So what do you think the origin is of blood alcohol in subjects who have not consumed alcoholic beverages ? (It can go up to 200 micromoles per litre)

Nick Miller,

London
----- Original Message -----
From: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 09:14:08 +1000
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: RE: Mercury Level and dental amalgam

>
> This posting damns itself in my opinion. It postulates "hypersensitivity"
> to mercury in a  proportion of the population and then "immune suppression"
> as the likely mechanism for "Candida overgrowth in the intestine" and
> "renal or brain tumours 20 years later". "Candida overgrowth in the
> intestine" is a non-disease that has been attributed to almost every
> spectre in the ghostly world of quackery. There is as yet no evidence to
> link renal and brain tumours to dental amalgam while there is overwhelming
> evidence to link cigarette smoking to an array of malignant and
> non-malignant diseases. This evidence was collected without access to
> double-blind clinical trials and if it exists for mercury then the same
> methods can be used to discover it.
>
> For a  review of the actual doses of mercury accumulated from dental
> amalgams see:
> Halbach S. Amalgam tooth fillings and man's mercury burden. Human and
> Experimental Toxicology 1994;13:496-501.
>
> Bruce Campbell
>
> ****************************************
> Bruce Campbell  FRCPA  FAACB
> Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology
> Ph 61 (0)7 3377 8672
> Fax 61 (0)7 3870 5989
> Email [log in to unmask]
> ****************************************
>
>
>
>                     "Nick Miller"
>                     <n.j.miller@scie        To:     "ACB Mailbase" <[log in to unmask]>,
>                     ntist.com>              <[log in to unmask]>
>                                             cc:
>                     27/05/03 00:48          Subject:     RE: Mercury Level and dental amalgam
>                     Please respond
>                     to n.j.miller
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Well Bruce, does that not tell you something interesting about the degree
> of
> metal exposure in your subjects ? I think it's a bit sinister that a rather
> low level chelation challenge can remove Hg and other (presumably toxic ?)
> metals into the urine in measurable quantities.
>
> Yes, everybody agrees that organic mercury is highly toxic and there is
> another (separate) controversy about the level of organic mercury ingestion
> by people who eat lots of certain kinds of fish (e.g. canned tuna - the
> tuna
> fish being at the top of the pelagic food chain and hence concentrating in
> its tissues mercury from other species).
>
> However the scientific literature is stuffed full of data on the harmful
> effects to human health of inorganic mercury, which if I was to summarise
> here would make this a rather lengthy message (look for example at
> http://www.amalgam.org). The difference with the literature on
> methylmercury
> is that many of the unfortunate individuals who have been poisoned in this
> way have high levels of mercury in their systems, suffer from acute
> exposure
> symptoms, live in geographical clusters and can be examined in more or less
> the same way as experimental animals. These factors usually do not apply
> with inorganic Hg exposure, which often involves a degree of individual
> hypsersensitivy to very low levels of the metal. The proof of the pudding
> is
> whether the symptoms recede when the mercury is removed. Most people seem
> to
> tolerate their fillings without harmful effect, but dental amalgam is so
> widely used that there are nevertheless many people who react adversely. A
> common clinical finding these days is gastro-intestinal Candida overgrowth,
> which may not immediately be associated with immune suppression in the GIT
> caused by leaching of inorganic Hg from fillings.
>
> For those of you who are interested, this is by no means a new controversy
> -
> dating back to the mid-19th century - and one which has not seen a
> scientific resolution. I wouldn't claim to have figures, but I am told by
> dentists who specialise in this area that it is an increasing problem,
> possibly caused by changes in dental practice (teeth are "lined" before the
> amalgam is inserted and this lining should remain intact).
>
> Dental associations have repeatedly countered the controversy by claiming
> that the Hg reacts with the other amalgam metals to form a biologically
> inactive substance and by observing that dentists do not report any adverse
> side effects in their patients. Long-term use of dental amalgam continues
> to
> be offered as evidence of its safety (similar to the cigarette story that
> "I
> 've smoked them all my life and I ain't dead yet"). I do not find these
> arguments particularly compelling, nor the argument than those who raise
> the
> issue is are "quacks". Mercury is, of course, a cumulative poison and if
> you
> get a renal or brain tumour 20 years later, you are unlikely to go back to
> your dentist and complain. Don't expect any double-blinded trials, either.
>
> Nick Miller,
>
> London
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clinical biochemistry discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Bruce Campbell
> Sent: 26 May 2003 01:22
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Mercury Level and dental amalgam
>
>
> The fact that a challenge test with a chelating agent shows that a quantity
> of a particular element can be removed from the body proves nothing in
> itself. Since we installed an ICP-MS I have had the chance to have a look
> at the results of challenge tests with several chelating agents and the
> amounts of a variety of metals that appear in the urine are striking.
>
> I am not aware of any evidence that the amounts of inorganic mercury
> leached from dental amalgams cause toxic effects other than rare cases of
> intra-oral mucosal hypersensitivity. Methylmercury is a lot more toxic but
> even then it is hard to demonstrate effects from chronic low-level oral
> exposure. The only data I know of is that on methylmercury from whalemeat
> in the offspring of pregnant Faroe islanders.
>
> Bruce Campbell
>
> ****************************************
> Bruce Campbell  FRCPA  FAACB
> Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology
> Ph 61 (0)7 3377 8672
> Fax 61 (0)7 3870 5989
> Email [log in to unmask]
> ****************************************
>
> ------ACB discussion List Information--------
> This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical
> community working in clinical biochemistry.
> Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed
> via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and
> they are responsible for all message content.
>
> ACB Web Site
> http://www.acb.org.uk
> List Archives
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
> List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
__________________________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical
community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed
via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and
they are responsible for all message content.

ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/