On 16 Oct 2003 21:43:49 +0200, "Piotr K. Olszewski"
Hm, chcesz mi narzuci=E6 styl pisania. napisa=B3em o Berlinie to, co znala=
z=B3em w
Nie, po prostu od kilku ostatnich postow caly czas obracalismy sie wokol te=
j
publikacji, wiec sadze, ze nie tylko ja, ale kazdy kto czytal Twoja wypowie=
dz
i ten cytat, sadzil ze on rowniez pochodzi z tamtej publikacji.
Uwazam, ze skoro Ciebie to interesuje to sam powinienes poswiecic swoj c=
zas na
poszukiwania: wpisz w googlach methylmercury i bacteria i dotaniesz peln=
o
informacji o tym, ze bakterie przetwarzaja rtec nieorganiczna na jej for=
me
zmetylowana, do jakis abstraktow tez pewnie dotrzesz.
Uznaj=EA, =BFe uwalniaj=B1ca si=EA rt=EA=E6 z amalgamatu nie tworzy metylo=
rt=EAci. Do
czasu,
Oooo! Czyzbys wyroznial rozne postacie alotropowe Hg, te z amalgamatow i te
inna? ;> Moglbys rozwinac te niezwykle ciekawa teorie? ;P Moze zacytujesz
zwiazana z tym publikacje? ;)
gdy kto=B6 uprzemy podsunie mi pod nos publikacj=EA naukow=B1 lub link do =
takowej.
Ales len, nie mysl, ze bede za Ciebie zawsze odwalal czarna robote.
Masz tu kopie pierwszych paru abstraktow na jakie sie natknalem:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
"The methylization of mercuric chloride by human intestinal bacteria";
Experentia, 31:9; 1975; Sept 15, 1064-5; IR Rowland; P Grasso; MJ Davies;
British Industrial Biological Research Association, Woodmansterne Road,
Cashalton, Surrey, SM5 4DS, England.
"Most strains of staphylococci, steptococci, yeasts and E. coli isolated fr=
om
human feces, could synthesize methyl mercury compounds. In contrast, few
strains of obligate anerobes could do so. Up to 6 ng methyl mercury/ml were
formed in 44 hours from 2 ug / ml mercuric chloride."
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
"Transformations of inorganic mercury by Candida albicans and Saccharomyces
cerevisiae"; Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Jan 1991; 57:1:245-247=
; S
Yannai; I Berdicevsky, L Duek; Dept. of Food Engineering and biotechnology,
and Unit of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of
Technology
"Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Candida albicans were incubated with 0.25, 0.=
5,
or 0.75 ug of Hg (as HgCl2) per ml of Nelson's medium in the presence of tr=
ace
amounts of oxygen at 28 =B0C for 12 days. Two controlled media were used, o=
ne
without add Hg and one with out yeast inoculum. Yeast cell growth was
estimated after 1, 2, 3, and 8 days of incubation. The contents of
organomercury in the system and of elemental mercury released from the medi=
a
and collected in traps were determined at the end of the experiments. The
results were as follows. (i) C. albicans was the more mercury-resistant
species, but both yeast species failed to grow in the media containing 0.75=
ug
per ml. (ii) (iii) The amounts of organomercury produced by the two species
were proportional to the amount of HgCl2 added to the medium. In all cases =
C.
albicans produced considerably larger amounts of elemental Hg produced were
all similar in the case of C. albicans. (iv) Neither organomercury nor
elemental Hg was produced in any of the control media."
PS. ode mnie: Candida Albicans to drozdzak wystepujacy u kazdego z nas,
zreszta jest to organizm oportunistyczny i tworzy stany patologiczne u ludz=
i
gdy ma ku temu okazje, np. po kuracji antybiotykowej.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
"Formation of methyl mercury by bacteria"; Appl Microbiol; 30:3, 1975; Sept=
;
424-32; MK Hamdy; OR Noyes; Dept. of Food Science, University of Georgia,
Athens, GA 30602.
"Twenty three Hg2+ resistant cultures were isolated from sediment of the
Savannah River in Georgia; of these, 14 were gram-negative shirt rods
belonging to the Genera Escherichia and Enterobacter, six were gram positiv=
e
cocci (three Staphylococcus sp. and three Streptococcus sp.) and three were
bacillus sp. All the Escherichia, Enterobacter, and the bacillus strain wer=
e
more resistant to Hg2+ that the strains of staphylococci and streptococci.
Adaptation using serial dilutions and concentration gradient agar plate
techniques showed that it was possible to select a Hg2+ resistant strain fr=
om
a parent culture identified as enterobacter aerogenes. this culture resiste=
d
1,200 ug of Hg2+ per ml of medium and produced methylmercury from HgCl2, bu=
t
was unable to convert Hg2+ to volatile elemental mercury (Hg0). Under const=
ant
aeration (i.e., submerged culture), slightly more methylmercury was formed
than in the absence of aeration. Production of methylmercury was cyclic in
nature and slightly decreased if DL-homocysteine was present in the media, =
but
increased with methylcobalamine. Is is concluded that the bacterial product=
ion
of methyl mercury may be a means of resistance and detoxification against
mercurial in which inorganic Hg2+ is converted to organic form and secreted
into the environment."
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
"Microbial transformations of metals"; Annu Rev Microbiol, 32:1978, 637-72;=
AO
Summers; Dept. of Microbiology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602
"Biological Methylation of Mercury...
Three alternative pathways for mercury metabolism have been proposed. (a)
bacteria living in bottom sediment and sludge can carry out mercury
methylation by excreting methylcobalamin, which serves as a methyl donor in
vitro. Indeed, bottom dwelling bacteria, soil anerobes, and yeasts, have be=
en
shown to have the ability to methylate mercury....
(b) Second the mercury may be methylated by the normal bacterial flora of t=
he
gills and guts of the fish...
(c) The third alternative for methyl mercury production is totally abiotic,
without the intervention of microbes or microbial metabolites..."
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D
Biliardami jesli juz, gdziez Twoja naukowa dokladnosc? ;>
Jego obliczenia IMHO nie sa dokladne, bo z 10 ug bedzie jeszcze wiecej n=
a
dobe.
Tak wielkie liczby atom=F3w onie=B6mielaj=B1 mnie.
Chcesz o tym porozmawiac? ;>
mia=B3o ilustrowa=E6 sublimacj=EA rt=EAci z 25 letniej plomby [...]
Kompozytowe tez potrafia przezyc tyle ze ho ho, co nie znaczy, ze tyle
gwarantuje producent i ze wiekszosc tyle przezywa.
Ha ha ha
A coz w tym smiesznego?
Poza tym ponownie wyciagasz pochopnie falszywe wnioski i dokonujesz
nadinterpretacji podobnie jak z tym profesorem.
Wiemy tylko, ze zab z tym amalgamatem ma rzekomo 25 lat, ale nie wiemy kied=
y
zostal wyrwany, wiec to wcale nie znaczy, ze ten amalgamat byl maltretowany=
w
jamie ustnej przez tyle lat i tyle tam przetrwal.
Mea culpa.
By=B3em tak zafascynowany tym filmem, =BFe gapi=B3em si=EA jak ciele na
A widzisz, robi wrazenie. ;)
malowane wrota. W pracy nie mam g=B3o=B6nik=F3w a na =B6ci=B1gni=EAcie fil=
mu naczeka=B3em
Tekstu tez nie widziales?
si=EA, =BFe hej! Obejrza=B3em w domu z d=BCwi=EAkiem i potwierdzam, =BFe m=
asz racj=EA. Jestem
zadowolony, =BFe moja intuicja podpowiada=B3a mi, =BFe podgrzewanie u=B3at=
wia usuwanie
rt=EAci z plomby.
Nic niezwyklego.
Ale znacznie wa=BFniejsza od wizualnej strony eksperymentu jest odpowied=
=BC na
pytanie: Jakie jet st=EA=BFenie rt=EAci nad tym z=EAbem? Tak, znam ju=BF k=
omentarz za
stromny www. Wola=B3bym jednak przczyta=E6 w pracy naukowej zdanie rozwiew=
aj=B1ce
Znowu nieuwaznie ogladales ten film - jestes nim zbyt zafascynowanay,
spokojnie, jestes przeciez naukowcem :> - tam mozna bylo zobaczyc kilka
wykresow, na ktorych byly podane konkretne wartosci stezenia Hg, np. po zuc=
iu
- przyjzyj sie im a znajdziesz odpowiedz na pare postawionych przez Ciebie
pytan - w linku pdf, ktory odnosnie tego filmu poprzednio podawalem sa
odnosniki do prac naukowych na podstawie, ktorych sporzadzono te wykresy. B=
yly
takze w tym filmie podane namiary na publikacje, w ktorych znajduja sie
interesujace Ciebie dane.
" St=EA=BFenie rt=EAci w =B6linie os=F3b bez plomb wynosi =B6rednio X(+/-d=
x) w =B6linie os=F3b
z plombami amalgamatowymi wynosi Y(+/-dy) w tym metylort=EAci Y'"
"w powietrzu wydychanym przez osoby z amlgamatem, nasz analizator zarejest=
rowa=B3
st=EA=BFenie C1. Warto=B6ci te rosn=B1 do C2 po stymulacji gum=B1 do =BFuc=
ia. Po czasie t
warto=B6=E6 C2 zmala=B3a do C1. Og=F3=B3em w okresie bez =BFucia do organi=
zmu z plomby
przedostaje si=EA masa M1 rt=EAci za=B6 zostaje z niego wydalona z
powietrzem/moczem/ka=B3em masa M2. Dobowy monitoring dla N os=F3b da=B3 =
=B6rednie
warto=B6ci M'/dob=EA."
Tutaj znajdziesz odnosniki do pozycji wyjasniajacych te sprawy:
http://www.cfspages.com/bernie.html
http://www.iaomt.org/documents/The%20Scientific%20Case%20Against%20Amalgam.=
pdf
Czytamy m.in.
"The baseline mouth air of people with amalgams contains more mercury than
that of people without amalgams. After ten minutes of chewing gum, the merc=
ury
concentration in mouth air does not change in subjects without amalgams, wh=
ile
for those with amalgam fillings it increases 8 - 10 fold, and remains eleva=
ted
for at least 90 minutes."
"The current best accepted reference on absorbed dose of mercury from amalg=
am
fillings comes from the World Health Organization proceedings of 1991 [(Wor=
ld
Health Organization): Environmental Health Criteria, Vol. 118: Inorganic
Mercury. Pg. 61. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, 1991.]. The conclusion of that
group was that the average person in the industrial world with an average
number of amalgam fillings, and no occupational exposure to mercury would
absorb between 3 - 17 ug per day, with an average of 10 ug, from the fillin=
gs;
2.3 ug from all dietary sources; and 0.3 ug from all other environmental
sources."
To nie jest calkiem to o co prosiles, gdyz tu pisza ile pochlonieto Hg z
amalgamatow, a nie ile sie wydziela i dotyczy to przecietnej ilosci
amalgamatow, a nie wszystkich przypadkow (pare lat temu widzialem zakres 4-=
200
ug), no ale tej reszty to juz sam sobie poszukaj.
Du=BFo wymagam?
Tak, bardzo duzo, bo chcesz, zebym tracil czas na poszukiwanie czegos co
Ciebie interesuje, a co moglbys sam znalezc, wyzyskiwaczu jeden. ;> Ja nie
potrzebuje tych dowodow, dla mnie wystarczy to co juz widzialem i z czym si=
e
zapoznalem, zreszta te dane, o ktore prosisz widzialem juz pare lat temu m.=
in.
w materialach WHO, niestety, nie gromadzilem ich na potrzeby takich dyskusj=
i.
Tylko nie proponuj mi bym sam si=EA zaj=B1=B3 takimi pomiarami. Mi wystarc=
zy
przeczyta=E6 o tym w publikacji papierowej w czasopi=B6mie naukowym (najch=
=EAtniej
chemicznym).
To przeczytaj, na co czekasz?
Hm.... jak na razie znalaz=B3em publikacj=EA dotycz=B1c=B1 rozprzestrznian=
ia si=EA rt=EAci
ipozosta=B3ych metali tworz=B1cych amalgamat w obr=EAbie z=EAba. Praktyczn=
ie zero
dyfuzji. Jutro link.
Skad wiec niejednokrotnie obserwowane przebarwienia w obrebie najblizszej
wypelnienia tkanki zeba? To ze takie przebarwienia powstaja jest opisane na
proamalgamatowych stronach, ktore sam polecales.
Poza tym ignorujesz to co juz mowilem, fakt ze Hg jest tak wszechstronni=
e
dzialajaca toksyna, kumulujaca sie w organizmie i nie jest mikroelemente=
m, dla
kazdego rozsadnego czlowieka bylby wystarczajacy, zeby z nia bez potrzeb=
y
kontaktu nie miec,
ale=BF ja nie lubi=EA rt=EAci! i wol=EA plomby nowoczesne, bez rt=EAci! (t=
ylko mi nie
m=F3w,=BFe zmieni=B3em zdanie!). Napisa=B3em ju=BF, =BFe przysz=B3o=B6=E6 =
nale=BFy do
materia=B3=F3w "ceramicznych, kompozytowych". Dyskutujemy o tym, czy amalg=
amat
szkodzi i w jakim stopniu.
Nie dojdziemy do innych wnioskow niz tych, ktore sa w cytowanych tu juz
przegladach publikacji:
http://www.iaomt.org/documents/The%20Scientific%20Case%20Against%20Amalgam.=
pdf
http://www.dentalmaterial.gov.se/Mercury.pdf
Zastanow sie jednak nad przyszloscia tego zagadnienia. Postep w technikach =
i
metodologiach badawczych jest nieuchronny. Biorac wiec pod uwage to co juz
wiemy o rteci, co jest bardziej prawdopodobne, to ze naukowcy udowodnia
ostatecznie, ze rtec jest nieszkodliwa ponizej jakiegos tam progu i ze prog
ten bedzie wyzszy niz dawki otrzymywane z amalgamatow, czy tez ze bedzie co=
raz
wieksza przewaga publikacji wykazujaca, ze tak male dawki nie wplywaja
pozytywnie na przemiany biochemiczne w organizmie? Moim zdaniem wszystkie
znaki na papierze i ekranie mowia jak dotad, ze zwyciezy opcja druga. Musia=
lby
nastapic jakis wielki przelom, cos na miare hormezy Hg lub cos jeszcze
znaczniejszego, zeby ten trend sie odwrocil - nic takiego poki co sie nie
zapowiada, wydaje sie zatem, ze stoisz na z gory przegranej pozycji w swoim
radykalnym sceptycyzmie.
nawet gdyby nie powodowala w tak malych dawkach zadnych
trwalych schorzen - Ty jestes po prostu ich zwolennikiem bez wzgledu na =
fakty.
ak
Zgubi=B3em si=EA.. zwolennikiem czego jestem?
To nie wiesz czego jestes zwolennikiem? Hmmm. Naprawde sie zgubiles. ;>
Amalgamatow.
To zreszta byla parafraza podobnej Twojej wypowiedzi:
"ty jeste=B6 po prostu ich zwolennikiem."
ak
PS. Pamietasz jak cytowalem, w ktoryms poprzednim poscie, ze rtec
nieorganiczna byla w okreslonym przypadku 10 razy bardziej toksyczna niz
metylortec?
Berni Widham zebral kiedys publikacje, z ktorych mialo wynikac, iz opary rt=
eci
metalicznej nie sa wcale mniej toksyczne od prostych zwiazkow organicznych
rteci typu metylortec, przynajmniej w niektorych okreslonych sytuacjach. Ni=
e
wiadomo, czy w tym ponizszym artykule jest to przedstawienie sprawy calkowi=
cie
obiektywne, czy tez przesiano literature wybiorczo i czy wszystkie wnioski =
sa
prawidlowe, ale przynajmniej faktem jest, ze takie pozycje istnieja, wiec i
tak jest to interesujace zestawienie. Przy okazji zajrzalem teraz na ponize=
j
cytowana strone: http://www.amalgam.org/ - jest to w istocie jedno wielkie
zestawienie abstraktow z ich omowieniem - zycze milej lektury. ;)
DENTAL AMALGAM MERCURY SYNDROME
www.amalgam.org
DAMS, Inc.; P.O. Box 7249 . Minneapolis, MN 55407- For Immediate Release
Mercury Vapor Causes Neurological Developmental and Behavioral Effects at
Lower Levels than Other Forms of Mercury.
1. Mercury vapor is lipid soluble and has an affinity for red blood cells
and Central Nervous System(CNS) cells.
2. Only a few micrograms of mercury severely disturb cellular function
and inhibits nerve growth. Prenatal or neonatal exposures have been found
to have life long effects on nerve function and susceptibility to toxic
effects.
3. Elemental mercury vapor is more rapidly transmitted throughout the
body than other forms of mercury and has more toxic effects on the CNS
and other parts of the body.
4. The half life of mercury vapor in the blood is less than 10 seconds,
so mercury from amalgam passes rapidly into cells in organs throughout
the body. Thus blood is known to not be a good way to test for mercury
exposure from amalgam. Likewise, urine though better, also is mostly
correlated with recent exposure and becomes less reliable as more
accumulates and damage occurs.
5. Exposure to mercury vapor causes rapid transmittal across the blood-
brain barrier and through the placenta of pregnant women to the fetus and
significant developmental effects.
6. Developmental learning and behavioral effects have been found from
mercury vapor at much lower levels than for exposure to methyl mercury.
7. More people have immune reactions to mercury vapor/inorganic mercury
than to methyl mercury. Immune reactions to mercury are documented to
cause autoimmunity and autoimmune conditions like chronic fatigue
syndrome(CFS), fibromyalgia, lupus, mutiple
sclerosis(MS), rheumatoid arthritis, ALS, etc.
8. Mercury vapor and inorganic mercury are methylated in the body to
methyl mercury by bacteria, yeast, and other methyl donars.
9. Dental amalgam fillings are the largest source of both inorganic and
methyl mercury in most people with amalgam.
Documentation:
There is a lot of controversy about the toxic effects significance of the
various types of mercury people are exposed to: vapor, inorganic,
organic(methyl) mercury. The American Dental Assoc.,
some at Gov't agencies, and other researchers have argued that methyl
mercury is much more toxic than other forms, and mercury from fish thus a
more important problem than vapor from
fillings. However the pharmakinetics of mercury in the body is complex
and the evidence seems contrary to that.
Mercury vapor may be the biggest problem even for equal exposures, in
addition to the fact it is well documented that mercury from fillings is
the number one source of both inorganic and
methyl mercury in most people(506), since elemental and inorganic mercury
in the body are methylized to methyl mercury by bacteria in the mouth and
intestines, and by yeast and other methyl donars (51,53,54,225). Some
people tested who do not eat fish have been found to have high levels of
methyl mercury . An interesting finding is evidence that indicates that
mercury vapor is 10 times more toxic to the fetal brain than methyl
mercury. Richardson(paper for Swedish Scientific Panel FRN-1999) has estima=
ted
that about 20% of the population suffers a subclinical impairment of kidney=
or
CNS function related to amalgam mercury.
Some references from the paper
(www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/amalg6.html) on this are
the following:
Mercury vapor is lipid soluble and has an affinity for red blood cells
and CNS cells (21).
Only a few micrograms of mercury severely disturb cellular function and
inhibits nerve growth
(175,147,226,255,305,149). Prenatal or neonatal exposures have been found
to have life long
effects on nerve function and susceptibility to toxic effects. Prenatal
mercury vapor exposure
that results in levels of only 4 parts per billion in newborn rat brains
was found to cause
decreases in nerve growth factor and other effects(305). Elemental
mercury vapor is more
rapidly transmitted throughout the body than most other forms of mercury
and has more toxic
effects on the CNS and other parts of the body according to the World
Health Organization and
other studies(38,183,265,282,287). Exposure to mercury vapor causes rapid
transmittal across
the blood-brain barrier and through the placenta of pregnant women to the
fetus
(38,85,113,146,162,262, 265, 281,287)-much more damage to the fetus than
for maternal
exposure to inorganic mercury(265,281,287,38) and significant
developmental effects(305).
Developmental learning and behavioral effects have been found from
mercury vapor at much
lower levels than for exposure to methyl mercury. (287,304,276e,etc.).
The OSHA health
standard level for mercury vapor in air is 50% lower than for organic
mercury in air, as is the
ATSDR MRL(217). More people have autoimmune reactions, related to chronic
autoimmune
conditions, to mercury vapor/inorganic mercury than to methyl
mercury(60).
Mercury vapor passes through the blood rapidly(half-life in blood is 10
seconds(370)) and
accumulates in other parts of the body such as the brain, kidneys, liver,
thyroid gland, pituitary
gland, etc. Thus blood test measures mostly recent exposure. Kidneys have
a lot of hydroxyl(SH)
groups which mercury binds to causing accumulation in the kidneys, and
inhibiting
excretion(503). As damage occurs to kidneys over time, mercury is less
efficiently eliminated
(11,36,57,183,216,260,503), so urine tests are not reliable for body
burden after long term
exposure. Significant levels are able to cross the blood brain barrier,
placenta, and also cellular
membranes into major organs such as the heart since the oxidation rate of
Hg0 though relatively
fast is slower than the time required by pumped blood to reach these
organs(290,370). Thus the
level in the brain and heart is higher after exposure to Hg vapor than
for other forms(360,370)
References
(11) Lamm O et al, Subclinical effects of exposure to inorganic mercury
revealed by somatosensory-evoked
potentials. Eur Neurol, 1985, 24:237-243; & (b)Altmann L, Sveinsson K,
Visual evoked potentials in 6
year old children in relation to mercury and lead levels. Neurotoxicol
Teratol 1998; 20(1):9-17; & . Chang
YC,Yeh CY, Wang JD, Subclinical neurotoxicity of mercury vapor revealed
by a multimodality potential
study of chloralkali workers , Immunol, 1999, 117(3):482-8.
(21) R.A.Goyer, Toxic effects of metals in: Caserett and Doull s
Toxicology- TheBasic Science of Poisons,
McGraw-Hill Inc., N.Y., 1993;
(36) F.L.Lorscheider et al, "Mercury exposure from silver tooth fillings:
emerging evidence questions a paradigm",
FASEB J 9:504-508,1995.
(38) Ziff S. and Ziff M. Infertility and Birth Defects: Is Mercury from
Dental Fillings a Hidden Cause?, Bio-Probe,
Inc. ISBN: 0-941011-03-8.1987
(51) Methylation of Mercury from dental amalgam and mercuric chloride by
oral Streptococci. Heintz,
Edwardson, Derand, Birkhed Scan. J. Dent. Res. 1983, 91:150-152; &
W.A.Sellars et al, Univ. Of Texas
Southwestern Medical School, "Methyl Mercury in the Human Mouth from
Dental Amalgams", Journal of Nutritioanl
& Environmental Medicine(1996), 6:33-36.
(53} The Methylation of Mercuric Chloride by Human Intestinal Bacteria.
Rowland, Grasso, Davies Experientia.
Basel 1975 ,31: 1064-1065
(54) Formation of methyl Mercury Compounds from inorganic Mercury . by
Chlostridium cochlearium Yamada,
Tonomura J Ferment Technol1972 50:159-1660
(225) S. Yannai et al, "Transformationss of inorganic mercury by candida
albicans and saccharomyces cerevisiae",
Applied Envir Microbiology,1991, 57:245-247; & I.R.Rowland et al, "The
methylization of mercuric chloride
by human intestinal bacteria", Experentia, Sept 1975, 31(9):1064-5.
(57) N.Campbell & M.Godfrey, Confirmation of Mercury Retention and
Toxicity using DMPS provocation ,J
of Advancement in Medicine, 7(1) 1994;(80 cases);
(60) Stejskal K. Automimmune reactions related to exposure to inorganic
mercury common. www.melisa.org
(85) J.A.Weiner et al,"The relationship between mercury concentration in
human organs and predictor
variables",138(1-3):101-115,1993; & "An estimation of the uptake of
mercury from amalgam fillings", Sci Total
Environ,v168,n3, p255-265, 1995.
(113) M.J.Vimy et al, Maternal-fetal distribution of mercury released
from amalgam fillings", Am J Physiol
258:R939-R945,1990. See also (238)
(146) T.Colborn(Ed.),Chemically Induced Atlerations in Functional
Development, Princeton Scientific Press,1992 &
Developmental Effects of Endocrine- Disrupting Chemicals",Eniron Heath
Perspectives, V 101, No.5, Oct 1993.
(147) M.Wood,"Mechanisms for the Neurotoxicity of Mercury", in
Organotransitional Metal Chemistry, Plenum
Publishing Corp, N.Y, N.Y, 1987. & R.P. Sharma et al, Metals and
Neurotoxic Effects , J of Comp Pathology, Vol
91, 1981.
(149) B.Choi et al, "Abnormal neuronal migration of human fetal brain",
Journal of Neurophalogy, Vol 37, p719-
733, 1978; & L.Larkfors et al,"Methyl mercury induced alterations in the
nerve growth factor level in the
developing brain ", Res Dev Res,62(2),1991,287-
(162) N.K.Mottet et al, "Health Risks from Increases in Methylmercury
Exposure",vol63:133-140,1985.
(175) 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; &
Chang LW, Hartmann HA, Quantitative
cytochemical studies of RNA in experimental mercury poisoning , Acta
Neruopathol(Berlin), 1973, 23(1):77-83.
(183) World Health Organization(WHO),1991, Environmental Health Criteria
118, Inorganic Mercury, WHO,
Geneva; & Environ metal Health. Criterion. 101, Methyl Mercury; 1990.
(216) T.W. Clarkson et al, in Biological Monitoring of Toxic Metals,
1988,Plenum Press, N.Y., The prediction
of intake of mercury vapor from amalgams ,p199-246 & p247-260;
Environmental Health Perspective,
1993,April, 100:31-8; & F.L. Lorscheider et al, Lancet, 1991, 337,p1103.
(217) Apr 19,1999 Media Advisory, New MRLs for toxic substances,
MRL:elemental mercury
vapor/inhalation/chronic & MRL: methyl mercury/ oral/acute; &
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls.html
(226)(a)B.J. Shenker et al, Dept. Of Pathology, Univ. Of Penn. School of
Dental Med., Immunotoxic effects of
mercuric compounds on human lymphocytes and monocytes: Alterations in
cell viability Immunopharmacologicol
Immunotoxical, 1992, 14(3):555-77; & M.A.Miller et al, Mercuric chloride
induces apoptosis in human T
lymphocytes , Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 153(2):250-7 1998;& Rossi
AD,Viviani B, Vahter M. Inorganic mercury
modifies Ca2+ signals, triggers apoptosis, and potentiates NMDA toxicity
in cerebral granule neurons. Cell Death
and Differentiation 1997; 4(4):317-24. & Goering PL, Thomas D, Rojko JL,
Lucas AD. Mercuric chloride-induced
apoptosis is dependent on protein synthesis. Toxicol Lett 1999; 105(3):
183-95;
(260) J.S. Woods et al, Urinary porphyrin profiles as biomarker of
mercury exposure: studies on dentists , J Toxicol
Environ Health, 40(2-3):1993, p235-; & Altered porphyrin metabolites as
a biomarker of mercury exposure and
toxicity , Physiol Pharmocol, 1996,74(2):210-15, & Canadian J Physiology
and Pharmacology, Feb 1996; &
M.D.Martin et al, Validity of urine samples for low-level mercury
exposure assessment and relationship to
porphyrin and creatinine excretion rates , J Pharmacol Exp Ther, Apr 1996
& J.S. Woods et al, Effects of
Porphyrinogenic Metals on Coproporphrinogen Oxidase in Liver and Kidney
Toxicology and Applied
Pharmacology, Vol 97, 183-190, 1989.
(262) L.W.Chang, "Neurotoxic effects of mercury", Environ. Res.,1977,
14:329-(265)M.R.Greenwood et al,
"Transfer of metallic mercury into the fetus", Experientia, 28:1455-1456,
1972.
(265) K.Lohmann et al, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Disorder in
patients with neurotoxic illnesses ,
Gesundheitswesen, 1996, 58(6):322-31.
(281) T.W. Clarkson et al, "Transport of elemental mercury into fetal
tissues", Biol. Neonate. 21:239-244, 1972.
(287) M.C. Newland et al,"Behavioral consequences of in utero exposure to
mercury vapor", Toxicology & Applied
Pharmacology, 1996, 139: 374-386; & K.Warfvinge et al, "Mercury
distribution in neonatal cortical areas ...after
exposure to mercury vapor",Environmental Research, 1994, 67:196-208.
(304) M.J.Vimy et al, Mercury from Maternal Silver Tooth Fillings: a
source of neonatal exposure , Biological
Trace Element Research, 56: 143-52,1997.
(305) Soderstrom S, Fredriksson A, Dencker L, Ebendal T, The effect of
mercury vapor on cholinergic neurons
in the fetal brain, Brain Research & Developmental Brain Res, 1995, 85:96-
108; & Toxicol Lett 1995; 75(1-
3):133-44.; & E.M. Abdulla et al, Comparison of neurite outgrowth with
neurofilament protein levels In
neuroblastoma cells following mercuric oxide exposure , Clin Exp
Pharmocol Physiol, 1995, 22(5): 362-3;
& Leong CC, Syed NI, Lorscheider FL. Retrograde degeneration of neurite
membrane structural integrity
of nerve growth cones following in vitro exposure to mercury. Neuroreport
2001 Mar 26;12(4):733-7
(360) Buchet JP, Lauwerys RR, 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 .
(370) 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. Biochem Biophys
Acta 1989; 991(1):85-9.
(503) Center for Chemical Hazard Assessment, Potential Occupational
Hazards: Dentistry, Syracuse
Research, Contract No.210-78-0019, 1980; & Merck Manuel, 14th Edition,
p1552.
(506) Leistevuo J et al, Dental amalgam fillings and the amount of
organic mercury in human saliva.
Caries Res 2001 May-Jun;35(3):163-6; &
www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/damspr12.html
**********************
National contact person: Bernie Windham ***@earthlink.net 850-878-
9024
www.home.earthlink.net/~indexd.html
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
