I am familiar with the author of this scathing report about Potential genocide on the part of vaccine manufacturers. You can also listen to him speak, by going to YouTube.com and typing in “{Horowitz & swine flu”
Archive for May, 2009
To the Editor ADA News:
ADANews@ADA.org
After having read an article about how the ADA felt that best management practices were all the profession needed, I wrote a letter to the editor, which, once again wasn’t published. I had a problem with your painting the profession as one that was very much concerned about the environment and we understood about the mercury our practices dealt with on a daily basis. I knew for a fact that most dentists won’t voluntarily install separators. I had a problem with the terminology. These devices are MERCURY separators, they are not, as you called them: amalgam separators.
Dentists have been taught that mercury, once in compound, becomes inert. We know, from the work of Vimy, and others, that this couldn’t be further from the truth. What the profession doesn’t know, is that mercury is the most toxic, naturally occurring substance on the planet surface. I never even heard a lecture about mercury, until I attended my first IAOMT meeting.
In the April 20, 2009 ADA News, you feature two letters to the editor, which made me wonder: “How do letters like these from Dr. Hurowitz of San Francisco, and Dr. Guerra of Utica, NY get published, but I never see mine?”
Dr. Hurowitz’s errors are corrected by the Editor, but smack of the ignorance dentists have about mercury. To believe that traps and filters are all that are necessary is truly the overall belief of the profession. They believe that to be best management practice. In speaking with assistants who temp or are trained in other offices, there is a cavalier attitude to how mercury is disposed of.
Dr. Guerra states that “It has been scientifically proven that the amount of free mercury released from amalgam is virtually zero.” He obviously hasn’t read the right research, and you might have referred him to the work of Dr. Boyd Haley, and Dr. Maurry Vimy.
It’s time that dentists got their collective heads out of the sand. The ADA, the organization that kept insisting mercury fillings (not silver fillings, they’re 50% Hg doc) were inert has seen the light of day. For them to come out and tell you BMP’s and separators are necessary should tell you, as I learned about 20 years ago, that you need to re-educate yourselves.
You need not only to understand what you’re putting into patients’ mouths, but more importantly, you need to understand what the health and environmental effects of the removal of mercury fillings are. That mercury slurry, laying on the floor of a thin mucosa with vascular interchange immediately beneath is as disgusting to me as thinking about working without gloves on. There is a protocol for safe removal of mercury both for the patient, and the community at large.
Wake up doctor! You’ve always put your scrap in a tightly closed glass jar, under antifreeze or other high specific gravity liquid. If mercury were inert, why couldn’t you just have your patient spit in the jar?
Vimy’s research, first on sheep, and then again on primates, using a radioisotope of mercury in his amalgams showed that the radioisotope distributed to all tissues of the body, congregating in the greatest density in the brain. In pregnant test animals, it crossed the placenta two times faster than in got to the brain.
Dr. Stephen J. Markus
University of Pennsylvania
School of Dental Medicine ‘75
Haddon Heights, NJ
Philadelphia Mandates informed consent for the placement of Mercury Fillings
May 17th, 2009 Comments OffTo the Editor:
Your staff writer, Mr. Sapatkin did a disservice to the Philadelphia community and to your paper by obfuscating the issue about the safety of dental mercury. As a practicing dentist for over thirty years, I have been one of the pioneers in the fight to educate the public about the fact that mercury, the most toxic substance on the planet surface, does not belong in anyone’s mouth, a mere four inches from the base of the brain.
To cite as his “expert” one Kareem Johnson, a dental patient who somehow obviously fully understands the issues (based on the number of fillings he’s had in his lifetime) left me incredulous. For your writer to state that “the safety of dental fillings…until recently has been a fringe issue,” shows a thorough lack of research on his part. The truth is that when these fillings were introduced in America (from Germany) back in the 1850’s the safety was questioned by dental practitioners because of the knowledge of the neurotoxic effects of mercury then, 160 years ago. Mercury (quicksilver) is quacksilber. Those first human experimenters with mercury fillings were called “quacks” by health care professionals.
The fact that these fillings are called silver fillings is in itself an obfuscation. Imagine a beverage that contained 50% plutonium being called anything but plutonium. The Philadelphia County Dental Society, with direct ties to the ADA, states that the filling is perfectly safe. This may be true for some, but certainly not for all. If your writer had looked to the research of Dr. Boyd Haley, Chairman of the Department of Chemistry at the University of Kentucky, he would have understood that Mercury Fillings can indeed be toxic.
I’m not sure where Mr. Sapatkin got his information that mercury fillings are “harmless as a mixture encapsulated inside the tooth.” Had he read about the research done by Dr. Maury Vimy over fifteen years ago, he would have understood that mercury in dental fillings distributes to all organ systems in the body. Its neurotoxic effects are manifested upon the brain. It crosses the placenta at twice the rate it goes anywhere else in the body.
He cites Marla Gold’s statement that the “FDA update raises an eyebrow.” As a keynote speaker on behalf of those who oppose the use of mercury in dental fillings at the FDA hearing which led to the changed agency opinion of the safety of these products, I can tell you that a lot of eyebrows were raised. When testimony ended, the FDA panel began questioning their author of their own white paper which bashed us nay-sayers. He could find nothing in the literature to support anything other than safety of mercury fillings.
They asked him why the “voluminous research” he presented was so one-sided. Imagine, if you would, Ralph Cramden. His response at first: “Hammina hammina hammina.” When pressed for an answer, he metamorphasized into Adolph Eichmann: “I was only following orders.” A large collective gasp filled the auditorium. The panel then surprisingly voted 2:1 against the adoption of their own white paper. Subsequently their website advised against the placement of mercury fillings in the mouths of children and pregnant women.
This mandate, in my opinion does not go far enough. Why allow mercury after the age of 6, in teeth that will be present throughout one’s lifetime? Shouldn’t the ban be extended to all women of child-bearing age, for how many women might find out they were pregnant after a filling was placed?
Other issues that should have been discussed, but weren’t on this issue include:
1. Should I have my mercury fillings removed?
2. What risks are involved in filling removal?
3. What about the mercury pollution caused by dental offices?
4. How is it that a profession that is built with graduates of colleges with degrees in the basic sciences don’t question why it is that the ADA continues to promote the safety of mercury fillings, but tells dentists to use extreme caution in disposing unused fillings?
5. Why is it that this substance has been banned in foreign countries?
6. What about the rate of spontaneous abortion and birth defects in dental auxiliaries?
7. How is it that the material is safe to place in an American’s mouth, but if there is any material left over after the process, it must be stored in a sealed glass jar under anti-freeze? Shouldn’t it be safe just to add some patient spit to the bottle?
It is fortunate for the children of Philadelphia that City Council saw this as a racial and socioeconomic issue. That was merely the tip of the iceberg. The day is coming when mercury fillings will not be used. Mr. Sapatkin reported correctly, that the economics of this situation have frequently dictated the use of the least expensive product. In my opinion the fact sheets that are presented in Philadelphia have diluted the issue. The internet has a vast wealth of information that the savvy parent, the concerned consumer need to become more familiar with. I would recommend visiting my website, or that of the International Academy of Oral Medical Toxicology (IAOMT). Until there is a public uproar over the fact that dental insurance has held back better, safer (but more expensive) materials, dental health professionals’ hands will be tied. This is not a black and white issue insofar as the color of the filling is concerned. It’s about health.
I would advise anyone who would dispute this to ask one last question: Why was the Mad Hatter in Alice in Wonderland named this? Lewis Carroll wrote this in 1864. Mad Hatter’s Disease was something that affected the mental status of those who worked the felt in hat brims. How did they shape the felt? With mercury. Now you may understand the reasoning behind the derivation of the term “quack.”
Dr. Stephen J. Markus
University of Pennsylvania
School of Dental Medicine ‘75
Haddon Heights, NJ
Nineteen Members of Congress send great letter asking FDA, in rule, to warn us all re mercury and protect children & young women from amalgam.
May 17th, 2009 Comments OffNineteen Members of Congress send great letter asking FDA, in rule, to warn us all re mercury and protect children & young women from amalgam.
Folks, ball now in your court — pls. call Congressmen in your state
Nineteen Congresswomen and Congressmen — from 12 states — have signed onto a bipartisan letter authored by Congresswoman Diane Watson (D-Calif) and Congressman Dan Burton (R-Ind.), urging FDA to require clear warnings about mercury toxicity to every dental patient and establish specific protections for children and young women.
With FDA under a court order to classify mercury amalgam by this July 28, the 19 Members of Congress wrote the FDA Acting Commissioner to insist that FDA (1) “require the industry to correctly label ‘silver’ fillings to reflect their predominate component, mercury”, (2) “require all parents of children under the age of 18 years old to sign a written consent form indicating that they are fully aware of the potential negative effects of mercury”, and (3) “require a verbal warning given by dentists to patients over 18 years noting the high toxicity of mercury and the potential of neurological problems.”
The Congressional letter reflects an in depth understanding of the dangers of mercury fillings, e.g., “Vapors from mercury can traverse the placenta of pregnant women and threaten the development of the fetus . . . Mercury is a known neurotoxin; the third most known toxic element as listed by the CERLA Priority List of Hazardous Substances . . . Dental amalgam is the predominant source of human exposure to mercury.” (The Watson-Burton letter will get posted as the lead item on our website within a couple of days.)
Such a strong and specific letter coming from so many Members of Congress should ensure that the new Commissioner, Margaret Hamburg (not confirmed but likely to be by month’s end) will pay special heed to this rule, and not allow a biased bureaucracy beneath to call the shots.
As FDA’s D-Day approaches, the momentum for a robust amalgam rule grows. The Watson-Burton letter follows on the heels of a similarly powerful letter by the State and Local Public Officials Mercury-Free Caucus, who advised the Senate and FDA that “the time is past for the use of mercury-based dental fillings … a pre-Civil War era device.” www.toxicteeth.org/Caucus%20letter%20April%2030.pdf
And because of great grassroots work by our friends Dr. Rebecca Painter and Monica Knievel in Gillette, Wyoming, Senator Mike Enzi — the ranking Republican on the health committee — promised to ask Commissioner-nominee Hamburg in writing whether FDA, consistent with its website warnings, will protect children and pregnant women from amalgam.
Folks, if you live in AZ, CA, DC, FL, IL, IN, ME, MD, MI, MO, NY, OH, TX, or WY, it’s your turn. (Or if you used to live there, close enough.) Please pick up the phone and call the office of the Member(s) of Congress in your state (phone numbers listed below). Tell whoever answers the phone:
“Thank you to Congressman/Congresswoman _______ for signing
the Watson-Burton letter to the Food and Drug Administration regarding
mercury fillings. He/she is protecting future generations of Americans.”
Here is the Congressional Roll of Honor, the 19 who signed the Watson-Burton letter:
Arizona: Raùl Grijalva (202)225-2435
California (southern): Grace Napolitano; (202)225-5256; Loretta Sanchez (202)225-2965; Diane E. Watson (202)225-7084
California (northern): Lynn Woolsey (202)225-5161
D.C.: Eleanor Holmes Norton (202)225-8050
Florida: Corrine Brown (202)225-0123
Illinois (Chicagoland): Danny Davis (202)225-5006; Luis Gutierrez (202)225-8203
Illinois (downstate): Phil Hare (202)225-5905
Indiana : Dan Burton (202)225-2276
Maine: Mike Michaud (202)225-6306
Maryland: Donna Edwards (202)225-8699
Michigan: John Conyers, Jr. (202)225-5126
Missouri: Emanuel Cleaver (202)225-4535
New York (City & L.I.): Yvette Clarke (202)225-6231
New York (upstate): Maurice Hinchey (202)225-6335
Texas: Henry Cuellar (202)225-1640; Sam Johnson (202)225-4201
Wyoming: A special category. Your thank-you to Senator Mike Enzi, (202)224-3424, should be: “Thank you to Senator Enzi for asking Commissioner-nominee Hamburg if the Food and Drug Administration will follow its website and protect children and pregnant women from amalgam.”
Charlie Brown
5/14/09
P.S. — We have never before had 19 Members of Congress step up for us like this, and it’s important we thank them. I guarantee you the ADA lobbyists are hammering on them. So please call Washington DC this Mon., Tu., or Wed. After you make that phone call, drop me an e-mail.