I"ve Heard Metal Fillings Contain Mercury - Should I Have Mine Replaced?
This is the title of an article I read from the Sun-Herald Magazine in Sydney a few weeks ago.
It was written by a dentist.
I must admit that I got very disturbed after reading the passage because it was so misleading and twisted.
He said," As I say to my patients - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Modern dentistry offers a range of filling materials and none are 100 per cent perfect.
Dental amalgam still remains the most cost effective and easy to use.
..
" He also said," Very sensitive instruments can detect billionths of a gram of a mercury vapour in the mouth of a person with amalgam fillings.
This is less than the normal consumption of organic compounds of mercury from dietary sources such as fish and tea, ...
and is far below the level that causes adverse health effects.
" So, for the faithful readers out there relying on his "expertise", it is easy to come to the conclusion that there is nothing to worry about.
But, deep down, do you think that this should be adequate knowledge in their best interest? For these innocent readers, would they know a/ that mercury is such a potent neurotoxin that it can do so much harm especially to developing fetuses, infants, and children; or b/ that mercury ranks Number 3 as the most poisonous substance, just after lead and arsenic; or c/ that you can contaminate a 25-acre lake by less-than-a-teaspoonful of mercury, rendering all fishes there not safe for consumption?; or d/ that dental amalgam fillings unquestionably contain mercury; or e/ that talking about America alone, increasing number of state governments are imposing laws such that dentists need to install dental amalgam separators in their offices to stop the pollution to the sewers, or f/ that they might be sleeping with the worse enemy to their health, and one day they have to pay the bill big time.
Even if we take the subject as debatable, I would think that it is good ethics for professionals to make known these risk factors to their patients so that they are given the chance to make a choice for themselves.
As a society, ultimately we have to answer these questions: - Is the innocent consumer made aware of the likely danger? - How much the professionals in the field are doing to "protect" these consumers? - How much the media are doing to uphold an unbiased presentation to the audience/readers out there? I think each and every one of us, when we come to know about it, has a part to play in making this message known too.
Live Life, Junius.
It was written by a dentist.
I must admit that I got very disturbed after reading the passage because it was so misleading and twisted.
He said," As I say to my patients - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Modern dentistry offers a range of filling materials and none are 100 per cent perfect.
Dental amalgam still remains the most cost effective and easy to use.
..
" He also said," Very sensitive instruments can detect billionths of a gram of a mercury vapour in the mouth of a person with amalgam fillings.
This is less than the normal consumption of organic compounds of mercury from dietary sources such as fish and tea, ...
and is far below the level that causes adverse health effects.
" So, for the faithful readers out there relying on his "expertise", it is easy to come to the conclusion that there is nothing to worry about.
But, deep down, do you think that this should be adequate knowledge in their best interest? For these innocent readers, would they know a/ that mercury is such a potent neurotoxin that it can do so much harm especially to developing fetuses, infants, and children; or b/ that mercury ranks Number 3 as the most poisonous substance, just after lead and arsenic; or c/ that you can contaminate a 25-acre lake by less-than-a-teaspoonful of mercury, rendering all fishes there not safe for consumption?; or d/ that dental amalgam fillings unquestionably contain mercury; or e/ that talking about America alone, increasing number of state governments are imposing laws such that dentists need to install dental amalgam separators in their offices to stop the pollution to the sewers, or f/ that they might be sleeping with the worse enemy to their health, and one day they have to pay the bill big time.
Even if we take the subject as debatable, I would think that it is good ethics for professionals to make known these risk factors to their patients so that they are given the chance to make a choice for themselves.
As a society, ultimately we have to answer these questions: - Is the innocent consumer made aware of the likely danger? - How much the professionals in the field are doing to "protect" these consumers? - How much the media are doing to uphold an unbiased presentation to the audience/readers out there? I think each and every one of us, when we come to know about it, has a part to play in making this message known too.
Live Life, Junius.
Source...