This following interchange should be read from the bottom up. It shows how ill-prepared and uneducated even the strongest of dentists are when it comes to the handling of mercury, the most toxic, naturally-occurring substance on the planet surface.
The story is one of a female patient who after having her mercury fillings ground down for crowns went into a mercury storm.
You are correct Steve about the sheep but incorrect about humans. The Frykholm study in 1957 crude by today’s standards found mercury in urine of humans both upon placement and removal. We now know that some mercury remains in those experimental subjects to this day. ( Frykholm KO: On mercury from dental amalgam. Its toxic and allergic effects and some comments on occupational hygiene. Acta Odont Scand 15:7-108, suppl 22, 1957)
Vimy and Lorscheider had already repeated the Sheep study in monkeys by the time the sheep study was published so they knew that exactly the same think occurred in monkeys. That is why in the Smoking Tooth video I ask, “So what’s the problem with monkeys?”
( Hahn, Leszek J.; Kloiber, Reinhard; Leininger, Ronald W.; Vimy, Murray J.; & Lorscheider, Fritz L. Whole-body imaging of the distribution of mercury released from dental fillings into monkey tissues. FASEB, Vol. 4, Nov. 1990, pp. 3256-3260.)
I will hasten to point our for the scientifically inclined that the journals that published Dr. Vimy’s sheep and monkey studies is THE most prestigious physiological journal in the world. They are not only peer reviewed by the worlds experts in medical physiology but their journal is ad free and this not subject to the pressures of advertisers and then truly a scientific journal.
All mercury fillings leak mercury. It has been proven. So now deal with the next issue body burden.
Eggleston’s autopsy study did a very good job of answering that question. (see previous post to Guy)
So now we are down to the final hurdle a specific disease. Ziff published in a review of numerous articles that found bone loss in humans from implanting amalgams. ( Ziff, MF. Documented Clinical Side-Effects to Dental Amalgam. Adv Dent Res, 6:131-4, 1992.)
Isn’t periodontal disease a wide spread disorder of mankind? Obviously since some people don’t have amalgams and do have the disease, mercury from amalgams can only be considered linked rather than causative but nevertheless a disease accelerated by implanting mercury/silver fillings.
BTW by the Doctrine of Learned Intermediary mercury packers are obligated to share with their patients prior to treatment the manufacturer’s warnings. Have you read what they say?
Sincerely,
David Kennedy DDS
On 11/8/09 2:26 PM, “Steve Markus”
The famous sheep study, by Vimy, using radioisotopes of Hg in amalgam proved that mercury dispersed to all parts of the body. What you may not be aware of is that Vimy, a wet-fingered suburban dentist like many of us designed the study, under supervision of the medical school at Calgary, to prove Huggins was confused about the non-binding nature of mercury in Amalgam. Vimy was shocked to find his results. The ADA, in a very weak moment told the NYTimes that “this study was done on sheep, it wasn’t done on humans.” Vimy repeated the same results in primates.
Steve Markus
The Centre for Dentistry at Haddon
209 White Horse Pike
Haddon Heights, NJ 08035
856 546 0665
—– Original Message —–
From: David Kennedy DDS
To: agoodman@agoodmandds.com
Cc: gmoor@windstream.net ; William Domb
Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: amalgam causes any disease or disorder in the human body
Actually Ashley, if you read carefully my post I was agreeing with you.
Dr. Huggins makes exactly the same error that many pro-mercury dentists and the Quackwatchers do. They make claims that are not supported or supportable by the peer reviewed scientific literature like no links to any disorder of man and 99+% exposure from sources other than amalgam.
I too am familiar with this group and they do not have a scientific leg to stand on. While they purport to represent themselves as evidence based you will note that they have never published any research, never appeared nor were consulted by the FDA.
The claim that amalgam mercury is benign was so soundly rejected by the FDA neurologists it surprised many of us when a dentist Susan Runner held a press conference July 28th 2009 to once again make the very same assertions that were so resoundingly rejected by her hand picked FDA panel.
That was my comment not about some indefensible claims of harm or safety.
David Kennedy, DDS
Past President
International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology
On 11/7/09 10:29 PM, “Ashley Goodman” wrote:
Dave, I made one assertion, “There wasn’t much science coming from Hal Huggins at his hearing and drew several admonitions by the Admin Law Judge on the case.” I also provided a link to Quackwatch.com for more background with references on the subject.
Huggins assumed the burden of proof in the Admin Law Hearing to counter the charges by the state of Colorado for his defense with expert witnesses corroborating his assertions after the state produced substantiation, etc., for their allegations. He was unsuccessful as can be verified by the finding of the admin law judge and, as I recall but not positive about, his entitled appeal of the hearings findings. Carol Brown, DDS was the testifying expert on the case and is licensed in the state of Colorado while I am not licensed there. She also testified in some of the MP cases brought in civil court in Colorado and lost by Huggins.
I am familiar with your background and that of your group. I have no desire to debate the case with you long after the fact. The case is public record. Any argument for his defense, etc., should have been introduced during the hearing or appellate period. He didn’t provide a preponderance of the evidence in his own behalf for his actions or “beliefs”.
Ash
—————————————
Ashley Email: agoodman@agoodmandds.com
Web: http://www.agoodmandds.com
—————————————
David Kennedy DDS wrote:
amalgam causes any disease or disorder in the human body Ashley I pretty much agree with you regarding Dr. Huggins grasp of the scientific literature but strongly disagree with your other assertions as did the FDA’s expert neurological panel.
First let me state for the record that the reason the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology was founded was to bring published peer reviewed scientific evidence into the debate regarding the safety of materials used in dentistry. To that end we’ve help design and funded a large body of research intended to fill the substantial gaps in our knowledge of the biological impact of dental treatments. I can furnish a list of the 25 or more studies we’ve funded over the many years and the results were all published in scientific journals. Among other things they show substantial mercury exposure, intake and increased body burden from in situ mercury/silver tooth filling implants.
In 2006 as a result of a long standing consumer lawsuit the FDA convened an expert panel to review the classification of mixed precapsulated dental amalgam. Because the dental panel did not have the medical expertise to diagnose or treat any of the diseases caused by exposure to mercury the FDA tapped the neurologists to sit on this expert panel. Then the dentists gave themselves 50% of the votes.
In a very biased fashion the FDA dentists invited only advocates for continued mercury use to present their information before the panel. Hundreds of pages of written submissions documentation and individuals reports were submitted during the 60 day public comment period.
The Draft FDA White Paper makes many of the same arguments you have and are often heard in dental circles including the one about any specific disease related to amalgams. Obviously this is because it was written almost entirely by dentists with Susan Runner, DDS leading the project.
When it came down to a vote the pivotal questions were asked:
2. Does the FDA White Paper objectively and clearly present the current state of knowledge about the exposure [to mercury] and health effects related to dental amalgam?
3. Given the amount and quality of the information available for the draft FDA White Paper, are the conclusions [exposure to mercury from amalgam is safe] reasonable.
The physician and toxicologist members of the neurological panel resounding and overwhelmingly rejected these claims of mercury safety by a vote of 9 to 1. Even the 1 favorable vote explained away her vote by stating that she did not believe it was her obligation to consider evidence that the FDA had not given her. No one else on the panel agreed. The dentists on the panel supported the paper but only partially and as a result the White Paper was rejected by a vote of 13 to 7.
Guy claims: Every major health organization in the world disagrees on the
stance that mercury in amalgam causes any disease or disorder in the human
body.
Can you support that claim?
Research long ago confirmed that amalgams cause bone loss around teeth. Isn’t periodontal disease a disease of the human body?
FYI it is just as unlawful for dentists to make claims and diagnose that mercury does not cause some disease (other than oral of course) as it is unlawful to diagnose that it does. So when a dentist claims that exposure to mercury is without harm then he/she has traversed into the unlawful practice of medicine. A negative medical diagnosis is a diagnosis nevertheless.
Sincerely,
David Kennedy DDS
On 11/7/09 10:26 AM, “Ashley Goodman” wrote:
Guy pretty much has it right. There wasn’t much science coming from Hal Huggins at his hearing and drew several admonitions by the Admin Law Judge on the case.
I was a consulting non testifying expert on the case (Prosecution) and was very familiar with the case facts.
http://quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mercury.html
Ash
—————————————
Ashley A. Goodman, D.D.S.
8736 Lake Murray Blvd. #108
San Diego, CA 92119
Phone: 619-697-6677
Fax: 619-697-6632
Email: agoodman@agoodmandds.com
Web: http://www.agoodmandds.com
—————————————
Guy Moorman wrote:
No one called you a quack, Steve, but a lot of us strongly disagree with your stance on dental amalgam even though we don’t use it. Every major health organization in the world disagrees on the stance that mercury in amalgam causes any disease or disorder in the human body.
Your anger is misplaced. You should be angry at the lack of true science showing amalgam causes illness. There simply is none. There is speculation. There is anecdotal belief. But there is nothing acceptable to the CDC, FDA, WHO or any other major group dealing with true solid research and science and you can bet your arse they are studying it like crazy because of the vaccines. They have yet to find a connection even there.
These damned scientifically challenged talk show hosts who are advising people not to take the H1Ni vaccine are going to be responsible for a lot of serious illness and even death. No real science Steve. You can do what you want in your office but telling a patient that removing amalgam is going to cure or help any existing disorder or prevent any disorder is stated to be unethical by every state board, the ADA, and every major dental group in the country other than those directed totally at holistic treatment of patients. Your anger is misplaced.
Guy W. Moorman, Jr. DDS
The Swamp
Douglas, Georgia
From: Steve Markus [mailto:smarkus147545@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 8:35 AM
To: rcarterdds@comcast.net; gkodish@gkodish.algxmail.com; ACEsthetics@googlegroups.com; DavidKennedy-dds@cox.net; Tom McGuire, DDS
Subject: Re: [ACEsthetics] My nightmare case
My comments in ANGRY RED below
Steve Markus
The Centre for Dentistry at Haddon
209 White Horse Pike
Haddon Heights, NJ 08035
856 546 0665
—– Original Message —–
From: rdc
To: gkodish@gkodish.algxmail.com ; ACEsthetics@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 1:31 AM
Subject: RE: [ACEsthetics] My nightmare case
I saw a case like this on House. It was the spouse that was gradually doing it>>Yeah, let’s blame whoever we can instead of learning about the science. Why not remove the temps flush them out>>you just don’t get it, it was the Hg liberated by the preparation of the teeth. When there is a mercury spill, do they just flush it out? No, It’s a hazardous waste site. , cut them apart . or send them to one of those quack dentists>>I resent that, and wonder whether you knew that the term quack was derived from the blacksmiths and barbers in this country who started using mercury (quaksolder in German) fillings that were invented in Germany- therefore, you**, sir, are the quack. and let him handle the case and just work out fees with him. JUSt say that you’ve done a ton of this work and didn’t have any reactions before and that she must be aspecial case . Lay out a plan , but add that if they think the other dentist would be a better fit for her, then you would understand and would be willing to work out fees with him so she wasn’t at a loss. Remind her of the reasons the work was done .
Sometimes changing materials is almost like a placebo affect and buys time for them to get better. >> so by admitting it’s only a placebo, you’re accomplishing what? Deluding the patient who is in a mercury storm that its awbetta? In the interest of fair play, I can state that most holistic MD’s look to mercury and other heavy metals first. Is that out of convenience, or because the medical profession fails to comprehend and understand it?
** Dentistry used to be a profession practiced by graduates of medical schools who specialized in oral problems, then amalgam came along, and the nation saw the birth of the precursor of the current ADA.
Yes she saw all the regular doctors first and had many test at which they found nothing. Then they tested for mercury poisoning and found that she was “poisoned” with mercury.
Gary S Kodish DDS
301 SE 16th St
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316
www.kodish.com
954-462-5252
——————————————————————————–
From: Jay Nelson [mailto:cosmeticdentist@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 8:47 AM
To: gkodish@gkodish.algxmail.com
Cc: Rick Coker; acesthetics@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [ACEsthetics] My nightmare case
Has she had a “conventional” medical work up?
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Gary Kodish
I thought I did get it all out, but he says the holistic dentist says she may have some in her jaw since I did a rct on # 14 and that I may have “pumped” it down the canals and inot her jaw.
I feel for the guy because his wife is ill and all he wants to know is why and how to fix it as you and I would do.
Gary S Kodish DDS
301 SE 16th St
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316
www.kodish.com
954-462-5252
——————————————————————————–
From: Rick Coker [mailto:riccoker@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 8:23 AM
To: Gary Kodish
Cc: acesthetics@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [ACEsthetics] My nightmare case
Oh, well, if he researched it on the INTERNET, then he wins! Pretty much guaranteed to be correct information there. The truth is, she might have a mercury allergy or concern, but you don't know what was going on beforehand with her, and she is going to need her teeth, no matter what, right? Did you get all of the alloy out for her? I have started just removing all of the old amalgam when I restore teeth, just to get that issue handled. Easy to do that and a quick buildup with a flowable or dual cure- sometimes I use Breeze for that! She might have some real issues, but you didn't do anything wrong. rick On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Gary Kodish Her husband claims she did not have a problem until I prepped her upper teeth. As an aside he thinks the whole dental an medical community is missing things. He is not an irrational guy as he is an engineer and very educated. He has been doing a lot of research on the internet about this and now sends his wife to holistic clinics where everyone there has this problem, so he feels it is very wide spread and that we as medical doctors are not up on this problem. Gary S Kodish DDS 301 SE 16th St Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316 www.kodish.com 954-462-5252 ——————————————————————————– From: Rick Coker [mailto:riccoker@gmail.com] To: gkodish@gkodish.algxmail.com Well, since you don’t have a pre-op mercury level to show, you really have no idea of what her mercury levels were BEFORE your prep visit, do you? It is unfortunate, but those folks are kind of lost here, and what she feels isn’t necessarily what is happening. Rick On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Gary wrote: I need some opinions on what I should do. Last month I posted a situation with a patient about a full mouth rehab I was doing. Below is the post: “I have a patient who had a reduced VD with a cl 2 occ. She wanted to improve her smile so she opted for FMR. I did a wax up and prepped her upper teeth and overlaid her lover teeth with luxamtemp. Through the past few weeks I have been adjusting her bite and even made her upper temps over again. In the last couple of weeks she is claiming that she feels something leaching out of her teeth and going down her throat. She claims to feel a tightness starting in her palate and then feels her throat is closing up. I examined her yesterday and did not see any redness around her gums and blisters on her lips which I thought I would see if she was allergic to the luxatemp. She wants me to remove the upper provisonals and the lower bonded splint because she feels she is being poisoned. I am not sure what I should do at this point. By the way I told her to take some Benadryl if it was an allergy but she claims it makes her heart race and doesn’t want to take it. Any suggestions on how I should handle this?” I had several good suggestions on how to proceed from the group and even had her see an endo and perio Doc down here. Long story short is I had a discussion with her husband this morning about her. She has gone to several holistic doctors and they have determined that she has metal poisoning from the prepping of her teeth. She had blood tests which show a high amount of mercury in her system and she needs to undergo chealation treatment. He says his wife is very sick and may take months for her to recover. Needless to say he is upset that his wife is sick. He thinks I should have done something to prevent it and would like what ever money back they have paid towards they case. Is there something I could have done to prevent this, should I give all the money or subtract my expenses? I am not sure how I could have known or prevented this from happening. Gary
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 8:05 AM
Cc: acesthetics@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [ACEsthetics] My nightmare case