home | articles on prevention
mail@ralphmoss.com
After using such fillings for 20 years, Huggins came to believe that their use in dentistry is a disaster; he has implicated mercury in the onset of many chronic diseases, including multiple sclerosis (MS) and certain cases of leukemia and solid tumors. By removing the fillings in a high tech laboratory, Huggins says he relieves the symptoms of many "incurable" illnesses.
The American Dental Association (ADA) has reacted with fury, claiming that "silver amalgam is the safest material we can use." One key question has been whether mercury, which is solid in the fillings, can vaporize and migrate into the rest of the body. And once there, can it do any harm?
Scientists have now shown that "amalgam can vaporize when people chew their food or brush their teeth," according to Science News (4/10/93). From there it can get into the gut. Microbiologist Anne O. Summers puzzled over the fact that many people harbor intestinal bacteria resistant to poisonous mercury. Since the same stretch of DNA provides resistance to both antibiotics and mercury, she wondered if exposure to vaporized mercury somehow conferred resistance to antibiotics, as well. Such resistance can be a serious health menace.
Summers and her Canadian colleagues examined the intestinal bacteria of 356 people who had not taken antibiotics within the previous two weeks. They found mercury-resistant germs in those samples, the very same bugs that shrugged off the lethal effects of antibiotics.
In an experiment on monkeys, the scientists then found that giving amalgam fillings resulted in a statistically significant increase in mercury-resistant and antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria in their colon. But when they substituted non mercury-containing fillings, the proportion of resistant bacteria went down.
"There's more than reasonable doubt about the safety of this material [amalgam]," according to co-author Dr. Murray J. Vimy of the University of Calgary. Amalgam removal may be drastic, but some health workers believe it should be considered by people prone to "superinfections" or in those with chronic illnesses that have not responded to other treatments. [Antimicrob Agents Chemother 37(4):825-34, April 1993.]