ry for most people. I've posted documentation from U.S. Department of Health, Agency of Toxic Substances, the official source for such to this effect; from a major assessment by the World Health organization that showed people with amalgam fillings get much more exposure from amalgam than from fish, from U.S. EPA and the Association of Municipal Sewer Agencies who did measurements showing that those with several fillings excreted an average of 30 micrograms per day down sewers- resulting in high levels in sewers and much higher levels in people than from other sources. I've provided the documentation and references, you have none to the contrary.
You posted an article by Mackert who is a paid lobbyist for the American Dental Association, but the study is not a serious study
and was not published in a peer-reviewed medical journal- rather in a dental journal. The article has no science, no measurements,
and is purely a review article stating his opinion- has no measurements. Note that the ADA has acknowledged in Court that they should not be considered to have expertise on this issue. Their information was found lacking in court. Likewise I supplied medical studies that they supplied to the FDA that supports what I've said.
I've cited information from medical labs based on hundreds of thosands of medicals tests(fecal tests and urine tests) by labs such as Doctors Data Lab, Great Smokies Diagnostic Lab, and Biospectron(European Lab) that fully supports the information of EPA and the
municipal sewer agencies regarding the extremely high levels of mercury in feces and urine of those with amalgam fillings.
Oral tests using a Jerome mercury vapor meter consistently show high and dangerous levels of mercury in oral air of those with amalgam fillings(higher than Gov't health standards) due to the fact that mercury is a gas at room temperature and mercury in amalgam continuously vaporizes into oral air and saliva. If I need to I can post as many of the 4000 peer-reviewed studies I've cited, but since you still persist, I'll post a few more based on measurements of mercury in saliva of those with amalgam:
A large study was carried out at the Univ. Of Tubingen Health Clinic in which the level of mercury in saliva of 20,000 persons with amalgam fillings was measured(199). The level of mercury in unstimulated saliva was found to average 11.6 ug Hg/L, with the average after chewing being 3 times this level. Several were found to have mercury levels over 1100 ug/L, 1 % had unstimulated levels over 200 ug/L, and 10 % had unstimulated mercury saliva levels of over 100 ug/L.. The level of mercury in saliva has been found to be proportional to the number of amalgam fillings, and generally was higher for those with more fillings. The following table gives the average daily mercury exposure from saliva alone for those tested, based on the average levels found per number of fillings and using daily saliva volumes of 890 ml for unstimulated saliva flow and 80 ml for stimulated flow (estimated from measurements made in the study and comparisons to other studies). It also gives the 84th percentile mercury exposure from saliva for the 20,000 tested by number of fillings. Note that 16% of all of those tested with 4 amalgam fillings had daily exposure from their amalgam fillings of over 17 ug per day, and even more so for those with more than 4 fillings.
Table: Average daily mercury exposure in saliva by number of amalgam fillings(199)
Number of fillings: 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Av. Daily Hg(ug) 6.5 8 9.5 11 12.4 14 15.4 16.9 18.3 19.8 21.3 22.8 24.3
84th percentile(ug) 17 23.5 26 30.5 35 41.5 43.8 48.6 50.3 46.7 56.6 61.4 64.5
Saliva tests for mercury are commonly performed in Europe, and many other studies have been carried out with generally comparable results(292,315,79,9b,335,179,317,352). Another large German study(352) found significantly higher levels than the study summarized here, with some with exposure levels over 1000 ug/day. These studies found that the amount of mercury in saliva increased about 1.5 to 2.5 micrograms for each additional amalgam filling(199,352).
References:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalg6.html (this article has over 4000 peer-reviewed studies cited)
note that this is just in saliva; the largest amounts of mercury measured in those with amalgam is in the feces- as noted by
the studies by EPA and Municipal Sewer Agencies and thousands of tests by medical labs that I've cited.
Why do you think that the main U.S. Federal agency responsible for this issue(ATSDR) is incorrect about exposure levels and
on what basis do you dispute the over 1000 page World Health Organization study to the same effect.
Call or contact a medical lab such as Doctors Data Lab and ask them how the urine mercury levels of those with amalgam compare
to those without. Just like the studies I've cited, the labs have found(and state in their test data based on hundreds of thosands of tests) that those with amalgam average mercury levels over 5 times that of those without. I can cite you over ten peer-reviewed
studies from the URL just listed that document the same thing.
Likewise there are hundreds of thousands of people who've had their amalgam fillings replaced, and it is clearly documented by the
peer-reviewed medical studies and by medical lab tests that after replacement the level of mercury in their urine decreases from 60 to 80%, while the level in their saliva and feces is reduced by over 90%.
* After filling replacement levels of mercury in the blood, urine, and feces typically temporarily are increased for a few days, but levels usually decline in blood and urine within 6 months to from 60 to 85% of the original levels(57,79,82,89,196,303). Mercury levels in saliva and feces usually decline between 80 to 95% (79,196,335,386)
references:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalg6.htmlIn other words all clinical tests and studies fully support that dental amalgam is clearly the largest source of mercury exposure in most of those with amalgam fillings.
Do you now agree?????? If not why. I can keep posting additional peer-reviewed and Gov't agency documentation if needed,
but there is none to the contrary. I've been researching mercury exposures for over 20 years and am extremely familiar with the literature. there is consensus among clinical studies and scientists on this- only
articles by dentists expressing opinions without test results and published in dental journals express opinions to the contrary- but without any support. All the science supports what I've said. I know you can't find any credible evidence tot he contrary because there have been millions of tests by medical labs and studies and they all support what I've said.