Cent4dent Blog

This is a letter, written by a friend of mine. For more info, visit

http://www.cent4dent.com/html/office_info/flossdie.html

We often times take our bodies for granted. And yes, your mouth is part of your body. Why is this important? Just ask me because I had triple bypass surgery ten years ago.

But it wasn’t my mouth that was the culprit, just genetics. But your mouth could be part of some of your health problems like heart disease and diabetes. Here’s how.

Let’s talk about heart disease. We all know one culprit is cholesterol. But what we don’t know is that for cholesterol to affect us we need it to stick to our arterial walls and for that stuff called plaque to form requires INFLAMMATION. Ironically, we also call the build up in our mouth “plaque”. In our arteries it starts out soft, just like in the mouth, then hardens and clogs our arteries. In our mouth it becomes what most people call “tartar”.

So what, I have tartar in my mouth. Well, that stuff is like barnacles on a piling. Bacteria are living in it like fish in a coral reef. Yes, barnacles are full of bacteria. Ask me, I know because I had hand surgery to remove an infection I got cleaning my boat bottom.

Why did my hand swell? I had infection and INFLAMMATION, just like in the mouth. And inflammation is the real culprit in heart disease. You see, cholesterol won’t stick to the wall of your arteries unless there is inflammation, just like in gum disease.

We now have cultured bacteria from the mouth from infected heart arteries. So, if you have inflammation in your mouth from gum disease, chances are you have inflammation in your heart arteries.

Now, about your cholesterol test. The good, the bad, and the ugly. Most are tested for the Good, HDL, the bad, LDL, but not the ugly. The ugly is really ‘uglies” because LDL can be good or bad. The good LDL is a large molecule with low energy and is like a ping pong ball, it bounces off the artery wall, if you will. The bad LDL, is a small,high energy molecule, that penetrates the arterial wall, causing INFLAMMATION, and the formation of plaque that clogs our arteries. The bad LDL is genetic. It’s what I have. But it can be controlled.

The other part of the ugly is INFLAMMATION. Fortunately, we can test for it. It’s called “C-reactive Protein”. There is even a medicine for it called Cerefolin-NAC. That stands for “a folic acid vitamin” plus N-Acetyl Cystein. When my doctor first told me about it she said it has a long name most people never heard of. I said, “Oh, you mean N-Acetyl Cystein”. She said how’d you know? I said , “duh, when I was a body builder ten years ago before my heart surgery, we always took NAC to recover from a hard work out because it reduces INFLAMMATION. I’m glad medicine has caught up with body builders.

Our diabetic patients are amazed when I look in their mouth and tell them their insulin is out of control. How’d you know? Look at your gums, they are swollen, red, and bleeding with that yucky stuff coming out. Yes, gum disease, diabetes, and heart disease are all related.

So why am I writing this article? So you can better understand heart disease, your mouth, and in the hopes you will visit your dentist and find out if you have gum disease and get it treated. You don’t have to have surgery. We treat gum disease with removal of the hard deposits and then with our Laser to help re-grow lost bone. Yes, we get you numb ‘cause it hurts if you are not numb. With the Laser we don’t usually have to numb you.

We offer free gum disease screening exams in our office here in Haddon Heights and hope you are caring for your mouth. Thank you for reading this article and we hope you have a healthy, happy mouth and heart.

This is a letter, written by a friend of mine. For more info, visit

Gary L. Fishbein, D.M.D.

Fellow, Academy General Dentistry

Certified in Laser Dentistry, Academy of Laser Dentistry

Palmetto Creek Dental

Lillian, AL

961-3737

To the Editor of the Trenton Times:

I had my own personal moonwalk this past year, when the FDA announced that it was changing its website to reflect the fact that mercury fillings should not be placed in the mouths of pregnant women, and children under the age of six. I had been one of the principal anti-mercury speakers at hearings the FDA held in September of 2006 (for the full text of my speech, see: http://www.cent4dent.com/html/mercury_issues/fdaletter.htm). Why it took them so long to change their stance reflects how slowly things move in DC, and also the fact that it takes strong lobbyists and threats of litigation to make anything happen.

In my mind, the changes to the website were a start, but did not go far enough. I was asked by the FDA in 2008 for my opinions on their changes, and I let them know it did not go far enough. Why ban it in children under 6 when the teeth that are going to be in their mouths their entire lifetimes don’t erupt into the mouth until age 6? Why ban it for pregnant women? Shouldn’t the ban be for all women of child-bearing age? The full text of my response is available at http://www.cent4dent.com/assets/The%20responses%20of%20Dr%20Markus%20to%20FDA%202008.doc

The publication of Mr. Brown’s letter to the editor in the December 31st Times deserves some comment as well. While, as Mr. Brown points out, there is a socio-economic stratification as to who receives mercury fillings and who receives composite resin, there is far more to the story than that. Most dentists who are still placing mercury fillings simply don’t understand the science. In fact, I would posit that most dentists who still place mercury fillings have never been to a lecture (even in dental school) on the fact that mercury is the most toxic, naturally-occurring substance on the planet surface.

Dentists have been hoodwinked into believing that once placed in the mouth, the fillings become inert. Nothing could be further from the truth. Curious patients should ask their dentist how they store unused filling material, or better still, ask their assistants. Mercury scrap cannot be thrown out with the trash, or flushed down the toilet. Many dentists have a cavalier attitude about it. Ask them why the ADA recommends storage of scrap in a tightly closed glass container, under a high-specific-gravity fluid like anti-freeze. Mercury scrap must be disposed of using a state-licensed hauler and refiner. Dental offices in New Jersey are now required to be equipped with mercury separators to recapture fine particulate mercury drilled out of patients’ mouths before they burden sewage treatment facilities. See: http://www.cent4dent.com/html/office_info/environment.html

Dental patients in New Jersey need to be educated about their choices. Very often dentists don’t even offer posterior resins as an option. The decision is often insurance-driven (isn’t it time that dental insurance carriers recognize that posterior resin fillings have been around, and successful for over 20 years? They need to be mandated to pay for them, rather than for the least expensive (and toxic) alternative?) Patients’ decisions are often made based on financial rather than health-related costs.

It is time for the dental patients of this state to understand that there is science that proves mercury fillings are not inert. When will dentists begin accepting science, rather than diatribe? The Vimy sheep study, performed almost 20 years ago was designed to prove that mercury fillings were, as the ADA stated, and continues to state “inert”. It proved the exact opposite. The ADA’s response: “That research was done on sheep, it wasn’t done on humans.” Talk about trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes! The study was duplicated, with the same results, on primates. (http://cent4dent.com/blog/?p=59)

Patients (and their dentists) need to understand that there is a safe way to remove mercury fillings from mouths: The IAOMT protocol (http://www.iaomt.org/articles/files/files288/Safe%20Removal%20of%20Amalgam%20Fillings.pdf) Anything less exposes patients to unnecessarily high levels of mercury when fillings are drilled out.

There are some patients more prone to the effects of mercury (http://www.toxicteeth.org/MercurySymptoms.doc) than others. Until there are tests to determine who these people are, shouldn’t’ everyone be treated as if they were in the “more prone” group? Certainly, the reason that dentists began wearing gloves and masks for over 20 years was because we needed to treat everyone as if they were a potential AIDS carrier.

The health effects of mercury fillings in those whose genome is deficient in the APO E-2 allele can be devastating. There’s a reason that there is something called “Mad Hatter’s Disease”. Centuries ago, people who worked the felt to shape hats used mercury to do so. These people went mad. Here’s another history lesson for you: What is the derivation of the term “quack”. Hint: it was a term given to dentists in the 1850 who used mercury, or quicksilver instead of gold to repair teeth!

Stephen J. Markus DMD FACE
www.SmileSouthJersey.com
209 White Horse Pike
Haddon Heights, NJ 08035
856 Smile SJ

From the Trenton Times (http://www.nj.com/opinion/times/oped/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1230699936117830.xml&coll=5)

My website is one of the most extensive on the topic of mercury toxicity of dental amalgam. Please visit http://www.cent4dent.com Following my reading of this letter to the editor, I wrote a reply. It will be the next item in the mercury issues section of this blog.

December 31, 2008

BY CHARLES G. BROWN

The biggest change in the history of American dentistry is about to occur. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is on the verge of limiting the use of dentistry’s 19th-century foundation-stone, amalgam fillings. Though promoted as “silver fillings,” this material is 50 percent mercury and only 25 percent silver.

Mercury is, of course, highly toxic; it can cause permanent harm to a fetus, to a child’s developing brain or an adult’s kidneys. The World Health Organization says no safe level of mercury exists. Unlike lead, whose risk becomes acute when the child licks it, mercury is notoriously volatile (it is the only metal in liquid form at room temperature), so its vapors alone can cause neurological or fetal damage. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control warns that mercury from amalgam is “a major source” of mercury exposure to our bodies.

In dentistry’s early days, no alternative existed, except expensive gold. That excuse is over. Composite, a white resin-like material, is interchangeable with mercury amalgam, albeit it takes a few moments longer to implant. That means, for upper-middle-class adults who go to modern dentists, composite is the norm. For children, working Americans, soldiers and sailors, prisoners and others receiving assembly-line dentistry, however, it is still mercury, mercury, mercury. Emmitt Carlton, a Washington lawyer testifying on behalf of the NAACP before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Wellness and Human Rights in 2003, summarized American dentistry as providing “choice for the rich, mercury for the poor.”

Dental mercury is an environmental hazard. A report by the Mercury Policy Project shows that dental offices are the largest source of mercury in the nation’s wastewater. Hence, dentistry puts an unnecessary burden on taxpayers to clean it up. Prudently, the Corzine administration ordered all dentists, effective Oct. 1, 2007, to install and maintain amalgam separators to catch mercury before it enters New Jersey’s water supply.

This rule, written by the state Department of Environmental Protection, took another step to reduce pollution, directing dentists, “where appropriate,” to use alternatives to amalgam. Many dentists don’t need to be encouraged to quit; to their credit, between one-third and one-half of U.S. dentists have stopped using amalgam.

With the pollution, the health controversy and the social-justice disparities, the question isn’t why so many dentists have switched — it’s why so many hang onto this anachronism.

Taking an active interest in the issue is Sen. Ronald Rice, D-Newark, sponsor of a bill directing the state Department of Health and Senior Services to investigate mercury use in dental fillings and to study its health and occupational effects. Also, New Jersey Attorney General Anne Milgram led the states, with New Jersey as the lead plaintiff, to compel the Bush administration to enforce the laws against mercury pollution.

To protect their babies, pregnant women are warned not to get any unnecessary exposure to mercury, such as to avoid eating tuna. Several years ago, a report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency showed that one in eight women of childbearing age is already so mercury toxic she is at risk of having a brain-damaged baby. Imagine if a dentist, instead of using the misnomer “silver fillings,” told a pregnant patient to prepare to receive “mercury fillings.” It is safe to assume she would vacate the dental chair immediately.

So mired in mercury is New Jersey that it seeks to ship it out. The state is battling obstacles to send tons of mercury sitting in Somerset County to Nevada. Congress has, however, closed off the option of shipping New Jersey’s mercury overseas; the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 bans mercury exports. The law’s lead sponsor: Sen., now president-elect, Barack Obama. Such strong action by our next president forecasts an administration that may be tough on mercury products and mercury users.

Mercury-free dentistry is more than a health and environment issue — it is a workplace safety issue. Largely female and of childbearing age, dental workers are the very persons who should be the most vigilant to avoid exposure to mercury vapors — which happens, sadly, each time a dental worker opens the amalgam capsule.

In New Jersey, private-sector workplace safety is enforced by the U.S. Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA), while the public sector workplace is handled by the New Jersey Public Employees Occupational Safety & Health program (“PEOSH”).

Fortunately, New Jersey PEOSH is ahead of the nation in the arena of protecting employees from mercury; its standard is for employers to “substitute safer chemicals” for mercury. But PEOSH has not acted on our request to apply its standard to dental clinics at UMDNJ and the state prisons, choosing, to date, not even to issue an alert (an advisory about the law).

The contrast between the Corzine administration’s vigorous environmental policy against mercury and its indifference toward workplace mercury is startling. In its environmental policies, New Jersey is positioned to be the cutting-edge state in the transition to mercury-free dentistry. But unwillingness to enforce its own workplace safety policies means New Jersey is putting young female workers at risk not only for themselves, but for their present and future babies.

Charles G. Brown is national counsel for Consumers for Dental Choice. More information on the FDA settlement is on the group’s website, www.toxicteeth.org