Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mcnc.mcnc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!mcnc!bch
From: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Re: Amalgam (silver) Dental Fillings are a Serious Health Hazard
Message-ID: <799@mcnc.mcnc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Sep-85 10:12:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: mcnc.799
Posted: Wed Sep 11 10:12:15 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 12-Sep-85 00:10:27 EDT
References: <2163@ukma.UUCP>
Reply-To: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes)
Distribution: na
Organization: North Carolina Educational Computing Service
Lines: 85
Summary: 


Again, I question Walt Stoll's ability to make inference from what
he reads or sees.  I saw the special report, and I got something
somewhat different...

In article <2163@ukma.UUCP> wws@ukma.UUCP (Bill Stoll) writes:
>The CBS Evening News, September 9, 1985, had a special report about
>the present "controversy" about the dangers of silver amalgam fillings
>in teeth.  This is only a controversy for those who have not done
>their homework.  In this regard it is much like the "sugar", "stress",
>"Electromagnetic Smog", "Holistic Medicine", etc., controversies.

Note that Walt is trying to associate unsubstiantated claims about
other theoretically hazardous events or phenomena with this partially
substaintiated claim.  Note that this in no way substantiates any previous
statements he has made, which still must be weighed according to their
own merits.

>The average person with 6 amalgam fillings has more mercury vapor in
>their mouth than is legal exposure in factories.  When they chew, the
>concentration increases several times more.  I have had dozens of
>patients who had been chronically ill for many years, been to many
>different doctors and clinics to no avail, who have suddenly got well
>upon replacement of their amalgam fillings with modern ceramic
>material.

The levels of mercury in the mouth are not determined, according to
the same CBS Report.  Walt is trying to insert his own data implicitly
attributing it to CBS.  This is known as a LIE!  What are your sources,
Walt?

>The American Dental Association has stubbornly insisted that there
>could not possibly be any danger from these fillings until a good and
>close friend of mine ( a lawyer here in Lexington) threatened to sue
>them if they continued making those kind of statements unless they
>could produce studies that demonstrated the safety of amalgams.  Their
>last gasp statement, just before the above threat was made, was made
>as an official statement in their national journal.  It stated that
>without question amalgams were safe and that any dentist that
>suggested otherwise should be severely censured.  In the same article
>the point was made that amalgam material was so toxic that there was
>no safe way to store it in the dental office.  There was no safe way
>to handle it and no safe way to dispose of it.  IN OTHER WORDS, THE
>ONLY SAFE PLACE FOR AMALGAM IS IN THE PATIENT'S MOUTH!

Sorry, Walt.  It just ain't so.  Since you don't cite a specific date
or journal, I cannot check your references.  The ADA is conducting
studies aimed at determining the level of mercury induced into the body
by Amalgum fillings.  Thus far, the findings are not enough to worry
about unless you have a particular sensitivity to heavy metal
poisoning.  Certainly the effects of mercury in amalgum fillings are
minimal as compared to the atmospheric content of lead due to tetraethyl
in gasoline.  Walt doesn't mention that, of course, because the AMA is
behind removing lead from gasoline.

Amalgum material is no more toxic than other heavy metal compounds.  We're
not talking about nuclear waste, here, we're talking about mercury.
I have already had all my fillings replaced, years ago. They did something
with the amalgum.  At the time nobody worried about what to do with it.
Are we polluting the environment with amalgum fillings?  Gimme a break.

>After my lawyer friend's letter to the ADA the official recommendation
>announced this spring, by the president of the ADA,  was that amalgams
>are no longer the filling material of choice.  For the past few years
>there have been stronger, and much safer, materials available.  It
>takes some extra training, and it takes a little longer to put them in
>so the dentist income goes down a little.  

Garbage.  The newer filling compounds are just as easy to work with as
amalgum.  (This from a dental student I know.)  If dentists really wanted
to make the maximum $$ off of you, theyd declare it necessary to recap
all your teeth with enamel caps.  Talk about profit margin...
Fillings, amalgum or no, are simply not where its at in terms of making
money.

>The only amalgam work done from this day forth should be taking
>amalgam out of the mouth, not putting it in.

I agree.  Tell your regular dentist (the one who knows your mouth best.)
Most will oblige.  If not, find another dentist.  Don't panic, however,
unless you are already suffering symptoms of heavy metal poisoning.
-- 

						Byron C. Howes
				      ...!{decvax,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch