Subscribe to Klinghardt Newsletter
Mercury Vapor Inhalation & Exhalation in People with Dental Amalgams
The mitigation of methyl mercury vapor inhalation and exhalation in people with dental amalgam fillings Ray, T.
Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients. Nov 2002. (232), 86-88.
A metal toxic patient, female, age 42, who had been doing extremely well on a detoxification program, called to report a sudden and inexplicable aggravation of her previous symptoms. The only difference we could determine was that her mother had moved in with her the day before the aggravation began.
She got along fine with her mother. It finally surfaced that the mother
had a mouthful of amalgams fillings and that the symptoms became
distinctly worse while the mother was in the room with her. I
instructed her to ask her mother to simply 'brush, rinse and spit' with
a few drops of Nanocolloidal-Detox-Factors Formula (NDF) 3 times a day.
The daughter's symptoms went away very quickly. Also, the mother's
health took a distinct turn for the better.
This event raised several questions. We all know that people with amalgams are becoming more toxic with each breath they take, and nothing has yet been discovered to protect them while the amalgams are still in the teeth. For every breath they inhale, they also exhale (and or 'outgas') into the workplace and the environment in which they live, posing a lesser yet significant threat to those around them. This group, with amalgam fillings still present, represents a huge patient population.
Is it possible to minimize the damage caused by the inhalation of mercury vapor leaking from amalgam fillings (precipitated by chewing, drinking hot beverages, teeth grinding, dental procedures, substandard 'soft' alloy preparations, galvanism) during pregnancy, during the procedure of having them replaced, or during heavy metal and chemical detoxification? DMPS, DMSA, and Metal-Free/PCA are known to cause side effects if used while amalgams are still in the teeth and are therefore contraindicated for these patients. NDF, used as directed, has never been known to cause a side effect in any patient. We know that NDF causes the excretion of heavy metals predominantly via the urine from independent lab data, (1) but can it directly bind to mercury vapor in the oral cavity? If it did, we would also have more insight into what it is doing after it gets into the body.
The following study was conducted using the Genesis Labs AAS (atomic absorption spectroscopy) Hg253 portable mercury vapor analyzer. (2) An attempt was made to determine if the mercury vapor precipitated by chewing could be bound and then discarded (identified as a decrease in mercury levels after brushing and spitting) without causing an increase in the oral presence of mercury (identified as an increase in the mercury level after brushing and spitting).
It was found that NDF in the amount of 10 drops repeatedly and effectively bound 100% (dose related) of the mercury vapor precipitated by chewing, and did not cause the precipitation of additional mercury from amalgam fillings into the oral cavity, as measured by atomic absorption spectroscopy.
Pre-Test Safety Check
A 6 [mm.sup.2] piece of amalgam alloy containing mercury, silver, copper and zinc was submerged and agitated in 1 ml of NDF, sealed, and left to sit for one hour. The following pre- and post-measurements were observed: There was no change in conductivity (mS/cm), mercury content (Dithizone reagent), or emanation of mercury vapor immediately upon opening of the test container (<.001 mg/[m.sup.3]). This reassured us that conducting the test would not cause further toxification of the participants.
Preliminary Substance Tests and Control
The oral cavities of all persons in the study were measured with the Hg253 at rest, after chewing gum, and after brushing and rinsing with various substances. Peak values are reported in milligrams per meter cubed (mg/[m.sup.3]). Measurements were taken through a tube placed in the center of the oral cavity while the lips were closed and the person breathed through the nose. The number and age of amalgams, and the presence or absence of gold fillings were recorded as a reference.
NDF (a 10 drop dose containing 10 mg. nanonized chlorella) was compared to 10 mg of normal 'cell wall broken' chlorella and then again to 100 and 500 mg of normal chlorella, all mixed with water. MouthMagic and Vitamin C were compared because MouthMagic contains 300 mg vitamin C per ounce, and we wanted to see what part the vitamin C might be playing in the effect. We used reverse osmosis water for the control, also curious to see if it had any metal binding effect of its own. DMPS, DMSA and Metal-Free/PCA were not tested as they are contraindicated while amalgams are present in the teeth. EDTA was not tested because it is not known to primarily bind to mercury.
Normal chlorella finally performed equally to NDF, but at a 500 mg dose, which required brushing and rinsing with the entire quantity, and then rinsing again with r/o water. This was extremely messy and distasteful to the patient as compared to a mere 10 drops of NDF. Interesting to note that it took 50 times more normal chlorella to bind as much mercury vapor as NDF. This explains why most of the testing done with normal chlorella has shown it to be 'lacking' as a heavy metal chelator.
Following the selection of the most convenient and efficient method based on the above study, the following study was conducted with 19 people. Five showed no detectable elevation of mercury after chewing (possibly harder, older fillings between 20-50 years); 2 did not have time to brush, rinse and re-test. The remaining 12 are reported below. The oral cavities of all persons in the study group were measured with the Hg253 at rest, after chewing, and after brushing and rinsing with either 5 or 10 drops of NDF.
Background: Safe Limits of Exposure
The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has established a threshold level value of 0.025 mg/[m.sup.3] of mercury for an eight hour time period. The ACGIH additionally recommends that women of childbearing age should not be exposed to air concentrations of mercury greater than 0.010 mg/[m.sup.3]. Additional regulatory agency guidelines for mercury exposure levels are as follows. The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and the World Health Organization (WHO) have established an exposure limit of 0.050 mg/[m.sup.3] for an eight-hour time period. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has established a ceiling (peak) exposure level of 0.100 mg/[m.sup.3].
Background: Measurements, Conversions, Nomenclature
One ppm (part per million) of mercury (molecular weight 200.59) at 75[degrees]F. at 29.9 in. of Hg (sea level) equals 8.22 mg/[m.sup.3] or 8220 Ug/[m.sup.3] of mercury. (3) One ppb (part per billion) Hg is equal to .0082 mg/[m.sup.3]. One ppm = 1 mg/L = 1 g/ml = 1000 ppb. To convert from milligrams to micrograms = x1000 or move 3 decimal places to the right. To convert from micrograms to milligrams = /1000 or move 3 decimal places to the left.
Background: Dental Amalgams Hazard
Amalgams contain 50% mercury, 35% silver, 9% tin, 6% copper and a trace of zinc. A single dental amalgam filling with a surface area of only 0.4 sq. cm is estimated to release as much as 15 micrograms of mercury per day primarily through mechanical wear and evaporation. (4-6) In direct contradiction to the published literature, an ADA spokesman estimated that only 0.08 micrograms of mercury per amalgam filling are taken in per day. (7) The average individual has eight amalgam fillings and could absorb up to 120 micrograms (0.120 mg/[m.sup.3]) of mercury per day from their amalgams. (8)
The primary route of mercury absorption into the body is through the inhalation of mercury vapor. (9) The mercury vapor from the amalgams is lipid soluble and passes readily through cell membranes and across the blood brain barrier. (10) The human body retains approximately 75% of the mercury that is inhaled. (11) Animal studies show that radioactively labeled mercury released from ideally placed amalgam fillings appears quickly in the kidneys, brain and wall of the intestines. (12,13) The mercury escapes continuously during the entire life of the filling primarily in the form of vapor, but also abraded particles. (14,15) Chewing, brushing, and the intake of hot fluids stimulate this release. (16) Gold placed in the vicinity of an amalgam restoration produces a 10-fold increase in the release of mercury. (17,18)
Measurement of Mercury Vapor from Dental Amalgams
"The current ADA estimate that only 0.08 micrograms of mercury per amalgam per day is taken into the human body does not take into consideration that up to five-sixths of the mercury released would be into the tooth (that area of the amalgam that exists below the visibly exposed amalgam surface) and not into the oral air. In addition, some mercury in the oral air would be rapidly absorbed into the saliva and oral mucosa (mercury loves hydrophobic cell membranes) and also not be measured by the mercury analyzer. The ADA estimate does not include the increase that would occur with amalgams when chewing, grinding the teeth, drinking hot liquids or in the presence of galvanism, which all greatly increase the release of mercury. Further, as the mercury analyzer pulls mercury-containing oral air into the analysis chamber, mercury-free ambient air rushes into the oral cavity decreasing the mercury concentration. Taking all of this into account you can calculate that most mercury analyzers could not detect this "esti mated" 0.08 micrograms/day level of mercury even with several amalgams. However, the fact is that it is quite easy to detect mercury emitting from one amalgam using these (mercury vapor) analyzers. Therefore, the "estimate" by this ADA spokesman is too low." (19)
According to this study, a person with amalgams mobilizes (inhales or exhales) between 1-50 ppb mercury vapor per (mouth) breath or swallow per mouthful of chewed food per meal per day, most of which is swallowed. According to the ACGIH peak limit of exposure for women of childbearing age of 1.21 ppb mercury, eating more than one half of one mouthful of food at a time, or more than 2 mouthfuls in an eight hour period, would be out of the question and recognized as unsafe according to the lowest levels detected during this study. That's not enough food per day, especially for a pregnant woman, nor does the situation offer an acceptable option: starve or be poisoned.
Mid-Data Reality Check
Mercury is neurotoxic to some degree at any level, and has pernicious synergistic effects in combination with many forms of bacteria, other metals, and chemicals. (20) Though we can measure exposure and excretion levels, we cannot yet measure cumulative body burden levels. Mercury has a half-life of between 15-30 years. Levels below what is considered as 'safe' devastate some patients, especially allergic ones. Others, reminiscent of the 90-year old who subsists on Big Macs, seem to at least temporarily tolerate higher levels. The bottom line is that if the patient has a 'complaint' or imbalance in conjunction with heavy metal exposure, addressing the toxicity issues first leads to greater and longer lasting clinical improvements than merely addressing the symptom.
Tobacco Smoking: Of Interest
It is known that the tobacco plant efficiently concentrates mercury out of the soil, so while preparing to use the Hg253 unit, we measured the smoke from an additive free tobacco cigarette (0.014 mg/[m.sup.3] of Hg) versus the exhaled smoke of the same cigarette (0.004 mg/[m.sup.3] of Hg). The smoker effectively filters out the 'danger level' of mercury in tobacco smoke into their own body, therefore it is the uninhaled secondary smoke that is of most danger to others in the vicinity. For the smoker, that's roughly 1 ppb mercury per puff.
Some Applications of the Data
NDF can be used to safely and effectively rid the oral cavity of precipitated mercury vapor after chewing, eating, brushing or otherwise disturbing teeth containing amalgam fillings. The dose required during brushing can be estimated from the above data according to number and age of amalgams, relative hardness of amalgams, normal length of chewing, and duration of brushing. In general, the less one uses (5 drops), the longer they have to brush, rinse and spit (3-4 minutes). The more they use (10 drops), the shorter the cleaning time (30 seconds to 1 minute).
During detoxification, while amalgams are still in the teeth, the patient brushes with 10 drops NDF, spits and then rinses with r/o water before taking the dose of NDF as drops down the back of the throat, followed by a glass of pure water.
Because up to 5/6 of the surface of an amalgam can be inside the tooth, and thus not outgassing into the oral cavity, this procedure is therefore not a complete alternative to having amalgam fillings removed. It does however minimize and mitigate the inhalation exposure.
We proved that we could get mercury vapor to go down the sink instead of down the throat, which is a definite improvement, but I have yet to hear about a plan for dealing with it after it goes down the sink or toilet and into the environment. Who pays the bill for that? The various organizations, companies and people who deceived us into thinking it was safe to put mercury into our teeth?
|| #/age of
| 10 dr.
| 10 mg
|| Chlorella (test 1)
|| Chlorella (test 2)
| 500 mg
|| Chlorella (test 3)
| 1 oz
| 300 mg
|| Vitamin C
| 1 oz
|| R/O water rinse only
| 1 oz
|| R/O water Brush,
Rinse & Spit
Code Age #/age of Gold Resting Resting Post
amalgams fillings S pH mg/m3 chewing
in years y/n mg/m3
Dose: 10 drops NDF
SR 35 6/22 N 6.3 <.001 0.05
KR 50 6/37 N 6.5 .002 .005
DD 32 10/16 N 7.4 .083 .131
GL 64 6/30 2 7.1 <.001 .016
JT 47 5/32 N 6.4 <.001 .019
LW 28 12/12 N 6.4 <.001 .023
AS 38 11/30 N 7.3 <.001 .019
LM 42 2/30 1 6.0 <.001 .004
Dose: 5 drops NDF
DD 32 10/16 N .097 .131
LB 32 7/8 N <.001 .51
EB 22 5/10 N <.001 .016
DD 32 10/16 N .054 .084
Dose: 10 drops NDF
SR <.001 100%
KR .002 100%
DD .040 100%
GL <.001 100%
JT <.001 100%
LW <.001 100%
AS <.001 100%
LM <.001 100%
Dose: 5 drops NDF
DD .073 100%
LB .17 66% *
EB .002 87% **
DD .046 100%
* brushed for 30 seconds, also notice the massive release of mercury in
this person with newer fillings.
** brushed for 3 minutes
Organization Threshold Conversion Time Frame
ACGIH 0.025 mg/m3 3 ppb 8 hours
MSHA, NIOSH, WHO 0.050 mg/m3 6 ppb 8 hours
OSHA 0.100 mg/m3 12.1 ppb peak
ACGIH 0.010 mg/m3 1.21 ppb peak
MSHA, NIOSH, WHO
OSHA Ceiling exposure limit
ACGIH Women of childbearing age
(1.) Please go to www.healthydetox.org and click on Lab Results on the Site Map.
(2.) Genesis Laboratory Systems, Inc. 1005 North 12th street Grand Junction, CO 81501 970-241-0889; 888-270-0465; fax 970-241-1239 www.genlabsystems.com
(3.) See Conversion Calculator at www.industrialhygienc.com and conversion formulas at www.ccohs.ca
(4.) Toxicological Profile For Mercury. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, March 1999 Published by Division of Toxicology/Toxicology Information Branch, 1600 Clifton Road NE, E-29, Atlanta, Georgia 3033
(5.) Harrison IA; Some electromchemical features of the in vivo corrosion of dental amalgams. J Appl Electrochem 1989;19:301-310
(6.) Marek M. Dissolution of mercury vapor in simulated oral environments. Dent Mater 1997 Sep;13(5):312-5.
(7.) See www.altcorp.com
(8.)[c]Copyright 1997-2002 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved. This content maybe copied in full, with copyright; contact; creation; and information intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format.
(9.) Genesis Laboratory Systems, Inc. 1005 North 12th street Grand Junction, CO 81501; 970-241-0889; 888-270-0465; fax 970-241-1239 www.genlabsystems.com
(10.) Lorschider, F, Vimy MJ, Summers, AO: Mercury exposure from 'silver' tooth fillings: Emerging evidence questions a traditional dental paradigm. FASEB J 1995; 9:504-508
(11.) Genesis Laboratory Systems, Inc. 1005 North 12th street Grand Junction, CO 81501; 970-241-0889; 888-270-0465; fax 970-241-1239 www.genlabsystems.com
(12.) Zalups RK. Molecular interactions with mercury in the kidney. Pharmacol Rev 2000 Mar;52(1):113-43.
(13.) Hahn LJ, Kloiber R, Leininzcr RW, Vimy MJ, Loracheider FI; whole-body imaging of the distribution of mercury released from dental fillings into monkey tissues. FASEB J 1990;4:3256-3260
(14.) Lorscheider F, Vimy MJ: Evaluation of the safety issue of mercury release from dental fillings. FASEB J 1993;7:1432-1433
(15.) Bjorkman L, Sandborgh-Englund G, Ekstrand J. Mercury in salvia and feces after removal of amalgam fillings. Toxicol Apply Pharmacol 1997; 144:156-162.
(16.) Svare CW, Peterson LC. Reinhardt JW, Boyer DB, et. al; The effects of dental amalgams on mercury levels in expired air. J Dent Res 1981;60:1668-1671
(17.) Zahnaerztl, Knappwost et al. Abgabe von Quecksilberdampf aus Dentalamalgamen unter Mundbedingungen. Welt/Reform 1985;94, 131-138
(18.) [c]Copyright 1997-2002 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved. This content may be copied in full, with copyright; contact; creation; and information intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format.
(19.) See www.altcorp.com. Extracted from the work of Dr. Haley.
(20.) See www.healthydetox.org under Articles / Published Articles "Heavy Metal Detox without a Healing Crisis', T. Ray, Explore, 2001.
Timothy Ray, OMD, LAc
2211 Corinth Ave. #100
Los Angeles, California 90064
COPYRIGHT 2002 The Townsend Letter Group
Timothy Ray "The mitigation of methyl mercury vapor inhalation and exhalation in people with dental amalgam fillings". Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients. . FindArticles.com. 02 Oct. 2008. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0ISW/is_2002_Nov/ai_93736415