916-786-4TMJ   Advanced Dental Concepts  916-786-4865

Topics:

A.   The Dental Amalgam Controversy

Ever since dentists first started installing amalgams in patients' teeth there has been an issue as to whether mercury is released and causes health (pathophysiologic) problems. Then in 1984 a group of conscientious dentists formed the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT). One of their objectives was to scientifically explore the safety of amalgam restorations. Since 1984, members of the IAOMT have inspired many renowned medical scientists at universities around the world to research possible pathophysiologic effects associated with mercury leaking from amalgam restorations. Consequently, there are a growing number of scientific studies that document pathophysiologic effects associated with amalgam mercury.

I a) Fundamental Health Flaws

A "silver filling" is a euphemism for an amalgam restoration, which a dentist places in a patient's tooth after a cavity is created by drilling out decay. Amalgam restorations consist of mercury, silver, tin, copper, and a trace amount of zinc. The dental amalgam has two fundamental flaws that adversely effect a patient's health. The first fundamental flaw is that all amalgam metals are cations. The net result of the tendency for covalent, ionic and metallic bonding and van der Waals forces between amalgam cations is a weak repulsion. So there is a sustained release of mercury and other metals from the amalgam into the body. Researchers have measured a daily release of mercury on the order of 10 micrograms from the amalgam into the body. Mercury is a toxic metal; the most minute amount damages cells.

The second fundamental flaw is that there are five dissimilar metals in the amalgam. Galvanic action between these metals in inevitable (the dissimilar metals form a battery). Galvanism produces electricity that flows through the body. The electric currents produced by the amalgam typically are between 0.1 and 10 microamps, compared to the body's natural electric current of 3 microamps.

The mercury challenges systemic functions of every individual and of developing fetuses, so it can lead to health problems and fetal malformations. Mercury leakage and its subsequent pathophysiologic effects are most often slow, insidious processes. So health problems caused by dental mercury poisoning are perceived many years after the amalgams are placed.

"...I will prescribe regimen for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone. To please no one, will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death. If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot."

As early as the 7th century, the Chinese used a "silver paste" containing mercury (Hg) to fill decayed teeth. Throughout the Middle Ages, alchemists in China and Europe observed that this mysterious silvery liquid, extracted from cinnabar ore, was volatile and would quickly disappear as vapor when mildly heated. Alchemists were fascinated that at room temperature Hg appeared to "dissolve" powders of other metals such as silver, tin, and copper. By the early 1800's, the use of a Hg/silver paste as a tooth filling material was being popularized in England and France and it was eventually introduced into North America in the 1830s. Some early dental practitioners expressed concerns that the Hg/silver mixture (amalgam) expanded after setting, frequently fracturing the tooth or protruding above the cavity preparation, and thereby prevented proper jaw closure. Other dentists were concerned about mercurial poisoning, because it was already widely recognized that Hg exposure resulted in many overt side effects, including dementia and loss of motor coordination. By 1845, as a reflection of these concerns, the American Society of Dental Surgeons and several affiliated regional dental societies adopted a resolution that its members sign a pledge not to use amalgam. Consequently, during the next decade some members of the society were suspended for the malpractice of using amalgam. But the advocates of amalgam eventually prevailed and membership in the American Society of Dental Surgeons declined, forcing it to disband in 1856. In its place arose the American Dental Association, founded in 1859, based on the advocacy of amalgam as a safe and desirable tooth filling material. Shortly thereafter, tin was added to the Hg/silver paste to counteract the expansion properties of the previous amalgam formula.

There were compelling economic reasons for promoting dental amalgam as a replacement for the other common filling materials of the day such as cement, lead, gold, and tinfoil. Amalgam's introduction meant that dental care would now be within the financial means of a much wider sector of the population, and because amalgam was simple and easy to use, dentists could readily be trained to treat the anticipated large number of new patients. By 1895, the dental amalgam mixture of metals had been modified further to control for expansion and contraction, and the basic formula has remained essentially unchanged since then. Scientific concerns about amalgam safety initially surfaced in Germany during the 1920's, but eventually subsided without a clear resolution. At the present time, based on 1992 dental manufacturer specifications, amalgam (at mixing) typically contains approximately 50% metallic Hg, 35% silver, 9% tin, 6% copper, and a trace of zinc. Estimates of annual Hg usage by U.S. dentists range from approximately 100,000 kg in the 1970's to 70,000 kg today. Hg fillings continue to remain the material preferred by 92% of U.S. dentists for restoring posterior teeth. More than 100 million Hg fillings are placed each year in the U.S. Presently, organized dentistry has countered the controversy surrounding the use of Hg fillings by claiming that Hg reacts with the other amalgam metals to form a "biologically inactive substance" and by observing that dentists have not reported any adverse side effects in patients. Long-term use and popularity also continue to be offered as evidence of amalgam safety.

B.   The Legal Position of the American Dental Association on Mercury in Dental Fillings

This legal position adopted by the ADA seems to contradict the organization's publicly stated mission. According to their own website (www.ada.org):

Somehow the ADA's stated mission of promoting public health does not require the organization to protect the public even when their own member dentists are following ADA guidelines and standards of care for the use of mercury containing dental amalgams. (For the uninformed public, most dental amalgam contains approximately 50% elemental mercury by weight (see http://www.caulk.com) )

To find out what the ADA "really meant" by its statements regarding the use and safety of dental amalgam in the Tolhust case see http://www.ada.org/prac/position/bioprobe.htm The following is extracted from the ADA’s website: Does it sound like the ADA is protecting the public or protecting its own financial interests?

C.   Nature's Intent for Oral Health

The usual approach to dental health focuses primarily on the appearance of the teeth. Are they white? Are they straight? Can I see decay? It is almost as if teeth decorate the body rather than form an integral part of the function of the body. However, Nature did not give us teeth as decoration. Why did nature give us teeth and what is the larger relationship of oral health to our overall well being?

Each child grows 20 teeth. 20 adult teeth plus 12 molars will replace these baby teeth. The 32 adult teeth are aligned the two arches, half in the fixed upper jaw (maxillae) and half in the moveable lower jaw (mandible). The jaw bones and teeth are surrounded by protective soft tissues and controlled primarily by 16 pairs of powerful muscles. Together these structures provide the first stages of food processing so the stomach and intestines can work efficiently.

The modern obsession with a pretty smile often leads us to forget that the mouth and body inter relate. Whatever happens to one body part effects every other part. The "Big Three" of bodily functions are breathing, swallowing and chewing. These functions are interrelated and imbalance of the oral system can upset these important functions and lead to significant secondary systemic effects. 

Form follows function in the development of oral form and the adult face. The eruption of teeth and the movement of powerful muscles of the tongue and the cheeks molds the face (see the orthodontic section). Pre-mature loss of loss of baby teeth will effect the growth of a child’s jaw and ultimately influence the adult shape of the jaw, lips and nose. The relationship between the teeth, the skull, muscular forces and appearance remains in action throughout life. Any negative change can appear to prematurely age a person. For example, wearing away the height of the teeth or the loss of teeth will result in the collapse of the bite. This collapse causes the appearance of "hag’s chins", thinning lips, and deepened facial lines.

Dental health is much more than a question of a pretty smile or teeth that are free of cavities. Dentists who take a holistic approach to dental well being appreciate the magnificent balance that is Nature’s primary design principal.

You, as an individual, can do much to ensure your own dental well being. Your daily habits, nutrition and your ability to manage stress in non-damaging ways are all keys to your good dental health.

Oral health means your 32 living adult teeth, your jaw, tongue, lips and body work harmoniously together free from decay or dysfunction. Therefore, oral health is about more than your teeth or your smile; it is about your whole body!

[top]

 D. Material Biocompatibility

 Biocompatability means how a material interacts with the complex living structure of your body. Dental materials become part of your body and their ingredients have an important effect on your system. This section begins a discussion about dental materials and suggests other on-line resources for finding more information.

What is the best material for a dental filling or restoration?

Can filling materials be tested for biocompatibility?

What is the best material for a dental filling or restoration?

Once decay begins in a tooth, the decayed area must be removed and the cavity repaired with a filling material. The object of filling a tooth is for you to keep the tooth. Your natural roots and tooth structures are preferable to either an implant or false teeth. It is important to realize that a dental filling, by definition, is a foreign material implanted in your body. Even the most skillfully constructed filling or crown is not absolutely permanent. They may have to be replaced in your lifetime.

The definition of the "best" dental material then becomes a trade-off between durability, cost, and biocompatibility.

Pure Gold: Gold foil is as close to a perfect filling material as dentists can get.  Unfortunately, pure gold foil can be used only in very small cavities. Pure gold is too soft for crowns or inlay structures.

Gold Alloy: Alloys are a mixture of several metals. Gold alloys are a mixture of gold with other metals which provide sufficient strength for a crown or inlay. The metals mixed with gold can be either base or precious metals. Alloys of gold and platinum do not corrode and are the most durable of filling materials. Well constructed crowns and inlay fillings can last 20 years or longer in a properly maintained mouth.

For a restoration bigger than a small pit, gold must be cast to exactly fit the prepared tooth. Gold fillings/crowns are the most expensive of the alternatives because of the cost of the materials, the laboratory expenses, and the several office visits to complete the restoration.

Non-gold Alloy: Crowns cast in base metals have the corrosive potential of base metals. They make a durable restoration that is somewhat less expensive than gold, but they are less biocompatible. Sensitization and allergenic reactions are more likely with non-gold, base metal alloys.

"Silver", Mercury Amalgam: This material is mix of base metals such as silver, tin, copper, or zinc dissolved to a malleable state by elemental mercury. The durability of these fillings is dependent upon the electrical currents created by the filling being
immersed in an electrolyte solution, saliva. Even though many people leave these fillings in place for 10-20 years, the research standard of durability is 7.6 years.

Mercury amalgam is the least expensive filling material. The dentist can prepare the tooth cavity, fill it with the malleable amalgam, and shape the contours in one sitting.   The material is technically easy to manage for the dentist. The combination of low cost materials and ease of use and reasonable durability has made mercury amalgam the most widely used dental material.

The drawback to mercury amalgam fillings is that elemental mercury constitutes 50 % of the amalgam mass. Elemental mercury is a poisonous heavy metal. Elemental mercury vapors continue to be released from amalgam fillings for the entire life of the filling.

Mercury is not a biocompatible material. Mercury is the active ingredient in many herbicides, fungicides and pesticides. As the environment of modern living becomes increasingly polluted, larger numbers of people find that their threshold of toleration to
pollutants has been exceeded, resulting in severe physical debilitation. Mercury   accumulates in the body tissue and gravitates to the central nervous system.   Accumulations of mercury stress the immune system, so even low levels of exposure to mercury is undesirable.

These are the issues that cause an increasing number of dentists and consumers to conclude that the convenience, low cost and relative durability of mercury amalgam fillings is not worth the health risks of continuous, micro-exposure to mercury in the body.

Composite materials: There are a number of formulations of glass and resin materials that have received Federal Drug Administration approval. These materials are tooth colored and can be placed in a single visit. The durability of these materials is less than mercury amalgams. The research standard of acceptable durability is 6.5 years.  Composites are definitely less durable than gold. Composite fillings will need to be replaced periodically.

To make an ideal composite filling with good durability, the dentist must exercise exacting care in placing the materials. Composites are very technique sensitive, and time consuming. The dentist should always use a rubber dam to keep the tooth absolutely dry when placing a composite filling. The technical demands of composite fillings means that they are usually more expensive than amalgams.

Can filling materials be tested for biocompatibility?

YES. Tests are available to evaluate biocompatibility of dental materials prior to placement in your teeth. In principal, any foreign material that is going to be permanently implanted in the body should be tested for compatibility with that body.

Testing for bio-compatibility does add to the expense of your dental treatment. If you believe that your system is especially susceptible to stresses or if you have symptoms of allergy or immune stress, then testing for bio-compatibility is highly recommended.

[top]

E. Why We Do Not Use Any Mercury "Silver" Filling

FACT: "Silver" or amalgam dental fillings contain from 48-55 percent mercury, 33-35 percent silver, and various amounts of copper, tin, zinc, and other metals. Since mercury is the major component of the material, any representation of the material should include the word "mercury". Thus we refer to them as mercury dental fillings.

FACT: Mercury is a powerful poison. Published research has shown that mercury is more toxic than lead, cadmium, and even arsenic. Furthermore, there is no known toxic threshold for mercury vapor and world renowned mercury toxicologists have stated that no amount of exposure to mercury vapor can be considered totally harmless.

FACT: Scientific research has demonstrated that mercury, even in small amounts, can damage the brain, heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, thyroid gland, pituitary gland, adrenal gland, blood cells, enzymes and hormones, and suppress the body's immune system. Mercury has been shown to pass the placental membrane in pregnant women and cause permanent damage to the brain of the developing baby.

FACT: Mercury is continually released from mercury dental fillings in the form of mercury vapor and abraded particles. This process is stimulated and can be increased as much as 15- fold by chewing, brushing, hot liquids, etc. The World Health Organization recently concluded that the daily intake of mercury from amalgam dental fillings exceeded the combined daily intake of mercury derived from air, water and food (including fish).

FACT: The mercury vapor released from mercury dental fillings is absorbed very rapidly and thoroughly in your body, primarily by inhalation and swallowing. FACT: In human autopsy studies, it has been found that there is a direct correlation between the amount of mercury found in the brain and the number and surfaces of mercury fillings in the teeth.

FACT: Mercury causes normal intestinal microflora to become mercury resistant and antibiotic resistant. Mercury resistant bacteria causes mercury in the intestinal tract to be converted back into vapor and recycled back into the body. Antibiotic resistance is becoming a major medical concern.

FACT: Recent scientific research has shown high levels of mercury in the brains of individuals dead from Alzheimer's disease (AD). Other research is demonstrating mercury can cause similar pathological effects in the brain, as that seen in Lou Gehrig's Disease (ALS) and AD. Laboratory studies of spinal fluid from ALS and AD patient's has confirmed that mercury inhibits key brain detoxification enzyme systems.

ESTABLISHMENT POSITION:
The American Dental Association and various agencies of the US government still support the use of amalgam dental fillings. They claim they are safe based on 150 years of use despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

SHOULD YOU OR YOUR CHILDREN HAVE MERCURY FILLINGS PUT IN YOUR
TEETH? THAT IS A DECISION ONLY YOU CAN MAKE.

EXERCISE YOUR RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF CHOICE AND INFORMED CONSENT.

[top]

TO CONCERNED PATIENTS: Many of California's communities, as well as communities all over America, are debating the merits of water fluoridation. Fluoride is a medication that is aimed at children. Fluoridated water may be effective in protecting teeth from decay if the water is ingested while the teeth are forming. Once a child's teeth are developed, about age 12, fluoride no longer serves any protective function. There are other ways to provide fluoride to children. Fluoride drops and fluoridated vitamins have been available, BY PRESCRIPTION ONLY, for many years. There are questions about the safety and long-term effects of fluoride on human populations. The debate continues. Personally, I would prefer not to have any additional medications in MY own drinking water. Based on the sales volume of bottled water, I think that their are many consumers that might agree with me. However, my hometown of Peoria, Illinois was one of the first communities in the nation to fluoridate the public drinking water. That was way back in the late 1950's. I have lived in Roseville, CA for twenty years. Roseville has fluoridated water. My children have somewhat mottled teeth, but little decay. I do not know what the long-term effect of fluoridated water will be on them. (I pray there is none) As a health concern, FOR MYSELF ONLY, I feel that it is not a big deal compared to other toxic exposures in my life, such as mercury from amalgam fillings. As with any material put into the human organism, every individual is different. I reprinted the following material from the newsletter of a dentist who is very honest and knowledgeable in an attempt to provide concerned citizens with the opposing viewpoint to the mass media materials promoting water fluoridation. I believe that a balanced presentation of materials is best. Both sides should be heard from and the American public left to make their own choices.

I published the above disclaimer because I was threatened with an Ethics Committee investigation of my attitude on fluoride by the organized dentistry's thought police. To prove how unbiased the committee would be, one committee member was a leader in the fluoridation movement (he suggested that my website did not "warrant an ethics review at this time") and another posted an entry to my guest book asking if I really believed what I printed below. I guess that in organized dentistry in the year 2000, there is NO room for dissenting opinions, opposing viewpoints, intellectual and professional tolerance, open discussion and sharing of information and the right of each individual to make informed decisions about their own healthcare needs. Dentists are among the best in the healthcare professions in explaining treatment options, risk and benefits, and empowering individuals to participate in their own healthcare. We, as a profession, are foremost in providing patients the opportunity to exercise their right's to "informed consent". Except, perhaps on this issue, the thought police, the Orwellian Big Brother, the intellectual Nazis want to stifle First Amendment rights. 

Consumers, read all the information available on both side of the fluoride issue, exercise your rights to informed consent and decide how important this issue is to you. 

F.   Fluoridation: The Overdosing of America

Overview
"Fluoridation" of the municipal water system was introduced by the federal government as a "cavity fighting" strategy in the 1940's. During that period, the US government set the "fluoride intake" standard for "optimal" benefit for teeth, between 0.7-1.2 mg/L (milligrams per liter), for an average of 1 mg/day. At that time fluoride was not generally available from other sources. The uncontrolled use of fluoride during the past 50 years has created a very serious national health problem. Now the American Dental Association and American Academy of General Dentistry are warning dentists of "...an increase in the prevalence of enamel fluorosis (irreversible mottling, staining and pitting of the teeth due to over-exposure to fluoride) in both optimally fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities."
The Facts
1."The 'optimal' level of fluoride intake has NEVER been determined scientifically." J. American Dental Association, Vol. 126, p.1625, Dec. 1995.
2.The FDA has classified fluoride as an unapproved new drug. After 52 years of fluoride's use in municipal water, the FDA does not have one study on file showing fluoride's safety or effectiveness.
3.In 1986, the EPA raised the level of fluoride allowed in municipal water from 1 ppm to 4 ppm (parts per million). The EPA's union of professional employees (scientists, engineers and attorneys), who are responsible for setting standards, attempted to file suit in federal court to overturn the new standard. They charged that the EPA had ignored scientific evidence of adverse health effects.
4.Today, less than 2% of Europe is fluoridated where as over 50% of U.S. drinking water is fluoridated. Fluoride is in the food, water, beverages and dental products as well as fluoride-based pharmaceuticals, work place exposure and air emissions.
5.In 1993, the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services stated in its Toxicological Profile on fluoride, "Existing data indicates that subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride and its compounds. These populations include the elderly, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium and/or vitamin C and people with cardiovascular and kidney problems."
6.Below is a summary and analysis of a table from the U.S. Dept. of health and Human Services report, Review of Fluoride Benefits and Risks (1991) that demonstrates exposure levels to fluoride from food, beverages, and dental products, This table does not include all sources of fluoride
exposure, such as fluoride-based medications, work place exposure, or air emissions. The more one uses products containing fluoride, the level of exposure to one's body increases. Please note the multiplier effect that use of fluoridated water has on fluoride intake:

[top]

According to the US Dept. of Health and Human Services, residents living in an unfluoridated community are already getting the so called "optimal" dose!

The FDA in FDA Consumer (Jan.-Feb. 1992) report, "As Dr. Edward Ohanian of the human and environmental criteria division in EPA's Office of Water explains, the agency has established two "maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)" for fluoride: 2 ppm and 4 ppm. The first MCL is considered the point above which cosmetic effects, in the form of a degree of dental fluorosis, can occur and is intended to ensure public awareness of that possibility. Although EPA cannot compel the states to hold fluorides to this level, the 4 ppm MCL is legally enforceable, since it is based on the possibility of adverse health effects above that level." The presence of dental fluorosis clinically signifies a chronic fluoride intoxication!
7.According to the above HHS table and FDA Consumer, "optimally" fluoridated communities are currently exposed to the risk of adverse health effects, while unfluoridated communities are exposed to the risk of fluorosis! The adverse health affects include: increase rates of cancer, increased hip fractures in the elderly, increase in osteoporosis, increased rates of infertility, chronic fatigue, headaches, bone and joint pain, behavioral problems, calcification of the brain, increase rates of stress fractures and Crohn's Disease (Irritable Bowel Syndrome).
8.The FDA's claim that fluorosis is only a cosmetic effect is unsubstantiated. It is symptomatic of chronic intoxification (over-exposure) to fluoride. The FDA's claim that 2 ppm will "ensure public awareness" is unfounded.
9.The University of Iowa published two articles, Risk of Fluorosis in a Fluoridated Population and Infant Fluoride Ingestion from Water, Supplementation and Dentifrice (JADA, Dec. 1995). Researchers have reported that fluorosis has increased in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities at an alarming rate. Their data shows (p.1630) that babies 9 months and younger are over-exposed to fluoride.
10.In December 1996, The Academy of General Dentistry (AGD) issued a press release warning parents to limit their children's intake of fruit juice, due to over-exposure to fluoride. The study was conducted by the University of Iowa and was reported in JADA (July 1996). The study found that
62% of the ready-to drink juices contain 0.6 - 1.0 ppm of fluoride, which is above the AGD recommended limit of 0.6 ppm. The Iowa study states that due to "the widespread use of fluoridated water, fluoride dentifrice and dietary fluoride supplements and other forms of fluoride ...(there is) an increased prevalence of dental fluorosis , ranging from about 15 to 65 percent in fluoridated areas and 5 to 40 percent in non-fluoridated areas in North America."
11.Fluoride has never passed the controlled studies necessary for "FDA Approval" as either a supplement or an additive to municipal water. 

[top]

Is It Safe?
"Fluorine is the most reactive and dangerous of all the halogen family of elements..." Albert W. Laubengayer, Ph.D. Professor of Chemistry Cornell University.

"In point of fact, fluorine causes more human cancer death, and causes it faster, than any other chemical." Dean Burk, Chief Chemist Emeritus at the U.S. National Cancer Institute.

Warning against swallowing fluoridated toothpaste, John Renshaw, spokesman for the British Dental Association said, " A child swallowing toothpaste on a regular basis would certainly run the risk of overdosing with fluoride, which can lead to very unsightly mottling of the teeth." British Dental Association.

The instructions on the back of the box of fluoridated toothpaste has an ominous warning: if a child six years or younger swallows a pea-sized amount of toothpaste you should call a physician or the poison control for help.

"Fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, with the capacity to modify the metabolism of cells by inhibiting certain enzymes. Sources of fluorine intoxication include drinking water containing 1 ppm or more of fluorine." AMA September 18, 1943.

"Drinking water containing as little as 1.2 ppm fluoride will cause developmental disturbances. In light of our present knowledge of the subject, the potentialities for harm outweigh those for good." Journal of the American Dental Association October 1, 1944.

Academy of General Dentistry's Press Release on the University of Iowa Study (December 1996): 62% of 532 ready-to-drink fruit juices (frozen-concentrate and juice flavored drinks) surveyed had
fluoride levels greater than 0.6 ppm. This amount is already above the recommended dose of supplemental fluoride which is between 0.3 and 0.6 parts per million.

"...there has been an increase in the prevalence of enamel fluorosis (irreversible mottling, staining and pitting) in both optimally fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities." J. American Dental Association, Vol. 126, p.1617, Dec. 1995.

There are now at least eight studies that showed an increase of hip fracture incidence in fluoridated compared to unfluoridated communities. Estimated that 350,000 hip fractures occur annually (and increasing) and at a cost of $9 billion dollars/yr. "A Brief Account of the Fluoridation and Hip Fracture Problem" by John R. Lee, M.D. June 30, 1995.

Danielson C, Lyon JL, Egger M, Goodenough GK, Hip fractures and fluoridation in Utah’s elderly population, J. American Medical Association Vol. 268, pp.746-748, 1992.

Riggs BL, Hodgson SF, O’Fallon WM et al.:Effect of fluoride treatment on the fracture rate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, New England Journal of Medicine Vol. 322, pp.802-809, 1990.

Fluoride causes poisoning of the central nervous system especially the hippocampus causing neuropathology and behaviorial deficits. Phyllis Mullenix, Ph.D. international authority on toxicology.

Fluoride has been associated with increased hip fractures, bone cancers, nerve damage, lower I.Q.’s, and Alzheimer’s disease.

[top]

How Does it Damage?

When fluoride reaches the cells which make the enamel, it destroys them. The enamel laid down is irregular, mottled, porous and thin. As the poisoning worsens, the enamel may even be absent. J.A. Albright, "The Effect of Fluoride on the Mechanical Properties of Bone," Transactions of the Annual Meeting of the Orthopedics Research Society, pp. 3,98, 1978.

"Once the fluoride ion is deposited in the apatite (tooth matrix) as fluorapatite, it becomes firmly fixed and the reaction is irreversible." Jenkins, G.N.: The mechanism of action of fluoride in reducing caries incidence. Int. Dent. J. 17:552, 1967.

Fluoride has a strong affinity for magnesium, calcium, and manganese and inactivates cellular function by making these minerals unavailable. "...evidence for the absence of a systemic anticaries effect of fluoride is now recognized by leading dental researchers." J. Dental Research 69, Special Issue, 1990.

"Any tooth decay reducing effect attributable to fluoride occurs by topical mechanisms involving action on tooth surfaces and on oral bacteria that promote dental caries. ... there is negligible anticaries benefit from ingested fluoride that does not have actual contact with the surfaces of the teeth." Fluoride in Dentistry, 2^nd Edition, Edited by O.Fejerskov, J. Ekstrand, and B.A. Burt. Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 1996.

Alleged Benefits

"...the consumption of water containing fluorides has a delaying action on the onset of caries (decay) rather than a lasting preventive effect." Albert W. Laubengayer, Ph.D., Professor of Chemistry at Cornell University (First National Symposium on Fluoridation).

The formation of enamel on the permanent teeth is completed by age 7. Why medicate anyone beyond the alleged period of benefit?

The FDA classifies fluoride as a non essential nutrient. To allege that anyone is deficient in fluoride is therefore a fallacy.

A New Zealand study which reviewed statistics of 60,000 school children revealed that fluoridation has no significant effect on the decay of permanent teeth. Colquhoun, J . Community Dentistry and Epidemiology 13:37-41, 1985.

The largest United States study on fluoridation and tooth decay conducted by the U. S. Public Health Service reviewed dental records of over 39,000 school children. This study showed that the decay rate of permanent teeth was virtually the same for fluoridated and nonfluoridated areas. Marcus, W. Chemical and Engineering News, 1990.

1992 study in Tucson, Arizona of 26,000 elementary school children found that the more fluoride a child consumes, the more cavities appear in the teeth. Study conducted by University of Arizona headed by professor emeritus Cornelius Steelink.

Children living in a fluoridated community had 11 times more risk of fluorosis. Study conducted by University of Arizona headed by professor emeritus Cornelius Steelink.

[top]

The American Dental Association states in its own literature that the average individual consuming "optimally" fluoridated water (0.7-1.2 mg/L) will ingest 1.9 mg of fluoride daily. Also stated in their literature is the statement that levels of 2 mg per day will cause dental fluorosis. Dental fluorosis as defined by Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary results from chronic fluoride intoxication or pathological change. Dental fluorosis is more than just a "cosmetic" defect!

There is only a 5% margin of safety if one drinks the average amount of water (one liter per day). Unfortunately fluoride is so ubiquitous in our environment that the 2 mg per day level is easily passed. As examples, drinking an 8 oz. glass of ready-to- drink fruit juice that contains 0.6 mg fluoride provides .15 mg and brushing with a pea-size amount of fluoridated toothpaste provides .33 mg of fluoride. In reality, there is no margin of safety with fluoride.

The ADA’s answer, in their own literature, to whether or not ingestion of optimally fluoridated water causes defects in the enamel was NO; however in the same literature in which this statement was made it also stated, "It has also been noted that when drinking water is the only source of fluoride, at the concentration recommended for protection against dental decay, mild degrees of dental fluorosis may occur in 10-15 percent of children who consume fluoridated water from birth."

Discontinuation of Mass Water Fluoridation:

1996: Water Authority of Western Nassau County voted 8 to 1 to discontinue their water fluoridation after 23 years.

1996: City of Worchester, Massachusetts discontinues fluoridation.

1997: Yardley Borough, Bucks County Pennsylvania. Fluoridation issue was defeated! 

Seventy-five percent of municipalities vote down the issue of fluoridation of their water supply when it is brought up for a vote.

[top]

Litigation Compensation:

November 24, 1996: "Colgate (United Kingdom) paid out the first compensation claim for teeth ruined by fluoride. This represents the first settlement of its kind any where in the world. An additional 230 parents are already attempting claims for damages.

Freedom of Choice:

No one is denying anyone the right to use fluoride. In a democracy, the individual has the right to choose if he or she wants to be medicated. Fluoridating the public water takes away one’s right of informed consent and is tantamount to mass medication!

Economics:

It is more cost effective to allow the individual to choose and pay for whatever medication they wish to have. No one has the right to force this on everyone! Even if a portion of the children in one’s community cannot afford its cost it still would be cheaper for municipalities to pay for these prescriptions than the total cost of fluoridating the water. Ironically the very children who are claimed to be the greatest "beneficiaries" of fluoridation, the under-nourished, the economically deprived are much more susceptible to fluoride poisoning than those with adequate diets. (A.L. Russel, "Dental Fluorosis in Grand Rapids During the Seventeenth Year of Fluoridation". Journal American Dental Association November 1962, pp.608-612.)

Today, 60% of the water supply in the U.S. is fluoridated, even though not one well-done study (double-blind and controlled) exists that shows a benefit from this poisonous substance. In spite of all this, the American Dental Association is still reassuring everyone that fluoride is absolutely safe and "vital for strong decay-resistant teeth." While they are reassuring the public they are simultaneously warning dentists in their journal articles of the increased incidence of dental fluorosis (intoxication due to excess fluoride).

The best way to avoid fluoride poisoning is by drinking distilled water, use of reverse osmosis or steam distillation water purifiers or home delivery of fluoride free water. Also avoid fluoridated toothpastes and mouthwashes, say NO to fluoride treatments at your dentist’s office, and do not let your grandchildren take fluoride supplements.

Fluoride drops and tablets are NOT approved by the FDA!

From: Health & Happiness Newsletter, V4, #1, Copyright © ICNR, Inc.

A special thanks goes out to Dr. Gerald Smith for providing The article
"Fluoridation: The Overdosing of America".

[top]

[ Home ] [ Guest Book ] [ Meet the Doctor ] [ Staff ] [ Office Information/Policies ] [ General Dentistry ] [ Cosmetic Dentistry ] [ Holistic Dentistry ] [ Pregnancy/Children ] [ Orthodontics ] [ Snoring/Sleep Apnea ] [ TMJ/Facial Pain. ] [ Chronic Pain ] [ Medical/Legal ] [ Publications ] [ Q + A ] [ Request Info ] [ Links ] [ Site Map ]

David B. Miller, D.D.S. 1269 Pleasant Grove Blvd. #100
Roseville, CA. 95747

 
dbmiller@xsspeed.net

Date this page was last edited: 06/30/01