Silver
amalgam fillings, which have plugged American cavities for
more than 150 years, have lost their luster over the last
couple of decades thanks to the rise of more attractive
tooth-colored fillings and concerns about the environmental
and health impact of their chief ingredient: mercury.
Although
use of amalgam fillings has dropped 30 percent in the last
decade, according to the American Dental Association, these
fillings are still sitting in hundreds of millions of mouths,
and dentists continue to fill some 50 million teeth with
amalgam each year — especially in children.
As the
safety debate rages on, how concerned should you be?
Mercury,
a known neurotoxin, makes up 50 percent (in weight) of amalgam
fillings, which also contain silver, copper and tin. The ADA
has steadfastly stood behind the safety of amalgam, saying the
amount of mercury vapor released by the fillings is too little
to cause harm.
In its
"final rule" on amalgam fillings, issued in 2009,
the Food and Drug Administration deemed them safe for adults
and children older than 6. Clinical studies have found no link
between dental amalgam fillings and health problems, and the
amount of mercury measured in the bodies of people with these
fillings is well below levels associated with adverse health
effects, the FDA said.
Regarding
kids younger than 6, whose developing bodies may be more
sensitive to the neurotoxic effects of mercury vapor, as well
as pregnant women and their developing fetuses, "very
limited to no clinical information is available regarding
long-term health outcomes," the FDA said, but existing
evidence suggests there’s little to worry about.
Still,
in response to concerns about its ruling, the FDA convened a
panel last December to re-examine the issue and expects to
make a new announcement by the end of this year.
For some
dentists, toxicologists and advocates, the fact that mercury
has been shown to hurt the neurological system, kidneys and
other organs is reason enough to keep it out of people’s
mouths.
"When
you plant a neurotoxin two inches from the brain, can you say
no one is ever harmed from that?" said Charlie Brown,
director of Consumers for Dental Choice. His group advocates
that dentists be required to disclose the mercury content of
amalgam fillings to patients. Four states and several cities
mandate such disclosure, though federal law does not, and the
ADA has no such recommendation.
The
buildup of mercury from vapors 24 hours a day, over a
lifetime, is the greatest concern, said Boyd Haley, retired
professor emeritus at the University of Kentucky, where he
headed the chemistry department. Eighty percent of mercury
vapor stays in body tissue for days, months, even years,
because the body doesn’t have a good system for excreting
it, he said. Cadaver studies have shown that bodies with more
amalgam fillings have more mercury in their brain tissue.
Given
people’s exposure to other sources of mercury, and how it
might interact with other heavy metals built up in the body,
it’s impossible to say that there is any safe level, said
Haley, whose studies have linked mercury to Alzheimer’s
disease.
Some
people who worry their amalgam fillings are a source of their
health problems, from allergies to multiple sclerosis, seek to
get the amalgam removed.
Michael
Fleming is a Raleigh, N.C.-based "mercury-free"
dentist who hasn’t used amalgam in his practice for 28
years. He never guarantees that removing amalgam will improve
health and advises of potential drawbacks: tooth sensitivity,
potential future need of a root canal if there’s nerve
damage in the process, the increased release of mercury vapors
during removal and the cost, which can range from a few
hundred to a few thousand dollars. He typically doesn’t
recommend it for very ill people or those with
life-threatening medical conditions.
But some
patients, anecdotally, have reported feeling better after
having their fillings removed.
"We
have had a couple of patients whose thyroid disease cleared
after removal of mercury, sleep and concentration improved, as
did energy levels, fatigue," said Fleming, an appointed
consultant to the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological
Health (his views don’t represent the FDA’s). "And in
others, you don’t see any improvement."
Edmond
Hewlett, vice chairman of restorative dentistry at UCLA School
of Dentistry and consumer adviser for the ADA, strongly warns
against removing sound fillings, as more trauma to the tooth
can weaken the tooth structure. Furthermore, he said, it’s
"unethical" and "cruel" to give people
hope that their symptoms will be cured post-amalgam without
any evidence that that’s true.
"Until
there’s compelling evidence there’s the slightest risk of
harm, then (amalgam fillings) are a good option," Hewlett
said.
Why
amalgam?
Durability,
affordability and speed of installation are the top reasons
dentists use amalgam, which costs patients about 20 percent
less than composite resin or glass ionomer fillings. Arguments
against banning amalgam often suggest higher costs would
discourage poorer people from fixing tooth decay.
Improvements
in composite resin, which eclipsed amalgam as the most popular
filling some seven years ago, have made it as durable as
amalgam, and it requires less removal of healthy tooth
structure, said dentist Edmond Hewlett. But it’s difficult
to use on teeth that have trouble staying dry during the
procedure, such as the back molars. Glass ionomer fillings,
which are beginning to be used more, may present a good
alternative, Hewlett said.
___