Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #912460 in Books
• Published on: 1997-09
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 189 pages

Customer Reviews

Intelligent People ?
It's frustrating that otherwise intelligent people ie. dentists, believe that by mixing the most toxic metal known (mercury) with other toxic metals (copper, silver, zinc, tin) and then placing this mixture in people's teeth, results in a harmless non-corroding filling. Yet dental guidelines insist that scrap dental amalgam is mixed in airtight containers and disposed carefully so as not to contaminate the environment. So what is it - safe or not safe ?

That mercury is there 24x7 in your mouth, leaking into your intestines. Yet we are told to limit our consumption of tunafish to no more than once a week due to mercury contamination. Who are the lying quacks ? Go figure.

Mercury Fillings and Science
It's surprising to me that so many dentists and otherwise thoughtful people are willing to ignore the evidence on dental toxicity when we have the following givens regarding mercury: (1) it's highly toxic for humans, (2) it does leech from fillings (which the ADA used to deny, but now admits) and (3) it accumulates in the body over time. Doesn't it seem like the dental industry needs to take a more serious look at this and not dismiss it out of hand so readily?

The amount of peer reviewed literature critical of mercury fillings (much of it from scientists and specialists oustide the dental industry) should make the dental profession stop and re-evaluate their position. It's sad that the potentially dangerous long term effects on people's health is not more of an issue for a majority of dental professionals. Books like this one and Hal Huggin's books provide a basis for finding the literature. Peer reviewed articles can be found on the internet, as well.

And while we're on the subject of what really is science and what isn't, I'd like to lay to rest an argument I've seen from the "pro-amalgam" group way too many times, i.e., that the mercury in the amalgam is "chemically bonded" to the other metals in the amalgam. This statement is not just questionable, it is scientifically wrong. Did these people not have junior high chemistry? Amalgam is an alloy, not a compound. The mercury is not chemically bonded to the filling in any way (and anyhow, studies have shown and the ADA now admits that mercury leeches off fillings). What will 20, 30, 40 years of mercury contamination 24 hours a day do to you?

Scare tactics? Make up your own mind. Read the book.

What a load of...
It's frustrating that otherwise intelligent people are being won over by such patently obtuse arguments that utilize methods of diagnosis that have been conclusively proven to do nothing except cost the person being tested a load of money. True science does not utilize scare tactics. While amalgam may not be pretty to look at, it has a proven record of efficacy with low adverse reactions (approx. 100 cases of true allergy in 150 years). These are the same people that are against fluoridation. A dentist who promotes no amalgams and no fluoride to their patients can expect a larger profit margin from the increase in decay and the inherently higher cost of the resin material used in place of amalgam. People who think that professional organizations such as the ADA and AGD are perpetuating some sort of cover up for their own benefit are sadly mistaken. Do me a favor- Take a good look at who is operating for the benfit of whom.