INFERTILITY, BIRTH DEFECTS, AND FETAL
DEVELOPMENTAL EFFECTS
RELATED TO MERCURY
FROM AMALGAM DENTAL FILLINGS
I. Introduction
Mercury is one of the most toxic substances
commonly encountered, and according to Government agencies causes adverse
health effects in large numbers of people in the U.S.[1,2] The extreme toxicity of mercury can be seen
from documented effects on wildlife by very low levels of mercury exposure.
Because of the extreme toxicity of mercury, only ½ gram is required to
contaminate the ecosystem and fish of a 10 acre lake to the extent that a
health warning would be issued by the government to not eat the fish[3]. Over half
the rivers and lakes in Florida have such health warnings[4] banning or
limiting eating of fish, as do approximately 20% of all U.S. lakes, all Great
Lakes, 7% of all U.S. river miles, and many bays. Other countries including Canada have similar
experience.
Mercury has been documented by studies on
animals to be extremely cytotoxic, neurotoxic, immunotoxic, genotoxic, and to
be an endocrine disrupter and cause of infertility and fertility problems(153). Humans have significant toxic exposures other
than mercury but mercury and other toxic metals have been documented to have
similar synergistic effects on children and adults (151,153). Toxic metals have
been documented by the U.S. Department of Health and EPA to cause large numbers
of adverse health effects each year, more than any other toxic exposures, with
mercury, lead, and arsenic affecting the largest number of people(1). A study by the National Academy of Sciences
and other similar studies have documented that in the 1990s the majority of
U.S. pregnancies resulted in birth defects, neurological, or other significant
developmental conditions(150). Studies have documented
that the majority of these were due to toxic exposures, with toxic metals being
the major factor in most(151,152). Vaccines and other toxic exposures have been
documented to be the main cause or a major factor in many chronic developmental
children’s conditions including autism, ADHD, learning disabilities, eczema,
epilepsy, asthma and chronic lung conditions, diabetes, SIDS, etc. (151,152). Exposures to mercury along with other toxic
metals together have been found by hundreds of thousands of medical tests to be
very common, and synergistic toxic effects that are more than 10 fold more
dangerous have been documented(155).
That mercury can affect
fertility is well known since mercury has been commonly used as a spermicide in
birth control products. Potential effects can again be seen from effects on
wildlife. Some Florida panthers that eat
birds and animals that eat fish, frogs, and turtles containing very low levels
of mercury (about 1 part per million) have died from chronic mercury poisoning[5,6].
Since mercury is an estrogenic chemical and reproductive toxin, the
majority of the rest cannot reproduce.
The average male Florida panther has estrogen levels as high as females,
due to the estrogenic properties of mercury.
Similar is true of some other animals at the top of the food chain like
alligators and wading birds[5,6,7], and marine mammals
such as polar bears, seals, beluga and orca whales.
Under the Proposition 65 procedures, passed by the
state of California in 1986, mercury has been determined to be a reproductive
toxin, and to cause birth defects. Thus,
products that use mercury and cause significant mercury exposure must provide
warnings to the public of the known health risk(156). Use of dental amalgam by dentists in
California requires such a warning.
Several other states have passed similar laws requiring warnings by
dentists of the known health risk related to use of dental amalgam. Dental amalgam has been documented by tests
at medical labs to be the largest source of mercury exposure for most people
who have several amalgam fillings (31), with exposure levels as much as 10
times the average for those without amalgam fillings. And as later shown
mother’s dental amalgam is similarly the largest source of mercury to the fetus
and young infants.
Historically most of the research and concern
regarding mercury's toxic effects on humans and in particular on fetal
development have focused on methyl mercury rather than mercury vapor or
inorganic mercury or the type of mercury in vaccines, ethyl mercury. This has
been due to a combination of factors, but basic misunderstandings of the
differential nature and effect mechanisms of the different forms of mercury
appears to have played a role in this.
There have been highly publicized major acute poisonings affecting many
people and infants of those exposed through fish in Japan and food in
Iran. Methylmercury has also been shown
to be extremely neurotoxic, much moreso than inorganic forms that do not as
readily cross cellular membranes such as the blood‑brain barrier, even
though they are also very neurotoxic.
Additionally, doctors and researchers have traditionally tended to use blood tests to test for mercury
exposure, without the understanding from more recent experience that has found
blood tests mainly relevant to methylmercury, not
mercury vapor or inorganic mercury body burden and only measure recent
exposures. Mercury vapor has been found to have an extremely short half‑life
in the blood[8-10] since the vapor form rapidly
crosses cellular membranes including the blood‑brain barrier and
placenta, where it is rapidly oxidized to inorganic forms. While the half life
of vapor in the blood has been found to be about 8 seconds[8], the inorganic
form does not readily cross cellular membranes resulting in accumulation in the
body organs, especially the brain where the half life can be over 20
years[11,12]. The form of mercury found
in the blood by blood tests is thus mostly organic[9,13],
while most of the mercury in body organs and urine is mostly inorganic. However, unfortunately there is no simple or
commonly accepted test methodology for inorganic mercury body burden, other
than post‑mortem autopsies which have verified the accumulation of
inorganic mercury in the brain and other organs [12,14,15,127]. In a large U.S.CDC survey more than 16 % of
infants had blood levels of mercury above the upper level of mercury exposure
recommended by the German Commission on Human Biomonitoring of 10 micrograms
per liter in the blood(54), and over 10% of women of
childbearing age had blood levels above the WHO standard of 40 ug/L at which infants born would be at significant risk of
developmental disabilities(1). The
upper level of mercury exposure recommended by the German Commission on Human Biomonitoring is 10 micrograms per liter in the blood(54), but adverse effects such as increases in blood pressure and cognitive
effects have been documented as low as 1 ug/L, with
impacts higher in low birthweight babies(54). Thus
the European and U.S. National Academy of Sciences mercury limit was lowered to
5 ug/L(54b). A much higher
percentage of child bearing women are thus seen to have mercury levels above
the new safety limits. Studies have
found that prenatal mercury exposure commonly results in metal retardation,
lowered IQs, learning disabilities,
and autism (138,148,149,118,119,132-137).
While urine mercury
correlates with inorganic mercury exposure and is a better measure than blood,
urine mercury is an unreliable measure for those chronically exposed since
mercury excretion through the kidneys deteriorates with cumulative
exposure. It apparently also is not
widely understood that mercury commonly changes forms within the body, both
from organic mercury to inorganic mercury and from inorganic mercury to organic
mercury. It has been demonstrated that bacteria in the mouth and intestines as
well as yeast methylate inorganic mercury to organic
mercury, and methylation of mercury from amalgam is the largest source of methyl
mercury in most people with amalgam[11,16,31,29]. Some patients who eat no
fish but have high levels of inorganic mercury exposure have been tested to
have high levels of organic mercury in the body.
Also while it has been known that the
general public is commonly exposed to methylmercury
which is the main form of mercury in fish, it has not been commonly understood
that there was significant widespread exposure to inorganic mercury. Although it has now been well documented that
the major exposure to mercury for most people is from amalgam fillings and that
likewise maternal amalgam fillings are a major source of exposure for the fetus
and infants, this information has not been widely publicized and appears to be
unknown to the majority of doctors, dentists, and the public. This paper clarifies and documents some of
these recent findings, and also reviews the fertility and fetal development
effects of mercury vapor, which have been documented at even lower levels than
for methylmercury in some cases.
II. Mechanisms of
Mercury Leakage from Amalgam fillings and Levels of Exposure.
The average amalgam
filling weighs more than ½ gram and is 50% mercury. Mercury is known to have a low vapor pressure
and to be continuously vaporized and absorbed by the body. Amalgam has also been shown to act like a battery,
setting up galvanic currents in the mouth, resulting in high levels of mercury
being deposited through this action in the oral tissues and mucosa, from which
it also spreads to other parts of the body[17-23]. Levels commonly found in the oral tissues of
those with amalgam fillings were 100 to 1200 times the FDA/EPA action level for
health warnings in food, which is 1 part per million (ppm)
mercury[4].
Except for special
populations such as occupationally exposed workers and populations with a high
level of fish in the diet, the number one source of mercury in most people has
been documented to be dental amalgam fillings[13,24-31]. Most of the thousands of people with several
amalgam fillings who have been tested were found to have daily exposure levels
of mercury vapor exceeding government safety guidelines. The U.S. ATSDR mercury
vapor minimum risk level(MRL) is 0.2 micrograms per
cubic meter(ug/M3)[32]. Most people with amalgam fillings who have
been tested have been found to have much higher levels of mercury in their oral
air than this, with some as high as 100 ug/M3[24,25,28-31].
For an adult breathing
0.2 ug/day of mercury and breathing approximately 20
cubic meters per day of air[27], the ATSDR MRL gives a
guideline level of exposure of approx. 4 micrograms per day. Most of the many thousands tested who have 9
or more amalgam fillings were found to have exposure levels above this level
and above U.S. government health guidelines for mercury[11,13,24-31]. While most studies such as Richardson’s
analysis for Health Canada[27] that are primarily
based on urine measurements use conservative estimates of daily mercury
exposure from amalgam in the range 3 to 5 ug/day,
studies which measure levels of mercury in feces or saliva found considerably
higher daily exposure levels. Two
studies found daily excretion in feces betweeen 30 to
190 ug for subjects with between 18 and 82 amalgam
surfaces, with an average of 60 ug/day[25,28]. Another study[29]
found daily excretion through feces from 10 to 87 ug. A medical laboratory, BIOSPECTRON SWEDEN AB, that has
performed thousands of fecal tests for mercury reports a similar range of daily
excretion. Large studies that measured
mercury levels in saliva have found that over 90 % of mercury in saliva
typically comes from amalgam fillings, and the level of mercury found in saliva
has a similar range as the studies for level in feces previously
quoted[24,29]. A large study of mercury
levels in the U.S. military population found average daily excretion levels in
urine for subjects with 20 amalgam surfaces to be appoximately
6.2 ug, assuming 2 liters of urine excreted per day[13]. Significant
levels of mercury have also been found in sweat and appear to often be more
than 2 ug per day for subjects with approximately
1200 ml of sweat per day. Additionally
autopsy studies[12] have found that for those with
chronic exposure, daily exposure levels are higher than excretion levels so
mercury accumulates in the major body organs including the brain, heart,
kidneys, liver, etc. Thus altogether
daily exposure levels for those with several fillings appear to often exceed 50
ug/day, with exposure levels of over 100 ug/day not uncommon[24,29]. Studies have also found the
majority of such exposure to come from vapor rather than particles, with
relatively high absorption rates in the body[25].
III. Effects of Mercury
Exposure on Fertility and Fetal Development
Many studies have
documented health effects occurring to the neurological, immune, hormonal, and
reproductive systems due to the high levels of mercury accumulating from
chronic occupational exposure. But many
recent studies have found reproductive effects including infertility (153,154)
and developmental effects in the fetus and infants at much lower levels than
those having significant effects on adults.
As compared to adults, the fetus and newborns have been found to be much
more susceptible to the effects of low levels of mercury exposure due to low
body weight with higher food consumption rate per kilogram of body weight,
higher gastrointestinal absorption rate, less effective renal excretion, and a
less effective blood-brain barrier[33].
Mercury has been found to
be a significant cause of seizures and epilepsy(147).
The effects of chronic, low-dose fetal and lactational
organic (MeHgCl) and inorganic (HgCl2) mercury
intoxication on epilepsy/seizures were investigated and compared in rats and
were found to have significant correlations between seizure susceptibility and
cortical mercury level(147a) Inorganic mercury
exposure facilitated the duration of seizure discharges in younger animals and
appeared to be more permanent than methyl mercury exposure. Another researcher had similar findings for infants(147b)
The most common source of maternal exposure to mercury vapor, as
previously shown, is amalgam fillings, while the most common sources of methyl
mercury in people are amalgam(31) and fish. Both have been demonstrated to cause rapid
transmittal through the placenta to the fetus [14,15,34-51/52-54]. The fetal mercury content after maternal
inhalation of mercury vapor was found to be over 20 times that for maternal
exposure to an equivalent dose of inorganic mercury[48-50], and levels of
mercury in the brain, heart, and major organs have been found to be higher
after equal exposure levels to mercury vapor than for the other mercury forms
[8,55]. Some developmental and
behavioral effects from mercury vapor have been found at levels considerably
below that required for similar effects by methyl mercury [10,38,49,56-58]. The studies reviewed found that mercury vapor
and organic mercury have independent and synergistic toxic and developmental
effects along with those of other toxic metals such as nickel, palladium, gold,
and cadmium, and that additionally conversions occur in the body between the
various forms of mercury[16,59]. Extensive immune system tests for populations
of patients with chronic autoimmune diseases such as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
or chronic neurological conditions have also demonstrated that a much higher
percentage of the patients have autoimmune reactions to inorganic mercury than
to organic mercury, and that immune reactivities and
symptoms improve in the majority of cases when amalgam fillings are
replaced[16,59]
Based on animal studies using
rats, sheep, and monkeys as well as human studies, mercury from amalgam in the
blood of pregnant women crosses the placenta and appears in amniotic fluid and
fetal blood, liver, and pituitary gland within 2 days of placement [10,14,15,
34-36,43-47,60,/54]. Studies have found a significant
correlation between number of amalgam fillings of the mother and the level of
mercury in the fetus, infants, and young children[10,14,15,34-40], and also
with the level in mother's milk [10,38-42].
Breast milk has been found to increase the bioavailability of inorganic
mercury, which was found to be excreted to milk from blood at a higher level
than organic mercury(41,44,61). The main mechanism of
transfer was found to be binding to albumin(45). For non-occupationally exposed populations
and populations without high fish consumption, these studies found dental
amalgams appear to be the main source of mercury in breast milk and the fetus,
but significant levels of methyl mercury are also often found in breast milk
[43,44,46,54,61].
U.S. ATSDR staff[62] indicate that under normal
circumstances mercury in mother’s milk should be
under 1.7 ug/L, and 3.5 ug/L
appears to be an adequate screening level for health risk. They indicate that
there is evidence that contaminated breast milk is a source of potential risk
to infants. An Italian study indicates
that a commonly used mercury tolerance level for human milk is 4 ppb(43).
Mercury is often stored in
breast milk and the fetus at much higher levels than that in the mother [10,36,38-46,60,61/54].
Milk from mothers with 7 or more fillings was found to have levels of
mercury approximately 10 times that of amalgam free mothers. The milk sampled
ranged from 0.2 to 57 ug/L. In a population of German women, the
concentration of mercury in early breast milk ranged from 0.2 to 20.3 ug/L. After 2 months lactation the level had
declined and was 0.1 to 11.7 ug/L[64]. A Japanese study found that the average
mercury level in samples tested increased 60% between 1980 and 1990[47b]. The study found that prenatal Hg exposure
is correlated with lower scores in neurodevelopmental
screening, but more so in the linguistic pathway(47b). The level of mercury in umbilical cord
blood, meconium, and placenta is usually higher than
that in mother's blood[43- 47].
Meconium(first stool) level
appears to be the most reliable indicator of fetal mercury exposure and often
has significant levels when there are low levels in mother’s blood and cord blood(46c). The level of maternal blood or hair
mercury is significantly correlated with mercury level in meconium
and in nursing infants , so maternal tests can be
easily used as a screen for developmental dangers[43-47,127]. But fetal levels
can be significant when there are low levels in maternal blood(46c).
The highest levels of mercury are usually found in the pituitary gland
of the fetus which affects development of the endocrine, immune, and
reproductive systems. Mercury has been
well documented to be an endocrine system disrupting substance in animals and
people, preferentially accumulating in and disrupting function of the pituitary
gland[10,12,39,65], hypothalamus, and thyroid gland[12,65-67]; along with
disrupting or blocking enzyme production processes[57,68-73], glucose
transfer[57], and many hormonal functions[74-79] at very low levels of
exposure. The pituitary gland controls many of the
body's endocrine system functions and secretes hormones that control most
bodily processes, including the immune system and reproductive
systems[79]. The hypothalamus regulates
body temperature and many metabolic processes.
Mercury has also been documented to be a reproductive and
developmental toxin in humans. Some of mercury’s documented hormonal effects at very low
levels of exposure include effects on
the reproductive system resulting in lowered sperm counts, defective sperm
cells, and lowered testosterone levels in males; along with menstrual
disturbances, infertility, spontaneous
abortions in women, and birth defects.
Studies found that very low levels of exposure to mercury cause genetic/
DNA damage[34,81-88] and inhibits DNA
& RNA synthesis[81,85/86];
damages sperm, lowers sperm counts and reduces motility
[34,81,88-92,5,6/88,93,95]; causes menstrual disturbances [96,97]; reduces
blood’s ability to transport oxygen to fetus, and
transport of essential amino acids and nutrients including magnesium, zinc and Vit B12 [40,57,71,72,98,99]; depresses enzyme function and isocitric dehydrogenase (ICD) in
fetus[92-95,99]; causes reduced iodine uptake, inhibited ATP activity, &
hypothyroidism[66]; causes
infertility[74-78,89-93,95,100-104,146,/88,106], and causes spontaneous
abortions and birth defects[36,40,51,66,75,78,79,100,101,104,107-113/106,113,114]. Pregnant women who suffer from hypothyroidism
(under active thyroid) have a four-times greater risk for miscarriage during
the second trimester than those who don’t, and women with
untreated thyroid deficiency were four-times more likely to have a child with a
developmental disabilities and lower I.Q.(66)
Reviews of recent studies have
found that the incidence of abnormalities of genitourinary abnormalities in
human males has increased during the past 50 years, including cryptorchidism and hypospadia[79,81,115]. The
incidence of testicular cancer was found to have increased 3 to 4 fold since
the 1940s. The reviews also found that
studies indicate that sperm quality and quantity have decreased significantly
during this period, with
an average decrease in sperm density of approximately 40 % since
1940 along with increased sperm abnormalities. Mercury and other toxic metals
are among the toxics that have been found in animal studies to have such effects [5-7,40,79,88,95].
A large cohort study of occupationally exposed women found an
increased risk of spontaneous abortion and other pregnancy complications[101].
Women with hormonal problems seeking help at a gynecological clinic in Germany
were found to have higher body burdens of
heavy metals, including mercury[74,75,78], and women with idiopathic
menstrual problems had higher levels of mercury[75,77,96,100]. Women with
hormonal related alopecia(hair loss) also had higher
mercury levels than controls[78,116,117] and the condition was alleviated by
amalgam removal. Most women with very
high levels of mercury were infertile, and after clearance of metals many were
fertile again[74-78].
The human brain forms and develops over a long period of time compared
to other organs, with neuron proliferation and migration continuing in the
postnatal period. The blood-brain
barrier is not fully developed until the middle of the first year of life. Similarly there is postnatal activity in the
development of receptors and transmitter systems as well as in the production
of myelin. Many of the toxic substances
such as mercury are known to damage the developing brain by interfering with
one of these developmental processes, interfering with structural development
depending on what is developing at the time of exposure[118-126]. Mercury and other toxic substances are known
to accumulate in endocrine system organs such as the pituitary gland, thyroid,
and hypothallamous and to alter hormone levels and
endocrine system development during crucial periods of development(10,12,33,41,47-49,79,132). Such effects are usually permanent and affect
the individual throughout their life. Some of the relatively subtle effects
that have been found to occur such as small decreases in IQ, attention span,
and connections to delinquency and
violence, if they occur in relatively large numbers over a lifetime can
have potentially serious consequences for individuals as well as for
society[118,119]. Infant head
circumference was found to be negatively correlated to infant meconium mercury levels(46c).
Animal studies of developmental effects of mercury on the brain have
found significant effects at extremely low exposure levels, levels commonly
seen in those with amalgam fillings or in dental staff working with
amalgam. One study[120]
found mercury vapor affected NGF concentration, RNA, and choline
acetyltransferese in rat’s forebrain at
between 4 and 11 parts per billion(ppb)
tissue concentration. Another study[123] found general toxicity effects at 1 micromole(uM) levels in immature cell cultures, increased immunoreactivity for glial fibrillary protein at 1 nanamole
(0.2 ppb) concentration, and microglial response at
even lower levels. Other animal studies
on rodents and monkeys have found brain cellular migration disturbances,
behavioral changes, along with reduced learning and adaption
capacity after low levels of mercury vapor or methylmercury
exposure [49-53,58,128-130/92,124-126]. The exposure levels in some of these studies
are seen in the fetus and newborn babies of mother’s with amalgam fillings or
who had work involving amalgam during pregnancy[14,15].
Epidemiological studies have found that human embryos are also highly
susceptible to brain damage from prenatal exposure to mercury[120,121,124-126,148,149]. Prenatal/early postnatal exposure to mercury
affects level of nerve growth factor(NGF) in the brain
and causes imbalances in development of the brain [40,120-123,130, /94,124-126].
Exposure of developing neuroblastoma cells to sub-cytotoxic
doses of mercuric oxide resulted in lower levels of neurofilament
proteins than unexposed cells[126]. Mercury vapor exposure causes impaired cell
proliferation in the brain and organs, resulting in reduced volume for
cerebellum and organs and subtle deficiencies[40,120-23]. Neurotoxicity
as a result of mercury exposure has also been found to be due to the inducing
of reactive oxygen species such as superoxide ion,
hydrogen peroxide, and hydroxyl radical causing enhanced lipid peroxidation, DNA damage, and altered calcium and sulfhydryl homeostasis[120,121,131].
Recent studies found that prenatal mercury
exposures from mother’s amalgams and other sources along with susceptibility
factors such as ability to excrete mercury appear to be major factors in those
with chronic neurological conditions like autism(148,149). Infants whose mothers received prenatal Rho D immunoglobulin injections containing mercury
thimerosal for RH factor or whose mother’s had high levels of amalgam fillings
had a much higher incidence of autism.
While the hair test levels of mercury of infants without chronic health
conditions like autism were positively correlated with the number of the
mother’s amalgam fillings, vaccination thimerosal exposure, and mercury from
fish, the hair test levels of those with chronic neurological conditions such
as autism were much lower than the levels of controls and those with the most
severe effects had the lowest hair test levels, even though they had high body
mercury levels. This is consistent with
past experience of those treating children with autism and other chronic
neurological conditions.
Several studies found that mercury along with other toxic metals cause
learning disabilities and impairment, and reduction in IQ[40,58,129,132-139].
Mercury has an effect on the
fetal nervous system at levels far below that considered toxic in adults, and
background levels of mercury in mothers correlate significantly with incidence
of birth defects and still births [36,40,100-102]. Prenatal exposure to 7 heavy metals was measured
in a population of pregnant women at approximately 17 weeks gestation[134]. Follow-up tests on the infants at 3 years of
age found that the combined prenatal toxic exposure score was negatively
related to performance on the McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities and positively related to the number of childhood
illnesses reported. Exposure to mercury
and 4 other heavy metals measured by hair tests in a study of school children
accounted for 23% of the variation in test scores for reading, spelling and
visual motor skills[135]. A Canadian
study found that blood levels of a similar group of metals were able to predict
with a 98% accuracy which children were learning disabled[136].
Another group of students were scored by their classroom teacher on the Walker Problem Behavior
Identification Checklist(WPBIC). A
combined hair level score for mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium and aluminum was
found to be significantly related to increased scores on the WPBIC subscales
measuring acting-out, disturbed peer relations, immaturity, and the total
score[133]. Similar tests in the California
juvenile justice system have found significant relations to classroom
achievement, juvenile delinquent temperaments, and criminality.
The saliva and feces of children with amalgams have approximately 10
times the level of mercury as children without[140,141],
and much higher levels in saliva after chewing. A group of German children with
amalgam fillings had urine mercury level 4 times that of a control group
without amalgams[142], and in a Norwegian group with
average age 12 there was a significant
correlation between urine mercury level and number of amalgam
fillings(143). Since mercury vapor is known
to rapidly cross cellular membranes and to bioaccumulate
over time with chronic exposure, these relationships get stronger with age,
with the most serious health effects occurring more commonly in middle‑aged
individuals.
Studies have
found much higher levels of mercury and copper in infants whose
mother’s were treated with amalgam during
pregnancy[37], as well as children with congenital hearing
deficiencies[63]. Most researchers in
this field advise that fertile women should not be exposed to vapor levels
above government health guidelines or have amalgams placed or removed during
pregnancy [10-12,15,16,24,27,39,40,65,74,103,144,145]; the U.S. ATSDR mercury
health MRL is 0.2 ug/M3 [32].
Many governments of developed countries have bans or guidelines
restricting use of amalgam by women of child‑bearing age. These include
Canada, Sweden, Germany, Norway, Austria, Great Britain, France, Australia, New
Zealand, and Japan.
References
1. ATSDR/EPA
Priority List for 1999: Top 20 Hazardous Substances, Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/99list.html; & U.S. CDC, National Center for Environmental Health , National Report on
Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, 2001 www.cdc.gov/nceh/dls/report/Highlights.htm
2. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Public Health Service, Toxicological Profile for Mercury, March
1999.
3. Electric
Power Research Institute. Mercury in the Environment.
Electric EPRI Journal 1990; April, p5.
4. Florida
Department of Health, Bureau of Environmental Toxicology, Health Advisories for Mercury in
Florida Fish 1997; 10-15; & United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Water, November 2000, The National Listing of Fish and
Wildlife Advisories: Summary of 1999
Data, EPA‑823‑F‑00‑20,
http://www.epa.gov/ost/fish/advisories/general.html ; & U.S. EPA, Office of
Water, Mercury Update: Impact on Fish Advisories-Fact Sheet,
http://www.epa.gov/ost/fish/mercury.html
5. Facemire CF, Gross
TS, Guillette, LJ.
Reproductive impairment in the Florida panther.
Health Perspect 1995; 103 (Supp4):79‑86;
6. Florida Panther Interagency Committee, Status
Report:Mercury Contamination
in Florida Panthers, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Dec
1989.
7. Maretta M, Marettova E,Skrobanek P, Ledec
M. Effect of mercury
on the epithelium of the fowl testis. Vet Hung 1995; 43(1):153‑6;
& Rao MV, Sharma PS. Protective effect of
vitamin E against mercuric chloride reproductive toxicity in male mice. Reprod Toxicol. 2001
Nov;15(6):705-12; & Monsees TK, Franz M, Gebhardt S, Winterstein U, Schill WB, Hayatpour J. Sertoli cells as a
target for reproductive hazards. Andrologia.
2000 Sep;32(4-5):239-46; & Orisakwe
OE, Afonne OJ, Low-dose mercury induces testicular damage
in mice that is protected against by zinc.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod
Biol. 2001 Mar;95(1):92-6.
8. Magos L, Clarkson TW, Hudson AR. The effects of dose of elemental mercury and
first pass circulation time on organ distribution of inorganic mercury in
rats. Biochim Biophys Acta 1989; 991(1):85-9.
9. Nixon, DE, Mussmann GV, Moyer TP.
Inorganic, organic, and total mercury in blood and
urine. J Anal Toxicol,
1996; 10(1): 17-22.
10. Vimy MJ,TakahashiY,
Lorscheider FL.
Maternal ‑Fetal Distribution of Mercury Released From Dental Amalgam Fillings. Amer J Physiol 1990; 8:R939‑945.
11. Pleva J. Mercury‑ A Public
Health Hazard. Reviews on Environmental Health 1994; 10:1‑27.
12. Weiner JA, Nylander M. The relationship between mercury concentration in human organs and
predictor variables. Sci Total Environ 1993; 138(1-3):101-15.
13. Kingman A, Albertini T, Brown L, National Institute of Dental
Research, Mercury concentrations in urine
and blood associated with amalgam exposure in the U.S. military population.
Dent Res 1998; 77(3):461-71.
14. Lutz E, Lind B,
Herin P, Krakau I, Bui TH, Vahter M. Concentrations of mercury, cadmium,
and lead in brain and kidney of second trimester fetuses and Infants. Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and
Biology 1996;10:61‑67.
15. Drasch G, Schupp I, Hofl H, Reinke R, Roider G. Mercury Burden of Human Fetal and Infant
Tissues, Eur J Pediatrics 1994; 153:607‑610;
& Drasch G, The Influence of Amalgam fillings of
mothers on the mercury levels in fetal and baby organs, in International
Symposium: “Status Quo
and
Perspectives of Amalgams and other dental
materials” European
Academy, Ostenhausen, Germany, April 29, 1994.
16. Stejskal VDM, Danersund A, Lindvall A, Hudecek R, Nordman V, Yaqob A et al,
Metal-specific memory lymphoctes: biomarkers
of sensitivity in man. Neuroendocrinology Letters, 1999.
17. Nogi N, Electric current around dental metals as a factor
producing allergic metal ions in the oral cavity. Nippon Hifuka
Gakkai Zasshi 1989;
99(12):1243-54.
18. Certosimo AJ, O’Conner RP, National Naval Dental Center, Oral
Electricity. Gen Dent 1996;
44(4):324-6.
19. Ogletree RH, Marek M. School of Materials Science, Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta. Effect of mercury on corrosion of eta’ Cu-Sn phase in dental
amalgams, Dent Mater 1995; 11(5):332-6.
20. Willershausen-Zonnchen B, Zimmermann M, Defregger
A, Schramel P, Hamm G. Mercury in the mouth mucosa of
patients with amalgam fillings. Dtsch Med Wochenschr, 1992, 117:46, 1743‑7.
21.Till T, Mercury release from amalgam fillings and oral dysbacteriosis as a cause of periodontal degeneration.
Zahnarztl Welt/Reform(ZWR)
1978; 87:1130‑1134.
22. Arvidson K. Corrosion studies of dental gold alloy in
contact with amalgam. Swed Dent J 1984; 68: 135‑139.
23. Freden H, Hellden L, Milleding P. Mercury in gingival tissues adjacent to amalgam fillings. Odontal Revy 1974; 25(2): 207‑210.
24. Kraub P, Deyhle M, Universitat Tubingen- Institut fur Organische Chemie. Field Study on the
Mercury Content of Saliva, 1997. (20,000 patients tested) ) www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/AMALGAM/EN/SCIENCE/tubingen.html
25. Engqvist A, Colmsjo A, Skare I. Speciation of mercury excreted in feces from
individuals with amalgam fillings. Arch Environ Health 1998; 53(3):205-13;
& Dept. of Toxicology &
Chemistry, Stockholm Univ., National Institute for Working Life, 1998 http:// www.niwl.se/ah/1998-02.html)
26. World Health Organization(WHO),1991,
Environmental Health criteria 118,
Inorganic Mercury, WHO, Geneva;
27. Richardson GM, Environmental
Health Directorate, Health Canada, Assessment of Mercury Exposure and Risks
from Dental Amalgam, 1995, Final Report.
28. Skare I, Engqvist A. Swedish
National Board of Occupational Safety and Health, Human Exposure to Hg and Ag
Released from Dental Amalgam Restorations.
Archives of Environmental Health 1994; 49(5):384‑394.
29. Bjorkman L, Sandborgh-Englund, Ekstrand J. Mercury in Saliva and Feces after Removal of Amalgam Fillings. Toxicol And Applied Pharmacol 1997;
144:156-162; &
Doctor’s Data Lab www.doctorsdata.com/repository.asp?id=43
30. Vimy MJ, Lorscheider FL. Intra oral Mercury released from dental amalgams and
estimation of daily dose. J Dent Res 1985;64(8):1069‑1075: & Jokstad A. Dental amalgam and mercury.
Pharmacol Toxicol
1992; 70(4): 308‑13.
31. Leistevuo J et al, Dental amalgam fillings and amount of
organic mercury in human saliva. Caries Res 2001 May‑Jun;35(3):163‑6;&
www.flcv.com/damspr1.html
32. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Apr 19,1999 Media
Advisory, New Minimum Risk Levels for
toxic substances, MRL: elemental mercury vapor/ inhalation/ chronic & MRL: methyl mercury/oral/acute; http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls.html
33. Kostial K, Blanusa M, Malikovic T. Age and
sex influence the metablolism and toxicity of
metals. In: Trace Elements in Man and
Animals (Monograph) , 1991, Inst Med Res Occup Health, University of Zagreb, Yugoslavia ,
p11/1-11/5.
34. Boyd ND, Benediktsson H, Vimy MJ, Hooper
DE, Lorscheider FL.
Mercury from dental silver tooth fillings impairs sheep kidney
function", Am.J. Physiol.
261 (Regulatory
Integrative Comp Physiol 1991: 30:
R1010‑R1014.
35.
Hahn LJ, Kloiber R, Leininger
RW, Vimy MJ, Lorscheider
FL.
Distribution of mercury released from amalgam fillings into monkey
tissues. FASEB J 1990; 4:5536
36. Kuntz WD, Pitkin RM, Bostrom AW, Hughes
MS. Maternal and chord blood mercury background
levels; a longitudinal surveillance. Am J Obstet and Gynecol 1982; 143(4): 440‑443.
37. Friese KH. Konnen Amalgamplomben angebornene Innenohrschaden verusachen?”,
Therapeutikon 1993; 7(11): 492-496; & Razagui IB, Haswell
SJ; . Mercury and selenium concentrations in maternal and neonatal scalp hair:
relationship to amalgam-based dental treatment received during pregnancy. Biol Trace Elem Res 2001 Jul;81(1):1-19
38.Vimy MJ, Hooper DE, King WW, Lorscheider
FL. Mercury from maternal silver tooth
fillings: a source of neonatal exposure", Biological Trace Element
Research, 56: 143‑52,1997.
39.Hanson M. Amalgam hazards in your teeth. J Orthomolecular Psychiatry 1983; 2(3):194‑201.
40. Ziff S and Ziff
M. Infertility and Birth Defects: is
Mercury from Dental Fillings a Hidden Cause? , Bio‑Probe, Inc.,
1987. ISBN: 0‑941011‑03‑8.
41. Oskarsson A, Schultz A, Skerfving
S, Hallen IP, Ohlin B, Lagerkvist BJ. Mercury in breast milk in relation to fish consumption and
amalgam. Arch Environ Health, 1996,51(3):234‑41.
42. Drasch G, Aigner S, Roider G, Staiger F, Lipowsky G. Mercury in human colostrum and early
breast milk. J Trace Elem Med Biol 1998; 12:23‑27;
43. Paccagnella B, Riolfatti M. Total mercury levels in human milk from
Italian mothers. Ann Ig 1989: 1(3-4):661-71; & Grandjean
P; Jurgensen PJ, Weihe P.,
Milk as a Source of Methylmercury Exposure in
Infants. Environ Health Perspect 1994 Jan;102(1):74‑7.
44. Yang J, Jiang Z,Wang
Y, Qureshi IA, Wu XD. Maternal‑fetal transfer of metallic mercury
via placenta and milk. Ann Clin Lab Sci 1997; 27(2):135‑141.
45. Soong YK, Tseng R,
Liu C, Lin PW. J of Formosa Medical
Assoc 1991; 90(1): 59‑65; &
Sundberg J, Ersson B, Lonnerdal B, Oskarsson A. Protein binding of mercury
in milk and plasma from mice and
man‑‑a comparison between methylmercury
and inorganic mercury. Toxicology 1999 Oct 1;137(3):169‑84.
46. Kuhnert PM, Kuhnert BR, Erhard
P. Comparison of mercury levels in
maternal blood, fetal blood, fetal cord blood, and placental tissues. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1981, 139(2):
209-13, & Vahter M, Akesson A, Lind B, Bjors U, Schutz A, Berglund M,
"Longitudinal study of methylmercury and inorganic mercury in blood and
urine of pregnant and lactating women, as well as in umbilical cord
blood", Environ Res 2000 Oct;84(2):186-94; & & G.
B. Ramirez, C. V. Cruz, C. Dalisay, The Tagum Study I:
Analysis and Clinical Correlates of Mercury in Maternal and Cord Blood, Breast
Milk, Meconium, and Infants' Hair , PEDIATRICS Vol. 106 No. 4 October 2000, pp.
774-781.
47. Suzuki T, Takemoto T, Shishido S, Kani K. Mercury in human amniotic fluid. Scand J Work Environ Health
1977; 3(1):32-5; & (b) Ramirez GB, Cruz MC, Pagulayan
O, Ostrea E, Dalisay
C. The Tagum
study I: analysis and clinical correlates of mercury in maternal and cord
blood, breast milk, meconium, and infants' hair. Pediatrics 2000 Oct;106(4):774‑81;
& (c) Ramirez GB, Pagulayan O, Akagi H, Francisco Rivera A, Lee LV, Berroya
A, Vince Cruz MC, Casintahan D. Tagum study II:
follow-up study at two years of age after prenatal exposure to mercury. Pediatrics. 2003 Mar;111(3):e289-95.
48. Clarkson TW, Magos
L, Greenwood MR. Transport of elemental
mercury into fetal
tissues, Biol Neonate 1972; 21:239-244; &
Greenwood MR, Clarkson TW, Magos L. Transfer of metallic mercury into the
fetus. Experientia 1972; 28:1455-1456.
49. Newland MC, Warfvinge
K, Berlin M. Behavioral consequences of
in utero exposure to mercury vapor. Toxicology & Applied Pharmacology 1996;
139: 374-386; & Berlin,
M; et al. Prenatal Exposure to Mercury Vapor: Effects on Brain Development.
The Toxicologist, 12(1):7(A245), 1992; & "Expert Consulted For Amalgam
Study Demands Amalgam Ban", Swedish Dental Materials Study ,"Dagens Nyheter", April 26 2003,
www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=597&a=134259&previousRenderType=6
www.tv4.se/nyheterna/lopsedel.html
50. Warfvinge K, Hua J, Logdberg B. Mercury distribution in
cortical areas and fiber systems of the neonatal and maternal cerebrum after
exposure to mercury vapor. Environmental Research 1994; 67:196-208.
51. Oster O, Prellwitz W. Die Pathobiochemie, Diagnose und Therapie
der Metall- und
Metalloidintoxikation-2. Die Quecksilberintoxikation.
Intensivmed 1985; 22(3):130-9.
52. Inouye M, Hoshino K, Murakami U. Behavioral and neuropathological
effects of prenatal
methyl mercury exposure in mice. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol 1985; 7;227‑232.
53. Annau Z, Cuomo
V, Johns
Hopkins Univ., School of Public Health, Mechanisms of neuro-toxicity and their relationships to behavioral
changes. Toxicology, 1988, 49(2): 219‑25.
54.
Mottet NK, Shaw CM, Burbacher,
TM, Health Risks from Increases in Methylmercury Exposure, Health Perspect
1985; 63: 133‑140; & (b) P.Grandjean et al,
“MeHg and neurotoxicity in
children”, Am J Epidemiol, 1999; & Sorensen N, et al; Prenatal mercury
exposure rasises blood pressure, Epidemiology 1999,
10:370-375; & [Environmental
epidemiology research leads to a decrease of the exposure limit for
mercury] [Article in Danish]
Weihe P, Debes F, White RF, Sorensen N, Budtz-Jorgensen E, Keiding N, Grandjean P. Ugeskr Laeger.
2003 Jan 6;165(2):107-11.
& (c)
National Research Council, Toxicological Effects of Methylmercury
(2000), pp. 304‑332: Risk Characterization and Public Health
Implications, Nat'l Academy Press 2000; &
Kate Mahaffey, U.S. EPA, The National
Forum on Contaminants in Fish, Jan 2004; and Environ Health Perspectives, 2003,
111: 1465-1470;
55. Buchet JP. Influence of DMPS on the mobilization of mercury
from tissues of rats pretreated with mercuric chloride, phenylmercury
acetate, or mercury vapor. Toxicology 1989; 54(3): 323-33.
56. Leonhardt R, Pekel M, Platt B, Haas HL, Busselberg
D. Voltage‑activated calcium
channel currents of rat DRG neurons are reduced by mercuric chloride and methylmercury. Neurotoxicology
1996 Spring;17(1):85‑92
57. Boadi Wyl, Urbach J, Brandes JM, Yannai S, In vitro
effect of mercury on enzyme activities and its accumulation in the
first-trimester human placenta. Environ Res 1992;
57(1):96-106.
58. Fredriksson A, Dencker L, Archer T, Danielsson
BR. Prenatal exposure to metallic
mercury vapour and methylmercury
produce interactive behavioral changes in adult rats. Neurotoxicol
Teratol 1996; 18(2): 129-34.
59. Tibbling L, Thomas
KA, Lenkei R, Stejskal V, Immunolocial
and brain MRI changes in patients with suspected metal intoxication. Int J Occup Med Toxicol 1995; 4(2):285-294.
60. Warfvinge K,
Berlin M, Logdberg B.
The effect on pregnancy outcome and fetal brain
development of prenatal exposure to mercury vapour.
Neurotoxicology 1994; 15(4).
61. Schumann K.
The toxicological estimation of heavy metal content(Hg,Cd,Pb) in food for infants and small children. Z Ernahrungswiss
1990; 29(1):54-73. (article in German with English
abstract)
62. Abadin HG, Hibbs BF, Pohl HR, U.S. Department of Health, Division of
Toxicology, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Breast-feeding exposure of
infants to cadmium, lead, and mercury: a public health viewpoint. Toxicol Ind Health 1997;
13(4):495-517.
63. Friese KH. Amalgamvergiftung_moglicher Zusammenhang mit
angeborener Schwerhorgkeit. Der Naturazt 1995; 135(8):13-15.
64. Drexler H,
Schaller KH. The
mercury concentration in breast milk resulting from amalgam fillings and
dietary habits. Environ Res 1998; 77(2): 124-9.
65. Nylander M, Friberg L, Eggleston D, Bjorkman
L. Mercury
accumulation in tissues from dental staff and controls in relation to exposure. Swedish Dental Journal
1989. 13:235-243.
66. Kawada J, Nishida M, Yoshimura Y, Mitani K. Effects of inorganic and methyl mercury on thyroidal function. J Pharmacobiodyn
1980; 3(3):149‑59; & Allan W.(MD),
Journal of Medical Screening, 2000; & Assoc. for Birth Defect Children,Birth Defect News, March 2001.
67. Lindqvist B. Effects of removing amalgam fillings from patients with diseases
affecting the immune system. Med Sci Res 1996; 24(5): 355-356.
68. Markovich D, James K.M.
Heavy metals (Hg,Cd)
inhibit the activity of the liver and kidney sulfate transporter Sat‑1. Toxicol Appl
Pharmacol 1999; 154(2):181‑7.
69. Berndt WO, Baggett JM, Blacker A, Houser
M. Renal glutathione and mercury uptake. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1985; 5(5):832‑9.
70. Hussain S, Rodgers
DA, Duhart HM, Ali SF. Mercuric chloride‑induced
reactive oxygen species and its effect on antioxidant enzymes in different
regions of rat brain. Environ Sci Health B 1997 May;32(3):395‑409.
71. Boadi WY, Urbach J, Branes JM, Yannai S. In vitro exposure to mercury and cadmium
alters term human placental membrane fluidity, Pharmacol
1992; 116(1): 17-23.
72. Urbach J, Boadi W, Brandes JM, Kerner H, Yannai S. Effect of inorganic mercury
on in vitro placental nutrient transfer
and oxygen consumption. Reprod Toxicol 1992;6(1):69- 75.
73. Karp WB, Robertson AF, Correlation of human placental enzymatic activity
with trace metal concentration in placenta.
Environ Res 1977; 13:470‑477.
74. Gerhard I, Moonga
B, Waldbrenner A, Runnebaum
B, Tubingen Univ. Gynecological Clinic,
Heidelberg. Heavy
Metals and Fertility. J of
Toxicology and Environmental
Health, 1998; Part A, 54(8):593‑611.
75. Gerhard I, Waibel
S, Daniel V, Runnebaum B. Impact of heavy metals on hormonal and immunological
factors in women with repeated miscarriages. Hum Reprod
Update 1998; 4(3):301‑9.
76. Gerhard I. Amalgam aus
gynakologischer Sicht. Der Frauenarzt 1995; 36(6): 627-28.
77. Gerhard I, Runnebaum
B, Schdstoffe und Fertillitatsstorungen. Schwermetalle und Mineralstoffe, Geburtshilfe Frauenheikd, 1992, 52(7):383-396; & Gerhard I, Waldbrenner P,
Thuro H, Runnebaum B, [Diagnosis of heavy metal loading by the oral DMPS and
chewing gum tests]. Klinisches Labor 38:404-411 (1992)
78. Gerhard I, Runnebaum.
Environmental pollutants and fertility disorders. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1992;
52(7), 383-96; &
Roller E et al, J Fert Reprod, 1995, 3, 31-33: &
Gerhard I. Ganzheitiche Diagnostik un Therapie bie
Infertilitat.
Erfahrungsheilkunde,
1993, 42(3): 100-106; & Gerhard I, Runnebaum
B, The limits of hormone substitution in
pollutant exposure and fertility disorders.
Zentralbl Gynakol 1992; 114, 593‑602.
79. T.Colborn(Ed.),Chemically Induced Alterations in Functional
Development, Princeton Scientific Press,1992.
80. Ogura
H, Takeuchi T,Morimoto
K. A comparison of chromosome
aberrations and micronucleus techniques for the assessment of the genotoxicity of mercury compounds in human blood
lymphocytes. Mutat Res 1996
Jun; 340(2‑3):175‑82.
81. Sheiner EK, Sheiner E, Hammel RD, Potashnik G, Carel R. Effect of
occupational exposures on male fertility: literature review. Ind
Health.
2003 Apr;41(2):55-62; & Leung TY, Choy CM, Yim SF, Lam CW, Haines CJ.
Whole blood mercury concentrations in sub-fertile men
in Hong Kong. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol.
2001 Feb;41(1):75-7; & Khera KS, Teratogenic and genetic effects of mercury toxicity.
In:The Biochemistry of Mercury in the Environment, Nriagu, J.O.(Ed) Amsterdam , Elsevier, 503‑18,1979; & Prati M, Gornati R, Boracchi P, Biganzoli E, Fortaner S, Pietra R, Sabbioni E, Bernardini G. A comparative study of the
toxicity of mercury dichloride and methylmercury,
assayed by the Frog Embryo Teratogenesis Assay--Xenopus (FETAX). Altern Lab Anim. 2002 Jan-Feb;30(1):23-32. &
John Aitken, Head- Dept. Of
Biological Sciences, University of Newcastle in Australia. “Sperm on the wane”, paper for Conference on Male-Mediated
Developmental Toxicity. Montreal, June 22, 2001, The Gazette, June
22, 2001;
82. Babich H. The
mediation of mutagenicity and clastogenicity
of heavy metals by physiochemical factors.
Environ Res 1985: 37;253‑286.
83. Bucio L, Garcia C,
Souza V, Hernandez E, Gonzalez C, Betancourt M, Gutierrez‑Ruiz MC.
Uptake, cellular distribution and DNA damage produced by mercuric chloride in a
human fetal hepatic cell line. Mutat Res 1999; Jan 25;423(1‑2):65‑72.
84. Pamphlett R,
Slater M, Thomas S. Oxidative
damage to nucleic acids in motor neurons containing Hg. J Neurol Sci 1998; 159(2):121‑6. (rats
& primates)
85. O’Halloran TV. Transition metals in
control of gene expression.
Science 1993; 261(5122):715-25.
86. Verschaeve L,
Kirsch‑Volders M, Susanne C, Groetenbriel C, Haustermans R, Lecomte A, Roossels D. Genetic damage induced by occupational low
level mercury exposure. Envir Res, 12:306‑10,1976.
87. Ariza ME, Williams
MV. Mercury mutagenesis. Biochem Mol Toxicol 1999; 13(2):107‑12.
88.
Lee IP, Dixon RL. Effects of mercury on spermatogenesis studied
by velocity sedimentation cell separation., J Pharmacol Exp Thera 1975,
194(1);171‑ 181; & Ben-Ozer EY, Rosenspire AJ, et al, Mercuric chloride damages cellular DNA by a
non-apoptotic mechanism. Mutat Res. 2000 Oct
10;470(1):19-27; & Ogura H, Takeuchi T, Morimoto
K, “A comparison of chromosome aberrations and
micronucleus techniques for the assessment of the genotoxicity
of mercury compounds in human blood lymphocytes. Mutat
Res 1996 Jun;340(2‑3):175‑82
89. Eggert‑Kruse
W, Effect of
heavy metals on in vitro interaction between human sperm and cervical mucus. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1992; 117(37):
1383‑9(German).
90. Ernst E, Lauritsen
JG. Effect of mercury
on human sperm motility. Toxicol 1991;
68(6):440‑4.
91. Dally A, Hendry B, Declining sperm count:
evidence that Young's syndrome is associated with mercury, BMJ, 1996,
313(7048): 44; & de Kretser DM, Huidobro C, Southwick GJ,
Temple-Smith PD (1998) The role of the epididymis in human infertility. J
Reprod Fertil Suppl 53: 271–275
92. Ng
TB, Liu WK. Toxic effect of heavy metals
on cells isolated from the rat adrenal and
testis. In Vitro Cell
Dev Biol 1990 Jan;26(1):24‑8.
93. Ivanitskaia NF,
Evaluation of combined effect of mercury and ionizing radition
on reproductive function of animals. Gig Sanit 1991;
12: 48‑51.
94. Mohamed MK, Mottet
NK. "Lazer Light Scatering
Study of the Toxic Effects of Methylmercury on sperm
motility". J Androl.,7(1):11‑15.,1986.
95. Mohamed MK, Burbacher
TM, Mottet NK, Effects of methyl mercury on testicular functions in monkeys. Toxicol 1987; 60(1):29‑36;
96.Gerhard I, “Reproductive risks of heavy metals in women”, in: Reproductive Toxicology,
Richardson
M(Ed.), VCH Weinheim,
1993,167-83.
97. Lorscheider FL, Vimy MJ, Summers AO.
Mercury exposure from silver tooth fillings: emerging evidence questions
a paradigm. FASEB J 1995; 9(7):504‑508;
& Yang JM,
Chen QY, Jiang XZ.
Effects
of metallic mercury on the perimenstrual symptoms and
menstrual outcomes of exposed workers. Am J Ind
Med. 2002 Nov;42(5):403-9.
98. Iioka H, Moriyama
I, Oku M, Hino K, Itani Y, Okamura y, Ichijo M. The effect of inorganic
mercury on placental amino acid transport. Nippon sanka Fujinka Gakkai
Zasshi 1987; 39(2):
202-6.
99. Danielsson BR, Dencker L, Khayat A, Orsen I, Ferotoxicity of
inorganic mercury in the mouse: distribution and effects on nutrient uptake by
placenta and fetus. Biol Res
Preg Perinatal 1984; 5(3):102-9.
100.
Schulte-Uebbing C. Umweltbedingte Frauenkranheiten. Sonntag-Verlag, Stuttgart,1996; & Umweltmedizin
in der Frauenheilkunde. Arztezeitschr Naturheilkunde 35(2):9-17.
101. Sikorsky R, Women in Dental Surgeries:Reproductive Hazards. Int Arch Occup Environ Health
1987; 59:551-557;
102. Brodsky JB.
Occupational exposure to mercury in dentistry and
pregnancy outcome. JADA 1985; 111(11):779‑780.
103. Daunderer M, Kostler W. Die Amalgamvergiftung und ihre medizinische Folgen”, Forum
Prakt Allgem Arzt 1991; 30(2): 44-66;
& M.Daunderer, “Jugendicher starb an Amalgam”, Forum Prakt Allgen Arzt 1990; 29(11):
294.
104. Neuburger N,Arend V, Guzek
B. Kompendium Umweltmedizin. MediVerlagsgesellschaft,
Hamburg, 1996.
105. Mikhailova LM. Influence of occupational factors on disease
of reproductive organs. Pediatriya Akusherstvoi Ginekologiya 1971;
33(6):56‑58; & Elghany NA, Stopford W, Bunn WB,
Fleming LE. Occupational exposure to
inorganic mercury vapour and reproductive outcomes. Occup Med (Lond). 1997 Aug;47(6):333-6.
106. Dickman MD, Leung
CD, Leong MK.
Hong Kong subfertility links to mercury in
human hair and fish. Sci Total Environ 1998; 214:165‑74;
& Choy CM,
Lam CW, Cheung LT, Briton-Jones CM, Cheung LP, Haines CJ. Infertility, blood mercury concentrations and
dietary seafood consumption: a case-control study. BJOG.
2002 Oct;109(10):1121-5.
107. Cordier S; Deplan F; Mandereau L; Hemon D. Paternal exposure to mercury and spontaneous abortions. Br J Ind Med 1991
Jun;48(6):375‑81
108. Savitz DA; Sonnenfeld NL; Olshan AF. Review of epidemiologic studies of paternal occupational exposure and spontaneous
abortion. Am J Ind
Med 1994, Mar;25(3):361‑83; & (b)Anttila A, Finnish
Inst. Of Occupational
Health, Effects of paternal occupation
exposure on spontaneous abortion. J of Occup & Environ Med 1995; 37(8):915‑21.
109. Occupational exposure in dentistry and
miscarriage. Lindbohm
ML, Ylostalo P, et al, Occup Environ Med. 2007
Feb;64(2):127-33. Epub 2006 Oct 19.
110. Wiksztrajtis M, Baranski B.
Epidemiological survey of Lithunia dental
office s. Med Pr 111 1973; 24:248; & Baranski
B. Effect of mercury
on the sexual cycle and prenatal and postnatal
development of progeny. Med Pr
1981; 32(4): 271-6.
111. Bjorklund G. Risk
evaluation of the occupational environment in dental care. Tidsski
Nor Laegeforen 1991; 111(8):
948-50.
112. Schoeny R, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Use of genetic toxicology data in U.S. EPA
risk assessment: the mercury study. Environ Health Perspect,
1996; 104, Supp
3: 663-73.
113. Lee CH Lin RH, Liu SH, Lin-Shiau SY. Genotoxicity of phenylHg acetate in humans as
compared to other mercury compounds. 392(3):269-76.
114.
Marsh DO, Clarkson TW, Cox C, Myers GJ, Amin-Zaki L, Al-Tikriti S. Fetal Methylmercury
Poisoning. Ann Neurol 1980; 7:348-355.
115. Giwercman A, Carlsen E, Keiding N, Skakkebaek N.E.
Evidence for increasing abnormaties of the
human testis: a review. Environ Health Perspect 1993; 101(Supp2): 65-71.
116. Klobusch J, Rabe T, Gerhard I, Runnebaum B.
Alopecia and environmental pollution.
Klinisches Labor 1992, 38:469‑ 476;
117. Klobusch, J, Gerhard I; Schwermetallbelastungen
bei Patientinnen mit Alopezie. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1993;
254(1-4):278-80.
118. Rodier P.M. Developing brain as a
target of toxicity. Environ
Health Perspect 1995; 103(Supp 6): 73-76
119. Rice, D.C., Issues in developmental neurotoxicology: interpretation and implications of the
data. Can J Public Health 1998;
89(Supp1): S31-40.
120. Soderstrom S, Fredriksson A, Dencker L, Ebendal T. The effect of mercury vapor on cholinergic neurons
in the fetal brain. Developmental Brain Research, 1995; 85(1): 96‑108.
121. Atchison WD. Effects of neurotoxicants on synaptic transmission. Neuroltoxicol Teratol
1998; 10(5):393-416.
122. Ronnback L, Hansson E. Chronic encephalopathies induced by low doses of mercury or lead.
Br J Ind Med 49:233‑240, 1992.
123. F. Monnet-Tschudi
et al, “Comparison
of the developmental effects of 2 mercury compounds
on glial cells and neurons in the rat telencephalon”, Brain Research, 1996, 741:52-59.
124. Larkfors L, Oskarsson A, Sundberg J, Ebendal T. Methylmercury induced alterations in the nerve growth
factor level in the developing brain. Res Dev Res 1991;62(2):287‑ 94; & Choi BH, Lapham LW, Amin-Zaki L, Saleem T. Abnormal neuronal migration
of human fetal brain. Journal of
Neurophalogy 1978; 37:719-733.
125. Rice
DC, Evidence of delayed neurotoxicity produced by methylmercury developmental exposure. Neurotoxicology
1996; 17(3‑4): 583‑96.
126. Abdulla EM, Calaminici M, Campbell IC.
Comparison of neurite outgrowth with neurofilament
protein levels in neuroblastoma cells following mercuric
oxide exposure. Clin
Exp Pharmocol Physiol 1995,
22(5): 362-3.
127. Cernichiari E,
Brewer R, Myers GJ, Marsh DO,
Berlin M, Clarkson TW; Monitoring methylmercury during pregnancy: maternal hair predicts fetal brain exposure. Neurotoxicology
1995 Winter;16(4):705‑10.
128. Danielsson BR, Fredricksson A, Dahlgren L, Gardlund
AT, Olsson L, Dencker L, Archer T. Behavioral effects of
prenatal metallic mercury inhalation exposure in rats. Neurotoxicol Teratol 1993; 15(6):
391-6.
129. Fredriksson
A. Behavioral effects
of neonatal metallic mercury exposure in rats. Toxicology, 1992,
74(2-3):151‑160.
130. C.K.Mittal et al,
"Interaction of heavy metals with the nitric oxide
synthase", Mol Cell Biochem,149‑150:263‑5, Aug 1995.
131. Stohs SJ, Bagchi D. Oxidative mechanisms in the
toxicity of metal ions. Free radic Biol Med 1995; 18(2):
321-36.
132. Needleman HL, Behaviorial
Toxicology. Environ Health Perspect 1995; 103(Supp6):
77-9.
133. Marlowe M, Cossairt
A, Moon C, Errera J, MacNeel
A, Peak R, Ray J, Schroeder C. Main and interactive effects
of metallic toxins on classroom behavior. Journal of
Abnormal Child
Psychology 1985; 13(2):185‑98.
134. Lewis M, Worobey
J, Ramsay DS, McCormack MK. Prenatal
exposure to heavy metals: effect on childhood cognitive skills and health
status. Pediatrics 1992;89(6 Pt 1): 1010-5.
135. Moon C, Marlowe M, Stellern
J, Errera J. Main and interaction effects of metallic pollutants on cognitive
functioning. Learn Disabil 1985 Apr;18(4):217-21.
136. Pihl RO, Rarkes M. Hair element content in Learning Disabled
Children. Science 1977; 198: 204‑6.
137. Gowdy JM, Demers
FX. Whole blood
mercury in mental hospital patients. Am J Psychiatry 1978; 135(1):115‑7.
138. Roeleveld N, Zielhuis GA, Gabreels F. Mental retardation and
parental occupation. Br J
Ind Med 1993; 50(10):
945‑954; & (b) Trasande L, Schechter
CB, Haynes KA, Landrigan PJ. Mental retardation and
prenatal methylmercury toxicity. Am J Ind Med. 2006
Mar;49(3):153-8
139. Smith PJ, Langolf
GD, Goldberg J. Effect of exposure to elemental mercury on short term
memory. Br J Ind
Med 1983; 40(4):413-9.
140. Engin‑Deniz
B. Die queckssilberkonzentration
im spichel zehnjariger kinder in korrelation
zur anzahl und Grobe iher amalgamfullungen” Zeitschrift fur Stomatologie,
1992, 89:471‑179.
141. Malmstrom C. Amalgam derived mercury in feces”, Journal of Trace Elements in Experimental
Medicine 1992; 5 (Abs 122).
142. Schulte A, Stoll R, Wittich
M, Pieper K, Stachniss V. Mercury Concentrations in
Children with and
without Amalgam Restorations. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed, 1994,104(11):1336‑40(German).
& J.Dent Res 73(4): 980 A‑334;
& Childhood
urine mercury excretion: dental
amalgam and fish consumption as exposure factors.
M. Levy et al, Arch Environ
Health. 1994 Sep-Oct; 49(5): 384-94
143. Olmsted ML, Holland RI, Wandel
N, Petterson AH.
Correlation between amalgam restorations and mercury in urine. J Dent Res 1987,
66(6): 1179‑1182
144. Drasch G, Roider G. Zahnamalgam und Schwangerschaft. Geburtshilfe
Frauenheikd 1995; 55(6): M63-M65
145. Kistner A. Quecksilbervergiftung
durch Amalgam: Diagnose und Therapie. ZWR, 1995;
146. Choy CM, Lam CW, et al, 2002, Infertility, blood
mercury concentrations, and dietary seafood consumption: a case control study,
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,
109: 1121-1125.
147. (a) Effects
of continuous low-dose exposure to organic and inorganic mercury
during
development on epileptogenicity in rats. Szasz A, Barna B, et al,
Neurotoxicology. 2002 Jul;23(2):197-206; & (b) D.Klinghardt(MD), “Migraines, Seizures, and Mercury Toxicity”, Future Medicine Publishing, 1997; &© Mechanisms by which mercury causes epilepsy and seizures, B. Windham(Ed), www.flcv.com/epilepsy.html
148. A.S. Holmes, M.F. Blaxill and B.E. Haley, Reduced Levels of Mercury in
First Baby Haircuts of Autistic Children; International Journal of
Toxicology, 2003; www.safeminds.org/ ; & Dr. A Holmes, Autism Treatment Center,Baton
Rouge, La, http://healing‑arts.org/children/holmes.htm
; & www.flcv.com/autismc.html
149.
Waly M, Olteanu H, Deth R C, et al; Activation of methionine
synthase by insulin-like growth factor-1 and
dopamine: a target for neurodevelopmental toxins and
thimerosal. Mol Psychiatry. 2004 Jan 27; & (b) Mercury and autism: accelerating evidence? Mutter J, Naumann J, Schneider R, Walach H, Haley B.
Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2005 Oct;26(5):439-46; & © Hornig M, Chian D, Lipkin WI., Neurotoxic effects of
postnatal thimerosal are mouse strain dependent. Mol
Psychiatry. 2004 Jun 8;
(150) National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council,
Committee on Developmental Toxicology, Scientific Frontiers in
Developmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment, June 1, 2000, 313 pages; & Evaluating Chemical and Other Agent Exposures for Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity
Subcommittee on Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity, Committee on Toxicology, Board on
Environmental Studies and Toxicology, National Research Council National
Academy Press, 262 pages, 6 x 9, 2001;
& National Environmental Trust
(NET), Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Learning Disabilities Association of America, "Polluting Our Future: Chemical
Pollution in the U.S. that Affects Child Development and Learning" Sept
2000; http://www.safekidsinfo.org ;
& & Dr. Fionta Stanley,
Department of Paediatrics, the University of Western
Australia “Before the bough breaks” National Library of
Australia , July 24, 2003 http://www.nla.gov.au/events/seminars/kmyer03.html
(151) Mechanisms
by which autism spectrum disorders(ASD) and childrens
developmental conditions have been caused by vaccines and other toxic prenatal
and neonatal exposures, Review; B.
Windham (Ed), over 150 peer-reviewed studies and Government agency
documentation cited, www.flcv.com/kidshg.html
(152) Neurological and behavioral effects of
mercury and toxic metals on children, Review; B. Windham (Ed.), over 150
peer-reviewed studies and Government agency documentation cited, www.flcv.com/tmlbn.html
(153) Cytotoxic, neurotoxic, immunotoxic, and
endocrine disrupting effects of mercury, Review; B. Windham (Ed), cites over
3000 peer-reviewed medical studies and Government agency documentation. www.flcv.com/amalg6.html
(154) Sensitization
to inorganic mercury could be a risk factor for infertility.
Podzimek S, Prochazkova J, Bultasova L, Bartova J, Ulcova-Gallova Z, Mrklas L, Stejskal VD., The Institute of Dental Research, 1st MF and
GUH, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. Neuro Endocrinol
Lett. 2005 Aug;26(4):277-82.
(155)
Synergistic Effects of Mercury with other toxic metals can multiply toxic
effects more than 10 fold, Review, B Windham (Ed), 2007, www.flcv.com/hgsynerg.html
(156) Laws of the
State of California, Proposition 65, Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement
Act of 1986.
Definitions
ATSDR- United States Department of Health,
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
MRL - Minimum Risk Level- the estimate of level
of daily exposure to a hazardous substance that is likely to be without appreciable
risk of non-cancer health effects over a specific period of exposure.
EPA- United States Environmental Protections
Agency
ug
micrograms
L
Liter
M Meter
************