Last Modified 5/ 11/ 04

 

AAA is still  receive expressions of interest from around the country. Parties indicate a desire to follow up other avenues as well as legal, and some very unfortunate stories have been told. It is clear that web accessibility is a problem for many people, and some have reported illness triggered by their computers. A number of applicants would be interested in a class action.

 

Oct 04: contact for info about Trade Practices Act prosecution, as supported by multiple legal opinions. Lawyers have expressed that such action would be successful, but apparently there is not enough money in it for them.

 

A number of callers want info about amalgam removals dentists. Action taken will make them more common.

 

Some legal inroads have been made overseas.

 

The following illustrate proper v actual handling of amalgam backfires:

 

Patient discusses amalgam concerns with actual dentist

Patient discusses amalgam concerns with theoretical dentist

 

Amalgam Action Group

 

Summary

 

               It is proposed to assess the feasibility of taking legal action against the dental profession for extensive failure to act in this country on the supposed illness cases caused by dental amalgam over an excessively protracted period of time (about 160 years history of use, with early reports of mercury- related illness). It is alleged that medicine has not acted appropriately in the matter due to a conflict of interest between doctors and dentists over the use of mercury, a poison. Expressions of interest should be taken from patients who believe they have dental amalgam illness to assess the existence of these phenomena, and then for the group to decide on a course of action, with legal action being a considered goal. Alleged illnesses from amalgam and its mercury content are discussed.

 

Objective

 

In the face of an upcoming important statute of limitations date in Victoria, Australia (30th September), it is proposed to assess the necessity and viability of legal action for damages against the dental profession, for their behaviour in respect of the alleged sided- effects of dental amalgam fillings. If following an initial feasibility assessment legal action is not thought to be warranted at this time, valuable information will have been consolidated for amalgam patients. To assess this feasibility, an assessment of porphyrin biomarkers in amalgam illness should be undertaken.

 

[Apologies for incomplete state of site, editor affected by computer use. Referencing incomplete.]

Reason

 

               Dental amalgam fillings are commonly useful and necessary for the prevention of tooth decay, however they have been the subject of controversy throughout their history, as outlined below. It is believed by many and supported by scientific and clinical evidence that they can in rare circumstances be the predominant cause, catalyst or trigger in individual cases if several diseases, including

 

 

As well as being an aggravating factor in several other medical conditions. See key sites below for complete coverage. Much but not all of the evidence for these connections has come over a long period of time from non- mainstream medicine. There are studies from around the world charting a predominance of improvement in patients claiming to have amalgam related illness following removal of fillings, as well as a lesser number of patients showing deterioration after removal. Some of the organizers of such studies have been interested parties with financial involvement in the issue, however the number of the studies and length of time of such reports suggest that they should be properly investigated. These investigations have notably and characteristically not been performed the by the mainstream dental profession in English speaking countries, and dissenting dentists have been the subject of professional repercussions and outrage. Studies that have been organized by large dental groups have not been noted for reporting on the existence of very serious cases, and have not seemed to take the situation very seriously.

 

               There is a clear opinion represented around the world in some quarters that dental amalgam can be involved in disease, however there is also a level of hysteria present in some of the claims that are made. Such hysteria can be necessary however, when backed up by the truth, to get a job done. The job is: for the dental profession to maintain a keen , vigilant and proactive interest in rare alleged amalgam illness cases. This has not been done.

 

               When a medical procedure has good effect (benefits), but occasionally backfires (costs), the issue becomes one of informed consent. It is practically impossible to maintain informed consent for all medical procedures, however fillings used to be among the most common dental procedures, if not the most common, and their safety has been questioned for 160 years. Informed consent, and professional vigilance, markers of a mature medical profession, are issues here clearly. It is arguable that due to dentistry’s privatization and profit motive they are not as rigidly enforced in dentistry as in medicine.

 

               It is proposed now, that a show of hands be taken around Australia, to assess the level and number of cases of significant illnesses suspected to have occurred from dental amalgams. It is proposed that if sufficient significant, clear and relatively provable cases can be found in this country (say 30 patients), and if the patients are of one mind, that a legal class action be undertaken. Such a decision could only be made by the group if they felt it appropriate in their own minds, taking into consideration legalities, justice and finances, as well as the individuals’ desire to not relapse with their illnesses. Additionally different feelings and motivations of group members should be discussed.

 

               Why a significant number of patients? To attain a standard of proof in senior courts in this country, it will be necessary to replicate some of the findings of studies overseas. Clear reasons will be given why legal action may be appropriate below. One- five patients could be coincidence, or possible fish poisoning say. Showing a case of amalgam illness may require some of

 

  1. temporal association of filling placement with illness onset
  2. number of fillings increasing with disease, possibly coupled with
  3. high bodily mercury values
  4. high bodily mercury values after DMPS challenge (DMPS challenge represents kidney burden, does not necessarily compare with normal urinary mercury, and can reveal hidden cotoxicity of mercury and lead, which multiply, not add, their toxicities)
  5. possibly altered porphyrin profiles consistent with mercury exposure after Woods.
  6. any other good reasons that respondents may like to suggest, followed by expert assessment of above conditions.

 

How fillings may cause disease

 

               As outlined below, mercury is a notorious poison, and that has always been the prime suspect in the problems it is believed to cause with fillings. However that is not the only possible problem.

 

               Assumed mechanisms of illness from dental amalgam include:

 

 

As we can see there are multiple ways that mercury fillings can and are believed to cause illness, not all of which are related solely to the mercury content.

 

There are numerous studies showing that amalgams may cause illness from around the world, and they are listed below. [unfinished: see http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalg6.html for extensive list] Some of these studies are hampered by possible economic interest of researchers, however there do appear to be too many cases of improvement following amalgam removals for it not to be taken seriously. Such  health improvement however may in some part be due to supportive therapies such as heavy metal chelation and nutrient replacement undertaken simultaneous to the removals, additive with partial placebo effect in some patients, a point also made by pro- amalgam dentists. Odds and statistics should be presented addressing this. Usually however, placebo effects do not last, some believe.

 

If the dentists and doctors would work together on these above issues in the best interests of the patient, problems would be decreased. But there is a jurisdiction issue: it’s a mouth, so the dentists should treat it, but it’s a disease, so the doctors should treat it. Neither ends up treating it. A more recent publication by Lindh by has shown profitable progress from rare joint involvement between the two parties: for patients of amalgam illness to be treated ethically, this cooperation is required.

 

               There is a significant conflict of interest for doctors in the handling of cases of amalgam illness. Doctors have made significant use of mercury throughout history, and they have admitted the unfortunateness of that situation. However doctors still use it in small quantities as thiomersal today. It is still being injected into young children today, an obviously improper situation. There is ongoing but unresolved concern about mercury in medicine, covered elsewhere. Doctors cannot contradict dentists in this matter. That would be the pot calling the kettle black. This situation has had grave ramifications for the treatment of these patients, and is capable of creating a miscarriage of justice in legal circles. This situation has everyday effects on amalgam patients: tests are not performed, doctors are censured, doctors are loathe to treat, doctors will not take seriously, fees are overcharged, etc etc.

 

Evidence

 

Of illness from mercury

 

               Mercury is a notorious poison, that while it has found use in medicine, has caused much grief and mortality over centuries. However mercury’s involvement in illness has been consistently hard to diagnose. For some time however we have had good  knowledge of potential dangers of mercury in fillings, and they cannot be considered unimaginable. Quite the opposite, whenever mercury is involved in a disease situation its role is to be sought out, not ignored. Simply speaking, an untrained citizen knows quite obviously that mercury is poisonous. Legally speaking, due to this historical common knowledge, the burden of proof to show dangers of mercury in medicine should not be on the patient. Rather, due to obviousness of its potential danger, and the proven fact that some mercury leaks from amalgam fillings, the burden of proof to show the safety of fillings should be in some measure on the dentists. Obviously the possibility exists that given the large inter- individual mercury sensitivities that exist, some people may get sick. The dental profession has held that mercury sets into the filling as a binding agent, and thus is not present in its dangerous vapor form. It has been adequately shown that this is not true, and that mercury is released from fillings.

 

               Many people throughout history have been unrecorded deaths due to historic use of mercury as a medicine by doctors. This was unavoidable, with the previous state of medicine. Mercury was used to treat syphilis.

 

               See http://www.algonet.se/~leif/AmFAQigr.html for a thorough list of mercury intoxication symptoms.

 

               Mercury was previously used in hat making, where mercury was used to cure the felt brims of hats. The hatmaker’s developed mercurialism, and were driven mad. The symptoms of mercurialism include: primary triad tremor, gingivitis/ stomatitis and erethism. Erethism  is a pathologically increased excitability and consists of some or more of: irritability, outbursts of temper, stress intolerance, decreased simultaneous capacity, increased sensitivity to sounds and light, resentment of criticism, loss of self-confidence, timidity, excessive shyness, embarrassment with insufficient reason, self-consciousness, anxiety, indecision, insomnia, vivid dreams, lack of concentration, memory loss, depression, fatigue.

 

Erethism caused the phrase ‘Mad as a hatter’. Hatmaker’s were still using mercury in New Jersey in 1940’s, and the following medical journal article (Am J Ind Med. 1989;16(2):225-33. ‘Were the hatters of New Jersey "mad"?’,Wedeen RP) should be quoted:

 

“Conventional wisdom holds that the "Mad Hatter" of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland earned his name because he exhibited psychotic behavior from mercury poisoning. The first description of mercurialism in hatters was published by J. Addision Freeman, M.D., in Transactions of the Medical Society of New Jersey in 1860, just 5 years before Lewis Carrol's famous tale. But it is unlikely that Alice's creator was aware of this obscure provincial report. Numerous subsequent studies of hatters in New Jersey showed that the hatters' shakes were rampant among the immigrant workers. The pathologic shyness of mercurialism, however, was not noted in New Jersey hatters until 1912. The idea that hatters were "mad" stemmed from popular perceptions more than from medical knowledge. Nor did medical studies lead to elimination of mercury in felt hat manufacturing. The hatters' occupational disease was curbed only in 1941 when mercury was required for the manufacture of detonators in World War II. The hatters of New Jersey were not only not mad, but neither were they, the physicians, nor the public of the period sufficiently angry to control the conditions under which the hatters worked.”

 

Other symptoms in mercurialism may include: headache, unsteady gait, numbness and pain in the extremities, muscular weakness, paraesthesias, drowsiness, slurring of words, slight stammering, difficulty in pronunciation of words, oedema, metallic taste, loosened teeth, increased salivation, loss of weight, hair loss, nausea, constipation, diarrhoea, other gastrointestinal disturbances, difficulty in breathing.

 

The term "quack" was first used to describe those dentists using quicksilver (i.e. mercury) amalgam fillings in their patients.

 

Pink disease/ acrodynia killed and injured babies and children who were exposed to mercury in teething powders. See http://www.users.bigpond.com/difarnsworth/ for thorough discussion. Doctors suspected but could not prove this link, so after many years and a parent outcry, mercury was removed from teething powders, after which acrodynia rapidly diminished. Mercury has now been accepted as the trigger and cause. None of this could be calculated with science at the time, only a precaution that saved many lives. Only a minority of those exposed to mercury from different mercury-containing medicaments, as teething powder, got affected - a fact that made it hard to track down its causation. It was described 1914 (or even earlier), but not until 1948 was it suggested to be caused by chronic mercury poisoning, and subsequently the mercury component banned.

 

               There have been some large industrial accidents involving fatalities from mercury such as the Minamata bay disaster, and Iraq. These disasters were reportedly difficult to initially diagnose. Mercury has been called by alternative medical practitioners the ‘great imitator’.

 

Mercury was used as thiomersal in vaccines as a preservative/ antimicrobial for a long period of time. Parent pressure groups and scientists caused a great outcry and senate enquiries in the US, and had it removed from vaccines only in the last few years, due to its suspicion in cases of autism following vaccinations. The role of vaccinations and mercury in autism have not been established, although there is an accepted degree of suspicion. It is being determined that metal metabolism is affected in several diseases including autism, leading to difficulty in some people handling heavy metals. Without significant lobbying and the existence of internet communications, nothing would have been done about this issue. It is not possible for society to continually monitor doctors. It is obvious that mercury should not be injected into babies and small children, and everybody knew this except the doctors.

 

Mercury in mercurochrome was long used in hospitals, but has now been banned in the US following deaths, as have mercury thermometers been phased out of hospitals there. Other countries have not finalized these moves yet, and mercury, a most often used poison still finds some use.

 

There is good evidence that Isaac Newton had mercurialism. Isaac Newton was an important mathematician/ physicist, with a deserved reputation for combative behaviour. He is accepted to have been a most unappealing character who persecuted his famous rivals, and had delusions of persecution, and was known to have had some fits of depression and nervous breakdown. He was an alchemist who regularly experimented with mercury. Suspecting erethism, his body was exhumed in 1979 and a hair analysis done, showing that his hair was laced with mercury. This is not proof of mercury poisoning- that is difficult, but it is yet another example. It is also thought that Beethoven was made ill by lead poisoning. Retrospective illnesses are however hard to accurately diagnose, nevertheless these are commonly held opinions. Concerning Newton, from http://www.oism.org/cdp/jan2003.html,

 

“Symptoms of chronic mercury poisoning were described in 1893 by the English neurologist William Gowers: irritability, difficulty concentrating, insomnia, overwhelming shyness, discouragement, and apathy. By the late nineteenth century, the syndrome was common medical knowledge.”

 

See also http://www.mercuryinschools.uwex.edu/shared/curriculum/national-curriculum-no-cover.pdf  Other famous figures have been associated with mercurialism.

 

Illnesses seen more commonly in modern times include chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivities, fibromyalgia and gulf war syndrome. These are overlapping disorders by common opinion (see for example http://www.mcsrr.org/factsheets/overlaping.html ), and heavy metal contamination is suspected in all. Gulf war vets were given heavy vaccine schedules prior to deployment, and the mercury content among others is suspected of being implicated in the condition. Suspect is not good enough for proof however, but with the politicizing of these illnesses and hostility towards them it has been difficult to attract infrastructure and funding necessary to study them properly.

 

When multiple toxins are present in the body, it is common for them to behave synergistically, with the combined effect being far more toxic than the addition of the separate toxic effects. For example combined small nonlethal doses of lead and mercury in rats produce lethality. It should be realized that mercury from fillings could interact with other toxins in the body, such as candida toxins or other heavy metals.

 

               History has long shown that mankind shows recalcitrant behaviour when it comes to the handling of dangerous poisons, mercury being a good example.Innumerable websites discuss illnesses created by mercury.

 

               There is not comprehensive and conclusive proof on the issue of various illnesses caused by mercury in dental amalgams. Why? It is not possible to properly investigate rare conditions when there is vested financial gain in dentists not reporting it, and they control financially and logistically the scientific research necessary to properly investigate the issues, as a monopoly. However there are repeated studies showing relatively small numbers on the whole of backfires. This would be to be expected if there were such people. Given this notorious history of mercury, it is impossible to realistically rule out the possibility it may cause problems in amalgams. Given that it has been repeatedly noted that mercury poisoning has been difficult to prove until after the fact, although suspicions have later correlated with proof, it has obviously been appropriate to investigate mercurialism in dentistry.

Of illness from amalgams

 

A noted government report by Maths Berlin states:

 

‘Clinical surveys

In a summary of just over 400 patients referred to Huddinge Hospital with

suspicion of amalgam-related conditions, the authors consider that some 30 per

cent of cases were attributable to diagnoses other than amalgam influence. These

diagnoses included, for example, heart disease, chronic collagenosis,

neurological disease and cancer; in the authors opinion, these could explain the

patients condition. In other cases, there was speculation about the causes and it

was found that the summary did not support the hypothesis that amalgam had

contributed to the patients pathological condition. The argument for this was

that no connection between their symptoms and elevated mercury concentrations

in their blood or urine were demonstrable (Langworth et al. 2002).

 

This survey supports the hypothesis that, among those who believe themselves

to be suffering as a result of amalgam, the true cause is not always amalgam.

However, it does not rule out the possibility that amalgam influence can be

found in some of these persons. The diagnoses mentioned in this study include

impaired thyroid function, oral lichen, kidney disease, fatigue, vertigo,

somatisation tendency, depression and anxiety ŒŒ all of which are symptoms

that may be associated with mercury exposure.

A Swiss dentist followed up 75 of the 90 patients he had treated with amalgam

removal according to the patients own wishes. All the patients had

psychoneurological symptoms or muscular and joint pains of various kinds.

Sixty-eight per cent of the patients felt that they were much better at the time of

their annual check-ups following the removal. Another 12 per cent felt better, 9

per cent were slightly better, 7 per cent were unchanged and one of the patients

felt worse after the removal (Engel 1998).

In a similar Swedish questionnaire survey comprising 445 patients of one

dentist, the patients amalgam fillings were removed because of prolonged,

unexplained ailments. Here, the health of 80 per cent of the patients whose

fillings had been removed was found to be good or better, while that of 11 per

cent was unchanged and 9 per cent felt that it had deteriorated or were doubtful.

More than half the patients stated that they had experienced symptoms in

connection with having their fillings removed. These symptoms often began

after a few days and commonly lasted about a week (Strömberg and Langworth

1998).’

 

The Australian Dental Journal reports (Australian Dental Journal 2000;45:(4)224-234)

 

“Certainly patients with dental amalgams do report symptoms such as irritability, depression, numbness and tingling in the extremeties, frequent night urination, chronic fatigue, cold hands and feet, bloating, memory loss, anger and constipation. However, this does not establish causation.”

 

Well known anti- amalgam source BERNIE WYNDHAM provides the following information CHECK COMPLETE REF BELOW WITH LINK TO PDF

 

CHECK FINISH considered role of maternal amalgams during pregnancy in cases of autism. This is a work in progress, and this researchhas only come about to due extensive efforts by pressure groups in the US.

 

List of links to studies can be found below.

Against dentists

History/ chronology of mercury use in dentistry

 

A history of the use of amalgam in dentistry can be found in several places online.

 

From Lindh et al (follow link for references):

“Dental amalgam was used very early in China. "Silver paste" is mentioned in the materia medica of Su Kung in 659 A.D. The name used is probably the historical reason why this material in some countries is called "silver amalgam" although its main ingredient always has been mercury. French chemists and dentists experimenting with various mixtures of metals in the end of the 18th century initiated the use of amalgam in the western world. Introduction of dental amalgam is usually ascribed to the French brothers Crawcour in 1831. They used a mixture of mercury and filings of French silver coins. Two years later the Crawcour brothers introduced the filling material in New York and they falsely pretended to be dentists.

Discussions about the rationale in using mercury as the main component in dental amalgams have been going on more than 160 years. In fact, the debate started immediately after the introduction of the material in the U.S.A. American medical-dentists at that time started a merciless crusade against their foreign rivals. They declared that not only was silver amalgam a lousy filling material but it also caused mercury poisoning. This had among other things the consequence that professional dentists started a dental association (The American Society of Dental Surgeons) in New York in 1840 to "increase the standing of the profession and to counteract charlatanry". The first amalgam war had begun.

Almost ignored were the results of studies in which warnings were issued for negative health effects associated with exposure to mercury from dental amalgams. Later during the 1920s, the German chemist Alfred Stock warned about the danger with mercury vapor. As late as in 1939 he issued enhanced warnings. The latest phase in these amalgam wars started in the late 1970s and has been especially intense in Scandinavia but also in the U.S.A. and Germany. Various attempts to estimate risks from dental amalgams have been published advancing conclusions of increased risk of disease as well as no correlation between amalgams and health problems. The latter study, however, demonstrated negligence of combinations of gold and amalgam causing increased corrosion and mercury vapor emission. Richardson concludes that a significant portion of all age groups exceeds the proposed reference dose for mercury exposure (0.98 mg Hg/day - tolerable daily intake) more than fives times due to dental amalgam. He also concludes that data suggest that approximately 19 to 20% of the general population may experience sub-clinical central nervous system and/or kidney function impairment as a result of the presence of amalgam fillings. Berlin arrives at the conclusion that the prevalence of side effects from mercury in amalgam on the nervous system, immune system and kidneys should fall in the interval 0.1-10% with the highest probability of 1%. This makes the probable side effects from amalgams a significant health problem.

 

Documented effects of amalgam removal appeared and were published already in 1842. However, probably the first comprehensive study was published in 1928 as a consequence of Stock's warnings. Seven patients with a completed treatment reported substantially improved health or complete health. Fleischmann interpreted the symptoms as an expression of "hypersensitivity" and recommended dentistry to abandon copper amalgam of that time immediately and silver amalgam when equivalent materials were available. Several contemporary studies have been published dealing with implications, both in general health, oral pathology and laboratory medicine, of removal of dental amalgam. A drawback of most of these studies is, however, that there are few indications of the treatment quality. “

 

               With respect to the introduction of amalgams into the US, various sources report a schism in dentistry- ‘The American Society of Dental Surgeons, formed in 1840, so abhorred the use of amalgam that it required its members to sign pledges that they would not use it. In 1848, The Society of Dentists of the City and State of New York suspended eleven of members for "malpractice," because they used amalgam. Internal strife over the use of mercury in dentistry led to the formation of the (US) ADA, whose leaders did not oppose its use.’ There were professional, ethical and economic reasons for early controversy. At the time, amalgam would truly have been a miracle, and benefits would have far outweighed its potential costs, so it was taken up.

 

               Additionally, plastics have only been at the stage where they are economically biocompatible since approximately the 1960’s- 1970’s, at a guess. A laser is required to set them, a modern invention. Nevertheless, during this time of the uptake of plastic fillings, proper monitoring of potential side effects of amalgams should have been possible within an ethical framework. Earlier methods of setting plastics without a laser could also have been invented for mercury sensitive patients if attention had been paid.

Other

 

Following media attention in the late 1980’s, the US ADA (AmDA) instituted a gag rule, preventing their members from sharing possible side effects of amalgams with their patients, and individual dentists have been harassed by this rule in that country. Recent media and legislative attention in the states is presently overturning this blatantly disgraceful rule. See http://www.toxicteeth.org/ for description. In the US, dental amalgam is treated as hazardous waste after it is removed from a patient’s mouth, and it is presenting environmental cleanup problems in many quarters. The only place it is considered safe is within a patient’s mouth.

 

               The time duration of the controversy surrounding mercury in fillings suggests that the delay in their phase- out is not a function of institutional lag. Institutional lag can explain a profession taking 20 years to properly act on a suspect practise, not 160 years. That is more indicative of monopoly, or trade practise issues, if dentistry were to be a trade. Institutional lag, a valid explanation of problems within human endeavour, nor misadventure nor human error are valid reasons for the apparent lack of action on possible side effects from amalgam fillings.

 

This author spoke to an accredited representative of the dental profession in a state in Australia in 2002, open- mindedly investigating this issue. Following a one- sided tirade on the safety of amalgams, and their admitted superiority  over composites with respect to ‘fringe oxidation’ and being ‘keriostatic’, he was told there is no problem with amalgams at all, some less ethical dentists want to make money, and concluding with ‘GET THE MESSAGE’ in a hostile voice, more appropriate for a mafia stand over merchant. The message turned out to be that a filling was placed six weeks prior to extremely serious illness in the author, and there may be involvement of it.

 

CHECK UNFINISHED NOT PUBLICATION

 

Within Australia, the main professional body of dentists, the ADA, distributes pamphlets citing the safety of amalgams, primarily referring to very rare mercury allergy as a possible side effect, as well as cautioning in pregnant women and kidney disease. This indicates an apparent one- sidedness of their opinion. Through the NHMRC, the ADA has maintained the overall safety of amalgams within the public arena, with a recent provision that they should be reconsidered CHECk in PREGNANT WOMEN AND CHILDREN, following pressure from dissenting dentists. Court transcripts on the internet appear to indicate that an Australian dentist was in recent years prohibited from practicing dentistry within Victoria for his treatment of amalgam patients showing raised mercury levels with DMSA, the accepted world’s best chelation drug, a practise that is followed worldwide. This same dentist had previously publicly questioned the overall safety of amalgams.

 

The ADA presents information on their website concerning their opinion of the amalgam issue at http://www.ada.org.au/, search on amalgam.

 

A thorough study has not been performed in this country to properly evaluate the safety of amalgam. Multiple studies in foreign countries contradict these studies, while others corroborate them, as previously discussed. No reference is made to contradictory studies on the ADA website, only some corroborative evidence HREF. To properly evaluate these statements in this country, a register needs to be set up of purported amalgam patients, and thorough biochemical rundowns performed, and medical and dental records cross- checked by an independent party.

 

How much money has been spent by professional medical and dental bodies in this country concerning the welfare of purported amalgam illness patients? What percentage of yearly budgets does this represent for those organizations, and over what period of time has this occurred? How many programs are in existence in this country to monitor and/ or solve this issue? Is it the intention of dentistry to simply follow overseas bodies with respect to amalgams?

 

It appears that serious illness from amalgams may be relatively rare, with mild morbidity being more common. Rare illness will not show up upon cursory investigations. By not thoroughly investigating claims of amalgam illness or setting up registers of purported patients at the professional level, dentists around the world would appear to have displayed neglect. If the allegations surrounding the dangers of mercury amalgams are substantiated, then dentists are guilty of displaying reckless endangerment, depraved indifference and potentially fraud.

 

http://www.toxicteeth.org/natCamp_IntScene_SwedenArticle.cfm New US federal legislation being introduced.

Consequences of not meeting objective if reasons are accurate

 

Around the world, numerous parties believe that they have been injured by amalgams. If this is true, and legal action is not taken shortly, it is probable that the majority of these cases will be swept under the carpet, entailing:

 

               No money for removals, and risk exists that a subset of dentists may profiteer at the expense of the vulnerable.

 

               The more seriously affected patients had the most amalgams more than a decade ago, when this debate was effectively hidden from the public. With this new law, they will probably lose any right to compensation. The law in Victoria allows for the statute to be overlooked on some occasions in the interest of justice, but such conditions are scarcely if ever enacted in practise. With this new law, controversial situations such as agent orange, asbestos (more serious than amalgam), having fatalities, may resist lawful prosecution, as 12 years has historically been a short period of time to act in situations that are aggravated by an imbalance in power.

 

               There has been sufficient evidence that a thorough investigation of patients with anxiety and other neuropsychiatric disorders needs to be undertaken to investigate the role of fillings. It is required that dental records be thoroughly cross- checked with medical- that the professions cooperate, without overcharging for the privilege. This author was significantly and dangerously obstructed in obtaining his dental records. It is required that when diagnosis is made of supposed amalgam associated illnesses, possible amalgam involvement be considered by medical staff and role of removals considered in treatment. This will probably given the evidence stop some cases of illness in a more timely manner.

 

It is believed that amalgam removal is a potentially risky business, and sources advise patients not to rapidly run out and have them ripped out without considering the consequences. Some doctors have reported patients that they believe have contracted extremely serious illnesses such as motoneurone illness from amalgam removals, due to the mercury released during a removal. A Victorian Public Dental Hospital representative has reported that the use of rubber mouth dam is legally mandatory in this state, however many if not most dentists do not use them (information not confirmed). This matter should be handled with care.

Legalities

 

US lawyer leading legal actions on mercury issues, http://www.khorrami.com/, see http://www.khorrami.com/Amalgam%20Web/Amalgam/Mercury%20Toxicity.htm

 

Porphyrin biomarkers in amalgam illness

 

Dr James Woods, a respected authority in porphyrins, has reported alterations in porphyrin metabolism in dentists, and has considered porphyrin abnormalities to be a potential biomarker of mercury exposure. Porphyrin profiles are academically established biomarkers in lead and arsenic poisoning, and it is a natural step to apply this as a principal measure in suspected cases of mercury poisoning. This has been done with dentists who have occupational exposure to amalgams via mercury vapor, and it is natural to consider a thorough study of them in suspected amalgam patients. This has not adequately been done, and it certainly should have been done. It is proposed by Amalgam Action Australia to check the porphyrin profiles of suspected amalgam patients in this country in a controlled fashion in the short term future.

 

Mercury vapor creates the following characteristic porphyrin changes in dentists:

 

Notable elevation of a unique mercury associated porphyrin, precoproporphyrin, easily testable using high pressure liquid chromatography.

 

Additionally, alterations in coproporphyrin and pentacarboxylporphyrin occur.

 

Using porphyrin profiling, it is difficult to establish exactly on an individual basis cases of mercury poisoning involvement in illness, but apparently with mercury vapor it is possible to show a definite trend given a group. Of course in some cases porphyrin levels are markedly altered showing obvious mercury involvement. Porphyrin profiling in serious cases of amalgam illness would go a long way to rigorously establishing its legitimacy, taking into consideration mercury contamination from fish, and would constitute legal evidence in court if performed by a reputable specialist laboratory. These acquired porphyrinopathies have been neglected by the profession, who deal with the much less common inherited porphyrias.

 

Some people with autism spectrum disorders have shown lowered hair levels of mercury, while it is believed that mercury is possibly involved. It is considered that these lowered levels are due to an autistics diminished ability to excrete heavy metals, not a diminished absorbed quantity. In other words, their body is unable to excrete mercury, storing it within cells, and thus not being in the bloodstream it won’t show up in hair. Normal measured mercury levels in combination with suspected mercury- related porphyrin abnormalities would appear to support the involvement of this retention toxicity. This work is in progress, but the law is changing. Suspicions with amalgams have been held for years privately. In cases of medical bad practises, this new law will give professionals effective carte blanche to avoid future legal actions in this country.

 

               References and printouts on porphyrin abnormalities in mercury exposure are coming, eg

 

Toxicol Sci. 2001 Jun;61(2):234-40. 

Quantitative evaluation of urinary porphyrins as a measure of kidney mercury

content and mercury body burden during prolonged methylmercury exposure in rats.

Pingree SD, Simmonds PL, Rummel KT, Woods JS.

 

See diagrams of porphyrin profiles, porphyrins disturbed by toxins.

 

Further Information will follow. Additionally, DMPS challenged mercury and lead level should be tested in patients, noting that this has rare risks, to attempt to obtain a mercury panel.

Conclusion/ Contact Details

 

If not mercury amalgams, then what? Amalgams are thought to be superior for back teeth, and durability. That’s not the point. The point is informed consent, patient’s welfare and vigilance, things desired by the community. Countries are slowly phasing out mercury amalgams, and the non- acceptance of the potential dangers of amalgam are thought by the anti- amalgam lobby to be dogma and anachronism. However plastic fillings may well also have lesser problems; they contain pseudo- oestrogens. To properly handle purported problems requires understanding by both sides of the rare potential dangers of fillings in general, as opposed to dogged adversarial activities.

It is preferable to have a non- adversarial process with health and informed acceptance and research of risks being the goal.

 

               Due to the upcoming and not well known legal issues, patients in Australia who believe they have been seriously injured by the action of dental amalgams may well be advised to act now to establish this and consider legal avenues. Amalgam Action Australia has this as one goal, and interested parties may contact the group via the email address below.

 

Goals of legal action may include:

 

 

The author is not a legal person, and approaches are confidential to the group.

 

Contact AAA at Email: amalgamaction@webprophets.net.au, including some personal details, to receive further contact information, or alternatively call 03 9899 7784. Respondents’ opinions and ideas on AAA are welcomed, and it is desired to include them within the direction of the action. Due to unforeseeable circumstances, there appears to be an extremely tight timetable to act on this issue. If in light of evidence it is not thought appropriate to proceed legally, a thorough check of porphyrin profiles and DMPS challenge results in supposed amalgam patients will be very useful in further establishing legitimacy and funding for the condition.

 

Bibliography/ Other Sites of interest

Websites

There are now innumerable websites covering the dangers of mercury in dental amalgam, from government, scientific and private sources. The primary ones include:

 

http://www.testfoundation.org/amalgampage.htm

http://www.algonet.se/~leif/AmFAQigr.html

http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/indexa.html

http://www.toxicteeth.org/

 

 

Studies and web sites showing amalgam associated health effects

 

 

Studies and web sites showing amalgam removal associated health effects

 

http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalg6.html for extensive list

http://www.toxicteeth.org/natCamp_IntScene_RyggArticle.cfm leads to http://www.dentalmaterial.gov.se/mercury.pdf

 

 

Extract Maths Berlin Mercury in dental-filling materials- an updated risk analysis in environmental medical terms, An overview of scientific literature published in 1997–2002 and current knowledge, Maths Berlin. Report of Swedish Government’s ‘Dental Material Commission’.

 

 

Langworth S, Bjorkman L, Elinder CG, Jarup L, Savlin P (2002) Multidisciplinary

examination of patients with illness attributed to dental fillings. J Oral Rehabil 29: 705-713

 

Engel P (1998) Beobachtungen uber die Gesundheit vor und nach Amalgamentfernung

(‚Observation of health before and after amalgam removal™). Schweiz Monatsschr

Zahnwith 108: 811-813

 

Neuroendocrinol Lett. 2002 Oct-Dec;23(5-6):459-82. Removal of dental amalgam and other metal alloys supported by antioxidant therapy alleviates symptoms and improves quality of life in patients with amalgam-associated ill health. Lindh U, Hudecek R, Danersund A, Eriksson S, Lindvall A. See full text at http://www.toxicteeth.org/natCamp_IntScene_SwedenArticle.cfm

 

 

 

References

 

Porphyrin profile from mercury poisoning

 

 

 

Porphyrins disturbed as secondary porphyrinopathy by toxins including mercury