|
The American Dental Association continues
to remain in denial about the toxicity of mercury. Dr. Murray
Vimey is one of the leading mercury researchers and he has
provided a detailed chronology documenting how mercury has
been clearly established as a contributing factor for periodontal
disease.
The news release by the American Dental
Association (ADA) dated June 13, 2001 contains a very significant
error. The ADA President Dr. Robert M. Anderton is reported
as saying,
"There is no
sound scientific evidence supporting a link between
amalgam fillings and systemic diseases or chronic illness''.
Yet, it is well
known in the published, peer-reviewed dental
journals that mercury leaks directly from amalgam into adjacent
oral tissues causing periodontal disease (gum disease).
Critical Fact #1: In 1957, Zander
(JADA, 55:11-15) reported "materials used in restorative
dentistry may be a contributing factor in gingival disease."
Critical Fact #2: In 1961, App
(J Prosth Dent 11:522-532) suggested that there was greater
chronic inflammation around amalgam sites than non-amalgam
areas.
Critical fact #3: In 1964, Trott
and Sherkat (J CDA, 30:766-770) showed that the presence
of amalgam correlates with gingival disease. Such disease
was not present at contralateral amalgam-free sites.
Critical fact #4: In 1969, Sanches
Sotres et al (J. Periodo. l40: 543-546) confirmed Trott
and Sherkat findings.
Critical fact #5: In 1972, Turgeon
et al. (J CDA 37:255-256) reported the presence of very
significant erythema around amalgam restorations that was
not present at control non-amalgam sites.
Critical fact #6: In 1973, Trivedi
and Talim (J. Prosth. Dentistry, 29:73-81) demonstrated
that 62.5% of amalgam sites have inflammatory periodontal
tissue reaction.
Thus, as early as 1973, a case can be
made that the presence of dental mercury-amalgam results
in chronic inflammation and bleeding in the gingival tissue
adjacent to it; in other words, in situ amalgam produced
chronic Gingivitis.
Critical fact #7: In 1974, Freden
et al. (Odontol. Revy, 25: 207-210) showed that gingival
biopsy material from sites not adjacent to amalgam had 1-10
µg mercury/gram of tissue (mean=3); whereas, gingival
biopsy sites near amalgams contained 19-380 µg mercury/gram
of tissue (mean=147).
Critical fact #8: In 1976, Goldschmidt
et al (J. Perio. Res., 11:108-115) demonstrated that amalgam
corrosion products were cytotoxic to gingival cells at concentrations
of 10-6; that is, micrograms/gram of tissue.
Critical fact #9: In 1984, the
year of the NIDR/ADA Workshop, Fisher et al (J Oral Rehab,
11:399-405) reported that at amalgam sites alveolar bone
loss was very pronounced and statistically significant as
compared to control non-amalgam sites! In other words, in
situ amalgam produces chronic Periodontitis.
This suggests that placing mercury fillings leads to a dentist-induced
disease, periodontal disease, which the same dentists then
treat. This is iatrogenesis.
Thus, for the ADA to conclude "There
is no sound scientific evidence supporting a link between
amalgam fillings and systemic diseases or chronic illness''
is incorrect.
Periodontal disease is one of the most
prevalent chronic diseases in Man, and mercury fillings
contribute significantly! Such statements by ADA spokespersons
suggest that the ADA and its advisors may be knowingly disinforming
the public through the media or they lack an understanding
of the scientific research about mercury release from amalgam
published in their own journals.
Murray J. Vimy DMD Clinical
Associate Professor Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary.
Calgary, Canada, July 4, 2001
| 