entitled: Toxicological Profile for Mercury Update TP – 93-10 (1993) which specifically states that “the continuous exposure to mercury from amalgam fillings is not without risk to patients.” At p. 25.The American Dental Association never acknowledges that there is a 1999 Update of the USPHS publication which clearly states that amalgam is the primary source of human body burden.Two presenters at an NIH/NIDR Technology Assessment Conference in 1991 presented significant documentation of adverse effects of mercury amalgams. The Final Statement of this conference was written by W.D. McHugh and the Conference Editor was Joyce a. Reese; both are dentists. The Final Statement from that Conference is not a strong endorsement of the safety of mercury amalgams. It states: “While the current evidence supports the concept that existing dental restorative materials are safe, it must be recognized that the supporting data are incomplete.” (Advances in Dental Research, Vol. 6, page 143, Sept. 1992.)One of the presenters of the adverse effects of mercury amalgam wrote to protest the Final Statement. The NIH responded to him thus: “The recognition of the paucity of data on the subject, especially with regard to mercury, was the reason for using the term ‘Technology Assessment’ rather than ‘Consensus Development.’ Our guidelines for a Consensus Development Conference do require the statement to be data-based to the extent possible …. In regard to the studies you presented being ignored, they were definitely considered and discussed at length, but not emphasized in the Final Statement.”In response to public uproar after the airing of the CBS 60 Minutes segment called: “Is there poison in your mouth?” the FDA held a Dental Products Panel Meeting on March 15, 1991. At page 208 of a transcript of that meeting, there is a list of Panel Recommendations. It includes: “Without the addition of any statements that reflect that the Panel feels that there is any unsafety [sic] to the use of dental amalgam as a restorative material, I would ask the Panel, now, that the information under review today, if that information raises questions that warrant further research. I will poll the Panel for a yes or no vote.” All Panel members voted “yes,” therefore all agreeing that questions about the safety of amalgams had arisen. The Panel made no declaration that amalgam was safe or harmless.The latest FDA Consumer Update (December 31, 2002) informs consumers that Canada limits the use of mercury amalgam in pregnant women and it indicates that the FDA is reviewing the scientific studies related to the safety of mercury amalgam. While the FDA has up until now indicated that there was insufficient scientific proof that mercury amalgams cause adverse health effects, it has never declared mercury amalgam to be safe.A World Health Organization (WHO) Scientific Panel in 1995 concluded that there is no safe level of mercury exposure. The Chairman of the panel, Lars Friberg stated that “dental amalgam is not safe for everyone to use.” L.T.Friberg, “Status Quo and perspectives of amalgam and other dental materials“, International symposium proceedings, G.Thieme Verlag Struttgart, 1995.Additionally, the U.S. EPA found that mercury amalgam fillings which are removed from dental patients are hazardous waste and must be sealed airtight and disposed of as such. “Amalgam declared hazardous“, Dentistry Today, February, 1989, p1.And, finally, a Canadian Government study for Health Canada concluded that any person with any amalgam fillings receives exposure beyond that recommended by the USPHS standard. Mark Richardson, Environmental Health Directorate, Health Canada, Assessment of Mercury Exposure and Risks from Dental Amalgam, 1995, Final Report; G.M. Richardson et al, “A Monte Carlo Assessment of Mercury Exposure and Risks from Dental Amalgam“, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2(4): 709-761.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ==  =

(13) REBUTTAL TO THE CLAIM THAT THE SMOKING TEETH VIDEO IS NOT SCIENCE

http://curezone.org/forums/am.asp?i=778748

Educating instead of medicating.

Hi Grant,

There is a good rebuttal on this site to the “science” provided by the Doctor who said that the smoking tooth video was water vapour, not mercury vapour.

Sandra

FOR THE VIDEO “SMOKING TEETH” ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF MERCURY AMALGAM DENTAL FILLINGS, go to  www.iaomt.org

FOR PORTLAND OREGON’S DR. LAIDLER’S COMMENT ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF THE VIDEO, SEE: http://quackfiles.blogspot.com/2005/04/smoking-teeth-truth-gets-smoked-out.html

BELOW:

(dr kennedy filmed, produced and directed the smoking teeth video in association w/ the IAOMT, funded by a grant from The Preventive Dental Health Association of San Diego, California. he contacted dr. boyd haley (one of america’s top leading mercury scientists and chemists), Dr. Murray Vimy, DDS, a dentist and professor of endocrinology and metabolism at the University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. (author of Tooth Traitors), Dr. Roger Eichman, DDS (the dr who demonstated the mercury vapor release in the smoking teeth video at the IAOMT Symposium 2000 in Oxford England). dr kennedy cooberated w/ them to write a rebuttle to dr laidler’s misinformation).

REBUTTAL:

Quackbuster’s Analysis Fails Scientific Scrutiny:

Opinions of: Vimy, M.J., Haley, B.E., Eichman, R. and Kennedy, D.C. (2006)

Dr. Laidler’s criticism, Response to: “Smoking Teeth” – the truth gets “smoked out”, reduces to the following propositions. First, he contends that what is actually being seen is water vapor; and second, since mercury is a heavier molecule than the other constituents of air (i.e. oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, etc) the mercury vapor could not rise, but would fall toward the floor. This analysis is not consistent with the Laws of Physics and Chemistry for the following reasons. First, atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AAS) is a well substantiated scientific analytical technique used to measure a wide range of elements in various materials such as metals, pottery and glass. It is based on the simple fact that some elements in the Periodic Table absorb specific wavelengths of light. This constitutes that materials fingerprint. In the case of mercury vapor the absorbance wavelength is 253.7nm.

Thus, when a pure material is vaporized by the application of heat, while specific wavelengths are sequentially shone at it, the wavelength absorbed tells one the element making up the sample. In it simplest form, gold miners employ this principle when mining for gold. In the natural state, gold has a very high attraction for mercury; the miner scratches his ore sample in a dark container, while shining an ultraviolet light. If a vaporizing shadow is cast, then mercury is present and the sample is likely gold. The amount of light absorbed is proportional to the concentration of the mercury.

The video “Smoking Teeth = Poison Gas” is simply an application of this Miner’s Test, using an amalgam filling, containing approximately 50% mercury, as the sample. Water vapor will not absorb the wavelength from the Miner’s light; and, it will not cast a shadow. Therefore, for Dr. Laidler to suggest it will is unfounded. In the video, the vaporizing shadow is caused by mercury atoms absorbing the spectrum from the Miner’s light. A light, scientifically designed to identify the presence of mercury, not water. Water vapor cannot be visualized with a 254 mm light.

Secondly, Dr. Laidler is correct when he states, “When molecules vaporize, the volume they fill depends on the number of molecules and their temperature”. This is called the partial pressure and the partial pressure for mercury in air is 0.00185 mm at 250 C. However, Dr. Laidler fails to report that the vapor pressure of mercury doubles for every 100 C increase in temperature. Employing dubious calculations, Dr. Laidler concludes that because mercury is heavier than the other components of air, if what we saw was actually mercury vapor coming off those teeth, and not just water vapor, it should have been SINKING rather than rising – even at 370 degrees C.” This of course is false, since the mercury in the amalgam is being heated, causing the mercury molecules to become more active and vaporize. Thus, the mercury vapor rises from the amalgam and spreads into the environment in accordance with Boyles Law of Gases, the Guy-Lussac Law, and Avogadro’s Law and the Law of Entropy. These laws indicate that gas molecules by natural law move away from each other. Therefore, concentrated mercury atoms near the tooth naturally move to a location where less mercury atoms reside. These laws of the behavior of gas have nothing to do with gravity as Dr. Laidler improperly assumes.

In conclusion, Dr. Laidler reports that “ever since (he) saw the video, (he) felt that there was something wrong with it.” Indeed, he is absolutely correct! It is wrong to place materials containing 50% poisonous elemental mercury into humans, while calling them “silver” fillings. It is wrong to promote such materials as safe, when there is no level of mercury exposure considered to be “safe”. Dr. Laidler has tried to “Manufacture Uncertainty” where none actually exists.

---

IS MERCURY RELEASED FROM FILLINGS?

The Patient Asks, "Does the mercury come out of my fillings when I eat or chew gum?"
The ADA Answers: “Recent advances in both equipment and measurement techniques have allowed researchers to detect extremely low levels of mercury vapor in patients’ breath after they have chewed vigorously. Very small quantities of this mercury vapor are absorbed by the body instead of being exhaled. But no evidence exists that associate this minute amount of mercury vapor with any toxic effects.”	IAOMT Response: The ADA answer is false.
IAOMT Position: Published experimental evidence as early as 1926 has demonstrated that mercury is not locked in, but is released from fillings.16 More recent research has shown that both chewing and tooth brushing release mercury vapor into the human oral cavity.17 18 19Recent advances in both equipment and measurement technique have allowed researchers to find intra-oral mercury levels thirty to one hundred times higher that the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) maximum allowable concentration for air quality. (0.3 part per million)20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Toxicology authorities maintain that there is no threshold level of mercury exposure which can be considered totally harmless.27 28Dental fillings release mercury. The mercury release dramatically increases with pressure or heat stimulation to the fillings and does not return to baseline for more than 90 minutes.29 30 This continual release of mercury will inevitably result in measurable exposure from the 17,000 breaths that a person inhales daily. Once this mercury is inhaled 74% to 100% of the mercury is absorbed from the lung into the blood stream and distributed throughout the body.31 Personal habits such as chewing gum, grinding teeth and mouth breathing will greatly increase an individuals daily dose exposure to dental amalgam mercury. The 1/2 life for mercury in humans is approximately 70 days. Thus, small multiple daily doses of mercury will result in a significant accumulation over time. The critical issues are the potential for exposure to the developing fetus and mercury accumulation in children because of their low body weight.To study these possibilities Vimy et al. (1990) designed an elegant animal experiment utilizing sheep and radioactively tagged mercury203. Twelve occlusal amalgams were placed in the molars of pregnant sheep. The mothers femoral vein, the placental sack and the femoral vein of the fetus were cannulated.32 33 Radioactivity measurements determined the presence and quantity of mercury from the dental amalgam fillings in the various body tissues of both the mother and fetuses. The experiment is specific for mercury from fillings, since radioactive mercury is not a naturally occuring substance in the environment. The design of this experiment eliminates the issue of mercury source.1) Within 3 days after amalgam placement mercury was found in the maternal blood, amniotic fluid, fetal blood, and maternal urine and feces.2) By 16 days after amalgam placement the maternal mercury levels were highest in the kidney, liver, G.I. tract, and thyroid. The mercury levels in the fetus were highest in the pituitary, liver, kidney, and placental cotyledon.3) At 33 days after amalgam placement (birthtime), most fetal tissues had higher levels of mercury than the maternal tissues. Specifically, the fetal liver, epiphysial bone, bile, bone marrow, blood, and brain.4) During lactation there was 8 times more mercury in the milk than maternal blood serum. This resulted in an increase in mercury exposure to the neonate.5) Seventy-three days after amalgam placement, mercury levels in the maternal kidneys, liver, parotid glands, pancreas, pituitary glands, urine, bile, brain, and thyroid were still rising slowly.The researchers concluded that mercury vapor released from dental amalgam fillings is readily absorbed in lung, gastrointestinal tract and jaw bone and progressively accumulates in maternal and fetal tissues with exposure duration. Neonatal mercury exposure from this dental material occurs via milk. They stated in their conclusions that, “our laboratory findings in this investigation are at variance with the anecdotal opinion of the dental profession, which claims that amalgam tooth fillings are safe.”

= = = = = = = = = = = = = ==

MISCELLANEOUS THOUGHTS

The United States is internationally renowned  for its sue-happy culture with its exorbitant settlements.  If you are a dentist, or if you are the amalgam industry in the U.S., you must have an impenetrable shield against challenges to the health consequences of mercury amalgams.  Heaven help you if there is a class-action lawsuit and a connection is established in court.

If you search on the word “amalgams” on the American Dental Association website,  http://www.ada.org/ , you will find their efforts and testimony regarding the safety of mercury amalgams.   That is not the place to go, if you are looking for information you can trust.

American culture is not conducive to putting problems on the table for the purpose of working out solutions that will benefit the community.   The culture is an adversarial one,  with more emphasis on the benefits for the individual, and money-driven.

– – – – – – – –

Heaven forbid that we should effectively address removal of cause, which a scientific and rational approach would do!  Indeed, Government funding for health research has as a criterion, that priority will be given to research that “has the potential for commercialization”.  There are no “commercial” benefits in removal of the causes of disease and developmental problems.  But consider the benefits in reduced suffering, in reduced costs for health and palliative care, and of a reduction in poisoning of the environment.

It doesn’t matter whether we are talking about MS or about cancer, about mercury in dental amalgams or about toxic chemicals.

People have been running for 30 years to find a cure for cancer (and MS, etc).  You’d think they’d catch on.  They should be running to remove the causes of these diseases.

The failure to act responsibly and rationally demonstrates the effectiveness of advertising campaigns (propaganda) for Terry Fox, with no disrespect – – If Terry was here I’m sure he’d say – – after 30 years of efforts that bear no fruit (surprise! Surprise!  There is no cure.) “Hey!  Let’s not have more people like me die because of the poisons.  Let’s get rid of them!  Let’s put all our effort into finding ways to transition away from the slow poisoning of ourselves and the planet.”   His understanding would have evolved over the 30 years since his Run, along with the disease evidence.  He wouldn’t, 30 years later, be stuck in the same place.  The disease organizations, cancer especially, play on human emotions to keep us stuck in that same place.   The development of “critical thinking” through our educational institutions is rhetoric; the population is deficient in this ability.

The failure to engage in a sane approach might also have to do with the fact, which I found out when I called the Terry Fox Run a couple of years ago to press them to prioritize removal of cause – – the Executive Director came straight from the biotech industry.  Of course he didn’t, and didn’t want to, hear anything about removal of the causes of cancer.  The biotech industry in Canada is the chemical companies and their owners, biotech pharma.   In the same vein, there are large industry interests in dental amalgams.

= = = =  ==  = = ==  ==

(14)   ADDITION:   The first video (Dr. Boyd Haley) explains why there is a higher incidence of autism and attention deficit in boys.

Further to the email sent Sept 21, 2010 on mercury.

This video is of Dr. Boyd Haley, University of Kentucky, (859) 218-6530, chairman of the chemistry department since 1996.

http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=249482&site_id=1

One thing he explains is the seeming contradiction:

–   Non-autistic people have much higher levels of mercury in hair samples than autistic people.

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

SOURCES OF MERCURY POISONING ARE NOT USUALLY ADDRESSED IN THE SAME ARTICLE.

Dr. Haley addresses mercury in vaccinations and mercury from dental amalgams in this one video.

Mercury from the Mother’s dental amalgams crosses the placenta to the foetus, mercury loads from the Mother’s amalgams are transferred into breast milk, vaccinations have then added to the baby’s mercury load, followed by insertion of their own dental amalgams when they are children.

DIFFERENT DIS-EASE OUTCOMES OF MERCURY POISONING ARE TYPICALLY NOT ADDRESSED IN THE SAME ARTICLE.

An article will deal with the connection between (for example)

–  mercury dental amalgams and alzheimers disease

while other literature will address

–   the connection between mercury from thimerosal in vaccinations and autism (for example).

It is not common to address the dis-ease sources and different outcomes at one go.

CHILDREN AND ADULTS:

The effects of mercury poisoning in children tend not to be discussed at the same time as the effects that emerge in adults after long term exposure to mercury through their dental amalgams. Nor in conjunction with mercury adults might receive through flu vaccines.

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

ADDITIONAL VALUABLE DOCUMENTATION ON MERCURY POISONING FROM OUR EARLIER WORK.

The email on mercury poisoning sent Sept 21, 2010 (Medical Orthodoxy:  mercury in dental amalgams.  Documentation.) told the stories of Joe Bourgault and Grant Schoenroth.  In middle age these two once-healthy men stared death in the face, if they could not determine the cause of their precipitous declines in health.

Earlier work of our network made it easier for me to see the effects of mercury poisoning from various sources, creating different dis-ease outcomes, across the age spectrum.

It goes back to Robert F. Kennedy Jr whose work we first circulated in August 2004.

– – – – – – – – – – – – — – –  – – – – –

http://www.alternet.org/story/19461/

“There are several ways to measure the effectiveness of a democracy. One is to look at how much the public is included in community decision-making.  Another is to evaluate access to justice.

The most telling aspect of a government, however, is how it distributes the goods of the land. Does it safeguard the commonwealth – the public trust assets – on behalf of the public? Or does it allow the shared wealth of our communities to be stolen from the public by corporate power?”

I use the preceding quote in relation to information and knowledge, an essential component of the commonwealth.  The medical profession cannot monopolize information and knowledge, especially not in the service of Big Pharma and the chemical corporations.

– – – – – – – – – – – – — – –  – – – – –

In April 2005 we circulated Kennedy’s article related to his book “Crimes Against Nature”.

Also in April, 2005 his article  “Congress Bill Will Allow Drug Companies to Continue Poisoning Children with Mercury-Tainted Vaccines”  Bill would insulate pharmaceutical firms from liability

http://www.organicconsumers.org/school/mercury041505.cfm

“Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has buried a provision in the “Protecting America in the War on Terror Act” to insulate the pharmaceutical industry from liability for venal actions that may have poisoned an entire generation of Americans.

Mounting evidence suggests that Thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative in children’s vaccines, may be responsible for the exponential growth of autism, attention deficit disorder, speech delays and other childhood neurological disorders now epidemic in the United States.”

– – – – – – – – – – – – — – –  – – – – –

In Sept 2005 the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN) brought Kennedy to Saskatoon to speak.  He talked of our willingness to let corporations pass their environmental and health costs off to the public to pay.  (Generally accepted accounting principles permit these costs to be “externalized”.)   He emerged as one of my heroes.  I trust him.

You would not describe Kennedy as a charmer or as a smooth-talking guy.  He is incredibly devoted to the public good.

– – – – – – – – – – – – — – –  – – – – –

On July 27, 2009 I circulated the email:

VACCINATIONS, DEADLY IMMUNITY BY ROBERT F KENNEDY JR (AUTISM)

http://www.infowars.com/vaccinations-deadly-immunity/ )

I wrote:  “ . . some things are too serious to ignore.

All your friends and relatives might want to know . .

This is all about the pharmaceutical corporations and their collaborators in government.  All at the expense of our health.  Some of it is heart-breaking (A MOTHER’S JOURNEY IN HEALING AUTISM BY JENNY MCCARTHY)”

It continues to be a very important article, right down to the notes at the bottom.  This one shows how “the science” is manipulated by influential professionals.

“Since that earlier correction, however, it has become clear from responses to the article that the forty-percent number, while accurate, is misleading. It measures the total mercury load an infant received from vaccines during the first six months, calculates the daily average received based on average body weight, and then compares that number to the EPA daily limit. But infants did not receive the vaccines as a “daily average”.  They received massive doses on a single day, through multiple shots. As the story states, these single-day doses exceeded the EPA limit by as much as 99 times. Based on the misunderstanding, and to avoid further confusion, we have amended the story to eliminate the forty-percent figure.”

– – – – – – – – – – – – — – –  – – – – –

The video conversation with Dr. Boyd Haley is another valuable contribution to an understanding of mercury poisoning.  The URL I had no longer works.  It is easiest just to google “Boyd Haley Interview”.