Amalgam controversy

[barry1817]

I have a question for those that are not dentists who read this forum, and hope that you will answer on line, or to me personally.

Suppose you are on a jury, and the question of whether of not amalgam is a safe material is the subject of the trial.

Do you vote that amalgam is safe or dangerous if the facts given to you are:

a. The ADA states it is safe

b. A law suit against Ca. dentists was filed, and won, leaving dentists to pay monetary damages, have to post signs stating the potential harm of amalgam, acknowledge that amalgam shouldn't be used for children under six, and was a basis for federal legislation looking to ban amalgam.

Amalgam safe?
Amalgam unsafe?

Which argument above was more persuasive, and why.

Thank you.

[email protected]

[Omie]

Hi Barry,
Frankly, I have reason to doubt that amalgam fillings are a problem.For 3 years, in the late '50s I worked in a private dentist office, mixing up amalgam, getting mercury all over my ring once, had to buff it off in the lab, and I suffered no ill effects.

I still have some amalgam fillings and reading about the 'dangers' of amalgam and mercury I was concerned that I might be 'contaminated' beyond redemption.

In Sept. I sent in some hair for analysis and the mercury was the smallest of blips on the chart. So now I know it is not a problem for me. For some super sensitive individuals, it could be a problem, but that is true of lots of things. One man's meat is another man's poison.

Based on my life experiences, I would have voted against the plaintiff. Omie