I learned of this paper focusing on mercury and dental amalagam by "Bernie" Windham, a researcher and editor of Chemical Engineer, from a German M.D. connection I have on Facebook, who has done additional training to specialize in auricular medicine. Auricular medicine (and the related 'auricular therapy' specialty) was something I only started hearing about in recent years, initially from someone who credited it with their having some remediation of symptoms from diseases caused by acuumulated burdens on the body. Common in Germany today, and  catching on in Canada with the United States lagging but with growing numbers getting the advanced training, it is a perfect discipline to 'shine our light on' at Lumigrate. (See separate topic in forums.)

I had a good foundation under me for about a decade related to toxins, including mercury, chelation to get things out of the body and decrease the burden, and support of the body for detoxification. Sometimes this is an involved process to get someone's wellness to a level they can safely 'undo' the damage done in the past.  It was the proverbial 'catch 22' for some, and can be frustrating. I had to get my wellness up to a certain point before I could chelate, and I learned the hard way about not having enough expertise guiding you on that journey.

Fortunately I didn't have any long-term setbacks and proceeded with the help of other experts and am continuing to keep my eyes open for different providers that do a good job on the Internet with education and service provision because the most important thing to remember is that everyone is different and that means "different strokes/providers for different folks". YOU are encouraged at Lumigrate to take the wheel and learn and then be in charge of what you do or don't do based on what you find fits for you, including what type of provider. We just provide the set-up and get you started in various directions mostly. 

Lumigrate launched in 2009 with videos from my local naturopathic doctor, who collaborated for a couple of years in a clinic many of us rented space in but ultimately everyone ended up independent. That time together with so much exposure, and recording most and attending all his seminars were instrumental in my 'steeping' in natural medicine when it comes to environmental illness. This is the provider who initially met me and said 'you have a few amalgams, you might want to get those replaced, if you had more I'd say definitely' and then later passed on a 'mental note' he'd made to share that another patient with a few had replacement done and stopped the up/down path of wellness/illness and 'took off' up and away after the replacement.

So I then put that top of my list to get to, got to it, and had the same experience -- until I had another mercury exposure (from the newfangled lightbulbs being mandated. One burned in my closet without my having known it was to be handled like hazmat. I presume I simply didn't read the fine print because it didn't seem to me that something that dangerous would be insisted upon compared to the old bulbs that I preferred anyway based on the way the light makes my brain and visual system 'feel'. Again, other topics in Forums on that if you wish.)

So clearly I have my radar UP about mercury. What my German auricular medicine specialist Facebook friend brought to me in my daily exposures online was this 'advancement in my knowledge': "Learn to test, and avoid NEW exposure to the element you are sensitive to." (I'm paraphrasing.)

This wasn't limited to things you put in your mouth, it was what you inhale and put on your skin (including of the scalp). What did he mean by 'learn to test'? He'd frequently say "it's a disorder of the system" and his "Notes" tab was focused on 'dysautonomia'.

Always looking for GOOD STONES unturned in order to bring what lies underneath to YOUsers at Lumigrate, I tried to learn.I made sure to stop by his Facebook page every day to be sure I saw all the gems he shared. Some of the items I have been able to add onto other topics in the Forums, but this one --- this one was HUGE and so I am creating it's very own topic. 

This article, below, is clearly a powerhouse of information, with hundreds of citations made and listed clearly in the reference section. But the way it was in it's original form at the link I provide for you to go see if you wish made it very difficult for me to read. It's still difficult to read here, in my opinion, and I spent many hours making it easier / more readable. Since it was really "impossible" for me to glean the knowledge I know Mr Windham wanted to convey  in the state it was in, I trusted that he would be appreciative of my making a more readable version for the Lumigrate YOUsers, who so often have difficulties from mercury that affect their state of brain, so to speak.

So I figured that what I'd do here is post the link to find it at the source site, and encourage people as always to go to the original source and get to know that source, it might have MORE for YOU that will be just what YOU need to learn! But instead of having one example on Lumigrate as close to original form to show people how things look at a website and encourage them to GO and see the photos and etc.. (this has NO images at all at the source site, it's all words and hundreds of references cited, very long paragraphs, so I just 'broke that up' in what you see, below with bolding of the words to read and not of the numbers for citations, and added more paragraph breaks so things are only a handfull of lines before a visual break).  

I hope you find it easier on the eyes and brains of those trying to learn but with impaired brains and neurological systems because of the exact thing they're attempting / studying! AND I trust you read how much encouragement I give to GO to the SOURCE and get to see what else is there! 

Prior to having my thyroid problem caught.  (Which was caught by my massage therapist, six months after I hired an MD who didn't take insurance but alleged to know how to treat complex chronic conditions.  Once I presented the third time saying 'my massage therapist saw something on my throat she was concerned about', he knew, at least, how to correctly test the thyroid to tease out the problem, he just needed the cue of focusing on the thyroid.)  At this time I also had 4 small to medium amalgam fillings, which I'd have removed a handfull of years later or so.

Then, when I was still not to the wellness level I felt I could get to, I sought out a holistic dentist about sleep apnea who caught my structural problems of jaw and cranium overall, THEN eventually in a treatment session brought up iodine and knew of a laboratory test related to iodine absorption that  nobody had so far told me about so far .... by now I've gone to two MORE pay to play MDs who were 'environmental medicine' types.  Got those test results back, did what the holistic dentist taught me to do and tah dah, no more need for supplemental thyroid hormone !  Just supplementing iodine in a maintenance way -- which will be different at different times and for different people.  

 

           

Me, Mardy Ross, above, Fall of 2003.  Someone, after I'd reversed symptoms and was looking better years later referred to this photo (which I'd given to family members as a holiday present that year) joking: "And they made her look so life-like".   (Such as a person would say when standing at a casket with the lid open at a viewing.)            BELOW, March 2004 (MT saw tissue summer 2004)

 

                                                                           

 

 Me, above, fall or so, 2005, after 'intervening' and getting not only thyroid hormone supplemented (which was not needed after another 'intervention' as I'm relating here), but IV nutrition in early 2004 and maintenance of that until those weren't needed either, and many other things.  Still had mercury amalgam fillings in at this point, by the way. But I kept getting better for a while, then not continuing to 'take off to wellness'.   However, notice the pronounced appearance of my 'pipe'? I'd later learn this is something to look for in childhood (and adult) sleep apnea .... if you're not able to get enough air in with a straight neck, the person compensates by jutting the head forward.  

(Thanks to Jim Kennedy, holistic DDS for the continuing medical education he did for outreach and thanks to me being able to get out of bed and to such an important 7 am training when I saw it on the schedule.  It changed my life.  And, to the regional medical center for including all allopathic providers to receive free education. Though some of it was misinformation, in terms of the truth about what's causing illness and what to do about it, it was not when they'd have providers like Dr Kennedy.)

---

AND, below, me the first year Lumigrate was on the Internet, this is November 2009. I did IV chelation x12 in early 2007 and subsequent testing showed the previously extremely high mercury was down to well under the limits there is concern.  

The woman whose face is nice hidden by her cracking up was a Denver Facebook friend who wanted to meet me when I was in town.  Clearly we got along!  

 

 

AMALGAMS REMOVED IN THIS TIMEFRAME

 

 

Me, below, December 2011....

 

I'd again, 'unexplanably' gained weight, above.  AND then I had the good information come my way about iodine testing, increased how much I was taking and basically detoxed my glandular system, and then .... yippee ..... no longer had to find a competent or not competent provider to write a Rx for thyroid hormone supplementation, I just maintain with what I think is the right amount of iodine for that point in time.  

I didn't lose the weight but felt really good, got into the information I present on Lumigrate about Steve Beddingfield's protocol and perspective on environmental illness' cause(s) and then it was like the clock jumped backwards years! And the scale! Because THE Stuff, as I affectionately call it, gets into the thyroid gland (and throughout the body) Steve teaches, and therefore what he's figured to remediate it, took care of more.  THE ROOT perhaps -- he thinks so.  I think he might be right! 

But when it comes to looking for symptoms in the throat, I provide all these photos so YOU can see that it's not a huge big goiter like you'll see in old medical text books.  It's a subtle thing -- my doctor that I was going to at the time the MT detected the tissue growth would use the analogy of the car needing a bigger engine, so it just makes more tissue. It helped me understand it, maybe it'll help you as well. 

 

---

So Please.. go and see the original version of this information in this long document, as it's WOWIE impressive with all the references showing, but if it's easier to read and then study BOTH, that is my intention here. YOUsers, I want you to find really quality information that you might not otherwise know about AND give credit where credit is due! Dr K of German, credit to you, and to 'Bernie', someone on Dr K's comments said the author is known as. And known as 'the best', per the commenter's statement about Bernard Windham.  

(I changed the way I was making it more readable in various sections so there is a bit of a shift in strategy I wanted to mention here. I basically was trying to make it so the most important words and concepts 'popped' and the overall structure for the levels of organization stood out as well. But basically this is so 'packed' with important and 'key' stuff, it's difficult to do. I hope this is good enough for YOU and you learn from it in the time and energy you have to expend with it.)

 

---

 BERNARD WINDHAM'S MAIN ARTICLE 

Facts about Mercury and Dental Amalgam

(With Medical Study References)

Bernard Windham, Editor—Chemical Engineer

12164 Whitehouse Road, Tallahassee, FL  32311

850-878-9024

 

      I.   Introduction

     II.   Toxicity and Health Effects of Mercury

    III.   Systemic Mercury Intake Levels from Amalgam Filling Exposure

   IV.   Immune System Effects and Autoimmune Disease   

    V.   Medical Studies Finding Health Problems Related to Amalgam Fillings

   VI.   Documented Results of Removal of Amalgam Fillings

  VII.   Tests for Mercury Level and Toxicity and Treatments

 VIII.   Health Effects from Dental Staff Exposure to Mercury                                                                            

   IX.   Scientific Panel and Government Bodies That Have Found Amalgam Fillings Unsafe

I.  Introduction

Toxic metals such as mercury, lead, cadmium, etc. have been documented to be neurotoxic, immunotoxic, reproductive/developmental toxins that, according to U.S. Government agencies, cause adverse health effects and learning disabilities to millions in the U.S. each year, especially children and the elderly (105,160).  Exposure of humans and animals to toxic metals such as mercury, cadmium, lead, copper, aluminum, arsenic, chromium, manganese, etc. is widespread and in many areas increasing.  

The U.S. Center for Disease Control (276) ranks toxic metals as the number one environmental health threat to children.  According to an EPA/ATSDR assessment, the toxic metals mercury, lead, arsenic, and cadmium are all ranked in the top 7 toxins having the most adverse health effects on the public based on toxicity and current exposure levels in the U.S., with nickel and chromium also highly listed.  

While there are large numbers of neurological and immune conditions among adults, the incidence of neurotoxic or immune reactive conditions in infants such as autism, schizophrenia, ADD, dyslexia, learning disabilities, etc. have been increasing especially rapidly in recent years (2, 276, 409, 441).  

A recent report by the National Research Council found that 50% of all pregnancies in the U.S. are now resulting in prenatal or postnatal mortality, significant birth defects, or otherwise chronically unhealthy babies (441). Exposure to toxic chemicals or environmental factors appears to be a factor in as much as 28 percent of the 4 million children born each year (441), with 1 in 6 having one of the neurological conditions previously listed.  EPA estimates that over 3 million of these are related to lead or mercury toxicity (2, 276, 409). 

While there is considerable commonality to the health effects commonly caused by these toxic metals, and effects are cumulative and synergistic in many cases, this paper will concentrate on the health effects of elemental mercury from amalgam fillings.  Studies have found considerable genetic variability in susceptibility to toxic metals as well.  

The public appears to be generally unaware that considerable scientific evidence supports that mercury is the metal causing the most widespread adverse health effects to the public, and amalgam fillings have been well documented to be the number one source of exposure of mercury to most people, with exposure levels often exceeding Government health guidelines and levels documented to cause adverse health effects.

II. Toxicity and Health Effects of Mercury

1.  Dental amalgam contains about 50% mercury, as well as other toxic metals such as tin, copper, nickel, palladium, etc.  The average filling has 1 gram of mercury and leaks mercury vapor continuously due to mercury’s low vapor pressure along with loss due to galvanic action of mercury with dissimilar metals in the mouth (182, 192, 292, 348, 349), resulting in significant exposure for most with amalgam fillings (see Section III).  Mercury vapor is transmitted rapidly throughout the body, easily crosses cell membranes, and like organic methyl mercury, has significant toxic effects at much lower levels of exposure than other inorganic mercury forms (38, 281, 287, 304, 329).  According to the U.S. EPA and ATSDR, mercury is among the top 3 toxic substances adversely affecting large numbers of people (217), and amalgam is the  number one source of exposure for most people (see III).

2. Mercury is the most toxic of the toxic metals.  Mercury (vapor) is carried by the blood to cells in all organs of the body where it:

   (a) is cytotoxic (kills cells) (2, 21, 27, 36, 56, 147, 148, 150, 160, 210, 259, 295, 333/333)

   (b) penetrates and damages the blood brain barrier (311), resulting in accumulation of mercury and other toxic substances in the brain (14, 20, 25, 85, 99, 175, 273, 301/262, 274); also accumulates in the motor function areas of the brain and CNS (48, 291, 327, 329)

   (c) is neurotoxic (kills brain and nerve cells): damages brain cells and nerve cells (19, 27, 34, 36, 43, 69, 70, 147, 148, 175, 207, 211, 273, 291, 295, 327, 329, 301, 303, 395/39, 262, 274, 303); generates high levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and oxidative stress, depletes glutathione and thiols causing increased neurotoxicity from interactions of ROS, glutamate, and dopamine (13, 56, 98, 102, 126, 145, 169, 170, 184, 213, 219, 250, 257, 259, 286, 290, 291, 302, 324, 326, 329, 424, 442); kills or inhibits production of brain tubulin cells (66, 67,161,166, 207, 300); inhibits production of neurotransmitters by inhibiting: calcium-dependent  neurotransmitter release (372, 432), dihydroteridine reductase (27, 122, 257, 333), nitric oxide synthase (259), blocking neurotransmitter amino acids (412), and affecting phenylalanine, serotonin, tyrosine and tryptophan transport to neurons (34, 122, 126, 257, 285, 288, 333, 372, 374, 412/255, 333)

   (d) is immunotoxic (damages and inhibits immune T-cells, B-cells, neutrophil function, etc.) (17, 27, 31, 38, 44, 45, 46, 60, 127, 128, 129, 130, 152, 155, 165, 181, 226, 252, 270, 285, 316, 355/272) and induces ANA antibodies and autoimmune disease (38, 43, 45, 59, 60, 118, 131, 181, 234, 269, 270, 313, 314, 334, 342, 343, 35)

   (e) is nephrotoxic (toxic to kidneys) (14, 20, 203, 223, 254, 260, 268, 334, 438)

   (f) is endocrine system-disrupting chemical (accumulates in pituitary gland and damages or inhibits pituitary glands’ hormonal functions at very low levels (9, 19, 20, 25, 85, 99, 105, 273, 312, 327, 348, 369/274), adrenal gland function (84, 369, 381), thyroid gland function (50, 212, 369, 382, 459, 35), and disrupts enzyme production processes at very low levels of exposure   (9, 13, 33, 35, 56, 111, 194, 348, 355, 410-412)

   (g) exposure to mercury vapor (or methyl mercury) causes rapid transmittal through the placenta to the fetus (20, 22-24, 27, 38, 39, 61, 112, 186, 281, 287, 304, 311, 338, 339, 348, 361, 366, 20/4, 22, 37, 39, 41, 42) and significant developmental effects—much more damage to the fetus than for maternal exposure to inorganic mercury and at lower exposure levels than for organic mercury (287, 304, etc.)

   (h) reproductive and developmental toxin (2, 4, 9, 10, 22, 23, 24, 31, 37, 38, 41, 61, 105, 149, 160, 275, 276, 281, 305, 338, 361, 367, 381, 20/4, 39, 55, 149, 162, 255, 308, 339, 357); damages DNA (296, 327, 272, 392, 142, 38, 41, 42, 35) and inhibits DNA and RNA  synthesis (114, 35/149); damages sperm, lowers sperm counts and reduces motility (4, 37, 104, 105, 159, 160, 35/4, 55, 162); causes menstrual disturbances (9, 27, 146); reduces blood’s ability to transport oxygen to fetus and transport of essential nutrients including amino acids, glucose, magnesium, zinc and vitamin B12 (43, 96, 198, 263, 264, 338, 339, 347, 427); depresses enzyme isocitric dehydrogenase (ICD) in fetus, causes reduced iodine uptake and hypothyroidism (50, 91, 212, 222, 369, 382, 459, 35) and learning deficits; causes learning disabilities and impairment, and reduction in IQ (1, 3, 38, 110, 160, 285c, 263, 264/39), causes infertility (4, 9, 10, 24, 38, 121, 146, 357, 365, 367/4, 10, 55, 162), causes birth defects (23, 35, 37, 38, 110, 142, 241, 338c/241)

   (i) prenatal/early postnatal exposure affects level of nerve growth factor in the brain, impairs astrocyte function, and causes imbalances in development of brain (38, 119, 131, 161, 175, 194, 305, 458/175, 255, 39)

   (j) causes cardiovascular damage and disease, including damage to vascular endothelial cells, damage to sarcoplasmic reticula, sarcolemma, and contractile proteins, increased white cell count, decreased oxyhemoglobin level, high blood pressure, tachycardia, inhibits cytochrome P450/heme synthesis (84, 35), and increased risk of acute myocardial infarction  (35, 59, 202, 205, 212, 232, 306, 310, 351/201, 308)

   (k) causes immune system damage resulting in allergies, asthma, lupus, chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), and multiple sensitivities (MCS)  (8, 17, 26, 35, 45, 46, 52, 60, 75, 86, 87, 90, 95, 97, 101, 128,129, 131, 132, 154, 156, 168, 181,212, 226, 228, 230, 234, 265, 267, 296, 313, 42, 375, 388, 445, 446/272) and neutrophil functional impairment (285, 404/59,etc.)

   (l) causes interruption of the cytochrome C oxidase system/ATP energy function (43,  84, 232, 338c, 35) and blocks enzymes needed to convert porphyrins to adenosine triphosphate (ATP) causing progressive porphyrinuria, resulting in low energy, digestive problems, and porphyrins in urine (34,  35, 69, 70, 73, 210, 212, 226, 232, 260)

   (m) inhibition of immune system facilitates increased damage by bacterial, viral, and fungal infections (17, 45, 59, 129, 131, 251, 296, 350, 40), and increased antibiotic resistance (116, 117, 161, 258, 389, 53)

   (n) mercury causes significant destruction of stomach and intestine epithelial cells, resulting in damage to stomach lining which, along with mercury’s ability to bind to SH hydroxyl radical in cell membranes, alters permeability (338, 35) and adversely alters bacterial populations in the intestines causing leaky gut syndrome with toxic, incompletely digested complexes in the blood (222, 228b, 35) and accumulation of helicobacter pylori, a suspected major factor in stomach ulcers and stomach cancer (256) and Candida albicans, as well as poor nutrient absorption

   (o) forming strong bonds with and modification of the -SH groups of proteins causes  mitochondrial release of calcium (1, 21, 35, 38, 43, 329, 333, 432), as well as altering molecular function of amino acids and damaging enzymatic process (33, 96, 111, 194, 252, 338, 410-412) resulting in improper cysteine regulation (194), inhibited glucose transfer (338, 254), damaged sulfur oxidation processes (33, 338), and reduced glutathione availability (necessary for  detoxification)(13, 126, 54).

3. Mercury has been well documented to be an endocrine system disrupting chemical in animals and people, disrupting function of the pituitary gland, thyroid gland, enzyme production processes, and many hormonal functions at very low levels of exposure.  

Mercury (especially mercury vapor) rapidly crosses the blood brain barrier and is stored preferentially in the pituitary gland, hypothalamus, and occipital cortex in direct proportion to the number and extent of dental amalgam surfaces (1, 14, 16, 19, 20, 25, 34, 38, 61, 85, 99, 162, 211, 273, 274, 287, 327, 348, 360, 366, 369).  

Thus mercury has a greater effect on the functions of these areas.  The pituitary gland controls many of the body’s endocrine system functions and secretes hormones that control most bodily processes, including the immune system and reproductive systems.  One study found mercury levels in the pituitary gland ranged from 6.3 to 77 ppb (85), while another (348) found the mean level to be 30ppb—levels found to be neurotoxic and cytotoxic in animal studies.

Mercury blocks thyroid hormone production by occupying iodine binding sites and inhibiting hormone action even when the measured thyroid level appears to be in proper range (35).   The thyroid and hypothalamus regulate body temperature and many metabolic processes including enzymatic processes that, when inhibited, result in higher dental decay (35). 

 Mercury damage thus commonly results in poor bodily temperature control, in addition to many problems caused by hormonal imbalances such as depression.  Such hormonal secretions are affected at levels of mercury exposure much lower than the acute toxicity effects normally tested, as previously confirmed by hormonal/reproductive problems in animal populations (104, 381).  Mercury also damages the blood brain barrier and facilitates penetration of the brain by other toxic metals and substances (311).

4.  Mercury’s biochemical damage at the cellular level include DNA damage, inhibition of DNA and RNA synthesis (4, 38, 41, 42, 114, 142, 197, 272, 296, 392/149); alteration of protein structure (33, 111, 114, 194, 252/114); alteration of the transport of calcium (333, 43, 96, 254, 329, 432); inhibition of glucose transport (338, 254), and of enzyme function and other essential nutrients (96, 198, 254, 263, 264, 338, 339, 347, 410-412); induction of free radical formation (13, 54), depletion of cellular glutathione (necessary for detoxification processes) (111, 126), inhibition of glutathione peroxidase enzyme (13), endothelial cell damage (202), abnormal migration of neurons in the cerebral cortex (149), and immune system damage (34, 38, 111, 194, 226, 252, 272, 316, 325, 355).  

Oxidative stress and reactive oxygen species (ROS) have been implicated as major factors in neurological disorders including stroke, PD, Alzheimer’s, ALS, etc. (13, 56, 84, 98, 145,1 69, 207b, 424, 442, 453).  Mercury-induced lipid peroxidation has been found to be a major factor in mercury’s neurotoxicity, along with leading to decreased levels of glutathione peroxidation and superoxide dismutase (SOD)(13).  Only a few micrograms of mercury severely disturb cellular function and inhibit nerve growth (147, 175, 226, 255, 305).   

Exposure to mercury results in metalloprotein compounds that have genetic effects, having both structural and catalytic effects on gene expression (114, 241, 296).  Some of the processes affected by such metalloprotein control of genes include cellular respiration, metabolism, enzymatic processes, metal-specific homeostasis, and adrenal stress response systems.  

Significant physiological changes occur when metal ion concentrations exceed threshold levels.  Such metalloprotein formation also appears to have a relation to autoimmune reactions in significant numbers of people (114, 60, 313, 342, 368, 369).  Of a population of over 3000 tested by the immune lymphocyte reactivity test MELISA (60, 275), 22% tested positive for inorganic mercury and 8% for methyl mercury.

A direct mechanism involving mercury’s inhibition of cellular enzymatic processes by binding with the hydroxyl radical (SH) in amino acids appears to be a major part of the connection to allergic/immune reactive conditions such as autism (408-414, 439, 33, 160), schizophrenia (409, 410), lupus(113, 234, 330, 331), eczema and psoriasis (323, 375, 385, 419, 455, 33), and allergies (26, 46, 60, 95, 132, 152, 156, 271, 313, 330, 331, 445, 446). For example, mercury has been found to strongly inhibit the activity of dipeptyl peptidase (DPP IV) which is required in the digestion of the milk protein casein (411, 412) as well as of xanthine oxidase (439). 

Studies involving a large sample of autistic and schizophrenic patients found that over 90% of those tested had high levels of the milk protein beta-casomorphin-7 in their blood and urine and defective enzymatic processes for digesting milk protein (410).  Elimination of milk products from the diet has been found to improve the condition.  Such populations have also been found to have high levels of mercury and to recover after mercury detox (413, 60, 313).  

As mercury levels are reduced, the protein binding is reduced and improvement in the enzymatic process occurs.  Additional cellular level enzymatic effects of mercury’s binding with proteins include blockage of sulfur oxidation processes (33, 114, 412), enzymatic processes involving vitamins B6 and B12 (418), effects on the cytochrome-C energy processes (43, 84, 232, 338c, 35), along with mercury’s adverse effects on cellular mineral levels of calcium, magnesium, zinc, and lithium (43, 96, 119, 198, 333, 386, 427, 432, 38).  And along with these blockages of cellular enzymatic processes, mercury has been found to cause additional neurological and immune system effects in many through immune/autoimmune reactions (60, 313, 314).

But the effect on the immune system of exposure to various toxic substances such as toxic metals and environmental pollutants has also been found to have additive or synergistic effects and to be a factor in increasing eczema, allergies, asthma, and sensitivity to other lesser allergens. Most of the children tested for toxic exposures have found high or reactive levels of other toxic metals, and organochlorine compounds (413, 313, 415).  Much mercury in saliva and the brain is also organic (220, 272), since mouth bacteria and other organisms in the body methylate inorganic mercury to organic mercury (51, 81, 225).  Bacteria also oxidize mercury vapor to the water soluble, ionic form Hg(II) (431). 

5. Because of the extreme toxicity of mercury, only ½ gram is required to contaminate a 10 acre lake to the extent that a health warning would be issued by the government to not eat the fish (151, 160).  Over half the rivers and lakes in Florida have such health warnings (160).  

Some Florida panthers that eat birds, and animals that eat fish containing very low levels of mercury (about 1 part per million), have died from chronic mercury poisoning (104, 160).  Since mercury is an estrogenic chemical and reproductive toxin, the majority of the rest cannot reproduce.  The average male Florida panther has higher estrogen levels than females, due to the estrogenic properties of mercury (105, 160).  Similar is true of some other animals at the top of the food chain like alligators, which are affected by mercury and other hormone-disrupting chemicals.

6.  Mercury accumulates in the pituitary glands, ovaries, testes, and prostate gland (35, 99, 9, 19, 20, 25, 85, 273).  In addition to having estrogenic effects, mercury has other documented hormonal effects including effects on the reproductive system resulting in lowered sperm counts, defective sperm cells, damaged DNA, aberrant chromosome numbers rather than the normal 46, chromosome breaks, and lowered testosterone levels in males; menstrual disturbances and infertility in women; and increased neurological problems related to lowered levels of neurotransmitters dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine (4, 9, 35, 38, 104, 105, 107, 140, 141, 275, 276, 288, 290, 296, 365, 367, 372, 381, 432, 412).  

Some of the effect on depression is related to mercury’s effect of reducing the level of posterior pituitary hormone (oxytocin).  The pituitary glands of a group of dentists had 800 times more mercury than controls (99).  This may explain why dentists have much higher levels of emotional problems, depression, suicide, etc. (Section VIII).  

Low levels of pituitary function are associated with depression and suicidal thoughts, and appear to be a major factor in suicide of teenagers and other vulnerable groups.  Amalgam fillings, nickel and gold crowns are major factors in reducing pituitary function (35, 50, 369, etc.).  

Supplementary oxytocin extract has been found to alleviate many of these mood problems (35), along with replacement of metals in the mouth (Section VI).  The normalization of pituitary function also often normalizes menstrual cycle problems, endometriosis, and increases fertility (35, 9).

7.  An average amalgam filling contains over ½ gram of mercury, and the average adult had at least 5 grams of mercury in fillings (unless most has vaporized).  Mercury in solid form is not stable, having low vapor pressure and being subject to galvanic action with other metals in an oral environment (182, 192, 292, 348, 349), so that within 10 years, up to half has been found to have been transferred to the  body of the host (34, 35, 182, and Section III).

8.  Elemental mercury vapor is more rapidly transmitted throughout the body than most other forms of mercury and has more much toxic effects on the CNS and other parts of the body than inorganic mercury due to its much greater capacity to cross cell membranes, according to the World Health Organization and other studies (38, 183, 282, 287, 360, and Section III).  

Mercury vapor rapidly crosses the blood-brain barrier (14, 85, 311) and placenta of pregnant women (20, 22-24, 27, 38, 105, 162, 186, 231, 281, 287, 304, 308, 311, 361).  

Developmental, learning, and behavioral effects have been found from mercury vapor at much lower levels than for exposure to methyl mercury (287, 304); similarly for inhibition of some essential cellular processes (333, 338, 329).

9. Running shoes with ½ gram of mercury in the heels were banned by several states, because the amount of mercury was considered dangerous to public health and created a serious disposal problem.  Mercury from dental offices and human waste from people with amalgam fillings has much higher levels and is a major source of mercury in Florida waters.  

One study found dental offices discharge into waste water between 65 and 842 milligrams per dentist per day (231), amounting to several hundred grams per year per office.  This is in addition to air emissions. 

Additionally, cremation of those with amalgam fillings adds to air emissions and deposition onto land and lakes.  A study in Switzerland found that in that small country, cremation released over 65 kilograms of mercury per year as emissions, often exceeding site air mercury standards (420), while another Swiss study found mercury levels during cremation of a person with amalgam fillings as high as 200 micrograms per cubic meter (considerably higher than U.S. mercury standards).  

The amount of mercury in the mouth of a person with fillings was on average 2.5 grams, enough to contaminate 5 ten acre lakes to the extent there would be dangerous levels in fish (151).  A Japanese study estimated mercury emissions from a small crematorium there as 26 grams per day (421).  A study in Sweden found significant occupational and environmental exposures at crematoria, and since the requirement to install selenium filters, mercury emission levels in crematoria have been reduced 85% (422).

10. Studies have found that levels of exposure to the toxic metals mercury, cadmium, and lead have major effects on classroom behavior, learning ability, and also in mental patients’ and criminals’ behavior (3, 160).  Studies have found that both genetic susceptibility and environmental exposures are a factor in xenobiotic related effects and disease propagation.  

Large numbers of animal studies have documented that genetically susceptible strains are more affected by xenobiotic exposures than less susceptible strains (234, 336, 425, 526, etc.).  Some genetic types are susceptible to mercury induced autoimmunity and some are resistant and thus much less affected (234, 336, 425, 383).  Studies found that mercury causes or accelerates various systemic conditions in a strain dependent manner, and that lower levels of exposure adversely affect some strains but not others, including inducing of autoimmunity.  

Also when a condition has been initiated and exposure levels decline, autoimmune antibodies also decline in animals or humans (233, 234c, 60, 368, 405).  One genetic factor in Hg-induced autoimmunity is major histocompatibility complex (MHC) linked.  Both immune cell types Th1 and Th2 cytokine responses are involved in autoimmunity (425c).  

One genetic difference found in animals and humans is cellular retention differences for metals related to the ability to excrete mercury (426).  For example, it has been found that individuals with genetic blood factor type APOE-4 do not excrete mercury readily and bioaccumulate mercury, resulting in susceptibility to chronic autoimmune conditions such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, etc. as early as age 40, whereas those with type APOE-2 readily excrete mercury and are less susceptible.  Those with type APOE-3 are intermediate to the other 2 types (437, 35).  The incidence of autoimmune conditions has increased to the extent this is now one of the leading causes of death among women (450).

11.   Long term occupational exposure to low levels of mercury can induce slight cognitive deficits, lability, fatigue, decreased stress tolerance, etc. Higher levels have been found to cause more serious neurological problems (119, 128, 160, 285, 457, etc.).  Occupational exposure studies have found mercury impairs the body’s ability to kill Candida albicans by impairment of the lytic activity of neutrophils and myeloperoxidase in workers whose mercury excretion levels are within current safety limits (285, 404).  Such levels of mercury exposure were also found to inhibit cellular respiratory burst.  

A population of plant workers with average mercury excretion of 20 ug/g creatinine was found to have long lasting impairment of neutrophil function (285, 404). Another study (59) found such impairment of neutrophils decreases the body’s ability to combat viruses such as those that cause heart damage, resulting in more inflammatory damage.  

Another group of workers with average excretion rates of 24.7 ug/g creatinine had long lasting increases in humoral immunological stimulation of IgG, IgA, and IgM levels.  Other studies (285b,g, 395) found that workers exposed at high levels at least 20 years previous (urine peak levels above 600 ug/L) demonstrated significantly decreased strength, decreased coordination, increased tremor, decreased sensation, polyneuropathy, etc.  

Significant correlations between increasing urine mercury concentrations and prolonged motor and sensory distal latencies were established (285g).  Elemental mercury can affect both motor and sensory peripheral nerve conduction and the degree of involvement is related to time‑integrated urine mercury concentrations.  Thirty percent of dentists with more than average exposure were found to have neuropathies and visuographic dysfunction (395). 

Another study found that many of the symptoms and signs of chronic candidiasis, multiple chemical sensitivity and chronic fatigue syndromes are identical to those of chronic mercurialism and remit after removal of amalgam combined with appropriate supplementation and gave evidence to implicate amalgam as the only underlying etiologic factor that is common to all (404).

Other studies (285c) found that mercury at levels below the current occupational safety limit causes adverse effects on mood, personality, and memory—with effects on memory at very low exposure levels.

More studies found that long term exposure causes increased micronuclei in lymphocytes and significantly increased IgE levels at exposures below current safety levels (128), as well as maternal exposure being linked to mental retardation (110) and birth defects (23, 35, 37, 38, 142, 241, 361, 338c/241).

III. Systemic Mercury Intake Level from Amalgam Fillings

1.  The tolerable daily exposure level for mercury developed in a report for  Health Canada is .014 micrograms/kilogram body weight (ug/kg) or approximately 1 ug/day for average adult (217).  The U.S. EPA Health Standard for elemental mercury exposure (vapor) is 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter of air (2).  The U.S. ATSDR health standard (MRL) for mercury vapor is 0.2 ug/m³ of air, and the MRL for methyl mercury is 0.3 ug/kg body weight/day (217).  

For the average adult breathing 20 m³ of air per day, this amounts to an exposure of 4 or 6 ug/day for the two elemental mercury standards.  The EPA health guideline for methyl mercury is 0.1 ug/kg body weight per day or 7 ug for the average adult (2), or approx. 14 ug for the ATSDR acute oral toxicity standard.  Since mercury is methylized in the body, some of both types are present in the body.  The older World Health Organization (183) mercury health guideline (PTWI) is 300 ug per week total exposure or approx. 42 ug/day.

2.   Mercury in the presence of other metals in the oral environment undergoes galvanic action, causing movement out of amalgam and into the oral mucosa and saliva (174, 192, 436, 179, 199).  Mercury in solid form is not stable due to low vapor pressure and evaporates continuously from amalgam fillings in the mouth, being transferred over a period of time to the host (15-19, 26, 31, 36, 79, 83, 211, 182, 183, 199, 298, 299, 303, 332, 335, 371).  The daily total exposure of mercury from fillings is from 3 to 1000 micrograms per day, with the average exposure being above 10 micrograms per day and the average uptake over 5 ug/day (183, 199, 209, 18, 19, 77, 83, 85,100, 335, 352, 371,etc.) (See further details continued).

A large study was carried out at the Univ. of Tubingen Health Clinic in which the level of mercury in saliva of 20,000 persons with amalgam fillings was measured (199).  The level of mercury in unstimulated saliva was found to average 11.6 ug Hg/L, with the average after chewing being 3 times this level.  Several were found to have mercury levels over 1100 ug/L, 1% had unstimulated levels over 200 ug/L, and 10% had unstimulated mercury saliva levels of over 100 ug/L.  The level of mercury in saliva has been found to be proportional to the number of amalgam fillings, and generally was higher for those with more fillings.  

The following table gives the average daily mercury exposure from saliva alone for those tested, based on the average levels found per number of fillings and using daily saliva volumes of 890 ml for unstimulated saliva flow and 80 ml for stimulated flow (estimated from measurements made in the study and comparisons to other studies).  It also gives the 84th percentile mercury exposure from saliva for the 20,000 tested by number of fillings.  Note that 16% of all of those tested with 4 amalgam fillings had daily exposure from their amalgam fillings of over 17 ug per day, and even more so for those with more than 4 fillings.

            Table:   Average daily mercury exposure in saliva by number of amalgam fillings (199)

Number of fillings:     4     5       6        7       8        9      10       11     12     13       14       15       16

Av. Daily Hg (ug):    6.5    8      9.5    11    12.4   14     15.4   16.9   18.3   19.8    21.3    22.8   24.3

84th percentile (ug): 17   23.5   26    30.5   35   41.5   43.8    48.6   50.3   46.7   56.6    61.4   64.5   

Saliva tests for mercury are commonly performed in Europe, and many other studies have been carried out with generally comparable results (292, 315, 79, 9b, 335, 179, 317, 352). Another large German study (352) found significantly higher levels than the study summarized here, with some with exposure levels over 1000 ug/day. 

Three studies that looked at a population with more than 12 fillings found generally higher levels than this study, with average mercury level in unstimulated saliva of 29 ug/L (18), 32.7 ug/L (292c), and 175 ug/day (352).  The average for those with 4 or less fillings was 8 ug/L (18).  While it will be seen that there is a significant correlation between exposure levels and number of amalgam surfaces and exposure generally increases as number of fillings increases, there is considerable variability for a given number of fillings. 

Some of the factors that will be seen to influence this variability include composition of the amalgam, whether person chews gum or drinks hot liquids, bruxism, oral environmental factors such as acidity, type of toothpaste used, etc.  Chewing gum or drinking hot liquids can result in 10 to 100 times normal levels of mercury exposure from amalgams during that period (15, 35).

The Tubingen study did not assess the significant exposure route of intraoral air and lungs.  One study that looked at this estimated a daily average burden of 20 ug from ionized mercury from amalgam fillings absorbed through the lungs (191), while a Norwegian study found the average level in oral air to be 0.8 ug/m³ (176).  

Another study at a Swedish University (335) measured intraoral air mercury levels from fillings of from 20 to 125 ug per day, for persons with from 18 to 82 filling surfaces.  Another study found similar results (83), and some individuals have been found to have intraoral air mercury levels above 400 ug/m³ (319).  Most of those whose intraoral air mercury levels were measured exceeded Government health guidelines for workplace exposure (2).

The studies also determined that the number of fillings is the most important factor related to mercury level, with age of filling being much less significant (319b).  Different filling composition/manufacturer can also make a difference in exposure levels (as will be further discussed). The authors of the Tubingen study calculated that, based on the test results with estimates of mercury from food and oral air included, over 40% of those tested in the study received daily mercury exposure higher than the WHO standard (PTWI).  

As can be seen, most people with several fillings have daily exposure exceeding the Health Canada TDE and the U.S. EPA and ATSDR health guideline for mercury (2, 209, 199, etc.), and many tested in past studies have exceeded the older and higher WHO guideline for mercury (183), without consideration of exposure from food, etc.

3.  The main exposure paths for mercury from amalgam fillings are absorption by the lungs from intraoral air; vapor absorbed by saliva or swallowed; amalgam particles swallowed; and membrane, olfactory, venous, and neural path transfer of mercury absorbed by oral mucosa, gums, etc. (6, 17, 18, 31, 34, 77, 79, 83, 94, 133, 174, 182, 209, 211, 216, 222, 319, 335, 348, 364, 436).  

A study at Stockholm Univ. (335) made an effort to determine the respective parts in exposure made by these paths.  It found that the majority of excretion is through feces, and that the majority of mercury exposure was from elemental vapor.  Daily exposure from intraoral air ranged from 20 to 125 ug of mercury vapor, for subjects with number of filling surfaces ranging from 18 to 82.  Daily excretion through feces amounted to from 30 to 190 ug of mercury, being more variable than other paths.  Other studies had similar findings (6, 15, 16, 18, 19, 25, 31, 36, 77, 79, 80, 83, 115, 196, 386).  Most with several amalgams had daily fecal excretion levels over 50 ug/day.  

The feces mercury was essentially all inorganic with particles making up at most 25%, and the majority being mercury sulfhydryl compounds—likely originating as vapor.   Their study and others reviewed found that at least 80% of mercury vapor reaching the lungs is absorbed and enters the blood from which it is taken to all other parts of the body (335, 348, 349, 363).  

Elemental mercury swallowed in saliva can be absorbed in the digestive tract by the blood or bound in sulfhydryl compounds and excreted through the feces.  A review determined that approx. 20% of swallowed mercury sulfhydryl compounds are absorbed in the digestive tract, but approx. 60% of swallowed mercury vapor is absorbed (292, 335, 348).  At least 80% of particle mercury is excreted.  Approx. 80% of swallowed methyl mercury is absorbed (335, 199, etc.), with most of the rest being converted to inorganic forms apparently.  

The primary detoxification/excretion pathway for mercury absorbed by the body is as mercury-glutathione compounds through the liver/bile loop to feces (111, 252), but some mercury is also excreted though the kidneys in urine and in sweat. The range of mercury excreted in urine per day by those with amalgams is usually less than 15 ug (6, 49, 83, 138, 174, 335, etc.), but some patients are much higher (93).  

A large NIDH study of the U.S. military population (49), with an average of 19.9 amalgam surfaces and range of 0 to 60 surfaces, found the average urine level was 3.1 ug/L, with 93% being inorganic mercury.  The average in those with amalgam was 4.5 times that of controls and more than the U.S. EPA maximum limit for mercury in drinking water (218).  The average level of those with over 49 surfaces was over 8 times that of controls.  The same study found that the average blood level was 2.55 ug/L, with 79% being organic mercury.  The total mercury level had a significant correlation to the number of amalgam fillings, with fillings appearing to be responsible for over 75% of total mercury. From the study results it was found that each 10 amalgam surfaces increased urine mercury by approx. 1 ug/L.  

A study of mercury species found blood mercury was 89% organic and urine mercury was 87% inorganic (349b), while another study (363) found on average 77% of the mercury in the occipital cortex was inorganic.  In a population of women tested In the Middle East (254), the number of fillings was highly correlated with the mercury level in urine, mean=7 ug/L.  Nutrient transport and renal function were also found to be adversely affected by higher levels of mercury in the urine.

As is known from autopsy studies for those with chronic exposure such as amalgam fillings (1, 14, 17, 20, 31, 34, 85, 94), mercury also bioaccumulates in the brain/CNS (301, 273, 274, 327, 329, 348, 18, 19, 85), liver, kidneys (85, 273), (14,85), heart (59, 205, 348), and oral mucosa (174, 192, 436) with the half life in the brain being over 20 years.  

Elemental mercury vapor is transmitted throughout the body via the blood and readily enters cells and crosses the blood-brain barrier and the placenta of pregnant women (38, 61, 287, 311, 361), at much higher levels than inorganic mercury and also higher levels than organic mercury.  

Significant levels are able to cross the blood-brain barrier, placenta, and also cellular membranes into major organs such as the heart since the oxidation rate of Hg0, though relatively fast, is slower than the time required by pumped blood to reach these organs (290, 370).  Thus the level in the brain and heart is higher after exposure to Hg vapor than for other forms (360, 370).  

While mercury vapor and methyl Hg readily cross cell membranes and the blood-brain barrier, once in cells they form inorganic mercury that does not readily cross cell membranes or the blood-brain barrier readily and is responsible for the majority of toxicity effects.  Thus inorganic mercury in the brain has a very long half life (85, 273, 274, etc.).

4.   The average amalgam filling has approximately 0.5 grams (500,000 ug) of mercury.  As much as 50% of mercury in fillings has been found to have vaporized after 5 years and 80% by 20 years (182, 204).  Mercury vapor from amalgam is the single largest source of systemic mercury intake for persons with amalgam fillings, ranging from 50 to 90% of total exposure (14, 16, 17, 19, 36, 57, 61, 77-83, 94, 129, 130, 138, 161, 167, 183, 191, 196, 211, 216, 273, 292, 303, 332), averaging about 80% of total systemic intake.  

After filling replacement, levels of mercury in the blood, urine, and feces typically temporarily are increased for a few days, but levels usually decline in blood and urine within 6 months to from 60 to 85% of the original levels (57, 79, 82, 89, 196, 303).  Mercury levels in saliva and feces usually decline between 80 to 95% (79, 196, 335, 386).

5.   Having dissimilar metals in the teeth (e.g. gold and mercury) causes galvanic action, electrical currents, and much higher mercury vapor levels and levels in tissues (182, 192, 292, 348, 349, 390, 19, 25, 27, 29, 30, 35, 47, 48, 100).  Average mercury levels in gum tissue near amalgam fillings are about 200 ppm, and are the result of flow of mercury into the mucous membrane because of galvanic currents with the mucous membrane serving as cathode and amalgam as cathode (192).  Average mercury levels are often 1000 ppm near a gold cap on an amalgam filling due to higher currents when gold is in contact with amalgam (30, 25, 35, 48).

These levels are among the highest levels ever measured in tissues of living organisms, exceeding the highest levels found in chronically exposed chloralkali workers, those who died in Minamata or animals that died from mercury poisoning.  German oral surgeons have found levels in the jaw bone under large amalgam fillings or gold crowns over amalgam as high as 5760 ppm with an average of 800 ppm (436).  These levels are much higher than the FDA/EPA action level for prohibiting use of food with over 1 ppm mercury.  

Likewise the level is tremendously over the U.S. Dept. of Health/EPA drinking water limit for mercury which is 2 parts per billion (218).  Amalgam manufacturers, Government health agencies such as Health Canada, dental school texts, and dental materials researchers advise against having amalgam in the mouth with other metals such as gold (446, 35), but many dentists ignore the warnings.

Concentrations of mercury in oral mucosa for a population of patients with 6 or more amalgam fillings taken during oral surgery were 20 times the level of controls (174).  Studies have shown mercury travels from amalgam into dentin, root tips, and the gums, with levels in roots tips as high as 41 ppm (192).  Studies have shown that mercury in the gums such as from root caps for root canalled teeth result in chronic inflammation, in addition to migration to other parts of the body (200, 47, 35).  

Mercury and silver from fillings can be seen in the tissues as amalgam “tattoos”, which have been found to accumulate in the oral mucosa as granules along collagen bundles, blood vessels, nerve sheaths, elastic fibers, membranes, striated muscle fibers, and acini of minor salivary glands.  Dark granules are also present intracellularly within macrophages, multinucleated giant cells, endothelial cells, and fibroblasts.

There is, in most cases, chronic inflammatory response or macrophagic reaction to the metals (47), usually in the form of a foreign body granuloma with multinucleated giant cells of the foreign body and Langhans types (192).

The periodontal ligament of extracted teeth is often not fully removed and results in incomplete jawbone regrowth resulting in a pocket where mouth bacteria in anerobic conditions, along with similar conditions in the dead tooth, produce extreme toxins similar to botulism which, like mercury, are extremely toxic and disruptive to necessary body enzymatic processes at the cellular level, comparable to the similar enzymatic disruptions caused by mercury and previously discussed (35, 437).

The component mix in amalgams has also been found to be an important factor in mercury vapor emissions.  The level of mercury and copper released from high copper amalgam is as much as 50 times that of low copper amalgams (191).  Studies have consistently found modern high copper non gamma-two amalgams have a high negative current and much greater release of mercury vapor than conventional silver amalgams and are more cytotoxic (35, 298, 299).  

Clinics have found the increased toxicity and higher exposures to be factors in increased incidence of chronic degenerative diseases (35, etc).  While the non gamma-two amalgams were developed to be less corrosive and less prone to marginal fractures than conventional silver amalgams, they have been found to be unstable in a different mechanism when subjected to wear/polishing/chewing/brushing: they form droplets of mercury on the surface of the amalgams (182, 297).  This has also been found to be a factor in the much higher release of mercury vapor by the modern non gamma-two amalgams.  

Recent studies have concluded that because of the high mercury release levels of modern amalgams, mercury poisoning from amalgam fillings is widespread throughout the population (95, 199, 238).  Numerous other studies also support this finding (Section IV).

Amalgam also releases significant amounts of silver, tin, and copper which also have toxic effects, with organic tin compounds formed in the body being even more neurotoxic than mercury (51, 222, 262).  

6.The number of amalgam surfaces has a statistically significant correlation to:

  (a)         blood plasma mercury level (17, 22, 23, 49, 79, 89, 133, 211) (usually not as strong as other                             measures)

  (b)         urine mercury level (38, 49, 57, 76, 77, 79, 82, 83, 134, 138, 167, 176, 254, 303, 332, 335)

  (c)         oral air (16, 18, 100, 176, 335)

  (d)         saliva and oral mucosa (18, 30, 77, 79, 117, 179, 174, 199, 211, 222, 292, 315, 317)

  (e)         feces mercury (25, 79, 80, 83, 115, 117, 182, 335, 386)

  (f)          pituitary gland (19, 20, 25, 85, 99, 273/274)

  (g)         brain occipital cortex (14, 16, 19, 25, 34, 85, 211, 273, 348, 366/274)

  (h)         renal (kidney) cortex (14, 16, 19, 20, 85, 254, 273, 348, 366) 

  (I)          liver (14, 19, 85, 366)

  (j)          motor function areas of the brain and CNS: brain stem, cerebellum, rhombencephalon, dorsal root                       ganglia, and anterior horn motor neurons (48, 291, 327, 329, 442, 35)

  (k)         fetal and infant liver/brain levels (61, 112, 186, 231, 22) related to maternal fillings.

7.  A person with amalgam fillings has daily systemic intake from mercury vapor of between 3 and 70 micrograms of mercury, with the average being at least 7 micrograms (ug) per day (18, 77, 83, 85, 93, 138, 183, 199, 211, 292, 315, 335).   In a large German study, the median daily exposure for those with fillings through saliva was approx. 10 ug/day, 4% of those with fillings had daily exposure through saliva of over 80 ug/day, and 1% had over 160 ug/day (199).

The methods and results of the Tubingen study (199) were similar to those of other German studies (292, 315, 9, 138, 317, 335).  Total intake is proportional to the number and extent of amalgam surfaces, but other factors such as chewing gum, drinking hot liquids, brushing or polishing, and using fluoride toothpaste significantly increase the intake (15, 18, 28, 31, 100,134-137, 182, 183, 199, 209, 211, 292, 317, 319, 348, 349, 350).  

Vapor emissions range up to 200 ug/m³ (35) and are much higher after chewing (15, 137, 319). After chewing, those with amalgams had levels over 50 times higher than those without, and the average level of exposure was 29 ug/day for those with at least 12 occlusal surfaces (18).  

At least 30% of those having amalgam fillings tested in a large German study had ingested mercury levels exceeding the WHO PTWI mercury standard of 43 ug/day (199, 183), and over 50% of those with 6 or more fillings had daily exposures more than the U.S. EPA health guideline level (199) of 0.1 ug/kg body weight/day (199).  The median daily exposure through saliva for those with 10 or more fillings was over 10 times that of those with no fillings (199, 292, 315, 318).  Mercury level in saliva has been found to give much better indication of body levels than blood or urine levels (36).  Most people with fillings have daily exposure levels exceeding the U.S. ATSDR and EPA health guideline levels (2, 36, 83, 89, 183, 199, 209, 217, 261, 292, 335, 93).

8.  The blood and urine mercury load of a person with amalgam fillings is often 5 times that of a similar person without (14, 16, 17, 79 80, 82, 93, 136, 138, 303, 315, 317, 318).  The average blood level for one large population was 5 ug/l (176).  Normal blood levels are less than 20 ppb, but health effects have been observed in patients in the upper part of this range.  A Swedish study estimated the total amount mercury swallowed per day from intra-oral vapor was 10 micrograms per day (177), and a large German study (199) found median exposure through saliva alone for those with fillings to be about 10 ug/day, with many having several fillings with over 10 times that level.  Other studies have found similar amounts (18, 83, 211, 183, 209). 

9.  Teeth are living tissue and have massive communication with the rest of the body via blood, lymph, and nerves.  Mercury vapor (and bacteria in teeth) has paths to the rest of the body (34, etc.).  German studies of mercury loss from vapor in unstimulated saliva found the saliva of those with amalgams had at least 5 times as much mercury as for controls (138, 199, 292, 315). 

10.  Mercury (especially mercury vapor) rapidly crosses the blood-brain barrier and is stored preferentially in the pituitary gland, hypothalamus, and occipital cortex in direct proportion to the number and extent of amalgam surfaces (14, 19, 20, 25, 34, 38, 85, 99, 273, 274, 287, 348, 366). Thus mercury has a greater effect on the functions of these areas.  The range in one study was 2.4 to 28.7 ppb (85), and one study found, on average, that 77% of the mercury in the occipital cortex was inorganic (363).

11.   Some mercury entering nasal passages is absorbed directly into the olfactory lobe and brain without coming from blood (34, 35, 182, 222, 348, 364).   Mercury also is transported along the axons of nerve fibres (5, 25, 34, 35, 327, 329).

12.  Mercury has a long half life in the body and over 20 years in the brain, and chronic low level intake results in a slow accumulation in body tissues (20, 34, 35, 38, 85, etc.). 

13.  Methyl mercury is more toxic to some body processes than inorganic mercury.  Mercury from amalgam is methylated by bacteria, galvanic electric currents (35), and Candida albicans in the mouth and intestines (51, 81, 98, 182, 225).  Oral bacteria Streptococommus mitior, S. mutans and S. sanguis were all found to methylate mercury (81).  High levels of vitamin B12 in the system also have been found to result in increased methyl mercury concentrations in the liver and brain (51).  

Methyl mercury is 10 times more potent in causing genetic damage than any other known chemical (Ramel, in (35)), and also crosses the blood-brain barrier readily.  Once mercury vapor or methyl mercury is converted to inorganic mercury in cells or the brain, the mercury does not readily cross cell membranes or the blood-brain barrier.  Thus mercury has a very long half life in the brain.  N-acetylcysteine (NAC) has been found to be effective at increasing glutathione levels and chelating methyl mercury (54, 126).

14.  The level of mercury in the tissue of the fetus, newborn, and young children is directly proportional to the number of amalgam surfaces in the mother’s mouth (20, 23, 61, 112, 210, 361).  The level of mercury in umbilical cord blood and placenta was higher than that in mother’s blood (22, 186).  

The saliva and feces of children with amalgams have approximately 10 times the level of mercury as children without (25, 315, 386), and much higher levels in saliva after chewing.  A group of German children with amalgam fillings had urine mercury level 4 times that of a control group without amalgams (76), and in a Norwegian group with average age 12, there was a significant correlation between urine mercury level and number of amalgam fillings (167).  The level of mercury in maternal hair was significantly correlated to level of mercury in nursing infants (279). One study found a 60% increase in average cord blood mercury level between 1980 and 1990 in Japan (186).

16.  The fetal mercury content after maternal inhalation of mercury vapor was found to be higher than in the mother (4, etc.)   Mercury from amalgam in the blood of pregnant women crosses the placenta and appears in amniotic fluid and fetal blood, liver, and pituitary gland soon after placement (20, 22, 23, 31, 36, 61, 162, 186, 281, 348, 366).  

Dental amalgams are the main source of mercury in breast milk (112, 186, 304, 339, 20).  Milk increases the bioavailability of mercury (112, 304, 391) and mercury is often stored in breast milk and the fetus at much higher levels than that in the mother's tissues (19, 20, 22, 23, 61, 112, 186, 210, 287, 304).  The level of mercury in breast milk was found to be significantly correlated with the number of amalgam fillings (61), with milk from mothers with 7 or more fillings having levels in milk approx. 10 times that of amalgam-free mothers.  The milk sampled ranged from 0.2 to 6.9 ug/L.  

Several authors suggest use of early mother’s milk as a screen for potential problems since it is correlated both to maternal and infant mercury levels.  The highest level is in the pituitary gland of the fetus which affects development of the endocrine system.  Levels for exposure to mercury vapor has been found to be approx 10 times that for maternal exposure to an equivalent dose of inorganic mercury (281, 287), and developmental behavioral effects from vapor have been found at levels considerably below that required for similar effects by methyl  mercury (20, 49, 119c, 264, 287, 304, 338).  The level of total mercury in nursing infants was significantly correlated to total mercury level in maternal hair (22, 279)

17.   There is a significant correlation between number of amalgam fillings of the mother and the level of the fetus and older infants (20, 22, 23, 61, 304), and also with the level in mother’s milk (19, 20, 38, 112, 304).  Fertile women should not be exposed to vapor levels above government health guidelines (38, 61, 182, 282); the U.S. ATSDR mercury health MRL of 0.2 mcg/m³ (2, 217); or have amalgams placed or removed during pregnancy (20, 182, 231, 304, etc.).

IV. Immune System Effects and Autoimmune Disease

1.  Many thousands of people with symptoms of mercury toxicity have been found in tests to have high levels of mercury, and many thousands who have had amalgam fillings removed (most) have had health problems and symptoms alleviated or greatly improved (see Section VI).  

From clinical experience some of the symptoms of mercury sensitivity/mercury poisoning include chronic fatigue, dizziness, frequent urination, insomnia, headaches, chronic skin problems, metallic taste, gastrointestinal problems, asthma (8, 97), stuffy nose, dry crusts in nose, rhinitis, plugged ears, ringing ears, chest pain, hyperventilation, diabetes (35), spacey feeling, chilly, chronic skin problems, immune and autoimmune diseases, cardiovascular problems and many types of neurological problems (26, 34, 35, 36, 38, 45, 59, 60, 69, 70, 71, 75, 91, 109, 148, 165, 204, 212, 199, 246, 255, 268-270, 290, 291, 294, 313, 343).   

Amalgam results is chronic exposure rather than acute exposure and accumulation in body organs over time, so most health effects are of the chronic rather than acute in nature, but serious health problems have been documented to be related to amalgam and researchers have attributed some deaths as due to amalgam (356, 32, 245).

2.   Mercury vapor exposure at very low levels adversely affects the immune system (17, 27, 31, 38, 45, 60, 84, 118, 129, 131, 165, 226, 270, 285, 296, 313, 314, 355, 368, 369).  From animal studies it has been determined that mercury damages T-cells by generating reactive oxygen species (ROS), depleting the thiol reserves of cells, damaging and decreasing the dimension of mitochondria, causing destruction of cytoplasmic organelles with loss of cell membrane integrity, inhibiting ability to secrete interleukin IL-1 and IL-2R, causing activation of glial cells to produce superoxide and nitric oxide, and inactivating or inhibiting enzyme systems involving the sulfhydryl protein groups (226, 424, 442).  

Mercury caused adverse effects on both neutrophil and macrophage function and after depletion of thiol reserves, T-cells were susceptible to Hg induced cellular death (apoptosis) (226, 272, 355).   Interferon syntheses was reduced in a concentration dependent manner with either mercury or methyl mercury as well as other immune functions (131), and low doses also induce aggregation of cell surface proteins and dramatic tyrosine phosphorylation of cellular proteins related to asthma, allergic diseases such as eczema and lupus (234, 323, 35), and autoimmunity (181, 314).  One study found that insertion of amalgam fillings or nickel dental materials causes a suppression of the number of T-lymphocytes (270), and impairs the T-4/T-8 ratio.  

Low T4/T8 ratio has been found to be a factor in lupus, anemia, MS, eczema, inflammatory bowel disease, and glomerulonephritis.  Mercury induced autoimmunity in animals and humans has been found to be associated with mercury’s expression of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II genes (314, 181, 226, 425c).  Both mercuric and methyl mercury chlorides caused dose dependent reduction in immune B-cell production (316). B-cell expression of IgE receptors was significantly reduced (316, 165), with a rapid and sustained elevation in intracellular levels of calcium induced (316, 333).  Both forms are immunotoxic and cytotoxic at very low levels seen in individuals.  Mercury also inhibited B-cell and T-cell RNA and DNA synthesis.  The inhibition of these functions by 50% occurred rapidly at very low levels, in the range of 10 to 25 ug/L.  All types of cells exhibited a dose dependent reduct in cellular glutathione when exposed to mercury, inhibiting generation of GSH by lymphocytes and monocytes (252).  

Workers occupationally exposed to mercury at levels within guidelines have been found to have impairment of lytic activity of neutrophils and reduced ability of neutrophils to kill invaders such as Candida (285, 404).  Immune Th1 cells inhibit Candida by cytokine related activation of macrophages and neutrophils.  Development of Th2 type immune responses deactivates such defenses (404b).  Mercury inhibits macrophage and neutrophil defense against Candida by its affects on Th1 and Th2 cytokine effects (181, 285).   Low doses also induced autoimmunity in some species (181, 314, 404, 129, 131, 43).  

Another effect found is increase in the average blood white cell count significantly (35).  The increased white count usually normalizes after amalgam removal.  Mercury also blocks the immune function of magnesium and zinc (198, 427, 43, 38).  Several studies found adverse health effects at mercury vapor levels of 1 to 5 mcg/m³(35).

Large numbers of people undergoing amalgam removal have clinically demonstrated significant improvements in the immune system parameters discussed here and recovery and significant improvement in immune system problems in most cases surveyed (Section VI).  Antigen specific LST-test was performed on a large number of patients with atopic eczema (323), using T-cells of peripheral blood. 87% showed LST positive reactions to Hg, 87% to Ni, 38% to Au, and 40% to Pd.  They removed LST positive dental metals from the oral cavities of patients.  Improvement of symptoms was obtained in 82% (160/196) of the patients within 1-10 months.  Similar results have been obtained at other clinics (455).

3.   Mercury from amalgam interferes with production of cytokines that activate macrophage and neutrophils, disabling early control of viruses and leading to enhanced infection (131, 251). Animal studies have confirmed that mercury increases effects of the herpes simplex virus type 2 for example (131).  Both mercuric and methyl mercury were equally highly toxic at the cellular level and in causing cell volume reductions (131).  However methyl mercury inhibits macrophage functions such as migration and phagocytosis at lower levels.

4.   Body mercury burden was found to play a role in resistant infections such as Chlamydia trachomatis and herpes family viral infections; it was found many cases can only be effectively treated by antibiotics after removal of body mercury burden (cilantro tablets were used with follow up antibiotics) (251, 131).  Similar results have been found for treatment of cancer (35).

5.  Mercury, by its effect of weakening the immune system, contributes to increased chronic diseases and cancer (91, 180, 237, 239, 222, 234, 355, 35, 38, 40, etc.).  Exposure to mercury vapor causes decreased zinc and methionine availability, depresses rates of methylation, and increased free radicals—all factors in increased susceptibility to cancer (14, 34, 38, 43, 143, 144, 180, 237, 239, 251, 256, 283).   

Amalgam fillings have also been found to be positively associated with mouth cancer (206, 251, 403).  Mercury from amalgam fillings has also been found to cause increase in white blood cells and in some cases to result in leukemia (35, 180).  White cell levels decline after total dental revision (TDR) and some have recovered from leukemia after removal of amalgam fillings in a very short time (35, 180).  Among a group of patients testing positive as allergic to mercury, low level mercury exposure was found to cause adverse immune system response, including effects on vitro production of tumor necrosis factor TNF alfa and reductions in interleukin-1 (131, 152).

Nickel and beryllium are 2 other metals commonly used in dentistry that are very carcinogenic, toxic, and cause DNA malformations (35, 456).  Nickel ceramic crowns and root canals have also been found to be a factor in some breast cancer and some have recovered after TDR, which includes amalgam replacement, replacement of metal crowns over amalgam, nickel crowns, extraction of root canalled teeth, and treatment of cavitations where necessary (35).  Similarly, nickel crowns and gold crowns over amalgam have been found to be a factor in lupus (456, 35, 229) and Bell’s Palsy, from which some have recovered after TDR and Felderkrais exercises (35). 

6.  A high correlation has been found between patients subjectively diagnosed with CNS and systemic symptoms suggestive of mercury intoxication, and immune reactivity to inorganic mercury (MELISA test, 118, 160) as well as with MRI positive patients for brain damage.  Controls without CNS problems did not have such positive correlations. Mercury, nickel, palladium, and gold induce autoimmunity in genetically predisposed or highly exposed individuals (314, 234, 130, 342).  Tests have found a significant portion of people to be in this category and thus more affected by exposure to amalgam than others (see Section V).  

Mercury also interrupts the cytochrome C oxidase system, blocking the ATP energy function (35, 43, 84, 232, 338c).  These effects, along with reductions in red blood cell’s oxygen carrying capability, often result in fatigue and reduced energy levels as well as neurological effects (35, 60, 119, 140, 141, 182, 202, 212, 232, 235, 313).     

7.   People with chronic and immune reactive problems are increasingly finding dental materials are a factor in their problems and getting biocompatibility tests run to test their immune reactivity to the various dental materials used; a high percentage of such patients test immune reactive to many of the toxic metals.  

Of the many thousands who have had the Clifford immune reactivity test (445), the following percentages were immune reactive to the following metals that have very common exposures: aluminum (91%), antimony (36%), arsenic (86%), beryllium (74%), cadmium (63%), chromium (83%), cobalt (78%), copper( 32%), lead (68%), mercury (93%), nickel (98%), palladium (32%), silver (25%), tin (32%), zinc (33%).   

Toxic/allergic reactions to metals such as mercury often result in lichen planus lesions in oral mucosa or gums and play a role in pathogenesis of periodontal disease.  Removal of amalgam fillings usually results in cure of such lesions (60, 75, 78, 82, 86, 87, 90, 94, 101, 118, 133, 168, 313).  

A high percentage of patients with oral mucosal problems along with other autoimmune problems such as CFS have significant immune reactions to mercury, palladium, gold, and nickel (46, 60, 118, 313, 81, 90, 212, 313, 342, 368, 369, 375, 456), including to mercury preservatives such as thimerosal.  94% of such patients had significant immune reactions to inorganic mercury (MELISA test) and 72% had immune reactions to low concentrations of HgCl2 (<0.5 ug/ml).  61% also had immune reaction to phenylHg, which has been commonly used in root canals and cosmetics (313).  10% of controls had significant immune reactions to HgCl and 8.3% to palladium.  

Other studies of patients suffering from chronic fatigue found similar results (369, 375).  Of 50 patients suffering from serious fatigue referred for MELISA test (369), over 70% had significant immune reaction to inorganic mercury and 50% to nickel, with most patients also reactive to one or more other metals such as palladium, cadmium, lead, and methyl mercury.

Mercury has been found to impair conversion of thyroid T4 hormone to the active T3 form as well as causing autoimmune thyroiditis common to such patients (369, 382, 459, 35).  In general, immune activation from toxics such as heavy metals resulting in cytokine release and abnormalities of the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis can cause changes in the brain, fatigue, and severe psychological symptoms (379-382, 385, 369, 375, 381, 382, 453, 118, 60) such as profound fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, sleep disturbances, gastrointestinal and neurological problems as are seen in CFS, fibromyalgia, and autoimmune thyroiditis.  

Such symptoms usually improve significantly after amalgam removal.   Such hypersensitivity has been found most common in those with genetic predisposition to heavy metal sensitivity (368, 369, 382, 60), such as found more frequently in patients with HLA-DRA antigens (375, 383).  A significant portion of the population appears to fall in this category.

 8.   Patients with other systemic neurological or immune symptoms such as arthritis, myalgia, eczema, CFS, MS, lupus, ALS, diabetes, epilepsy, Hashimodo’s thyroiditis, scleroderma, etc. also often recover or improve significantly after amalgam replacement (12, 35, 60, 113, 212, 222, 229, 313, 323, 342, 368, 369, 375, 453, 459, Section VI).  Of a group of 86 patients with CFS symptoms, 78% reported significant health improvements after replacement of amalgam fillings within a relatively short period, and MELISA test found significant reduction in lymphocyte reactivity compared to pre removal tests (342, 368, 369, 375). The improvement in symptoms and lymphocyte reactivity imply that most of the Hg-induced lymphocyte reactivity is allergenic in nature.  

Although patch tests for mercury allergy are often given for unresolved oral symptoms, this is not generally recommended as a high percentage of such problems are resolved irrespective of the outcome of a patch test (87, 86, 90, 101, 168, etc.).  Also, using mercury in a patch test has resulted in some adverse health effects.  A group of patients that had amalgams removed because of chronic health problems, was able to detect subjectively when a patch test used mercury salts in a double blind study (373).   

Mercury inhibits production of insulin and is a factor in diabetes and hypoglycemia, with significant reductions in insulin need after replacement of amalgam fillings and normalizing of blood sugar (35). 

Of the over 3,000 patients tested for lymphocyte reactivity to metals (60, 342, 368, 375), the following were the percentages testing positive: nickel—34%, inorganic mercury—23%, phenol mercury—13%, gold—12%, cadmium—11%, palladium—11%, silver—1%.  Other studies have also found relatively high rates of allergic reactions to inorganic mercury and nickel (81, 35, 445, 456). 

For groups with suspected autoimmune diseases such as neurological problems, CFS, and oral lichen planus, most of the patients tested positive to inorganic mercury and most of such patients’ health improved significantly and immune reactivity declined after amalgam removal.  In a group of patients tested by MELISA before and after amalgam removal at a clinic in Uppsula Sweden, the patients reactivity to inorganic mercury, palladium, gold, and phenyl mercury all had highly significant differences from the control group, with over 20 % being highly reactive to each of these metals (375).  

A high percentage was also reactive to nickel in both groups.  After amalgam removal, the immune reactivity to all of these metals other than nickel declined significantly, and 76% reported significant long term health improvements after 2 years.  Only 2% were worse.  The study concluded that immune reactivity to mercury and palladium is common and appears to be allergenic/immune related in nature since immune reactivity declines when exposure levels are reduced.  

Such studies have also found that deficiencies in detoxification enzymes such as glutathione transferases cause increased susceptibility to metals and other chemicals (384).  Such deficiencies can be due to genetic predisposition, but are also known to be caused by acute or chronic toxic exposures. For MS and lupus patients, a high percentage tested positive to nickel and/or inorganic mercury (MELISA).

A patch test was given to a large group of medical students to assess factors that lead to sensitization to mercury (132).  13% tested positive for allergy to mercury.  Eating fish was not a significant factor between sensitive and non-sensitized students, but the sensitized group had a significantly higher average number of amalgam fillings and higher hair mercury levels.  In a population of dental students tested, 44% were positive for allergy to mercury (156). 

9.   A high correlation has been found between patients subjectively diagnosed with CNS and systemic symptoms suggestive of mercury intoxication and immune reactivity to inorganic mercury (MELISA test, 118) as well as with MRI positive patients for brain damage.  81% of the group with health complaints had pathological MRI results including signs of degeneration of the basal ganglia of the brain, but none in the controls.  60% of the symptom group tested positive for immune system reaction to mercury.  Controls without CNS problems did not have such positive correlations.  The authors concluded that immune reactions have an important role in development of brain lesions, and amalgam fillings induce immune reactions in many patients (91, 118) (270, 286). Mercury, nickel, palladium, and gold induce autoimmunity in genetically predisposed or highly exposed individuals (60, 314, 234, 130, 342, 35).  Tests have found a significant portion of people to be in this category and thus more affected by exposure to amalgam than others.  

10.   Low level mercury exposure (as well as other toxic metals) including exposure to amalgam fillings has been found to be associated with increased autoimmune diseases (19, 27, 34, 35, 44, 45, 60, 215, 234, 268, 269, 270, 313, 314), including lupus (12, 33e, 35, 60, 113, 229, 233, 234, 270, 323, 330, 331, 456), Crohn’s Disease, lichen planus (86, 87, 90, 168, 313), endometriosis (1, 9, 38, 229).  Silver also is released from amalgam fillings and stored in the body and has been shown to cause immune complex deposits, immune reactions, and autoimmunity in animal studies (77, 78, 129, 314).

11.  Mercury exposure through fillings appears to be a major factor in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) through its effects on ATP and immune system (lymphocyte reactivity, neutrophil activity, effects on T-cells and B-cells) and its promotion of growth of Candida albicans in the body and the methylation of inorganic mercury by Candida to the extremely toxic methyl mercury form which, like mercury vapor, crosses the blood-brain barrier and also damages and weakens the immune system (222, 225, 226, 234, 235, 265, 293, 60, 313, 314, 342, 368, 369, 404), and both inorganic and methyl mercury have  been shown in animal studies to induce autoimmune reactions and disease in susceptible types through effects on immune system T cells (226, 234, 268, 269, 270, 314, 425, 426/272).             

V. Medical Studies Finding Health Problems Related to Amalgam Fillings (other than immune)

1.  Neurological problems are among the most common and serious and include memory loss, moodiness, depression, anger and sudden bursts of anger/rage (434), self-effacement, suicidal thoughts, lack of strength/force to resolve doubts or resist obsessions or compulsions, etc.  Many studies of patients with major neurological diseases have found evidence amalgam fillings may play a major role in development of  conditions such as depression (94, 107, 109, 212, 222, 271, 294, 212, 229, 233, 285e, 317, 320, 322, 372, 374, 453), schizophrenia (34, 35, 295), memory problems (212, 222), and other more serious neurological diseases such as MS, ALS, Parkinson’s, and Alzheimer’s (see # 25).  One mechanism by which mercury has been found to be a factor in aggressiveness and violence is its documented inhibition of the brain neurotransmitter acetylcholinesterase (175, 451).   

Mercury causes decreased lithium levels, which is a factor in neurological diseases such as depression and Alzheimer’s.  Lithium protects brain cells against excess glutamate and calcium, and low levels cause abnormal brain cell balance and neurological disturbances (280, 294, 333, 33, 56).  

Medical texts on neurology (27, 295) point out that chronic mercurialism is often not recognized by diagnosticians and misdiagnosed as dementia or neurosis or functional psychosis or just “nerves”.  

“Early manifestations are likely to be subtle and diagnosis difficult: Insomnia, nervousness, mild tremor, impaired judgment and coordination, decreased mental efficiency, emotional lability, headache, fatigue, loss of sexual drive, depression, etc. are often mistakenly ascribed to psychogenic causes.”  

Very high levels of mercury are found in brain memory areas such as the cerebral cortex and hippocampus of patients with diseases with memory related symptoms (158, 34, 207, etc.).   

Mercury (as well as toxins from root canals and cavitations) interact with brain tubulin and disassembles microtubules that maintain neurite structure (207b, 35, 437).  Thus chronic exposure to low level mercury vapor can inhibit polymerization of brain tubulin and creatinine kinase which are essential to formation of microtubules.  Studies of mercury studies on animals give results similar to that found the Alzheimer brain.  The effects of mercury with other toxic metals have also been found to be synergistic, having much more effect than with individual exposure (35).

Animal studies of developmental effects of mercury on the brain have found significant effects at extremely low exposure levels, levels commonly seen in those with amalgam fillings or in dental staff working with amalgam.  One study (175) found mercury vapor decreased NGF concentration in rat’s forebrain at 4 parts per billion (ppb) tissue concentration.  Another study (134) found general toxicity effects at 1 micromole (uM) levels in immature cell cultures, increased immunoreactivity for glial fibrillary protein at 1 nanamole (0.2 ppb) concentration, and microglial response at even lower levels.  

Other animal studies on rodents and monkeys have found brain cellular migration disturbances, behavioral changes, along with reduced learning and adaptation capacity after low levels of mercury vapor exposure (210, 264, 287, 149).  The exposure levels in these studies are seen in the fetus and newborn babies of mother’s with amalgam fillings or who had work involving amalgam during pregnancy (61).

Epidemiological studies have found that human embryos are also highly susceptible to brain damage from prenatal exposure to mercury.  Studies have confirmed that there are vulnerable periods during brain and CNS development that are especially sensitive to neurotoxic exposures and affect development processes and results (429). The fetal period is most sensitive, but neural development extends through adolescence.  

Maternal hypothyroidism has been found to cause endocrine system abnormalities in the fetus, and mercury is documented to commonly cause hypothyroidism, both chronically and as a transient condition (458).  Some conditions found to be related to such toxic exposures include autism, schizophrenia, ADD, dyslexia, eczema, etc.  Prenatal/early postnatal exposure to mercury affects level of nerve growth factor (NGF) in the brain and causes brain damage and imbalances in development of the brain (38, 119, 181, 305, 259, 210, 149, 305, 24/39, 175,  255, 149).  

Exposure of developing neuroblastoma cells to sub-cytotoxic doses of mercuric oxide resulted in lower levels of neurofilament proteins than unexposed cells (305).  Mercury vapor exposure causes impaired cell proliferation in the brain and organs, resulting in reduced volume for cerebellum and organs and subtle deficiencies (38, 305).  Exposure to mercury and 4 other heavy metals tested for in a study of school children accounted for 23% of the variation in test scores for reading, spelling, and visual motor skills (3).  

A Canadian study found that blood levels of five metals were able to predict with a 98% accuracy which children were learning disabled (3). Several studies found that mercury causes learning disabilities and impairment, and reduction in IQ (3, 21, 38, 110, 264, 285c, 279).  Mercury has an effect on the fetal nervous system at levels far below that considered toxic in adults, and background levels of mercury in mothers correlate significantly with incidence of birth defects and still births (23, 38, 287, 338c, 10).

2. Calcium plays a major role in the extreme neurotoxicity of mercury and methyl mercury. Both inhibit cellular calcium ATPase and calcium uptake by brain microsomes at very low levels of exposure (270, 288, 329, 333, 432, 56).  Protein Kinase C (PKC) regulates intracellular and extracellular signals across neuronal membranes, and both forms of mercury inhibit PKC at micromolar levels, as well as inhibiting phorbal ester binding (43, 432).  They also block or inhibit calcium L-channel currents in the brain in an irreversible and concentration dependent manner. Mercury vapor or inorganic mercury exposure affects the posterior cingulate cortex and causes major neurological effects with sufficient exposure (428, 453).  Some of the resulting conditions include stomatitis, tremor, ADD, erethism, etc.  Metallic mercury is much more potent than methyl mercury in such actions, with 50% inhibitation in animal studies at 13 ppb (333, 329).

Spatial and temporal changes in intracellular calcium concentrations are critical for controlling gene expression and neurotransmitter release in neurons (432, 412).  Mercury alters calcium homeostasis and calcium levels in the brain and affects gene expression and neurotransmitter release through its effects on calcium, etc.

Mercury inhibits sodium and potassium (Na, K) ATPase in dose dependent manner and inhibits dopamine and norepinephrine uptake by synaptosomes and nerve impulse transfer (288, 50, 270, 35).  Mercury also interrupts the cytochrome oxidase system, blocking the ATP energy function (35, 43, 84, 232, 338c), lowering immune growth factor IGF-I levels and impairing astrocyte function (119, 131).  Astrocytes are common cells in the CNS involved in the feeding and detox of nerve cells.  Increases in inflammatory cytokines such as caused by toxic metals trigger increased free radical activity and damage to astrocyte and astrocyte function (152).  IGF-I protects against brain and neuronal pathologies like ALS, MS, and fibromyalgia by protecting the astrocytes from this destructive process. 

Mercury lymphocyte reactivity and effects on glutamate in the CNS induce CFS type symptoms including profound tiredness, musculoskeletal pain, sleep disturbances, gastrointestinal and neurological problems along with other CFS symptoms and fibromyalgia (342, 346, 368, 369, 375).  

Mercury has been found to be a common cause of fibromyalgia (293, 346, 369).  Glutamate is the most abundant amino acid in the body and in the CNS acts as excitatory neurotransmitter (346, 386, 412), which also causes inflow of calcium.  Astrocytes, a type of cell in the brain and CNS with the task of keeping clean the area around nerve cells, have a function of neutralizing excess glutamate by transforming it to glutamic acid.  If astrocytes are not able to rapidly neutralize excess glutamate, then a build-up of glutamate and calcium occurs, causing swelling and neurotoxic effects (119, 131, 152, 333).  

Mercury and other toxic metals inhibit astrocyte function in the brain and CNS (119, 131), causing increased glutamate and calcium related neurotoxicity (119, 152, 333, 226a) which is responsible for much of the fibromyalgia symptoms and a factor in neural degeneration in MS and ALS.  This is also a factor in conditions such as CFS, Parkinson’s, and ALS (346, 416).  Animal studies have confirmed that increased levels of glutamate (or aspartate, another amino acid excitatory neurotransmitter) cause increased sensitivity to pain, as well as higher body temperature—both found in CFS/fibromyalgia.  Mercury and increased glutamate activate free radical forming processes like xanthine oxidase which produce oxygen radicals and oxidative neurological damage (346, 142, 13).  

Extremely toxic anaerobic bacteria from root canals or cavitations formed at incompletely healed tooth extraction sites have also been found to be common factors in fibromyalgia and other chronic neurological conditions such as Parkinson’s and ALS, with condensing osteitis which must be removed with a surgical burr along with 1 mm of bone around it (35, 437).  Cavitations have been found in 85% of sites from wisdom tooth extractions tested and 55% of molar extraction sites tested (35, 437).  The incidence is likely somewhat less in the general population.  

Medical studies and doctors treating fibromyalgia have found that supplements which cause a decrease in glutamate or protect against its effects have a positive effect on fibromyalgia and other chronic neurologic conditions.  Some that have been found to be effective include vitamin B6, methyl cobalamine (B12), L-carnitine, choline, ginseng, Ginkgo biloba,  vitamins C and E, nicotine, and omega 3 fatty acids (fish and flaxseed oil) (417). 

3.   Numerous studies have found long term chronic low doses of mercury cause neurological, memory, behaviour, sleep, and mood problems (3, 34, 60, 69, 70, 71, 74, 107, 108, 109, 119, 140, 141, 160, 199, 212, 222, 246, 255, 257, 258, 282, 290, 453).  Neurological effects have been documented at very low levels of exposure (urine Hg< 4 ug/L), levels commonly received by those with amalgam fillings (290).  One of the studies at a German University (199) assessed 20,000 people.  

There is also evidence that fetal or infant exposure causes delayed neurotoxicity evidenced in serious effect at middle age (255, 306).  Organic tin compounds formed from amalgam are even more neurotoxic than mercury (222, 262).  Studies of groups of patients with amalgam fillings found significantly more neurological, memory, mood, and behavioral problems than the control groups (3, 34, 107, 108, 109, 140, 141, 160, 199, 212, 222, 290, 453).

4.  Mercury binds to hemoglobin oxygen binding sites in the red blood cells thus reducing oxygen carrying capacity (332, 35) and adversely affects the vascular response to norepinephrine and potassium.  Mercury’s effect on pituitary gland vasopressin is a factor in high blood pressure (35).  Mercury also increases cytosolic free calcium levels in lymphocytes in a concentration dependant manner causing influx from the extracellular medium (270c), and blocks entry of calcium ions into the cytoplasm (1, 16, 17, 21, 33, 35, 333), and at 100 ppb can destroy the membrane of red blood cells (35, 22, 17, 270c) and damage blood vessels, reducing blood supply to the tissues (34, 202, 306).  Amalgam fillings have been found to be related to higher blood pressure, hemoglobin irregularities, tachycardia, chest pains, etc. (201, 202, 205, 212, 222, 306, 310, 35).  

Mercury also interrupts the cytochrome oxidase system, blocking the ATP energy function (35, 43, 84, 232, 338c) and impairing astrocyte function (119).  These effects often result in fatigue and reduced energy levels (35, 60, 119, 140, 141, 182, 202, 212, 232, 235, 313).  Mercury also accumulates in the heart and damages myocardial and heart valves (Turpayev, in (35)) & (59, 201, 205, 306, 351, 370).  Both mercury and methyl mercury have been shown to cause depletion of calcium from the heart muscle and to inhibit myosin ATPase activity by 50% at 30 ppb (59), as well as reducing NK-cells in the blood and spleen.    The interruption of the ATP energy chemistry results in high levels of porphyrins in the urine (260).  

Mercury, lead, and other toxins have different patterns of high levels for the 5 types of porphyrins, with pattern indicating likely source and the level extent of damage.  The average for those with amalgams is over 3 time that of those without, and is over 20 times normal for some severely poisoned people (232, 260).  The FDA has approved a test measuring porphyrins as a test for mercury poisoning.  However, some other dental problems such as nickel crowns, cavitations, and root canals also can cause high porphyrins.  

Cavitations are diseased areas in bone under teeth or extracted teeth, usually caused by lack of adequate blood supply to the area.  Tests by special equipment (Cavitat) found cavitations in over 90% of areas under root canals or extracted wisdom teeth that have been tested, and toxins such as anaerobic bacteria and other toxins which significantly inhibit body enzymatic processes in virtually all cavitations (437).  These toxins have been found to have serious systemic health effects in many cases, and significant health problems to be related such as arthritis, MCS, and CFS.  These have been found to be factors along with amalgam in serious chronic conditions such as MS, ALS, Alzheimer’s, MCS, CFS, etc. (35, 204, 222, 292, 437).  The problem occurs in extractions that are not cleaned out properly after extraction (437).  

Supplements such as glucosamine sulfate and avoidance of orange juice and caffeine have been found to be beneficial in treating arthritic conditions as well (35).

A study funded by the Adolf Coors Foundation (232) found that toxicity such as mercury is a significant cause of abnormal cholesterol levels, increasing as a protective measure against metals toxicity, and that cholesterol levels usually normalize after amalgam replacement. However, lowering cholesterol levels by other means below 160 correlates with much higher rates of depression, suicide, cancer, violent deaths, cerebral hemorrhage, and deaths—all known to be affected by mercury effects (35).  The study also found that mercury has major adverse effects on red and white blood cells, oxygen carrying capacity, and porphyrin levels (232), with most cases seeing significant increase in oxyhemoglobin level and reduction in porphyrin levels along with 100% experiencing improved energy.

5.  Patch tests for hypersensitivity to mercury have found from 2% to 44% to test positive (87, 154, 156, 178, 267), much higher for groups with more amalgam fillings and length of exposure than those with less.  In studies of medical and dental students, those testing positive had significantly higher average number of amalgam fillings than those not testing positive (and higher levels of mercury in urine) (132, 156).  Of the dental students with 10 or more fillings at least 5 years old, 44% tested allergic.  

Based on these studies and statistics for the number with 10 or more fillings, the percent of Americans allergic to mercury just from this group would be about 17 million people especially vulnerable to increased immune system reactions to amalgam fillings.  However, the total would be much larger and patch tests do not measure the total population getting toxic reactions from mercury.  The most sensitive reactions are immune reactions, DNA mutations, developmental, enzyme inhibition, and systemic effects (34, 38, 61, 149, 186, 226, 263, 264, 270, 272, 296, 305, 410-412/357).

6. People with amalgam fillings have an increased number of intestinal micro-organisms resistant to mercury and many standard antibiotics (35, 116, 117, 161, 389).  Mercury is extremely toxic and kills many beneficial bacterial, but some forms of bacteria can alter their form to avoid being killed by adding a plasmid to their DNA, making the bacteria mercury resistant. But this transformation also increases antibiotic resistance and results in adversely altered populations of bacteria in the intestines. 

Recent studies have found that drug resistant strains of bacteria causing ear infections, sinusitis, tuberculosis, and pneumonia more than doubled since 1996, and similar for strains of bacteria in U.S. rivers (53).  

Studies have found a significant correlation between mercury resistance and multiple antibiotic resistance (116, 117, 161, 369), and have found that after reducing mercury burden, antibiotic resistance declines (251, 389, 40).   

The alteration of intestinal bacterial populations necessary for proper digestion, along with other damage and membrane permeability effects of mercury, are major factors in creating “leaky gut” conditions with poor digestion and absorption of nutrients and toxic incompletely digested compounds in the bloodstream (338, 35, etc.).

7.  Mercury from amalgam binds to the -SH (sulfhydryl) groups, resulting in inactivation of sulfur and blocking of enzyme function, producing sulfur metabolites with extreme toxicity that the body is unable to properly detoxify (33, 114), along with a deficiency in sulfates required for many body functions.  Sulfur is essential in enzymes, hormones, nerve tissue, and red blood cells.  These exist in almost every enzymatic process in the body.  

Blocked or inhibited sulfur oxidation at the cellular level has been found in most with many of the chronic degenerative diseases, including Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, ALS, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, MCS, autism, etc. (330, 331, 33, 35, 56), and appears to be a major factor in these conditions.  Mercury also blocks the metabolic action of manganese and the entry of calcium ions into cytoplasm (333).  

Mercury from amalgam thus has the potential to disturb all metabolic processes (25, 21, 33, 35, 56, 60, 111, 180, 194, 197).  Mercury is transported throughout the body in blood and can affect cells in the body and organs in different ways.

8.  A large study of 20,000 subjects at a German university found a significant relation between the number of amalgam fillings with periodontal problems, neurological problems, and gastrointestinal problems (199).  Allergies and hair-loss were found to be 2-3 times as high in a group with large number of amalgam fillings compared to controls (199, 9).  Levels of mercury in follicular fluid were significantly higher for those with amalgam fillings (9, 146).  

Based on this finding, a Gynecological Clinic that sees a large number of women suffering from alopecia/hair loss that was not responding to treatment had amalgams replaced in 132 women who had not responded to treatment.  68% of the women then responded to treatment and alopecia was alleviated (187).  

In other studies involving amalgam removal, the majority had significant improvement (40, 317). Higher levels of hormone disturbances, immune disturbances, infertility, and recurrent fungal infections were also found in the amalgam group.  The results of hormone tests, cell culture studies, and intervention studies agree (9, 146).  Other clinics have also found alleviation of hair loss/alopecia after amalgam removal and detox (40, 317).  

Another study in Japan found significantly higher levels of mercury in gray hair than in dark hair (402). 

9.  Mercury accumulates in the kidneys with increasing levels over time.  One study found levels ranging from 21 to 810 ppb.  A study of levels in kidney donors found an average of 3 times higher mercury level in those with amalgams versus those without (14c).  

Mercury exposure has been shown to adversely affect kidney function in occupational and animal studies (20, 203, 211, 260, 438), and also in those with more than average number of amalgam fillings (254).  Inorganic mercury exposure has been found to exert a dose-dependent cytotoxicity by generating extremely high levels of hydrogen peroxide, which is normally quenched by pyruvate and catalase (203).  HgCl2 also has been found to impair function of other organelles such as lysosomes that maintain transmembrane proton gradient, and to decrease glutathione peroxidase activity in the kidneys while upregulating heme oxidase function.  

The Government's toxic level for mercury in urine is 30 mcg/L (189), but adverse effects have been seen at lower levels and low levels in urine often mean high mercury retention and chronic toxicity problems.

10.  Amalgam fillings produce electrical currents which increase mercury vapor release and may have other harmful effects (19, 27, 28, 29, 30, 35, 100, 192, 194).  These currents are measured in micro amps, with some measured at over 4 micro amps.  The central nervous system operates on signals in the range of nano-amps, which is 1000 times less than a micro amp (28).  Negatively charged fillings or crowns push electrons into the oral cavity since saliva is a good electrolyte and cause higher mercury vapor losses (35, 192).  

Patients with autoimmune conditions like MS, or epilepsy, depression, etc. are often found to have a lot of high negative current fillings (35).  The Huggins total dental revision (TDR) protocol calls for teeth with the highest negative charge to be replaced first (35).  Other protocols for amalgam removal are available from international dental associations like IAOMT (153) and mercury poisoned patients organizations like DAMS (447).  For these reasons, it is important that no new gold dental work be placed in the mouth until at least 6 months after replacement.  Some studies have also found persons with chronic exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) to have higher levels of mercury exposure and excretion (28).

11. Mercury from amalgam fillings is transferred to the fetus of pregnant women and children who breast feed, at levels often higher than those of the mother (18, 19, 20, 23, 31, 38, 61, 112, 186, 281).  Mercury has an effect on the fetal nervous system at levels far below that considered toxic in adults, and background levels of mercury in mothers correlate significantly with incidence of birth defects and still births (10, 23, 38, 197, 210, 287, 338c, 361).  Mercury vapor exposure causes impaired cell proliferation in the brain and organs, resulting in reduced volume for cerebellum and organs and subtle deficiencies (38, 305).

12.  Since mercury (all forms) is documented from studies of humans and animals to be a reproductive and developmental toxin (23, 38, 61, 105, 186, 224, 255, 287, 305, 381,etc.), mercury can reduce reproductive function and cause birth defects and developmental problems in children (2, 4, 9, 10, 20, 23, 24, 31, 37, 38, 39, 41, 55, 61, 104, 146, 159, 162, 224, 255, 458).

Clinical evidence indicates that amalgam fillings lead to hormone imbalances that can reduce fertility (9, 38, 55, 4, 105, 146, 367).  Mercury has been found to cause decreased sperm volume and motility, increased sperm abnormalities and spontaneous abortions, increased uterine fibroids/endometritis, and decreased fertility in animals (4, 104, 105, 162) and in humans (9, 10, 23, 31, 37, 105, 146, 159, 395, 433, 27, 35, 38).  In studies of women having miscarriages or birth defects, husbands were found to typically have low sperm counts and significantly more visually abnormal sperm (393).  

Studies indicate an increase in the rate of spontaneous abortions with an increasing concentration of mercury in the fathers' urine before pregnancy (37).  Studies have found that mercury accumulates in the ovaries and testes, inhibits enzymes necessary for sperm production, affects DNA in sperm, causes aberrant numbers of chromosomes in cells, causes chromosome breaks, etc.—all of which can cause infertility, spontaneous abortions, or birth defects (10, 31, 35, 296). 

Subfertile males in Hong Kong were found to have 40% more mercury in their hair than fertile controls (55).  Studies in monkeys have found decreased sperm motility, abnormal sperm, increased infertility and abortions at low levels of methyl mercury (162, 365).  

Researchers advise pregnant women should not be exposed to mercury vapor levels above government health standards (2, 19, 25, 227, 61, 100, 182, 282, 366); currently U.S. ATSDR mercury health MRL of 0.2 mcg/m³ which is exceeded by any dental work involving amalgam (Section III).  Many governments have bans or restrictions on use of amalgam by women of child-bearing age. 

13.  Mercury causes breaks in DNA (4, 38, 41, 42, 197, 272, 296).  Low non-cytotoxic levels of mercury induce dose dependent binding of mercury to DNA and significantly increased cell mutations (142, 4) and birth defects (197, 38, 105).  In addition to effects on DNA, mercury also promotes cancer in other ways. Mercury depletes and weakens the immune system in many ways documented throughout this paper. 

14.  Mercury has been well documented to be an endocrine system disrupting chemical in animals and people, disrupting function of the pituitary gland, hypothalamus, thyroid gland (50, 369, 35), enzyme production processes (111, 194, 33, 56), and many hormonal functions at very low levels of exposure (9, 105, 146, 210, 312, 369).  The pituitary gland controls many of the body’s endocrine system functions and secretes hormones that control most bodily processes, including the immune system and reproductive systems (105, 312, 381).  

The hypothalamus regulates body temperature and many metabolic processes.  Mercury damage thus commonly results in poor bodily temperature control, in addition to many problems caused by hormonal imbalances.  Such hormonal secretions are affected at levels of mercury exposure much lower than the acute toxicity effects normally tested.  

Mercury also damages the blood-brain barrier and facilitates penetration of the brain by other toxic metals and substances (311).  Low levels of mercuric chloride also inhibit ATPase activity in the thyroid, with methyl mercury inhibiting ATP function at even lower levels (50, 35).  Both types of mercury were found to cause denaturing of protein, but inorganic mercury was more potent.  These effects result commonly in a reduction in thyroid production (50) and an accumulation in the thyroid of radiation.  

Toxic metal exposure’s adverse influence on thyrocytes can play a major role in thyroid cancer etiology (144).  Among those with chronic immune system problems with related immune antibodies, the types showing the highest level of antibody reductions after amalgam removal include thyreoglobulin and microsomal thyroid antigens (91). 

15.  There has been no evidence found that there is any safe level of mercury in the body that does not kill cells and harm body processes (WHO, 183, 189, etc.).  This is especially so for the pituitary gland of the developing fetus where mercury has been shown to accumulate and which is the most sensitive to mercury (2-4, 19-24, 30, 31, 36-44, 61, 186).   

16.  Low levels of mercury and toxic metals have been found to inhibit dihydroteridine reductase, which affects the neural system function by inhibiting transmitters through its effect on phenylalanine, tyrosine and tryptophan transport into neurons (27, 98, 122, 257, 289, 372, 342, 372, 412).  This was found to cause severe impaired amine synthesis and hypokinesis.  

Tetrahydrobiopterin, which is essential in production of neurotransmitters, is significantly decreased in patients with Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, MS, and autism.  Such patients have abnormal inhibition of neurotransmitter production.  Such symptoms improved for most patients after administration of R-tetrahydrobiopterin (412), and some after 5-formyltetrahydrofolate, tyrosine (257), and 5-HTP (412).

17.   The level of mercury released by amalgam fillings is often more than the levels documented in medical studies to produce adverse effects and above the U.S. government health guidelines for mercury exposure (see previous text).

18. Many studies of patients with major neurological or degenerative diseases have found evidence amalgam fillings may play a major role in development of conditions such as Alzheimer’s (66, 67, 158, 166, 204, 207, 221, 238, 242, 244, 257, 295, 300, 35), ALS (92, 97, 229, 325, 346, 416, 423, 35), MS (102, 163, 170, 183, 184, 212, 285, 291, 302, 324, 326, 35), Parkinson’s (98, 169, 248, 250, 258, 363, 56, 84, 35), ADD (285e), etc.  

Mercury exposure causes high levels of oxidative stress/reactive oxygen species (ROS) (13, 442), which has been found to be a major factor in neurological disease (56, 442).  Mercury and quinones form conjugates with thiol compounds such as glutathione and cysteine and cause depletion of glutathione, which is necessary to mitigate reactive damage.  Such conjugates are found to be highest in the brain substantia nigra with similar conjugates formed with L-Dopa and dopamine in Parkinson’s disease (56).  Mercury depletion of GSH and damage to cellular mitochondria and the increased lipid peroxidation in protein and DNA oxidation in the brain appear to be a major factor in Parkinson’s disease (33, 346).  

One study found higher than average levels of mercury in the blood, urine, and hair of Parkinson’s disease patients (363).  Another study (169) found blood and urine mercury levels to be very strongly related to Parkinson’s with odds ratios of approx. 20 at high levels of Hg exposure.  

Increased formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) has also been found to increase formation of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) that have been found to cause activation of glial cells to produce superoxide and nitric oxide, they can be considered part of a vicious cycle, which finally leads to neuronal cell death in the substantia nigra in PD (424).  Another study (145) that reviewed occupational exposure data found that occupational exposure to manganese and copper have high odds rations for relation to PD, as well as multiple exposures to these and lead, but noted that this effect was only seen for exposure of over 20 years.

Mercury has been found to accumulate preferentially in the primary motor function related areas such as the brain stem, cerebellum, rhombencephalon, dorsal root ganglia, and anterior horn motor neurons, which enervate the skeletal muscles (48, 291, 327, 329, 442).  There is considerable indication this may be a factor in ALS development (48, 325, 405, 416, 423, 442).  

Mercury penetrates and damages the blood-brain barrier, allowing penetration of the barrier by other substances that are neurotoxic (20, 38, 85, 105, 162, 301, 311/262).  Such damage to the blood-brain barrier’s function has been found to be a major factor in chronic neurological diseases such as MS (286, 289, 291, 302, 324, 326). \

 MS patients have been found to have much higher levels of mercury in cerebrospinal fluid compared to controls (163, 35, 139). Large German studies including studies at German universities have found that MS patients usually have high levels of mercury body burden, with one study finding 300% higher than controls (271).  Most recovered after mercury detox, with some requiring additional treatment for viruses and intestinal dysbiosis. Studies have found mercury related mental effects to be indistinguishable from those of MS (207, 212, 222, 244, 271, 289, 291, 302, 183, 184, 324, 326).

Low levels of toxic metals have been found to inhibit dihydroteridine reductase, which affects the neural system function by inhibiting brain transmitters through its effect on phenylalanine, tyrosine and tryptophan transport into neurons (122, 257, 289, 372).  This was found to cause severe impaired amine synthesis and hypokinesis.  

Tetrahydro-biopterin, which is essential in production of neurotransmitters, is significantly decreased in patients with Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and MS.  Such patients have abnormal inhibition of neurotransmitter production (supplements which inhibit breach of the blood-brain barrier such as bioflavonoids have been found to slow such neurological damage).

Clinical tests of patients with MND, ALS, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, Lupus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis and autism have found that the patients generally have elevated plasma cysteine to sulphate ratios, with the average being 500% higher than controls (330, 331, 56, 33e), and in general being poor sulphur oxidizers.  This means that these patients have insufficient sulfates available to carry out necessary bodily processes.  

Mercury has been shown to diminish and block sulphur oxidation and thus reducing glutathione levels which is the part of this process involved in detoxifying and excretion of toxins like mercury (33).  Glutathione is produced through the sulphur oxidation side of this process.  Low levels of available glutathione have been shown to increase mercury retention and increase toxic effects (111), while high levels of free cysteine have been demonstrated to make toxicity due to inorganic mercury more severe (333, 194, 56, 33e).  Mercury has also been found to play a part in inducing intolerance and neuronal problems through blockage of the P-450 enzymatic process (84, 33e).

In one subtype of ALS, damaged, blocked, or faulty enzymatic superoxide dismutase (SOD) processes appear to be a major factor in cell apoptosis involved in the condition (443).  Mercury is known to damage or inhibit SOD activity (441, 33, 111).            

19.  Mercury at extremely low levels also interferes with formation of tubulin producing neurofibrillary tangles in the brain similar to those observed in Alzheimer’s patients, with high levels of mercury in the brain (207), and  low levels of zinc (363, 43).  Mercury and the induced neurofibrillary tangles also appear to produce a functional zinc deficiency in the of AD sufferers (242), as well as causing reduced lithium levels which is another factor in such diseases.    

Lithium protects brain cells against excess glutamate induced excitability and calcium influx (280, 56). Also, mercury binds with cell membranes interfering with sodium and potassium enzyme functions, causing excess membrane permeability, especially in terms of the blood-brain barrier (155, 207, 311).  Less than 1ppm mercury in the blood stream can impair the blood- brain barrier.  Mercury was also found to accumulate in the mitochondria and interfere with their vital functions, and to inhibit cytochrome C enzymes which affect energy supply to the brain (43, 84, 232, 338c, 35). 

Persons with the Apo-E4 gene form of apolipoprotein E which transports cholesterol in the blood, are especially susceptible to this damage (207, 221, 346), while those with Apo-E2 which has extra cysteine and is a better mercury scavenger have less damage.  The majority have an intermediate form Apo-E3.  This appears to be a factor in susceptibility to Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and multiple sclerosis.  One’s susceptibility can be estimated by testing for this condition.  In many cases (many thousand documented), removal of amalgam fillings and treatment for metal toxicity led to “cure” or significant improvement in health (see Section V).  

Mercury causes an increase in white blood cells, with more created to try to react to a foreign toxic substance in the body.  There is evidence that some forms of leukemia are abnormal response to antigenic stimulation by mercury or other such toxins, and removal of amalgam has led to remission very rapidly in some cases (35, 38, 180, 239).

20. Mercury and methyl mercury impair or inhibit all cell functions and deplete calcium stores (96).  This can be a major factor in bone loss of calcium (osteoporosis).  Mercury (like copper) also accumulates in areas of the eyes such as the endothelial layer of the cornea and macula and is a major factor in chronic and degenerative eye conditions such as iritis, astigmatism, myopia, black streaks on retina, cataracts, macula degeneration, etc.  Most of these conditions have been found to improve after amalgam replacement (35, 212, 271, 322, etc.)

 VI. Results of Removal of Amalgam Fillings

1. For the week following amalgam removal, body mercury levels increase significantly, depending on protective measures taken, but within 2 weeks levels fall significantly (82, 89). Chronic conditions can worsen temporarily, but usually improve if adequate precautions are taken to reduce exposure during removal.

2. Removal of amalgam fillings resulted in a significant reduction in body burden and body waste product load of mercury (75, 82, 88, 89, 93, 95, 115).  Total reduction in mercury levels in blood and urine is often over 80% within a few months (79, 82, 89, 93, 115, 57). 

3. For the following case studies of amalgam replacement, some clinics primarily replaced amalgam fillings using patient protective measures and supportive supplements, whereas some clinics do something comparable to Hal Huggins total dental revision, where in addition to amalgam replacement, patients’ gold or nickel crowns over amalgam are replaced by biocompatible alternatives, root canals extracted and cavitations checked for and cleaned.  

There are extensive documented cases (many thousands) where removal of amalgam fillings led to cure or significant improvement of serious health problems such as

• periodontal diseases (35, 40, 46, 57, 60, 75, 78, 82, 86, 87, 90, 94, 95, 100, 101, 115, 133, 168, 212, 222, 233, 271, 313, 317, 321, 322, 376),
• oral keratosis (pre cancer) (87, 251),
• immune system/autoimmune problems (8, 35, 60, 222, 270, 271, 313, 323, 368, 91, 212, 229, 291, 452),
• allergies (8, 26, 35, 40, 46, 94, 95, 97,165, 212, 222, 228, 229, 233, 271, 317, 322, 349, 376),
• asthma (8, 75, 97, 222, 228, 271, 322),
• chronic headaches/migraines (5, 34, 35, 95, 212, 222, 229, 233, 271, 317, 322, 349, 354, 115, 376, 440, 453),
• multiple chemical sensitivities (26, 35, 95, 222, 229, 232, 233, 115, 313, 368),
• epilepsy (5, 35, 309, 229),
• blood conditions (212, 222, 232, 233, 271, 35, 95),
• eczema (60, 212, 222, 271, 313, 317, 323, 94, 376, 341, 459),
• Crohn’s disease (222, 229),
• stomach problems (35, 95, 212, 222, 228, 229, 233, 271, 317, 322, 440, 35),
• lupus (12, 35, 113, 222, 229, 233, 323),
• dizziness/vertigo (40, 95, 212, 222, 271, 322, 376, 453),
• arthritis (35, 95, 103, 212, 222, 271, 313, 322, 358),
• MS (94, 95, 102, 170, 212, 222, 271, 291, 302, 34, 35, 229),
• ALS (97, 229, 423, 405, 35),
• Parkinson’s/muscle tremor (222, 248, 229, 271, 212, 94, 98, 35),
• Alzheimer’s (204, 35),
• muscular/joint pain/fibromyalgia (35, 222, 293, 317, 322, 369, 440, 94),
• infertility (9, 35, 38, 229, 367),
• depression (94, 107, 222, 271, 294, 212, 229, 233, 285e, 317, 322, 376, 453, 35, 40),
• schizophrenia (294, 34, 35),
• insomnia (35, 94, 212, 222, 271, 317, 322, 376),
• anger (212, 233, 102, 35),
• anxiety and mental confusion (94, 212, 222, 229, 233, 271, 317, 322, 440, 453, 35, 57),
• susceptibility to infections (35, 40, 222, 251, 317, 349, 350),
• antibiotic resistant infection (251),
• endometriosis (229, 35, 38),
• Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (8, 35, 60, 212, 293, 229, 222, 232, 233, 271, 313, 317, 323, 368, 369, 375, 376, 440),
• tachycardia and heart problems (205, 35, 59, 94, 115, 212, 222, 232, 233, 271, 306, 310, 212),
• memory disorders (35, 94, 212, 222, 440, 453),
• cancer (breast, etc.)/leukemia (35, 38, 94, 180),
• neuropathy/paresthesia (35, 94, 212, 222, 322),
• alopecia/hair loss (40, 187, 271, 317, 322, 349),
• sinus problems (35, 40, 94, 222, 271, 322),
• tinnitus (35, 94, 222, 271, 349, 376),
• chronic eye conditions: inflammation/ iritis/astigmatism/myopia/cataracts/macula degeneration (35, 222, 271, 322),
• vision disturbances (35, 212, 271, 322),
• psoriasis (323, 385, 375, 408, 459),
• skin conditions (212, 222),
• urinary/prostrate problems (212, 222),
• hearing loss (102, 35),
• Candida (26, 35, 404, etc.),
• PMS (35, 6, etc.),
• diabetes (35, etc.),
• etc.  

The above over 60,000 cases of cure or significant improvements were not isolated cases of cures; the clinical studies indicated a large majority of most such type cases treated showed significant improvement.  (Details available and case histories.)  

Some of the above cases used chemical or natural chelation to reduce accumulated mercury body burden in addition to amalgam replacement.  Some clinics using DMPS for chelation reported over 80% with chronic health problems were cured or significantly improved (222, 271, 359).  Other clinics reported similar success.  

But the recovery rate of those using dentists with special equipment and training in protecting the patient reported much higher success rates than those with standard training and equipment, 97% versus 37 to 88% (435).  The Huggins TDR protocol includes testing teeth with metal for level of galvanic current caused by the mixed metals, and removal of the teeth with highest negative galvanic current first (35).  This has been found to improve recovery rate for chronic conditions like epilepsy and autoimmune conditions.  

Metals are being pushed into the body from negatively charged metal dental work with saliva as electrolyte and the highest charged teeth lose the most metal to the body (35).

Clinical studies have found that patch testing is not a good predictor of success of amalgam removal, as a high percentage of those testing negative also recovered from chronic conditions after replacement of fillings (86, 87, 168, etc.).

The Huggins Clinic using TDR has successfully treated over a thousand patients with chronic autoimmune conditions like MS, Lupus, ALS, AD, diabetes, etc. (35), including himself with the population of over 600 (approx. 85%) who experienced significant improvement in MS. In a large German study of MS patients after amalgam revision, extraction resulted in 85% recovery rate versus only 16% for filling replacement alone (222, 302).

Other cases have found that recovery from serious autoimmune diseases, dementia, or cancer may require more aggressive mercury removal techniques than simple filling replacement due to body burden.  This appears to be due to migration of mercury into roots and gums that is not eliminated by simple filling replacement.  That such mercury (and similarly bacteria) in the teeth and gums have direct routes to the brain and CNS has been documented by several medical studies (34, 325, etc.).

Among those with chronic immune system problems with related immune antibodies, the types showing the highest level of antibody reductions after amalgam removal include glomerular basal membrane, thyreoglobulin, and microsomal thyroid antigens (91).  TDR and other measures used in metals detox have been found to increase T-cells and immune function in AIDS patients (35).

Swedish researchers have developed a sophisticated test for immune/autoimmune reactions that has proved successful in diagnosing and treating environmentally caused diseases such as lichen planus, CFS, MS, etc. related to mercury and other immunotoxins (60, 313, etc.).

Interviews of a large population of Swedish patients that had amalgams removed due to health problems found that virtually all reported significant health improvements and that the health improvements were permanent (233) (study period 17 years).  A compilation of an even larger population found similar results (212, 282).  For example, 89% of those reporting allergies had significant improvements or total elimination; extrapolated to U.S. population this would represent over 17 million people who would benefit regarding allergies alone.

VII. Tests for Mercury Level or Toxicity and Treatments

1. Feces is the major path of excretion of mercury from the body, having a higher correlation to systemic body burden than urine or blood, which tend to correlate with recent exposure level (35, 36, 79, 80, 183, 278).  For this reason many researchers consider feces to be the most reliable indicator of daily exposure level to mercury or other toxins.  

The average level of mercury in feces of those with fillings is over 1 ppm and approx. 10 times that of a similar group without fillings (79, 80, 83, 335, 386, 25), with significant numbers of those with several fillings having over 10 ppm and 170 times those without fillings (80).  For those with several fillings, daily fecal mercury excretion levels range between 20 to 200 ug/day.  The saliva test is another good test for daily mercury exposure, done commonly in Europe and representing one of the largest sources of mercury exposure. 

There is only a weak correlation between blood or urine mercury levels and body burden or level in a target organ (36, 157, 183, 278, 11, etc.).  Mercury vapor passes through the blood rapidly (half-life in blood is 10 seconds, 370) and accumulates in other parts of the body such as the brain, kidneys, liver, thyroid gland, pituitary gland, etc.  Thus blood test measures mostly recent exposure.  As damage occurs to kidneys over time, mercury is less efficiently eliminated (11, 36, 57, 183, 216, 260), so urine tests are not reliable for body burden after long term exposure. 

Some researchers suggest hair offers a better indicator of mercury body burden than blood or urine (279), though still not totally reliable and may be a better indicator for organic mercury than inorganic.  In the early stages of mercury exposure before major systemic damage other than slight fatigue results, you usually see high hemoglobin, hemocrit, alkaline phosphatase, and lactice dehydroganese; in later states you usually see marginal hemoglobin, hemocrit, plus low oxyhemoglobin (35).

Hair was found to be significantly correlated with fish consumption, as well as with occupational dental exposure and to be a good medium for monitoring internal mercury exposure, except that external occupational exposure can also affect hair levels.  Mercury hair level in a population sampled in Madrid Spain ranged from 1.3 to 92.5 ppm.  This study found a significant positive correlation between maternal hair mercury and mercury level in nursing infants.  

Hair mercury levels did not have a significant correlation with urine mercury in one study (340) and did not have a significant correlation to number of fillings (350).  One researcher suggests that mercury levels in hair of greater than 5 ppm are indicative of mercury intoxication.

A new test approved by the FDA for diagnosing damage that has been caused by toxic metals like mercury is the fractionated porphyrin test (260, 35), that measures amount of damage as well as likely source.  Mercury blocks enzymes needed to convert some types of porphyrins to hemoglobin and adenosine triphosphate (ATP).  The pattern of which porphyrins are high gives an indication of likely toxic exposure, with high precoproporphyrin almost always high with mercury toxicity and often coproporphyrin. 

Provocation challenge tests after use of chemical chelators such as DMPS or DMSA also are effective at measuring body burden (57, 58), but DMPS can be dangerous to some people—especially those still having amalgam fillings or those allergic to sulfur drugs or sulfites. Many studies using chemical chelators such as DMPS or DMSA have found post chelation levels to be poorly correlated with prechelation blood or urine levels (57, 115, 303), but one study (340) found a significant correlation between pre and post chelation values when using DMPS.  

Challenge tests using DMPS or DMSA appear to have a better correlation with body burden and toxicity symptoms such as concentration , memory, and motor deficits (290)—with many studies finding a significant correlation between post chelation mercury level and the number of amalgam surfaces (57, 172, 173, 222, 290, 292, 273, 303).  Several doctors use 16 ug/L as the upper bound for mercury after DMPS challenge, and consider anyone with higher levels to have excess body burden (222, 352).  However, one study (290) found significant effects at lower levels.  

Some researchers believe DMSA has less adverse side effects than DMPS and prefer to use DMSA for chelation for this reason.  Some studies have also found DMSA as more effective at removing mercury from the brain (58).  A common protocol for DMSA (developed to avoid redistribution effects) is 50 mg orally every 4 hours for 3 days and then off 11 days.

Another chelator used for clogged arteries, EDTA, forms toxic compounds with mercury and can damage brain function (307).  Use of EDTA may need to be restricted in those with high Hg levels.  N-acetylcysteine (NAC) has been found to be effective at increasing cellular glutathione levels and chelating mercury (54).  Experienced doctors have also found additional zinc to be useful when chelating mercury (222) as well as counteracting mercury’s oxidative damage (43).  Zinc induces metallothionein which protects against oxidative damage and increases protective enzyme activities and glutathione which tend to inhibit lipid peroxidation and suppress mercury toxicity (430).  

Also, lipoic acid has been found to dramatically increase excretion of inorganic mercury (over 12 fold), but to cause decreased excretion of organic mercury (54) and copper.  Lipoic acid has a protective effect regarding lead or inorganic mercury toxicity through its antioxidant properties, but should not be used with high copper.  Zinc is a mercury and copper antagonist and can be used to lower copper levels and protect against mercury damage.

2.   Tests suggested by Huggins/Levy (35) for evaluation and treatment of mercury toxicity:

(a) hair element test (386) (low hair mercury level does not indicate low body level) (more than 3 essential minerals out of normal range indicates likely metals toxicity)

(b) CBC blood test with differential and platelet count

(c) blood serum profile

(d) urinary mercury (for person with average exposure with amalgam fillings, average mercury level is 3 to 4 ppm; lower test level than this likely means person is poor excretor and accumulating mercury, often mercury-toxic) (35) 

(e) fractionated porphyrin (note test results sensitive to light, temperature, shaking)

(f) individual tooth electric currents (replace high negative current teeth first)

(g) patient questionnaire on exposure and symptom history

(h) specific gravity of urine (test for pituitary function, s.g.>1.022 normal; s.g.<1.008 consistent with depression and suicidal tendencies (35)

3.   Note: during initial exposure to mercury, the body marshals immune system and other measures to try to deal with the challenge, so many test indicators will be high; after prolonged exposure, the body and immune system inevitably lose the battle and measures to combat the challenge decrease—so some test indicator scores decline.  Chronic conditions are common during this phase.  Also, high mercury exposures with low hair mercury or urine mercury level usually indicates body is retaining mercury and likely toxicity problem (35).  In such cases where    calcium>1100 or < 300 ppm and low test mercury, manganese, zinc, potassium; mercury toxicity likely and hard to treat since retaining mercury.

Test results indicating mercury/metals toxicity (35):

(a) white blood cell count > 7500 or < 4500

(b) hemocrit > 50% or < 40%

(c) lymphocyte count > 2800 or < 1800

(d) blood protein level > 7.5 gm/100 ml

(e) triglycerides > 150 mg/ml

(f) BUN > 18 or < 12

(g) hair mercury > 1.5 ppm or < .4 ppm

(h) oxyhemoglobin level < 55% saturated

(I) carboxyhemoglobin > 2.5% saturated

(j) T lymphocyte count < 2000

(k) DNA damage/cancer

(l) TSH > 1 ug

(m) hair aluminum > 10 ppm

(n) hair nickel > 1.5 ppm

(o) hair manganese > 0.3 ppm  

(p) immune reactive to mercury, nickel, aluminum, etc.

(q) high hemoglobin and hemocrit and high alkaline phosphatase (alk phos) and lactic dehydrogenase (LDA) during initial phases of exposure; with low/marginal hemoglobin and hemocrit plus low oxyhemoglobin during long term chronic fatigue phase.

4. Huggins Total Dental Revision Protocol (35):

(a) history questionnaire and panel of tests.

(b) replace amalgam fillings starting with filling with highest negative current or highest negative quadrant, with supportive vitamin/mineral supplements

(c) extract all root canalled teeth using proper finish protocol

(d) test and treat cavitations and amalgam tattoos where relevant

(e) supportive supplementation, periodic monitoring tests, evaluate need for further treatment (not usually needed)

(f) avoid acute exposures/challenges to the immune system on a weekly 7/14/21 day pattern.

Note: after treatment of many cases of chronic autoimmune conditions such as MS, ALS, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, CFS, Lupus, Rheumatoid Arthritis, etc., it has been observed that often mercury along with root canal toxicity or cavitation toxicity are major factors in these conditions, and most with these conditions improve after TDR if protocol is followed carefully (35).  Other measures in addition to TDR that have been found to help in treatment of MS in clinical experience are avoidance of milk products, get lots of sunlight, supplementation of calcium AEP (448) and alpha lipoic acid (448b).  Progesterone creme has been found to promote regrowth of myelin sheaths in animals (448c). 

VIII. Health Effects from Dental Personnel Exposure to Mercury Vapor

1.  It is well documented that dentists and dental personnel who work with amalgam are chronically exposed to mercury vapor, which accumulates in their bodies to much higher levels than for most non-occupationally exposed.  Adverse health effects of this exposure including subtle neurological effects have also been well documented that affect most dentists and dental assistants, with measurable effects among those in the lowest levels of exposure.  Mercury levels of dental personnel average at least 2 times that of controls for hair (397-401), urine (25d, 57, 64, 69, 99, 123, 124, 138, 171, 173, 222, 249, 290, 362, 397-399) and for blood (124, 195, 253, 249, 397).  

Sweden, which has banned use of mercury in fillings, is the country with the most exposure and health effects studies regarding amalgam, and urine levels in dental professionals from Swedish and European studies ranged from 0.8 to 30.1 ug/L with study averages from 3.7 to 6.2 ug/L (124, 172, 253, 64, 68).  The Swedish safety guideline for mercury in urine is 5.6 nmol Hg/mmol (11.6 ug/L).  Study averages for other countries ranged from 3.3 to 36 microgram/liter (ug/L) (69, 70, 171, 290, 397).  

A large survey of dentists at the Norwegian Dental Assoc. meeting (171) found that the mean mercury level in 1986 was 7.8 ug/L with approx. 16% above 13.6ug/L, and for 1987 found an average of 8.6 ug/L with approx. 15% above 15.8 ug/L, with women having higher levels than men in general.  

A U.S. national sample of dentists provided by the American Dental Association had an average of 5.2 ug/L (70, 290).  In that large sample of dentists, 10% of dentists had urine mercury levels over 10.4 ug/L and 1% had levels over 33.4ug/L (290, 25c), indicating daily exposure levels of over 100 ug/day.         

Mercury excretion levels were found to have a positive correlation with the number of amalgams placed or replaced per week, the number of amalgams polished each week, and with the number of fillings in the dentist (171, 172, 173).  In one study, each filling was found to increase mercury in the urine approx. 3%, though the relationship was non-linear and increased more with larger number of fillings (124).  

Much higher accumulated body burden levels in dental personnel were found based on challenge tests than for controls (303), with excretion levels after a dose of a chelator as high as 10 times the corresponding levels for controls (57, 69, 290, 303).  Autopsy studies have found similar high body accumulation in dental workers, with levels in pituitary gland and thyroid over 10 times controls and levels in renal cortex 7 times controls (99, 363, 38).   

Autopsies of former dental staff found levels of mercury in the pituitary gland averaged as high as 4,040 ppb.  They also found much higher levels in the brain occipital cortex (as high as 300 ppb), renal cortex (as high as 2,110 ppb) and thyroid (as high as 28,000 ppb).  In general, dental assistants and women dental workers showed higher levels of mercury than male dentists (171, 172, 173, 253, 303, 362). 

Mercury levels in blood of dental professionals ranged from 0.6 to 57 ug/L, with study averages ranging from 1.34 to 9.8 ug/L (124, 195, 253, 249).  A review of several studies of mercury level in hair or nails of dentists and dental workers found median levels were 50 to 300% more than those of controls (38, p287-288,& 10, 16, 178).  

A group of dental students taking a course involving work with amalgam had their urine tested before and after the course was over.  The average urine level increased by 500% during the course (63).  Allergy tests given to another group of dental students found 44% of them were allergic to mercury (156).   Studies have found that the longer time exposed, the more likely to be allergic.  

Another group of dental students had similar results (362), while another group of dental student showed compromised immune systems compared to medical students.  The total lymphocyte count, total T cell numbers (CD3), T helper/inducer (CD4+CD8-), and T suppressor/cytotoxic (CD4-CD8+) numbers were significantly elevated in the dental students compared to the matched control group (408).  Similar results have been seen in other studies as well (408).

Urinary porphyrin profiles were found to be an excellent biomarker of level of body mercury level and mercury damage neurological effects, with coporphyrin significantly higher in those with higher mercury exposure and  urine levels (70, 260).  

Coporphyrin levels have a higher correlation with symptoms and body mercury levels as tested by challenge test (69, 303), but care should be taken regarding challenge tests as the high levels of mercury released can cause serious health effects in some, especially those who still have amalgam fillings or high accumulations of mercury.  Screening tests that are less burdensome and less expensive are now available as first morning void urine samples have been found to be highly correlated to 24 hour urine test for mercury level or porphyrins (73). 

2.  The average dental office exposure affects the body mercury level at least as much as the workers on fillings (57, 64, 69, 123, 138, 171, 173, 303), with several studies finding levels approximately the same as having 19 amalgam fillings (123, 124, 173).  Many surveys have been made of office exposure levels (1, 6, 7, 10, etc.).  The level of mercury at breathing point in offices measured ranged form 0.7 to over 300 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m³) (120, 172, 253, 249).  

The average levels in offices with reasonable controls ranged from 1.5 to 3.6 ug/m³, but even inSweden, which has had more office environmental controls than others, spot levels of over 150 ug/m³ were found in 8 offices (172).  Another study found spot readings as high as 200 ug/m³ in offices with few controls that only used saliva extractor (120).  

OSHA surveys find 6-16% of U.S. dental offices exceed the OSHA dental office standard of 50 ug/m³, and residual levels in equipment sterilizers often exceed this level (454).  The U.S. ATSDR mercury vapor exposure MRL for chronic exposure is much lower, 0.2 ug/m³ (217) (giving approx. 4 ug/day exposure), similar to U.S. EPA and Health Canada guidelines (2, 209).  Thus most office mercury levels were found to far exceed the U.S. guidelines for chronic mercury exposure.

Use of high speed drill in removal or replacement has been found to create high volume of mercury vapor and respirable particles, and dental masks to only filter out about 40% of such particles (219, 247).  This produces high levels of exposure to patient and dental staff.  Use of water spray, high velocity evacuation and rubber dam reduce exposure to patient and dental staff significantly, as seen in previous discussion.  

In addition to these measures, researchers also advise all dental staff should wear face masks and patients be supplied with outside air (120,153).  Some studies note that carpeting in dental offices should be avoided as it is a major repository of mercury (188, 7).  Use of such measures along with a Clean-Up^TM aspirator tip was found to reduce exposure to patient and staff approximately 90% (397).

3.  Dentists were found to score significantly worse than a comparable control group on neurobehavioral tests of motor speed, visual scanning, and visuomotor coordination (69, 70, 123, 249, 290, 395, 1b), concentration, verbal memory, visual memory (68, 69, 70, 249, 290, 395, 1b), and emotional/mood tests (70, 249, 290, 395, 1b).  Test performance was found to be proportional to exposure/body levels of mercury (68, 70, 249, 290, 395, 1b).  Significant adverse neurobehavioral effects were found even for dental personnel receiving low exposure levels (less than 4 ug/L Hg in urine) (290).  

This study was for dental personnel having mercury excretion levels below the 10th percentile of the overall dental population.  Such levels are also common among the general population of non-dental personnel with several fillings.  This study used a new methodology which used standard urine mercury levels as a measure of recent exposure, and urine levels after chelation with a chemical, DMPS, to measure body burden mercury levels.  Thirty percent of dentists with more than average exposure were found to have neuropathies and visuographic dysfunction (395).

Chelators like DMPS  have  been found after a fast to release mercury from cells in tissue to be available for excretion.  This method was found to give enhanced precision and power to the results of the tests and correlations.  Even at the low levels of exposure of the subjects of this study, there were clear demonstrated differences in test scores involving memory, mood, and motor skills related to the level of exposure pre and post chelation (290).  Those with higher levels of mercury had deficits in both memory, mood, and motor function compared to those with lower exposure levels.  And the plotted test results gave no indication of there existing a threshold below which effects were not measurable.  

Mood scores including anger were found to correlate more strongly with pre-chelation urine mercury levels; while toxicity symptoms, concentration, memory (vocabulary, word), and motor function correlated more strongly with post-chelation mercury levels. 

Several dentists have been documented to suffer from mercury poisoning (72, 74, 193, 246, 247, 248, 369), other than the documented neurological effects.  One of the common effects of chronic mercury exposure is chronic fatigue due to immune system overload and activation. Many studies have found this occurs frequently in dentists and dental staff along with other related symptoms—lack of ability to concentrate, chronic muscular pain, burnout, etc. (249, 369, 377, 378, 1b).  

In a group of dentists and dental workers suffering from extreme fatigue and tested by the immune test MELISA, 50% had autoimmune reactions to inorganic mercury and immune reactions to other metals used in dentistry were also common (369).  Tests of controls did not find such immune reactions common.  In another study, nearly 50% of dental staff in a group tested had positive autoimmune ANA titers compared to less than 1% of the general population (35).

One dentist with severe symptoms similar to ALS improved after treatment for mercury poisoning (246), and another with Parkinson’s disease recovered after reduction of exposure and chelation (248).  Similar cases among those with other occupational exposure have been seen.  

A survey of over 60,000 U.S. dentists and dental assistants with chronic exposure to mercury vapor and anesthetics found increased health problems compared to controls, including significantly higher liver, kidney, and neurological diseases (99, 193).  Other studies reviewed found increased rates of brain cancer and allergies (99, 193).  Swedish male dentists were found to have an elevated standardized mortality ratio compared to other male academic groups(284).

Dental workers and other workers exposed to mercury vapor were found to have a shortening of visual evoked potential latency and a decrease in amplitude, with magnitudes correlated with urine excretion levels (190).  Dentists were also found to have a high incidence of radicular muscular neuralgia and peripheral sensory degradation (190, 395).

4.  Both dental hygienists and patients get high doses of mercury vapor when dental hygienists polish or use ultrasonic scalers on amalgam surfaces (240, 400).  Pregnant women or pregnant hygienist especially should avoid these practices during pregnancy or while nursing since maternal mercury exposure has been shown to affect the fetus and to be related to birth defects, SIDS, etc. (10, 23, 31c, 37, 38, 110, 142, 146, 401, 19, 31).  Amalgam has been shown to be the main source of mercury in most infants and breast milk, which often contain higher mercury levels than in the mother’s blood (20, 61, 112, 186, 287).  

Because of high documented exposure levels when amalgam fillings are brushed (182, 222,  348), dental hygienist are advised not to polish dental amalgams when cleaning teeth.  Face masks worn by dental workers filter out only about 40% of small dislodged amalgam particles from drilling or polishing, and very little mercury vapor (247).  Dental staff have been found to have significantly higher prevalence of eye problems, conjunctivitis, atopic dermatitis, and contact urticaria (247, 156, 74).

An epidemiological survey conducted in Lithuania on women working in dental offices (where Hg concentrations were < 80 ug/m³) had increased incidence of spontaneous abortions and breast pathologies that were directly related to the length of time on the job (277a).  A large U.S. survey also found higher spontaneous abortion rate among dental assistants and wives of dentists (193), and another study found an increased risk of spontaneous abortions and other pregnancy complications among women working in dental surgeries (277b).  A study of dentists and dental assistants in the Netherlands found 50% higher rates of spontaneous abortions, stillbirths, and congenital defects than for the control group (394), with unusually high occurrence of spina bifida.

A study in Poland also found a significant positive association between mercury levels and occurrence of reproductive failures and menstrual cycle disorders, and concluded dental work to be an occupational hazard with respect to reproductive processes (401).

5.  Body burden increases with time and older dentists have median mercury urine levels about 4 times those of controls, as well as higher brain and body burdens (1, 34, 68-74, 99), and poor performance on memory tests (68, 69, 70, 249, 290).  Some older dentists have mercury levels in some parts of the brain as much as 80 times higher than normal levels (14, 34, 99).  

Dentists and dental personnel experience significantly higher levels of neurological, memory, musculoskeletal, visiomotor, mood, and behavioral problems, which increase with years of exposure (1, 34, 68-73, 88, 123, 188, 246, 247, 248, 249, 290, 369, 395).  Even dental personnel with relatively low exposure (urine Hg<4 ug/L) were found to have significant neurological effects (290) and was found to be correlated with body burden of mercury.  

Most studies find dentists have increased levels of irritability and tension (1), high rates of drug dependency and disability due to psychological problems (15, 1b), and higher suicide rates than the general white population (284, 1b), but one study found rates in same range as doctors.

6. Female dental technicians who work with amalgam tend to have increased menstrual disturbances (275, 401, 10, 38), significantly reduced fertility and lowered probability of conception (10, 24, 38, 121), increased spontaneous abortions (10, 31, 38, 277, 433), and their children have significantly lower average IQ compared to the general population (1, 279, 38, 110).  

Populations with only slightly increased levels of mercury in hair had decreases in academic ability (3).  Effects are directly related to length of time on the job (277).  The level of mercury excreted in urine is significantly higher for female dental assistants than dentists due to biological factors (171, 172, 173, 247, 124a).  Several dental assistants have been diagnosed with mercury toxicity and some have died of related health effects (32, 245, 246, 247, 248).     

From the medical register of births since 1967 in Norway, it can be seen that dental nurses/assistants have a clearly increased risk of having a deformed child or spontaneous abortion (433).  Female dentists have increased rates of spontaneous abortion and perinatal mortality (193, 38, 10, 433) compared to controls.  A study in Poland found a much higher incidence of birth defects among female dentists and dental assistants than normal (10).  

A chronically ill dental nurse diagnosed with mercury sensitivity recovered after replacement of fillings and changing jobs (60), and a female dentist recovered from Parkinson’s after mercury detox (248).  Some studies have found increased risk of lung, kidney, brain, and CNS system cancers among dental workers (14, 34, 99, 143, 283).

7.  Many homes of dentists have been found to have high levels of mercury contamination used by dentists bringing mercury home on shoes and clothes (188).

IX.  Scientists and Government Panels or Bodies That Have Found Amalgam Fillings to be Unsafe.

 1.   A World Health Organization Scientific Panel concluded that there is no safe level of mercury exposure (183, 189, 208).  The Chairman of the panel, Lars Friberg, stated that “dental amalgam is not safe for everyone to use (208, 238).  

A study of dental personnel having very low levels of mercury excretion found measurable neurological effects including memory, mood, and motor function related to mercury exposure level as measured by excretion levels (290), and found no threshold level below which effects were not measurable.  

Other studies have found measurable effects to the immune, cardiovascular, hormonal, and reproductive systems from common levels of exposure (Section IV).  Studies have found significant measurable adverse health effects at levels far below current government regulatory levels for mercury (290).

2.  In 1987 the Federal Dept. of Health in Germany issued an advisory warning against use of dental amalgam in pregnant women (61).  Most major countries other than the U.S. have similar or more extensive bans or health warnings regarding the use of amalgam, including  Canada, Great Britain, France, Austria, Norway, Sweden, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, etc. (164, 435).  A Swedish National Mercury Amalgam Review Panel and a similar Norwegian panel found that "from a toxicological point of view, mercury is too toxic to use as a filling material" (164,435).  Both countries have indicated plans to ban or phase out use of amalgam.  

A major amalgam manufacturer, Caulk Inc., advises that amalgam should not be used as a base for crowns or for retrograde root fillings as is commonly done in some countries (387).  A Swedish medical panel unanimously recommended to the government “discontinuing the use of amalgam as a dental material” (282).  The U.S. EPA found that removed amalgam fillings are hazardous and must be sealed airtight and exposed of as hazardous waste (214).  

Most European countries require controls on dental waste amalgam emissions to sewers or air.  A Canadian Government study for Health Canada concluded that any person with any number of amalgam fillings receives exposure beyond that recommended by the USPHS Standard (209).  Many of those researching amalgam related health effects, including several very prominent scientists, have concluded that the health effects are widespread and serious so that mercury should not be used as a filling material (1, 18, 19, 20, 36, 38, 57, 60, 61, 88, 94, 99, 125, 148, 153, 164, 170, 183, 208, 209, 210, 212, 222, 227, 236, 238, 282). 

3.   The Legislature of the State of California passed a law, Proposition 65, which requires all dentists in the state to discuss the safety of dental materials with all patients and to post the following warning about use of amalgam on the wall of their office:

                “This office uses amalgam filling materials which contain and expose you to a chemical known to the State of California to cause birth defects and other reproductive harm.”    

4.  The use of mercury amalgams has been banned for children and women of child-bearing age or put on a schedule for phase out by several European countries.  The use of amalgam is declining in Europe and Germany’s largest producer of amalgam has ceased production.  The director of the U.S. Federal program overseeing dental safety advises against using mercury amalgam for new fillings.

 

REFERENCES

(1)        Denton S (MD) & Butler J, Dept. of Psychology, Univ. of North Texas; Proceedings of the First International Conference on Biocompatibility, Life Sciences Press, Oct 1990, p133-145.

(2)        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 1999, "Integrated Risk Information System,  National Center for Environmental Assessment, Cincinnati, Ohio, http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris.htm.

(3)        Marlowe M, et al., “Main and interactive effects of metallic toxins on classroom behavior”, J Abnormal Child Psychol, 1985, 13(2):185-98; & Moon C, et al., “Main and Interactive Effect of Metallic Pollutants on Cognitive Functioning”, Journal of Learning Disabilities, April, 1985; &  Pihl RO, et al., “Hair element content in learning disabled children”, Science, Vol 198, 1977, 204-6; & Gowdy JM, et al., “Whole blood mercury in mental hospital patients”, Am J Psychiatry, 1978, 135(1):115-7.

(4)        Lee IP, ”Effects of Mercury on  Spermatogenesis”, J Pharmacol Exp Thera 1975, 194(1);171- 181; &  H. Ogura, et al., “A comparison of chromosome aberrations and micronucleus techniques for the assessment of the genotoxicity of mercury compounds in human blood lymphocytes”, Mutat Res, 1996 Jun;340(2‑3):175‑82.

(5)        D. Klinghardt (MD), “Migraines, Seizures, and Mercury Toxicity”, Future Medicine Publishing, 1997.

(6)       T.M. Schulein, et al., ”Survey of Des Moines area dental offices for mercury vapour”, Iowa Dent. J., 70(1):35‑36, 1984; & D.W. Jones, et al., “Survey of  mercury vapour in dental offices in Atlantic Canada”, Can. Dent. Assoc. J.,  4906:378‑395, 1983; & R.W. Miller, et al., ”Report on independent survey taken of Austin dental offices for mercury contamination”, Texas Dent. J., 100(1):6‑9, 1983; & A. Skuba, “Survey for mercury vapour in Manitoba dental offices”,  J. Can.Dent. Assoc., 50(7):517‑522, 1984; & R.H. Roydhouse, et al., ”Mercury in dental offices”, J Can Dent  Assoc, 51(2):156‑158, 1985; &   R.T. McNerney, et al., "Mercury Contamination in the Dental Office: A Review",   NYS Dental Journal, Nov 1979, p457-458.

(7)        L. Kantor, et al., “Mercury vapour in the  dental office‑does carpeting make a difference?”, JADA , 103(9):402‑407, 1981; & G.F.Chop, et al., “Mercury vapour  related to  manipulation of amalgam and to floor surfaces”, Oper. Dent., 8(1):23‑27, 1983; & G.C. Battistone, et al., “Mercury as occupational hazard in dentistry”, Clinical Chemistry and Chemical Toxicity of Metals, 1977, 219:205-8.

(8)        Redhe, O., Sick From Amalgam R-Dental Ab, Frejavagen 33, S-79133 Falun, Sweden(100 cases). Olle Redhe; [olle.redhe@telia.com]

(9)        Dr. I. Gerhard, Dr. E. Roller, et al., Tubingen Univ. Gynecological Clinic, Heidelberg, 1996;   &  “Heavy Metals and Fertility”, J of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 54(8):593-611, 1998; & “Impact of heavy metals on hormonal and immunological factors in women with repeated miscarriages”, &  I. Gerhard, “Ganzheitiche Diagnostik un Therapie bie Infertilitat”, Erfahrungsheilkunde, 1993, 42(3):100-106; & “Unfruchtbarkeit bei Frauen durch Umweltgifte” in Pravention, Diagnose und Therapie von Umwelterkrankungen, JD Kruse-Jarres (Ed.), 1993, p51-68; & Gerhard I, Waldbrenner P, Thuro H, Runnebaum B, [Diagnosis of heavy metal loading by the oral DMPS and chewing gum tests], Klinisches Labor, 38:404-411 (1992).

(10)     Editorial, J California Dental Assoc., 1984, 12:37.; & Proceedings of Intl Conference on Mercury Hazards in Dental Practice, Sept 2‑4,1981, Glasgow Scot, Dept. of Clinical Physics and Bio-Engineering, (Gordon - Pregnancy in Female Dentists‑ a Mercury Hazard) & (several survey studies comparing level of mercury in hair of dental staff vs. controls); & Gordon HP, Cordon LD, “Reduction in mercury vapour levels in Seattle dental offices”,  J Dent Res Abstract, 1092, 57A:347, 1981.

(11)     Lamm O, et al., “Subclinical effects of exposure to inorganic mercury revealed by somatosensory‑evoked potentials”, Eur Neurol, 24:237-243; & (b) Altmann L, Sveinsson K,   “Visual evoked potentials in 6 year old children in relation to mercury and lead levels”,  Neurotoxicol Teratol, 1998, 20(1):9-17; & (c) Chang YC, Yeh CY, Wang JD, “Subclinical neurotoxicity of mercury vapor revealed by a multimodality potential study of chloralkali workers”, Immunol, 1999, 117(3):482-8.

(12) Dimaval Scientific monograph, sixth Ed., Jan 1997, Dr Johann Ruprecht, Heyl Corporation.

(13)     S. Hussain, et al., “Mercuric chloride‑induced reactive oxygen species and its effect on antioxidant enzymes in different regions of rat brain”, J Environ Sci Health, B 1997 May;32(3):395‑409; & S. Tan, et al., “Oxidative stress induces programmed cell death in neuronal cells”, J Neurochem, 1998, 71(1):95-105; &  J.S. Bains, et al., “Neurodegenerative disorders in humans and role of glutathione in oxidative stress mediated neuronal death”, Brain Res Rev, 199, 25(3):335-58; & P. Bulat, “Activity of Gpx and SOD in workers occupationally exposed to mercury”,  Arch Occup Environ Health, 1998, Sept, 71 Suppl:S37-9; & Stohs SJ, Bagchi D, “Oxidative mechanisms in the toxicity of metal ions”, Free Radic Biol Med, 1995, 18(2): 321-36.

(14)     (a) Magnus Nylander, “Mercury concentrations in the human brain and kidneys in relation to exposure from dental amalgam fillings”, Proceedings, ICBM 1988; & M. Nylander, et al.,   "Mercury concentrations in the human brain and kidneys and exposure from amalgam fillings", Swed Dent J, 1987, 11:179-187; & Prosth Dent, 1987, 58:704-707; & (b) Schupp, Riedel, et al., “Amalgamfullungen auf die Quecksilberkonzentration in menschlichen”, Organen.Dt Zahnarztl.Z., 1992, 47:490-496.; & (c) Barregard L, Svalander C, Schutz A, Westberg G, Sallsten G, Blohm, Molne J, Attman PO, Haglind P, "Cadmium, mercury, and lead in kidney cortex of the general Swedish population: A study of biopsies from living kidney donors", Environ Health Perspect, 1999 Nov;107(11):867-871.

(15)      Svare CW, et al., Univ. of Iowa, “The effects of dental amalgam on mercury levels in expired air”, J. Dent. Res., 1981, 60(9):1668‑1671; & Patterson JE, "Mercury in human breath from dental amalgams", Bull Env Contam Toxicol, 34 1985 459.

(16)      K. Ott, et al., “Mercury burden due to amalgam fillings”, Dtsch. Zahnarztl. Z.,   39(9):199‑205, 1984; & Lichtenberg H, "Mercury vapour in the oral cavity in relation to number of amalgam surfaces and the classic symptoms of chronic mercury poisoning",  J Orthomol Med, (1996), v11, n.2, 87-94.

(17)      J. Abraham, C.Svare, et al., “The effects of dental amalgam restorations on blood mercury  levels”, J. Dent.Res., 1984, 63(1):71‑73; & Snapp KR, Boyer DB, Peterson LC, Svare CW, "The contribution of dental amalgam to mercury in blood", J Dent Res, 1989, May;68(5):780-5

(18) M.J. Vimy, F.L. Lorscheider, ”Intra oral mercury released from dental amalgams and estimation of daily dose”, J. Dent Res., 1985, 64(8):1069‑1075; & Res, 1985,  64(8):1072-5.

(19)     Matts Hanson, Dept of  Zoophysiology, University of Lund, Sweden, “Amalgam hazards in your teeth”,  J. Orthomolecular Psychiatry, 1983, 2(3): 194-201; & F.L. Lorscheider, et al., “Evaluation of the safety issue of mercury release from amalgam fillings”, 1993, FASEB J, 7:1432-33. 

(20)      M.J. Vimy, Takahashi Y, Lorscheider FL, Maternal‑Fetal Distribution of Mercury Released From Dental Amalgam Fillings, Dept of Medicine and Medical  Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Univ of Calgary, Calgary Alberta Canada, 1990;  & Amer. J. Physiol., 1990,  258:R939-945; & N.D. Boyd, J. Vimy, et al., ” Mercury from dental silver tooth fillings impairs sheep kidney function”,  Am. J. Physiol,  261 (Regulatory Integrative Comp  Physiol. 30):R1010‑R1014, 1991; & L.Hahn, et al., Distribution of mercury released from  amalgam fillings into monkey tissues”, FASEB J., 1990, 4:5536.

(21)      R.A. Goyer, ”Toxic effects of metals” in: Cassarett and Doull’s Toxicology - The Basic Science of Poisons, McGraw-Hill Inc., N.Y., 1993.

(22)      P.Kuhnert, et al., “Comparison of mercury levels in maternal blood fetal cord blood and placental tissue”, Am. J. Obstet. and Gynecol., 139:209‑212, 1981; & Vahter M, Akesson A, Lind B, Bjors U, Schutz A, Berglund M, "Longitudinal study of methylmercury and inorganic mercury in blood and urine of pregnant and lactating women, as well as in umbilical cord blood", Environ Res, 2000, Oct;84(2):186-94. 

(23) W.D. Kuntz, “Maternal and chord blood mercury background levels; Longitudinal surveillance”, Am J Obstet and Gynecol, 143(4):440‑443, 1982. 

(24)      J.B. Brodsky, “Occupational exposure to mercury in dentistry and pregnancy outcome”, JADA 111(11):779‑780, 1985.

(25)      C. Malmström, M. Hansson, M. Nylander, Conference on Trace Elements in Health and Disease, Stockholm May 25‑1992; & C. Malmstrom, et al., “Silver amalgam: an unstable material”, Swedish paper translated in Bio-Probe Newsletter, Vol 9(1):5-6, Jan. 1993; &   C. Malmström, “Amalgam derived mercury in feces”, Journal of Trace Elements in Experimental Medicine, 5, (Abs 122), 1992; Nylander, et al., Fourth International Symposium Epidemiology in Occupational Health, Como Italy, Sept 1985.

(26) A.F. Zamm, “Removal of dental mercury: often an effective treatment for very sensitive patients”, J Orthomolecular Med, 1990, 5(53):138-142 (22 patients). 

(27)      Matts Hanson,” Why is mercury toxic?: Basic chemical and biochemical properties of mercury/amalgam in relation to biological effects”, ICBM conference Colorado Springs, Co,1988, Proceedings; & Hartman DE, “Missed diagnoses and misdiagnoses of environmental toxicant exposure”, MCS, Psychiatr Clin North Am, 1998, 21(3):659-70; &     Merritt’s Textbook of Neurology, 9th Ed., Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, 1995, p668-; & Clinical Management of Poisoning, 3rd Ed. (p753), Haddad, Shannon, and Winchester, W.B. Saunders and Company, Philadelphia, 1998; & U.S. EPA, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Mercury Health Effects, Update Health Issue Assessment, Final Report, 1984, EOA-600/8-84f. 

(28)     F. Schmidt, et al., “Mercury in urine of employees exposed to magnetic fields”, Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen, 1997, 117(2):199-202; & Sheppard AR and Eisenbud M, Biological effects of electric and magnetic fields of extremely low frequency, New York University Press, 1977; & Ortendahl TW, Hogstedt P, Holland RP, "Mercury vapor release from dental amalgam in vitro caused by magnetic fields generated by CRT's", Swed Dent J, 1991, p 31 Abstract 22.

(29)     Mareck and Hockman, “Simulated crevice corrosion experiment for pH and solution chemistry determinations”, Corrosion, 1974, 23:1000‑1006.

(30)     T.Till, et al., "Mercury release from amalgam fillings and oral dysbacteriosis as a cause of resorption phenomena", Zahnarztl Welt/Reform (ZWR), 1978, 87:1130‑1134; & S. Olsson, et al., “Release of elements due to electrochemical corrosion of dental amalgam”,  J of Dental Research, 1994, 73:33-43; & T. Fusayama, et al., J Dental Res, 1963, 42:1183-1197; &  H. Freden, et al., “Mercury in gingival tissues adjacent to amalgam fillings”,  Odontal Revy, 1974, 25(2):207-210; & H. Reden, Odontal Revy, 25,1971, 207-210.

(31)     Langan, Fan, Hoos, “The use of Mercury in dentistry: a critical review of the  literature”, JADA, Vol 115 December 1987, 867 Donated by The ADA; & Health damage due to exposure to mercury vapour (Mercury) Szkody zdrowotne wywolane narazeniem na pary rteci (Mercury). Moszczynski‑P Jr; Moszczynski‑P Czas‑Stomatol. 1989 Apr; 42(4):    233‑81989, POLISH; & I Mandel, Assoc Dean for Research, School of Dental and Oral Surgery, Columbia Univ., N.Y., JADA, Vol 122, Aug 1991.

(32) T.A. Cook, et al., “Fatal mercury intoxication in a dental surgery assistant”,  British Dent Journal, 1969, 127:533-555. 

(33) S.C. Langley-Evans, et al., “SO2: a potent glutathione depleting agent”, Comp Biochem Physiol Pharmocol Toxicol Endocrinol, 114(2):89-98; & (b) P.E. Emory, et al., “Increased prevalence of poor sulphoxidation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis”, Ann Rheum Dis, 1992, 51(3):318-20; & (c)  Markovich, et al., "Heavy metals (Hg, Cd) inhibit the activity of the liver and kidney sulfate transporter Sat‑1", Toxicol  Appl Pharmacol, 1999, 154(2):181‑7; & (d) S.A. McFadden, “Xenobiotic metabolism and adverse environmental response: sulfur-dependent detox pathways”, Toxicology, 1996, 111(1-3):43-65; & (e) Alberti A, Pirrone P, Elia M, Waring RH, Romano C,  “Sulphation deficit in ‘low-functioning’ autistic children”, Biol Psychiatry, 1999, 46(3):420-4.

(34)     Patrick Störtebecker, Associate Professor of Neurology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Mercury Poisoning from Dental Amalgam—A Hazard to the Human Brain, ISBN: 0-941011001-1, & Dental Caries as a  Cause of Nervous Disorders, Bioprobe, Inc., http://www.bioprobe.com; &Neurology for Barefoot Doctors, Störtebecker Foundation for Research, 1988; & J Canadian Dental Assoc, 33(6):300-.

(35)     Huggins HA, Levy TE, Uniformed Consent: the hidden dangers in dental care, 1999, Hampton Roads Publishing Company Inc; & Hal Huggins, Its All in Your Head, 1997; & Center for Progressive Medicine, 1999, http://www.hugnet.com. 

(36)     Sam Queen; Chronic Mercury Toxicity—New Hope Against an Endemic Disease, http://www.bioprobe.com; & F.L. Lorscheider, et al., "Mercury exposure from silver tooth fillings: emerging evidence questions a paradigm", FASEB J, 9:504-508, 1995.

(37)     A. Anttila, et al., Finnish Inst. of Occupational Health, “Effects of paternal occupation exposure to lead or mercury on spontaneous abortion”, J of Occup & Environ Med, 1995, 37(8):915-21; & Cordier S, Deplan F, Mandereau L, Hemon D, “Paternal exposure to mercury and spontaneous  abortions”, Br J Ind Med, 1991 Jun, 48(6):375‑81; & Savitz DA, Sonnenfeld NL, Olshan AF, “Review of epidemiologic studies of paternal occupational exposure and spontaneous abortion”,  Am J Ind Med, 1994 Mar, 25(3):361‑83; & Mohamed, et al., “Laser light scattering study of the toxic effects of methylmercury on sperm motility”, J Androl, 7(1):11‑15, 1986.

(38)     S. Ziff and M. Ziff, Infertility and Birth Defects: Is Mercury from Dental Fillings a Hidden Cause?, Bio-Probe, Inc., ISBN: 0-941011-03-8.1987.

(39)     M. Inouye, et al., “Behavorial and neuropathological effects of prenatal methyl mercury exposure in mice”, Neurobehav. Toxicol. Teratol.,  1985,7:227‑232; & P. Grandjean, et al., “MeHg and neurotoxicity in children”,  Am J Epidemiol, 1999, 150(3):301-5; & Z. Annau, et al., Johns Hopkins Univ., School of Public Health, “Mechanisms of neurotoxicity and their relationships to behavioral changes”, Toxicology, 1988, 49(2):219-25; & S.D. Vanay, et al., “CNS arylsulfatases inhibited by methyl mercury”, Pharmacol Toxicol, 1991, 69(1):71-4.

(40) F. Perger, Amalgamtherape, in Kompendiu der Regulationspathologie und Therapie, Sonntag-Verlag, 1990; & “Belastungen durch toxische Schwermetalle”, 1993, 87(2):157-63; & K.H. Friese, ”Homoopathische Behandlung der Amalgamvergiftung”, Allg. Homoopathische Z, 241(5):184-187, & Erfahrungsheikunde, 1996, (4):251-253; & “Amalgamvergiftung_moglicher”, Der Naturazt, 1995, 135(8):13-15; & “Schnupfen-Was tun?”, Therapeutikon, 1994, 8(3):62-68; & Homoopathische Behandlung de Amalgamvergiftung & “Polemik und Wirklichkeit”, Allgemeine Homoopathische zeitschrift, 1994, 239(6): 225-233 ; & “Amalgamtherapie fur Arzte und Zahnarzte”, Panta 3, 1992, Haug-Verlag.; & Natura Med, 1992, 7(4):295-306; & M. Strassburg, et al., “Generalized allergic reaction from silver amalgam fillings”, Dtsche Zahnarztliche Zeit, 22:3-9, 1967 (total: over 1200 cases).

(41)     Khera, et al., Teratogenic and genetic effects of mercury toxicity. The biochemistry of mercury in the environment, Nriagu, J.O. Ed, Amsterdam, Elsevier, 503‑18,1979; &   Teratology, 8:293-304.

(42) Babich, et al., ”The mediation of mutagenicity and clastogenicity of heavy metals by physiochemical factors”, Environ Res, 1985, 37:253‑286; & K. Hansen, et al., “A survey of metal induced mutagenicity in vitro and in vivo”, J Amer Coll Toxicol, 1984, 3:381‑430. 

(43)     Knapp LT, Klann E, “Superoxide‑induced stimulation of protein kinase C via  thiol modification and modulation of zinc content”, J Biol Chem, 2000 May 22; & B. Rajanna, et al., “Modulation of protein kinase C by heavy metals”, Toxicol Lett, 1995, 81(2-3):197-203; & A. Badou, et al., “HgCl2-induced IL-4 gene expression in T cells involves a protein kinase C-dependent calcium influx through L-type calcium channels”, & D.B. Veprintsev, 1996, Institute for Biological Instrumentation, Russian Academy of Sciences, “Pb2+ and Hg2+ binding to alpha‑lactalbumin”, Biochem Mol Biol Int, 1996 Aug, 39(6):255‑65. 

(44)     L. Verchaeve, et al., Comparative in vitro cytogenetic studies in mercury exposed human lymphocytes”, Mutation  Res., 1985, 157:221‑226; & G.A. Caron, et al., “Lymphocyte transformation induced ...”, Int Arch Allergy, 37:76-87, 1970. 

(45)     L. Pelletier, et al.., ”In vivo self reactivity of mononuclear cells to T cells and macrophages exposed to Hg Cl2", Eur. J Immun., 1985, 460‑465; & Pelletier, et al., “Autoreactive T cells in mercury induced autoimmune disease”, J Immunol,1986, 137(8):2548-54; & Scand J   Immunology, 1990, 31:65-74;& M. Kubicka, et al., “Autoimmune disease induced by mercuric chloride”, Int Arch Allergy Immunol, Jan 1996, 109(1):11-20.

(46)     Veron, et al., “Amalgam dentaires et allergies”, J Biol Buccale., 1986, 14:83‑100 (41 cases); & D.E. Swartzendruber, Med Hypotheses, 1993, vol. 41, no. 1, p31-34.

(47)     A. Buchner, et al., “Amalgam tattoo of the oral mucosa: a clinicopatholigic study of 268 cases”, Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1980, 49(2):139-47; & M. Forsell, et al., “Mercury content in amalgam tattoos of human oral mucosa and its relation to local tissue reactions”,  Eur J Oral Sci, 1998, 106(1):582-7; & J.D. Harrison, et al., “Amalgam tattoos: light and microscopy and electron-probe micro-analysis”;  & T. Kanzaki, et al., Electron microscopic X-ray microanalysis of metals deposited in oral mucosa”,  J Dermatol, 1992,  19(8):487-92; & K. Nilner, et al., “In vitro testing of dental materials by means of macrophage cultures”, J Biomed Mater Res, 1986, 20(8):1125-38.

(48)     K. Arvidson, ”Corrosion studies of dental gold alloy in contact with amalgam”,  Swed Dent J, 68:135-139, 1984; & Skinner EW, The Science of Dental Materials, 4th Ed. revised,   W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, p284-285, 1957.

(49)     A. Kingman, et al., National Institute of Dental Research, “Mercury concentrations in urine and blood associated with amalgam exposure in the U.S. military population”, Dent Res, 1998, 77(3):461-71.

(50)     J. Kawada, et al., “Effects of inorganic and methyl mercury on thyroidal function”, J Pharmacobiodyn, 1980, 3(3):149-59; & Ghosh N, “Thyrotoxicity of cadmium and mercury”, Biomed Environ Sci, 1992, 5(3):236-40. 

(51)     Heintze, et al., “Methylation of mercury from dental amalgam and mercuric chloride by oral          Streptococci”, Scan. J. Dent. Res., 1983, 91:150‑152; &  Rowland, Grasso, Davies, “The methylation of mercuric chloride by human intestinal bacteria”, Experientia,  Basel 1975, 31:1064‑1065; & M.K. Hamdy, et al., “Formation of methyl mercury by bacteria”, App Microbiol, 1975, Sept.; & W. Forth, “Toxikologie von Quecksilberverbindungen”, in Quecksilber in der Umwelt-Hearing zur Amalgamprolematik, Niedersachsisches Umweltministerium, 1991. 

 (52)     “Bacterial growth on dental restorative materials in mucosal contact”, Orstavic, Arneberg, Valderhaug, Acta Odontol. Scand.,1981, 39:267‑274.

(53)     C. Thornsberry, MRL Services, Franklin, Tenn, Proceedings of Infectious Diseases Soc. of America, San Francisco, Ca.; & USA Today, April, 1997; & Science News, Vol 155, June 5, 1999, p356. 

(54)     M.E. Lund, et al., “Treatment of acute MeHg poisoning by NAC”, J Toxicol Clin Toxicol, 1984, 22(1):31-49; & Livardjani F, Ledig M, Kopp P, Dahlet M, Leroy M, Jaeger A, “Lung and blood superoxide dismutase activity in mercury vapor exposed rats: effect of  N‑acetylcysteine treatment”, Toxicology, 1991 Mar 11, 66(3):289‑95; & G. Ferrari, et al., Dept. of Pathology, Columbia Univ., J Neurosci, 1995, 15(4):2857-66; & R.R. Ratan, et al., Dept. of Neurology, Johns Hopkins Univ., J Neurosci, 1994, 14(7):4385-92; &  Z. Gregus, et al., “Effect of lipoic acid on biliary excretion of glutathione and metals”, Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1992, 114(1):88-96; & J.F. Balch, et al., Prescription for Nutritional Healing, 2nd Ed., 1997. 

(55)      Dickman MD, Leung KM, “Hong Kong subfertility links to mercury in human hair and fish”, Sci Total Environ, 1998, 214:165-   74; & “Mercury and organochlorine exposure from fish consumption in Hong Kong”, Chemosphere, 1998 Aug, 37(5):991‑1015. 

(56)     X.M. Shen, et al., “Neurobehavioral effects of NAC conjugates of dopamine: possible relevance for Parkinson’s Disease”,  Chem Res Toxicol, 1996, 9(7):1117-26; & Chem Res Toxicol, 1998, 11(7):824-37; &  A. Nicole, et al., “Direct evidence for glutathione as mediator of apoptosis in neuronal cells”, Biomed Pharmacother, 1998, 52(9):349-55; & J.P. Spencer, et al., “Cysteine and GSH in PD; mechanisms involving ROS”, J Neurochem, 1998, 71(5):2112-22; & P. Jenner, “Oxidative mechanisms in PD”, Mov Disord, 1998, 13(Supp1):24-34; & D. Offen, et al., “Use of thiols in treatment of PD”, Exp Neurol, 1996,141(1):32-9; & A.D. Owen, et al., Ann NY Acad Sci, 1996, 786:217-33; & J.J.  Heales, et al., Neurochem Res, 1996, 21(1):35-39.       

(57)     N. Campbell, M.Godfrey, “Confirmation of mercury retention and toxicity using DMPS provocation”, J of Advancement in Medicine, 7(1), 1994, (80 cases); & (b) D. Zander, et al., “Mercury mobilization by DMPS in subjects with and without amalgams”, Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed, 1992, 192(5):447-54(12 cases). 

(58)      Kostial K, et al., “Decreased Hg retention with DMSA”,  J Appl Toxicol, 1993, 13(5):321-5; & Kostyniak PJ, Soiefer AL, J Appl Toxicol, 1984, 4(4):206-10; & Butterworth RF, et al., Can J Neurol Sci, 1978, 5(4):397-400. 

(59)     A. Frustaci, et al., “Marked elevation of myocardial trace elements in Idiopathic Dilated Cardiomyopathy”, J of American College of Cardiology, 1999, 33(6):1578-83; & Husten L.,  “Trace elements linked to cardiomyopathy”, Lancet, 1999, 353(9164):1594; & D.V. Vassalo, “Effects of mercury on the isolated heart muscle are prevented by DTT and cysteine”, Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1999 Apr 15, 156(2):113‑8; & N.G. Ilblack, et al., “New aspects of murine coxsackie B3 mycocarditis: focus on heavy metals”, European Heart J, 1995, 16:supp O:20-4. 

(60)     V.D.M. Stejskal, Dept. of Clinical Chemistry, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden,   “Lymphocyte immuno‑stimulation assay—MELISA”,  & VDM Stejskal, et al., "MELISA: tool for the study of metal allergy", Toxicology in Vitro, 8(5):991-1000, 1994.

(61)     E. Lutz, et al., “Concentrations of mercury in brain and kidney of fetuses and infants”, Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology, 1996, 10:61-67; & G.Drasch, et al., “Mercury burden of human fetal and infant tissues”, Eur J Pediatr, 153:607-610, 1994. 

(62)      W. Kostler, President of the Austrian Oncology Society, Paper presented at the World Congress on Cancer, April 1994, Sydney, Australia. 

(63)     K. Peiper, et al., “Study of mercury uptake in dental students”, Dtsch Zahnarzt Z, 1989, 44(9):714-. 

(64)     Steinberg D, Grauer F, Niv Y, Perlyte M, Kopolivic K, Dept. of Oral Biology, Hebrew Univ. “Mercury among dental personnel in Israel”, Med Sci, 1995, 31(7):428-32.

(65)     Y.K. Fung, et al., “In vivo mercury and methyl mercury levels in patients at different intervals after amalgam restorations”, Carlson‑MP College of  Dentistry, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Lincoln, Northwest‑Dent, 1991 May‑Jun, 70(3):23‑6. 

(66)     C.M Thompson, W.R. Markesbery, et al., Univ. of Kentucky Dept. of Chemistry, “Regional brain trace‑element studies in Alzheimer's disease”, Neurotoxicology, 1988 (Spring),  9(1):1‑7; & Hock, et al., “Increased blood mercury  levels in Alzheimer’s patients”, Neural.  Transm., 1998, 105:59-68; & Cornett, et al., “Imbalances of trace elements related to oxidative damage in Alzheimer’s diseased brain”, Neurotoxicolgy, 1998, 19:339-345.

(67)     Vance DE, Ehmann WD, Markesbery WR, “A search for longitudinal variations in trace element levels in nails of Alzheimer's disease patients”, Biol Trace Elem Res, 1990 Jul‑Dec, 26‑27:461‑70; & Ehmann, et al., 1986, Neurotoxicology, 7:195-206; &    Thompson, et al., Neurotoxicology, 1988, 9:1-7. 

(68)      K.A. Ritchie, et al., Univ. of Glasgow, "Psychomotor testing of dentists with chronic low level mercury exposure",  J Dent Res, 74:420, IADR Abstract 160 (1995); & Occup Environ Med, 1995, 52(12):813-7.

(69)      D. Gonzalez-Ramirez, et al., "Urinary mercury, porphyrins, and neurobehavioral changes of dental workers in Monterrey, Mexico”, J Pharmocology and Experimental Therapeutics, 272(1):264-274, 1995.

(70)      D. Echeverria, et al., Batelle Center for Public Health Reseach, Seattle, "Behavioral effects of low level exposure to Hg vapor among dentists", Neurotoxicology & Teratology, 17(2):161-168, 1995.

(71)      S.C. Foo, et al., "Neurobehavioral effects in occupational chemical exposure",   Environmental Research, 60(2):267-273, 1993; & D.G. Mantyla, et al., "Mercury toxicity in the dental office: a neglected problem", JADA,  92:1189-1194, 1976.

(72)      D.L. Smith, "Mental effects of mercury poisoning", South Med J, 71:904-5, 1978.

(73)      M.E. Cianciola, et al., “Epidemiologic assessment of measures used to indicate exposure to mercury vapor”, Toxicol Eniviron Health, 1997, 52(1):19-33.

(74)      A.C. Bittner, et al., “Behavior effects of low level mercury exposure among dental professionals”, Neurotoxicology & Teratology, 1998, 20(4):429-39.

(75)   Katsunuma, et al., “Anaphylaxis improvement after removal of amalgam fillings”, Annals of Allergy, 1990, 64(5):472-75; & Yoshida S, Mikami H, Nakagawa H, Amayasu H,  “Amalgam allergy associated with exacerbation of aspirin-intolerant asthma”, Clin Exp Allergy, 1999, 29(10):1412-4; & M. Drouet, et al., “Is mercury a respiratory tract allergen?”,  Allerg Immunol(Paris), 1990, 22(3):81.

(76)      A. Schulte, et al., "Mercury concentrations in children with and without amalgam restorations", J Dent Res, 73(4):980 A-334; & Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed, 1994, 104(11):1336-40.

(77)      I. Skare, "Mass balance and systemic uptake of mercury released from dental fillings", Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 80(1-4):59-67, 1995. 

(78)      G. Drasch, et al., "Silver concentrations in human tissues: the dependence on dental amalgam", J Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology, 9(2):82-7, 1995; & L.J. Calsakis, et al., "Allergy to silver amalgams", Oral Surg, 46:371-5, 1978.

(79)      L. Bjorkman, et al., "Mercury in saliva and feces after removal of amalgam fillings", Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 1997, 144(1):156-62; & (b) J Dent Res, 75:38-, IADR Abstract 165, 1996.

(80)      M. Osterblad, et al., "Antimicrobial and mercury resistance among persons with and without amalgam fillings", Antimicrobial Agents and Chem, 39(11):2499, 1995. 

(81)      L.I. Liang, et al., "Mercury reactions in the human mouth with dental amalgams", Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 80:103-107.

(82)      J. Begerow, et al., "Long-term mercury excretion in urine after removal of amalgam fillings", Int  Arch Occup Health, 66:209-212, 1994. 

(83)      I. Skare, et al., Swedish National Board of Occupational Safety and Health, "Human exposure to Hg and Ag released from dental amalgam restorations", Archives of  Environmental Health, 1994, 49(5):384-394.

(84)      J.C. Veltman, et al., “Alterations of heme, cytochrome P-450, and steroid metabolism by mercury in rat adrenal gland”,  Arch Biochem Biophys, 1986, 248(2):467-78; & A.G. Riedl et al., Neurodegenerative Disease Research Center, King’s College,UK, “P450 and hemeoxygenase enzymes in the basal ganglia and their role’s in Parkinson’s disease”, Adv Neurol, 1999, 80:271-86; & Alfred V. Zamm, “Dental mercury: a factor that aggravates and induces xenobiotic intolerance”,  J. Orthmol. Med., vol. 6, no. 2, p67-77, 1991. 

(85)      J.A. Weiner, et al., “The relationship between mercury concentration in human organs and predictor variables", Sci Tot Environ, 138(1-3):101-115,1993; & "An estimation of the uptake of mercury from amalgam fillings in Swedish subjects", Science of the Total Environment, v168,n3, p255-265, 1995.

(86)      E.R. Smart, et al., "Resolution of lichen planus following removal of amalgam  restorations", Br Dent J, 178(3):108-112, 1995 (12 cases); & H. Markow, ”Regression from orticaria following dental filling removal”, New York State J Med, 1943, 1648-1652; & G. Sasaki, et al., “Three cases of oral lichenosis caused by metallic fillings”, J Dermatol, 23 Dec, 1996, 12:890-892; & J. Bratel, et al., “Effect of replacement of dental amalgam on OLR”, Journal of Dentistry, 1996, 24(1-2):41-45 (161 cases).

(87)      A. Skoglund, Scand J Dent Res, 102(4):216-222, 1994; and 99(4):320-9, 1991 (40 cases); & P.O. Ostman, et al., “Clinical and histologic changes after removal of amalgms”,  Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Endodontics, 1996, 81(4):459-465; & S.H.bIbbotson, et al., “The relevance of amalgam replacement on oral lichenoid reactions”, British Journal of Dermatology, 134(3):420-3, 1996 (270 cases).

(88)      M.E. Godfrey, ”Chronic ailments related to amalgams”, J Adv Med,1990, 3:247.

(89)      Berglund A, Molin M, "Mercury levels in plasma and urine after removal of all amalgam restorations: the effect of using rubber dams", Dent Mater, 1997 Sep, 13(5):297-304; & M. Molin, et al., "Kinetics of mercury in blood and urine after amalgam removal", J Dent Res, 74:420, IADR Abstract 159, 1995; & (b) M. Molin, et al., “Mercury, selenium, and GPX before and after amalgam removal”,  Acta Odontol Scand, 1990, 48:189-202. 

(90)      P. Koch, et al., “Oral lesions and symptoms related to metals”, Dermatol, 1999, 41(3):422-430; & "Oral lichenoid lesions, mercury hypersensitity, ...", Contact Dermatitis, 1995, 33(5): 323-328; & S. Freeman, et al., “Oral lichenoid lesions caused by allergy to mercury in amalgam”, Contact Dermatitis, 33(6):423-7, Dec 1995 (Denmark); & H. Mobacken, et al., Contact Dermatitis, 10:11-15, 1984; & M. Jolly, et al., “Amalgam related chronic ulceration of oral mucosa”, Br Dent J, 1986,160:434-437; & C. Camisa, et al., “Contact hypersensitivity to mercury”, Cutis, 1999, 63(3):189-. 

(91)    B. Lindqvist, et al., "Effects of removing amalgam fillings from patients with diseases affecting the immune system", Med Sci Res, 24(5):355-356, 1996. 

(92)      L. Tandon, et al., "Elemental imbalance studies by INAA on ALS patients", J Radioanal Nuclear Chem, 195(1):13-19, 1995; & Y. Mano, et al., “Mercury in the hair of ALS patients”, Rinsho Shinkeigaku, 1989, 29(7):844-848; & Mano, et al., Rinsho Shinkeigaku, 1990, 30:1275-1277; & Khare, et al., “Trace  element imbalances in ALS”, Neurotoxicology, 1990, 11:521-532. 

(93)      L. Barregard, et al., "People with high mercury uptake from their own dental amalgam fillings",  Occup Envir Med, 52:124-128, 1995; & S.Langworth, et al., “A case of high mercury exposure from dental amalgam”, European J Oral Sci, 1996, 104(3):320-321; & R. Stromberg, et al., "A case of unusually high mercury exposure from amalgam fillings", Tandlakartidningen, 88(10): 570-572, 1996; & McCann, et al., “Intravenous gamma globulin (IVIG) treatment of autoimmune kidney disease associated with mercury (Hg++) toxicity”,  J Allergy Clin Immunol, 95(1)(Pt 2):145. 

(94)   F.Berglund, Case reports spanning 150 years on the adverse effects of  dental amalgam, Bio-Probe, Inc., Orlando, FL, 1995, ISBN 0-9410011-14-3 (245 cured); & Tuthill JY, "Mercurial neurosis resulting from amalgam fillings", The Brooklyn Medical Journal, December 1898, vol.12, no.12, p725-742.  

(95)   Lichtenberg HJ, "Elimination of symptoms by removal of dental amalgam from mercury poisoned patients", J Orthomol Med, 8:145-148, 1993; & Lichtenberg H, "Symptoms before and after proper amalgam removal in relation to serum-globulin reaction to metals", Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, 1996, 11(4):195-203 (119 cases). 

(96)      A.F. Goldberg, et al., “Effect of amalgam restorations on whole body potassium and bone mineral content in older men”, Gen Dent, 1996, 44(3):246-8; & K. Schirrmacher,1998, “Effects of lead, mercury, and methyl mercury on gap junctions and [Ca2+]i in bone cells”, Calcif Tissue Int, 1998 Aug, 63(2):134‑9. 

(97)      Redhe O, Pleva J, "Recovery from ALS and from asthma after removal of dental amalgam fillings", Int J Risk & Safety in Med, 1994, 4:229-236; & Vanacore N, Corsi L, Fabrizio E, Bonifati V, Meco G, "Relationship between exposure to environmental toxins and motor neuron disease: a case report", Med Lav, 1995 Nov-Dec, 86(6):522-33. 

(98)      A. Seidler, et al., “Possible environmental factors for Parkinson's disease", Neurology, 46(5):1275-1284, 1996; & Vroom FO, Greer M, "Mercury vapor intoxication", 95:305-318, 1972; & Ohlson, et al., “Parkinson’s disease and occupational exposure to mercury”, Scand J of Work Environment Health, Vol. 7, No. 4, 252-256, 1981; & L.G. Golota, “Therapeutic properties of Unitihiol”, Farm.Zh., 1980, 1:18-22.

(99)      M. Nylander, et al., “Mercury accumulation in tissues from dental staff and  controls”, Swedish Dental Journal, 13:235-243, 1989; & M. Nylander, et al., Br J Ind Med, 1991, 48(11):729-34; & “Mercury in pituitary glands of dentists”, Lancet, 442, Feb 26, 1986. 

(100)   M.Hanson, et al., "The dental amalgam issue: a review", Experientia, 47:9-22, 1991; & J.A. Weiner, et al., “Does mercury from amalgam restorations constitute a health hazard”, Sci Total Environ, 1990, 99(1-2):1-22; & R. Marxkors, “Korrosionserscheinungen an Amalgamf llungen und Deren Auswirkungen auf den Menschlichen Organismus”, Das Deutsche Zahn rztebl., 24, 53, 117 and 170, 1970. 

(101)    E. Henriksson, et al., "Healing of lichenoid reactions following removal of  amalgam", J Clinical Periodontol, v22,n4, p287-94, 1995; & M. Forsbec, et al., Journal of Clinical Immunology, 16(1):31-40, Jan 1996; & A. Larsson, et al., “The histopathology of oral mucosal lesions associated with amalgam”, Oral Dis, 1995, 1(3):152-8.

(102)    R.L. Siblerud, et al., "Evidence that mercury from silver fillings may be an etiological factor in multiple sclerosis", Sci Total Environ, 1994, v142,,n3, p191-; & “Mental health, amalgam fillings, and MS”, Psychol Rep, 1992, 70(3 Pt2):1139-51; & T. Engalls, Am J Forensic Med Pathol, 1983 Mar, 4(1):55-61; & Siblerud R.L. and Kienholz E., “Evidence that mercury from dental amalgam may cause hearing loss in multiple sclerosis patients”, J. Orthomol. Med, v12, n4, p240-4, 1997.

(103)    A.P. Tanchyk, "Amalgam removal for treatment of arthritis", Gen Dent, v42, n4, July 1994, p 354-.

(104)    C.F. Facemire, et al., “Reproductive impairment in the Florida panther”, Health Perspect, 1995, 103 (Supp4):79-86; & J.M. Yang, et al., “The distribution of HgCl2 in rat body and its effect on fetus”, Environ Sci, 1996, 9(4):437-42; M. Maretta, et al., “Effect of mercury on the epithelium of the fowl testis”, Vet Hung, 1995, 43(1):153-6.

(105)    T. Colborn (Ed.), Chemically Induced Atlerations in Functional Development, Princeton Scientific Press, 1992; & ”Developmental effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals", Environ Heath Perspectives, v101, n5, Oct 1993; &  B. Windham, "Health, Hormonal, and Reproductive Effects of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals" (including mercury), Annotated Bibliography, 1996; & Giwercman A, Carlsen E, Keiding N, Skakkabaek NE, “Evidence for increasing incidence of abnormalities of the human testis: a review”, Environ Health Perspect, 1993, 101 Suppl(2):65-71; & Trachtenberg IM, Chronic effects of mercury in ogranisms, U.S. Dept. of Health, Eductation, and Welfare, Publ 74-473, 1974.

(106)    G.R. Bruce,"Cytotoxicity of retrofil materials", J Endodont., v19, n6, p288-92, 1993.

(107)    R.L. Siblerud, et al., ”Psychometric evidence that mercury from dental fillings may be a factor in depression, anger, and anxiety", Psychol Rep, v74, n1, 1994; & Amer. J. Psychotherapy, 1989, 58:575-87; Poisoning and Toxicology Compendium, Leikin & Palouchek, Lexi-Comp,1998, p705.

 (108)   M.Henningsson, et al., "Defensive characteristics in individuals with amalgam illness", Acta Odont Scand, 54(3):176-181, 1996.

(109)    Y.X. Liang, et al., "Psychological effects of low exposure to mercury vapor", Environmental  Med Research, 60(2):320-327, 1993; & T. Kampe, et al., "Personality traits of adolescents with intact and repaired  dentitions", Acta Odont Scand, 44:95-, 1986; & R. Kishi, et al., “Residual neurobehavioral effects of chronic exposure to mercury vapor”, Occupat. Envir. Med., 1994, 51:35-41; & A. Sikora, et al., “Evaluation of mental functions in workers exposed to metalic mercury”, Med Pr, 1992, 43(2):109-21.

(110)    N.  Roeleveld, et al., "Mental retardation and parental occupation", Br J Ind Med, 50(10):945-954, 1993. 

(111)    T.W. Clarkson, et al., "Billiary secretion of glutathione‑metal complexes", Fundam Appl       Toxicol, 1985, 5(5):816‑31; & D. Quig, Doctors Data Lab, "Cysteine metabolism and metal       toxicity",  Altern Med Rev, 1998, 3:4, p262‑270; & J. de Ceaurriz, et al., "Role of gamma‑ glutamyltranspeptidase (GGC) and extracellular glutathione in disopition of inorganic mercury", J Appl Toxicol, 1994, 14(3): 201‑; & W.O. Berndt, et al., "Renal glutathione and mercury uptake", Fundam  Appl Toxicol, 1985, 5(5):832‑9; & R.K. Zulups, et al., J Toxicol Environ Health, 1995, 44(4): 85-99; & D. Jay, “Glutathione inhibits SOD activity of Hg”, Arch Inst Cardiol Mex, 1998, 68(6):457-61. 

(112)    A. Oskarsson, et al., “Mercury in breast milk in relation to fish consumption and amalgam”,  Arch Environ Health, 1996, 51(3):234-41; & “Risk assessment in relation to neonatal metal exposure”, Analyst, 1998, 123(1):19-23; & Drasch, et al., “Mercury in human colostrum and early breast milk”,  J.,Trace Elem. Med. Biol., 1998, 12:23-27; & Grandjean P, Jurgensen PJ, Weihe P, “Milk as a source of methylmercury exposure in infants”, Environ Health Perspect, 1994 Jan, 102(1):74‑7.

(113)    T.A. Glavinskiaia, et al., “Complexons in the treatment of lupus erghematousus”, Dermatol Venerol, 1980, 12:24-28; & A.F. Hall, Arch Dermatol, 47, 1943, 610-611.

(114)    M. Aschner, et al., “Metallothioein induction in fetal rat brain by in utero exposure to elemental mercury vapor”, Brain Research, 1997, Dec 5, 778(1):222-32; & T.V. O’Halloran, “Transition metals in control of gene expression”, Science, 1993, 261(5122):715-25; & Matts RL, Schatz JR, Hurst R, Kagen R, “Toxic heavy metal ions inhibit reduction of disulfide bonds”,  J Biol Chem, 1991, 266(19):12695-702; & Boot JH, “Effects of SH-blocking compounds on the energy metablolism in isolated rat hepatocytes”, Cell Struct Funct, 1995, 20(3):233-8.

(115)    G. Hall, V-TOX, Mercury levels excreted after Vit C IV as chelator‑ by number of fillings,  Int Symposium "Status Quo and Perspectives of Amalgam and Other Dental Materials", European Academy, Ostzenhausen/Germany, April 29 ‑ May 1, 1994; & Heavy Metal Bulletin, Apr 1996, Vol.3, Issue 1, p6-8 (200 cured or significantly improved).

(116)    Liebert CA, Wireman J, Smith T, Summers AO, "The impact of mercury released from dental ‘silver’ fillings on antibiotic resistances in the primate oral and intestinal bacterial flora", Met Ions Biol Syst, 1997, 34:441-60; & A.O. Summers, et al., Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 37(4):825-834, 1993; & The Physiologist, 33(4), A-116, 1990; & J. Wireman, et al., Appl Environ Microbiol, 1997, 63(11):4494-503; & M. Vimy, et al.,”Silver dental fillings provoke an increase in mercury and antibiotic resistant bacteria in the mouth and intestines of primates”, APUA Newsletter, Fall, 1991.

(117)    C. Edlund, et al., "Resistance of the normal human microflora to mercury and antimicrobials", Clin Infect Dis, 22(6):944-950, 1996.

(118)    Tibbling L, Stejskal VDM, et al., “Immunolocial and brain MRI changes in patients with suspected metal intoxication", Int J Occup Med Toxicol, 4(2):285-294, 1995.

(119)    L. Ronnback, et al., "Chronic encephalopathies induced by low doses of mercury or lead",   Br J Ind Med, 49:233-240, 1992; & H. Langauer‑Lewowicka, ”Changes in the nervous system due to occupational metallic mercury poisoning”, Neurol Neurochir Pol, 1997 Sep‑Oct, 31(5):905‑13; & Kim P, Choi BH, “Selective inhibition of glutamate uptake by mercury in cultured mouse astrocytes”, Yonsei Med J, 1995, 36(3):299-305; & Brookes N. “In vitro evidence for the role of glutatmate in the CNS toxicity of mercury”, Toxicology, 1992, 76(3):245-56.

(120)    L.Pohl, Dept. of Dental Materials Science, Umea Univ., Sweden, "The dentist's exposure to elemental mercury during clinical work", Acta Odontol Scand, v53, n1, p44-48, 1995.

(121)    A.S. Rowland, et al.,“The effect of occupational exposure to mercury vapor on the fertility  of female dental assistants", Occupational & Environmental Medicine, v55, n1, 1994.

(122)  B. Ono, et al., “Reduced tyrosine uptake in strains sensitive to inorganic mercury”, Genet, 1987, 11(5):399-.

(123)    I. Skare, et al., "Mercury exposure of different origins among dentists and dental nurses", Scand J Work Environ Health, 16:340-347, 1990.

(124)    I. Akesson, et al., Dept. of Occupational Medicine, "Status of mercury and selenium in dental personnel", Arch Environ Health,  46(2):102-109, 1991; & Chang SB, et al., “Factors affecting blood mercury concentrations in practicing dentists”, Dent Res, 1992, 71(1):66-74; & “Examination of blood levels of mercurials in practicing dentists”, Anal Toxicol, 1987, 11(4):149-53. 

(125)    G. Hall, "Perspectives of Amalgam and Other Dental Materials", European Acadamy Symposium Article, Ostzenhausen, Germany, April 29, 1994.

(126)    K.R. Hoyt, et al., “Mechanisms of dopamine-induced cell death and differences from glutamate induced cell death”, Exp Neurol, 1997, 143(2):269-81; & P.Froissard, et al., Universite de Caen, “Role of glutathione metabolism in the glutamate-induced programmed cell death of neuronal cells”, Eur J Pharacol, 1997, 236(1): 93-99. 

(127)   Moszczynski, et al., "The behavior of T-Cells in the blood of workers exposed to mercury", Med Lav, 85(3):239-241,1994; & "Lymphocytes, T and NK cells in men exposed to mercury", Int J Occup Med Environ Health, 8(1):1995.

(128)    M.L.S. Queiroz, et al., "Immunoglobulin levels in workers exposed to inorganic mercury",   Pharmacol Toxicol, 74:72-75, 1994; & “Presence of micronuclei in lymphocytes of mercury exposed workers”, Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol, 1999, 21(1):141-50; & D.C. Santos, “Immunoglubulin E in mercury exposed workers”, 1997, 19(3):383-92.

(129)    P. Hultman, et al., Dept. of Pathology, Linkoping Univ., Sweden, ”Adverse immunological effects and immunity induced by  dental amalgam", FASEB J, 8:1183-1190, 1994; & Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1992, 113(2):199-208.

(130)    S. Enestrom, et al., "Does amalgam affect the immune system?",  Int Arch Allergy Immunol, 106:180-203, 1995.

(131)   Christensen MM, Ellermann-Eriksen S, Mogensen SC,  “Influence of mercury chloride on resistance to generalized infection with herpes simplex virus type 2 in mice”, Toxicology, 1996, 114(1): 57-66; & S.Ellermann-Eriksen, et al., "Effect of mercuric chloride on macrophage-mediated resistance mechanisms against infection", Toxicology, 93:269-297,1994; & M. Kubicka-Muranyi, et al., “Systemic autoimmune disease induced by mercuric chloride”, Int Arch Allergy Immunol, 1996, 109(1):11-20; & M.M.Christensen, et al., Institute of Medical Microbiology, “Comparision of interaction of MeHgCl2 and HgCl2 with murine macrophages”, Arch Toxicol, 1993, 67(3):205-11.

(132)    K. Sato, et al., "An epidemiological study of factors relating to mercury sensitization",   Arerugi, 44(2):86-92, 1995; & T. Mori, et al., “Mercury sensitization caused by environmental factors”, Nippon Eiseigaku Zasshi, 1998, 52(4):661-6.

(133)    M. Molin, et al., "Mercury in plasma in patients allegedly subject to oral galvanism",  Scand J Dent Res, 95:328-334, 1987. 

(134)    A.M. Aronsson, et al., "Dental amalgam and mercury", Biol Metals, 2:25-30,1989.

(135)    L. Bjorkman, et el, "Factors influencing mercury evaporation rate from dental amalgam fillings", Scand J Dent Res, 100(6):354-360, 1992.

(136)    D. Gay, et al., "Chewing releases mercury", Lancet, 8123:985-98, 1979.

(137)    B. Fredin, "Studies on the mercury release from dental amalgam fillings", Swed J Biol Med, No.3, 1988, p8-15; & Summers, Science News, 4-10-93; & G. Sallsten, et al., "Long term use  of  nicotine chewing gum and mercury exposure from dental amalgam", J Dent Res, 75(1):598, 1996; & (b) T. Gebel, et al., “Influence of chewing gum on urine mercury content”, Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed, 1996, 199(1):69-75.

(138)    D. Zander, et al., "Studies on human exposure to mercuy amalgam fillings", Ubl Hyg, 1990, 190: 325-.

(139)    G. Sallsten, et al., “Mercury in cerebrospinal fluid in subjects exposed to mercury vapor”, Environmental Research, 1994; 65:195-206.

(140)    R.L. Siblerud, "Health effects after dental amalgam removal", J Orthomolecular Med, 5(2): 95 -106.

(141)    L. Siblerud, et al., "Evidence that mercury from dental fillings may be an etiological factor in smoking", Toxicol Lett, v68, n3, 1993,p307-, & v69(3):305.

(142)    Ariza ME, Bijur GN, Williams MV, “Lead and mercury mutagenesis: role of H2O2, superoxide dismutase, and xanthine oxidase”, Environ Mol Mutagen, 1998, 31(4):352‑61; & M.E. Ariza, et al., “Mercury mutagenisis”, Biochem Mol Toxicol, 1999, 13(2):107-12; &           M.E. Ariza,et al., "Mutagenic effect of mercury", In Vivo, 8(4):559-63, 1994.                                        

(143)    P. Boffetta, et al., "Carciagenicity of mercury", Scand J Work Environ Health, 1993, 19(1):1-7; & “Study of workers compensated for mercury intoxication”, J Occup Med, 1994, 36(11):1260-4; & J Occup Med, 36(11):1260-64, 1994.

(144)    Y Zaichick, et al., ”Trace elements and thyroid cancer", Analyst, 120(3), 1995.

(145)    J.M. Gorell, et al., “Occupational exposure to mercury, manganese, copper, lead, and the risk of Parkinson’s disease”, Neurotoxicology, 1999, 20(2-3):239-47; & J.M. Gorell, et al., ”Occupational exposures to metals as risk factors for Parkinson's disease”, Neurology, 1997 Mar, 48:3, 650‑8.

(146)    Gerhard, et al., Zentralbl Gynakol, 1992, 114, 593-602; & I. Gerhard, Therapeutikon, 1993, 7, 478-91; & E. Roller, et al., J Fert Reprod, 1995, 3, 31-33; & U. Vallon, et al., J Fert Reprod, 1995, 3, 31.

(147)    M. Wood, "Mechanisms for the neurotoxicity of mercury", in Organotransitional Metal  Chemistry, Plenum Publishing Corp, N.Y, N.Y, 1987; & R.P. Sharma, et al., “Metals and neurotoxic effects”, J of Comp Pathology, vol 91, 1981.

(148)    H.R. Casdorph, Toxic Metal Syndrome, Avery Publishing Group, 1995.

(149)    B. Choi, et al., "Abnormal neuronal migration of human fetal brain", Journal of Neurophalogy, vol 37, p719-733, 1978; & F. Monnet-Tschudi, et al., “Comparison of the developmental effects of 2 mercury compounds on glial cells and neurons in the rat telencephalon”, Brain Research, 1996, 741:52-59; & Chang LW, Hartmann HA, “Quantitative cytochemical studies of RNA in experimental mercury poisoning”, Acta Neruopathol (Berlin), 1973, 23(1):77-83.

(150)    U.S. Public Health Service, "Toxicological Profile of Mercury", 1988; & J. Leiskir,   ”Cytotoxity of silver amalgam”, Scand J Dental Res, 1974.

(151)    Electric Power Research Institute, EPRI Technical Brief: "Mercury in the  Environment", 1993; & EPRI Journal, April 1990.

(152)    Pons S, Torres-Aleman I, “Insulin-like growth factor-I stimulates dephosphorylation of ikappa B through the serine phosphatase calcineurin”, J Biol Chem, 2000 Dec 8, 275(49):38620-5; & Langworth, et al., “Effects of low exposure to inorganic mercury on the human immune system”, Scand J Work Environ Health, 19(6):405-413, 1993. 

(153)   International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, “A Scientific Response to the American Dental Association Special Report and Statement of Confidence in Dental Amalgam”, IAOMT, POB 608531, Orlando,32860-8531, http://emporium.turnpike.net/P/PDHA/mercury/asr.htm; & IAOMT, Protocol for Mercury/Silver Filling Removal, http://emporium.turnpike.net/P/PDHA/mercury/iaomt.htm. 

(154)    K. Nordlind, et al., “Patch test reactions to metal salts in patients with oral mucosal lesions associated with amalgal fillings”, Contact Dermatitis, 1992, 27:3, 157-160; & E. Djerasci, et al., Int Dent J, 19:481-8, 1969; & A.M. Robinson, et al., “Contact dermatitis due to amalgam fillings”, Arch Dermatol Syphilol, 59:116-8, 1949; & R.R. White, et al., J Amer Dent Assoc, 92:124-7, 1976. 

(155)    L.D. Koller, “Immunotoxicology of Heavy Metals”, Int J of Immunopharm, 2:269-279, 1980; & Amer J Vet Res, v34, p1457-, 1973. 

(156)    E.G. Miller, et al., “Prevelence of mercury hypersensitivity among dental students”, J Dent   Res, 64:Abstract 1472, p338, 1985; & D. Kawahara, et al., “Epidemiologic study of occupational contact dermatitis in the dental clinic”, Contact Dermatitis, v 28, n2, p114-5, 1993. 

(157)    L.J Goldwater, “Toxicology of inorganic mercury”, Annals NY Acad Sci, 65:498-503, 1957; & J.B. Nielsen, et al., “Evaluation of mercury in hair and blood as biomarkers for methylmercury exposure”, Arch Toxicology, 1994, 65(5):317-321.

 (158)   Wenstrup, et al., “Trace element imbalances in the brains of Alzheimers patients”, Research, Vol 533, p125-131, 1990; & F.L. Lorscheider, B. Haley, et al., “Mercury vapor inhibits tubulin binding...”, FASEB J, 9(4):A-3485, 1995; & Vance, et al., Neurotoxicology, 1988, 9:197-208; & l. de Saint-Georges, et al., “Inhibition by mercuric chloride of the in vitro polymerization of microtubules”, CR Seances Soc Biol Fil, 1984, 178(5):562-6. 

(159)    W. Eggert-Kruse, et al., “Effect of heavy metals on in vitro interaction between human sperm and cervical mucus”, Dtsch Med Wochenschr, 1992, 117(37):1383-9 (German); E. Ernst, et al., “Effect of mercury on human sperm motility”, Toxicol, 1991, 68(6):440-4; & A. Daily, et al., “Declining sperm count: evidence that Young’s syndrome is associated with mercury”, BMJ, 1996, 313(7048):44. 

(160)  B.Windham, "Health Effects of Toxic Metals: An Annotated Bibliography", 1999; &    B. Windham, “Cognitive and Behavioral Effects of Toxic Metals”, 2000 (over 100 medical study references). 

(161)    F.L. Lorscheider, et al., “Inorganic mercury and the CNS: genetic linkage of mercury and antibiotic resistance”, Toxicology, 1995, 97(1):19-22; & M.C. Roberts, Dept. of Pathobiology, Univ. of Washington, “Antibiotic resistance in oral/respiratory bacteria”, Crit Rev Oral Biol Med, 1998, 9(4):522-. 

(162) N.K. Mottet, et al., “Health risks from increases in methylmercury exposure”, Health Perspect, v63:133-140, 1985; & M.K. Mohamed, et al., “Effects of methyl mercury on testicular functions in monkeys”, Toxicol, 1987, 60(1):29-36; & M.K. Mohamed, et al., Toxicol (Copenhagen), 1986, 58(3):219-24; & N.F. Ivanitskaia, ”Evaluation of effect of mercury on reproductive function of animals”, Gig Sanit, 1991, 12:48-51. 

(163)    Ahlrot-Westerlund B, Multiple sclerosis and mercury in cerebrospinal fluid, Second Nordic Symposium on Trace Elements and Human Health, Odense, Denmark, Aug 1987; &  Nutrition Research, 1985 Supplement. 

(164)    Swedish National Dept. of Health, Mercury Amalgam Review Panel, 1987. 

(165)    Anneroth G, Ericson T, Johansson I, Mornstad H, Skoglund A , “Comprehensive medical examination of patients with alleged adverse effects from dental amalgams”, Acta Odontal Scand, 1992, 50(2):101-11. 

(166)    H. Basun, et al., “Metals in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid in normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease”, J Neural Transm Park Dis Dement Sect, 1991, 3(4):231-58.

(167)    M.L. Olsted, et al., “Correlation between amalgam restorations and mercury in urine”, J Dent Res, 66(6):1179-1182, 1987. 

(168)    J. Laine, et al., “Immunocompetent cells in amalgam-associated oral licheinoid contact lesions”, Oral Pathol Med, 1999; 28(3):117-21; &  “Contact allergy to dental restorative materials in patients with oral lichenoid lesions”, Contact Dermatitis, 1997, 36:3, 141-6; & “Resolution of OLL after replacement of amalgam restorations”, Br J Dermatol, 1992, 126(1):10-15 (20 cases); & A. Adachi, et al., “Efficacy of dental metal elimination in the management of atopic dermatitis”, J Dermatology, 1997, 24:1,141-6.

(169)    C.H. Ngim, et al., ”Epidemiologic study on the association between body burden mercury level and idiopathic Parkinson’s disease”, Neuroepidemiology, 1989, 8(3):128-41. 

(170)    R.L. Siblerud, “A comparison of mental health of multiple sclerosis patients with silver   dental fillings and those with fillings removed”, Psychol Rep, 1992, 70(3), Pt2, 1139-51. 

(171)    A. Jokstad, “Mercury excretion and occupational exposure of dental personnel”, Community Dent Oral Epidemiology, 18(3):143-8, 1990. 

(172)    B. Nilsson, et al., Dept. of Environmental Medicine, Univ. of Umea, “Urinary mercury excretion in dental personnel”, Swed Dent J, 1986, 10(6):221-32; & Swed Dent J, 1986, 10(1-2):1-14; & Science of the Total Environment, 1990, 94(3):179-85. 

(173)    D. Zander, et al., “Mercury exposure of male dentists, female dentists, and dental aides”, Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed, 1992, 193(4):318-28. 

(174)    B. Willershausen, et al., “Mercury in the mouth mucosa of patients with amalgam fillings”, Dtsch Med Wochenschr, 1992, 117:46, 1743-7. 

(175)    L. Larkfors, et al.,"Methylmercury induced alterations in the nerve growth factor level in  the developing brain ", Res Dev Res, 62(2), 1991, 287-; & Soderstrom S, Fredriksson A, Dencker L, Ebendal T, “The effect of mercury vapor on cholinergic neurons in the fetal brain”, Brain Research & Developmental Brain Res, 1995, 85:96-108; & Toxicol Lett, 1995, 75(1-3):133-44. 

(176)    A. Jokstad, et al., "Dental amalgam and mercury", Pharmacol Toxicol, 70(4), 1992, 308-13; & L. Barregard, et al., “Mercury exposure from dental amalgam”, Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen, 1998, 118(1):58-62. 

(177)    S. Olsson, et al., "Daily dose calculations from measurements of intra-oral mercury  vapor", J Dent Res, 71(2):414-23, 1992. 

(178)    J. Lenihan, et al., “Mercury hazards in dental practice”, Br Dent J, 1973, 135:363-376; & G.S. Nixon, et al., J Oral Ther Pharm, 1965, 1:512; & Gelbier S, Ingram J, "Possible foetotoxic effects of mercury vapour: a case report", Public Health, 1989, 103, 35-40. 

(179)    A. Lussi, "Mercury release from amalgam into saliva", Schweiz Monatsschr  Zahnmed, 1993, 103(6):722-29; & Kindl A, Zinecker S, "Amalgam: Quecksilberdamfe bis ins Gehrin", der Kassenarzt,  4, 23, 1992. 

(180)    Pinto OF, et al., J Intl Acad Prev Med, v3, n2, 1976; & Huggins HA, “Proposed role of dental amalgam toxicity in leukemia and hemotopoietic dyscrasias”,  International J of Biosocial and Medical Research, 1989, 11:84-93; & Schimpff SC, Young WH, Greene WH, “Origin of infections in acute nonlymphocytic leukemia”,  Annals of International Medicine, 1972, 77:707-711; & Y. Kinjo, et al., “Cancer mortality in patients exposed to methylmercury through fish diet”, J Epidemiol, 1996, 6(3):134-8. 

(181)    P.W. Mathieson, “Mercury: god of TH2 cells”, Clinical Exp Immunol, 1995, 102(2):229-30; & Parronchi P, Brugnolo F, Sampognaro S, Maggi E, “Genetic and environmental factors contributing to the onset of allergic disorders”, Int Arch Allergy Immunol, 2000 Jan, 121(1):2-9. 

 (182)   Pleva J, "Dental mercury—a public health hazard", Rev Environ Health, 10(1):1-27, 1994; & J Pleva, “Mercury from dental amalgams: exposure and effects”, Int J Risk & Safety in Med, 1992, 3:1-22; & “Mercury—a public health hazard”, Reviews on Environmental Health, 1994, 10:1-27; & “Mercury poisoning from dental amalgam”, J. Orthomol. Medicine, 1989, 4(3):141-148; & J Orthomol Psych, v12, n3, 1983; & Emler, Cardone, Oral Roberts Univ., “An assessment of mercury in mouth air”, Journal of Dental Research, March 1985; & Vimy M, and Lorschieder, University of Calgary, " Intra oral mercury released from dental amalgam", Journal of Dental Research, 1985, 64:1069-1071; & "Serial measurements of intra oral mercury", Journal Dental Research, 1985, 64:1072-1075. 

(183)    World Health Organization (WHO),1991, Environmental Health Criteria 118, Inorganic  Mercury, WHO, Geneva; & Envir. H. Crit. 101, Methyl Mercury. 

 (184)   T.H. Ingalls, J Forensic Medicine and Pathology, v4, n1, 1953; & “Epidemiology, etiology and prevention of MS”, Am J For Med & Pathology, 1983, 4:55-61; & “Endemic clustering of MS”, Am J For Med Path, 1986, 7:3-8; & Craelius W, “Comparative epidemiology of multiple sclerosis and dental caries”, J of Epidemiological and Community Health, 32:155-65. 

(185)    L. Jones, “Health outcomes following amalgam removal”, New Zealand Psychology Journal, Sept.,1999. 

(186)    Yang J, Wang Yl, “Maternal-fetal transfer of metallic mercury via the placenta and milk”, Annals of Clin & Lab Sci, 1997, 27(2):135-41; &  C.N. Ong, et al., "Concentrations of heavy metal in maternal and umbilical cord blood",  Biometals, 6(1):61‑66, 1993; &   Y.K. Soong, et al., J of Formosa Medical Assoc, 1991, 90(1):59-65; & T. Suzuki, et al., Dept. of Human Ecology, Univ. of Tokyo, “Mercury in human amnotic fluid”, Scand J Work Environ & Health, 3:32-35, 1977; & D.A. Spencer, et al., “Mercury concentration in cord blood”, Arch Dis Child, 1988, 63(2):202-3; & S. Sugiyama, et al., “Comparison of heavy metal concentrations in human umbilical cord blood in 1980 and 1990”, Kinki Univ. School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan; & R. Sikorski, et al.,”The intrapartum content of toxic metals in maternal and umbilical cord blood”, Ginekol Pol, 1989, 60(3):151-5. 

(187)    Klobusch J, Rabe T, Gerhard I,  Runnebaum B, "Alopecia and environmental pollution", Klinisches Labor, 1992, 38:469‑476; & “Schwermetallbelastungen bei Patientinnen mit Alopezie”, Arch Gynecol Obstet, 1993, 254(1-4):278-80; & G. Kunzel. et al., “Arch Gynecol Obstet, 1993, 254:277-8. 

(188)    I.I. Ship, et al., School of Dental Research, Univ of Penn, Mar 1983; & P.A. Gronla, et al., JADA, 1970, 81:923-25.

(189)    U.S. CDC, Toxicology Division, Atlanta, Ga. and WHO, Environmental Health Criteria 101,1990.

(190)    P.Urban, et al., “Neurological examination on three groups of workers exposed to mercury vapor”, Eur J Neurology, 1999, 6(5):571-7; & B. Polakowska, “Neurological assessment of health status in dentists”, Med Pr, 1994, 45(3):221-5; & L. Ekenvall, et al., “Sensory perception in the hands of dentists”, J Work Environ Health, 1990, 16(5):334-9.

(191)    D. Brune, et al., Gastrointestinal and in vitro release of metals from conventional and copper-rich amalgams”, Scand J Dent Res, 1983, 91:66-71; & Sci Tot Envir, 1985,44:...; & “Metal release from dental materials”, Biomaterials, 1986, 7:163-175.

(192)    N. Nogi, “Electric current around dental metals as a factor producing allergic metal ions in the oral cavity”, Nippon Hifuka Gakkai Zasshi, 1989, 99(12):1243-54; & M.D. Rose, et al., Eastman Dental Institute, “The tarnished history of a posteria restoration”, Br Dent J, 1998, 185(9):436; & J. Bergdahl, A.J. Certosimo, et al., National Naval Dental Center, “Oral electricity”, Gen Dent, 1996, 44(4):324-6; & R.H. Ogletree, et al., School of Materials Science, GIT, Atlanta, ”Effect of mercury on corrosion of eta’ Cu-Sn phase in dental amalgams”, Dent Mater, 1995, 11(5):332-6; & R.D. Meyer, et al., “Intraoral galvanic corrosion”, Prosthet Dent, 1993, 69(2):141-3; & B.M. Owens, et al., “Localized galvanic shock after insertion of an amalgam restoration”, Compenium, 1993, 14(10):1302,1304,1306-7; & Johansson E, Liliefors T, "Heavy elements in root tips from teeth with amalgam fillings", Department of Radiation Sciences, Division of Physical Biology, Box 535, 751 21 Uppsala, Sweden. 

(193)    E.N. Cohen, et al., “Occupational disease in dentistry”, Amer Dent Assoc, 1980, 101(1):21-31; & G. Bjorklund, “Risk evaluation of the occupational environment in dental care”, Tidsski Nor Laegeforen, 1991, 111(8):948-50; &  A. Ahlbom, et al., “Dentists, dental nurses, and brain tumors”, Br Med J, 1986, 202(6521):662. 

(194)    Lu SC, “Regulation of hepatic glutathione synthesis: current concepts and controversies”, FASEB J, 1999, 13(10):1169‑83; & R.B. Parsons, J Hepatol, 1998, 29(4):595-602; & R.K. Zalups, et al.,"Nephrotoxicity of inorganic mercury co‑administered with L‑cysteine", Toxicology, 1996, 109(1):15‑29; & T.L. Perry, et al., “Hallevorden-Spatz Disease: cysteine accumulation and cysteine dioxygenase deficiency”, Ann Neurol, 1985, 18(4):482-489. 

(195)    B. Moller-Madsen, et al., “Mercury concentrations in blood of Danish dentists”, Scand J Dent Res, 1988, 96(1):56-9. 

(196)    G. Sandborgh-Englund, “Pharmakinetics of mercury from dental amalgam”, Medical School Disertation, Dept. of Basal Oral Sciences, Karolinska Institute (Stolckholm), 1998, 1-49; & G. Sandborgh-Englund, et al., “Mercury in biological fluids after amalgam removal”, J Dental Res, 1998, 77(4):615-24. 

(197)    J.Taylor, A Complete Guide to Mercury Toxicity from Dental Fillings, Scripps Pullishing.      

(198)    E.S. West, et al., Textbook of Biochemistry, MacMillan Co, 1957, p853; &  B.R.G. Danielsson, et al.,”Ferotoxicity of inorganic mercury: distribution and effects of nutrient uptake by placenta and fetus”, Biol Res Preg Perinatal, 5(3):102-109, 1984; &   Danielsson, et al., Neurotoxicol Teratol, 18:129-134. 

(199)    Dr. P. Kraub,  M. Deyhle, University at Tubingen—Institut fur Organische Chemie, “Field  study on the mercury content of saliva”, 1997, http://www.uni‑tuebingen.de/KRAUSS/amalgam.html  (20,000 people tested for mercury level in saliva and health status/symptoms compiled). 

(200)    V. Nadarajah, et al., “Localized cellular inflammatory response to subcutaneously implanted dental mercury”, J Toxicol Environ Health, Oct 11, 49(2):113-25.   

(201)    J.T. Salonen, et al., “Intake of mercury from fish and the risk of   myocardial infarction and cardiovasculr disease in eastern Finnish men”, Circulation, 1995, 91(3):645-55. 

(202)    T. Kishimoto, et al., “Methylmercury injury of cultured human vascular endothelial cells”, Journal of Trace Elements in Experimental Medicine, 6(4):155-163, 1993. 

(203)    M.J.Vimy, et al., “Renal function and amalgam mercury”, Amer J Physiol, 1997, 273(3/2):1199- ; & (b) Miller DM, Lund BO, Woods JS, “Reactivity of Hg(II) with superoxide: evidence for the catalytic dismutation of superoxide by Hg(II)”, J Biochem Toxicol, 1991, 6(4):293‑8; & K.A. Nath, et al., Dept. of Medicine, Univ. of Minnesota, “Renal oxidant injury induced by mercury”, Kidney Int, 1996, 50(3):1032-43; & (c)are RA, et al., “Ultrastructural changes in renal proximal tubules after chronic organic and inorganic mercury intoxication”, Environ Res, 1975, 10(1):121-40; & (d) McCann, et al., “Intravenous gamma globulin (IVIG) treatment of autoimmune kidney disease associated with mercury (Hg++) toxicity”,  J Allergy Clin Immunol, 95(1)(Pt 2):145; & (e) G.D. Nuyts, et al., “New occupational risk factors for chronic renal failure”, Lancet, 1995, 346(8966):7-11. 

(204)    Tom Warren, Beating Alzheimer’s, Avery Publishing Group, 1991. 

(205)    M.F. Ziff, et al.,  A Persuasive New Look at Heart Disease as it Relates to Mercury, Bio-   Probe, Inc., ISBN 0-941011-08-9; & J. of American College of Cardiology, v33,n 6, p1578‑1583, 1999. 

(206)    R. Ma, et al., “Association between dental restorations and carcinoma of the tongue”, European Journal of Cancer, Part B, Oral Oncology, 1995, 31B(4):232-4.R. 

(207)   Pendergrass JC, Haley BE, Univ.of Kentucky Dept. of Chemistry, “The Toxic Effects of Mercury on CNS Proteins: Similarity to Observations in Alzheimer’s Disease”, IAOMT Symposium paper, March 1997; & “Mercury vapor inhaltion inhibits binding of GTP ...-similarity to lesions in alzheimers diseased brains”, Neurotoxicology, 1997, 18(2):315-24;   & Met Ions Biol Syst, 1997, 34:461-.

(208)    L.T. Friberg, “Status Quo and Perspectives of Amalgam and Other Dental Materials”, International Symposium Proceedings, G.Thieme Verlag Struttgart, 1995. 

(209)    Mark Richardson, Environmental Health Directorate, Health Canada, Assessment of Mercury Exposure and Risks from Dental Amalgam, 1995, Final Report; & G.M. Richardson, et al., ”A Monte Carlo assessment of mercury  exposure  and risks from   dental amalgam”, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2(4):709-761.

(210)    Mats Berlin, “Is amalgam in dental fillings hazardous to health?”, Lakartidningen, 1992,    89(37):2918-23; & “Prenatal exposure to mercury vapor: effects on brain development”, Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, 1, 112, 1:7(?)  & M. Berlin, “Mercury in dental  filling materials—environmental medicine risk analysis”, paper for the  Swedish Council for Coordinating and Planning Research, 1998.

(211)    M.J. Vimy and F.L. Lorscheider, Faculty of Medicine, Univ. of Calgary, July 1991(Study findings); & J. Trace Elem. Exper. Med., 1990, 3, 111-123. 

(212)    Ziff M.F., “Documented clinical side effects to dental amalgams”, Adv. Dent. Res., 1992,  1(6):131-134; & S. Ziff, Dentistry Without Mercury, 8th Edition, 1996, Bio-Probe, Inc., ISBN 0-941011-04-6; & Dental Mercury Detox, Bio-Probe, Inc., http://www.bioprobe.com. (cases: FDA Patient Adverse Reaction Reports—762; Dr. M. Hanson, Swedish patients—519 (includes many MS); Dr. H. Lichtenberg—100 Danish patients; Dr. P. Larose—80 Canadian patients; Dr. R.Siblerud—86 Colorado patients; Dr. A.V. Zamm—22 patients—see (26)).

(213)    Dr. C. Kousmine, Multiple Scherosis is Curable, 1995. 

(214)    “Amalgam Declared Hazardous”, Dentistry Today, February, 1989, p1.

(215)    K.W. Sehnert, “Autoimmune Disorders”, Advance, Jan 1995, p47-48. 

(216)    T.W. Clarkson, et al., in Biological  Monitoring of Toxic Metals, 1988, Plenum Press, N.Y., “The prediction of intake of mercury vapor from amalgams”, p199-246  & p247-260; & Environmental Health Perspective, 1993 April, 100:31-8; & F.L. Lorscheider, et al., Lancet, 1991, 337, p1103. 

(217)    Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service, Toxicological Profile for Mercury , 1999; & Apr 19, 1999, Media Advisory, New MRLs for toxic substances, MRL:elemental mercury vapor/inhalation/chronic & MRL:methy mercury/ oral/acute; & http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls.html.

(218)    U.S. Dept. of Health, ASTDR ToxFAQ CAS# 7349-97-6. 

(219)    D.E. Cutright, et al., Dept. of Prosthodontics, Temple Univ., “Systemic mercury levels caused by inhaling mist during high-speed amalgam grinding”, J Oral Med, 28(4):100-104,1973; & A. Nimmo, et al., “Inhalation during removal of amalgam restorations”, J  Prosthet Dent, 1990 Feb, 63(2):228-33. 

(220)    Sellars WA, Sellars R, Univ.of Texas Southwestern Medical School, “Methyl mercury in dental amalgams in the human mouth”, Journal of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine, 1996, 6(1):33-37; & C Arch Environmental Health, 19, 891-905, Dec 1969. 

(221)    R. Golden, et al., Duke Univ., “Dementia and Alzheimer’s Disease”, Minnesota Medicine, 78: 25-29, 1995. 

(222)    M. Daunderer, Handbuch der Amalgamvergiftung, Ecomed Verlag, Landsberg, 1998, ISBN 3‑609‑71750‑5 (in German); & “Improvement of nerve and immunological damages after amalgam removal”, Amer. J. of Probiotic Dentistry and Medicine, Jan 1991; & Toxicologische erfahrungen am menchen; Quecksilber in der umwelf-hearing zum  amalgamproblem”, Niedersachsiscles Umweltministerium, 1991; & “Amalgam”, Ecomed-Verlag, Landsberg, 1995; & “Amalgamtest”, Forum Prakt. Allgen. Arzt, 1990, 29(8):213-4; & “Besserung von Nerven—und Immunschaden nach Amalgamsanierung”, Dtsch. Aschr. F. Biologische Zahnmedzin, 1990, 6(4):152-7 (amalgam removal & DMPS, over 3,000 cases). 

(223)    Nicholson, et al., “Mercury nephrotoxicity”, Nature, Vol 304:633, 1983; & Friberg, et al., “Kidney injury after chronic exposure to inorganic mercury”, Archives of Environ Health, Vol 15: 64, 1967; & Kazantis, et al., “Nephrotic syndrome following exposure to mercury”, Quarterly J. of Medicine, Vol 31:403-418, 1962; & L.H. Lash, Environmental Health  Perspective, 1994, 102(11). 

(224)    M.S. Hughes, Amer. J. of Obstetrics and Gynecology, v143, n4, 440-443, 1982.

(225)    S. Yannai, et al., “Transformations of inorganic mercury by Candida albicans and Saccharomyces cerevisiae”, Applied Envir Microbiology, 1991, 7:245-247; & N.E. Zorn, et al., “A relationship between Vit B-12, mercury uptake, and methylation”, Life Sci, 1990, 47(2):167-73; & W.P. Ridley, et al., Environ Health Perspectives, 1977, Aug 19, 43-6; & R.E. DeSimone, et al., Biochem Biophys Acta, 1973, May 28; & Yamada, Tonomura, “Formation of methyl mercury compounds from inorganic mercury by Clostridium cochlearium”, J Ferment Technol, 1972, 50:159‑1660.

(226)    (a) B.J. Shenker, et al., Dept. of Pathology, Univ. of Penn. School of Dental Med., ”Immunotoxic effects of mercuric compounds on human lymphocytes and monocytes: alterations in cell viability”, Immunopharmacologicol  Immunotoxicol, 1992, 14(3):555-77;  & M.A. Miller, et al., “Mercuric chloride induces apoptosis in human T lymphocytes”,  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 153(2):250‑7, 1998; & Rossi AD, Viviani B, Vahter M, “Inorganic mercury modifies Ca2+ signals, triggers apoptosis, and potentiates NMDA toxicity in cerebral granule neurons”, Cell Death and Differentiation, 1997, 4(4):317-24; & Goering PL, Thomas D, Rojko JL, Lucas AD, “Mercuric chloride-induced apoptosis is dependent on protein synthesis”, Toxicol Lett, 1999, 105(3):183-95; & (b) B.J. Shenker, et al., “Immune suppression of human T-cell activation”, Immunopharmacologicol  Immunotoxicol, 1992, 14(3):555-77 & 14(3):539-53, & 1993, 15(2-3):273-90.

(227)    Dr. Pierre Blais, Health Canada, 1976 & Discovery, Feb 1997 (TV,Quebec).

(228)    Dr. T. Rau, Paracelsus Allergy Clinic, Lustmuhle, Switzerland, 1996 (www); & Dr. B. Shelton, Director, The Allergy Center, Phoenix, Arizona, in (293); & E. Cutler, Winning the War Against Asthma & Allergies, DAMS (800-311-6265).

(229)    M.Davis, Editor, Defense Against Mystery Syndromes, Chek Printing Co., & March, 1994 (case histories documented); & Kantarjian A, "A syndrome clinically resembling amyotrophic lateral sclerosis following chronic mercurialism", Neurology, 11:639‑644,  1961.

(230)    S. Rogers, M.D., Chemical Sensitivity, Keats Publishing.

(231)    Larsen, A.H., et al., “Mercury discharge in waste water from dental clinics”, Water Air and Soil Pollution, Jan 1996, 86(1-4):93-99; & Rubin P.G., et al., Archives of Environmental Health, Jul 1996, 51(4):335-337; & A. Lindvall, et al., “Mercury in the Dental Practice: Contamination of Ambient Air and Waste Water”, FDI World Dental Congress, Aug 19, 1993, Goteborg,Swe.

(232)    Adolph Coors Foundation, “Coors Amalgam Study: Effects of Placement and Removal of Amalgam Fillings”, 1995 (www); & Internations DAMS Newsletter, p17, Vol VII, Issue 2, Spring 1997 (31 cases).

(233)    Sven Langworth, et al., ”Amalgamnews and Amalgamkadefonden, 1997 and Svenska Dogbladet, 1997 (286 cases); & F.Berglund, Bjerner/Helm, Klock, Ripa, Lindforss, Mornstad, Ostlin, “Improved health after removal of dental amalgam fillings”, Swedish Assoc. of Dental Mercury Patients, 1998 (www.tf.nu) (over 1000 cases) (Sweden has banned amalgam fillings & Gov’t maintains health records on all citizens); & Heavy Metal Bulletin, No.3, 1996 and No.1, 1999, p7,8; & Klock B, Blomgren J, Ripa U, Andrup B, "Effekt av amalgamavlägsnande på patienter som misstänker att de lider eller har lidit av amalgamförgiftning", Tandläkartidn, 81(23):1297-1302, 1989.

(234)    P.E. Bigazzi, “Autoimmunity and heavy metals”, Lupus, 1994, 3:449-453; & Pollard KM, Pearson Dl, Hultman P, “Lupus-prone mice as model to study xenobiotic-induced autoimmunity”, Environ Health Perspect, 1999, 107(Suppl 5):729-735; & Nielsen JB, Hultman P, “Experimental studies on genetically determined susceptibility to mercury‑induced autoimmune response”, Ren Fail, 1999 May‑Jul, 21(3‑4):343‑8; & Hultman P, Enestrom S, “Mercury induced antinuclear antibodies in mice”, Clinical and Exper Immunology, 1988, 71(2):269-274. 

(235)    H.J. Hamre, “Mercury from Dental Amalgam and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome”, The CFIDS  Chronicle, Fall 1994, p44-47.

(236)    G.J. Murphy, American Academy of Head, Neck, and Facial Pain, Oct 21, 1994.

(237)    H.D. Foster, “The calcium-selenium-mercury connection in cancer and heart disease”, Hypotheses, 1997, 48(4):335-60.

(238)    World Health Organizaition Scientific Panel Members (Dr. Lars Friburg, chairman; Dr. Fritz Lorscheider, Professor of Medical Physiology, Univ. of Calgary; Dr. Murray Vimy, Professor of Oral Biology and Dental Medicine, Univ. of Calgary Medical School; Dr. Vasken Aposhian, Dept. Head, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Univ. of Arizona; Dr. David Eggleston, Univ. of Califoria, researcher on mercury in the brain; Dr. Boyd Haley, Univ.of Kentucky, reasearcher on mercury in the brain and Alzheimer’s Disease (http://www.altcorp.com/); Dr. Gustav Drasch, Univ. of Munich, researcher on mercury in  brains of dead infants and fetuses; Dr. D. Echeverria, Neuro-Toxicologist, researcher on  reproductive problems and birth defects in dental workers; BBC Panorama Program on  Dental Amalgam: ”The Poison in Your Mouth”, June 1994.

(239)    J.M. Varga, et al., “High incidence of cross stimulation by natural allergens of  rat basophilic leukemia cells sensitized with IgE antibodies”, Int Arch Allergy Immunol, 1995, 108(2):196-9; & J.H. Gainer, “Activation of Rauscher leukemia virus by metals”, J Natl Cancer Inst, 1973, 51(2):609-13.

(240)    K.W. Hinkleman, et al., “Mercury release during ultrasonic scaling of amalgam”, J Dent Res, 74(SE):131, Abstract 960, 1995; & Haikel Y, Gasser P, Salek P, Voegel JC, "Exposure to mercury vapor during setting, removing, and polishing amalgam restorations", J Biomed Mater Res, 1990 Nov, 24(11):1551-8. 

(241)    R. Schoeny, U.S. EPA, “Use of genetic toxicology data in U.S. EPA risk assessment: the mercury study”, Environ Health Perspect, 1996, 104, Supp 3: 663-73; & C.H. Lee, et al., “Genotoxicity of phenylHg acetate in humans as compared to other mercury compounds”, 392(3):269-76.

(242)    J. Constantinidis, et al., Univ. of Geneva Medical School, “Hypothesis regarding amyloid and zinc in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer Disease”,  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord, 1991,  5(1):31-35; & G. Bjorklund, “Can  mercury cause Alzheimer’s”, Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen,1991. 

(243)    P.R. Walker, et al., National Research Council of Canada, “Effects of aluminum and mercury on the structure of  chromatin”, Biochemistry, May 2 1989, 28(9):3911-3915.

(244)    H. Basun, et al., Dept. of Geriatric Medicine, Huddinge Hospital, Sweden, “Trace metals  in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid in Alzheimer’s disease”, J Neural Transm Park Dis Dement Sect, 1991, 3(4):231-.

(245)    P.,Lokken, “Lethal mercury poisoning in a dental assistant”, Nor Tannlaegeforen Tid, Apr  1971, 81(4):275-288; & R. Wronski, et al., “A case of panarteritis nodoa associated with chronic mercury poisoning”, Dtsch Med Wohenschr, Mar 1977, 102(9):323-325. 

(246)    K. Iyer, et al., “Mercury poisoning in a dentist”, Arch Neurol, 1976, 33:788-790.

(247)    E.C. Lonnroth, et al., “Adverse health reactions in skin, eyes, and respiratory tract among dental personnel in Sweden”, Swed Dent J, 1998, 22(1-2):33-45; & L. Kanerva, et al., ”Occupational contact urticaria”, Contact Dermatitis, 1996, 35(4):229-33.

(248)    Y. Finkelstein, “The enigma of parkinsonism in chronic borderline mercury intoxication,   resolved by challenge with penicillamine”, Neurotoxicology, 1996, Spring, 17(1):291-5.

(249)    C.H. Ngim, et al., Dept. of Occupational Medicine, Univ. of Singapore, “Chronic neurobehavioral effects of elemental mercury in  dentists”,  British Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1992, 49(11):782-790.

(250)    B.A. Rybicki, et al., ”Parkinson's disease mortality and the industrial use of heavy metals in Michigan”, Mov Disord, 1993, 8(1):87‑92; & Yamanaga H, “Quantitative analysis of tremor in Minamata disease”, Tokhoku J Exp Med, 1983 Sep, 141(1):13‑22.

(251)    Y. Omura, et al., Heart Disease Research Foundation, NY, NY, “Role of  mercury in resistant infections and recovery after Hg detox with cilantro”,  Acupuncture & Electro-Therapeutics Research, 20(3):195-229, 1995; & “Mercury exposure from silver fillings”, Acupuncture & Electrotherapy Res, 1996, 133-.

(252)    B.J. Shenker, et al., Dept. of Pathology, Univ. of Pennsylvania, “Immunotoxic effects of mercuric compounds on human lymphocytes and monocytes: alterations in cellular glutathione content”, Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol, 1993, 15(2-3):273-90.

(253)  S. Langworth, et al., “Exposure to mercury vapor and impact on health in the dental profession in Sweden”, J Dent Res, 1997, 76(7):1397-404.

(254)    al-Saleh I, Shinwari N, “Urinary mercury levels in females: influence of dental amalgam fillings”, Biometals, 1997, 10(4):315-23.

(255)    D.C. Rice, “Evidence of delayed neurotoxicity produced by methylmercury developmental exposure”, Neurotoxicology, Fall 1996, 17(3-4), p583-96.

(256)    D.B. Alymbaeva, et al., Med Tr Prom Ekol, 6:13-15, 1995 (Russian).

(257)    I. Smith, et al., “Pteridines and mono-amines: relevance to neurological damage”, Postgrad Med J, 62(724):113-123, 1986; &  A.D. Kay, et  al, “Cerebrospinal fluid biopterin is decreased in Alzheimer’s disease”,  Arch Neurol, 43(10):996-9, Oct 1986; & T. Yamiguchi, et al., “Effects of tyrosine administration on serum biopterin in patients with Parkinson’s disease and normal controls”, Science, 219(4580):75-77, Jan 1983; & T. Nagatsu, et al., “Catecholoamine-related enzymes and the biopterin cofactor in Parkinson’s”, Neurol, 1984, 40: 467-73.

(258)    J.M. Aguiar, et al., “Heavy metals and antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli isolates from ambulatory patients”, Chemother, 1990, 2(4):238-40. 

(259)    C.K. Mittal, et al., “Interaction of heavy metals with the nitric oxide synthase”, Mol Cell Biochem, 149-150:263-5, Aug 1995; & J.P. Bolanos, et al., “Nitric oxide mediated mitochondrial damage in the brain”,

(260)    J.S. Woods, et al., “Urinary porphyrin profiles as biomarker of mercury exposure: studies on dentists”, J Toxicol Environ Health, 1993, 40(2-3):235-; & “Altered porphyrin metabolites as a biomarker of mercury exposure and toxicity”, Physiol Pharocol, 1996, 74(2):210-15, & Canadian J Physiology and Pharmacology, Feb 1996; & M.D. Martin, et al., “Validity of urine samples for low-level mercury exposure assessment and relationship to porphyrin and creatinine excretion rates”, J Pharmacol Exp Ther, Apr 1996; & J.S. Woods, et al., “Effects of porphyrinogenic metals on coproporphyrinogen oxidase in liver and kidney”, Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, Vol 97, 183-190, 1989.

(261)    New Scientist: This Week, Nov 22, 1997, p4 (and editorial), and Jan 10, 1998; & Neurotoxicology and Teratology, Jan 1998, Vol 19, p417.

(262)    Chang LW, “The neurotoxicology and pathology of organomercury, organolead, and organotin”, J Toxicol Sci, 1990, 15 Suppl 4:125-51; & “Latent effects of methyl mercury on the nervous system after prenatal exposure”, Environ Res, 1977, 13(2):171-85.

(263)    H. Iioka, et al., “The effect of inorganic mercury on placental amino acid transport”, Nippon sanka Fujinka Gakkai Zasshi, 1987, 39(2):202-6.

(264)    B.R. Danielsson, et al., ”Behavioral effects of prenatal metallic mercury inhalation exposure in rats”, Neurotoxicol Teratol, 1993, 15(6):391-6; & A. Fredriksson, et al., ”Prenatal exposure to metallic mercury vapour and methylmercury produce interactive behavioral changes in adult rats”, Neurotoxicol Teratol, 1996, 18(2):129-34; &  “Behavioral effects of neonatal metallic mercury exposure in rats”, Toxicology, 1992, 74(2-3):151‑160.

(265)    K. Lohmann, et al., “Multiple chemical sensitivity disorder in patients with neurotoxic illnesses”, Gesundheitswesen, 1996, 58(6):322-31. 

(266)    N. Matsuo, et al., “Mercury concentration in organs of contemporary Japanese”, Environ Health, 1989, 44(5):298-303; & R. Schiele, et al., “Study on the normal mercury concentrations of human organs”, Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg (B), 1981, 173(1-2:45-62; & T. Suzuki, et al., “The hair-organ relationship in mercury concentration in contemporary Japan”, Arch Environ Health, 1993, 48(4):221-9; & K. Schmid, et al., ”Hazardous burden by country”, Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed, 1996, 199(1):24-37.

(267)    R. Brun, “Epidemiology of ...”,  Contact Dermatitis, 1975, 1(4):214-217; & L. Nebenfuhrer, et al., “Hg allergy ...”, Contact Dermatitis, 1984, 10(2):121-.

(268)    J.J. Weening, et al., “Mercury induced immune complex glomerulopathy”, Chap 4, p36-66, VanDendergen, 1980; & P. Duuet, et al., “Glomerulonephritis induced by heavy metals”, Arch Toxicol, 50:187-194,1982 & Transplantation Proceedings, Vol  XIV(3), 1982,482-.

(269)    (a) C.J.G.Robinson, et al., “Mercuric chloride induced anitnuclear antibodies in mice”, Toxic Appl Pharmacology, 1986, 86:159-169; & (b) P. Andres, “IgA-IgG disease in the intestines of rats ingesting HgCl”,  Clin Immun Immunopath, 30:488-494, 1984; & (c) F. Hirsch, et al., J Immun, 136(9), 3272-3276, 1986; & (d) J Immun, 136(9):3277-3281; & (e) J Immun, 137(8):2548-, 1986; & (f) Cossi, et al., “Beneficial effect of human therapeutic IV-Ig in mercury induced  autoimmune disease”, Clin Exp Immunol, Apr 1991; & (g) El-Fawai HA, Waterman SJ, De Feo A, Shamy MY, “Neuroimmunotoxicology: humoral assessment of neurotoxicity and autoimmune mechanisms”, Contact Dermatitis, 1999, 41(1):60-1.

(270)    D.W. Eggleston, “Effect of dental amalgam and nickel alloys on T-lymphocytes”,nJ Prosthet Dent, 51(5):617-623, 1984; & D.W. Eggleston, et al., J Prosthet Dent, 1987, 58(6):704-7; & J American Medical Assoc, Sept 96; & Tan XX, Tang C, Castoldi AF, Costa Lg, “Effects of inorganic and organic mercury on intracellular calcium levels in rat T lymphocytes”, J Toxicol Environ Health, 1993, 38(2):159-70.

(271)    B.A. Weber, “The Marburg Amalgam Study”, Arzt und Umwelt, Apr 1995 (266 cases); & (b)  “Amalgam and Allergy”, Institute for Naturopathic Medicine, 1994; & (c) “Conjunctivitis Sicca (dry eye study)”, Institute for Naturopathic Medicine, 1994; & “Alternative Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis, Tumor, or Cancer”, Institute for Naturopathic Medicine, 1997

              (40 MS cases), http://home,t‑online.de/home/Institut_f._Naturheilverfahren/patinf.htm.                 

(272)    BJ Shenker, “Induction of apoptosis in human T-cells by methyl mercury”, Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1999, 157(1):23-35; Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol, 1992, 14(3):555-77; & Immunotoxicol, 1992, 14(3):539-53; & “Low-level MeHg exposure causes human T-cells to undergo apoptosis: evidence of mitochondrial disfunction”, Environ Res, 1998, 77(2):149-159; & O. Insug, et al., “Mercuric compounds inhibit human monocyte function by inducing apoptosis: evidence for formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), development of mitochondrial membrane permeability, and loss of reductive reserve”, Toxicology, 1997, 124(3):211-24.

(273)    R. Schiele, et al., Institute of Occupational Medicine, Univ. of Erlamgem- Nurnberg, “Studies of organ mercury content related to number of amalgam  fillings”, Symposium paper, March 12, 1984, Cologne, Germany; (& 38) ; & “Quecksilber-Mobiliztion durch  DMPS bei Personen mit und ohne Amalgamfullungen”, Zahnarztl. Mitt, 1989, 79(17): 1866-1868; & J.J. Kleber, “Quecksilberverkonzen- tration im Urin nach DMPS” in [Status Quo and Perspectives of Amalgam], L.T. Friberg (Ed.), Georg-Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, 1005, p61-69.

(274)    L. Friberg, et al., “Mercury in the brain and CNS in relation to amalgam fillings”, Lakartidningen, 83(7):519-521, 1986 (Swedish Medical Journal); & T. Suzuki, et al., Ind Health, 4:69-75, 1966.

(275)    L.M. Mikhailova, et al., “Influence of occupational factors on disease of reproductive organs”, Pediatriya Akusherstvoi Ginekologiya, 33(6):56-58, 1971.

(276)  ATSDR/EPA Priority List for 1999: Top 20 Hazardous Substances, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/99list.html; & U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Hazardous Air Pollutant Hazard Summary Fact Sheets, EPA: In Risk Information System, 1995.

(278)   NIDR/ADA Workshop, Biocompatibility of Metals in Dentistry, JADA, 109(3):469-471, Sept 1984; (& 38). 

(279)    M.J. Gonzalez, et el, “Mercury in human hair; residents of Madrid, Spain”, Arch Environ Health, 1985, 40(4):225-8; & D. Airey, “Mercury in human hair: a review”, Environmental Health Perspectives, 1983, 52:303-316; & “Total mercury concentrations in human hair from 13 countries”, Sci Total Environ, 1983, 32(2):157-80; & S.A. Katz, et al., “Use of hair analysis for evaluating mercury intoxication of the human body”, J Appl Toxicol, 1992, 12(2):79-84; & Wilhelm M, Muller F, Idel H, ”Biological monitoring of mercury vapour exposure by scalp hair analysis in comparison to blood and urine”, Toxicol Lett, 1996 Nov, 88(1‑3):221‑6. 

(280)    S. Nonaka, et al., Nat. Inst. of Mental Health, Bethesda Md., “Lithium treatment protects neurons in CNS from glutamate induced excitability and calcium influx”,  Neurobiology, 95(5):2642-2647, Mar 3, 1998.

(281)    T.W. Clarkson, et al., “Transport of elemental mercury into fetal tissues”, Biol Neonate,   21:239-244, 1972; & M.R. Greenwood, et al., “Transfer of metallic mercury into the fetus”,   Experientia, 28:1455-1456, 1972.

(282)    Press Release, Swedish Council for Planning and Coordinating Research (FRN), Stockholm, 19 February, 1998.

(283)    A. Ahlbom, et al., “Dentists, dental nurses, and brain tumors”, British Medical Journal, Vol 292, March 8, 1986, p262.

(284)    R. Glass, “Mortality of New England Dentists”, U.S. Dept. of Health, Public Health Service, Washington D.C., 1966; & R. Simpson, et al., “Suicide rates of Iowa dentists”, J. of Amer. Dental Assoc., 1983, 107:441-; &  B.B. Arnetz, et al., “Suicide among Swedish dentists”, Scand J Soc Med, 1987, 15(4):243-6.

(285)    R.C. Perlingeiro, et al., “Polymorphonuclear phagentosis in workers exposed  to mercury vapor”, Int J Immounopharmacology, 1994, 16(12):1011-7; & Hum Exp Toxicol, 1995, 14(3):281-6; & M.L. Queiroz, et al., Pharmacol Toxicol, 1994, 74(2):72-5; & (b) J.W. Albers, et al., “Neurological abnormalities associated with remote occupational elemental mercury exposure”, Ann Neurol, 1988, 24(5):651-9; & (c) L. Soleo, et al., “Effects of low exposure to inorganic mercury on psychological performance”, Br J Ind Med, 1990, 47(2):105-9; & (d) P.J. Smith, et al., “Effect of exposure to elemental mercury on short term memory”, Br J Ind Med, 1983, 40(4):413-9; & (e) M.S. Hua, et al., “Chronic elemental mercury intoxication”, Brain Inj, 1996, 10(5):377-84; & (f) Gunther W, et al., “Repeated neurobehavioral investigations in workers ...”, Neurotoxicology, 1996, 17(3-4):605-14; & (g) Levine SP, Cavender GD, Langolf GD, Albers JW, “Elemental mercury exposure: peripheral neurotoxicity”, Br J Ind Med, 1982 May, 39(2):136‑9.

(286)    M. Lai, et al., “Sensitivity of MS detections by MRI”, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 1996, 60(3):339-341.

(287)    M.C. Newland, et al., ”Behavioral consequences of in utero exposure to mercury vapor in squirrel monkeys”, Toxicology & Applied Pharmacology, 1996, 139:374-386; & “Prolonged behavioral effects of in utero exposure to methyl mercury or lead”, Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1994, 126(1):6-15; & K. Warfvinge, et al., “Mercury distribution in neonatal cortical areas ...after exposure to mercury vapor”, Environmental Research, 1994, 67:196-208.

(288)    Rajanna B, Hobson M, Harris L, Ware L, Chetty CS, “Effects of cadmium and mercury on Na(+)-K(+)ATPase and uptake of 3H-dopamine in rat brain synaptosomes”, Arch Int Physiol Biochem, 1990, 98(5):291-6; & M. Hobson, B. Rajanna, “Influence of mercury on uptake of dopamine and norepinephrine”, Toxicol Letters, Dep 1985, 27:2-3:7-14; & McKay SJ, Reynolds JN, Racz WJ, “Effects of mercury compounds on the spontaneous and potassium-evoked release of [3H]dopamine from mouse striatial slices”, Can J Physiol Pharmacol, 1986, 64(12):1507-14; & Scheuhammer AM, Cherian MG, “Effects of heavy metal cations, sulfhydryl reagents and other chemical agents on striatal D2 dopamine receptors”, Biochem Pharmacol, 1985 Oct 1, 34(19):3405‑13; & Lewis RN, Bowler K, “Rat brain (Na+‑K+)ATPase: modulation of its ouabain‑sensitive K+‑PNPPase activity by thimerosal”, Int J Biochem, 1983, 15(1):5‑7; & Anner BM, Moosmayer M, “Mercury inhibits Na-K-ATPase primarily at the cytoplasmic side”, Am J Physiol, 1992, 262(5 Pt2):F84308.

(289)    J.Mai, et al., Biological Trace Element Research, 1990, 24:109-117. 

(290)    D. Echeverria, et al., “Neurobehavioral effects from exposure to dental amalgam: new distinctions between recent exposure and Hg body burden”, FASEB J, Aug 1998, 12(11):971-980; & Amalgam and Health, Swedish Council for Planning and Coordination of Research, 1999, p297-307.

(291)    H.A. Huggins, TE Levy, “Cerebrospinal fluid protein changes in MS after dental amalgam removal”, Alternative Med Rev, Aug 1998, 3(4):295-300.

(292)    M. Daunderer, H. Schiwara, et al., “Quecksilber, Methylquecksilber, ... in Korpermaterial von Amalgamtrager”, Klin Lab, 1992, 38:391-403; & M. Gradl, et al., in Akute und chronische Toxizitat von Spurenelemente, Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft nbH, Stuttgart, 1993, p65-71; & A. Gebhardt, “Ermittlung der Quecksilberbelastung aus Amalgamfullurngen”,  Labormedizin, 1992, 16:384-386; & R. Mayer, et al., “Zur Ermittlung de Quecksilberfreisetzung aus Amalgamfullungen”, Die Quintessenz, 1994, 45:1143-1152; & K. Mayer, “Risikobestimmung der Amalgambelastung”, ZWR, 105(4):213-218 & 105(5):280-283; & “Amalgam: zeitbombe in mund?”, ZWR, 1995, 104(3):209-214; & JGD Birkmayer, et al., “Quecksilberdepots im Organismus korrelieren mit der Anzahl der Amalgamfullungen”, Biol. Zahnmedizin, 1990, 6(2):57-61.

(293)    H. Huggins, Burton Goldberg, & Editors of Alternative Medicine Digest, Chronic Fatigue  Fibromyalgia & Environmental Illness, Future Medicine Publishing, Inc, 1998, p197-; &          U. Dorffer, “Anorexia Hydragyra: ...”, Monatsschr. Kinderheilkd., 1989, 137(8):472.

(294)    “Do amalgam fillings influence manic depression?”, Journal of Orthomol. Medicine, 1998,   http://www.depression.com/news/news_981116.htm.

(295)    Cecil Textbook of Medicine, 20th Ed., Bennett & Plum, W.B. Saunders and Company, Philadelphia, 1996, p 69; &  Comprehensive Psychiatry, 18(6), 1977, p595-598; & Poisoning & Toxicology Compendium, Leikin and Palouchek, Lexi-Comp., Cleveland, 1998; & Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, 14th Ed., McGraw-Hill, N.Y., 1998; &  Sunderman FW, “Perils of mercury”, Ann Clin Lab Sci, 1988 Mar‑Apr, 18(2):89‑101.

(296)  L. Bucio, et al., “Uptake, cellular distribution and DNA damage produced by mercuric chloride in a human fetal hepatic cell line”, Mutat Res, 1999 Jan 25, 423(1‑2):65‑72; & L. Verschaeve, et al., “Comparative in vitro cytogenetic studies in mercury-exposed human lymphocytes”, Muta Res, 1985, 157(2-3):221-6;  &  L. Verschaeve, “Genetic damage induced by low level mercury exposure”, Envir Res, 12:306-10, 1976.

(297)    P.E. Schneider, et al., “Mercury release from dispersalloy amalgam”, IADR Abstracts #630, 1982; & N. Sarkar, “Amalgamation reaction of dispersalloy  reexamined”, IADR Abstracts #217, 1991; & N.K. Sarkar, et al., IADR Abstracts # 895, 1976; &  R.S. Mateer, et al., IADR Abstracts #240, 1977; &  N.K. Sarkar, et al., IADR Abstracts #358, 1978; & N.W. Rupp, et al., IADR Abstracts # 356, 1979. 

(298)    C. Toomvali, “Studies of mercury vapor emission from different dental amalgam  alloys”, LIU-IFM-Kemi-EX 150, 1988; & A. Berglund, ”A study of the release of mercury vapor from different types of amalgam alloys”, J Dent Res, 1993, 72:939-946; & D.B. Boyer, “Mercury vaporization from corroded  dental amalgam”, Dental Materials, 1988, 4:89-93; & V. Psarras, et al., “Effect  of selenium on mercury vapour released from dental amalgams”, Swed Dent J, 1994, 18:15-23; & L.E. Moberg, “Long term corrosion studies of amalgams   and casting alloys in contact”, Acta Odontal Scand, 1985, 43:163-177; & L.E. Moberg,   “Corrosion products from dental alloys”, Published Dissertation, Stockholm, 1985.

(299)    H. Lichtenberg, “Mercury vapor in the oral cavity in relation to the number of amalgam fillings and chronic mercury poisoning”, Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, 1996, 11:2, 87-94.

(300)    C. Hock, et al., “Increased blood mercury levels in patients with Alzheimer’s disease”, J Neural Transm, 1998, 105(1):59-68.

(301)    Chang LW,  “Neurotoxic effects of mercury”, Environ. Res., 1977, 14(3):329-73; &  “Histochemical study on the localization and distribution of mercury in the nervous system after mercury intoxication”, Exp Neurol, 1972, 35(1):122-37; & “Ultrastructural studies of the nervous system after mercury intoxication”, Acta Neuropathol(Berlin), 1972, 20(2):122-38 and 20(4):316-34.

(302)    D. Klinghardt, IAOMT Conference & tape, 1998; “Large study by M. Daunderer (Germany) of MS patients after amalgam removal”.

(303) H.V. Aposhian, et al., “Mobilization of mercury in humans by DMPS”, Envir. Health Perspectives, Vol 106, Supp. 4, Aug.1998; & Toxicology, 1995, 97(1-3):23-38; & “Urinary mercury after administration DMPS”, FASEB J., 6:2472-2476, 1992.

(304)    M.J. Vimy, et al., “Mercury from maternal silver tooth fillings: a source of neonatal exposure”, Biological Trace Element Research, 56:143-52, 1997.

(305)    S. Soederstroem, et al., “The effect of mercury vapor on chloinergic neurons in the fetal  brain”, Developmental Brain Research, 85(1):96-108, 1995; & E.M. Abdulla, et al., “Comparison of neurite outgrowth with neurofilament protein levels in neuroblastoma cells following mercuric oxide exposure”, Clin Exp Pharmocol Physiol, 1995, 22(5):362-3. 

(306)    E.M. Oliveira, et al., “Mercury effects on the contractile activity of the heart muscle”, Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1:86-91,1994.

(307)    Duhr EF, Pendergrass JC, Slevin JT, Haley BE, “HgEDTA complex inhibits GTP interactions with the E‑site of brain beta‑tubulin”, Toxicology & Applied Pharmacology, 1993, 122(2):273‑80.

(308)    N. Sorenson, et al., “Prenatal methyl mercury exposure as a cardiovascular risk factor at 7 years of age”, Epidemiology, 1999, 10(4):370-4; & D.O. Marsh, et al., “Fetal methylmercury poisoning”, Ann Neurol, 1980, 7:348-55.

(309)    The Tribune, Mesa, Az., 13 Apr 1998, (Paul Mills, Apalachee Junction); & Kyle BP,   Nordic J of Biological Med, 2000.

(310)    R.L. Siblerud, “The relationship between mercury from dental amalgam and the cardiovascular system”, Science of the Total Envir., 1990, 99(1-2):23-35.

(311)    Chang LW, Hartmann HA, ”Blood-brain barrier dysfunction in experimental mercury intoxication”, Acta Neuropathol (Berl), 1972, 21(3):179-84; & Ware RA, Chang LW, Burkholder PM, “An ultrastructural study on the blood-brain barrier dysfunction following mercury intoxication”, Acta Neurolpathol(Berlin), 1974, 30(3):211-214; & Prenatal and neonatal toxicology and pathology of heavy metals”,  Adv Pharmacol Chemother., 1980, 17:195-231

(312)    Richard Hanson, The Key to Ultimate Health, 1999;& J. Lee(MD), What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Hormones, DAMS, (800-311-6265).

(313)    V.D.M. Stejskal, et al., “Mercury-specific lymphocytes: an indication of  mercury allergy in   man”, J. of Clinical Immunology, 1996, 16(1):31-40.

(314)    M. Goldman, et al., “Chemically induced autoimmunity ...”, Immunology Today, 1991, 12:223-; & K. Warfyinge, et al., “Systemic autoimmunity due to mercury vapor exposure in genetically susceptible mice”, Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1995, 132(2):299-309; & L.M. Bagentose, et al., “Mercury induced autoimmunity in humans”, Immunol Res, 1999, 20(1):67-78; & “Mercury-induced autoimmunity”, Clin Exp Immunol, 1998, 114(1):9-12.

(315)    B. Engin-Deniz, et al., ”Die queckssilberkonzentration im spichel zehnjariger kinder in korrelation zur anzahl und Grobe iher amalgamfullungen”, Zeitschrift fur Stomatologie, 1992, 89:471-179.

(316)   B.J. Shenker, et al., Dept. of Pathology, Univ. of Pennsylvania School of Dental Medicine, “Immunotoxic effects of mercuric compounds on human lymphocytes and monocytes: alterations in B-cell function and viability”, Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol, 1993, 15(1):87-112; & J.R. Daum, ”Immunotoxicology of mercury and cadmium on B-lymphocytes”, Int J Immunopharmacol, 1993, 15(3):383-94.

(317)    S. Zinecker, “Amalgam: Quecksilberdamfe bis ins Gehirn”, der Kassenarzt, 1992, 32(4):23; & “Praxiproblem Amalgam”, Der Allgermeinarzt, 1995, 17(11):1215-1221 (1800 patients).

(318)  V. Schneider, “Untersuchungen ...”, Dissertation, Frankfurt, a>M., 1976. 

(319)  H.D. Utt, “Mercury breath”, Journal of Calif. Dental Assoc., 1984, 12(2):41; & (b) Motorkina, AV, Barer GM, Volozhin AI, “Hg release from amalgam fillings into oral cavity”,  Stomatologiiia (Mosk), 1997, 76(4):9-11.

(320)    U.F. Malt, et al., “Physical and mental problems attributed to dental amalgam fillings”, Psychosomatic Medicine, 1997, 59:32-41 (99 cured).

(321)    R.L. Siblerud, “Relationship between dental amalgam and health”, Toxic Substances  Journal, 1990b, 10:425-444; & “Effects on health following removal of dental amalgams”, J Orthomolecular Med, 5(2):95-106, & “Relationship between amalgam fillings and oral cavity health”, Ann Dent, 1990, 49(2):6-10 (86 cured).

(322)    P. Engel, “Beobachtungen uber die gesundheit vor und nach  amalgamentfernug”, Separatdruck aus Schweiz. Monatsschr Zahnm, 1998, 108(8) (75 cases amalgam removal) http://soho.globalpoint.ch/paul‑engel (89% sigificant improvement).

(323)    Dr. Kohdera, Faculty of Dentistry, Osaka Univ, International Congress of Allergology and Clinical Immunology, EAACI, Stockholm, June 1994; & Heavy  Metal Bulletin, Vol 1, Issue 2, Oct 1994 (160 cases cured—eczema); & Tsunetoshi Kohdera, MD, dermatology, allergology,  31 Higashitakada‑cho Mibu Nakagyo‑ku Schimazu Clinics Kyoto 604 Japan   e‑mail:smc‑inet@mbox.kyoto‑inet.or.jp; & P. Dallmann,”kon nen durch Quecksilber entstehen?”, PeDa_Eigenverisg, 1995; & G. Ionescu, Biol Med, 1996, (2):65-68; & SS Tsyganok, “Unithiol in treatment of dermatoses”, Vestn.Dermatol.Venerol., 1978, (9):67-69; & (these clinics use MELISA test for diagnosis of immune reactivity) Neukirchen (clinic)(Germany, near Czech border), Director: Gruia Ionescu, owns 2 Clinics, cases paid by insurance companies in Germany. Email: Spezialklinik‑Neukirchen@toolpool.de       fax: 0049 9947 10 51 11 

(324)    D. Bangsi, et al., “Dental amalgam and multiple sclerosis”, International J of   Epidemiology, 1998 Aug, 27(4):667-71; & E. Mauch, et al., “Umweltgifte und multiple sklerose”, Der Allgremeinarzt, 1996, 20:2226-2220.

(325)  B. Arvidson (Sweden), “Inorganic mercury is transported from muscular nerve terminals to spinal and brainstem motorneurons”, Muscle Nerve, 1992, 15(10);1089-94; & Mitchell JD, “Heavy metals and trace elements in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis”, Neurol Clin, 1987  Feb, 5(1):43‑60; & M. Su, et al., “Selective involvement of large motor neurons in the spinal cord of rats treated with methylmercury”, J Neurol Sci, 1998, 156(1):12-7.

(326)    E. Baasch, “Is multiple sclerosis a mercury allergy?”, Schweiz arch Neurol Neurochir  Psichiatr, 1966, 98:1-19; & J. Clausen, “Mercury and MS”, Acta Neurol Scand, 1993, 87:461-; & "Sur un cas de mercurialisme chronique simulant la sclerose en plaque", Nord med Ark Stockholm 1880 xii no 17 1‑48 1 pl; & P. Le Quesne, “Metal-induced diseases of the nervous system”, Br J Hosp Med, 1982, 28:534-. 

(327)    G. Danscher, et al., Environ Res, “Localization of mercury in the CNS”, 1986, 41:29-43; & Danscher G, Horsted‑Bindslev P, Rungby J, “Traces of mercury in organs from primates with  amalgam fillings”, Exp Mol Pathol, 1990, 52(3):291‑9; & ”Ultrastructural localization of mercury after expsoure to mercury vapor”, Prog Histochem Cytochem, 1991, 23:249-255; & R. Pamphlett, et al., “Entry of low doses of mercury vapor into the nervous system”, Neurotoxicology, 1998, 19(1):39-47; & Pamphlett, et al., “Oxidative damage to nucleic acids in motor neurons containing Hg”, J Neurol Sci, 1998, 159(2):121-6 (rats & primates); & Pamphlett R, Waley P, "Motor neuron uptake of low dose inorganic mercury", J. Neurological Sciences, 135:63‑67 (1996); & Schionning JD, Danscher G, "Autometallographic inorganic mercury correlates with degenerative changes in dorsal root ganglia of rats intoxicated with organic mercury", APMIS, 1999 Mar, 107(3):303‑10.

(328)    P. McKeever, et al., “Patterns of antigenic expression in human glioma cells”, Crit Rev Neurobiology, 1991, 6:119-147.

(329)    B. Arvidson, et al., Acta Neurol Scand, “Retrograde axonal transport of mercury in primary sensory neurons”, 1990, 82:324-237; & Neurosci Letters, 1990, 115:29-32; & S.M. Candura, et al., “Effects of mercuric chloride and methyl mercury on cholinergic neuromuscular transmission”, Pharmacol Toxicol, 1997, 80(5):218-24; & Castoldi AF, et al., “Interaction of mercury compounds with muscarinic receptor subtypes in the rat brain”, Neurotoxicology, 1996, 17(3-4):735-41; & C Rouleau, et al., Environmental Science and Technology, Oct 1, 1999; & Arvidson B, Arvidsson J, Johansson K, "Mercury deposits in neurons of the trigeminal ganglia after insertion of dental amalgam in rats", Biometals, 7(3):261-263, 1994.

(330)  C.M. Tanner, et al., “Abnormal liver enzyme metablolism in Parkinson’s”, Neurology,  1991, 41(5):Suppl 2, 89-92; & M. Watanabe, et al., Amino Acids, 1998, 15(2):143-50; &    M.T. Heafield, et al., "Plasma cysteine and sulphate levels in patients with motor neuron disease”, Parkinson's Disease and Alzheimer's Disease", Neurosci Lett, 1990, 110(1‑2):216,20; & A.Pean, et al., "Pathways of cysteine metabolism in MND/ALS", J Neurol Sci, 1994, 124,Suppl:59‑61. 

(331)  C. Gordon, et al., “Abnormal sulphur oxidation in systemic lupus erythrmatosus (SLE)”, Lancet, 1992, 339:8784, 25-6; & P. Emory, et al., “Poor sulphoxidation in patients with rheumatoid arthitis”, Ann Rheum Dis, 1992,  51:3, 318-20; & P. Emory, et al., Br J Rheumotol, 1992, 31:7, 449-51.

(332)  Trepka MJ, Heinrich J, Krause C, Schulz C, Wjst M, Popescu M, Wichmann HE, “Factors affecting internal mercury burdens among German children”, Arch Environ Health, 1997, 52(2):134-8; & L. Soleo, et al., “Influence of amalgam fillings on urinary mercury excretion” (S.Italy), G Ital Med Lav Ergon, 1998, 20(2):75-81.

(333)    A.J. Freitas, et al., “Effects of Hg2+ and CH3Hg+ on Ca2+ fluxes in the rat brain”, Brain       Research, 1996, 738(2):257-64; & P.R. Yallapragoda, et al., “Inhibition of calcium transport by Hg salts in rat cerebellum and cerebral cortex”, J Appl Toxicol, 1996, 164(4):325-30; & E.Chavez, et al., “Mitochondrial calcium release by Hg+2", J Biol Chem, 1988, 263:8, 3582-; A. Szucs, et al., Cell Mol Neurobiol, 1997, 17(3):273-8; & D. Busselberg, “Calcium channels as target sites of heavy metals”, Toxicol Lett, 1995 Dec, 82‑83:255‑61; & Cell Mol Neurobiol, 1994 Dec, 14(6):675‑87.

(334)  T. Nguyen, et al., Mol Immunol, 1996, 3(4):379-86; & P. Eggleton, et al., “Pathophysicological roles of calreticulin in autoimmune disease”, Scand J Immunol, 1999, 49(5):466-73.

(335)    A. Engqvist, et al., “Speciation of mercury excreted in feces from individuals with amalgam fillings”, Arch Environ Health, 1998, 53(3):205-13; & Dept. of Toxicology & Chemistry, Stockholm Univ., National Institute for Working Life, 1998 (www.niwl.se/ah/1998-02.html).

(336)  G.S. Hill, “Drug associated glomerulopathies”, Toxicol Pathol, 1986, 14(1):37-44; & M. Monestier, et al., European J Immunology, 1994, 29(3):723-30; &  Adler SG, et al.,  “Hypersensitivity phenomena and the kidney: role of drugs and environmental agents”, Am J Kidney Dis, 1985 Feb.

(337)    H.G. Abadin, et al., U.S. ATSDR, “Breast-feeding exposure of infants to mercury, lead, and cadmium: a public health perspective”, Toxicol Ind Health, 1997, 13(4):495-517.

(338)   (a) W.Y. Boadi, et al., Dept. of Food Engineering and Biotechnology, T-I Inst of Tech., Haifa, Israel, “In vitro effect of mercury on enzyme activities and its accumulation in the first-trimester human placento”, Environ Res, 1992, 57(1):96-106; & “In vitro exposure to mercury and cadmium alters term human placental membrane fluidity”, Pharmacol, 1992, 116(1):17-23; & (b) J. Urbach, et al., Dept. of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel, “Effect of inorganic mercury on in vitro placental nutrient transfer and oxygen consumption”, Reprod Toxicol, 1992, 6(1):69-75; & (c) Karp W, Gale TF, et al., “Effect of mercuric acetate on selected enzymes of maternal and fetal hamsters”, Environmental Research, 36:351-358; & W.B. Karp, et al., “Correlation of human placental enzymatic activity with trace metal concentration in placenta”, Environ Res, 1997, 13:470-477.

(339)    H. Drexler, et al., “The mercury concentration in breast milk resulting from amalgam fillings and dietary habits”, Environ Res, 1998, 77(2):124-9.

(340)    Herrman M, Schweinsberg F,  “Mercury burden from amalgam fillings”, Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed, 1993, 194(3):271-91.

(341)  A.Tosti, et al., “Contact stomatitis”, Semin Cutan Med Surg, 1997, 16(4):314-9; & T. Nakada, et al., “Patch test materials for mercury allergic contact dematitis”, Dermatitis, 1997, 36(5):237-9.

(342)  V.Stejskal, “MELISA: A New Technology for Diagnosing and Monitoring of Metal Sensitivity”, Proceedings: 33rd Annual Meeting of American Acadamy of Environmental Medicine, Nov. 1998, Baltimore, Maryland.

(343)  P.L. Bigazzi, “Autoimmunity induced by metals”, in Chang, L., Toxicology of Metals, Lewis Publishers, CRC Press Inc.,1996, p835-52.

(344)  G.A.Caron, et al., “Lymphocytes transformation induced by inorganic and organic mercury”, Int Arch Allergy, 1970, 37:76-87. 

(345)  N.H.Nielsen, et al., “The relationship between IgE-mediated and cell-mediated hypersensitivities”, The Glostrup Allergy Study, Denmark, British J of Dermatol, 1996, 134:669-72. 

(346)  Clauw DJ, “The pathogenesis of chronic pain and fatigue syndrome: fibromyalgia”, Med Hypothesis, 1995, 44:369-78; & Hanson S, “Fibromyalgia, glutamate, and mercury”,   Heavy Metal Bulletin, Issue 4, 1999, p5,6. 

(347)  G.Benga, “Water exchange through erythrocyte membranes”, Neurol Neurochir Pol, 1997 Sep‑Oct, 31(5):905‑13. 

(348)  A Kistner, “Quecksilbervergiftung durch Amalgam: Diagnose und Therapie”, ZWR, 1995, 104(5):412-417; & Mass C, Bruck W, “Study on the significance of mercury accumulation in the brain from dental amalgam fillings through direct mouth-nose-brain transport”, Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed, 1996, 198(3):275-91.

(349) M. Schaeffer, et al., “Risikofaktor Amalgam-Ein Problemstoff”, Schriftenreihe mweltmedizin, Forum Medizin Verlagsgesellschaft, 1996; & (b) Nixon DE, Mussmann GV, Moyer TP, “Inorganic, organic, and total mercury in blood and urine”, J Anal Toxicol, 1996, 10(1):17-22.

(350)  F. Schweinsberg, “Risk estimation of mercury intake from different sources”, Toxicol. Lett., 1994, 72:45-51; & L.D. Pzheusskaia, “Disintoxication therapy of patients with nonspecific inflammatory diseases of the the female genital organs”, Akush. Ginekol, 1977, (4):30-34.

(351)  S. Halbach, et al., “Thiol chelators and mercury effects on isolated heart muscle”, Plzen.Lek. Sborn, 1990, 62(Supp):39-41; & “Sulhydryl-induced restoration of myocardial contractility after alteration by mercury”, Arch. Toxicol., 63(Supp 13):349-352, 1989; & N.V. Klykov, “Treatment of patients with mycardial infarction”, Vrach. Delo., 1979, (12):50-3; & “Treatment of patients with chronic circulatory insufficiencey” ,Kardiologila, 1972, 12(1):126-31.

(352)  B. Arnold, Eigenschaften und Einsatzgebiete des Chelatbildners:DMPS”, Z. Umweltmedizin, 1997, 5(1):38- ; & Diagnostik un Monitorung vonSchwermetallbelastungen, I, II, ZWR, 1996, 105(10):586-569 & (11):665-; &     Therapie der Schwermetallbelastung, Mineraloscope, 1996, (1):22-23.

(353)  P.P Guida, “Therapeutic efficacy of unithiol in Buschke’s sclerodrma”, Vrach. Delo.,1983, (8):36-38; & A.A. Dubinskii, et al., “Morphological changes in the skin in scleroderma after treatment with unithiol”, Vrach.Delo., 1978, (10):112-114.

(354)  W. Behnke, “Kopfschmerz un Migrane: Schon mal an Amalgam gegcht?”, Der Allgemeinarzt, 1995, 17(11):1222-1223; & J. Lechner, “Quecksilberbelastung,...”, Dtsch. Z. Biol. Zahnmed., 1992, 8(1):8-14.

(355)  W. Kostler, “Beeinflubung der zellularen Immunabwehr drch Quecksilberfreisetzung”, Forum Prakt. Allgem. Arzt, 1991, 30(2):62-3; & P. Schleicher, “Schwermetalle schadigen das Immunsystem”, Mineraloscope, 1996, (1):37; & “Immunschaden durch Toxine”, Argumente+Fakten der Medizin, 1992, 05; & W. Scheicher, Dissertation, Universitat Karlsruhe, 1977.

(356)  M. Daunderer, Die Amalgamvergiftung und ihre medizinische Folgen”, Forum Prakt. Allgem. Arzt, 1991, 30(2):44-66; & M. Daunderer, “Jugendicher starb an Amalgam”, Forum Prakt. Allgen. Arzt, 29(11):294.

(357)  S.B. Elhassani, “The many faces of methylmercury poisoning”, J Toxicol Clin Toxicol, 1982(8):875-9; & N. Neuburger, et al., “Kompendium Umweltmedizin”, MediVerlagsgesellschaft, Hamburg, 1996; & O. Oster, et al., “Die Pathobiochemie, Diagnose    und Therapie der Metall- und Metalloidintoxikation-2. Die Quecksilberintoxikation, Intensivmed, 1985, 22(3):130-9.

(358)  N.I. Shtelmakh, et al., “Comparative treatments of rheumatoid arthities”, Vrasch. Delo., 1982, (1):49-52.

(359)  G. Tapparo, “Toxische Untersunchungen zu Amalgam”, Die Zahn Arztwoche, 1992.

(360)  Buchet JP, Lauwerys RR, “Influence of DMPS on the mobilization of mercury from tissues of rats pretreated with mercuric chloride, phenylmercury acetate, or mercury vapor”, Toxicology, 1989, 54(3):323-33.

(361)  K.H. Friese, “Konnen Amalgamplomben angebornene Innenohrschaden verusachen?”, Therapeutikon, 1993, 7(11):492-496; & “Amalgamvergiftung-moglicher Zusammenhang mit angeborener Schwerhorlgkeit, Der Naturarzt, 1995, 135(8):13-15; & E. Bonnet, “Okopadiatrie-Verbindung zur Naturheilkunde”, Arztezeitschr Naturheikunde, 1995, 36(4): 272-78. 

(362)  G. Bohmer, et al., “Quecksilber-Mobilisation mit dern DMPS bei arztlichem und zahnarztlichem Personal im Vergleich”, Der Artikulator, 1989, (30):11-12; & W. Legrum, “Wie problematisch ist der Dentalwerkstoff Amalgam?”, Dtsch. Med. Wochenschr., 1990, 115(39):1490-1494; & M. Cikrt, et al., “Mobilization of mercury using DMPS”, 1993, Plzen Lek. Sborn., 68(Supp), 119; & R. Hickel, et al., “Die Quecksilberbelastung von Zahnmedizinstudenten anch beruflicher Amalgaexposition, Dtsch. Zahnarztl. Z., 1995, 50(7):506-10.

(363)  J.W. Reinhardt, Univ. of Iowa College of Dentistry, “Side effects: mercury contribution to

             body burden from dental amalgam”, Adv Dent Res, 1992, 6:110-3.

(364)  W. Bayer, Erfahrungsheikunde, 1992, 41(10):628-633; & B. Gabard, Arch Toxicol, 1978, 39(4):289-298; & H. Pscheidl, “Amalgamvergiftung- eine chronische Krankheit und ihre Therapie”, ACD, 1994, 3(4):153-166.

(365)  C. Schulte-Uebbing, “Umweltbedingte Frauenkranheiten”, Sonntag-Verlag, Stuttgart, 1996; & Umweltmedizin in der Frauenheilkunde, Arztezeitschr. Naturheilkunde, 35(2):9-17.

(366)  “Zahnamalgam und Schwangerschaft”, Geburtshilfe Frauenheikd, 1995, 55(6):M63-M65; & T. Zinke, “Gibt es neue Erkenntnisse zur Amalgamproblematic?”, in Status Quo and Perspectives of Amalgam and Other Dental Materials, L.F. Friberg (Ed.), Georg=Thieme-Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, 1995, p1-7.

(367)  I. Gerhard, “Amalgam aus gynakologischer Sicht”, Der Frauenarzt, 1995, 36(6):627-28; & “Schdstoffe und Fertillitatsstorungen”, Schwermetalle und Mineralstoffe, Geburtshilfe Frauenheikd, 1992, 52(7):383-396; & “Reproductive risks of heavy metal and pesticides in women”, in:Reproductive Toxicology, M.Richardson (Ed.), VCH Weinhelm, 1993, 167-83;              & “Unfruchtbarkeit bei Frauen durch Umwelterkrankungen, JD Kruse-Jarres (Ed.), 1993, 51-68. 

(368)  Stejskal VDM, Danersund A, Lindvall A, Hudecek R, Nordman V, Yaqob A, et al., “Metal- specific memory lymphocytes: biomarkers of sensitivity in man”, Neuroendocrinology Letters, 1999.

(369)  Sterzl I, Prochazkova J, Stejskal VDM, et al., “Mercury and nickel allergy: risk factors in fatigue and autoimmunity”, Neuroendocrinology Letters, 1999, 20:221-228. 

(370)  Magos L, Clarkson TW, Hudson AR, “The effects of dose of elemental mercury and first pass circulation time on organ distribution of inorganic mercury in rats”, Biochim Biophys Acta, 1989, 991(1):85-9.

(371)  Halbach S, “Estimation of mercury dose by a novel quantitation of elemental and inorganic species released from amalgam”, Int Arch Occup Environ Health, 1995, 67(5):295-300.

(372)  Atchison WD, “Effects of neurotoxicants on synaptic transmission”, Neuroltoxicol Teratol, 1998, 10(5):393-416; & Sidransky H, Verney E, “Influence of lead acetate and selected metal salts on tryptophan binding to rat hepatic nuclei”, Toxicol Pathol, 1999, 27(4):441-7; & Shukla GS, Chandra SV, “Effect of interaction of Mn2+ with Zn2+, Hg2+, and Cd2+ on some neurochemicals in rats”, Toxicol Lett, 1982, 10(2-3):163-8; & Brouwer M, et al., “Functional changes induced by heavy metal ions”, Biochemistry, 1982, 21(20):2529-38.

(373)  Marcusson JA, “Psychological and somatic subjective symptoms as a result of dermatological patch testing with metallic    mercury and PHA”, Toxicol Lett, 1996, 84(2):113-22; & “The frequency of mercury intolerance in patients with CFS and healthy controls”, Contact Dermatitis, 1999 Jul, 41(1):60‑1.

(374)  Benkelfat C, et al., “Mood lowering effect of tryptophan depletion”, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 1994, 51(9):687-97; & Young SN, et al., “Tryptophan depletion causes a rapid lowering of mood in normal males”, Psychopharmacology, 1985, 87(2):173-77; & Smith KA, et al., “Relapse of depression after depletion of tryptophan”, Lancet, 1997, 349(9056):915-19; & Delgado PL, et al., “Serotonin function, depletion of plasma tryptophan, and the mechanism of antidepressant action”, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 1990, 47(5):411-18.

(375)  Stejskal VDM, Danersund A, Lindvall A, “Metal-specific memory lymphocytes: biomarkers of sensitivity in man”, Neuroendocrinology Letters, 1999; &  Stejskal V, Hudecek R, Mayer W, "Metal-specific lymphocytes: risk factors in CFS and other related diseases", Neuroendocrinology Letters, 1999, 20:289-298.

(376)  Melchart D, Wuhr E, Weidenhammer W, Kremers  L, “A multicenter survey of amalgam fillings and subjective complaints in non-selected patients in the dental practice”, Eur J Oral Sci, 1998,106:770-77 (6,744 patients in 34 clinics). 

(377)  Murtomaa H, Haavio-Manila E, Kandolin I, “Burnout and its causes in Finnish dentists”,  Comunity Dental Oral Epidemiol, 1990, 18:208-12.

(378)  Cheraskin E, Ringsdorf WM, Medford FH, “Daily vitamin C consumption and fatigability”, J Am Gerialr Soc, 1976, 24:136-37.

(379)  MacDonald EM, Mann AH, Thomas HC, “Interferons as mediators of psychiatric morbidity”, The Lancet, 1978 Nov 21, 1175-78; & Hickie I, Lloyd A, “Are cytokines associated with neuropsychiatric syndrome in humans?”  Int J Immunopharm, 1995, 4:285-294.

(380)  Komaroff AL, Buchwald DS, “Chronic fatigue syndrome: an update”, Ann Rev Med, 1998, 49:1-13; & Buchwald DS, Wener MH, Kith P, “Markers of inflammation and immune activation in CFS”, J Rheumatol, 1997, 24:372-76.

(381)  Demitrack MA, Dale JK, “Evidence for impaired activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in patients with chronic fatigue sydrome”, J Clin Endocrinol Metabol, 1991, 73:1224-1234; & Turnbull AV, Rivier C, “Regulation of the HPA axis by cytokines”, Brain Behav Immun, 1995, 20:253-75; & Ng TB, Liu WK, “Toxic effect of heavy metals on cells isolated from the rat adrenal and testis”, In Vitro Cell Dev Biol, 1990 Jan, 26(1):24‑8.

(382)  Sterzl I, Fucikova T, Zamrazil V, “The fatigue syndrome in autoimmune thyroiditis with polyglandular activation of autoimmunity”, Vnitrni Lekarstvi, 1998, 44:456-60.

(383)  Saito K, “Analysis of a genetic factor of metal allergy-polymorphism of HLA-DR-DO gene”,  Kokubyo Gakkai Zasschi, 1996, 63:53-69; & Prochazkova J, Ivaskova E, Bartova J, Stejskal VDM, “Immunogentic findings in patients with altered tolerance to heavy metals”, Eur J Human Genet, 1998, 6:175.

(384)  Kuklinski B, “Glutathione Transferasen und Krankheit”, Seitschrift fur Umweltmedizin, 1999, 7:39-45.

(385)  Kohdera T, Koh N, Koh R, “Antigen-specific lymphocyte stimulation test on patients with psoriasis vulgaris”, XVI International Congress of Allergology and Clinical Immunology, Oct 1997, Cancun, Mexico; & Ionescu G, “Schwermetallbelastung bei atopischer Dermatitis und Psoriasis, Biol Med, 1996, 2:65-68.

(386)  Great Smokies Diagnostic Lab, research web pages (by condition) http://www.gsdl.com;   & Doctors Data Lab, http://www.doctorsdata.com, inquiries @doctors data.com, & MetaMetrix Lab, http://www.metametrix.com; & Biospectron Lab, LMI, Lennart Månsson International AB, lmi.analyslab@swipnet.se. 

(387)  Caulk, Inc. (amalgam manufacturer), http://www.caulk.com/mSDSDFU/DISPERSDFU.html.

(388)  Sata K, Kusada Y, Zhang Z, Ueda K, Ishi Y, Mori T, et al., “An epidemiological study of mercury sensitization”, Allergology International, 1997, 46:201-6.

(389)  Brunker P, Rother D, Sedlmeier R, J Mol Gen Genet, 1996, 251(3); & Williams MV,  Environ Mol Mutagen, 1996, 27(1):30-3.

(390)  Ellingsen DG, Nordhagen HP, Thomassen Y, “Urinary selenium excretion in workers with low exposure to mercury vapour”, J Appl Toxicol, 1995, 15(1):33-6.

(391)  Schumann K, “The toxicological estimation of heavy metal content (Hg,Cd,Pb) in food for infants and small children”, Z Ernahrungswiss, 1990, 29(1):54-73 (article in German with English abstract).

(392)  Gebbart E, “Chromosone damage in individuals exposed to heavy metals”, Curr Top Environ Toxicol Chem, 1985, 8:213-25.

(393)  Furuhjelm M, Jonson B, Int J of Fertility, 1962, 7(1):17-21; & Dr. J.K Sherman, Univ. of Arkansas, study reported in Washington Star Newspaper, Jan 7, 1979.

(394)  Blatter B, van der Star M, Roeleveld N, Int Archives of Occup and Environ Health, 1987, 59:551-7.

(395)  Baranski B, Environmental Health Perspectives, 1993, 101(suppl 2): 85-90; & Baranski B, “Effect of mercury on the sexual cycle and prenatal and postnatal development of progeny”, Med Pr, 1981, 32(4):271-6.

(395)  Shapiro IM, Cornblath DR, Sumner AJ, “Neurophysiological and neuropsychological function in mercury-exposed dentists”, The Lancet, 1982, 1:1147-1150; & Szzell BP, Oler J, “Chronic low-level mercury exposure and neuropsychological functioning”, J of Clin and Exper Neuropsych, 1986, 8:581-93.

(396)  Epidemiologisk undersokning av fosterkador hos 1.2 milj. barn, fodda sedan 1967; Norgeyrkesmed. Avd. Haukelands sykehus. Aftenposton 6 mpv 1997.

(397)  Hudecek R, Danersund A, Removal of Incompatible Dental Material in Patients with Intolerance of Dental Materials, In: Amalgam and Health: The Swedish Council for Planning and Research Coordination, 1999, p78-84.

(398)  Saengsirinavin C, Pringsulaka P, “Mercury levels in urine and head hair of dental personnel”, J Dent Assoc Thai, 1988, 38(4):170-9.

(399)  Herber RF, Wibowo AA, “Exposure of dentists and assistants to mercury: levels in urine and hair related to conditions of practice”, Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 1988, 16(3):153-8.

(400) Kim DE, Song KB, Kim YJ, “Mercury contents in hair of dental personnel and evaluation of various agents suppressing mercury vaporization”, Taehan Chikkwa Uisa Hyophoe Chi,  27(7): 649-59.

(401)  Sikorski R, Juszkiewicz T, “Women in dental surgeries: reproductive hazards in occupational exposure to mercury”, Int Arch Occup Environ Health, 1987, 59(6):551-7.

(402)  Ando T, Wakisaka I, Hatano H, “Mercury concentration in gray hair”, Nippon Eiseigaku Zasshi, 1989, 43(6):1063-8. 

(403)  Mayall FG, Hickman J, Knight LC, Singharo S, "An amalgam tattoo of the soft palate: a case report with energy dispersive X-ray analysis”, J Laryngol Otol, 1992 Sep, 106(9):834-5; & Pierson HF, "Pharmacological perturbation of murine    melanoma growth by copper chelates”, Cancer Lett, 1985 Mar, 26(2):221-33.

(404)  M.E. Godfrey, “Candida, dysbiosis and amalgam”, J. Adv. Med., vol 9, no 2 (1996); & Romani L, “Immunity to Candida albicans: Th1,Th2 cells and beyond”, Curr Opin Microbiol, 1999, 2(4):363-7; & Alfred V. Zamm, “CANDIDA ALBICANS THERAPY: Dental mercury removal, an effective adjunct”,  J. Orthmol. Med., v1, n4, p261-5 (1986). 

(405)  Jenny Stejskal, Vera Stejskal, “The role of metals in autoimmune diseases and the link to neuroendocrinology”, Neuroendocrinology Letters, 1999, 20:345‑358 (see #218).

(406)  Goering Pl, Rowland AS, “Toxicity assessment of mercury vapor drom dental amalgams”, Fundam Appl Toxicol, 1992, 19:319-329.

(407)  Wehner‑Caroli J, Scherwitz C, Schweinsberg F, Fierlbeck G, “Exacerbation of pustular psoriasis in mercury  poisoning”, Hautarzt, 1994 Oct, 45(10):708‑10. 

(408)  Eedy DJ, Burrows D, Dlifford T, Fay A, “Elevated T cell subpopulations in dental students”, J Prosthet Dent, 1990, 63(5):593-6; & Yonk LJ, et al., “CD+4 helper T-cell depression in autism”, Immunol Lett, 1990, 25(4):341-5; & Jaffe JS, Strober W, Sneller MC, “Functional abnormalites of CD8+ T cells define a unique subset of patients with common variable immunodeficiency”, Blood, 1993, 82(1):192-20.

(409)  Autism: a unique form of mercury poisoning, http://www.canfoundation.org/newcansite/sciwatch/invest.html... & Yazbak FE (MD, FAAP)  Autism 99: A National Emergency, http://www.garynull.com/documents/autism_99.htm. 

(410)  J.R. Cade, et al., “Autism and schizophrenia linked to malfunctioning enzyme for milk protein digestion”, Autism, Mar 1999.

(411)  Puschel G, Mentlein R, Heymann E, “Isolation and characterization of dipeptidyl peptidase IV from human placenta”, Eur J Biochem, 1982 Aug, 126(2):359-65; & Kar NC, Pearson CM, “Dipeptyl peptidases in human muscle disease”,Clin Chim Acta, 1978, 82(1-2):185-92; & Seroussi K, Autism and Pervasive Developmental Disorders, 1998, p174,etc.

(412)  Moreno-Fuenmayor H, Borjas L, Arrieta A, Valera V, “Plasma excitatory amino acids in autism”, Invest Clin, 1996, 37(2):113-28; & Rolf LH, Haarman FY, Grotemeyer KH, Kehrer H, “Serotonin and amino acid content in platelets of autistic children”, Acta Psychiatr Scand, 1993, 87(5):312-6; & Naruse H, Hayashi T, Takesada M, Yamazaki K, “Metabolic changes in aromatic amino acids and monoamines in infantile autism and a new related treatment”, No To Hattatsu, 1989, 21(2):181-9; & Carlsson ML, “Is infantile autsim a hypoglutamatergic disorder?”,  J Neural Transm, 1998, 105(4-5):525-35. 

(413)  Autism-Mercury@egroups.com, web group of parents with autistic kids and autism doctors and researchers; & http://www.edelsoncenter.com; & Edelson SB, Cantor DS, “Autism: xenobiotic influences”, Toxicol Ind Health, 1998, 14(4):553-63; & Liska DJ, “The detoxification  enzyme systems”, Altern Med Rev, 1998, 3(3):187-98.

(414) Wecker L, Miller SB, Cochran SR, Dugger DL, Johnson WD, “Trace element concentrations in hair from autistic children”, Defic Res, 1985, 29(Pt 1):15-22.

(415)  Reichrtova E, et al., “Cord serum immunoglobulin E related to enviornmental contamination of human placentas with organochlorine compounds”, Envir Health Perspec, 1999, 107(11):895-99; &  Gavett SH, et al., “Residual oil fly ash amplifies allergic cytokines, airway responsiveness, and inflammation in mice”, Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 1999, 160(6):1897-1904; & Kramer U, et al., “Traffic-related air pollution is associated with atopy in children living in urban areas”, Epidemiology, 2000, 11(1):64-70.

(416)  Rothstein JD, Martin LJ, Kuncl RW, “Decreased glutamate transport by the brain and spinal cord in ALS”, New Engl J Med, 1992, 326:1464-8.

(417)  Folkers K, et al., “Biochemical evidence for a deficiency of vitamin B6 in subjects reacting to MSL-Glutamate”, Biochem Biophys Res Comm, 1981, 100:972; & Felipo V, et al.,       “L-carnatine increases the affinity of glutamate for quisqualate receptors and prevents glutamate neurotoxicity”, Neurochemical Research, 1994, 19(3):373-377; & Akaike A, et al., “Protective effects of a vitamin-B12 analog (methylcobalamin) against glutamate cytotoxicity in cultured cortical neurons”, European J Pharmacology, 1993, 241(1):1-6.

(418)  Srikantaiah MV, Radhakrishnan AN, “Studies on the metabolism of vitamin B6 in the small intestine. Purification and properties of monkey intestinal pyridoxal kinase”, Indian J Biochem, 1970 Sep, 7(3):151‑6.

(419)  Lipozencic J, Milavec‑Puretic V, Pasic A, “Contact allergy and psoriasis”, Arh Hig Rada Toksikol, 1992 Sep, 43(3):249‑54; & Roujeau JC, et al., “Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis. Analysis of 63 cases”, Arch Dermatol, 1991 Sep, 127(9):1333‑8; & Yiannias JA, Winkelmann RK, Connolly SM, “Contact sensitivities in palmar plantar pustulosis (acropustulosis)”, Contact Dermatitis, 1998 Sep, 39(3):108‑11.

(420)  Rivola J, Krejci I, Imfeld T, Lutz F, “Cremation and the environmental mercury burden”, Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed, 1990, 100(11):1299‑303; & Matter‑Grutter C, Baillod R, Imfeld T, Lutz F, “Mercury emission measurements in a crematorium. The dentistry aspects”, Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed, 1995, 105(8):1023‑8.

(421)  Yoshida M, Kishimoto T, Yamamura Y,  Tabuse M, Akama Y, Satoh H, “Amount of mercury from dental amalgam filling released into the atmosphere by cremation”, Nippon Koshu Eisei Zasshi, 1994 Jul, 41(7):618‑24.

(422)  Reese KM, “Mercury emissions from crematoria”, Chem & Engin News, 12-7-98, p80-81; & Lancet, 1998, 352:1602.

 (423) C.R. Adams, et al., “Mercury intoxication simulating ALS”, JAMA, 1983, 250(5):642-5; & T. Barber, “Inorganic mercury intoxification similar to ALS”, J of Occup Med, 1978, 20:667-9.        

(424)  Munch G, Gerlach M, Sian J, Wong A, Riederer P, “Advanced glycation end products in neurodegeneration: more than early markers of oxidative stress?”, Ann Neurol, 1998 Sep, 44(3 Suppl 1):S85‑8.  

(425)  Hu H, Abedi‑Valugerdi M, Moller G, “Pretreatment of lymphocytes with mercury in vitro induces a response in T cells from genetically determined low‑responders and a shift of the interleukin profile”, Immunology, 1997 Feb, 90(2):198‑204; & Hu H, Moller G, Abedi‑Valugerdi M, “Major histocompatibility complex class II antigens are required for both cytokine production and proliferation induced by mercuric chloride in vitro”, J Autoimmun, 1997 Oct, 10(5):441‑6; & Hu H, Moller G, Abedi‑Valugerdi M, “Mechanism of mercury‑induced autoimmunity: both T helper 1‑ and T helper 2‑type responses are involved”, Immunology, 1999 Mar, 96(3):348‑57.

(426)  Hultman P, Nielsen JB, “The effect of toxicokinetics on murine mercury-induced autoimmunity”, Environ Res, 1998, 77(2):141-8.

(427)  Chetty CS, McBride V, Sands S, Rajanna B, “Effects in vitro on rat brain Mg(++)-ATPase”,   Arch Int Physiol Biochim, 1990, 98(5):261-7; & M.Burk, et al., Magnesium, 4(5-6):325-332, 1985?

(428)  O’Carroll RE, Masterton G, Goodwin GM, “The neuropsychiatric sequelae of mercury poisoning. The Mad Hatter’s disease revisited”, Br J Psychiatry, 1995, 167(1):95-8; &  PUBLIC HEALTH REPORTS, PUBLIC HEALTH BULLETIN #263,March 28, 1941, “Mercurialism and its control in the felt hat industry”. 

(429)  Rodier P.M., “Developing brain as a target of toxicity”, Environ Health Perspect, 1995, 103(Supp 6):73-76; & Rice DC, “Issues in developmental neurotoxicology: interpretation and implications of the data”, Can J Public Health, 1998, 89(Supp1):S31-40; & Rice DC, Barone S, “Critical periods of vulnerability for the developing nervous system: evidence from human and animal models”, Environ Health Persect, 2000, 108(supp 3):511-533; &  Crinnion WJ, “Environmental toxins and their common health effects”, Altern Med Rev, 2000, 5(1):52-63.

(430)  Fukino H, Hirai M, Hsueh YM, Yamane Y, “Effect of zinc pretreatment on mercuric choride-induced lipid peroxidation in the rat kidney”, Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1984, 73(3):395-401.

(431)  Smith T, Pitts K, McGarvey JA, Summers AO, “Bacterial oxidation of mercury metal vapor”,  Appl Environ Microbiol, 1998, 64(4):1328-32. 

(432)  Sutton KG, McRory JE, Guthrie H, Snutch TP, “P/Q-type calcium channels mediate the activity-dependent feedback of syntaxin-1A”, Nature, 1999, 401(6755):800-4.

(433)  Epidemiologisk undersokning av fosterkador hos 1.2 milj. barn, fodda sedan 1967; Norge yrkesmed. Avd. Haukelands sykehus. Aftenposton 6 mpv 1997.

(434)  Echeverria D, et al., “Neurobehavioral effects from exposure to dental amalgam vapor (Hg0): new distinctions between recent exposure and Hg body burden”, Swedish Council for Coordinating and Research, 1999.

(435) Norwegian Dept. of Health, “The Use of Dental Restoration Materials in Norway”, Oct 1998, IK-2652, & Press Release, Australian NHMRC, Mar 1999; & Heavy Metal Bulletin, Issue 1, 1999.

(436)  Schiwara, H.-W. (Medical Laboratory) Arzte fur Laboratoriumsmedizen, D-28357 Bremen; & Heavy Metal Bul, 1999, 1:28.

(437)  Affinity Labeling Technology, Inc. (Dental Lab), oral toxicity testing technology and tests, see research web pages on amalgam toxicity, root canals, cavitaions,  http://www.altcorp.com.

(438)  Stefanovic V., et al., “Kidney ectopeptidases in mercuric chloride-induced renal failure”,  Cell Physiol Biochem, 1998, 8(5):278-84.

(439)  “Part 1, mercuric chloride intoxication”, Bull Environ Contam Toxicol, 1978, 20(6):729-35; & Mondal MS, Mitra S, “Inhibition of bovine xanthine oxidase activity by Hg2+ and other metal ions”, J Inorg Biochem, 1996, 62(4):271-9; & Sastry KV, Gupta PK, “In vitro inhibition of digestive enzymes by heavy metals and their reversal by chelating agents”.

(440)  Kidd RF, “Results of dental amalgam removal and mercury detoxification”, Altern Ther Health Med, 2000 Jul, 6(4):49‑55.      

(441)  National Acadamy of Sciences, National Research Council, Committee on Developmental Toxicology, Scientific Frontiers in Developmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment, June 1, 2000, 313 pages. & PR.

 (442)  Olanow CW, Arendash GW, “Metals and free radicals in neurodegeneration”, Curr Opin Neurol, 1994, 7(6):548-58; & Kasarskis EJ (MD), “Metallothionein in ALS Motor Neurons (IRB #91-22026), FEDRIP DATABASE, NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE (NTIS), ID: FEDRIP/1999/07802766.

(443)  Troy CM, Shelanski ML, “Down-regulation of copper/zinc superoxide dismutase causes apototic dealth in PC12 neuronal cells”, Proc National Acad Sci, USA, 1994, 91(14):6384-7; & Rothstein JD, Dristol LA, Hosier B, Brown RH, Kunci RW, “Chronic inhibition of superoxide dismutase produces apoptotic death of spinal neurons”, Proc Nat Acad Sci, USA, 1994, 91(10):4155-9.

(444)  Beal MF, “Coenzyme Q10 administration and its potential for treatment of neurodegenerative diseases”, Biofactors, 1999, 9(2-4):262-6; & Nagano S, Ogawa Y, Yanaghara T, Sakoda S, “Benefit of a combined teatment with trientine and ascorbate in famial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis model mice”, Neurosci Lett, 1999, 265(3):159-62.

          (Note: 442-4 not used, look at ALS paper)

(445)  Clifford Consulting & Research, Inc, Dental Materials Reactivity Testing, Colorada Springs, Colo, http://www.ccrlab.com; &  Peak Energy Performance, Inc., Dental Materials Biocompatibility Testing, http://www.peakenergy.com . 

(446)  P.W. Phillips, Skinner’s Science of Dental Materials, 1980; & ImmunoSciences Lab.

(447)  Amalgam/mercury poisoned patients organizations, DAMS: Assoc. of Dental Mercury Patients-U.S., http://www.amalgam.org; & Swedish Association of Dental Mercury Patients, http://www.tf.nu/eng/infoeng1.html.

(448)  Dr. J. Mercola, Optimal Center Newsletter, Aug 2000, http://www.mercola.com; & (b) “Decreased phagocytosis of myelin by macrophages with ALA”, Journal of Neuroimmunology, 1998, 92:67-75; & (c) (Human Reproduction, Jun 2000, Supp1:1-13; & J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 1999, 69:97-107; & Mult Scler, 1997, 3:105-12).

(449)

(450)  Dr. S J Walsh and L M Rau, University of Connecticut Health Center, “Autoimmune disease overlooked as a leading cause of death in women”, Am J Public Health, 2000, 90:1463‑1466.

(451)  Miszta H, Dabrowski Z, “Effect of mercury and combined effect of mercury on the activity of acetylcholinesterase of rat lymphocytes during in vitro incubation”, Folia Haematol Int Mag Klin Morphol Blutforsch, 1989, 116(1):151‑5; & Bear D, Rosenbaum J, Norman R, “Aggression in cat and human precipitated by a cholinesterase inhibitor”, The Journal Psychosomatics, July 1986, vol 27, no 7, p535‑536; & Devinsky O, Kernan J, Bear D, “Aggressive behavior following exposure to cholinesterase inhibitors”, Journal of Neuropsychiatry, vol 4, no 2, Spring 1992, p189‑199.

(452)  Uppsala Amalgam Clinic, Sweden, (www.melisa.org) (over 800 patients, CFS, MCS, neurological).

(453)  Blumer W, "Mercury toxicity and dental amalgam fillings", Journal of Advancement in Medicine, v.11, n.3, Fall 1998, p.219.

(454)  Cooley RL, Stilley JS, Lubow RM, "Mercury vapor produced during sterilization of amalgam-contaminated instruments", The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, March 1985, v53, n3, p304- 308.

(455)  Lindvall A, Lindh U, Danersund A, Metal Profiles in 25 Patients with Long-Term Illness, Presented at Eurotox 93 Congress; & Lindh U, Nucl Instr and Meth,1988, B30:404; & Hallgren R, Feltelius N, Lindh U, J. Rheumatol., 1988, 15:308.

(456)  Panasiuk J, “Peripheral blood lymphocyte transformation test in various skin diseases of allergic origin” (nickel & lupus), Przegl Dermatol, 1980, 67(6):823‑9 [Article in Polish]; & Barnett JH, “Discoid lupus erythematosus exacerbated by contact dermatitis”, Cutis, 1990 Nov, 46(5):430‑2 (nickel & lupus).

(457)  International Labor Organization, Mental health in the workplace in Finland, Germany,  United Kingdom and United States, Oct 2000,   www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/inf/pr/2000/37.htm (not used).

(458)  Dowling AL, Iannacone EA, Zoeller RT, “Maternal hypothyroidism selectively affects the expression of neuroendocrine‑specific protein A messenger ribonucleic acid in the proliferative zone of the fetal rat brain cortex”, Endocrinology, 2001 Jan 1,142(1):390‑399.

(459)  Isny Clinic (South Germany), Kurt Muller, MD, member of Editorial Board for Ganzheitliches Medicine Journal, Wassertornstrasse 6 , Isny, BRD  fax: 0049 7562 550 52