EPA mercury limit exceeded in 21 % of women of childbearing age tested

[philb]

EPA's limit of 1 microgram of mercury per gram of hair was exceeded in 21 percent (126 out of 597) of women of childbearing age tested.

Coal burning power plants are the nation's biggest mercury polluter, releasing 41 percent of the country's industrial mercury pollution. Mercury from these dirty power plants and other sources falls into lakes, streams and oceans, concentrating in fish and shellfish, which are then consumed by people.

http://www.flcv.com/flhg.html

But while fish is a big source of mercury in people; the largest source of mercury in people is documented to be dental amalgam fillings:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr1.html

and dental amalgam is also the largest source of mercury in sewers- all of which have high and dangerous levels- and are also a major source of mercury in fish
http://www.flcv.com/~berniew1/damspr2f.html

[Angry Girl]

1. These are some interesting sites

Calculate how much mercury you consume!
http://www.gotmercury.org/

Over recent years NOW has examined how the influence of the tuna industry on the FDA may be putting Americans and their children at risk for mercury poisoning....
http://www.pbs.org/now/science/mercuryinfish.html

Eating Tuna Safely - Guidelines
http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/mercury/tuna.asp

Some supplements you can take to get the meercury out of your system. Google them with the term "mercury" to find dosages:

Cilantro (yes, the herb!)
Selenium
N-Acetyl cysteine
Chlorella


Nightweed's Hurricane Katrina Aid Organizations

[trotsky]

2. Amalgam link disputed.

Mercury is dangerous indeed, but amalgam is not a dangerous source of it.

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mercury.html

[bloom]

3. Quackwatch is also suspect:

"On the other hand, some of his connections make him a little suspect. For one, he's an adviser to the American Council on Science and Health. And until very recently (2003), his organization was part of the Consumer Federation of America.

There is plenty of valuable information on the site, but there's also some (IMHO) BS -- in particular, his views on Gulf War syndrome, GM foods, pharmaceuticals and psychiatry, and (as Sheldon noted) pesticide exposures. And some stuff, like the odd rant against postmodernism, have next to nothing to do with the subject matter, serve as nothing more than expositions of his personal views and, frankly, don't really belong on the page."

As is the "Skeptics Dictionary"

"Dr. S Barrett is but one of several "hired hands" that publishes misleading informational websites that is financial sponsored by the government.

The purpose with websites such as QuackWatch or Skeptics Dictionary (www.skepdic.com) is to present a scientific and/or medical definition on a given topic. These sites advise the visitor/guest/reader (general public) that all information contained has been written, studied, proven, or researched by Dr Barrett, for example; whom possess proper credentials making him an "expert." Usually when people visit sites such as this they may be questioning opinions or claims made by others and are truly seeking an honest resource and/or explanation. With that said, it is crucial to have the visitor gain trust in the author through the building of the authors charechtor and credintials.

In order to sustain power and control the "higher powers in dark places" (government in general) will do anything to mislead, lie, and mask the Truth from the public. These sites are "tools" used to maintain control such control."

http://www.prwatch.org/forum/archive/index.php?t-1384.html

Also:

http://www.quackpotwatch.org/quackpots/quackpots/barrett.htm

People should be skeptical of Quackwatch.org & skepdic.com.

[trotsky]

4. Attack the source rather than the facts, eh?

Whether the personal rants within pages are appropriate or not, the facts presented are accurate. Dispute the facts rather than attacking the messenger.

[bloom]

5. The original post includes plenty of facts with sources

that back up those facts. You didn't provide anything useful to the debate.

I was merely pointing that out to people who may not be aware of the disinformation you try to spread through dubious sources.

[trotsky]

7. Dubious sources, indeed.

I'll agree with you on that. Personal web pages are a dangerous thing to base opinions on.

[philb]

11. what personal web site are you talking about? if you mean the

original site posted, its the web site of the research director of
DAMS, Inc. which is an organization that provides information and support to mercury toxic people in all states of the U.S. and several other countries. His web site is the one I'm allowed to use for other purposes. They have a regular newsletter and interact on a regular basis with dentists and doctors. They attend medical and dental conferences on a regular basis, and often are presenters. They have coordinators in most states, who can provide information to people who have questions about dental or mercury toxicity issues, and who can provide information on doctors and dentists with special training to deal with mercury toxicity and other issues.
Phone number for those desiring information or help is
800-311-6265. Most families have someone affected by mercury.
Another DAMS website is: http://www.amalgam.org

But my orignial intention was to focus on the high degree of mecury exposure and mercury toxicity in the U.S. popluation. And both emissions/fish and dental amalgam are major sources of mercury in people.

[skids]

22. Never bother arguing with a dancing baby cthulhu.

...for some reason, and painting with perhaps too broad a brush, that sig avatar seems to be associated with some sort of "skeptic dogma" that refuses to apply any skepticism to skeptics themselves.

FWIW.

[philb]

9. Gov't Agencies have documented dental amalgam is largest source of mercury

The Quackwatch people are known to be Quacks. Do you know what the original definition of quack came from. People who promoted the use of mercury- like the Quackwatch People.

But the U.S. Gov't and others say mercury is the most toxic substance that people commonly come in contact with.
The EPA health standard for mercury in wate is 2 parts per billion. You can find standards for mercury in air or food or etc. on the previously posted thread. The posted article leads to over 3000 peer-reviewed medical studies supporting its statements, most from the National Library of Medicine www.nlm.nih.gov/

There is no controversy regarding what is the largest source of mercury in most people- The World Health Organization and U.S. Dept. of Health, Agency for Toxic Substances and Desease Registry (ATSDR) both along with other gov't agencies have documented that dental amalgam is the largest source of mercury in people. This is due to the fact that mercury is a gas at room temperature and vaporizes constantly in the mouth, plus there is also galvanic conrosion caused by mixed metals in the mouth in an electrolyte- as any engineer, plumber, electrician, chemist,etc. knows. And its easy to measure both the mercury vapor in the mouth and the galvanic currents- using common equipment.
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr1.html

and dentists and dental staff are documented to have occupational exposure with large exposures(double most people) and common adverse health effects http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/dental.html


and as I noted, dental amalgam is also the largest source in sewers,
in large part because people with dental amalgam get such large mercury exposures that they excrete on average 30 micrograms per day of mercury into home and work sewers. This is documented and verified by Municipal Sewer Agencies. And from the sewers its goes into water bodies, fish, etc. and into sewer sludge, which is all toxic with high levels of mercury(on average about 3 parts per million). And researchers from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory have documented that most of the mercury in sewer sludge goes into the air as emissions whether land spread or landfilled, since soil bacteria methylate the mercury to methyl mercury, the kind found in fish, and the methyl mercury and mercury vapor is outgased mostly when the sun shines.
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr2f.html

note these threads lead to a web site with over 3000 peer-reviewed medical and Gov't studies supporting all said here.
And the articles there have been peer-reviewed by well known experts and doctors who work in this field. and you can check out the references yourself in the National Library of Medicine web site noted above.

[philb]

10. People on that site are neither credible doctors or researchers

and are in a heap of trouble, being sued by real doctors and such who they've libeled. Judges have in cases stated they are not credible or knowledgable witnesses regarding the issues they deal with on the site and that discussed here. See http://www.quackpotwatch.org/default_t.htm

Mercury is so toxic and amalgam such a large source of mercury that several states such a California, Maine, etc. require dentists who use mercury amalgam to warn their patients of its dangers.
And some countries have banned use of dental amalgam- Sweden, Norway,etc. Most modern countries have warnings regarding it use.

Stick to facts and things supported by credible medical studies- don't be mislead by Quacks without credible support whose main purpose is to mislead- and who have been paid extremely handsomly to spread their message. You won't find credible scientific or medical support on their site for what they say.

[trotsky]

13. And yet millions of educated professionals and experts disagree.

People can choose who they want to believe - the fearmongers or the facts.

[philb]

16. Don't think so; show me one

who is a credible expert with a credible case/documentation

find evidence of a single contradiction to any of what I said and I'll explain whats wrong with it and provide credible documentation.

[bloom]

6. Thanks for the post.

It's sad to think of what mercury is doing to all of the wildlife and to us.

[hatrack]

8. Gimme that "Clean Coal" Technology, Gimmee that "Clean Coal Technology . .

It was good enough fer Chenee
It's good enough fer MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[philb]

12. 35% of those tested by GreenPeace in Florida have dangerous levels of merc

since people in coastal areas eat more fish than average, and commonly have high and dangerous levels of mercury.

[trotsky]

14. Yep, no one is disputing the problem of environmental mercury.

Well, maybe some politicians with ties to the coal industry.

What does the issue a great disservice, however, is to promote the factually unsupported idea that mercury in fillings and vaccines is somehow equivalent or just about as dangerous as the massive amounts found in the environment thanks to pollution.

[philb]

15. You don't believe the World Health Organization & U.S. Dept of Health are

credible sources of information?

As I said, its documented that dental amalgam is the number one source of mercury both in people and sewers; and Government agencies have confirmed this. I provided the documentation, you just are too lazy to check it out.
And you can test yourself borrowing a mercury vapor meter from a Gov't agency or etc. or some dentists; and checking galvanic currents(into your body) using an inexpensive ampmeter from Radio Shack(put post on tooth with amalgam or metal crown and other firmly on palate of mouth roof.

And as I noted, vaccines were by far the largest source of mercury in kids in the 1990s(when autism increased 1000% and ADHD hugely also). I provided documention from Gov't agencies and doctors which of course you likewise didn't check out.
http://www.home.eartlhink.net/~berniew1/kidshg.html

And the type of exposure from mercury amalgam is also more dangerous
than the type from fish; though that from fish is extremely toxic.
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr13.html

But its also true that worldwide emissions and mercury in fish and wildlife are major problems; and power plant and incinerator emissions are the largest source of such-
though dental amalgam is also a major source of mercury in water bodies, and into the atmosphere- see documentation I've already provided- EPA and municipal sewer agencies, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,etc.

[trotsky]

17. You can attack me all you want, call me "lazy," whatever.

I know what the most educated researchers are saying, and I'm going to defer to them.

[philb]

18. You haven't named me one of them; or provdided a single piece of documenta

tion to counter the 3000 peer-reviewed medical studies and Gov't studies that I posted the URL for supporting my statements.
If you have a single credible source or some documentation post it.
Otherwise you seem to be talking with no evidence of support for your position. Stick to talking about facts and evidence and don't try to distract from such. Make your case if you have one.
If you want to start quoting experts, I can do that to. And mine are real experts with credible backgrounds and research. I've already posted references from the most experienced researchers and the Gov't agencies responsible for dealing with mercury; I can get more specific.

[trotsky]

19. Denying reality is not healthy.

There were plenty of links and studies mentioned in the article I already linked to.

And then there's the American Dental Association, they *might* just know a thing or two.

http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/positions/statements/amalgam.asp

Your standard response now would be to claim that the ADA is in the back pocket of the mercury industry, the government, or whatever other powerful hidden organization is forcing us all to be mercury poisoned to death.

[bloom]

20. "LIES YOUR DENTIST IS FORCED TO TELL YOU", the ADA, and "quacks"

A similar professional fight over mercury raged in the dental community. The first mercury fillings were used in 1818. In 1840, the American Society of Dental Surgeons (ASDS) organized and required its members to sign pledges that they would not use mercury in their practice. That same year, 11 New York dentists were charged with malpractice for using mercury fillings. In 1859, after disputes within the ASDS, the American Dental Association (ADA) was founded and has aggressively promoted and defended the use mercury fillings since. Seven out of 10 dentists today are members of the ADA.

The dirty little secret in the dental community these days is that the ADA, some years ago, established a gag rule to forbid dentists, under penalty of loss of licensure, to inform their patients that mercury fillings could cause serious health problems and possibly death.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Dean/carolyn1.htm

In the 1800's mercury+silver dental filling material (Amalgam) was developed, probably in Germany. Prior to that the only decent fillings were gold. The problem with gold was that it was difficult and took a lot of work to do and had to be done pretty well to work at all. That made it expensive. On the other hand, the new "amalgam" (which literally means "mixture") was quick and easy and could be done sloppily and yet still seemed to work. As a result fillings could be done very quickly and less expensively. The public was very happy to embrace it.

On the other hand, the organized dentists were against it. There were reports of health problems that were thought to be related to mercury use and the quality of these new fillings was often terrible plus many other related problems. Many dentists, and organized dentistry, in Germany, then England and finally in the US were almost up in arms against Amalgam use.

But since the public thought it was a bargain and seemed to do the job, they supported it and went to the dentists that offered it. McDentistry...? Sound familiar?

Anyway, those in the public as well as in the professional sectors that were against the use of amalgam fillings referred to it as "Quicksilver" fillings , from the common name of mercury, "quicksilver". After a time it became corrupted (?) into "Quacksilver fillings", then "Quacksilver" and finally, yes, you guessed it before my dramatic punchline..... The dentists that offered Quacksilver fillings were called ....Quacks !

I find that so fascinating, because now the ones... that don't offer amalgam fillings are sometimes lumped together and called quacks. That's it folks....

Michael C. Goldman, DDS

http://www.mgoldmandds.com/Quackery%20.htm

More on the "quack" origin...

In northern Europe, the term for mercury was "quaksilber" — a forerunner of our English term "quicksilver." A dentist who used mercury was called a "quaksilber placer" or "quak" for short. Hence, the original use of the word "quack" was taken from dentists who used mercury for fillings. In 1986 the American Dental Association (ADA) changed its code of ethics, making it a violation for any dentist to recommend the removal of amalgam because of mercury. "Who are the "quacks" now?"
{"Living Healthy in a Toxic World," David Steinman, 1996}

Every time someone outside, or even inside, the field of medicine makes a discovery he/she will be labeled a "quack." The term "quack" was hurled at those who we now consider some of our greatest heroes; Jenner, Harvey, Ross, Lister, Pasteur, Ehrlich (chemotherapy), and Sister Kenny. Many herbalists were burned as witches.

http://www.jrussellshealth.com/quacks.html

[NNadir]

21. It's nice to see a flame war in which I'm not involved. Some chemical...

comments.

Mercury in fillings is typically present as an amalgam, a solid solution of silver and mercury. This is NOT the same thing as pure mercury, which is, of course a liquid.

The vapor pressure of mercury amalgams is given in the following paper's abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9002861&dopt=Abstract

The vapor pressure of abraded dental amalgams is given as 1.7 x 10^(-4) Pa. Ordinary atmospheric pressure is 600 million times greater.

The biological fate of mercury is very much dependent on its oxidation state. Mercury commonly is available in three oxidation states, 0, +1, +2. (It also has a -1 state, but this is not common under ordinary conditions.) In the 0 state, mercury is not toxic, since it is not biologically absorbed, nor is it available to complex with sulfur in proteins, which is the source of most toxicity associated with mercury. The +1 oxidation state typically forms insoluble halides. Calomel, a common oral medication that was formerly used to treat syphilis was mercurous chloride (Mercury (I) chloride). Mercury (I) chloride, which has the formula Hg2Cl2 typically passes directly through the alimentary canal without absorption, although small amounts of oxidized mercury II may be absorbed and probably this was the mechanism of action against syphilis. Like modern day anti-cancer drugs, the mercury was more toxic against the syphilis organism than it was to ordinary flesh, but it was nonetheless toxic to both.

The most dangerous oxidation state of mercury is mercury (II). Fortunately mercury II is reduced by mercury metal Mercury (0) to give mercury (I), which is again, insoluble. This affords some measure of protection from amalgams. Once they are free of mercury metal, however, Mercury I can and does oxidize to the more toxic form of Mercury (II).

Mercury (II) is the common form of mercury released to the environment by coal burning power plants.

In septic systems, often there is considerable quantities of hydrogen sulfide which reacts with mercury(II) to form mercuric sulfide, the insoluble compound that is the chemical form of most mercury ores, the mineral cinnabar. Certain organisms can release methyl mercury from this insoluble form however (and from other forms of mercury II.) This is the source of most fish toxicity, methyl mercury.

I would expect, but do not know, that mercury amalgams do result in some mercury poisoning, but I would also expect that this is not the major source of most mercury toxicity in the environment. I would expect that some (but not all) of the toxicity of septic/sewage systems is mitigated by hydrogen sulfide. It is interesting to note that when the city of Los Angeles banned the dumping of heavy metals (not only Mercury) into its sewage system, back in the 1960's, the system began to corrode faster, since fewer sulfides were removed by metal precipitation. These sulfides oxidized to corrosive sulfuric acid which then damaged the system.

My own dentist is keen on replacing my amalgams, but of course I then have to pay her major money for crowns.

The process is almost complete, but my major area of concern was not the amalgams, but the integrity of the teeth themselves. I replaced them when the teeth lost structural integrity, and I still have a few amalgams remaining.

One of the most insoluble mercury compounds (or compounds of any type) known by the way, is Mercury (I) Iodide. Probably one ameliorates mercury risk through the use of iodized salt.