Dental updates from Dr. Mckeever.

Archives

• July 2003
• August 2003
• October 2003
• January 2004
• March 2004
• June 2004
• August 2004
• October 2004
• June 2005
• September 2005
• October 2005
• January 2006
• February 2006
• May 2006
• August 2006
• October 2006
• January 2007
• June 2007
• December 2007
• March 2008

 
SILVER AMALGAM FILLINGS VINDICATED (AGAIN)

For years, pseudo-scientists, holistic practitioners, quack physicians and, yes, even some dentists have preached to their audiences that the metals in dental amalgam fillings (mainly mercury) are hazardous to our health (see "METAL MOUTHS" below). Never have these people presented valid scientific evidence of such "poisoning" but the chatter never quits. This in spite of the fact that, over the years, major U.S. and international scientific and health bodies, including the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Public Health Service, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization, among others, have all stated that dental amalgam is a safe restorative material. As recently as October 30, 2003, a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that exposure to mercury from dental amalgam, as well as from fish consumption, is not associated with adverse health effects.

The federal health agencies recently commisioned an independent, third-party panel to analyze the peer-reviewed, scientific literature published since 1996 on potential adverse human health effects caused by dental amalgam. This panel was presented by a company called Life Science Research Office, a forty year-old non-profit scientific organizationn which describes itseld as a "widely accepted, authoritative source, independent from special-interest groups and politics" and producing "timely, comprehensive, state-of-the-science review". The panel met last December and heard testimony from government agencies, health care groups - including the American Dental Association who also conducts scientific research through it's foundations Paffenbarger Research Center - on the safety of amalgam. (It also heard testimony from patients and researchers who claim amalgam is a health hazard and should be banned).

What has always amazed me is that those who doubt the safety studies blame the dental profession for a "cover up". Think about how the banning of amalgam would effect oral health care in this country; any legislative bill to do so (as was presented to the California Legislature by one of their wacky female members and, I'm glad to say, immediately dismissed) could rightfully be called the "Dentist Full Employment Act". Amalgam substitutes costs at least twice as much and up to ten times more mostly because they take a lot longer to fabricate and often have to be sent to a dental laboratory. The already-predicted dentist shortage in the next decade would be catastrophic and those dentists still practicing would be rolling in the dough. It makes no sense to charge the profession of a "cover up".

If those outside of dentistry want to spread mis-information about amalgam fillings, it is their prerogative to do so. I really get upset with those insiders (dentists) that try to scare patients into believing this unproven theory in order to "sell" newer, more expensive restorations that may not be as good as the amalgam they want to replace. (Click on the archive dated October 26 in the margin.)
posted by Steve at 4:21 PM