SkepticblogSkepticblog logo banner

top navigation:

FDA “Reverses” Its Position on Amalgam Fillings?

by Brian Dunning, Jun 18 2009

Not.

Although, if you follow the alt-med news, you may have seen an article from six months ago or so trumpeting “FDA Reluctantly Admits Mercury Fillings Have Neurotoxic Effects on Children“. Wow! So, the FDA has finally admitted that the mercury in amalgam fillings is having devastating results on our children’s health. It’s on the Internet, so it must be true.

This headline grabbed my attention, in part because I had done a Skeptoid episode debunking the silly “smoking teeth” video on YouTube, made by some anti-amalgam people. In it, they dipped an extracted tooth in water and then filmed the water vapor rising off of the tooth using a fluorescent screen; only they said it was mercury vapor, and that it represented the constant flow of mercury into your body from amalgam fillings. (Mercury vapor is far heavier than air, it wouldn’t rise, it would sink.) It was a textbook case of alarmism.

The American Dental Association has always maintained that amalgam fillings are safe. They do release mercury, but it’s at the same rate as a gold or silver watch or ring releases gold into your body. It’s orders of magnitude below safe levels, and so amalgam’s many benefits have always far outweighed any risks.

The FDA actually changed its position in 2006, saying that more study is needed, but did not go so far as to say that amalgam shouldn’t be used or that people should consider having existing amalgam fillings removed. Removal of an amalgam filling would alone release far more mercury than keeping it for a lifetime would.

So I was pretty intrigued by this article. It seems to suggest that there had been some recent ruling or change, however, no mention of any such event was made in the article. The best I could determine was that this article was referencing the 2006 change. My guess is that it was a slow news day, so this “Natural News” web site trawled and found this old item which could be easily manipulated. According to the article:

The warning was one of the conditions that the FDA agreed to in settling a lawsuit filed by several consumer health groups.

Whether that’s true or not I don’t know, because the article gives no references or sources. Maybe it is; such a change does sometimes happen under pressure from consumer groups, which is an unfortunate but true facet of life in our political world. It is true that the FDA continues its ongoing review of amalgam fillings (that’s what the FDA does, it’s not news) and is expected to issue an updated ruling in July 2009.

The entire article is grossly dishonest. First, the headline:

FDA Reluctantly Admits Mercury Fillings Have Neurotoxic Effects on Children

The FDA has never said any such thing, and absolutely disagrees with that claim. What the FDA does say is:

Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses.

They did not “reluctantly admit” anything, they pointed out that mercury is a known neurotoxin (who knew!) and that it’s contained in amalgam fillings. The same way cement contains lime.

And then, a quote from the “lead lawyer” (still no case citation or source provided):

“Gone, gone, gone are all of FDA’s claims that no science exists that amalgam is unsafe.”

Absurdly untrue. Every study we have continues to show that amalgam fillings are safe. The next quote is from “another plaintiff”:

“It’s a watershed moment.”

How do they define a “watershed moment”? Nothing substantial changes? The ADA and FDA both continue to endorse the use of amalgam fillings, and this is the “watershed” turnaround that the anti-amalgam crew has been waiting for? I don’t think so. Maybe, just maybe, this article is trying to sensationalize and frighten.

84 Responses to “FDA “Reverses” Its Position on Amalgam Fillings?”

  1. Cambias says:

    I expect the genesis of the article was a press release from one of the lawyers quoted.

    • I hope so, because I contributed to these consumer organizations to make sure this issue got enough attention so that it would discussed in a blog like this one. That was the only way that the FDA would have to recognize the implications of the MELISA assay.

  2. Linda Brocato says:

    I was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis in 1981. 3 hospitalizations, 8 different medications including oral and intravenous chemotherapy for MS, experimental Plasmaphoresis, bedridden for 10 years, slurred speech and dying. I had my dental amalgam mercury “silver” fillings removed and guess what? All symptoms gradually disappeared, NO medication, NO relapses, NO symptoms, except this left me in a wheelchair! This is extremely unusual for MS people. Prior to mercury dental removal I had 1 to 3 relapses per year and haven’t had 1 relapse since 1989.

    I have been in contact with people since 1996 regarding their symptoms of mercury toxicity. The diseases encompass a wide range of symptoms from autoimmunity to heart problems etc. Unfortunately, some symptoms like mine manifest later in life. According to Dr. Boyd Haley, former Professor and Chair of Chemistry at the University of Kentucky and renowned toxicologist, says there are NO SAFE LEVELS OF MERCURY.

    Linda Brocato
    DAMS-IL

    • sailor says:

      I am delighted your symptoms went away. It may, or may not have had anything to do with the mercury. The NMSS does not seem to think there is a link.
      National Multiple Sclerosis Society: “There is no scientific evidence to connect the development or worsening of MS with dental fillings containing mercury, and therefore no reason to have those fillings removed. Although poisoning with heavy metals-such as mercury, lead, or manganese-can damage the nervous system and produce symptoms such as tremor and weakness, the damage is inflicted in a different way than occurs in MS and the process is also different.” Source: National MS Society Web site, June 2008 http://www.nationalmssociety.org/about-multiple-sclerosis/treatments/complementary–alternative-medicine/index.aspx

      • Just because the National Multiple Sclerosis Society says their is no scientific evidence associating MS and amalgam filing does not make it true. There is a commercially available assay for mercury allergy (www.melisa.org) and a positive result on this test has been associated with MS. This research was done in the 1990’s, but I have never met an American doctor who has heard of this test (http://www.melisa.org/articles.php). Of course that’s thanks to US doctor’s complete faith in the omniscience of organizations such as the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. All the European doctors I have spoken too have heard of this test. Here is the link to their many published papers, which you can also find in PubMed.

        Because this is an allergy, there is no such thing as a “safe level” for susceptible people. That is like saying the levels of peanut in peanut butter are “orders of magnitude below safe levels” for someone with a peanut allergy. Of course mercury is a bioaccumulator, so the allergic reaction won’t be transient, but will last for the rest of your life.

        I was severely ill and largely disabled with MS like symptoms for 8 years before I noticed that all my sicknesses immediately followed amalgam removals. Because I had allergic attacks during these removals, I began to look into allergies associated with dental materials. I found out about the MELISA test, took it, had a positive result, had my amalgams removed, and fully recovered over a 3 year period of difficult chelation treatments.

        Now that all of you know about MELISA, mercury allergy, and amalgams, all of your objections are rebutted and you have to recognize that the FDA has been allowing the use of this material for 10 years despite science proving its devastating health effects. You should also learn something about how skepticism can be dangerous if you believe your own unsupported conclusions and those of others too easily.

  3. Dustin says:

    @Linda:
    Your one example (which doesn’t show causation) doesn’t even come close to outweighing the scientific consensus.

    • Read the Wikipedia page on Dental Amalgam Controversy and the supporting papers if you have a couple months and you will find that there is no consensus. By saying there is one, the FDA and ADA can try to end the discussion, which is there only hope of avoiding having to try and refute assays such as MELISA which have proven the existence of mercury allergies and its association with MS and other autoimmune diseases.

  4. actually, Linda, that’s not uncommon for MS. My husband has MS, so I know a lot more than I’d like to about it. It is quite typical for people with relapsing-remitting MS to have between 1 and 5 relapses, then remit and never have another relapse again. Your case is quite typical in that you have been left with the damage of your relapses.

    • Like many others who have recovered from this disease, I have had my MS diagnosis “taken back” after having FULLY recovered with amalgam removal and chelation. All my “remittences” and “relapses” were associated with unprotected amalgam removals, so I could see how patients that stopped having removals would stop having exacerbations.

      Now that you know that there is a commercially available assay (www.melisa.org) which could be used to test and see if your husband is one of the 70% of MS patients who are allergic to mercury in their filings, the question is this: is your skepticism and faith in the FDA, ADA, etc. so great that you are willing to ignore this research ( http://www.melisa.org/articles.php ) and not have your husband tested?

      • By the way, my own brothers have been sick for years with the same illness I was cured of (which is genetically inherited), still have their filings, and still refuse to get tested. We are still close, so I am sympathetic.

  5. gwen says:

    Linda,
    1. ANECDOTE is NOT the same as EVIDENCE.
    2. CORRELATION is NOT the same as CAUSATION

  6. Linda – Removal of your fillings would have no effect at all on the mercury levels remaining in your body. Was mercury poisoning ever confirmed by a blood test? If so, it would be a medical first if it came from fillings.

    • Blood tests are often useless because mercury does not stay in your blood long. Filings have substantial amounts of mercury in them (a set can contain as many as a thermometer), are partially vaporized during removal, and 80% of inhaled vapor is permanently absorbed. So inhale during removals and you are poisoned.

      There is also mercury allergy, a proven clinical entity ( http://www.melisa.org/articles.php ). How much peanut does it take to make susceptible people sick? If you are breathing small amounts of mercury vapor all the time, you have constant exposure, and whatever is absorbed is often permanently retained. The MELISA research shows roughly 10% of people are allergic to mercury, and roughly 75% of MS sufferers. So one out of ten of you here are allergic AND there is a commercial assay you could take to find out if your fillings are making you sick. Apparently the FDA and MS societies can’t even Google “mercury allergy” or read papers on PubMed. I never would have recovered if my wife wasn’t a molecular biologist…

  7. Albert says:

    “The American Dental Association has always maintained that amalgam fillings are safe. They do release mercury, but it’s at the same rate as a gold or silver watch or ring releases gold into your body.”

    You cannot compare mercury ingestion with gold or silver ingestion, unless ALL you are doing is comparing ingestion RATES.

    From a toxic point of view the substances are completely different. Mercury IS an incredibly toxic substance. Gold and silver are NOT incredibly toxic. Infact silver has been show to have anti-bacterial properties.

    Just because the body ingests mercury from fillings at the same rate as gold from a wrist watch, does not mean mercury is as safe as gold.

    Come on, as a skeptic you can do better. Surely?

  8. fluffy says:

    I’m glad to no longer have any amalgam fillings, but not because of the alleged toxicity, but because they look bad and they’re prone to cause teeth to fracture due to their thermal expansion properties which slowly fatigue the structure of the tooth.

    To be fair, composite has an even higher thermal expansion coefficient, but composite fillings break down before they destroy the tooth. As a result, you do have to replace composite fillings more often (which I’m sure dentists like), but when they need replacing it’s obvious, while amalgam fillings fail slowly and in subtle ways which can end up causing way more damage.

  9. nullability says:

    Oh good, your headline scared me for a second, because lately I’ve been telling people that the ADA finds no danger from amalgam fillings after extensive study.

    And Albert, while silver or gold are not toxic per se, they can accumulate in the body and cause disfiguring conditions like argyria, so the comparison is relevant.

    • Before you stand down from your position of concern, you should read the Wikipedia page on the Dental Amalgam Controversy to find out how complex this issue really is. I wouldn’t make up your mind based on what is said here!

  10. I had the flu once and then I ate some pizza and then my flu went away.

    I’m calling the AMA, EDA, and whomever else y’all suggest right now.

    • Max says:

      I touched a hot stove, and now my finger burns. I’m calling the AMA to find out whether I should stop touching the stove.

      • At least you brought it on yourself. Better check the receipt for the stove and see if it was sold to you by the AMA. If so, they will tell you touching it is harmless.

    • tmac57 says:

      Call Domino’s !

    • I got severely ill with anaphylactic attacks, gallstones, loss of 10% of my body weight, adrenal and thyroid insufficiency, 6 years of diarrhea, depression, sleeplessness, tremors, inability to concentrate, nausea, heat intolerance, exercise intolerance, heart arrhythmia, diabetes, and anemia after I had unprotected amalgam removals.

      I took a commercially available assay for mercury allergy called MELISA and tested positive.

      After having all my mercury based filings safely removed and treating my poisoning for years using chelation, I completely recovered.

      I sent my case reports to the FDA but they did nothing so I contributed to a consumer organization that sued them and forced them into the settlement under discussion here.

  11. Albert – Did you read the next sentence, or did you feel that it was easier to make a straw man out of only half the paragraph?

  12. aaron says:

    Its worth noting that Albert has hinted at a fondness for coloidal silver aka quite expensive snake oil…

  13. Brian M says:

    I love skeptic blogs. Someone comes in spewing rhetoric, and they just get shredded.

    Thank you Brian Dunning, for being the best source for the tools to be skeptical! They have helped me immensely!

  14. Richard Smith says:

    the same rate as a gold or silver watch or ring releases gold into your body

    So, osmosis is the key to the philosopher’s stone?

  15. CybrgnX says:

    I worked in Bell Labs with a material scientist Ching Ping Chen (PhD)who did the mercury amalgum testing at the Univ.of Michigan. Her studies clearly show that there is no hazardous release of mercury from the amalgum over its useful life of 80yrs (she did high speed aging tests). We talked about her work because the 1st cases of people sueing the dentist had just started.

  16. Pierre Larose says:

    If your dentist offered to fill your cavity with a new dental material containing 50% arsenic and said the ADA believes it is safe, would a skeptic allow this material be placed in his/her body?

    Amalgam is 50% mercury, the second most toxic element on earth – more toxic than arsenic, cadmium and lead – and it leaches out daily as mercury vapor every time we eat, brush our teeth, grind or use a cell phone! And 80% of mercury vapor is absorbed through the lungs.

    I have been a dentist 37 years. I placed amalgams for 11 years. After reading the available scientific and medical literature on mercury fillings, in 1983 I decided I no longer wanted this material in my mouth, in the mouths of my family nor of my patients. I stopped using it. It was a moral decision: ‘First, do no harm.’

    Since 1983, have my patients been reporting health improvements after having their mercury fillings safely replaced? Ask me…

    • Adam Yakaboski says:

      Does that mean you won’t eat foods with arsenic in it?

      • Toxic metals are poorly absorbed through food, whereas 80% of inhaled vapor is absorbed. Yes, I won’t eat or breath things that contain toxic metals which are known to make me sick. Of course my amalgams were put in when I was a kid, without informed consent, without having been classified as medical devices, etc, etc.

  17. Mike Fleming says:

    Thanks for the attempt, albeit inadequate, to address perhaps the most complex regulatory issue FDA has ever faced.

    I do not speak for FDA here but I am currently an appointed member to the FDA’s Dental Products Panel and acting Consumer Member on the Circulatory System Devices Panel. I had the privilege to serve on the 2006 panel regarding the neurotoxic effects of dental amalgam.

    As I understand it, your blog is characterized by the following premises:

    Skeptoid: Critical Analysis of Pop Phenomena is a weekly pro-science, anti-pseudoscience podcast. It was born in October, 2006 to help fight the good fight against the overwhelming majority of noise in the media supporting useless alternative medicine systems, psychics preying upon the vulnerable, the erosion of science education in the classroom, xenophobia of advanced energy and food production methods, and generally anything that distracts attention and public funding from scientific advancement.

    There is a distinct difference in your blog between what you are claiming to be critical analysis and inherent skepticism. The former requires you to analyze directly the evidence without bias, not parroting back what someone else has claimed as objective truth. The latter simply requires you to oppose whatever is presented to you regardless of any facts to the contrary. You appear to have your mind made up on a variety of issues irrespective of any ohter evidence.

    Critical thinking would require you to recognize there are volumes of science to support the view that mercury, wherever it is found, is a deadly xenobiotic. Skepticm of the variety you espouse is an entirely unsophisticated, dogmatic and dangerous approach to complex issues about which you have very little direct understanding.

    I must, however, thank you for your narrowminded approach to everything outside whatever you consider to be in the scientific mainstream. Your blog takes on so many issues I am forced to conclude you are a jack of all trades and master of none.

    However, it is precisely your kind of approach that propels others of a more pioneering, egalitarian and, yes, scientific bent to refine their views and focus on the most important issue of our time, the health and welfare of the consumer public.

    Please keep up the good work, we need you.

    • sailor says:

      “Critical thinking would require you to recognize there are volumes of science to support the view that mercury, wherever it is found, is a deadly xenobiotic.”
      Funny that, but I was in school before anyone realized that mercury was dangerous. (This was a REALLY long time ago) We had bottles of mercury in the chemistry lab. We used to roll balls of it around with our fingers. We also dipped copper coins in acid, then covered them in mercury to make them silver in the hopes of passing them off as higher value. The coins of course sat in out pockets and we handled them/
      I often wonder why we did not all die or get sick or die.

      • Last time I checked everybody was getting sick and dying. The question is whether any of the diseases that are making you sick and killing you are caused by mercury exposure.

    • Hi Mike,

      I have read the transcripts of the FDA’s Dental Products Panel’s meetings, including the 2006 meeting. I find no mention of the important research associated with the MELISA assay, despite its availability as a commercial assay, or of allergy as a factor concerning the amount of mercury exposure which might potentially be harmful.

      The skepticism here is basically FDA an ADA press releases repeated by a blogger. I am all for science. Perhaps a good place to start would be a press release saying mercury allergy has been a proven clinical entity for 10 years and is associated with MS and other autoimmune pathologies.

  18. Mike Fleming says:

    Oh, Brian, by the way, I forgot to include my recommendation for an experiment that would be the skeptics delight-a mercurial Holy Grail, if you will.

    Simply ask your dentist to mix up enough amalgam to fill, say, three or four teeth of average size and place this material in a covered wine glass with perhaps a little water if that would make you happier.

    At your leisure but on a daily basis, uncover the glass and, as you would with a fine wine, stick your nose down into the glass and take a long sniff so as to take in that harmless “water vapor”. When finished, take a small piece of amalgam, chew it up completely and swallow.

    Do this once a day for around 10-15 years or longer and you will have conducted an entirely reasonable and convincing anecdotal study of the notable deleterious effects upon your memory, disposition and bodily functions that would simulate the implantation of those same three or four amalgams in your own teeth.

    This experiment should, of course, be conducted under the supervision of a physician who is well schooled in the signs and symptoms of neurological impairment and overall symptoms of mercury erethism.

    I would suggest keeping the covered glass in a well ventilated area away from pets and children.

    • sailor says:

      There is absolutely no need for such stupidity. There are millions of us running around with amalgam in out mouths. We are all getting older too, since probably less dentists use it now. All you have to to do is make a comparison with people that don’t have such fillings and see if there is any significant difference in health.

      • Adam Yakaboski says:

        The problem is that this type of stupidity has all ready been well documented and quite honestly shows how ignorant these people really are. I’ve found documented cases where people have actally ignested elemental mercury (Kids). The interesting fact is that it won’t poison you.

      • Absorption through ingestion does not occur easily. Absorption through inhalation is 80%. Once absorbed, mercury is not excreted easily or at all by some people. Some people are allergic to mercury. Like other allergies, these can become more severe over time, even decades after exposure. I have heard of people who had these kinds of exposures decades ago, developed allergies many years later, had the MELISA test with a positive result, and then were cured of severe illnesses through chelation.

      • Here is the study you asked for, links to the research can be found in Wikipedia, which is worth reading before you start on what is stupid:

        In 2001, the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey of 31,000 adult Americans, NHANES III covering 1988-94, which cost $120 Million, is owned by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and published by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and is statistically valid for all 180,000,000 adult Americans found that the number of dental fillings was significantly correlated to incidence of cancer, thyroid conditions, mental conditions, diseases of the nervous system including MS, diseases of the respiratory and genito-urinary systems, and disorders of the eye, circulatory and respiratory systems. At the time of the survey (1988-94), the vast majority of dental fillings placed were silver amalgam.[32]

  19. Mike, that’s a fine ad hominem attack that states nothing useful whatsoever. If you’ve discovered that the ADA and FDA findings are substantially wrong, you are invited to present your evidence. That would perform a more valuable public service than thumbing your thesaurus to find clever adjectives to describe me.

    • Here it is, waiting for capitulation:

      http://www.melisa.org/articles.php

      Take the MELISA assay with ten of your friends with amalgam and will see who is a skeptic then. The public service will be if you read the Wikipedia page on the Dental Amalgam Controversy and get some sense of how complicated this issue really is.

      • If Brain Dunning will accept, I will BUY him a MELISA test. Of course, there is only a 1 in 10 chance that he is allergic to his filings. Of course if there is anyone here with MS, they will have a 7 in 10 chance of having a positive result.

  20. Travis Roy says:

    Don’t everybody forget too that there are different types of mercury, ethyl and methyl mercury. methyl mercury is much more toxic. I’m not sure what type is in fillings.

    And since everybody likes throwing in their own personal stories. My dad worked at a power plant that would use mercury rather than water and use the mercury vapor to turn the turbines.

    One guy was opening a barrel of mercury and it fell over along with himself. He was COVERED in mercury, got in his mouth, his eyes, everywhere.

    They put him in the hospital for observation and he was out within a week and lived to be over 80.

    • Max says:

      They put him in the hospital for observation and he was out within a week and lived to be over 80.

      Anecdotal evidence that mercury is harmless?
      I know a chain smoker who lived to be over 80.

    • Max says:

      Don’t everybody forget too that there are different types of mercury, ethyl and methyl mercury. methyl mercury is much more toxic. I’m not sure what type is in fillings.

      Fillings contain elemental mercury and other metals like silver and tin. Don’t confuse it with thimerosal.

  21. FYI Bryan you did not and cannot refute the YouTube “Smoking Teeth” video. Quite the contrary we have debunked the debunker and have once and for all proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the “smoke” you see rising from the 25-year-old amalgam is in fact elemental mercury vapor.

    How?

    In a follow up documentary by filmmaker Steve Kroschel “The Beautiful Truth” Dr. Eichman using his 254 nm light first sticks his gloved hand in warm water and then holds it in front of the fluorescent screen and said to you, “See no smoke”. ZERO vapor “smoke” is visible as is expected since water vapor is not visible at 254 nm light. You can watch an excerpt of this documentary on YouTube.

    Another complaint was that mercury being a very heavy metal should fall not rise. This is only true under static conditions with no moving air. In the first demonstration Dr. Eichman had heated the tooth therefore the tooth was hotter than the cold Oxford room and hot air rises. So this time Dr. Eichman merely scratches the filling’s surface while wearing an insulated glove to prevent heat from escaping his hand. As expected the mercury vapor falls under these conditions.

    Next I used the Jerome Mercury Vapor Analyzer to measure the amount of mercury in the plume. Just passing the sniffer near the plume I measured 191 or 636 times greater than the EPA’s 24 hour air quality standard of 0.30. At 1 min 45 seconds into the film you can watch me measure the plume with a Jerome 411 Mercury Vapor Analyzer and find the mercury reading.

    Then we mixed an new mercury/silver amalgam tooth filling and when we saw the thick black plume of mercury spew from the mixing capsule we all quickly left the room.

    BTW take a course in chemistry and you’ll learn that water vapor is not visible at 254 nm light or simply check Atomic Absorption of mercury on galbraith.com. So much for the debunkers great wisdom.

    • Max says:

      Instead of comparing a gloved hand to a tooth, how about a blind experiment comparing a control tooth without an amalgam filling to a tooth with an amalgam filling. The experimenter shouldn’t know which tooth he’s holding.

  22. Evil Eye says:

    I notice that “Linda” did a “hit and run” and relied on everyone else to support her anecdotal evidence. Just pointing it out.

  23. Evil Eye says:

    Safe Mercury Vapor levels

    http://tinyurl.com/lclcxo

    And to be fair….

    http://tinyurl.com/n7h38w

  24. Linda Brocato says:

    Dear Evil Eyes and all those people who may be “skeptical” about dental amalgam “mercury” fillings. No matter who responds to your postings and has all the evidence to prove the physical dangers and harm of “mercury” in the amalgam fillings it WON’T change your mind. NO, I have NOT run away…but find it’s USELESS to try to educate people like you.

    Linda Brocato
    DAMS-IL

  25. Drew says:

    Sorry Linda, but you can only educate people with facts.

    Good luck with your continued good health.

  26. Dayvid – OK, so you used a fan to blow the mercury vapor up? Was this deliberate to create confusion? You’re not being clear on how this supports your cause.

    The biggest question I would like to ask you is why have the FDA, the ADA, and virtually all dentists not been convinced that your claims are valid? Surely if your evidence is as valid as you claim, it would have become mainstream by now. Instead it’s been relegated to the fringe.

    Please don’t respond by making yourself look even more foolish and stating that a meaningful number of dentists do accept your claims. They don’t.

    • Max says:

      The biggest question I would like to ask you is why have the FDA, the ADA, and virtually all dentists not been convinced that your claims are valid?

      This just invites speculation or conspiracy theories. You’re the skeptic, ask them yourself and think for yourself.

    • Any dentists that accepted these claims would have their licenses taken by the ADA and know it. See Dental Amalgam Controversy in Wikipedia for citations:

      “The American Dental Association (ADA) has asserted that dental amalgam is safe since its foundation in 1859. In its advisory opinion to Rule 5.A. of the ADA Code of Ethics, it has also held that, “the removal of amalgam restorations from the non-allergic patient for the alleged purpose of removing toxic substances from the body, when such treatment is performed solely at the recommendation or suggestion of the dentist, is improper and unethical”.[38] According to the Boston College Law School study, “A dentist who is found guilty of violating the ADA Code of Ethics can be sentenced, censured, suspended, or expelled from the ADA” and the “ADA forbids its dentists from suggesting mercury removal under threat of license suspension”.[9] The same study pointed out that state dental associations and disciplinary boards have “not only adopted the ADA’s position as a matter of routine” in proceedings which have sanctioned anti-amalgam dentists or stripped them of their licenses in California, Maryland, Arizona, Colorado, and Minnesota, but in many cases “the board members themselves often belonged to the ADA as well”.[9] A 2002 article in the Atlanta Journal and Constitution reported allegations by anti-amalgamists that the ADA had effectively imposed gag rules which forbade them from discussing their positions with patients.[39] The Boston College Law School study also cites proceedings in which an Arizona dentist, “is facing sanctions for advocating alternative materials”, a California dentist lost his license, “for running an advertisement entitled: “Mercury Emission from Silver Filings Unsafe by Government Standards”, and a Maryland dentist, “was sanctioned for writing an article on dental amalgam removal”.[39][40][41] More recently, the ADA has entered into litigation “aimed at defending its reputation and discouraging further lawsuits by patient-plaintiffs against dental amalgam”.[9]“

  27. Linda Brocato says:

    MSDS (Materials Data Safety Sheet) Copyright 1997 DENTSPLY INTERNATIONAL (World’s largest amalgam manufacturer)

    Dispersalloy®
    http://www.caulk.com/MSDSDFU/DispersDFU.html

    Contraindication
    The use of amalgam is contraindicated;

    ♦. In proximal or occlusal contact to dissimilar metal restorations.
    ♦. In patients with severe renal deficiency.
    ♦. In patients with known allergies to amalgam
    ♦. For retrograde or endodontic filling.
    ♦. As a filling material for cast crown.
    ♦. In children 6 and under.
    ♦. In expectant mothers.

    Side Effects/Warning
    Prior to use, read the MSDS information and product instructions for this item.

    Exposure to mercury may cause irritation to skin, eyes, respiratory tract and mucous membrane. In individual cases, hypersensitivity reactions, allergies, or electrochemically caused local reactions have been observed. Due to electrochemical processes, the lichen planus of the mucosa may develop.

    Mercury may also be a skin sensitizer, pulmonary sensitizer, nephrotoxin and neurotoxin.
    After placement or removal of amalgam restorations, there is a temporary increase of the mercury concentration in the blood and urine.

    Mercury expressed during condensation and unset amalgam may cause amalgamation or galvanic effect if in contact with other metal restorations. If symptoms persist, the amalgam should be replaced by a different material.

    Removal of clinically acceptable amalgam restorations should be avoided to minimize mercury exposure, especially in expectant mothers.

    Precautions
    ♦ The number of amalgam restorations for one patient should be kept to a minimum.

    ♦ Inhalation of mercury vapor by dental staff may be avoided by proper handling of the amalgam, the use of masks, along with adequate ventilation.

    ♦ Avoid contact with skin and wear safety glasses and gloves.

    ♦ Store amalgam scrap in well sealed containers. Regulations for disposal must be observed.

    http://www.caulk.com ./MSDSDFU/DispersalloyMSDS.htm l

    Look at these web sites:
    http://www.iaomt.org,
    http://www.toxicteeth.org,
    http://www.mercurypoisoned.com,
    http://www.dams.cc,
    http://www.flcv.com/dams.html,
    http://www.melisa.org.

    These are some UTUBE Sites:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDnfeIwd0wI

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJOY7de5jCM

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ylnQ-T7oiA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfVsUuhoFWY

    FDA WEBSITE-JUNE 2008
    http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/consumer/amalgams.html

    INDIVIDUAL CASES OF MERCURY POISONING
    http://www.mercurypoisoned.com/FDA_hearings/advisory_panel_rejects_amalgam_safety.html

    This will hopefully help the public understand mercury poisoning.

    Linda Brocato
    DAMS-IL

  28. Ellie says:

    I have my skeptic hat firmly on my head and I don’t happen to belief mercury fillings pose much risk (although I will change my mind if presented with good non-anecdotal evidence to the contrary).

    I just wanted to point out that David did not claim to use a fan. He said the tooth had been heated. He is saying that mercury vapour that is hotter than the surrounding air will rise.

    If you want to avoid looking foolish on your own blog you should read comments more carefully before responding.

  29. Michael Kingsford Gray says:

    Mr. Kennedy: To what temperature, and for how long did you heat the tooth?

  30. MadScientist says:

    What the mercury spooks don’t say is, given their typical claims for how those fillings are poisoning people, the amount of mercury released by the fillings must be far greater than the total mass of the original fillings – quite a feat of defeating nature. Whether silver or gold amalgam, significant loss of mercury will change the mechanical properties of the filling and the fillings would fail (both will become too soft and become deformed, while silver will also tarnish and corrode).

  31. Linda Brocato says:

    Please review the following and also research the “gag” rule initiaed by the ADA and entered into their code of ethics if dentists did not believe “mercury” amalgams were safe. The ADA also owned patents on amalgams. If DDS spoke about “mercury” in the “silver” amalgam fillings…the DDS were in jeopardy of losing their licenses. IF THEY WILL PRINT THIS SEE:

    MSDS (Materials Data Safety Sheet) Copyright 1997 DENTSPLY INTERNATIONAL (World’s largest amalgam manufacturer)

    Dispersalloy®
    http://www.caulk.com/MSDSDFU/DispersDFU.html

    Contraindication
    The use of amalgam is contraindicated;

    ♦. In proximal or occlusal contact to dissimilar metal restorations.
    ♦. In patients with severe renal deficiency.
    ♦. In patients with known allergies to amalgam
    ♦. For retrograde or endodontic filling.
    ♦. As a filling material for cast crown.
    ♦. In children 6 and under.
    ♦. In expectant mothers.

    Side Effects/Warning
    Prior to use, read the MSDS information and product instructions for this item.

    Exposure to mercury may cause irritation to skin, eyes, respiratory tract and mucous membrane. In individual cases, hypersensitivity reactions, allergies, or electrochemically caused local reactions have been observed. Due to electrochemical processes, the lichen planus of the mucosa may develop.

    Mercury may also be a skin sensitizer, pulmonary sensitizer, nephrotoxin and neurotoxin.
    After placement or removal of amalgam restorations, there is a temporary increase of the mercury concentration in the blood and urine.

    Mercury expressed during condensation and unset amalgam may cause amalgamation or galvanic effect if in contact with other metal restorations. If symptoms persist, the amalgam should be replaced by a different material.

    Removal of clinically acceptable amalgam restorations should be avoided to minimize mercury exposure, especially in expectant mothers.

    Precautions
    ♦ The number of amalgam restorations for one patient should be kept to a minimum.

    ♦ Inhalation of mercury vapor by dental staff may be avoided by proper handling of the amalgam, the use of masks, along with adequate ventilation.

    ♦ Avoid contact with skin and wear safety glasses and gloves.

    ♦ Store amalgam scrap in well sealed containers. Regulations for disposal must be observed.

    http://www.caulk.com ./MSDSDFU/DispersalloyMSDS.htm l

    Look at these web sites:
    http://www.iaomt.org,
    http://www.toxicteeth.org,
    http://www.mercurypoisoned.com,
    http://www.dams.cc,
    http://www.flcv.com/dams.html,
    http://www.melisa.org.

    These are some UTUBE Sites:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDnfeIwd0wI

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJOY7de5jCM

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ylnQ-T7oiA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfVsUuhoFWY

    FDA WEBSITE-JUNE 2008
    http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/consumer/amalgams.html

    INDIVIDUAL CASES OF MERCURY POISONING
    http://www.mercurypoisoned.com/FDA_hearings/advisory_panel_rejects_amalgam_safety.html

    This will hopefully help the public understand mercury poisoning.

    Linda Brocato
    DAMS-IL

  32. Linda Brocato says:

    LISTEN PEOPLE, I’M TRYING TO HELP YOU BY GIVING YOU SCIENTIFIC LINKS TO “MERCURY” POISONING… BUT WHOEVER IS IN CHARGE WON’T LET MY REPLY BE PRINTED IN ENTIRETY. CONTACT ME AT lindabrocato@aol.com AND I WILL E-MAIL THE INFORMATION TO YOU.

    MSDS (Materials Data Safety Sheet) Copyright 1997 DENTSPLY INTERNATIONAL (World’s largest amalgam manufacturer)

    Dispersalloy®
    http://www.caulk.com/MSDSDFU/DispersDFU.html

    Linda Brocato
    DAMS-IL

  33. Ms. Brocato, “whoever is in charge’ is actually a software feature that prevents posting of multiple links as a prophylactic against spamming, and a fairly clumsy one at that. But there is no censoring by the powers that be, if that’s your fear.

    I’d be very surprised if you could provide any links to any info that hasn’t already been considered. And though it has no affect on the evidence either way, the use of all caps is usually unsupportive of a poster’s credibility.

    AND THOUGH IT HAS NO BEARING EITHER WAY ON THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE, THE USE OF ALL CAPS IS USUALLY UNSUPPORTIVE OF A POSTER’S CREDIBILITY. SINCE YOU HAVE ALREADY INDICATED YOU CONSIDER PERSONAL ANECDOTE TO BE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, I’M SUGGESTING YOU CAN’T AFFORD THIS.

  34. Militant Agnostic says:

    David Kennedy claimed the mecury vapour was rising because the tooth had been heated and the vapour was hotter than the air.

    Michael Kingsford Gray asked what temperature the tooth was heated to.

    We can calculate how hot mercury vapour would have to be to be lighter than air at 15 Celsius (about 60 Fahrenheit) from the gas law.

    PV = zNRT where
    P is Absolute Pressure
    V is Volume
    z is supercompressibily or gas deviation factor (1.0 for an ideal gas and nearly 1.0 at one atmosphere pressure for a real gas)
    N is number of moles
    R is a constant depnding on the units we are using and the kind of moles we are using (gram moles, kilogram moles or pound moles). A gram mole is 6.022 10^23 molecules.
    T is Absolute Temperature (Degrees Kelvin or Rankin)

    The mass of gas is it’s molecular weight W times the Number of Moles

    Density is mass divided by volume = NW/V

    Volume V = zNRT/P and Density = PWN/(zNRT) = PW/(zRT) = PW/RT for z=1

    At constant pressure, density is proportional to Molecular Weight divided by Absolute Temperature

    The Molecular Weight of Air is 28.964 and the Atomic Weight of Mercury is 200.59. This would be the Molecular Weight of Mercury Vapour if it is Monatomic like the Inert Gases (Helium, Argon Neon etc.) which I doubt. If Mecury Vapour is Diatomic like most single element gases it has a Molecular Weight of 401.18.

    A temperature of 15 Degrees Celcius is an Absolute Temperature of 288.15 Degrees Kelvin. For Mercury Vapour to be have a density as low as 15 C (288.15 K) air the temperature of the Mercury wouold be:
    200.59/28.964 * 288.15 = 1996 Degrees Kelvin (1722 C or 3132 F) IF
    Mercury Vapour is Monatomic. If Mercury Vapour is Diatomic, the temperature of the Mercury would be: 3991 K (3718 C or 6724 F).

    I would like to know how David Kennedy achieved such a huge difference between the temperature of the Mercury Amalgam and the surrounding air.

  35. SionH says:

    Wowzers Brian! I guess that this means a new ‘big-‘ that you can be accused of being a shill for, along with big-pharma, big-agro and big-new-world-orda. Those cheques from ‘big-denta’ must come in handy.
    The thing is, I’d like to sign up for a share of the money too and can’t find their contact details anywhere. I don’t suppose you could …?
    ;)

  36. Todd says:

    Out of curiosity I found the manual for the Jerome 411 (http://www.azic.com/pdf/manual_SS-101.pdf). It can only measure 0 to 1.99 mg/m3 of mercury (Page 20 of the spec). It cannot measure 191. It also appears that the EPA does not set a standard for mercury vapor exposure. Most states set their own limits. OSHA does set limits for occupational settings.

    A question for folks who know more about chemistry and physics than I do. It struck me when I watched the smoking tooth video. If my fillings were out gassing mercury vapor at the rate shown that after 30+ years the mercury in my fillings would eventually deplete? I’ve had amalgam fillings since the 1970s, as far as I can tell they have not become any smaller or changed in shape.

  37. John says:

    Brian, we are still waiting on the “Mystery Lights at Sea”, bro.

    https://skepticblog.org/2009/02/12/solving-the-mystery-lights-at-sea/

  38. One positive potential in favor of the ‘amalgam mercury is poison’ hypothesis is that mercury vapor emission appears to make people more skeptical.

  39. paul says:

    I have tried to respond to your blog twice outlining why you have got it wrong about the nature of mercury but you wont put my comments on your site are you scared of the truth?!!?

  40. paul says:

    my posts have been removed from this site It appears to be true you cant handle the truth!!!!! mercury fillings have no place in peoples mouths I have explained why but because I got too close to the bone the powers that be have removed the truth leaving all you gibbering idiots fumbling around in the dark

  41. peter says:

    wouldnt the action of breathing draw up mercury vapours in the same way an exhaust fan works anyway the question is do the fillings leak and the ada has admitted they do

  42. do you have any tips on diet for adrenal fatigue syndrome?

  43. what about hypothyroidism? chronic fatigue the same thing?

  44. Jamie says:

    why do the cranks insist on shilling a debunked heavy metal test, the Melisa test is bull. Stop it already, you can link to it a hundred more times and it doesn’t make it a good test.
    http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/78/8/1450