IS THE DENTAL PROFESSION COVERING-UP MERCURY TOOTH FILLING HAZARDS?

IS THE DENTAL PROFESSION COVERING-UP MERCURY TOOTH FILLING HAZARDS?
By Charles W. Moore

© 1998 Charles W. Moore

"There is perhaps no other problem with such political and economic implications as mercury toxicity, particularly as it applies to dental amalgams," says Dr. John C. Kline, MD, a Nanaimo, BC, physician who treats people suffering from chronic mercury poisoning.

Last March a class-action lawsuit was filed in Toronto by a group of 8000 dental patients who contend that 20 million Canadians are being slowly poisoned by the fillings in their teeth. The action names the federal government, professional dental associations, and the firms Dentsply International and Johnson & Johnson, and seeks primarily that the cost of having mercury fillings removed and replaced be covered, although some damages are sought as well.

If the courts rule for the plaintiffs, awards could run to "billions of dollars," according to David Himilfarb, the lawyer representing the Canadians for Mercury Relief group. "This without a doubt will be a precedent setting case, that is sure to change the face of the dental
industry in Canada forever," says Mr. Himilfarb.

Amalgam ("silver") fillings contain 50% mercury, 35% silver, 13% tin, 2% copper, and a bit of zinc. Amalgam's cheapness, ease of placement, and durability make it the filling material favoured by 92% of dentists. The Canadian Dental Association (CDA) insists that there is no scientific evidence linking medical illness symptoms to mercury fillings, except relatively for rare allergic sensitivity to mercury. Others with less conflict of interest beg to differ.

Amalgam tooth fillings are by far the most significant source of mercury exposure for the general population. It is well-established that amalgam fillings continuously release mercury vapour during chewing, brushing, and eating hot and/or acidic foods. Most of this vapour is inhaled. A World Health Organization committee has estimated that people with amalgam tooth fillings are exposed to from three to 17 micrograms of mercury daily, compared it a maximum of 2.6 micrograms from all other sources combined. Other researchers contend that just one amalgam filling can release as much as 10 micrograms per day.

Mercury has been banned form latex paint because of mercury vapour inhalation risks, estimated at 4.6 micrograms per day for approximately two weeks after application. Persons with amalgam tooth fillings could be getting more than three times that exposure 365 days per year.

Scrap dental amalgam is classified hazardous waste by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "What is it about the mouth that makes this same stuff non-toxic?" asks Dr. Sandra Denton, M.D., who specializes in treating chronic mercury toxicity.

Unfortunately, it is politically-incorrect in the dental and medical professions to discuss this question, except to circle the wagons and scornfully imply that those who do seriously address it are charlatans or quacks. "The opposition to treating or even researching mercury toxicity is intense," says John Kline, whose own practise is under full-scale review by the BC College of Physicians and Surgeons, even though there have been no patient complaints.

The CDA contends that with billions of mercury amalgam fillings placed, there is no apparent epidemic of ill health effects. However, others argue that so many people have mercury fillings that no effective "control" group exists. "I am now convinced that the vast majority of people with chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia suffer from chronic accumulation of mercury and other toxic metals," says Dr. Kline in the October, 1998 issue of alive magazine.

Patients get caught in the crossfire of these disputes. It seems to be simply common-sense logic that putting a potent neurotoxin like mercury in the mouth is inadvisable. Is the dental profession really acting in patients' interest by stonewalling a large and growing body of evidence that amalgam fillings make people sick, or is it primarily interested in covering its proverbial backside with respect to class-action torts like the one mentioned above?

Former Health Canada biologist Mark Richardson who researched the scientific literature on mercury toxicity in preparing a risk assessment report, notes that it is people wanting to maintain the status quo who conclude that there is no evidence that mercury toxicity is a health problem. Personally, after more than 10 years of researching this topic as a journalist and an interested layman, there is no way I would ever allow more mercury to be put in my mouth, and I am gradually having existing amalgam fillings replaced with other materials.

This page hosted by Get your own Free Homepage