"Joel M. Eichen" <joeleichen[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4266e32a_2[at]x-privat.org...
- quote -


http://www.lichtenberg.dk/mercury_va...oral_cavit.htm
MERCURY VAPOUR IN THE ORAL CAVITY - IN RELATION TO NUMBER OF
AMALGAM -SURFACES / GOLD / PORCELAIN, AND THE CLASSIC SYMPTOMS OF CHRONIC
MERCURY POISONING.

Abstract

This study shows that individuals with dental amalgam fillings who exhibit

symptoms typical of chronic mercury poisoning, all have mercury vapour

concentrations in their oral cavity far higher than acceptable levels and on

average, higher than the maximum permitted levels for the industrial
environment

"Vendicar Decarian" <VD[at]Pyro.net> wrote in message
news:8tA9e.2047$K24.1430[at]read1.cgocable.net...
- quote -


LL/Jan

PS. Joel is a blathering idiot.

....and have much trouble with Break Dancing .....



"Vendicar Decarian" <VD[at]Pyro.net> wrote in message
news:wsA9e.2046$K24.35[at]read1.cgocable.net...
- quote -

"Joel M. Eichen" <joeleichen[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:42638bcd[at]x-privat.org...
- quote -


http://www.lichtenberg.dk/mercury_va...oral_cavit.htm

"Joel M. Eichen" <joeleichen[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4260f7fa[at]x-privat.org...
- quote -

http://www.lichtenberg.dk/mercury_va...oral_cavit.htm
MERCURY VAPOUR IN THE ORAL CAVITY - IN RELATION TO NUMBER OF
AMALGAM -SURFACES / GOLD / PORCELAIN, AND THE CLASSIC SYMPTOMS OF CHRONIC
MERCURY POISONING.

Abstract

This study shows that individuals with dental amalgam fillings who exhibit

symptoms typical of chronic mercury poisoning, all have mercury vapour

concentrations in their oral cavity far higher than acceptable levels and on

average, higher than the maximum permitted levels for the industrial
environment

"LadyLollipop" <LadyLollipop[at]insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:5cF8e.25233$xL4.9090[at]attbi_s72...
- quote -

We only lie when we know Jan will not see it.

THAT ADA gang.


Joel


- quote -

"Tim Miller" <rabbitispoor[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1113612260.510117.156580[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

I suggest you get updated and immediately stop with this INCORRECT
information that could greatly harm.

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/admehg.html

http://www.ewg.org/issues/mercury/20031209/index.php

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/.../17mercury.htm

Letter to FDA about better protecting US women and children from exposure to
mercury
February 24, 2004


Mark McClellan, M.D., Ph.D.
Commissioner
Food and Drug Administration
5600 Fishers Lane
Rockville, MD 20857-0001

Dear Commissioner McClellan:

We are writing to call your attention to three recent scientific reports
that, taken together, underline the urgency of the ongoing FDA/EPA effort to
update dietary advice regarding methylmercury exposure from fish and seafood
consumption. These recent studies make it clear that FDA must be more
assertive about guiding consumers to keep their mercury intake from fish and
seafood within scientifically defined safe limits. We urge you to instruct
the FDA team working on dietary advice regarding mercury in fish to take
these concerns more effectively into account.

At the National Forum on Contaminants in Fish, held in San Diego late last
month, Dr. Kathryn Mahaffey, EPA's senior researcher on mercury hazards,
presented an analysis estimating that roughly one in six babies born in
America, or 630,000 infants born each year, has a blood mercury level above
the EPA's safe level (Mahaffey 2004). This figure doubles a previous
estimate (Schober et al. 2003) that some 300,000 such at-risk births occur
annually. Prenatal mercury exposure has been associated with an increased
risk of developmental toxic effects on the brain, including adverse effects
on fine motor skills, memory and learning ability.

Dr. Mahaffey's updated estimate is based on recent data from Japan
confirming that the fetal blood mercury level (represented by umbilical cord
blood sampled at birth) is higher than the maternal blood mercury level. The
earlier estimate of 300,000 at-risk infants per year was based on 1999-2000
NHANES data that indicated that 7.8 percent of women of childbearing age had
blood mercury levels above EPA's safe upper limit, 5.8 µg Hg/L. (Elevated
blood mercury levels correlated strongly with a diet rich in fish and
seafood in the NHANES survey.) The recent Japanese study confirmed that
fetal blood contains 1.6 times as much mercury as maternal blood (several
earlier studies had found an average ratio of about 1.7.). At that ratio,
fetal blood mercury will exceed 5.8 µg/L when the mother's blood mercury
level exceeds 3.5 µg/L. The NHANES data indicate that 15.7 percent of women
have blood mercury above 3.5 µg/L. With about 4.1 million births per year in
the U.S., this means that about 630,000 infants per year are exposed in
utero to excessive mercury levels.

This doubled estimate of the population of newborn Americans at risk for
mercury-related brain damage would add urgency to the effort to manage
dietary mercury intake from fish and seafood, even if there were no new
evidence to refine and strengthen our understanding of the nature of the
risks involved. However, two papers published in the February issue of the
Journal of Pediatrics add to evidence that methylmercury toxicity in the
developing brain is not just a theoretical hazard.

The two reports (Murata et al., 2004; Grandjean et al., 2004) are the latest
from a long-term study following the development of a cohort of children in
the Faroe Islands, where the population consumes a diet rich in fish and
seafood. The study, begun in 1986, is being conducted by a team of
scientists from the Harvard School of Public Health and institutions in
Japan, Denmark and the Faroe Islands. At the outset, mercury body burden was
measured in pregnant women and in their newborn infants, and the health
status and neurological development of the children have been assessed at
intervals since birth. The papers published this month report on findings in
some 859 children at age 14.

While several similar studies (including an ongoing study in the Seychelles
islands) have produced evidence on the developmental neurotoxicity of
methylmercury in people with a high-fish diet, a National Research Council
committee has identified this study of the Faroese population as the best
available evidence on the question (NRC 2000). The two latest papers add to
that body of recognized high-quality scientific evidence.

The first paper, by Murata et al., reports on tests of brain function in the
14-year-old population. Earlier reports by these investigators had evaluated
brain function in these children at the age of 7 years and found delays in
transmission of brainstem auditory evoked potentials, which increased with
higher pre-natal mercury exposure. The current study found that the
impairment persisted at age 14, suggesting that the adverse effects of
prenatal methylmercury exposure are irreversible. The investigators also
measured the mercury levels in the children's hair at the ages of 7 and 14,
which provides an index of post-natal mercury exposure. Some neurotoxic
effects correlated with hair (postnatal) mercury levels, i.e., primarily
mercury from the children's own consumption of fish and seafood, as distinct
from their association with prenatal mercury exposure.

Most (96 percent) of the mothers at childbirth had hair mercury levels above
the 1 ppm level defined by the US EPA as the maximum safe hair mercury
concentration. But the 14-year-olds in this study had much lower hair
mercury levels (the average level in the study population was 0.96 ppm).
Their lower hair mercury levels indicate that these children had lower
dietary mercury exposure than their mothers had had. Nevertheless, the
children's postnatal mercury exposure was correlated with latency in neural
signal transmission in the midbrain, suggesting that postnatal mercury
exposure may damage different neural functions than those affected by
prenatal exposure.

Most notably, even very low mercury exposure was associated with delays in
nerve signal transmission. The researchers observed no threshold of mercury
exposure below which impairment was not detected. They concluded that some
adverse effects on brain function of methylmercury exposure during childhood
appear to occur at doses below the current EPA Reference Dose (RfD). While
this new finding needs confirmation, it would not be surprising if, like
lead, methylmercury posed some risk of adverse toxic effects on the
developing brain across the full range of "normal" human exposure.

The second paper, by Grandjean et al., examined heart function in the same
14-year-old Faroese children. The investigators measured variability of
heart rate, an objective index of heartbeat regulation by the autonomous
nervous system. At higher levels of (mainly prenatal) mercury exposure,
regulation of heart rate variability was weaker, confirming a finding by the
same investigators when they examined the study population at the age of 7
years. Decreased heart rate variability in adulthood is a risk factor for
cardiovascular disease and sudden death. Two recent studies have linked
methylmercury exposure with increased risk of cardiovascular mortality
(Salonen et al. 1995, Guallar et al. 2002). The latest findings from the
Faroes investigation suggest a mechanism (neurotoxicity) underlying the
cardiovascular risk from mercury exposure.

In summary, these recent studies indicate that methylmercury exposure from
fish and seafood consumption is very likely an even more serious public
health problem in the United States than was previously recognized. EPA's
updated exposure assessment indicates that the population of newborns at
risk is twice as large as estimated just a few years ago; and the latest
epidemiological evidence strengthens the inference that adverse effects can
occur at current levels of methylmercury exposure from seafood consumption
in amounts typical of many Americans' diets. Evidence that post-natal
exposure (as well as pre-natal exposure) has effects on the developing brain
highlights the need for advice to help parents keep children's mercury
intake within safe limits, and the suggestion that exposure to methylmercury
even below the EPA RfD poses some risk of harm makes it imperative that
every effort be made to keep consumer exposures below that RfD.

Unfortunately, FDA's current effort to update its dietary advisory on
mercury in fish and seafood seems in danger of falling short of addressing
these clear needs. We have been actively participating as stakeholders in
the FDA/EPA process to develop a new dietary advisory. We believe the effort
up to now (as indicated by the latest draft, presented to a focus group in
San Diego on January 28, 2004), is on the right track but still far short of
the mark. In particular:

(1) FDA's proposed dietary advice could allow, and might even encourage,
many consumers to eat varieties and amounts of fish that would result in
exposure to methylmercury above the RfD. Conceding that this was true, FDA's
David Acheson said, at the December 10-11 FDA Food Advisory Committee
meeting, that while FDA endorses the EPA RfD, he sees it as a "useful
guideline," not as an essential exposure limit. Acheson and other FDA
scientists have expressed a lack of concern that many consumers will exceed
the RfD. We believe, considering recent evidence summarized here, that much
more serious concern about exposure above the RfD is warranted, and that FDA's
advice should be tailored to guide consumers to keep their mercury intake
within the RfD, as much as possible.
(2) The proposed advisory does not effectively protect sensitive populations
from the methylmercury in canned albacore tuna and fresh tuna. FDA's latest
draft advises that "commonly eaten albacore" can be consumed once a week.
Yet, based on FDA's own 2003 test results from 300 cans of tuna, a single
weekly serving of albacore would provide a dose in excess of the RfD for
many consumers. FDA's tests showed that albacore, or "white" canned tuna,
has three times as much mercury as "light" tuna, averaging 0.358 parts per
million mercury. The EPA RfD, which has been endorsed by the National
Research Council as science-based and appropriately protective, is 0.1 µg
Hg/kg-bw/day, or 0.7 µg Hg/kg-bw/week. Consider the following examples
showing how easily eating normal servings of albacore tuna containing 0.358
ppm Hg can exceed the RfD:
· For a 10-kg (22-pound) toddler, the weekly RfD is 7 µg Hg. A small serving
of just 2 ounces (57 g) of tuna containing 0.358 ppm mercury would provide a
dose of 20 µg Hg, nearly 3 times the RfD.
· For a 20-kg (44-pound) five-year-old, the weekly RfD is 14 µg Hg. Two
albacore tuna salad sandwiches a week containing 6 ounces (170 g) of tuna
with 0.358 ppm Hg would provide a dose of 61 µg-more than four times the
RfD. A single tuna sandwich made with albacore would give that child more
than double the RfD.
· For a 40-kg (88-pound) child, the weekly RfD is 28 µg Hg. Six ounces of
tuna (two sandwiches, or about one can) with 0.358 ppm mercury weekly would
give that child 61 µg Hg, more than twice the RfD.
· For a 60-kg (132-pound) adult woman, the weekly RfD is 42 µg Hg. If she
were to consume six ounces of albacore canned tuna with 0.358 ppm (61 µg) Hg
in a week, she would exceed the RfD by about 50 percent.
These examples make it clear that members of sensitive populations can
exceed the RfD by wide margins by consuming modest portions of albacore tuna
(or of fresh tuna steak, which contains a similar mercury level, but is
eaten less often.) The most critical current deficiency of the FDA's draft
advisory is its continuing laissez-faire attitude about tuna consumption.
Tuna fish is the largest source of mercury exposure in the American diet,
and albacore tuna contains significantly more methylmercury than most other
popular seafood choices. FDA simply cannot avoid its responsibility to issue
clear advice telling consumers to limit their own and their children's
exposure to this pre-eminent source of methylmercury in the diet, no matter
how intense the pressure from the tuna industry may be to avoid airing these
particular facts.
(3) The proposed advisory does not adequately consider the specific need to
manage children's dietary mercury exposure from fish. While FDA's latest
draft mentions children, advice is still aimed primarily at women of
childbearing age. The reference to children's diets is vague-it suggests
applying the same guidelines offered for adult women to children, except
that the "serving size should be smaller." A clear need exists for separate,
specific advice defining safe fish intake for children of various ages,
whose smaller bodies mean they can safely eat fewer or smaller portions of
mercury-containing seafood. Given the latest evidence from the Faroe Islands
that fish consumption during childhood appears to pose an additional risk of
mercury toxicity, FDA should explicitly address this need with specific fish
consumption guidance based on a child's age and weight.

(4) The current draft advisory puts some, but not enough, emphasis on
low-mercury fish and seafood choices. FDA is concerned, legitimately, that
advice aimed at limiting mercury exposure from fish and seafood should not
frighten people unduly about consuming fish, since a general decrease in
fish consumption would have other adverse nutritional and public health
implications. The solution, however, is to offer clear advice that puts as
much emphasis on a "positive list" (fish that contain low levels of mercury,
and can be eaten often) as it does on a "negative list" (fish with moderate
or high levels of mercury, whose consumption should be limited or avoided
altogether). From the draft advisory presented to the focus group in San
Diego, FDA seems to have taken aboard that concept, since the latest draft
does include a rudimentary positive list. We strongly recommend that this
theme be expanded upon in the final advisory, due to be issued in April. For
example, including a list of the 10 most popular seafood choices (based on
market data) with their methylmercury content would make it clear that there
are many appealing low-mercury options. We also urge that additional details
on low- and very-low mercury fish be made available on the FDA website and
revised on a regular basis as additional data becomes available.

In addition to the critical task of updating its dietary advisory, we also
urge FDA to keep collecting data on mercury levels in widely consumed
varieties of fish and seafood. The current database is inadequate for
assessing the distribution of mercury exposure from many species of
interest. To accurately determine how many women and children are exposed to
unsafe amounts of methylmercury in the fish they eat, data are needed on
both amounts of various fish species consumed and the range of values for
methylmercury in those fish. We agree with the recommendation, included in
the Fiscal 2004 Agriculture Appropriations bill report, strongly urging FDA
to restart its monitoring program for mercury in fish. We believe more
extensive data on low-mercury fish, i.e., the safest choices, are needed, as
well as data on high-mercury fish.

Further, we have recently learned that FDA's test data on mercury in canned
tuna are based on composite samples. While compositing samples allows a
survey to cover more of the food supply and gives a good indicator of
average methlymercury levels to which consumers of different fish (e.g.,
light vs. albacore tuna) are exposed, compositing also levels out peaks and
valleys in the data. Because even short-term peaks in exposure to
methylmercury could have adverse effects on the developing brain (if they
occurred at a critical point in brain development), it is important that
data also be gathered that reveal the full range of methylmercury values
that consumers may occasionally encounter. We urge that FDA's future
testing, especially for frequently-consumed items like tuna, look at both
values in individual cans and than composite samples.

In conclusion, recent scientific evidence has made it even clearer that FDA
needs to act assertively to help consumers minimize their mercury exposure
from fish and seafood in their diets. We hope you share our belief that
dietary advice can be crafted that helps the consumer enjoy the benefits of
a diet rich in fish and seafood, while avoiding excessive exposure to
methylmercury. We urge you to instruct Dr. Acheson's team to thoroughly
re-work the draft dietary advisory, until the needs borne out by recent
scientific evidence have been effectively addressed. And we urge you to
expand and refine FDA's critical testing program to collect the data needed
for a more precise risk assessment.

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. Should you or your
staff have questions, please call Michael Bender at 802-223-9000.

Sincerely,

R. David Pittle, Ph.D.
Senior Vice-President, Technical Policy
Consumers Union, Publisher of Consumer Reports

Linda Knobeloch, Ph.D.
Research & Toxicology
Wisconsin Division of Public Health,

Karen L. Perry, MPA
Deputy Director, Environment and Health Program
Physicians for Social Responsibility

Jennifer Sass, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Natural Resources Defense Council

R. Montgomery Fischer
Water Resources Policy Director
National Wildlife Federation

Navis Bermudez
Washington, DC Representative
Sierra Club

Zachary Corrigan
Staff Attorney & Clean Air Advocate
US Public Interest Research Group

John M. Stanton
Vice President
National Environmental Trust

David Wallinga, MD
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy


Bill Ravanesi, MA, MPH
Health Care Without Harm

Nizanna Bathersfield
Program Support Attorney
Waterkeeper Alliance

Michael T. Bender, MS
Director
Mercury Policy Project

Ned Groth III, Ph.D.
Groth Consulting Services

Philip J. Landrigan*, M.D., M.Sc.
Chair, Department of Community and Preventive Medicine and Director,
Center for Children's Health and the Environment,
Mount Sinai School of Medicine
New York, NY

Bruce P. Lanphear*, MD
The Sloan Professor of Children's Environmental Health
Departments of Pediatrics and of Environmental Health
Cincinnati Children's Environmental Health Center
Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center
University of Cincinnati

Steven G. Gilbert*, PhD, DABT
Director
Institute of Neurotoxicology and Neurological Disorders
Seattle, WA

Katherine M. Shea*, MD, MPH, FAAP
Adjunct Assistant Professor
Department of Community and Family Medicine
Duke University Medical Center
Durham, NC

James R Roberts* MD, MPH
Department of Pediatrics
Medical University of South Carolina
Charleston, SC

*Affiliations listed only for identification purposes, and do not constitute
endorsement

cc Dr. David Acheson, FDA

References Cited:

Mahaffey, K.R. (2004) Methylmercury: Epidemiology Update. Presentation at
the National Forum on Contaminants in Fish, San Diego, January 28, 2004.

Schober, S.E., Sinks, T.H., Jones, R.L., Bolger, P.M., McDowell, M.,
Osterloh, J., et al. (2003) Blood mercury levels in US Children and women of
childbearing age, 1999-2000. Journal of the American Medical Association
289(13): 1667-1674.

Murata, K., Weihe, P., Budtz-Jørgensen, E., Jørgensen, P.J., and Grandjean,
P. (2004) Delayed brainstem auditory evoked potential latencies in
14-year-old children exposed to methylmercury. Journal of Pediatrics
144:177-183.

Grandjean, P., Murata, K., Budtz-Jørgensen, E. and Weihe, P. (2004) Cardiac
autonomic activity in methylmercury neurotoxicity: 14-year follow-up of a
Faroese birth cohort. Journal of Pediatrics 144:169-176.

National Research Council (2000) Toxicological Effects of Methylmercury.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Salonen, J.T. et al. (1995) Intake of mercury from fish, lipid peroxidation,
and the risk of myocardial infarction and coronary, cardiovascular and any
death in eastern Finnish men. Circulation 91: 645-655.

Guallar, E., et al. (2002) Mercury, fish oils and the risk of myocardial
infarction. New England Journal of Medicine 347:1747-1754.


LL

"raylopez99" <raylopez99[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113607390.220672.293720[at]l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

You've been told wrong and need to get updated. That's a lie the ADA told
for years, when they got caugth in that one, they made up another, claiming
only small amonts leaked and caused no harm, that also is a lie. It is a
well known proven scientific fact that amalgams not only let off vapors they
leak into every organ of the body.

- quote -

Do some research, it is clear you are completely ignorant on this subject..

LL




- quote -

"Tim Campbell" <timcall[at]sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1113582257.965033.19700[at]g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
- quote -


Thanks Tim!

LL/Jan

"Tim Miller" <rabbitispoor[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1113612260.510117.156580[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
- quote -


Does that include the shells or not?

"Vendicar Decarian" <VD[at]Pyro.net> wrote in message
news:J7_7e.13034$If1.3377723[at]read2.cgocable.net...
- quote -

True, the Amercian Break Dance Society has banned its use.

Joel

"Tim Miller" <rabbitispoor[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1113612260.510117.156580[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

Odd this appears to me to say that there is no detectable effect of low
levels
of mercury to a developing fetus.

This is not the same as the title of the article claims Mr. Miller.

Why the deception?

"raylopez99" <raylopez99[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113607390.220672.293720[at]l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

The absorption of Mercury Vapour seems to be a source of problems.

Tim Campbell wrote:
- quote -

Silly greeno-pinkos!!

No detectable risk from mercury in seafood, study shows

May 16, 2003

An exhaustive study of 643 children from before birth to 9 years of age
shows no detectable risk from the low levels of mercury their mothers
were exposed to from eating ocean seafood, according to a study in the
May 16 issue of The Lancet.

Children born to mothers-to-be who ate an average of 12 meals of fish a
week ? about 10 times the average U.S. citizen eats ? showed no
harmful symptoms.

The study by scientists at the University of Rochester Medical Center
is the latest in a series of updates on children who have been studied
since their birth in 1989 and 1990 in the Republic of the Seychelles,
an island nation in the Indian Ocean. The children have been evaluated
five times since their birth, and no harmful effects from the low
levels of mercury obtained by eating seafood have been detected.

"Consumption of fish is generally considered healthy for your heart,
yet people are hearing that they should be concerned about eating fish
because of mercury levels," says lead author Gary Myers, M.D., a
pediatric neurologist. "We've found no evidence that the low levels of
mercury in seafood are harmful. In the Seychelles, where the women in
our study ate large quantities of fish each week while they were
pregnant, the children are healthy."

In a commentary on the research in The Lancet, Johns Hopkins scientist
Constantine Lyketsos writes that, "For now, there is no reason for
pregnant women to reduce fish consumption below current levels, which
are probably safe." He calls the Seychelles study a "methodological
advance over previous studies."

Questions about the health effects of mercury often boil down to
seafood because fish are the primary source of exposure to mercury for
most people. Scientists estimate that about half the mercury in the
Earth and its atmosphere originates from natural sources such as
volcanoes, and about half comes from man-made sources.

People receive most of their mercury exposure by eating ocean fish like
tuna, swordfish and shark. The fish eaten by women in the Seychelles
had approximately the same levels of mercury as those eaten by
consumers in the United States ? but they ate much more fish than
most people in the United States. The Seychelles women, however, had an
average of six times as much mercury in their bodies, as measured in
hair samples, as most people in the US.

"This study indicates that there are no detectable adverse effects in a
population consuming large quantities of a wide variety of ocean fish,"
says Myers, the senior author of the Seychelles study and an
internationally recognized authority on mercury. "These are the same
fish that end up on the dinner table in the United States and around
the world."

In the current study doctors and nurses tested the children in a
variety of ways and measured 21 different cognitive, behavioral, and
neurological functions such as concentration, attention span,
problem-solving abilities, intelligence, and motor skills. Only two
functions varied slightly according to mercury level: Children of women
with higher mercury levels were slightly less likely to be hyperactive,
and sons of such women did slightly worse on a pegboard task.
Statistically, both findings are likely due to chance, the researchers
say.

The Seychelles findings apply to fish bought and sold commercially, at
grocery stores, supermarkets, seafood markets, and restaurants. Those
fish are already regulated based on their mercury levels. Consumers
should carefully follow advisories about eating fish caught in lakes
and rivers, since there are hundreds of polluted waterways whose fish
are dangerous to eat in abundance, often because of pollutants like
PCBs.

The Seychelles study came about as a result of previous work by the
same Rochester team, which put together the first precise data showing
that pre-natal exposure to mercury could harm a developing child. Their
study of the victims of an accidental mercury poisoning event in Iraq
more than 30 years ago spurred them to start the Seychelles study to
try to pinpoint the levels at which mercury poses a danger.

Now the team is launching a new study in the Seychelles to compare the
levels of nutrients pre-natally to the health of children early in
their lives. The study has its roots in a finding in one of the
previous Seychelles reports, that children born to mothers with
slightly higher mercury levels did better on some neurological and
intelligence tests than their counterparts. That may be because those
children's mothers with the higher mercury ate more fish. This study,
funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, is
being done with colleagues at the University of Ulster in Northern
Ireland and Cornell University.

"There are a lot of good, vital nutrients in fish," says Myers, who is
directing the team that is studying 300 children to compare their
health with the levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids, selenium, and
other nutrients in their mothers during pregnancy.

The Seychelles study, ongoing since 1989 with funding from the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, is one of the longest
"longitudinal" studies ever done in children. The research has been
funded by the NIH, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the
Republic of the Seychelles.

"The cooperation from people in the Seychelles and the Ministry of
Health has been extraordinary," Myers says. "They recognize the
importance of this subject both to their own citizens and to the people
around the world who consume fish."

University of Rochester Medical Center

Straight to the Source at
http://www.fisheriesresearch.org/rochesterrelease.htm

"raylopez99" <raylopez99[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113607390.220672.293720[at]l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

Nope that's been found to be incorrect ....

Still, small amounts are not found to be harmful.

Joel


- quote -

I think science says mercury in amalgams is stable and doesn't leach
out. At least that's what I've been told.

Cremation of a cadaver with mercury fillings is a different matter, but
I doubt this bill is really about that issue. Rather it's about junk
science that says dental mercury poisons you.

Ray

://www.sunjournal.com/pdfs/2005/04/14/PDFs/A08SJD-041405_1.pdf

Bill targets dental mercury
Environmentalists want element banned from teeth fillings
BY DOUG FLETCHER
Staff Writer
When it comes to a mouthful
of mercury, Pam Anderson
doesn't mince words.
"End this toxic assault on humanity,"
she urged legislators
during a recent legislative hearing
on two bills that would ban
the use of mercury in dental fillings,
phased in over three years.
"Implanting the same elemental
mercury that we have
banned in fever thermometers,"
Anderson continued, "in the
mouths of children, pregnant
women, the poor and willing
Maine citizens must be made a
criminal act."
The goal of L.D.s 1327 and 1338,
sponsors say, is to reduce the
mercury that gets into Maine's
environment. Dental mercury
has been found in municipal
sewage as a result of it being absorbed
by the body and then excreted.
It also gets sent into the
atmosphere during the cremation
of cadavers.
Once in the environment,
mercury, a heavy metal, accumulates
in the food chain, leading
to advisories against eating
fish in Maine and elsewhere.
Mercury in humans can adversely
affect childhood development
and lead to other health
problems.
Anderson, of Houlton, said by
passing the legislation and outlawing
the use of mercury fillings,
Maine's lawmakers have
an opportunity to "close a dark
chapter in dental history."
The wife of dentist Thomas
Anderson, whose practice has
been mercury-free since 1983,
Anderson said, "There are alternatives"
available that work as
well, are similarly priced and offer
similar durability.
The Natural Resources Committee
will hold a work session
on the bills on Friday, April 22,
in the Cross Office Building. Anderson,
says she'll be there. So
too, likely, will be those from
the opposing side: The American
Dental Association.
The ADA has steadfastly opposed
efforts to outlaw the use
of mercury in dental fillings.
END OF A GRAND SEASON FOR MAINEIACS

http://www.sunjournal.com/pdfs/2005/...D-041405_1.pdf

http://www.sunjournal.com/pdfs/2005/...D-041405_1.pdf