Rich Murray: Haley: brilliant testimony to Congress on health fraud
re dental amalgam mercury and Alzheimers Part 1/2 6.12.1 rmforall

June 12 2001 Hello, Advisory: this is very long, referenced
testimony to Congress in two parts by a qualified scientist on
the realities of mercury dental amalgam toxicity. [Just let me know
if you want to be off my list!]

Leading Mercury Scientist, Dr. Haley,
Refutes ADA in Congressional Testimony
Part 1/2 http://www.mercola.com/2001/jun/9/amalgam_safety.htm

Boyd E. Haley Professor and Chair behaley@...
Department of Chemistry University of Kentucky
http://www.uky.edu/

Dear Mr. Chairman:

At the April 25th meeting of your committee, I gave testimony that the
President of the American Dental Association (ADA)
takes exception to in a letter sent to you dated 11 May 2001.

Quoting from that letter the testimony the ADA dislikes is "that
elementary mercury from dental amalgam could work synergistically
with other ethyl-mercury sources and have a cumulative toxic effect
on the body. Dr. Haley postulated that this could be a potential cause
of autism and Alzheimer's disease."

I stand by my statement as a sensible concern based on published
scientific research regarding synergist toxicities caused by
two very toxic agents,
mercury and the organic mercury compound thimerosal.

This concern is elevated since mercury exposure from amalgams to a
pregnant mother concentrates in the fetus and a single vaccine
given to a six-pound newborn is the equivalent of giving a
180-pound adult 30 vaccinations on the same day.

Include in this the toxic effects of high levels of aluminum and
formaldehyde contained in some vaccines, and the synergist
toxicity could be increased to unknown levels.
Further, it is very well known that infants do not produce
significant levels of bile or have adult renal capacity for several
months after birth.

Biliary transport is the major biochemical route by which mercury is
removed from the body, and infants cannot do this very well.
They also do not possess the renal (kidney) capacity to remove aluminum.

Additionally, mercury is a well-known inhibitor of kidney function.

Common sense indicates that the concern I expressed should be taken
seriously since we do not know how combined toxicities effect humans,
especially in utero. Consider the current epidemic death on birth of
over 500 foals from apparently healthy mares around Lexington, KY.

These deaths were identified as being due to a low level toxicity
delivered by caterpillars eating poison plants and later, on migration,
depositing their waste products on grass being eaten by the mares.

The point being, it is the infant in utero that suffered most on
exposure to low level, toxins, not the mother.
Combined mercury toxicities can
be devastating, as I reference below and in the many references
available on the http://www.altcorp.com website.

What is needed is research by non-biased scientists to clarify this,
something our FDA and NIDCR have refused to do.
As the American public find out what has happened regarding this issue,
they will be quite angry. This is a biomedical science issue
that should have been resolved a long time ago by the
responsible federal agencies.

Below, I present detailed and referenced information supporting my case
and respond to various statements made by the ADA President that I
believe to be misleading and sometimes flagrantly wrong.
The ADA seems to think it has the right to select which research it
believes and to trash that research that says it is wrong,
even though the latter represents the bulk of published research.

To address the issues raised by the ADA President in his letter, I will
go in sequential order of the comments made in the letter, placing the
ADA comments in italics, and providing scientific references
for my conclusions.

"There is no scientifically valid evidence linking either autism or
Alzheimer's disease with dental amalgam".
First, mercury is a well-known, potent neurotoxicant,
and common sense would lead to the conclusion
that severe neurotoxins would exacerbate all neurological disorders,
including Parkinson's, ALS, MS, autism and AD.
Several research papers in refereed, high quality journals and
scientific publications have shown that mercury inhibits
the same enzymes in normal brain tissues as are inhibited in AD brain
samples (1a-c, 2, 3).

AD is pathologically confirmed post-mortem by the appearance of
neuro-fibillary tangles (NFTs) and amyloid plaques in brain tissue.

Published research, within the past year, has shown that exposure of
neurons in culture to sub-lethal doses of mercury (much less than is
observed in human brain tissue) causes the formation of NFTs (4),
the increased secretion of amyloid protein and the
hyper-phosphorylation of a protein called Tau (5).

All three of these mercury-induced aberrances are
regularly identified as the major diagnostic markers for AD.

In the manuscript published in the J. of Neurochemistry (5) the authors
state: "These results indicate that mercury may play a role in the
patho-physiological mechanisms of AD."
In most of these experiments, mercury and only mercury
among the several toxic heavy metals tested, caused the AD related
responses reported.

Many medically trained individuals would agree that if something causes
the appearance of the pathological hallmarks confirming the disease,
then it likely causes the disease. I at least have limited my claims to
exacerbation of these diseases to err on the side of caution.

Further, consider this about AD. A study of 500 sets of identical twins
from World War II era lead to the conclusion that sporadic AD, which
represents 90% of the cases, was not a directly inherited disease.
In many cases one twin would get AD and the other would not.
Genetic susceptibility is involved, but a toxic exposure is required
(e.g., if you are genetically susceptible to being an alcoholic,
you still need to be exposed to alcohol to become one).

The work by Rose's group at Johns Hopkins University implicates APO-E
genotype as a "risk" factor with APO-E2 being protective and APO-E4
being a major risk factor. APO-E2 has the ability to protect the brain
from mercury by having two additional
thiol-groups to bind mercury appearing
in the cerebrospinal fluid whereas APO-E4 does not have this additional
capability (1). This may explain the proven genetic susceptibility
to AD of the APO-E4 carriers.

NIH has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to find a causal factor
for AD. Yet, no virus, yeast or bacteria has been identified, so the
cause remains unknown to general science.
The rate of AD per 1,000 population is nearly the same in
California, Michigan, Maine, North Carolina, Florida, Texas, etc.
It is not significantly different for rural versus urban individuals, or

factory workers versus those with outside jobs.

So the primary toxicant that may be involved is most likely
not environmental.

Therefore, it must be a very personal toxicant, like what you put in
your mouth. Since we place grams of a neurotoxic metal, mercury,
in our mouths in the form of dental amalgam, this makes it a good
suspect for the exacerbation of AD-- not that all would be affected,
just those that are genetically susceptible, or those who become ill
enough to fall prey to the toxicity, or those that are also
exposed to another synergistic toxin (see below).

The one fact that ties mercury into a major suspect for AD is the fact
that most of the proteins/enzymes that are inhibited in AD brain are
thiol-sensitive enzymes.

Mercury is one of the most potent chemical inhibitors of
thiol-sensitive enzymes and mercury vapor easily penetrates
into the central nervous system (2).

Mercury is not the only toxicant to inhibit thiol-sensitive enzymes.
Thimerosal and lead will do this also, as well as reactive oxygen
compounds created in oxidative stress
and many other industrial compounds.

However, mercury has been reported to be significantly elevated in AD
brain (14a,b, 15). Mercury is in many mouths being emitted from
dental amalgam and absolutely would exacerbate the clinical condition
identified as AD. Therefore, mercury should be considered as a
causal contributor, since mercury can produce the two pathological
hallmarks of the disease, and inhibits the same
thiol-sensitive enzymes that are dramatically inhibited in AD brain.

It is documented by a 1991 World Health Organization report that dental
amalgams constitute the major human exposure to mercury.

Grams of mercury are in the mouths of individuals with several amalgam
fillings. Further, the level of blood and urine mercury positively
correlates with the number of amalgam fillings. This was confirmed by a
recently published NIH funded study (6). Therefore, I fail to see the
ADA's viewpoint that there is no scientifically valid evidence linking
mercury from amalgams to exacerbating AD, especially since
mercury produces the diagnostic hallmarks of AD (4,5).

The ADA hides behind the fact that there has not been an
epidemiological study to attempt to correlate mercury exposure and AD.
However, absence of proof is not proof of absence.
This also begs the question why the ADA, the FDA
and the National Institutes of Dental Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
have not pushed for such a study. These agencies know this would be
immensely expensive and only the U.S. government could afford to
support any reliable long-term study.

Yet, these same responsible agencies have failed to confirm as safe the
placing into the mouth of Americans grams of the most toxic heavy metal
Americans are exposed to.

The dental branch of the FDA has steadfastly refused to
investigate the toxic potential of dental amalgam.

Look at the references in the ADA letter!

Even they must quote Scandinavian literature to support their
contentions of safety, and even then they have to reference papers on
fertility instead of neurotoxicity!
Where is the ADA, FDA and NIDCR supported U.S. research in
this area? Go to the NIH web-sites and look for research on the safety
of mercury from amalgams, or try to find an NIH study concerning
possible mercury involvement in any common neurological diseases.

NIH does support research on methyl-mercury, as we seem to like beating
up on the fishing industry whilst leaving the dental industry alone.
However, according to the NIH study about 90% of the mercury in our
bodies is elemental mercury, not methyl-mercury,
showing the exposure is more likely
from dental amalgams rather than fish (6). Support at NIH has
been very sparse for investigating the relationship
of elemental mercury exposure to neurological diseases.

"And there is no scientifically valid evidence demonstrating in vivo
transformation of inorganic mercury into organo mercury species in
individuals occupationally exposed to amalgam mercury vapor".

There was a paper published entitled
"Methylation of Mercury from Dental Amalgam and Mercuric Chloride
by Oral Streptococci in vitro" (19). This strongly indicates that
"organo mercury species" are indeed capable of being made in the
human body and may explain the appearance of methyl-mercury
in the blood and urine of individuals who don't eat seafood.

Further, periodontal disease is considered one of the major risk
factors for stroke, heart and cardiovascular disease and
late onset, insulin independent diabetes.
Many studies of the toxicants produced in
periodontal disease have identified hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and
methane-thiol (CH3SH) as major toxic products of infective anerobic
bacteria in the mouth, metabolizing the amino acids
cysteine and methionine, respectively.

These volatile thiol-compounds are what cause bad-breath! Methane-thiol
(CH3SH) would react immediately and spontaneously in the mouth with
amalgam generated mercury cation to produce
the following two compounds, CH3S-HgCl and CH3S-Hg-SCH3,
which are organo-mercurial compounds
(check this out with any competent chemist). They are also very similar
in structure to methyl-mercury (CH3-HgCl) and dimethyl-mercury
(CH3-Hg-CH3), the latter which caused the highly publicized death
of a University of Dartmouth chemistry professor 10 months after
she spilled two drops on her gloved hand.

We have synthesized CH3S-HgCl and CH3-Hg-CH3 in my laboratory and
tested their toxicity in comparison to Hg2+.
As expected, they were both
more toxic than Hg2+ and this data is available on the
http://www.altcorp.com web-site.
Therefore, the ADA President is badly misinformed on this issue.
Additionally, I am amazed that the researchers at the ADA and NIDCR
did not previously report on this obvious chemistry, as I would imagine
this is the kind of topic they should be addressing.

"Based on currently available scientific evidence,
the ADA believes that dental amalgam
is a safe, affordable and durable material for all but a
handful of individuals who are allergic to one of its components.
It contains a mixture of metals such as silver, copper and tin,
in addition to mercury, which chemically binds these components
into a hard, stable and safe substance."

This is a totally wrong statement unless you underline the "ADA
believes" and define how big is a "handful of individuals".
Sensible people want "believes" replaced with "knows"
and a "handful" replaced with a "hard number".

Amalgams emit dangerous levels of mercury and the ADA
absolutely refuses to accept this fact or even to study the possibility.

Otherwise, the ADA administrators seem to be unable to separate fact
from fiction. Consider, if they wanted to destroy my argument on
amalgam toxicity they would reference several solid, refereed
publications showing that mercury is not emitted from dental
amalgams-- but they cannot do this with even one article.

They always state the "estimate" is that a very, very, very small
amount. Competent, well-informed researchers don't use the
evasive language used in the ADA President's letter.
They would state the amount is so many micrograms mercury
released per centimeter squared amalgam surface area, and
a "handful of individuals" would be a percentage of our population!
Let's look at the published literature.

First, careful evaluation of the amount of mercury emitted from a
commonly used dental amalgam in a test tube with 10 ml of water
was presented in an article entitled
"Long-term Dissolution of Mercury from a
Non-Mercury-Releasing Amalgam". This study showed that
"the over-all mean release of mercury was
43.5 ± 3.2 micrograms per cm2/day, and the amount remained
fairly constant during the duration of the experiments (2 years)" (7).

This was without pressure, heat or galvanism, as would have occurred
if the amalgams were in a human mouth. Further, research where amalgams
containing radioactive mercury were placed in sheep and monkeys,
showed the radioactivity collecting in all body tissues and
especially high in the jaw and facial bones. (8,9).

Another publication, from a major U.S. School of Dentistry, stated that
solutions in which amalgams had been soaked were
"severely cytotoxic initially when Zn release was highest" (13).
Zn is a needed element for body health, and is found
in very low percentages in dental amalgams when compared to mercury.
Why mercury was not mentioned in the abstract of this publication
baffles me. Why would the statement be true?
Because Zn2+ is a synergist that enhances mercury toxicity!

However, does this sound like amalgams are a safe, stable material?
We have repeated similar amalgam soaking experiments in my laboratory,
and the results can be seen at http://www.altcorp.com .
Cadmium (from smoking), lead, zinc and other heavy metals
enhanced mercury toxicity, as expected (this research is
currently being prepared for publication).

The ADA claim that a zinc oxide layer is formed on the
amalgams that decreases mercury release is true, if you
don't use the teeth.

The zinc oxide layer would be easily removed by slight abrasion,
such as chewing food or brushing the teeth. Further, my laboratory
has confirmed that solutions in which amalgams have been soaked
can cause the inhibition of brain proteins that are inhibited by adding
mercury chloride, and these are the same enzymes
inhibited in AD brain samples.

Further, mercury emitting from a dental amalgam can be easily detected,
using the same mercury vapor analysis instrument
used by OSHA and the EPA to monitor mercury levels.

Anyone who does not believe mercury is emitted from
amalgams should consider doing the following.

Have your local dentist make 10 amalgams using the same material he/she
places in your mouth. Take these 10 amalgams to your nearest research
university's department of chemistry or toxicology department,
and have them determine how much mercury is being emitted.
For example, have them calculate how long it would take a
single spill of hardened amalgam to make a
gallon of water too toxic to pass EPA standards as drinking water.

You will then have an answer from an unbiased, solid group of
scientists who are trained to do such determinations.
Also, remember the level of mercury they measure
would not include the increase that would occur
with amalgams in the mouth where chewing, grinding your teeth,
drinking hot liquids and galvanism greatly increase the release of
mercury.
Since this approach can be easily done by anyone, don't you think the
ADA, FDA and other amalgam supporters would have this published
by now, if the level of mercury released was below the danger level?

Here is their attempt.

According to an ADA spokesman, he has "estimated" that only 0.08
micrograms of mercury per amalgam per day is taken into the human
body. Applying simple math to this "estimate" of 0.08 micrograms/ day,
one would divide this amount by 8,640
(24 hours/day X 60 minutes/hour X 6 ten second intervals/minute) to
determine the amount of mercury in micrograms available for
a ten second mercury vapor analysis.

Consider that somewhere between one-half 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.

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
"estimated" 0.08 micrograms/day level of mercury,
even if you had several amalgams.

However, the fact is that it is quite easy to detect mercury emitting
from one amalgam using these analyzers. Therefore, the "estimate"
by this ADA spokesman is way too low.

Also, if you gently rub the amalgam with a tooth-brush the amount of
mercury emitted goes up dramatically. This is a test anyone can do and
demonstrate to any group. The ADA spokesmen state that the mercury
vapor analyzer is not accurate at determining oral mercury levels,
and they are quite correct.

However, using this instrument would greatly underestimate the amount
of mercury exiting the amalgam. The very fact that the mercury analyzer
detects high levels of oral mercury strongly indicates the emitted
amount of mercury is too high to be acceptable.

Mercury release from dental amalgams is also the reason OSHA has used
this analyzer to make the dentists place unused amalgam in a
sealed container under liquid glycerin. This is done so that the
mercury vapors from the amalgams will not contaminate
the dental office, making it an unsafe place to work.

This is also the reason the EPA insists that removed amalgam filling
and extracted teeth containing amalgam material be picked up and
disposed of as toxic waste. Apparently, the only safe place for
amalgams is in the human mouth, if you believe what the ADA believes.

"Amalgams have been used for 150 years and, during that time, has
established an extensively reviewed record of safety and effectiveness."

First, what other aspect of industry or medicine is still using the
same basic manufactured material that they used 150 years ago?
One has to ask the question as to what has hindered the progress of
development of better and safer dental materials?

Also, consider that in the early 1900s the average life expectancy of
most Americans was about 50 years of age, and most of them
could not afford dental fillings.

Fifty to sixty years is much less than the average age of onset of AD.
Further, amalgams became more available to most working class
Americans after World War II, or in the early 1950s. The greatest
increase in the use of amalgam occurred at about this time, and
these 'baby boomers are the great ongoing amalgam experiment'.

They are now reaching the age where AD appears, and have lived most of
their lives carrying amalgam fillings. They also wonder what is causing
their chronic fatigue, as the physicians can find nothing
systemically wrong with them.
I would encourage all concerned to contact the health experts on
the rate of increase of AD in the U.S.A. at this time.

Consider the cost it will place on the taxpayer and how much we would
save if we could even remove the exacerbation factors that might speed
up the onset of AD. I must point out that the
"extensively reviewed record of safety" mentioned in the ADA letter
was mostly done by dentists and committees
dominated by ADA dentists.

Also, much of the "safety opinion" was developed long before words like
Alzheimer's disease and chronic fatigue were commonplace.
Further, these were "reviews", and not carefully documented studies
based on scientific experimentation, and done by unqualified dentists,
not medical scientists. Dentists are not trained to do basic research,
nor are they trained in toxicology.

Furthermore, the ADA does have a vested interest in keeping amalgam use
legitimate. The ADA was founded on using amalgam technology and
participated in patenting and licensing amalgam technology. One has to
question why there has not been a general outcry by the bulk of
well-meaning dentists and their patients,
and this question should be addressed.

The International Association of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, started
by American & Canadian dentists, does adamantly disagree with the ADA
on the issue of safety of dental amalgams, and this organization has the

mantra of "Show me your science" with regards to all dental issues.

Part 2/2 and References
http://www.mercola.com/2001/jun/9/amalgam_safety2.htm
http://www.mercola.com/2001/jun/9/amalgam_safety3.htm
*******************************************************

Boyd E. Haley Professor and Chair
Department of Chemistry University of Kentucky
http://www.uky.edu/ behaley@...
Department Chemistry
Address 125 Chemistry-Physics Building 0055
859 257-7082 Fax 859 257-3936 Home 859 887-4341
Department2 Advanced Science and Technology-ASTeCC
Address2 A057 ASTeCC Building 0286
Phone2 859 257-2300
*******************************************************

http://www.asomat.com/index.html
http://www.asomat.com/links/links-content.htm many links
Australasian Association of Oral Medicine and Toxicology
PO Box A860 Sydney South NSW 2000 Australia
asomat@... +61-2-9867-1111 FAX: +61-2-9283-2230
asomat@...
*******************************************************

http://www.iaomt.org/
International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology
Michael F. Ziff, Executive Director 1-407-298-2450 mziff@...
http://www.iaomt.org/biblio-toc.htm extensive references
*******************************************************

Rich Murray, MA Room For All rmforall@...
1943 Otowi Road, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505
505-986-9103

M.I.T. (physics and history, BA, 1964), Boston U. Graduate School
(psychology, MA, 1967): As a concerned layman, I want to clarify the
aspartame toxicity debate.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/618
long 40K summary

Excellent 5-page review by H.J. Roberts in "Townsend Letter",
Jan 2000, "Aspartame (NutraSweet) Addiction"
http://www.dorway.com/tldaddic.html http://www.sunsentpress.com/
H.J. Roberts, M.D. HRRobertsmd@... sunsentpress@...
Sunshine Sentinel Press 6708 Pamela Lane West Palm Beach, FL 33405
800-814-9800 561-588-7628 561-547-8008 fax
1038 page text "Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic"
published May 30 2001 $ 85.00 postpaid data from 1200 cases
http://www.aspartameispoison.com/contents.html 34 chapters
********************************************************