Download - Truly Alive Magazine

eport observes: “According to the Norwegian Dental
Biomaterials Adverse Reaction Unit, the majority of cases
of side-effects of dental filling materials are linked with
dental amalgam.”
• Alternative dental restoration
materials are available. The
report cites studies indicating that
many alternatives are superior
to amalgam, and states that
“alternative restorative materials
of sufficient quality are available
for use in the deciduous [baby]
dentition of children”—the
population whose developing
neurological systems are most
susceptible to the neurotoxic effects of dental mercury.
Perhaps more important than the survival of the filling,
WHO asserts that: “Adhesive resin materials allow for less
tooth destruction and, as a result, a longer survival of the
tooth itself.”
The WHO report also included mention of the known
toxic effects of mercury exposure, stating: “Mercury is
highly toxic and harmful to health. Approximately 80 percent
of inhaled mercury vapor is absorbed in the blood through
the lungs, causing damages to lungs, kidneys and the nervous,
digestive, respiratory and immune systems. Health effects
from excessive mercury exposure include tremors, impaired
vision and hearing, paralysis, insomnia, emotional instability,
developmental deficits during fetal development, and
attention deficit and developmental delays during childhood.”
popular alternatives to amalgam is resin composite, made of
a type of plastic reinforced with powdered glass. It is already
common throughout the U.S. and the rest of the developed
world, offering notable improvements over amalgam, as it:
• Is environmentally safe:
Composite, which contains no
mercury, does not pollute the
environment. This saves taxpayers
from paying the costs of cleaning
up dental mercury pollution in our
water, air, and land – and the costs
of health problems associated with
mercury pollution.
• Preserves healthy tooth structure,
because, unlike amalgam, it does not require the removal
of significant amounts of healthy tooth matter. Over the
long term, composite preserves healthy tooth structure
and can actually strengthen teeth, leading to better oral
health and less extensive dental work over the longterm.
• Is long-lasting: While some claim that amalgam fillings
last longer than composite fillings, the science reveals
this claim to be baseless. The latest studies show that
composite not only lasts as long as amalgam, but actually
has a higher overall survival rate.
Alternatives are Readily Available… and Desired by Most
Americans:
Far from being an essential dental product with no viable
alternatives, amalgam is interchangeable with many other
filling materials—including resin composites and glass
ionomers—which have rendered amalgam completely
unnecessary for any clinical situation. One of the most
TRULY ALIVE in your INBOX...
FREE Email Subscriptions
505.828.3430
www.trulyalive.net
Email your
request
today!
Read more articles by Bill Wolfe online: www.trulyalive.net
Truly Alive | September/October 2012 23