Re: Mercury and Brain Intelligence

From: Dr Steve (nospam_at_home.net)
Date: 03/03/05 

Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 22:06:11 GMT

And my son is the manufacturer of Kool-Aid Since he mixes the powder and
liquid together. 

-- 
~+--~+--~+--~+--~+--
Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S.
Troy, Michigan, USA
....................................................
This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only.
Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on
the advice or opinion expressed here.  Only a dentist who has examined you
in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect
your health.
......................
"Mark & Steven Bornfeld" <bornfeldmung@dentaltwins.com> wrote in message 
news:L1HVd.41540$ya6.11307@trndny01...
> clintonz@prodigy.net wrote:
>> Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>>
>>>clintonz@prodigy.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>>potential adverse reactions certainly could be claimed as a matter of
>>
>>
>>>professional negligence.  Whether your area of concern (amalgam
>>>toxicity) has ever succeeded on that basis I have no idea.
>>>
>>
>> I don't know either because I haven't researched it. I do
>> believe that capsule manufacturer's have been sued by some
>> dentists because of Hg that was leaking from faulty capsules
>> in the office. The other issue is standard of care.
>> As you know a medical professional cannot be held accountable
>> for a procedure which causes harm, if it is accepted practice.
>> Therefore a patient would probably have to prove that any
>> Hg toxicity came directly from the amalgam and that the
>> amalgam was placed in a way that exceeded certain common
>> standards.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Dentistry is not unique in this regard.  We have a statutory
>>
>> reporting
>>
>>>requirement in New York state for suspected child abuse.  Certain
>>>illnesses must be reported to the state department of health.
>>>As it happens, abnormal heavy metal levels that turn up in tests
>>
>> (lead
>>
>>>or mercury) must be reported to the state.  There may be dentists who
>>
>>
>>>perform this test, but I do not.
>>
>>
>> Well that's the problem, if you don't test for it you
>> can't report it. Actually some dentists do monitor WBC
>> and other Blood tests before and after removal. They
>> do find a correlation. Of course there is probably no requirement
>> to report these changes. In my case my thyroid levels and
>> neutrophil count  went from borderline /low to normal
>> after removal.
>>
>> Now they are coming out with more sophisticated saliva test
>> kits that can measure Hg coming from amalgam directly.
>> I think this test alone will eventually force changes
>> in dentistry.
>>
>> any case, while the patient should obviously know the
>> quality control. In fact the dentist is the manufacturer of
>>
>>>>the amalgam and by rights should be required to provide a
>>>>specification/precaution *** for the final amalgam product since
>>>>there is apparently wide variation in the composition and Hg
>>
>> release
>>
>>>>rates of the amalgam.
>>>
>>> I understand what you are saying, and can entertain how you can hold
>>
>>
>>>this position.  I think that it is highly unlikely that it is
>>>supportable on a legal basis.
>>> Of course, I'm only a dentist, not a lawyer.
>>>
>>
>>
>> You'd be surprised. the manufacturer goes to great pain
>> to disassociate themselves from the final product. The
>> FDA has also refused to classify the final amalgam product.
>> What this probably means is that dentists are considered
>> the manufacturer and responsible from a product liability
>> standpoint, because they do control the quality of the final
>> product. Considering that recent case law holds that
>> the statute of limitations tolls for toxic exposures from
>> some products until the affected persons become aware of harm, this
>> probably means that every dentist who has placed an amalgam
>> can be sued 10, 20 years down the road, if the patient can
>> prove harm or high levels of Hg exposure. The intereting question would
>> be how much protection the "standard of care" defense gives against the
>> "product liability argument". I think ultimately it won't because 1)
>> after all, a car manufacturer cannot be absolved
>> of responsability for a car defect based on the "standard of
>> customer care" and 2) standard of care inherently assumes a small
>> variability in the established procedures, while there is large
>> variation in the behavior and Hg release of amalgam .
>>
>
> I might indeed be surprised.  But my understanding is that liability for 
> negligence is based on deviation from the standard of care at the time the 
> treatment was rendered.  Perhaps some lawyer will maintain that dentists 
> "manufacture" amalgam.  By the same token, we may "manufacture" any 
> substance that undergoes any alteration or mixing before use.  The list of 
> these substances in the dental office is very long.
> I certainly will be watching current case law, as I'm sure you will 
> too--with interest, but certainly not with fear.
>
> Steve
>
> -- 
> Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
> http://www.dentaltwins.com
> Brooklyn, NY
> 718-258-5001
Loading