        |
Mercury Dental Amalgams - Analyzing the Debate
Revised May 2001
Note: The information on this
website is not a substitute for
diagnosis and treatment by a qualified, licensed professional.
AMALGAM REMOVAL
Fortunately, the many problems created by amalgam respond to a simple solution: removal of the offending fillings. Indeed, the symptoms that abate with the removal of amalgam parallel those created by its use. These include seizures, muscle tremors, chronic fatigue, memory loss, depression, headaches, menstrual disorders, joint pains, intestinal problems and irregular heartbeat.99
All of these disorders, and more, have been cured by amalgam removal. And to date, approximately 1,500 dentists in the United States advocate the removal of amalgam and replacement of the filling with alternative materials.(211)
A 1998 study of 12 patients undergoing amalgam removal at the Karolinska Institute found that 60 days after removal, mercury levels in blood, plasma, and urine had declined to 60% of pre-removal levels. Over time, mercury levels approached those of subjects without any history of amalgam fillings.(212)
A Swedish survey of 60 patients who had undergone replacement of dental amalgam found that 78% were either satisfied or very satisfied with the results of treatment, and 9.5% reported that they were disappointed. The reasons for undergoing treatment were many, ranging from a patient's desire to avoid potential health problems in the future to treatment of serious current disease.(213)
The most common complaints were problems with memory and/or concentration; muscle and/or joint pain; anxiety and insomnia; stomach, bowel, and bladder complaints; depression; food or chemical sensitivities; numbness or tingling; and eye symptoms, in descending order of frequency. The most distressing symptoms were headache and backache, fatigue, and memory and concentration problems. Headache and backache responded best to treatment, but all symptoms showed considerable improvement on average.(214)
At the Huggins Diagnostic Center, 85% of patients who have their amalgams removed respond positively. Over the years, Dr. Huggins has used several dozen tests to monitor the effects of removal. "A frightening observation is that we (are) able to find affirmative changes in all of those tests after amalgam removal in the majority of patients observed," he says.(215)
What follows are a few examples of disorders that improved following amalgam removal:
When amalgams were removed from three patients, their number of T-lymphocytes (white cells) increased, according to a 1984 report by Dr. David Eggleston in the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. These cells, which combat invaders such as viruses, bacteria and parasites, decreased again when the amalgams were put back in the patients' mouths.(216)
In his book, It's All In Your Head, Dr. Huggins tells of an 11 year-old girl who was having seizures every 15 minutes, which prevented her from walking, standing or talking. Neurologists had failed to diagnose or treat her problem. The girl had three fillings removed, and her seizures stopped five days later. Two years later they still had not returned.(217)
A 48 year-old woman with 38 amalgams was suffering not only from lupus but also from vision disorders, gastrointestinal problems and skin rashes, says Dr. Sam Ziff. The fillings were removed over a three-month period, and a follow-up examination five months later found her to be symptom-free.(218)
When a commercial pilot began to have trouble seeing and walking, he was diagnosed as having multiple sclerosis. His level of functioning became so poor that his pilot's license was in jeopardy. At the Huggins Diagnostic Center, he had 15 amalgams removed. The man experienced rapid improvement in his vision, balance and ability to walk. Today, he is still a fully competent pilot.(219)
But here's the interesting part: According to the ADA's Code of Ethics, any dentist who removes a serviceable amalgam filling from a nonallergic patient for the purpose of removing toxic substances (such as mercury) from the body is acting unethically. The ADA's 1987 edict specifies that the treatment is improper when it is "performed solely at the recommendation or suggestion of the dentist."(220)
In an accompanying statement, the ADA said, "There is no scientifically documented evidence of a cure or improvement of a specific disease or malady due to removal of amalgam restorations from a nonallergic patient." While some dentists may have a "good faith disagreement with the established scientific position on the issue," said the statement, that belief does not justify the removal of amalgam given the lack of credible evidence.(221)
Of course, the ADA has consistently held the position that those allergic to amalgam constitute less than 1% of the population.