INFERTILITY,
BIRTH DEFECTS,
AND FETAL DEVELOPMENTAL
EFFECTS
RELATED
TO MERCURY FROM AMALGAM DENTAL FILLINGS & Other Toxins
B.
Windham
(Ed.)
I.
Introduction
The health effects of
toxic metals are
synergistic
with other toxic exposures such
as
pesticides
, herbicides,& other
endocrine
disrupting substances
like organochlorine compounds
, POP
s,
PAHs
, PCBs, etc. There are also
synergistic effects with the various types of parasites, bacteria, viruses to
which people have common exposures and commonly become infected when the immune
system is weakened by toxic exposures. Studies have found considerable genetic
variability in
susceptibility
to toxic metals as well. The
health effects caused to children by
pesticides and herbicides
include
birth defects, ADHD, seizures, developmental conditions, etc. While there is
considerable commonality to the health effects commonly caused by the toxic
metals, and effects are cumulative and
synergistic
with other toxic exposures,
this paper will concentrate on the health effects of elemental
mercury from amalgam fillings and toxic metals.
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. Other estrogenic
chemicals such as dioxins, PCBs, organophosphate pesticides, other pesticides,
toxic metals, and some
organochlorinechemicals
,
and Phthalates are also known to cause neurological and other developmental
conditions in
children(
161,152)
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.
A study of environmental mercury levels in Texas school
districts
found a
61 percent increase in autism and a 43 percent increase in special education
cases for every 1,000 pounds of mercury released into
the environment(157a). A
utism prevalence diminished by 2 percent for every 10 miles of
distance from a mercury source.
Another similar
study found similar results and estimated economic costs due to disability or
lower IQ (157b). Fossil fuel-burning power plants were the largest
source of the widespread mercury pollution(157), but dental amalgam was
the largest source in most people with several dental amalgams(31) plus the
largest source of mercury in sewers and a significant source of environmental
mercury in water bodies, fish, and air emissions(158).
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/M
3
)[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/M
3
[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
lactationalorganic
(
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(
41,44,45,61). 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]. A recent
study found hundreds of toxic chemicals in umbilical cords of newborns
including mercury(160) and toxic chemicals are known to have
synergistic
effects
.
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. Low level lead exposure has been found to have
similar
effects(
159). 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
inIQ
[
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/M
3
[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 2019:
Top 20 Hazardous Substances
,
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services; & U.S. CDC, National Center for Environmental Health,
National Report on Human
Exposure to Environmental Chemicals
, 2019
2. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services,
Toxicological
Profile for Mercury
, March 2019.
3. Electric Power Research
Institute. Mercury in the Environment. Electric
EPRI Journal 1990; April, p5.
4. Florida Department of Health, Bureau of
Environmental Toxicology,
Mercury
Fish Advisory
, 2020, & FFWGC,
Health Advisories
for Mercury in Florida Fish
; 2021; & United
States Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, November 2020,
The National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories:
Summary
of 2020 Data
, EPA ; & U.S. EPA, Office of Water,
Mercury
Update
: Impact on Fish Advisories-Fact Sheet,
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
BiophysActa
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:R
939‑945.
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.
NeuroendocrinologyLetters
, 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.myflcv.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,
OstreaE
, 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
):e
289-95.
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; &
KheraKS
, 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),2020,
www.myflcv.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.myflcv.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
EndocrinolLett
.
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, 200
3
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.myflcv.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.myflcv.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.myflcv.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), 2017,
www.myflcv.com/hgsynerg.html
(156)
Laws of the State of California, Proposition 65, Safe Drinking Water and Toxic
Enforcement Act of 1986.
(157)
Environmental mercury release,
special education rates, and autism disorder: an ecological study of
Texas,
Health and
Place, R.F. Palmer et al, March 2005
http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/seed.pdf
&
Mercury pollution from power plants, NWF,
http://www.nwf.org/wildlife/pdfs/MercuryMythsFacts.pdf
& (b) Mental retardation and
prenatal methylmercury toxicity.,
Trasande
L,
Schechter CB, Haynes KA,
Landrigan
PJ.,
Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, Center for Children's Health
and the Environment, New York, New York. Am J Ind Med. 2006
Mar;49(3):153-8,
http://www.melisa.org/abstracts.php#1
(158) Dental amalgam is the largest source of mercury in sewers
and a significant source of mercury in water bodies, fish, and the
environment, EPA &
www.myflcv.com/damspr2f.html
(159) Reproductive toxicity of low-level lead exposure in
men. Telisman S, Colak B, Pizent A, Jurasović J, Cvitković P. Environ
Res. 2007 Oct;105(2):256-66. Epub2007 Jul 16.
(160) Study finds hundreds of toxic chemicals in umbilical
cords of newborns
http://www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2/
(161) Developmental Effects of estrogenic chemicals-Review, B.
Windham (Ed.),
www.myflcv.com/endocrin.html
; &
Prenatal
phthalate exposure is associated with childhood behavior and executive
functioning. Engel SM,
Miodovnik
A,
Canfield RL, Zhu C, Silva MJ, Calafat AM, Wolff MS. Environ Health
Perspect
.
2010 Apr;118(4):565-71; & endocrine system effects
of mercury,
www.myflcv.com/endohg.html
;
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
************