Please watch the movie and realize amalgam or silver fillings are either destroying peoples health or killing many slowly!! Mercury is a neurotoxin!!
Amalgam Fillings
Background
Amalgam is the generic term applied to the silver-mercury filling commonly used in dentistry to restore teeth. Amalgam is also known as the "silver filling" (due to its shiny appearance) or the silver–mercury filling. Amalgam literally means mixed with mercury and in the dental sense that is true. Powdered metals and metal compounds consisting of silver, copper, tin and zinc are mixed with about an equal weight of liquid mercury. Three different types of chemical reactions take place within this mixture and the resultant silver-mercury amalgam will set at room temperature and, most importantly, within a few minutes.
Silver-mercury amalgam has been used as a filling material for 160 years and has enjoyed the reputation of being an inexpensive, long lasting filling. The materials alone only cost about one dollar. Although the average life span of a silver-mercury amalgam filling is only around five years, according to Dr. Leon Silverstone at the University of Colorado School of Dentistry, some amalgam fillings have been known to last for up to 20 years.
Three times now, mercury from fillings has been accused of initiating diseases. The first time was in the 1830s, again in the 1920s and the third time a movement started in 1973 in which more substantial information has been available to determine the toxicity of mercury. Up until recently, it was felt that the mercury stayed within the filling. Now it is known that mercury leaches out every minute of the day.
Today's Fillings
Mercury comprises about 50 percent of the most common filling in the world called silver-mercury amalgam. Amalgam also contains copper, tin, silver and zinc. It is silver colored when first placed; therefore, the name, "silver" filling. After it has been in the mouth, mercury fillings begin to tarnish. The blacker the filling, the more tarnish has taken place. Silver-mercury fillings have an electrical current which can be measured. The higher the current, the faster mercury is being released. As of 1976, the new ADA sponsored (and patent holder) high copper mercury amalgam started taking over the market. Mercury is released 50 times faster from high copper (around 30 percent) amalgam than the "conventional" silver-mercury amalgam of before that time.
Currently dental amalgam fillings contain around 48 to 51 percent mercury by weight. Copper comes in second with the high copper amalgam now leading the markets. Copper can be from 24 to 33 percent of the amalgam. The higher the copper level, the faster the mercury and copper - both - are emitted from the fillings. If a gold crown is anywhere in the mouth, mercury comes off faster. According to university studies done by Dr. Chew, over the first two years after placement, amalgams release bout 34 micrograms of mercury per filling (per square centimeter of filling exposed) per day. These tests were done of silver-mercury fillings sitting in water and tested daily.
There are many things that make mercury come out faster. As just mentioned, any other metals such as gold crowns, nickel crowns and removable bridges will increase the speed of release of mercury. Chewing foods increases the emissions, dramatically. Hot liquids, like coffee, increase the release by thousands of percent, but only for 10 or 15 minutes. Abrasion from chewing gum increases the release of mercury by 1500 percent as published. Abrasion during the grinding of teeth during waking or sleeping hours, called "bruxism," also releases mercury vapor.
Compression of the filling from chewing releases mercury into the mouth. The electrical charge on a filling gives a hint as to how fast mercury, copper and other metals are being released. The higher the current measured, the faster the mercury release. The total amount of mercury released would be difficult to measure, but suffice it to say that the current measurements are adequate to contribute significantly to disease processes and the actual total mercury release in a living human being with saliva (which has a much higher electrical potential with dissimilar metals than water), in a warm , with acidic foods, bruxism, chewing gum, eating foods and several hundred bacterial strains is greater than any of today's estimates.
https://www.hugginsappliedhealing.com/amalgam-fillings.php
In November 2001, U.S.Representative Diane Watson (D-CA] announced that she was introducing a bill intended to stop dentists from using amalgam to fill cavities [1]. She appears to believe that the mercury content of amalgam poses a severe threat to health. There isn't a shred of scientific evidence supporting this belief.
Amalgam use has been supported by the American Dental Association [2]; the U.S. Public Health Service; the vast majority of dentists; the National Council Against Health Fraud; and Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports magazine [3]. But Watson, who appears to have swallowed anti-amalgam propaganda completely, thinks that a law is needed to protect the American public from science-based beliefs.
In announcing her intentions, Watson contributed to a press release that appears to have been written and distributed by the public relations agency for an anti-amalgam organization. The statements in the release, which is posted to an antifluoridation site, are similar to those in the proposed bill [6].
National Council Against Health Fraud president Robert S. Baratz, M.D., D.D.S., Ph.D., has written detailed analyses of both the bill and the press release [7,8]. He notes that Watson doesn't appear to understand that different forms of mercury have different properties and that the mercury in tooth restorations poses no danger. He also points out that since the FDA doesn't actually regulate amalgam, the bill might not have any effect even if it were passed. But he warns:
Quackwatch Home Page
Mar 10, 2014 | News Americas
U.S. Rep. Diane Watson
Introduces Anti-Amalgam Bill
Introduces Anti-Amalgam Bill
Stephen Barrett, M.D.
In November 2001, U.S.Representative Diane Watson (D-CA] announced that she was introducing a bill intended to stop dentists from using amalgam to fill cavities [1]. She appears to believe that the mercury content of amalgam poses a severe threat to health. There isn't a shred of scientific evidence supporting this belief.Amalgam use has been supported by the American Dental Association [2]; the U.S. Public Health Service; the vast majority of dentists; the National Council Against Health Fraud; and Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports magazine [3]. But Watson, who appears to have swallowed anti-amalgam propaganda completely, thinks that a law is needed to protect the American public from science-based beliefs.
Background Information
Representative Watson was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in a special election on June 5, 2001, with 75% of the vote. The top 20 contributors to her campaign included the American Medical Association ($5,000), the American Academy of Ophthalmology ($2,500) and the American Dental Association ($1,500). [4] Before entering Congress, she had spent several months as the U.S. Ambassador to Federated States of Micronesia and 20 years as a California state senator, representing the 26th Senatorial District, which encompasses a large portion of Los Angeles. Her background includes:- Bachelor of Arts degree in Education, University of California, Los Angeles
- Master of Science Degree in School Psychology from California State University, Los Angeles
- Attendance at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- PhD in Educational Administration from the Claremont Graduate School in 1987
- Her occupational experience includes working as an elementary school teacher, acting principal, assistant superintendent of child welfare, and school psychologist. She has taught at both Cal State Los Angeles and Long Beach. She taught gifted children in Okinawa and France; directed the Secondary School Allied Health Professions Project at UCLA; and was a health occupations specialist for the California Department of Education.
- She was named "Legislator of the Year" several times by the State Bar of California, CSULA, the California Trial Lawyers Association, the California National Organization for Women, and the State Council on Developmental Disabilities; and in 1982, she received the "Alumnus of the Year Award" from UCLA.
There are differences between dental materials and the individual elements or components that compose these materials. For example, dental amalgam filling material is composed mainly of mercury (43-54%) and varying percentages of silver, tin, and copper (46-57%). . . . Like all materials in our environment, each of these elements by themselves is toxic at some level of concentration if they are taken into the body. When they are mixed together, they react chemically to form a crystalline metal alloy. Small amounts of free mercury may be released from amalgam fillings over time and can be detected in bodily fluids and expired air. The important question is whether any free mercury is present in sufficient levels to pose a health risk. Toxicity of any substance is related to dose, and doses of mercury or any other element that may be released from dental amalgam fillings falls far below the established safe levels as stated in the 1999 US Health and Human Service Toxicological Profile for Mercury Update [5].
The New Bill
Watson's proposed bill, titled the Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act, would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to "prohibit the introduction of dental amalgam into interstate commerce . . . effective January 1, 2007, if it is a mercury alloy intended for use as a dental amalgam." As of July 1, 2002, it would would also ban amalgam use in children under 18 years of age, pregnant women, and lactating women, and would require a warning that " the product contains mercury, which is an acute neurotoxin, and therefore poses health risks. The bill's second section -- a list of 11 "Congressional findings" -- would declare that amalgam "is an acute neurotoxin," "continually emits poisonous vapors," poses great danger to developing infants, and is opposed by several prestigious medical organizations. Each of these assertions is preposterous.In announcing her intentions, Watson contributed to a press release that appears to have been written and distributed by the public relations agency for an anti-amalgam organization. The statements in the release, which is posted to an antifluoridation site, are similar to those in the proposed bill [6].
National Council Against Health Fraud president Robert S. Baratz, M.D., D.D.S., Ph.D., has written detailed analyses of both the bill and the press release [7,8]. He notes that Watson doesn't appear to understand that different forms of mercury have different properties and that the mercury in tooth restorations poses no danger. He also points out that since the FDA doesn't actually regulate amalgam, the bill might not have any effect even if it were passed. But he warns:
The American scientific community, on which the FDA depends in part for its advice in the FDA regulatory processes, bases its opinions on the scientific process of discovery, validated by experimental evidence. The purpose of this bill seems to mandate the adoption of illegitimate facts upon the scientific community. It would be a grave and dangerous precedent for that to occur. The review and regulation of medical devices and their components should be based on objective scientific fact, not political whimsy [7].In May 2002, Time magazine's Web site posted a column by science writer Leon Jaroff urging Watson to modify her views on amalgam fillings. Calling Watson "scientifically unsophisticated," Jaroff stated that her association with amalgam opponents "can only tarnish what has been an otherwise worthy career" and advised her to get over her "amalgam hang-up" and "learn not to be taken in by quacks." [9]
For Further Information
- The Mercury Amalgam Scam: How Anti-Amalgamists Swindle People.
- Analysis of Proposed Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act.
- Analysis of Watson's Statement about the Act
References
- Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act, draft, Nov 1, 2001.
- ADA Council on Scientific Affairs. Dental amalgam: Update on safety concerns. Journal of the American Dental Association 129:494-501, 1998.
- The mercury in your mouth. Consumer Reports 56:316-319, 1991.
- Data from Center for Responsive Politics, accessed Nov 11, 2001.
- Dental Board of California. Dental materials fact sheet, adopted Oct 17, 2001.
- Statement by Congresswoman Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles): Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act. Los Angeles, California, Nov 5, 2001. Accessed on Fluoride Action Network Web site, Nov 9, 2001.
- Baratz RS. Analysis of U.S. Representative Diane Watson's Statement about the "Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act." Quackwatch Web site, Nov 13, 2001.
- Baratz, RS. Analysis of U.S. Representative Diane Watson's Proposed "Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act." Quackwatch Web site, Nov 13, 2001.
- Jaroff, L. There's nothing dangerous about 'silver' fillings: But some in Congress continue to insist there is. Time.com, May 8, 2002.
Amalgam opponents file lawsuit against FDA
WASHINGTON, USA: Last week, several groups advocating for mercury-free dentistry fillings filed a lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration, accusing the state agency of failing to address the risk of mercury in dental fillings properly. The plaintiffs are demanding either a formal ban on dental amalgam use or a risk reclassification of dental amalgam by the FDA.
According to nonprofit health organization the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Technology (IAOMT), the FDA failed to respond within a reasonable time to petitions calling for a ban or placement in a higher risk class with additional restrictions and more stringent proof of safety.
The FDA currently lists dental amalgam as a Class II device, a class of higher risk devices that require greater regulatory control to provide safety and effectiveness, such as condoms. However, the agency does not prescribe control or other measures intended to protect the public although the risks of dental amalgam fillings have been demonstrated scientifically by a number of studies, IAOMT stated.
Among other findings, it has been documented that mercury, which can accumulate in the body, is associated with adverse effects in the nervous system and the kidneys. Children in particular are more susceptible to the effects of mercury from dental amalgam fillings. Therefore, many countries advise against the placement of mercury fillings in children and pregnant women. Owing to its toxicity, the chemical has been banned in disinfectants, thermometers and many other consumer products.
According to IAOMT, a joint panel of physicians and dentists reviewed the FDA's white paper on dental amalgam in 2006 and found that it did not demonstrate adequate proof of safety. In addition, the FDA's scientific advisory panel urged the agency to review its amalgam recommendations based on current science in 2010. However, the FDA has not revised its statement to date.
The academy also stated that the U.S. government is the largest user of dental amalgam. It is provided to welfare recipients, prisoners, people residing on American Indian reservations and the military, serving predominately low-income patients, including women and children.
The lawsuit was filed on March 5 at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by several nonprofit organizations dedicated to raising awareness of and educating the public on the dangers of mercury, including IAOMT, Moms Against Mercury, Dental Amalgam Mercury Solutions and the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs, as well as individuals who claim to have suffered adverse effects of mercury.
Click here to read more about dental amalgam.
The FDA currently lists dental amalgam as a Class II device, a class of higher risk devices that require greater regulatory control to provide safety and effectiveness, such as condoms. However, the agency does not prescribe control or other measures intended to protect the public although the risks of dental amalgam fillings have been demonstrated scientifically by a number of studies, IAOMT stated.
Among other findings, it has been documented that mercury, which can accumulate in the body, is associated with adverse effects in the nervous system and the kidneys. Children in particular are more susceptible to the effects of mercury from dental amalgam fillings. Therefore, many countries advise against the placement of mercury fillings in children and pregnant women. Owing to its toxicity, the chemical has been banned in disinfectants, thermometers and many other consumer products.
According to IAOMT, a joint panel of physicians and dentists reviewed the FDA's white paper on dental amalgam in 2006 and found that it did not demonstrate adequate proof of safety. In addition, the FDA's scientific advisory panel urged the agency to review its amalgam recommendations based on current science in 2010. However, the FDA has not revised its statement to date.
The academy also stated that the U.S. government is the largest user of dental amalgam. It is provided to welfare recipients, prisoners, people residing on American Indian reservations and the military, serving predominately low-income patients, including women and children.
The lawsuit was filed on March 5 at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by several nonprofit organizations dedicated to raising awareness of and educating the public on the dangers of mercury, including IAOMT, Moms Against Mercury, Dental Amalgam Mercury Solutions and the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs, as well as individuals who claim to have suffered adverse effects of mercury.
Click here to read more about dental amalgam.
