|
The War on Mercury (UPDATED)
By Marvin Schissel, D.D.S.
Editor's note: With the Senate narrowly staving off more restrictive mercury regulations recently (see ACSH's new report on mercury emissions for an explanation of the futility of trying to improve human health through further limitations on factory emissions of mercury), New York governor George Pataki recently approving an unscientific and belated call for mercury-free vaccines, and dental quacks perpetually blaming human ills on mercury in dental fillings, mercury may be in the running for America's Least Favorite Element. ACSH Advisor Dr. Marvin Schissel looks at the latest on the dental front...
It is characteristic of pseudoscience devotees that when one of their assertions is refuted they come up with another -- equally unsound, equally outrageous. For some time, dental amalgam fillings, which contain about 50% mercury, have come under attack by the fringe, who claim that mercury in fillings vaporizes into the mouth and causes manifold health catastrophes. But in amalgam fillings the mercury is bound tightly to other metals, chiefly silver. Any mercury vaporization into the mouth is negligible -- otherwise these fillings would not last long (a properly done amalgam filling can last a lifetime).
Dr. Stephen Barrett has made an analogy between water and amalgam: hydrogen is an explosive gas; oxygen is highly combustible. However, put them together and we get water, which is neither explosive nor combustible. Similarly, mercury in some compounds is highly toxic, but not when bound in dental amalgam. Moreover, the American Dental Association has labeled the removal of amalgams for alleged reasons of health to be improper and unethical.
Recently, some anti-amalgamists, confronted with the overwhelming evidence that dental amalgam fillings have never been shown to be a health hazard, have given their pet cause a new and bizarre spin. They are claiming that the mercury in fillings vaporizes, then is excreted by the body and contributes to environmental toxicity. To this they add some grisly postscripts: if a person with amalgam fillings dies, this increases the toxicity of the earth where the lamented dental patient is buried. Worse yet, should the dearly beloved dental patient be cremated, mercury vapors will pollute the atmosphere!
In their desperation, the fringe seems to be drifting towards the macabre, focusing on lavatories, cemeteries, and crematoriums. I next expect them to warn ghouls and grave robbers of the dread mercury peril linked to their occupations.
Here are conclusions from two recent Swiss studies:
"The minimal contribution to mercury contamination due to cremation can thus not be used as an argument to ban the use of dental amalgams."
"The amount of mercury contamination during cremation as a result of amalgam fillings is so low that no additional preventive measures are required at the crematoria."
The tiny amount of mercury released into the environment from amalgam fillings has never been documented as a health threat.
Mercury occurs naturally in the environment: burying people with amalgams returns but a tiny amount. Moreover, studies done some years ago showed that dentists who work with amalgam have between three and fifteen times the body burden of mercury of the general public but as a group have no greater incidence of disease and actually enjoy somewhat better health than the population at large.
Another dental-related bit of dubious treatment in the news:
The Aetna insurance company has been sued because they have refused to pay for procedures related to a device that allegedly diagnoses a jaw disease, so-called "neuralgia-inducing cavitational osteonecrosis." This hypothetical disease is not recognized by science. The suit was brought by the makers of the device and financially backed by dentists calling themselves "biological dentists." Some "biological" dentists have advocated unusual treatments that have no scientific support, including a particularly heartless and radical practice, the extraction of any root canal-treated tooth. They have also claimed, without valid evidence, that a variety of pains throughout the body can be caused by the "cavitational osteonecrosis" and should be treated with surgery of the jaw, although no evidence was established to verify either the malady or the treatment. I saw a patient who was in substantial pain after such surgery was performed by a "biological dentist," and that pain persisted for over a year.
The American Dental Association lists "biological" dentistry with "unconventional dentistry, defined as encompassing scientifically unproven practices." The ADA statement "encourages advocates of unconventional dentistry to pursue scientifically valid, systematic assessment of diagnostic and treatment efficacy and safety."
The suit against Aetna failed but is only one of many cases of a dubious treatment, having failed in the court of science, trying to obtain legitimacy through a court of law. And efforts continue to prohibit the use of amalgam. I believe it is necessary for mainline scientific organizations to overcome their reticence and speak out strongly against pseudoscience, lest medical treatments and policies be chosen not by doctors and scientists but by know-nothing politicians, quacks, and political opportunists.
Dr. Marvin J. Schissel is a dentist and an advisor to the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH.org, HealthFactsAndFears.com), the National Council Against Health Fraud, and the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.
W. Carl McMillan, DMD (November 7, 2005)
I don't know how any educated individual can make a comparison of H2O to Hg in an amalgam of all CATIONS. It takes an anion and cation to form a stable compound. There cannot be anything stable about Mercury, Copper, Silver, Tin, and Zinc. The ADA has made a statement acknowledging the release of Hg from amalgams, but it is insignificant? A known neurotoxin, accumulating in one's body over a lifetime, could not be insignificant especially if you happen to be unable to excrete like your neighbor. There is no science to prove safety with amalgam. There is a boat load of science saying that mercury (Hg makes up roughly 50% of amalgam) is unsafe. Wake up!! Someone's pockets are getting lined for a cover up.
Pat Kultgen (November 7, 2005)
I must respond to the erroneous assumptions in this commentary.
Unfortunately, the author has clearly failed to do his research before publicly commenting on two issues that affect millions of people in this country.
Dental amalgams have been researched for over one hundred years, and the results have been published in many peer reviewed journals; Mercury amalgams are harmful.
As for cavitations, they are also real!
If the good doctor would care to contact me, I will be more than happy to share my personal experiences associated with mercury poisoning due to amalgams and direct him to supporting research.
s yours,
Pat Kultgen
Craig (November 8, 2005)
I would like to take issue with someone you reference in your article. Dr Steven Barrett, whom I believe is a non-practicing psychiatrist and apparently a self-appointed expert on chemical compounds, has made some grievous errors. Yes, water is a compound consisting of hydrogen and oxygen in a fixed ratio. Table salt is a compound consisting of sodium and chlorine in a fixed ratio.
With respect to mercury compounds and mercury alloys there is a world of difference. Mercury amalgam is not a compound; it is a mixture, an alloy that is blended together in variable ratios with other metals as determined by the manufacturer. The mercury is not chemically bound to the other metals within the alloy and can escape as vapor and corrosion products.
If you would like to try an interesting experiment, place water in a pan on the stove and heat it. You will get hot water and steam (water vapor) but it is still water. If you heat salt you will get hot salt, not sodium and chlorine gas. If you heat mercury amalgam, filling material, you will indeed get mercury vapor coming off of the alloy. If you heat it for a sufficient period of time over the stove you will have all of the other metals of the alloy remaining in the pan but no mercury. I hope you use good ventilation.
It might well be prudent to review the Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry -Toxicological Profile for Mercury, which can be found at:
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp46-c5.pdf
It references the health effects of mercury, the likelihood of mercury amalgam fillings being the primary source of mercury exposure in those who have mercury fillings (vapor coming from the alloy mixture). It also addresses the variability of exposure from mercury fillings depending on bruxing or chewing habits, which increase the rate of vaporization.
Short term exposure of animals to high levels of mercury vapor cause easily recognized symptoms.
Yes, it says no definitive human studies have demonstrated a direct disease cause effect relationship exists due to long-term exposure to low levels of mercury vapor. When 80% of that vapor from your fillings is absorbed by breathing, 24 hours each day, I would just as soon avoid the risk. How about you?
I am sure I would not volunteer for a long-term study that exposed me to toxic vapor to determine the levels necessary for a disease to be recognized. Would you?
If mercury usage in fillings were not “grandfathered” in, avoiding all safety concerns by virtue of it having been used for 150+ years, would it be accepted today as safe material for implanting in the human body? I doubt it.
This is just my perspective as a chemical engineer and dentist.
Christoph Reuss (November 8, 2005)
You cite recent Swiss research that the mercury pollution from crematoria is "minimal" compared to other sources. But you failed to mention that mercury filters are mandatory in Swiss crematoria, unlike in other countries. So it's no big wonder that our Hg pollution from crematoria is minimal. However, a middle-sized crematorium without Hg filters emits as much mercury as 1,100 spilled mercury thermometers.
Also, I was surprised to learn from Mr. Barrett that water is an alloy of hydrogen and oxygen.
Christoph Reuss, Switzerland
|
