|
Letter to the Editor, JNJDA
May 15, 1995
Dr. Harvey Nisselson
Editor - J.N.J.D.A.
1 Dental Plaza
North Brunswick, NJ 08902
Dear Harvey:
Am I relieved! From a blurb in the Journal's last
issue, I learned that a research study of 125 nuns (aged 72-100+ ???)
showed that there was no significant difference in the IQ's of the group
that had many large silver fillings, and the control group which either
had fillings or teeth which were few and far between (i.e. a relatively
clean mouth with little history of caries or were fully edentulous). I am reminded of the quote of the A.D.A. representative,
who when asked by the New York Times to respond to research by Summers
et. al. (Journal of Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 4/93 - which
indicated that there was evidence of immunosuppression in the test group
of monkeys who had undergone recent amalgam placement) stated that the
research held no validity since it was not performed on humans, it was
performed on monkeys. That one moment inexorably altered my practice,
for since that moment, I have not placed more than a handful of mercury-containing
fillings. So now, the J.N.J.D.A. News Brief tells me amalgams
are safe. Well you can quote me on this. The results from which you drew
the conclusion as stated in your headline "Dental Fillings; Further Proof
That They're Safe" has no statistical significance because it was done
on elderly nuns, not on a representative sample of humans. Nor is utilizing
the results of IQ tests a valid evaluation of the toxic side-effects mercury
is known to cause. I don't think that this was what the Public Health
Service meant when in its study of the safety of mercury it indicated
that further research was necessary before any conclusions could be reached. I guess whoever is feeding you the amalgam safety
propaganda missed the point that they could have also concluded from their
data that both groups of nuns probably had equal rates of offspring with
birth defects, and therefore there is no evidence whatsoever that amalgam
is unsafe!
By the way, in a prior letter to the editor I offered-up
my old jar of underwater-scrap-amalgam to the first scrap metal salesperson
who darkened my door. It was sitting on a shelf in a supply closet. When
we went to get it we noted that the metal screw-top had been totally eaten
through. I questioned the A.D.A. on that. Their spokesperson indicated
that a nest of ants must have mistaken it for a bottle of Bud Light! Any
nuns, aged 72-100 who ask for an amalgam in my office can get one. Here
is another statistically significant research figure for you. In my practice,
over the last 5 years, 100% of all posterior fillings placed in nuns of
all ages were composite, not amalgam. As a result, their dental IQ's are
higher. This is not a new debate. When amalgam was first
introduced in the 1850's, in Germany, those who began using it were held
in disrespect by other members of their profession. In German, mercury
is "Quaksolder". Those who used it were not called Quakers, they were
given the acronym: "QUACKS"
Respectfully,
Dr. Stephen J Markus
For further discussion you can E-mail
me at drmarkus@cent4dent.com.
|
