点击显示 收起
Who Is Debating?
Koss and others contend that the debate over mercury in fillings is being run -- and won -- by dentists, but instead should actually be led by neurologists. They point to a vested economic interest of the ADA in the amalgam.
Those who oppose mercury in fillings also say there is research suggesting that prenatal mercury exposure from fillings has been equated with epidemic levels of childhood learning disabilities, neurological illnesses, and autism. They also say that exposure has been linked to adult illnesses including MS, lupus, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and autoimmune, gastrointestinal, and mental illness.
According to the FDA and other organizations of the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) who continue to investigate the safety of amalgams used in dental restorations (fillings), no valid scientific evidence has shown that amalgams cause harm to patients with dental restorations, except in the rare case of allergy.
Alternatives Abound
Many alternatives to silver fillings exist.
"The wave of the future, at least cosmetically speaking, is porcelain fillings," Davis says. "I have placed porcelain fillings that look so real that other dentists have ground them out and put silver fillings in there. They can be so lifelike it's very difficult to tell if there is a filling in there."
Plus, porcelain can't decay, he adds. Porcelain fillings are, however, more expensive and less durable then their amalgam counterparts.
Another option is a resin, which mixes plastic and fine glass particles. "While resins can fill a hole, they don't hold up over time, but they are great for small cavities where you can remove the decay and replace minor areas."
Published Aug. 8, 2005.
SOURCES: J. Rodway Mackert, DDS, professor, School of Dentistry at the Medical College of Georgia, Augusta. Nicholas Davis, DDS, president, American Academy of Cosmetic Dentistry. Freya Koss, development director, Consumers for Dental Choice, Wynnewood, Pa. FDA.