Comments-Dental amalgam fillings - Mercury

Ten years ago I had all my amalgam fillings replaced with porcelain inlays. I've been to two local dentists, and they no longer use amalgam.
 
I personally have not used amalgam in over 13 years. In fact, I don't use metal at all with the exception of titanium implants.

However, a little reality check is in order. We have placed literally billions of amalgam fillings. It it was as bad as some say, people would be dropping like flies.

Don't listen to Dr Oz for anything. :nonod:
 
When I was a child, my mother got sucked into a dental program called "Preventative Dentistry" that she enrolled me in. She had been given false teeth in her late teen or early twenties, her mother thought false teeth were the best thing for her, and she paid for all of it. She hated her false teeth and wanted to do all she could to keep her own kids from having them.

"Preventative Dentistry" consisted of filling every single tooth in my head with mercury fillings even though those teeth had no cavities. They put a filling in every location that a cavity might form, so some of my teeth had two to three fillings in them.

I'm 70 now and all of my teeth except for five of them, are all implants. I had that done over the last ten or twelve years as I could afford it. I will have the best looking teeth in the graveyard.

I do not know what the impact of having all that mercury in my mouth for all those years had on me, but it has always seemed harder for me to learn new skills than it seemed to be for others to learn those same skills, I felt I had to study harder and work harder, but I always accomplished it sooner or later.

But then in those days of my childhood, I had a toy soldier making machine that used melted lead that we poured into molds, the heating ducts in our house were all covered in asbestos, and most of the paint was lead based.

All that, and I am alive and in good health at 70.

-John
 
"almost 400 tons of dental Mercury is used annually"? Is that WW or just in the US? He doesn't say. If that's world wide, I don't really care so much, but if that's just in the US, that's a whole bunch of Mercury going in people's mouths.
 
Pretty sure that amalgams are not a good thing and help no one.

I doubt that every person responds identically to any industrial waste. Some might get symptoms mimicking MS or other hard to understand medical issues. Others might not have any noticeable reaction for a while.
 
I don't do amalgam because that's not what my patients want, but I still place one occasionally. Nothing substitutes for amalgam when you cannot maintain a dry field. My honest opinion is that in the future we will question why we ever considered composites as a good option. You create more mercury by removing an amalgam than placing it.

Think of it on a chemical level. When 2 substances combine, they are now an entirely different substance. Take table salt. Sodium and Chlorine are both pretty bad dudes, but combine them and get NaCl, good old fashioned table salt. Too much of anything can kill you. Even too much water can be harmful.

Dr. Oz has one goal, and that's to sell adds on a tv show.
 
teethdoc said:
Think of it on a chemical level. When 2 substances combine, they are now an entirely different substance. Take table salt. Sodium and Chlorine are both pretty bad dudes, but combine them and get NaCl, good old fashioned table salt. Too much of anything can kill you. Even too much water can be harmful.
Click to expand...

Parroting the party line. What happens when you mix salt and water? You get saltwater, not an entirely different substance. Amalgam is an alloy, not a new substance formed from a chemical reaction.
 
dmspilot said:
Parroting the party line. What happens when you mix salt and water? You get saltwater, not an entirely different substance. Amalgam is an alloy, not a new substance formed from a chemical reaction.
Click to expand...

It's not my concern who I convince or not other than my patients. If you don't want an amalgam, don't get one, but don't think you are making the wise decision by having them removed and replaced with something that will probably someday be labeled as toxic as amalgam. We don't know what we don't know.
 
teethdoc said:
It's not my concern who I convince or not other than my patients. If you don't want an amalgam, don't get one, but don't think you are making the wise decision by having them removed and replaced with something that will probably someday be labeled as toxic as amalgam. We don't know what we don't know.
Click to expand...

My amalgam fillings (20+years old) were cracking and had to be replaced anyway. Porcelain seemed better, more sturdy than composite.
 
teethdoc said:
I My honest opinion is that in the future we will question why we ever considered composites as a good option. You create more mercury by removing an amalgam than placing it.
Click to expand...

Is it not regular practice to use dental dams and suction when removing amalgam? I get that you are fussing with something that was probably stable but sooner or later they need be fixed/removed/replaced anyway.

I read that Dentists have the highest incidence of depression/suicide of all professionals.... Could there be a relationship between mercury vapor and this incidence? Has it been looked at?

I also read that dental technicians have higher incidence of permanent illness, fertility issues and birth defects.

It is easy to blow it off, just wondering.

I blew up at my dental staff last time I visited as they have the x-ray machine facing the three exam rooms and I was in the last of 3 farthest away from the x-ray machine but the techs came in and told the Doc to step out side while they hit the photo button and I demanded they offer me the same courtesy. They said we work with it daily so obviously we do not want to be dosed daily, your dose is so insignificant......screw you I'm thinking "that is my decision not yours"....That was my last visit to that Doc, now looking for another dentist.
 
This spring I had my last amalgam filling replaced. The one before that was replaced about a year before I became fairly "sick" with fatigue that was possibly due to mercury toxicity. At the time I had no idea of the risks of amalgam fillings and especially the risks of getting them removed. My dentist didn't use a dam or extra suction...basically no precaution whatsoever. This last time I had them do both, and I got on some chelation supplements ahead of time to prevent any trouble if it got absorbed through my mouth.

I think it is a real problem, and not well known to the general public. Mercury and other metal toxicity can cause some real insidious, sub-clinical conditions that are devastating.
 
Sorry to hear that Scott. I do agree with you and I believe may of the over diagnoses of MD, MS and other issues are often toxicity of other elements.

What do you use for chelation?
 
Thorne Captomer pills, King Chlorella tablets, and a lot of other supporting supplements under the supervision of a naturopath/homeopathic doctor.
 
Getting my (new) dentist to use amalgam is like... well, pulling teeth. I wanted it and couldn't get it. He wouldn't do it. He does in some very particular circumstances, but he wouldn't in mine.

I have amalgam fillings that have been there for 45 years, with no problems; but the composite ones keep falling out and having to be replaced. My new dentist said that was because they relied on adhesion with inadequate physical ... anchoring, or something like that.

We'll see how the new ones he did last. I had four of them done last week -- in one sitting.

-Rich
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
I read that Dentists have the highest incidence of depression/suicide of all professionals.... Could there be a relationship between mercury vapor and this incidence? Has it been looked at?

I also read that dental technicians have higher incidence of permanent illness, fertility issues and birth defects.

It is easy to blow it off, just wondering.
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention that.... a number of years ago I did participate in an informal testing program to measure airborne mercury in a dentists office. Although informal we did use standard air monitoring methods.

None was ever detected. Our detection level was .005 mg/m3, well below the OSHA standard. It was a private test, so no, I have no report or reference.

Gary
 
Sorry, but this sounds like tin foil hat territory. Mercury is bad (except in light bulbs, where it's better than incandescent light bulbs with no mercury) even though we have no proof that amalgam fillings are of any demonstrated health risk whatsoever. Oh, wait, that's because of the big industry lobby who is paying and pulling strings to cover it all up. And I can't prove it, but I'm pretty sure that some problem that I had at some point in my life could possibly have been caused by the amalgam fillings.

If folks only knew how many OTHER environmental toxins they were exposed to every day, I have a feeling that a mouth full of amalgam fillings would be the least of their concerns.


JKG
 
Good logic. Since you cannot identify let alone avoid all industrial toxins and pollutants you might as well not worry about any of them you can identify and do know about. I take solace Darwinism will self select those who move forward and those who do not.


JGoodish said:
Sorry, but this sounds like tin foil hat territory. Mercury is bad (except in light bulbs, where it's better than incandescent light bulbs with no mercury) even though we have no proof that amalgam fillings are of any demonstrated health risk whatsoever. Oh, wait, that's because of the big industry lobby who is paying and pulling strings to cover it all up. And I can't prove it, but I'm pretty sure that some problem that I had at some point in my life could possibly have been caused by the amalgam fillings.

If folks only knew how many OTHER environmental toxins they were exposed to every day, I have a feeling that a mouth full of amalgam fillings would be the least of their concerns.


JKG
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
newer amalgams are triturated in machines and the amount of free mercury released from a filling is negligible. Amalgams, in general, are one of the longer laster restorations for what they do. When a tooth needs a larger restoration, a crown is often required. Composite (tooth colored) restorations are much better than they used to be, but amalgams generally last longer on posterior teeth.

I guarantee that a larger reason that amalgams are fewer and farther between is esthetics. Gold is superior to metal/porcelain crowns but you don't see too many of those any more, do you? As far as safety, the tooth colored fillings also use chemicals that leach out over time.
 
Gold on teeth looks tacky.
 
bluee said:
Gold on teeth looks tacky.
Click to expand...

Not if you have a nice design imprinted in it, a star or maybe your initials.

I always thought that the silhouette of a naked woman one finds so frequently on mud flaps would look great on David White's incisors... maybe one on each upper, looking towards each other.
 
SCCutler said:
Not if you have a nice design imprinted in it, a star or maybe your initials.

I always thought that the silhouette of a naked woman one finds so frequently on mud flaps would look great on David White's incisors... maybe one on each upper, looking towards each other.
Click to expand...

e6enyzat.jpg


I think it'd be a good look. Then I'd get all the ladies! (Right before my parents killed me dead!)


Sent from my Banana Phone
 
bluee said:
Gold on teeth looks tacky.
Click to expand...

I had my first root canal at about 28. Bad teeth, and I didn't take care of them real well all the time. It was on a back molar, and I got a porcelain crown. That lasted a few years. Next time I asked what would last the longest and they said gold, so I got gold. It's been in there for a long time. If you want to look down my mouth, you'll see a few gold crowns. They work flawlessly, and I don't mind the look.
 
I also have a couple gold crowns on molars but you can't see them. I have some porcelain crowns too. The reason I have so many crowns is that all my amalgam fillings I got as a child had deteriorated (they were probably 30-40 years old). I never realized that some people thought they caused health problems.
 
dmspilot said:
Parroting the party line. What happens when you mix salt and water? You get saltwater, not an entirely different substance. Amalgam is an alloy, not a new substance formed from a chemical reaction.
Click to expand...


but it does stabilize the mercury content and prevent it from leaking into the oral cavity. The article referenced by the OP had some guy refer to them as "a primitive, pre-Civil War, polluting product that cracks and damages your teeth."

the modern amalgams are not the same ones used even 4 or 5 decades ago. it is a totally misinformed article.
 
My dentist uses a UV-activated polymer not unrelated to contact lenses. I thought they all did that.
 
The two times you have an exposure to metallic mercury is when the fillings are placed and when someone drills them out. The 50 years in between, they just sit there and do their job. The toxicity from metallic mercury is quite limited, the the toxicity of organic mercury compounds is very high. Dental amalgam after it is placed does not release any significant amounts of organic mercury compounds.

I rather expose myself to some metallic mercury whose effects we can gauge pretty well than the various softeners and conditioners leeching from composite implants. Haven't needed a filling in 25 years, if I need another one I'll look for a dentist that uses amalgam.
 
I believe the UV stuff is acrylic with some glass added to the mix. After my amalgam fell out a few years ago I had it replaced with that. Also my front teeth are capped with that material.
 
flyingron said:
I believe the UV stuff is acrylic with some glass added to the mix. After my amalgam fell out a few years ago I had it replaced with that. Also my front teeth are capped with that material.
Click to expand...

typically it's methyl methacrylate. the UV light activates it. not exactly the safest material in the world, either.
 
rbridges said:
typically it's methyl methacrylate. the UV light activates it. not exactly the safest material in the world, either.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is perfectly safe though it can be irritating to the skin and eyes in some individuals. They make contact lenses with it. You are confusing it with acrylic, which in its liquid form is neurotoxic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top