In article , remove munged
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:01:36 GMT, "Frank Logullo"
wrote:

The mercury one is really crap. I've got
more mercury in one tooth in my mouth than 1,000,000 fish combined and I'm
still hear to talk about it.

Mercury contamination is a growing problem in game fish, but nothing
compared to the growing problem of dioxin, but harmful levels have only
been found in farm-raised fish. A more injurious problem in wild
populations is the growing levels of dioxins that transfer up the
foodchain & is already killing off killer whales & increasing tumors in
sharks; as humans are also at the top of the food chain, we're inheriting
double-doses of dioxins from eating seafoods as well as from
pesticide-dependent crops. Human behaviors provide the source of these
dioxins: chemical pesticides that find their way into rivers, lakes, &
oceans, plus dioxin as byproduct of waste treatment plants pumping
brownwater right into the oceans.

As for tooth fillings....

Mercury fillings require removal of the middle third of the tooth,
weakening the tooth structure by 75%. At some point the repaired tooth
will fracture. So even if it weren't toxic, new modern methods of
composite fillings exist which preserve tooth strength so the tooth can
last a lifetime, as mercury fillings cannot.

Dangerous side-effects of mercury fillings have been documented since the
1840s, but there were "compelling economic reasons" to overlook the high
incidence of tooth loss & sickness. Economic reasons are still the only
reason mercury is still used. In terms of permanancy, better modern
methods are not actually more expensive; the mercury filling will have to
be redone or the tooth removed later in life, so the "more expensive"
composites are a better bargain in the long run. But people aren't
thinking long-term, they're looking at it being done cheaply up-front.
Today fewer & fewer people are getting mercury fillings who are not too
impoverished for better; it is still almost exclusively the filling
welfare dental patients will receive. But no child born today really
needs to be subjected to mercury from fillings for any reason other than
poverty, unless secondarily from mothers who can pass mercury
contamination to neonatal tissue.

Yes, you are, but working with an obviously addled brain! One of the
primary effects mercury on already delusional sub-adults.

"For more than 160 years dentistry has used silver amalgam, which contains
approximately 50% Hg metal, as the preferred tooth filling material.
During the past decade medical research has demonstrated that this Hg is
continuously released as vapor into mouth air; then it is inhaled,
absorbed into body tissues, oxidized to ionic Hg, and finally covalently
bound to cell proteins. Animal and human experiments demonstrate that the
uptake, tissue distribution, and excretion of amalgam Hg is significant,
and that dental amalgam is the major contributing source to Hg body burden
in humans. Current research on the pathophysiological effects of amalgam
Hg has focused upon the immune system, renal system, oral and intestinal
bacteria, reproductive system, and the central nervous system. Research
evidence does not support the notion of amalgam safety." [Lorscheider,
Vimy, & Summer, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, in FASAB
JOURNAL, April 1995]

-paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
Visit the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com