Sunday, August 2, 2009

FDA Classification Disaster

IAOMT Response
On Tuesday, July 28, 2009, the FDA completed its classification of the traditional dental amalgam filling material by making it a Class II device, with minimal controls. Dr. Susan Runner, the acting director of the dental devices division, stated flatly that there are no serious concerns about the toxic mercury exposure from amalgam, that is in fact thoroughly documented in the scientific literature.


David Kennedy, DDS said...

The FDA July 28th 2009 admitted the following points:
A. Body burden mercury is not reflected in urine levels
B. Neurological impairment is related to body burden mercury
C. Kidney is a major reservoir of mercury in the body
D. Amalgams leak elemental mercury vapor
E. Dental professionals show injury at urine levels considered safe by the FDA
F. Careless placement or removal of amalgam can expose everyone present to a bolus dose of mercury
G. Amalgams are frequently placed in contact with cast metal restorations (increases mercury released)
H. Mercury causes inflammation of gums (Periodontal disease) a major cause of tooth loss
I. FDA is underreporting adverse reaction reports claimed only 141
J. FDA underestimates exposure to children
K. FDA misquotes the conclusions of the WHO 1991 criteria document.
L. FDA uses industrial workplace surveys that found injury from mercury chloride and extrapolates these findings to children
M. There is no urinary threshold for neurological injury as Echeverria demonstrated
N. FDA has not considered even one genetic variable in their analysis. Not even males vs. females Woods 2007.
O. FDA inappropriately describes steps for employee protections that are not in compliance with OSHA long standing rules

Thus exposure to mercury from amalgam exceeds the ATSDR minimum risk level (MRL).

gypsyjohn said...


I would like to investigate this more before I have my mercury fillings replaced. I have heard of two diagnostic tests to determine how much mercury is being emitted from the fillings.

One involves an electrical test to measure the voltage or current in the filling, by which the higher readings relate directly to fillings that are emitting more mercury. This test I am unclear on the process and equipment needed. If you can explain further, I would appreciate it.

The second test I have seen on your videos where a mercury sniffer is used to test the level of emission following stimulation of the filling. This test I am clear on the process and do have access to a dated analog mercury sniffer.

Which testing method would you recommend?

DrDK said...

Neither and electrical voltage test or a mercury vapor test will accurately reflect the body burden of mercury if that is your concern. A challenge test with DMPS is the current standard for that. Also Chris Shade has a tri test of hair, blood and urine that he claims reflects body burden but I have not personally evaluated this testing.