I have seen many things weighing for/against this. Your thoughts? By the way I have an amalgam filling.
Reasonably safe when used properly.
The real danger related to this issue is in succumbing to the claims of anti-amalgam proponents and getting one’s fillings yanked out and replaced by composite fillings (which aren’t any safer and have even scarier-sounding components than mercury).
Dentist here, like anything else, you have to weigh the pros against the cons. Yes they leech some mercury, but you probably get more from tuna and coal fired power plants. Amalgam is generally cheaper and longerlasting than composite(white) fillings which can give off bisphenols. FWIW I have amalgams in several teeth, some almost 50 years old and when my daughter needed a fillings years ago I placed amalgam. All in all if it isn’t an aesthic issue, I’d leave it alone.
I recently visited two separate dentists near my workplace and found that in 2013 both used amalgams. I was disappointed.
I think it comes down to 3 things:
-
Mercury is a toxin and no way putting it in your mouth makes it magically untoxic
-
Amalgams are not a chemical compound but a physical compound and mercury does leach
from amalgam fillings -
The fact that millions have been used throughout the world means nothing about safety. As with any toxin, there are acute and sub-acute doses and there is no way to determine in something as complex as neurological function whether one is affected. But there sure is a lot of dementia nowadays, ain’t there?
Lead was used in gasoline for years despite warnings from doctors. No one became drooling idiot from chronic exposure but now they are tracing reduction in crime rates to it being eliminated.
The advice from one who had his fillings removed:
Probably you shouldn’t have it done. I have had problems with the teeth that were weakened by the procedure and I am also not convinced that I wasn’t exposed to a lot of Hg during the removal.
But for sure: Do not have new ones put in and don’t let your family use them. There are alternatives that I bet are less toxic than mercury. And, boy, don’t let an argument based on dollar cost persuade you – what would you sell an IQ point for? (I’m buying, btw.)
Interestingly, 14% of mercury in the environment, affecting levels in fish, is attributed to dental waste and fillings that are vaporized during cremation.
Of course, you’re not putting “mercury” in your mouth, are you.
. See the reply above of a dentist. The amount is so minimal, you get more in your life from other sources that you never even think about.
. You’re saying that dental amagams cause dementia? PLEASE.
. While you may be correct, I’d like to see a link to a reliable site citing this.
I almost hate to ask, but where did you get this sketchy bit of info?
Link to a reputable site, please.
About 3 years ago, one of my amalgam fillings fell out while I was eating. I didn’t immediately realize it and apparently swallowed the filling. My dentist assured me that it won’t harm me, but I’ve never felt at ease about it since so many have shared opinions to the contrary.
A year ago, a second amalgam filling fell out. Luckily, I felt it right away and didn’t repeat the earlier mishap.
You’ll consume more mercury during an evening at a sushi restaurant, I suspect.
relesabe,You are right murcury is toxic, but it is the vapor that is harmful, not that which is bound to the other metals in the amalgam. Yes there is some exposure with amal. fillings but minimal compaired to sources in some fish or in the air around coal burning powerplants.
Chlorine is even more toxic than amalgam, but do you want them to take it out of the drinking water and risk contaminated water? Even things that are good in usual doses such as vitamin A and Tylenol are toxic in doses that aren’t too much above theraputic doses.
As I said before you must weigh the pluses against the minuses. No way I would remove my amalgams. Hell one of them is over 45 years old. The stuff lasts better than any other dental restorative material other than gold but nowadays no one wants it in their mouth.
No, the element or compounds of it are also toxic. Vapor is especially dangerous because it directly enters the bloodstream through the lungs.
Seafood is also a source of mercury and unfortunately a dangerous one. This is well known and does not mean that therefore you should ignore other sources.
I think your dentist was right – the filling after being swallowed might ironically contribute less mercury to your bloodstream since you are no longer submitting it to mechanical stress by chewing, thus liberating mercury vapor.
I said indeed that I would advise against removal but avoid having them put in.
relesabe, are you aware of how meaningless the designation “toxin” is unless one specifies the dose?
Anything is toxic given a sufficient dose, even things essential for life (oxygen, water, elements and minerals vital for normal biochemical processes etc.).
You are living in a sea of “toxins”, but unless it is demonstrated that the substances in question are are harmful at the doses encountered, they are not toxins at all.
Like for example composite fillings? Here are some of the nice chemicals you’ll find in them (I am reproducing just part of the list from this site to spare you possible further anxiety):
1,10-Decane-diol-dimethacrylate
Diethyl-amino-ethanol
Diethyleneglycol-di-methacrylate
Dihydroxy-ethyl-p-toluidine
1,6-Diisocyanato-hexane
2,6-Diisopropyl-aniline
4-Dimethylaminobenzoic acid ethyl ester
2-(4-Dimethyl-aminophenyl)ethanol
Dimethoxybenzoine
Dimethyl-dodecane-amine
Dimethyl-p-toluidine
N,N-Dimethyltetradecylamine
Ethyleneglycol-di-methacrylate
2-Hydroxy-ethyl-methacrylate
2-Hydroxy-4methoxy-benzophenone
Triethylenglycol
Triethylenglycol-di-methacrylate
Trihexylamine
Triphenylphosphine
Triphenylstibane
Urethane-di-methacrylate
These and/or other components of composite fillings have been linked to problems including cytotoxicity, immunosuppression and allergies, at least involving in vitro laboratory studies.
The point is not to scare people away from composite fillings (which are considered safe in dental applications), but to make you aware that their long-term effects are much less well known than those of amalgam fillings, which have a good, well documented safety profile.
Cool. Dentistry cannot find a non-toxic filling material?
Even if it was possible to regenerate dentin and enamel, some woo specialist would find some reason to be afraid of it.
Why isn’t gold used? Just the cost?
According to this lunatic, even gold isn’t safe.
As for me, I am worried about neurotoxins.
And some elements are more toxic than others.
Not really sure who is saying what for what reason but Hg fillings date from a time when physicians did not even wash their hands.
One final point:
Years ago a spokesman for the ADA argued that just as salt is a compound of sodium and chlorine, both dangerous alone but indeed the CHEMICAL COMPOUND is not nearly as dangerous to ingest, amalgams are “safe” because of the combination of Hg and other metals. This is complete nonsense and I wondered if this represented the level of sophistication prevalent among dentists.