|
SAFER WORLD a private independent international internet information network www.safer-world.org/ amalgam |
|
contact: info@safer-world.org
|
PRESS RELEASE Dental amalgams and heavy metals: what risks for health and the environment< Colloquium organised by the Green Group in the European Parliament - 7 and 8 January 1999 - European Parliament - Luxembourg Brussels, 19 January 1999 Press release The international colloquium held on 7 and 8 January in the European Parliament in Luxembourg on the subject of dental amalgams and heavy metals was a definite success: more than 250 people participated in the event including high level Commission staff, representatives of national governments, dentists, general practitioners as well as of patient associations from numerous European countries. The European media, which was widely represented also, showed an active interest in the event. For a long time heavy metals - cadmium, mercury, lead - have been known to be particularly toxic. Their capacity to accumulate in food chains makes their dissemination in the environment fearsome. The mercury poisoning in Minamata in 1954 and Iraq in 1972 are tragically famous in this regard. For more than 150 years, dentistry has utilised silver amalgam as a material for filling teeth. This amalgam contains approximately 50% of metal mercury. Since several years, medical research has shown that this mercury is released in the oral cavity in the form of a vapour and is thus susceptible to being absorbed in the different human tissues. The colloquium in Luxembourg allowed a confrontation between scientists, practitioners, patients and those responsible for public health concerning the magnitude of the health problem which individuals with dental amalgams might face. If, actually the re-release of mercury in the body (analyses confirm this) is not contested, opinions diverge on the risks which this poses for the body. The tendency of the associations of doctor-dentists and of their representatives in the ad hoc expert groups, is to relativise the toxicological and immunological impact of low doses of mercury. However, numerous studies presented in Luxembourg confirm the concerns increasingly voiced:
In addition, emphasis was placed on the insufficient amount of data available on alternatives to amalgams. Other dental materials, metal or plastic, can lead to phenomenon and even auto-immune reactions of which the impose negative effects do not seem to be comparable to in their magnitude and frequency to those of amalgams. The organisers of the colloquium consider on the basis of the various presentations made in Luxembourg and the available scientific literature that political initiatives with a view to a revision of current practices are necessary as much on a national level as on a European level and that on the basis of the precautionary principle. Initiatives of this kind have already been taken, notably in Sweden and Germany. In 1998 the Swedish government decided to stop the reimbursement by the social security service of the use of amalgams as fillings with effect from 1999, a total ban is scheduled for 2001. In 1997, a consensus was reached in Germany for a case-by-case approach leading to an official contraindication of the use of amalgams in children of less than six years of age, pregnant or breast-feeding women and patients with kidney problems. The organisers of the colloquium pleaded for a programmed elimination of the use of dental amalgams given that the demonstrated risks are sufficiently severe for the population in general. The current scientific uncertainty cannot serve as a justification for inaction. They consider that as a first step very strict contra-indications should be promulgated by the health authorities: Technical contra-indications:
Precautionary contra-indications
The organisers launch an appeal to the same authorities in order to deal effectively with the problems that those individuals who suffer from metal poisoning have to contend with and who need to have their dental amalgams removed and to undergo an efficient detoxification treatment. In addition, the organisers question the approach of the European Commission which is mainly motivated by concerns relating to the free movements of medical devices, amongst which are dental amalgams. This is why the ad hoc group which has been commissioned by DG III to report on the problems of amalgams does not include either a toxicologist or an immunologist and why the precautionary principle has not been taken into consideration in the work of this group. The organisers further regret the absence of representatives of DG XI (Environment) from the colloquium given that the environmental pollution from mercury waste from the dental industry is by no means insignificant and boosts the credibility of the option to eliminate amalgams. They, therefore, demand the widening of the scope of the report being prepared by DG III and a revision of Directive 93/42/EEC in a way to introduce more rigorous criteria for the commercial introduction of dental materials. Long term tests of biocompatibility should be made obligatory to exclude carcinogenic, neurological, mutagenic, teratogenic, allergising and autoimmunitary effects. Finally, they favour an intensified research with a view to making alternatives available which are as biocompatible as possible and which present a satisfactory price/quality ratio. (*) Certain scientists insisted in particular on the fact that simple blood or urine analyses are not suited to evidence chronic mercury poisoning and that it is necessary amongst other things to make use of urine analysis after chelation. These scientists have also brought into question the tests currently used in the study of allergies ("Epikutantest") often giving false negative results, while the new immonological tests of lymphocytary transformation (for example Melisa) allow for detection in a much more precise way of immunological sensitivity to mercury, heavy metals and other metals used in dentistry. At the level of the analysis of the neurotoxic effects of mercury amalgams, these scientists have also insisted on the importance of using a range of behavioural toxicological tests as well as SPECT imaging which analyzes cerebral perfusion or the state of the receptors of the cerebral mainstem. On behalf of the Green Group in the European Parliament Paul Lannoye Member of the European Parliament Vice-President of the European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection In collaboration with Jean Huss, Member of the Luxembourg Chamber Member of the Committee on Public Health of the Luxembourg Parliament For more information, please contact Mrs Olga Pisano : 00.352.430024580.
|
Copyright© 1998-2008 SAFER WORLD. All rights reserved |