Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Mercury/dental amalgam is a common cause of Alzheimer's/dementia

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Health Donate to DU
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 02:25 PM
Original message
Mercury/dental amalgam is a common cause of Alzheimer's/dementia
Mercury & Alzheimers Disease/Dementia

Mutter J, Naumann J, Sadaghiani C, Schneider R, Walach H. Alzheimer disease: mercury as pathogenetic factor and apolipoprotein E as a moderator.
Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2004 Oct;25(5):331-9.
abstract:
The etiology of most cases of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is as yet unknown. Epidemiological studies suggest that environmental factors may be involved beside genetic risk factors. Some studies have shown higher mercury concentrations in brains of deceased and in blood of living patients with Alzheimer's disease. Experimental studies have found that even smallest amounts of mercury but no other metals in low concentrations were able to cause all nerve cell changes, which are typical for Alzheimer's disease. The most important genetic risk factor for sporadic Alzheimer's disease is the presence of the apolipoprotein Ee4 allele whereas the apolipoprotein Ee2 allele reduces the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease. Some investigators have suggested that apolipoprotein Ee4 has a reduced ability to bind metals like mercury and therefore explain the higher risk for Alzheimer's disease. Therapeutic approaches embrace pharmaceuticals which bind metals in the brain of patients with Alzheimer's disease. In sum, both the findings from epidemiological and demographical studies, the frequency of amalgam application in industrialized countries, clinical studies, experimental studies and the dental state of AD patients in comparison to controls suggest a decisive role for inorganic mercury in the etiology of AD


Schofield P, Dementia associated with toxic causes and autoimmune disease.
Int Psychogeriatr. 2005;17 Suppl 1:S129-47.

Toxic causes of dementia include exposure to heavy metals such as lead, mercury and aluminum as well as to carbon monoxide and solvents. Such conditions can be prevented by avoiding toxic exposures.


Mutter J, Daschner F, et al, Amalgam risk assessment with coverage of references up to 2005] , Gesundheitswesen. 2005 Mar;67(3):204-16.
(Medline)
Abstract
Dental Amalgam contributes substantially to human mercury load. Mercury accumulates in some organs, particularly in the brain, where it can bind to protein more tightly than other heavy metals (e. g. lead, cadmium). Therefore, the elimination half time is assumed to be up to 1 - 18 years in the brain and bones. Mercury is assumed to be one of the most toxic non-radioactive elements. There are pointers to show that mercury vapour is more neurotoxic than methyl-mercury in fish. Review of recent literature suggests that mercury from dental amalgam may lead to nephrotoxicity, neurobehavioural changes, autoimmunity, oxidative stress, autism, skin and mucosa alterations or non-specific symptoms and complaints. The development of Alzheimer's disease or multiple sclerosis has also been linked to low-dose mercury exposure. There may be individual genetical or acquired susceptibilities for negative effects from dental amalgam. Mercury levels in the blood, urine or other biomarkers do not reflect the mercury load in critical organs. Some studies regarding dental amalgam reveal substantial methodical flaws. Removal of dental amalgam leads to permanent improvement of various chronic complaints in a relevant number of patients in various trials. Summing up, available data suggests that dental amalgam is an unsuitable material for medical, occupational and ecological reasons.

Kidd PM., Neurodegeneration from mitochondrial insufficiency: nutrients, stem cells, growth factors, and prospects for brain rebuilding using integrative management. Altern Med Rev. 2005 Dec;10(4):268-293.

mitochondrial insufficiency contributes to the etiopathology of many disorders. Mercury exposure is a factor in such effects. Alzheimer's and other dementias, Down syndrome, stroke, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Huntington's disease, Friedreich's ataxia, aging are affected.
B vitamin group; vitamins E and K; and the antioxidant and energetic cofactors alpha-lipoic acid (ALA), ubiquinone (coenzyme Q10; CoQ10), and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide, reduced (NADH) help. The trophic nutrients acetyl L-carnitine (ALCAR), glycerophosphocholine (GPC), and phosphatidylserine (PS) provide mitochondrial support and conserve growth factor receptors; all three improved cognition in double-blind trials. The omega-3 fatty acid docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is enzymatically combined with GPC and PS to form membrane phospholipids for nerve cell expansion.


more documentation: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/alzhg.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. Mercury also known to cause other neurological problems: Parkinson's, P.N.
Mercury & parkinsons

Carpenter DO. Effects of metals on the nervous system of humans and animals.
Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2001;14(3):209-18.

metals, especially lead, mercury, manganese and copper, have been implicated in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis(ALS) and Parkinson's disease.


Miller K, Ochudlo S, Opala G, Smolicha W, Siuda J. Neurol Neurochir Pol. 2003;37 Suppl 5:31-8.

chronic mercury encephalopathy (parkinsonismus) was diagnosed based on documented occupational exposure and diagnostic test results.
much more documentation:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/parkins.html
(note pesticides also causes parkinson's http://www.flcv.com/pesticid.html )

Mercury & PN
Gerr F, Letz R. Epidemiological case definitions of peripheral neuropathy: experience from two neurotoxicity studies. Neurotoxicology. 2000 Oct;21(5) :761-8.

Conclusion: the composite case definition showed an odds ratio of more than 3.1 for the mercury study and 5.1 for the arsenic study.


Mercury & PN & hypertension & behavioral changes
Koyun M, Akman S, Guven AG. Mercury intoxication resulting from school barometers in three unrelated adolescents. Eur J Pediatr. 2004 Mar;163(3):131-4. Epub 2004 Jan 13.

CONCLUSION: mercury intoxication should be considered in any child with signs and symptoms of hypertension, skin rash, peripheral neuropathy and behavioural changes. The parents and school administrators, as well as paediatricians, should be aware of the potential risks of mercury and should be encouraged to avoid mercury-containing devices in schools and households.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Only in extremely high concentrations does it cause symptoms
that mimic these diseases. Sorry, but dental fillings don't supply that kind of concentration.

Coincidence is not causality.

This is quackery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Careful!
If you keep up that kind of logic and reason, you'll be labeled an agent of Big Dentistry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KT2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. long term - low dose
exposure is the missing link in most toxicology research. Its absence is generally used to assert that there is no risk. Idiotic conclusion.

Synergy is another missing link. Absence of such research is also used to assert that there are no risks arising from synergistic effects of various toxins. Bush was so convinced of that fact that he halted government research into synergysitc effects.

Quackery? I suggest that it is quackery to base conclusions on lack of research - a profit driven, corporate tactic by the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Well, that didn't take long
a profit driven, corporate tactic by the way.

In any DU discussion of corporate involvement in public health, a person who questions the assertion that corporations undertake a campaign of deliberate poisoning & coverup will invariably be accused of either working for such corporations or sympathizing with their nefarious doings.

Here's an overview of the amalgam issue from a non-corporate, non-quack authority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Good luck
I'm done with these dental filling true believers. I won't let bullshit and quackery pass with tacit approval, but I know it's like trying to convince fundies, libertarians, and other true believers, nothing penetrates.

Plus, the research has been done, and done to death, you just won't find that in the pages of "Prevention."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
22. These studies are from peer-reviewed journals by prestegious researchers
If you disagree with the studies, what is your basis. Are you aware that when researchers
publish in peer-reviewed studies, other researchers are duty bound to point out any problems
they find with the study. Are you aware of any credible researcher who has disagreed with
any of the studies I have posted? Its possible to search for such by web or through such as
Science Citation Index. Because I've been doing research on such for many years, I'm certain
that you can find no credible study or comment to the contrary. But if you believe you can I'd
be interested in seeing it.
I'm aware that you can find statements by those with special interest to the contrary or
even something called a study, but it will be easy to see that they aren't real science and are not
credible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. You're attempting to place an unreasonable burden on your debate opponents
In a nutshell, you're asking us to review the thousands of (no doubt) excellent and serious medical studies that you describe so that we can correct and/or point out the errors. Sorry, but that's just not a reasonable demand for you to make.

Like it or not, the prevailing wisdom is that amalgam does not cause the heartache and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to. If your intent is to unseat that prevailing wisdom, then it's on you to distill your argument to its essence and to present it.

I have seldom read or heard of a study "confirming" the dangers of amalgam by anyone who did not have a vested financial interest in the subject, and the majority of those are hardcore holistic "healers" and similar profit-conscious gurus. Anyone who suspects the ADA's moneymaking complicity in the Great Amalagam Coverup should subject anti-amalgamists to the same financial scrutiny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. I am a single dad, a landlord and a consumer of dental services.
Aside from the obviously toxic properties of mercury,

mercury amalgam turns black with age, gets brittle and cracks with age, leaks, and just doesn't hold up as well or look as good as do the ceramic fillings.

Add all that up, and as a consumer, I know what I'm buying. And it ain't the mercury amalgam.

At one time I had a whole mouthful of mercury amalgam. Then as it cracked and leaked over time I had those teeth refilled with ceramic fillings. I'm very happy with them and my whole mouth looks much better without all the black fillings in there.

I haven't read any studies pro or con about mercury amalgam. I've talked to my dentist.

As for "hardcore holistic "healers," I can't see how they would make a dime off the issue unless they are also licensed DDS and then can provide the ceramic alternatives, which are only slightly more expensive than amalgam.

As a consumer, it's a no brainer for me, no matter how much the pro mercury folks keep trying to make my consumer choice appear somehow suspect.

I remember when they did the same thing with organic food, ridiculing anyone who would dare to oppose the orthodoxy of Corporate Farming.

If you want mercury in your mouth, ask for it. I don't care.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #28
40. A point that must be mentioned
I haven't read any studies pro or con about mercury amalgam. I've talked to my dentist.

Unless your dentist has qualifications that you haven't revealed, he's no authority on the subject of amalgam-based toxicity, so his testimony is basically worthless unless he backs it up with credible data.

I don't doubt that your dentist is a highly skilled professional and very good in his field, but his advice on mercury absorption is outside of his field, and he should stop witnessing about it in any official capacity.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. The above studies are peer-reviewed studies from National Library of Medic
Edited on Thu Dec-22-05 02:59 PM by philb
ine Medline. You apparently haven't done your homework. It is well documented that mercury from dental amalgam
commonly causes over 40 chronic health conditions and people commonly recover when treated for mercury deto x(including
amalgam replacement)
The mechanism by which mercury is documented in the medical literature to cause these conditions, as well as over
60,000 clinical cases of recovery are documented (over 4,000 peer-reviewed medical studies cited, most from Medline)
at:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/indexa.html

You apparently get your information unknowingly from quack sites. Stick to sites like the National Library of Medicine
http://www.nlm.nih.gov or similar
The U.S. Dept. of Health (ASTDR) and EPA list mercury as the most toxic non radioactive element with drinking water standard equal to 2 parts per billion, and in the top 3 of toxic substances causing adverse effects to large numbers of people. Amalgam exposures are hugely higher. The average person with several fillings has hugely high exposure of approx. 30 micrograms per day
flushed down toilets from their excretion(according to medical studies, medical labs, EPA, and Municipal Sewer Agencies)
Amalgam is the largest source of mercury exposure for most people (http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr1.html
and also the largest source of mercury in sewers(by a lot) due to the high levels from dental officies and from the high level in
excretion of those with amalgam fillings
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr2f.html


I'd be glad to discuss any of the thousands of studies cited here, and any study you are aware of that you think contradicts any of them.

I've been doing research on mercury for over 20 years and have served on Federal advisory panels.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GrumpyGreg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. Something like the second-hand smoke thing? I don't believe
those statistics either.

Junk science abounds these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. The battle over mercury fillings is a long one, dating back to the
early 20th century. Their was a major battle in the ADA over the adverse health effects of mercury. Eventually, the pro-mercury side won. Not surprisingly, the pro mercury forces were also invested heavily in in cinnabar mines, speculating that mercury amalgam would be approved and mercury would rise rapidly in price.(which is what happened)

My dentist won't use amalgam. He's an older guy close to retirement and he told me this;

"I can't tell you that mercury amalgam is dangerous. If I did I could lose my license. But I can tell you I wouldn't put it in my mouth or in the mouths of any of my loved ones."

I asked him about the license aspect. He said it's true, that they could pull his license if he said what he believes as regards mercury amalgam.

He also said the term "quick silver" for mercury dates from the early 20th century battles over mercury amalgam, when they were trying to come up with an acceptable euphemism for mercury, which was widely known to be highly toxic.

I trust my dentist. He's a fairly conservative guy, but a straight shooter and he does great work.

I remember the EPA said the air was fine at ground zero, Manhattan. Lies.

Any fool knows mercury is a deadly poison with irreversible effects on body organs, especially but not limited to, brain function. As amalgam fillings get old, they turn black from oxidation, they leak, and when drilled they gasify to some extent. Why put that in your mouth when there are non-toxic alternatives? (Though they are slightly more expensive and require more skill on the part of the dentist than does amalgam) Just think about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. With due respect to your dentist, he's way off on his etymology
"cwicseolfor" predates the 20th century by close to a millennium.

That doesn't mean he's a quack, but it does mean that he passes on (some) bogus information without subjecting it to critical review.

Hmm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Shut up, you corporate stooge!
Lies, lies, lies, I tell ya!!! ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Doh! I've been caught!
My only hope is to fill your molars with amalgam and wait for nature to take its course!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. Your point is fine, and well taken, but in fairness to my
Edited on Thu Dec-22-05 04:15 PM by John Q. Citizen
dentist the discussion took place back in early 1994. After thinking about it perhaps what he said was the term "Silver Amalgam" was the euphemism put in place, since their is no silver in "silver amalgam" but about 50% mercury and 50% other metals.

I am not posting to try to convince you of anything, just offering my experience.

If you like your dentist to put mercury in your mouth or the mouths of your loved ones, go for it! that is your right as an American.

However, to use the "public service" history of commercial corporations to bolster your argument seems counter productive, at best.

I'm sure there are lots of studies that prove pesticide are harmless to humans, that smoking tobacco isn't harmful, and that asbestos isn't really the problem that alarmist think it is. So what. Their arguments seem pretty close to yours. Those arguments also ask people to assume that anecdotal evidence is always suspect, that what we know is poison really isn't poison, and don't worry, because corporations have our best interest at heart.

We are ultimately responsible for our own choices. I've made mine, and apparently you have made yours.

Good luck!

-edit for spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Silver amalgam typically contains mercury, tin, zinc, copper, and SILVER
I don't mean to belabor the point, but I'm afraid that your dentist was basing his actions and conclusions on really shaky evidence. That's his right, of course, but as a purported man of medicine he's doing his patients and himself a great disservice by failing to explore the topic critically. Instead, he accepts (as many here appear willing to accept) anecdotal hearsay coupled with a lot of eyebrow waggling and "corporations-are-bad" mantras.

Sorry, but that's insufficient, as are testimonials along the lines of "I got my fillings removed and my hemorrhoids went away."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top