<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: FDA &#8220;Reverses&#8221; Its Position on Amalgam Fillings?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/</link>
	<description>The official blog of the Skeptologists</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:44:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-39728</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 05:09:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-39728</guid>
		<description>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&#039;t make it a good test.
http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/78/8/1450</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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&#8217;t make it a good test.<br />
<a href="http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/78/8/1450" rel="nofollow">http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/78/8/1450</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Windy Guerrini</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-22617</link>
		<dc:creator>Windy Guerrini</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 05:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-22617</guid>
		<description>what about hypothyroidism? chronic fatigue the same thing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>what about hypothyroidism? chronic fatigue the same thing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arlen Castell</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-22613</link>
		<dc:creator>Arlen Castell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-22613</guid>
		<description>do you have any tips on diet for adrenal fatigue syndrome?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>do you have any tips on diet for adrenal fatigue syndrome?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peter</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-14465</link>
		<dc:creator>peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:54:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-14465</guid>
		<description>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</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-12780</link>
		<dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 03:59:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-12780</guid>
		<description>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</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-10321</link>
		<dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:54:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-10321</guid>
		<description>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?!!?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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?!!?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mercury Poisoned</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-9478</link>
		<dc:creator>Mercury Poisoned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:00:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-9478</guid>
		<description>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:

&quot;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, &quot;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&quot;.[38] According to the Boston College Law School study, &quot;A dentist who is found guilty of violating the ADA Code of Ethics can be sentenced, censured, suspended, or expelled from the ADA&quot; and the &quot;ADA forbids its dentists from suggesting mercury removal under threat of license suspension&quot;.[9] The same study pointed out that state dental associations and disciplinary boards have &quot;not only adopted the ADA&#039;s position as a matter of routine&quot; 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 &quot;the board members themselves often belonged to the ADA as well&quot;.[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, &quot;is facing sanctions for advocating alternative materials&quot;, a California dentist lost his license, &quot;for running an advertisement entitled: &quot;Mercury Emission from Silver Filings Unsafe by Government Standards&quot;, and a Maryland dentist, &quot;was sanctioned for writing an article on dental amalgam removal&quot;.[39][40][41] More recently, the ADA has entered into litigation &quot;aimed at defending its reputation and discouraging further lawsuits by patient-plaintiffs against dental amalgam&quot;.[9]&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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:</p>
<p>&#8220;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, &#8220;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&#8221;.[38] According to the Boston College Law School study, &#8220;A dentist who is found guilty of violating the ADA Code of Ethics can be sentenced, censured, suspended, or expelled from the ADA&#8221; and the &#8220;ADA forbids its dentists from suggesting mercury removal under threat of license suspension&#8221;.[9] The same study pointed out that state dental associations and disciplinary boards have &#8220;not only adopted the ADA&#8217;s position as a matter of routine&#8221; 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 &#8220;the board members themselves often belonged to the ADA as well&#8221;.[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, &#8220;is facing sanctions for advocating alternative materials&#8221;, a California dentist lost his license, &#8220;for running an advertisement entitled: &#8220;Mercury Emission from Silver Filings Unsafe by Government Standards&#8221;, and a Maryland dentist, &#8220;was sanctioned for writing an article on dental amalgam removal&#8221;.[39][40][41] More recently, the ADA has entered into litigation &#8220;aimed at defending its reputation and discouraging further lawsuits by patient-plaintiffs against dental amalgam&#8221;.[9]&#8220;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mercury Poisoned</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-9476</link>
		<dc:creator>Mercury Poisoned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:56:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-9476</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mercury Poisoned</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-9474</link>
		<dc:creator>Mercury Poisoned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-9474</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mercury Poisoned</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/06/18/fda-reverses-its-position-on-amalgam-fillings/#comment-9473</link>
		<dc:creator>Mercury Poisoned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:48:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=3004#comment-9473</guid>
		<description>Everyone one this board take the MELISA test and then we&#039;ll see how many skeptics there are.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Everyone one this board take the MELISA test and then we&#8217;ll see how many skeptics there are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

